-
Introduction open_in_new
The Commencement of The Contest Between Yahweh and Pharaoh In Egypt (Exodus 4:27 to Exodus 7:13).
Moses now meets up with Aaron and they go to Egypt to demand the release of Israel so that they may go into the wilderness and worship Yahweh. Pharaoh refuses their request and responds viciously.
a On arriving in Egypt Moses and Aaron perform their signs before the elders and begin their task in preparation for approaching Pharaoh (Exodus 4:27-31).
b They approach Pharaoh who turns on the people (Exodus 5:1-23)
c Yahweh responds to Pharaoh's behaviour with a show of authority and power, providing His credentials, and promising to deliver His People (Exodus 6:1-9).
c Yahweh's gives a charge to Moses and Aaron concerning the deliverance and details of Aaron's credentials are provided as the head of Moses' family (Exodus 6:10-30)
b After their first rebuff Moses and Aaron are to approach Pharaoh again (Exodus 7:1-5)
a They begin their task by performing the miracle of the staff becoming a snake, and their snake eats up the snakes of Egypt (Exodus 7:6-13)
Note the parallels. In ‘a' Moses meets up with Aaron and they go to Egypt to demand the release of Israel so that they may go into the wilderness and worship Yahweh. Pharaoh refuses their request and responds viciously. In the parallel Yahweh by a sign reveals what He will do to Pharaoh if he remains intransigent. He too will act viciously. In ‘b' Moses and Aaron approach Pharaoh who turns on the people, in the parallel, having been rebuffed they approach Pharaoh again. In ‘c' Yahweh responds to Pharaoh's behaviour with a show of authority and power, providing His credentials and promising to deliver His People, and in the parallel He gives a charge to Moses and Aaron to bring about this deliverance and Aaron's credentials are provided as the head of Moses' family.
Yahweh's Battle With Pharaoh - The Ten Plagues (Exodus 7:14 to Exodus 12:51)
In the first seven Chapter s we have seen how God raised up Moses to deliver His people, and how when he approached Pharaoh with a simple request that they might go into the wilderness and worship Him because He had revealed Himself in a theophany there, Pharaoh had reacted savagely and had increased Israel's burdens.
Then Yahweh had promised to Moses that He would reveal His name in mighty action and deliver them, but had initially provided Pharaoh with a further opportunity to consider by three signs which Pharaoh had rejected. Now He would begin in earnest.
The first nine plagues that follow were the intensification of natural occurrences that struck Egypt from time to time. Yet they came in such a way and with such effect and were so intense that they could not be described as ‘natural', for they came when called on, ceased when Yahweh commanded, and affected only what Yahweh wanted affecting. They were thus supernaturally controlled natural phenomenon.
Because these plagues were common to natural occurrences that took place in Egypt they were connected with the gods of Egypt, for the Egyptians had gods which were connected with every part of life. Thus the very plagues meant that Yahweh was, in Egyptian eyes, in conflict with the gods of Egypt. However, it is important to recognise that the writer only mentions the gods of Egypt once (Exodus 12:12), and there only in relation to the slaying of the firstborn because at least one of the firstborn who would die would be connected with a god (Pharaoh). Thus he is drawing attention to Yahweh's dealings with Pharaoh and the Egyptians rather than with their gods. This indicates that while the gods may have had the Egyptians as their servants, they did not have any control of the land or of nature. The writer is clearly monotheistic. To him the gods of Egypt are an irrelevance.
The Overall Pattern of the Narrative.
The first nine plagues can be divided into three sets of three as follows;
· The first three - water turned to blood (Exodus 7:14-25), plague of frogs (Exodus 8:1-15), plague of ticks and similar insects (Exodus 8:16-19).
· The second three - plague of swarms of flying insects (Exodus 8:20-32), cattle disease (Exodus 9:1-7), boils (Exodus 9:8-12).
· The third three - great hail (Exodus 9:13-35), plague of locusts (Exodus 10:1-20), thick darkness (Exodus 10:21-27).
As we have seen in Part 1 the previous section of Exodus has been mainly based on a series of chiastic and similar patterns which demonstrate the unity of the narrative. Here the overall pattern changes to a more complicated one in view of the combined subject matter, but the underlying pattern is the same nevertheless.
For we should note that there is a definite pattern in these series of threes. The first and second of each of the judgments in each series is announced to the Pharaoh before it takes place, while in each case the third is unannounced. The first incident of each series of three is to take place early in the morning, and in the first and second of these ‘first incidents of three' the place where Moses meets Pharaoh is by the Nile, in the third it is before Pharaoh. The second judgment in each series is announced in the king's palace. The third judgment in each series comes without the Pharaoh or the Egyptians being warned. As these judgments from God continue, their severity increases until the last three bring the Egyptian people to a place where life itself becomes almost impossible, and their economy is almost totally destroyed. The huge hailstones kept them in their homes and wrecked their environment, the locusts ate up what the hail had left and made life unbearable, and the thick darkness kept them in solitude even from each other. They must have wondered what was coming next.
Furthermore in the first two judgments the magicians pit themselves against Moses as they imitate the judgments of blood and frogs, but in the third judgment of the first series, that of ticks, they are forced to yield and acknowledge, "This is the finger of God" (Exodus 8:19) and from then on they withdraw from the contest. In the sixth they cannot even stand before Moses, presumably because of the effect of the boils which they could do nothing about.
It is noteworthy in this regard that while blood and frogs can easily be manipulated by conjurors, ticks are a different proposition, for they cannot be so easily controlled.
In the second series an important distinction is drawn between the Israelites and the Egyptians, for from then on only the Egyptians are affected, and not the whole land of Egypt as previously. Several times the specific protection of Israel is mentioned.
As the intensity of the plagues increases, so does the intensity of the Pharaoh's desire to secure the intervention of Moses and Aaron for deliverance from the plague (consider Exodus 8:8; Exodus 8:25; Exodus 8:28; Exodus 9:27-28; Exodus 10:16-17; Exodus 10:24), and Moses becomes more outspoken.
In the first series of three judgments the staff of Aaron is used, in the second series of three no staff is mentioned and in the third series either the hand or staff of Moses is prominent. Note also that in two cases in the second series neither Moses nor Aaron do anything. Thus an instrument is used seven times. These overall patterns clearly demonstrate the unity of the narrative.
Another division can be made in that the first four plagues are personal in effect producing annoyance and distress while the next four inflict serious damage on property and person, the ninth is the extreme of the first four and the tenth the extreme of the second four. This further confirms the impression of unity.
The same is true of the wording and ideas used throughout. We have noted above the three sets of three plagues, and that in the first plague of each set Moses goes to Pharaoh in the early morning, either to the river or ‘before Pharaoh', while in the second in each set Moses goes to the palace, and in the third plague in each set the plague occurs without warning. Now we should note the intricate pattern of phrases and ideas which are regularly repeated.
We should, for example, note that God says ‘let my people go' seven times, the divinely perfect number (although only six times before specific plagues - Exodus 5:1; Exodus 7:16; Exodus 8:1; Exodus 8:20; Exodus 9:1; Exodus 9:13; Exodus 10:3). This is significant in the light of what follows below.
We should also note that there is a central core around which each plague is described, although the details vary. This central core is:
· A description in detail of what will happen (Plague one - Exodus 7:17-18; plague two - Exodus 8:2-4; plague three - no separate description; plague four - Exodus 8:21; plague five - Exodus 9:3-4; plague six - Exodus 9:9; plague seven - Exodus 9:15; plague eight - Exodus 10:4-6; plague nine - no separate description).
· The call to Moses either to instruct Aaron (three times - Exodus 7:19; Exodus 8:5; Exodus 8:16) or to act himself (three times - Exodus 9:22; Exodus 10:12; Exodus 10:21) or for them both to act (once - Exodus 9:8).
· The action taken (Exodus 7:20; Exodus 8:6; Exodus 8:17; no action; no action; Exodus 9:10; Exodus 9:23; Exodus 10:13; Exodus 10:22).
· And an inevitable description of the consequences, which parallels the previous description where given (Exodus 7:21; Exodus 8:6; Exodus 8:17; Exodus 8:24; Exodus 9:6-7; Exodus 9:10-11; Exodus 9:23-26; Exodus 10:13-15; Exodus 10:22-23).
It may be argued that this core was largely inevitable, and to a certain extent that is true, but we should note that while there are nine plagues, there are only seven separate prior descriptions, and as previously noted seven calls to act followed by that action, but the sevens are not in each case for the same plagues. Thus the narrative is carefully built around sevens. This can be exemplified further.
For example, Pharaoh's initial response to their approach is mentioned three times, in that Pharaoh reacts against the people (Exodus 5:5-6); calls for his magicians (Exodus 7:11); and makes a compromise offer and then drives Moses and Aaron from his presence (Exodus 10:11). It indicates his complete action but denies to him the number seven. That is retained for Yahweh and His actions as we shall see, or for Pharaoh's negativity overall caused by Yahweh.
One significant feature is that Pharaoh's final response grows in intensity.
1). Yahweh hardened his heart so that he did not listen to them as Yahweh had said (Exodus 7:13) (Yahweh hardening him, and that he would not let the people go had been forecast in Exodus 4:21). This was prior to the plagues.
2). His heart was hardened and he did not listen to them as Yahweh had said, and he turned and went into his house, ‘nor did he set his heart to this also' (Exodus 7:22-23).
3). He entreated Yahweh to take away the plague and said that he would let the people go to worship Yahweh (Exodus 8:8), and later hardened his heart and did not listen to them as Yahweh had said (Exodus 8:15).
4). Pharaoh's heart was hardened and he did not listen to them as Yahweh had said (Exodus 8:19).
5). He told Moses and Aaron that they may sacrifice in the land (Exodus 8:25), and then, on Moses' refusing his offer, said that they may sacrifice in the wilderness but not go far away (8:28) which Moses accepts, but later Pharaoh hardened his heart and would not let the people go (Exodus 8:32).
6). He sent to find out what had happened and then his heart was hardened and he would not let the people go (Exodus 9:7).
7). Yahweh hardened his heart and he did not listen to them as Yahweh had spoken to Moses (Exodus 9:12).
8). Pharaoh admitted that he had sinned, asked them to entreat for him, and said ‘I will let you go and you will stay no longer' (Exodus 9:27-28). Then he sinned yet more and hardened his heart, he and his servants (Exodus 9:34), and his heart was hardened nor would he let the children of Israel go as Yahweh had spoken to Moses (Exodus 9:35).
9). Pharaoh admitted that he had sinned, and asked them to entreat Yahweh for him (Exodus 10:17), but later Yahweh hardened his heart so that he would not let the children of Israel go (Exodus 10:20).
10). Pharaoh said that they might go apart from their cattle (Exodus 10:24), and on Moses refusing ‘Yahweh hardened Pharaoh's heart and he would not let them go' (Exodus 10:27), and he commanded that they leave his presence and not return on pain of death (Exodus 10:28).
11). In the summary ‘Yahweh hardened Pharaoh's heart so that he would not let the children of Israel go out of his land' (Exodus 11:10).
We note from the above that ‘Pharaoh will not listen to you' occurs twice (Exodus 7:4; Exodus 11:9), ‘did not listen to them as Yahweh had said' occurs four times (Exodus 7:13; Exodus 7:22; Exodus 8:15; Exodus 19); and ‘did not listen to them as Yahweh had spoken to Moses' occurs once (Exodus 9:12), thus his not being willing to listen occurs seven times in all (the phrase ‘as Yahweh had spoken to Moses' occurs twice (Exodus 9:12; Exodus 9:35), but not as connected with not listening).
In contrast he entreats that Yahweh will show mercy four times (Exodus 8:8; Exodus 8:28; Exodus 9:27; Exodus 10:17), and parleys with Moses three times (Exodus 8:8; Exodus 8:25; Exodus 10:24), making seven in all. Yahweh hardened his heart five times (Exodus 7:13; Exodus 9:12; Exodus 10:20; Exodus 10:27; Exodus 11:10), which with Exodus 4:21 and Exodus 10:1 makes seven times. (Yahweh also hardened his heart in Exodus 14:8, but that was over the matter of pursuing the fleeing people. See also Exodus 14:4; Exodus 14:17. He said that He would do it in Exodus 7:3).
His heart was hardened (by himself?) four times (Exodus 7:22; Exodus 8:19; Exodus 9:7; Exodus 9:35), and he hardened his own heart three times (Exodus 8:15; Exodus 8:32; Exodus 9:34), again making seven times. It is said that he would not let the people go five times (Exodus 8:32; Exodus 9:7; Exodus 9:35; Exodus 10:20; Exodus 11:10). With Exodus 4:21; Exodus 7:14 that makes not letting the people go seven times. Yahweh told Pharaoh to let His people go seven times (Exodus 5:1; Exodus 7:16; Exodus 8:1; Exodus 8:20; Exodus 9:1; Exodus 9:13; Exodus 10:3). Thus the writer would clearly seem to have been deliberately aiming at sevenfold repetition, and this sevenfoldness is spread throughout the narrative in different ways, stressing the total unity of the passage. One or two sevens might be seen as accidental but not so many.
Taking with this the fact that each narrative forms a definite pattern any suggestion of fragmented sources of any size that can be identified is clearly not permissible. Thus apart from an occasional added comment, and in view of the way that covenants were always recorded in writing, there seems little reason to doubt that Exodus was written under the supervision of Moses or from material received from him as was constantly believed thereafter. Other Old Testament books certainly assert the essential Mosaic authorship of the Pentateuch (‘the Law') demonstrating the strong tradition supporting the claim (see 1 Kings 2:3; 1 Kings 8:53; 2 Kings 14:6; 2 Kings 18:6; 2 Kings 18:12). More importantly Jesus Christ Himself saw the Pentateuch as the writings of Moses (John 5:46-47), and as without error (Matthew 5:17-18), and indicated Moses' connection with Deuteronomy (Matthew 19:7-8; Mark 10:3-5). See also Peter (Acts 3:22), Stephen (Acts 7:37-38), Paul (Romans 10:19; 1 Corinthians 9:9), and the author of the Epistle to the Hebrews (Hebrews 10:28).
One fact that brings out Pharaoh's total selfishness and disregard for his people is that he only asks Moses to entreat Yahweh to remove a plague four times, in the case of the frogs, the flying insects, the hail and the locusts. These were the ones that would personally affect him the most. The narrative is totally consistent.
The Plagues In The Light Of Natural Phenomena.
We will now try to see the plagues in the light of natural phenomena, recognising that God used natural phenomena, enhancing it where necessary, to accomplish His purpose. While the land waited totally unaware of the forces that were gathering He knew exactly what was coming and what He would do with it and directed Moses accordingly.
The first nine plagues form a logical and connected sequence if we work on the basis that in that year there was an abnormally high inundation of the Nile occurring in July and August. In Egypt too high an inundation of the Nile could be as bad as too low an inundation, and this was clearly beyond anything known. This would be caused by abnormal weather conditions in lands to the south of Egypt of a kind rarely experienced which may well have also caused the effects not produced directly by the inundation.
The higher the Nile-flood was, the more earth it carried within it, especially of the red earth from the basins of the Blue Nile and Atbara. And the more earth it carried the redder it became. The flood would further bring down with it flood microcosms known as flagellates and associated bacteria. These would heighten the blood-red colour of the water and create conditions in which the fish would die in large numbers (Exodus 7:21). Their decomposition would then foul the water further and cause a stench (Exodus 7:21). The water would be undrinkable and the only hope of obtaining fresh water would be to dig for it (Exodus 7:24). The whole of Egypt would of course be affected. This is the background to the first plague.
The result of these conditions would be that the decomposing fish would be washed along the banks and backwaters of the Nile polluting the haunts of the frogs, who would thus swarm out in huge numbers seeking refuge elsewhere (Exodus 8:3). Their sudden death would suggest internal anthrax which would explain their rapid putrefaction (Exodus 8:13-14). This is the background to the second plague.
The high level of the Nile-flood would provide especially favourable conditions for mosquitoes, which may partly explain either the ‘ken' (ticks/lice/fleas) (Exodus 8:16) or the ‘arob (swarms) (Exodus 8:21), while the rotting carcasses of the fish and frogs would encourage other forms of insect life to develop, as would excessive deposits of the red earth which may have brought insect eggs with them. Insects would proliferate throughout the land (Exodus 8:16). These might include lice and also the tick, an eight-legged arthropod and blood-sucking parasite and carrier of disease, as well as fleas. This is the background to the third plague.
As well as mosquitoes from the Nile flood, flies would also develop among the rotting fish, the dead frogs and the decaying vegetation, including the carrier-fly, the stomoxys calcitrans (which might well be responsible for the later boils), and become carriers of disease from these sources. The ‘swarms' may well have included both (Exodus 8:21). This is the background to the fourth plague.
The dying frogs might well have passed on anthrax, and the proliferating insects would pass on other diseases, to the cattle and flocks who were out in the open (Exodus 9:3) and therefore more vulnerable. This is the background to the fifth plague.
The dead cattle would add to the sources of disease carried by these insects, and the insect bites, combined with the bites of the other insects, may well have caused the boils (Exodus 9:9). This would occur around December/January. It may well be the background to the sixth plague.
Thus the first six plagues in a sense follow naturally from one another given the right conditions, but it is their timing, extremeness and Moses' knowledge of them that prove the hand of God at work.
The excessively heavy hail (Exodus 9:22), with thunder, lightning and rain, may well have resulted from the previously mentioned extreme weather conditions, but it went beyond anything known and was exceptional, resulting in death and destruction, and the ruination of the barley and flax, but not the wheat and spelt which was not yet grown (Exodus 8:31-32). (This indicates a good knowledge of Egyptian agriculture). This would probably be in early February.
The excessively heavy rains in Ethiopia and the Sudan which led to the extraordinarily high Nile would cause the conditions favourable to an unusually large plague of locusts (Exodus 10:4; Exodus 10:13), which would eventually be blown down into Northern Egypt and then along the Nile valley by the east wind (Exodus 10:13).
The thick darkness (Exodus 10:21) that could be felt was probably an unusually heavy khamsin dust storm resulting from the large amounts of red earth which the Nile had deposited which would have dried out as a fine dust, together with the usual sand of the desert. The khamsin wind would stir all this up making the air unusually thick and dark, blotting out the light of the sun. Three days is the known length of a khamsin (Exodus 10:23). This, coming on top of all that had come before, and seeming to affect the sun god himself, would have a devastating effect.
These unusual and freak events demonstrate an extremely good knowledge of Egyptian weather conditions with their particular accompanying problems, which could only have been written in the right order by someone with a good knowledge of the peculiar conditions in Egypt which could produce such catastrophes, confirming the Egyptian provenance of the record and the unity of the account.
In all this the gods of Egypt would be prominent to the Egyptians as the people were made aware that the God of the Hebrews was doing this, and that their gods could seemingly do nothing about it. Prominent among these would be Ha‘pi, the Nile god of inundation, Heqit the goddess of fruitfulness, whose symbol was the frog, Hathor the goddess of love, often symbolised by the cow, along with Apis the bull god, Osiris for whom the Nile was his life-blood, now out of control, the goddess Hatmehyt whose symbol was a fish, and of whom models were worn as charms, Nut the sky goddess, Reshpu and Ketesh who were supposed to control all the elements of nature except light, and Re the sun god. All these would be seen to be unable to prevent Yahweh doing His work and thus to have been at least temporarily defeated.
But it should be noted that that is the Egyptian viewpoint. Moses only mentions the gods of Egypt once, and that is probably sarcastically (Exodus 12:12). As far as he is concerned they are nothing. They are irrelevant.
-
Exodus 5:1-4 open_in_new
The Situation Worsens (Exodus 5:1-23).
After the wonder of what they had seen probably all the parties involved considered that the future would be plain sailing. For who could resist such wonders? They had overlooked someone who thought of himself as a god and beyond being touched by men and their tribal gods.
The first Confrontation with Pharaoh (Exodus 5:1-4).
a Moses and Aaron come to Pharaoh and in the name of Yahweh, the God of Israel, request that he let them go to feast to Yahweh in the wilderness (Exodus 5:1).
b Pharaoh contemptuously asks who Yahweh is and says that he does not know Him (Exodus 5:2).
b They reply that He is the God of the Hebrews Who has met with them and called on them to make offerings and sacrifices in the wilderness (Exodus 5:3).
a The king of Egypt's reply is to ask why they are seeking to release the people from their obligatory service and to demand that they return to their burdens (Exodus 5:4).
Note the parallel between (a) their desire to hold a religious feast to Yahweh and in the parallel the implication that their true service lies in slaving for the king of Egypt. His anger was probably aroused by the request that all may go. That would seriously hinder the building work being done. Permission might have been given to a few.
‘And afterwards Moses and Aaron came and said to Pharaoh, “Thus says Yahweh, the God of Israel, ‘Let my people go that they may hold a feast to me in the wilderness.' ” '
Moses and Aaron now sought the privilege of approaching Pharaoh. There is no suggestion that Moses is seen as a prince or given special privileges. He and Aaron approach as representatives of the children of Israel and would need to go through all the necessary formalities. We know that even lowly slaves were permitted to appeal freely to Pharaoh, at least in the days of the Ramesside dynasty. Pharaoh probably liked to see himself as a father to his subjects.
“Yahweh, the God of Israel.” The children of Israel are now being depicted as a tribal grouping, Israel, and Yahweh is declared to be their God.
“A feast to me in the wilderness.” No doubt more was said than we have here. Pharaoh would be used to the flowery requests put before him by trained orators, and Aaron would no doubt follow the pattern (it was this that Moses had demurred at). But the end request was made that they be permitted to have a pilgrimage to the place where their God had revealed Himself, which would include a period of worship, followed by feasting, in the wilderness to honour the God Who had appeared to Moses in a great theophany in the wilderness.
Later it would also be pointed out that it was necessary to go out of sight of their Egyptian neighbours because they would be offended at the sacrifices offered by the Israelites at such a great feast (Exodus 8:26). For some of the animals slaughtered were seen as sacred by many Egyptians, and to see them killed would be to rouse them to extreme violence.
‘And Pharaoh said, “Who is Yahweh that I should listen to his voice to let Israel go? I do not know Yahweh and moreover I will not let Israel go.”
That Pharaoh had been willing to see them indicates that their request, which would have been explained to high officials, was considered appropriate to be offered. But he refused to consider it, and replied with contempt.
“Who is Yahweh? --- I do not know Yahweh.” As a god and companion of the gods he indicated that Yahweh was an unknown among the gods. Certainly he did not acknowledge Him, for He was a nonentity. Why then should He listen to Him? His voice would be filled with contempt. He possibly recognised that this Yahweh must be a ‘God of the Hebrews', but that was different from acknowledging Him and respecting Him. Then he came down to earth. ‘Moreover I will not let Israel go.' His reply was final. It should be recognised that this revealed this Pharaoh as a particularly unyielding person. Many kings would have been willing to acknowledge the gods of their slaves even though they did not themselves worship them. To refute such gods was to display religious arrogance of an unusual kind. This might point to Amenophis IV as the Pharaoh, for he sought to restrict worship to the worship of Aten.
“I do not know Yahweh.” By this he probably meant that he did not acknowledge that He had any rights. As far as he was concerned Yahweh could be ignored.
“Israel”. Pharaoh usually thinks of the children of Israel as just ‘Israel' (compare Exodus 14:5).
‘And they said, “The God of the Hebrews has met with us. Let us go, we pray you, three days journey into the wilderness and sacrifice to Yahweh our God, lest he fall on us with pestilence and the sword.”
Courageously they pressed their request further to urge its crucial importance. ‘The God of the Hebrews has met with us.' They assured him that there had been a wonderful theophany and that He had made certain demands on them. They dare not refuse, otherwise they may suffer pestilence and physical violence by the sword. Pharaoh might not acknowledge Yahweh but they did, and they were fearful of what He might do. It was widely believed that such afflictions resulted from not honouring gods sufficiently.
They possibly hoped that this would give Pharaoh pause for thought. Pestilence would affect his people as well and ‘the sword' could only indicate an invasion. Significantly Goshen was near the Egyptian northern borders, the direction from which invasion would probably come, and from which the Hyksos had previously come. It was thus in everyone's interest that the God of the Hebrews be propitiated.
“The God of the Hebrews.” An attempt to explain more of Whom Yahweh is. Pharaoh might not know who ‘Israel' are, but he will know who ‘the Hebrews' are. So they explain that Yahweh is their God. To Pharaoh ‘the Hebrews' would equate with ‘the Habiru', the landless and wild people who had no settled place, who gathered in bands and came out of the wilderness and even attacked cities, who worked in mines and many of whom he had now himself enslaved. The ‘prw, as the Egyptians called them, are mentioned in a number of Egyptian texts and range from fighting men in Canaan to captives employed as servants to strain wine, to prisoners given to the temples, to workers in the quarries of the Wadi Hammamat.
“Three days journey.” A stereotyped term. Not a great distance but sufficient to be able to reach ‘the wilderness' proper. It could be less than two actual days (an evening, a day and a part morning) They did not want the request to sound too demanding. They would only be gone a short time.
‘And the king of Egypt said to them, “Why do you, Moses and Aaron, loose the people from their works. Get you to your burdens.”
As we have seen constantly, the ancient writer liked to use variety when writing, thus here ‘Pharaoh', the father of his people, now becomes the stern ‘king of Egypt'. It is not as ‘father' of his people that he speaks but as the despotic king. He had now lost patience with them and accused them of simply trying to find an excuse to avoid working, to obtain for the people a holiday. He commanded that they cease such foolishness and get down to the tasks assigned to them. Their loyalty lay in serving him. That was where their true religious service lay.
It should be noted that at this point no signs and wonders had been shown to Pharaoh. The appeal had been made to him on the basis of common justice and seeking the favour that would be expected from a just ruler. Pharaoh had been given his chance to prove himself just and wise.
“Moses and Aaron.” The fact that Moses and Aaron are mentioned together in this way suggests that Moses has approached as a representative of the children of Israel rather than as a prince of Egypt. The latter thought never appears at any stage. It was probably better that Pharaoh did not know who he was.
“The king of Egypt.” This is an indication of what Pharaoh is. In comparison with Yahweh he is only the king of Egypt, an earthly monarch with a limited kingdom.
-
Exodus 5:5-19 open_in_new
Pharaoh's Vindictive Response to Their Approach (Exodus 5:5-19).
a Pharaoh says, the people of the land are many and you make them rest from their burdens (Exodus 5:5).
b Pharaoh commands officers and taskmaster not to give straw to the people, they must gather straw for themselves (Exodus 5:6-7).
c But the tally of bricks produced must not diminish because they are idle in seeking to sacrifice to their God (Exodus 5:8).
d Heavier work is to be laid on the people so that they do not listen to lying words (Exodus 5:9).
e The officers and taskmasters of Egypt explain that Pharaoh has said, ‘Do not give them straw'. (Exodus 5:10).
f They are to get straw where they can but their tally must not be diminished (Exodus 5:11).
f The people scatter through the land to get stubble for use as straw (where they can), and the taskmasters say, ‘fulfil you daily quotas as when there was straw' (Exodus 5:13).
e The officers of the children of Israel are beaten and asked why they have not produced their quotas on the same level as before. They complain to Pharaoh that they are not given straw (Exodus 5:14-16 a).
d They complain to Pharaoh that they are expected to make bricks, and are beaten whereas the fault lies with his people (as a result of being made to work more heavily) (Exodus 5:15-16).
c He replies that they are idle which is why they seek to sacrifice to Yahweh (Exodus 5:17).
b They are therefore to go and work and no straw is to be given to them, although they must still deliver their quotas (Exodus 5:18).
a The officers of the children of Israel recognise their evil situation when they are told that they must fulfil their daily quotas (Exodus 5:19).
Note that in ‘a' it is Pharaoh's case that they are seeking a relatively easy time, while in the parallel it is the case of the officers of the children of Israel that their situation is evil. In ‘b' Pharaoh commands the Egyptian officers and taskmaster not to give straw to the people, they must gather straw for themselves, while in the parallel they are to go and work and no straw is to be given to them, although they must still deliver their quotas. In ‘c' Pharaoh insists that the tally of bricks must be maintained because they are idle, as revealed by their desire to go and offer sacrifices, while in the parallel he replies that they are idle which is why they seek to sacrifice to Yahweh. In ‘d' heavier work is to be laid on the people so that they do not listen to lying words, while in the parallel they are beaten because heavier work is laid on them by forcing them to make bricks and collect the straw for themselves, so that the fault lies with the Egyptians. In ‘e' the officers and taskmasters of Egypt explain to the children of Israel that Pharaoh has said, ‘Do not give them straw', while in the parallel the officers of the children of Israel are beaten and asked why they have not produced their quotas on the same level as before, at which they complain to Pharaoh that they are not given straw. In ‘f' they are told that they are to get straw where they can but their tally must not be diminished, while in the parallel the people scatter through the land to get stubble for use as straw where they can, and the taskmasters say, ‘fulfil you daily quotas as when there was straw' (they must not be diminished).
‘And Pharaoh said, “Behold, the people of the land are now many, and you make them rest from their burdens.” '
“The people of the land.” An interesting term. It is clear that the children of Israel were now seen as permanent residents in Goshen, and possibly constituted the majority. They are said to be ‘many'. Had they been but a few permission might have been granted, but such permission here would result in almost total cessation of work on Pharaoh's projects.
Pharaoh's complaint is that Moses and Aaron are making the people rest from their burdens. In other words they are making cultic activity an excuse for not fulfilling their responsibilities.
‘And the same day Pharaoh commanded the taskmasters of the people, and their administrative scribes, saying, “You shall no more give the people straw to make brick, as you have done before. Let them go and gather straw for themselves. And the recorded requirement of bricks which they made previously, you shall require of them. You shall not diminish any of it, for they are idle. That is why they cry, saying, ‘Let us go and sacrifice to our god'.”
Pharaoh now demonstrated his view of the situation. Their request was not one made from genuine religious motives, but in order to dodge work. They must therefore be taught a lesson that they would not forget. He would not have had any real knowledge of their struggles to survive or of their hardships. He would simply have judged them by the standards of himself and his palace officials. It was a similar attitude to that of Catherine the Great of Russia, who when told of the shortage of bread in Russia so that the people were starving, said, ‘Let them eat cake'. She thought that they were just being pernickety. She had no idea of the sparse conditions under which they lived and that to them cake was something that was totally unheard of. In the same way this Pharaoh had his eyes closed to the real conditions under which the Israelites lived, and reacted accordingly. This whole attitude would tie in with someone like Amenophis IV whose whole sense of religion was concentrated on one god, and considered all other worship to be sacrilege. (But while he worshipped Aten he did not withdraw the worship of himself. His people worshipped Aten through him). On the other hand it could have been true of any Pharaoh who despised gods other than those of Egypt.
Straw was required to make the bricks, probably to act as a binding agent. This has been confirmed by the examination of Egyptian brickwork. The bricks were made of Nile mud mixed with the straw and were made in frames or moulds and then left to dry in the sun. But the people were now to be required to gather the straw themselves and yet maintain the level of production. (They do not, as suggested by some commentators, make bricks without straw at any stage). An interesting supporting comment is found in an Egyptian papyrus in which a man, who had to supervise or construct a building, said, "I am not provided with anything. There are no men for making bricks, and there is no straw in the district."
“The taskmasters -- the administrative scribes.” These are the "nogesim" and the "shoteray". Usually these are translated as "taskmasters" and "officers". However, from Egyptian pictures it is possible to determine the functions of these two officials. The first one was actually a driver or a presser, and this corresponds to the Egyptian word for "overseer", the one who supervised the men at work and oppressed them to his heart's content, even flogging them if he so desired. The other word is shoteray, and is derived from the word "shatar", which probably refers to writing and involves scribes. They had complete control over the construction, and of the bondsmen themselves, including their food and other particulars. They also had control over the supply of bricks and absenteeism. Some of the latter, if not all, were in this case Israelite officials appointed by the taskmasters (Exodus 5:15).
We must not be deceived by the fact that the people of Israel were slaves. In fact all Egyptians were slaves to Pharaoh as well. He was a god to them and his position had been firmly established in the time of the great famine (Genesis 47:20). Furthermore many foreign slaves would be employed in high places and hold powerful positions. But the majority of the people of Israel were not in that happy position, although some may well have been.
“The recorded requirement of bricks.” This literally involves the measuring of the bricks. The practical Egyptian did not count the bricks, but laid them in rows and measured them to assess the space they would fill in a building. Their facility with numbers was limited.
“For they are idle.” This was the common excuse for making unreasonable demands in order to obtain more work and larger production from slaves. Up to now the labour of the children of Israel had been harsh but bearable. We read elsewhere that they were able to cultivate their own plots of ground (Deuteronomy 11:10); to raise crops of cucumbers, melons, leeks, onions and garlic (Numbers 11:5); to catch fish (Numbers 11:5); and to attend public meetings (Exodus 4:30-31), although much might have been done by the womenfolk.
Now the pressure would come on them which would take them beyond the limit. In Pharaoh's view the reason that they were able to ask for time off was because they were not working full out. He would not take their desire to worship their God seriously. The well-to-do, who would shudder at the thought of doing such work themselves, and who live for enjoyment, have always very easily characterised working people who wanted some enjoyment for themselves as idle.
“Let heavier work be laid on the men that they may toil in it, and let them not regard lying words.”
In future the men were to be made to sweat even more, so that they would become really exhausted, and they were to be warned against accepting their leaders ‘lying tales' which he saw as just an excuse to avoid work, and as coming from troublemakers.
‘And the taskmasters of the people went out, and their administrative scribes, and they spoke to the people, saying, “Thus says Pharaoh, ‘I will not give you straw. Go yourselves, obtain yourselves straw wherever you can find it, for none of your required workload shall be diminished'.” So the people were scattered abroad throughout all the land of Egypt to gather stubble for straw.'
The people were informed of Pharaoh's decision, and they had to start looking for stubble to replace the straw which had previously been provided. All the straw in the fields had obviously been gathered in. Thus it was a matter of searching for stubble and then cutting it up to make it suitable for making bricks. And the extra time spent was not taken into account when deciding production levels
“Throughout all the land of Egypt.” It would seem possible that the decision affected not only the children of Israel but Habiru slaves throughout Egypt. Alternately the phrase might be a deliberate exaggeration to bring out how wide their search had to be and to emphasise the difficulties involved.
‘And the taskmasters pressed them hard saying, “Fulfil your works, your daily tasks, as when there was straw.”
The Egyptian taskmasters had no pity, indeed it was their responsibility to ensure that the quotas were fulfilled lest they be punished. So they reacted by greater severity. There was to be no lessening of the number of bricks produced.
‘And the administration scribes of the children of Israel, whom Pharaoh's taskmasters had set over them, were beaten severely, and were asked, “Why have you not fulfilled your assignment both yesterday and today in making the same amount of bricks as previously?” '
Thus in the end the buck fell on the middlemen, the Israelite administrative scribes responsible for general management, and they were beaten severely because the quotas were not fulfilled and were asked why they had not fulfilled them in the way that they had previously.
‘Then the administrative scribes of the children of Israel came and cried to Pharaoh, saying, “Why do you deal with your servants in this way? There is no straw given to your servants, and they say to us, ‘Make brick', and behold your servants are beaten, but the fault is in your own people.” '
The managers professed that they could not believe that it was Pharaoh who had given the orders because they were so unreasonable, and they sought to blame the taskmasters, Pharaoh's ‘own people'. Instead of ‘the fault is in your own people' LXX and Syriac read ‘and you will be guilty of a wrong against your own people' but the Massoretic text fits better psychologically. It would not have been wise for them to accuse Pharaoh directly.
‘But he said, “You are idle, you are idle, that is why you say ‘Let us go and sacrifice to Yahweh.' Go therefore now and toil, for no straw will be given to you, yet you will deliver the expected quantity of bricks.” '
Pharaoh's reply was uncompromising. Notice the repetition. It expressed his animosity He stated that it was clear to him that they did not have enough to do or they would not have made the request to go and worship this Yahweh. Therefore they must carry on without being provided with straw and make sure they fulfilled their quota. ‘Go -- and toil.' he knew that what was being asked of them was difficult, but considered that they had deserved it.
‘And the administrative scribes of the children of Israel saw that they were in a dreadful position (literally ‘an evil') when it was said, “You shall not diminish anything from your bricks, your daily tasks”.'
Understandably the administrative scribes, the managers, felt let down. Moses and Aaron had taken on themselves (that was how they now saw it) to approach Pharaoh with their suggestion and now they, the managers, were paying for it. They called on Yahweh to judge, in view of the consequences, whether Moses and Aaron had been right to do what they did. It was a bitter request and heartfelt.
-
Exodus 5:20-1 open_in_new
The Complaint of the Administrative Scribes of the Children of Israel (Exodus 5:20 to Exodus 6:1).
a As they leave the presence of Pharaoh the administrative scribes meet Moses and Aaron, and ask that Yahweh will look on Moses and Aaron and judge them for making the children of Israel an abhorrence to Pharaoh and his servants so that they are treating them so badly (Exodus 5:20-21).
b Moses returns to Yahweh and asks Him why He has treated His people so badly and what purpose He had in sending him (Exodus 5:22)
b For, he points out, since he has spoken to Pharaoh in Yahweh's name His people are being even more ill-treated, nor had Yahweh delivered them as He promised (Exodus 5:23).
a Yahweh replies that he will now see what He intends to do to Pharaoh, and He will do it with such a strong hand that (it will be an abhorrence to Pharaoh and) he will let them go, no, will be so affected that he will even drive them out of his land by a strong hand (Exodus 6:1).
In ‘a' The administrative scribes of Israel leave the presence of Pharaoh, in the parallel they will be driven out by him. Their complaint is that they have been made an abhorrence to Pharaoh, and Yahweh's reply is essentially that they will become such an abhorrence to Pharaoh that he will want to get rid of them. In ‘b' Moses returns to Yahweh and asks Him why He has treated His people so badly and what purpose He had in sending him, while in the parallel he points out that since he has spoken to Pharaoh in Yahweh's name His people are being even more ill-treated, nor had Yahweh delivered them as He promised.
‘And they met Moses and Aaron who stood in the way as they came out from Pharaoh, and they said to them, “Yahweh look on you and judge, for you have made our odour abhorred in the eyes of Pharaoh, and in the eyes of his servants, to put a sword in their hand to kill us.'
The administrative scribes now charge Moses and Aaron with having made things much worse. They call on Yahweh Himself to pass judgment on them because they have made the name of Israel abhorred in Pharaoh's mind so that they themselves (the scribes) are under the threat of execution.
“They met Moses and Aaron.” Moses and Aaron had been waiting anxiously to find out what response Pharaoh would give to the pleas of the managers.
“To put a sword in their hand to kill us.” Not literally, but figuratively. They would be killed by the strain of impossible demands and the consequent severe punishments. It may, however, be that the overseers had even had to resort to swords because of their resistance, or that there were threats of summary execution.
‘And Moses returned to Yahweh and said, “Lord, why have you treated this people so badly? Why is it that you sent me? For since I came to Pharaoh to speak in your name he has treated this people badly, nor have you delivered your people at all.”
Moses was baffled. Why had God sent him if this was to be the result? He had come at Yahweh's command and yet God was seemingly standing by and doing nothing. Indeed in view of the fact that as a consequence the people were being ill treated even more by Pharaoh, that ill treatment could be laid at His door.
Note for Christians.
What happened to Moses and Israel, will often happen in our lives. When we pray God does not always deliver from trials immediately. He has greater purposes to work than we can ever know. Things may seem to be getting worse day by day, but we can be sure of this, that if we have committed our cause into His hands, our deliverance is sure. But it will be easier for us if instead of fighting Him we trust Him for our future. For then we will both enjoy His presence now and His deliverance when it comes. ‘In quietness and confidence shall be your strength' (Isaiah 30:15).
End of note.
‘And Yahweh said to Moses, “Now you will see what I will do to Pharaoh, for by a strong hand will he let them go, and by a strong hand will he drive them out of his land.” '
Yahweh's reply is, ‘you wait and see what I will do'. And He promises that Pharaoh will be made to listen under Yahweh's strong hand, so much so that he himself will drive the people out with a strong hand.
“By a strong hand.” In Exodus 3:19 ‘the mighty hand' refers to Yahweh. Compare also Exodus 13:3 ‘by strength of hand Yahweh brought you out of this place' (see also Exodus 13:9; Exodus 13:14; Exodus 13:16). This would suggest that the strong hand which would move Pharaoh must be that of Yahweh, for Yahweh was about to exert His power against him. By it He would reveal that He truly was Yahweh, ‘the One Who is there'. So we may paraphrase, ‘by means of a strong hand will Yahweh make him let them go and by a strong hand will Yahweh make him drive them out of his land.' Others, however, refer it to Pharaoh's strong hand seeing it as representing the forcefulness with which Pharaoh will make them depart.