Two men of the Hebrews strove together.
Moses’ championship of the right
In the first instance we might have thought that in taking part with the Hebrew against the Egyptian, Moses was but yielding to a clannish feeling. It was race against race, not right against wrong. In the second instance, however, that conclusion is shown to be incorrect. We now come to a strife between two Hebrews, both of whom were suffering under the same galling bondage. How did the youthful Moses deport himself under such circumstances? Did he take part with the strong against the weak? Did he even take part with the weak against the strong? Distinctly the case was not one determined by the mere disparity of the combatants. To the mind of Moses the question was altogether a moral one. When he spoke, he addressed the man who did the wrong; that man might have been either the weaker or the stronger. The one question with Moses turned upon injustice and dishonourableness. Do we not here once more see traces of his mother’s training? yet we thought that the home life of Moses was a life unrecorded! Read the mother in the boy; discover the home training in the public life. Men’s behaviour is but the outcome of the nurture they have received at home. Moses did not say, You are both Hebrews, and therefore you may fight out your own quarrel: nor did he say, The controversies of other men are nothing to me; they who began the quarrel must end it. Moses saw that the conditions of life had a moral basis; in every quarrel as between right and wrong he had a share, because every honourable-minded man is a trustee of social justice and common fair play. We have nothing to do with the petty quarrels which fret society, but we certainly have to do with every controversy, social, imperial, or international, which violates human right, and impairs the claims of Divine honour. We must all fight for the right: we feel safer by so much as we know that there are amongst us men who will not be silent in the presence of wrong, and will lift up a testimony in the name of righteousness, though there be none to cheer them with one word of encouragement. (J. Parker, D. D.)
The Hebrew quarrel
1. Multiplied their enemies.
2. Weakened Israel.
3. Banished Moses.
Divisions defeat the Church. Moses, as--
1. A judge dooming his enemies.
2. A peacemaker among his countrymen. (Dr. Fowler.)
Lessons
1. Daily and successive is the care of God’s saving instruments to His oppressed Church.
2. God’s faithful instruments leave courtly pleasures to visit God’s afflicted frequently.
3. In visiting for good the oppressed Church, sad contentions may appear among the members.
4. It is an observable evil by overseers, to see Church members striving together.
5. Duels in the Church and among its members are sad things to record.
6. Men called of God must interpose and curb the injurious and offending parties.
7. Smiting of neighbours and brethren is a sin sharply reprovable in the Church (verse 13).
8. Injurious and offending parties are apt to recoil against rulers upon reproof.
9. Wickedness makes men question any authority of God, that would suppress them.
10. Sin will not endure to be suppressed by power; but will rage against it.
11. It is the artifice of malefactors to recriminate powers for escaping themselves.
12. Zealous avengers of God’s oppressed may be terrified sometimes with the criminations of the wicked. (G. Hughes, B. D.)
A good man’s interference with a quarrel
I. It is the duty of good men to try to subdue any quarrels they may be called to witness.
1. Because they recognize the common grief of men. The suffering of humanity an argument for friendliness.
2. Because they recognize the claim arising from the brotherhood of men.
3. Because they ought to be superior to the passion of strife.
II. In this endeavour good men should make moral considerations the basis of their appeal to the quarrelsome.
1. Not favouritism.
2. Not greater physical strength. Christianity must aid weakness when associated with rectitude.
3. Not hope of reward. A satisfied conscience is brighter and more enduring than gold.
III. Good men, in trying to subdue the quarrels of others, often get little thanks, and may involve themselves in trouble. “Who made thee,” etc.
1. They imagined that Moses assumed unrightful authority.
2. They reminded Moses of, and taunted him with, past sin. It requires a blameless life to rebuke evil.
3. The heroic interference of Moses lacked moral continuity. His own sin made him a coward.
4. Moses incurred the hatred of Pharaoh. Through endeavouring to stay this quarrel, he lost position and comfort; but it was the means of putting him on the track of Divinely-imposed duty, which would win him world-wide renown. (J. S. Exell, M. A.)
Wherefore smitest thou thy fellow
?:--Apply this question--
1. To the domestic circle.
2. To society at large.
3. To the Church. (J. S. Exell, M. A.)
Some find reason for their conduct
1. In revenge.
2. In impulse.
3. Necessity. (J. S. Exell, M. A.)
Discouragement
The best friends of the Church often meet with the most discouragement.
1. Their authority is rejected.
2. They are not understood.
3. Their safety is endangered.
4. The welfare of the Church is imperilled. (J. S. Exell, M. A.)
The good man must not be turned aside from duty by circumstances
1. Moses was not offended by this treatment.
2. He did not give up in despair.
3. He worked out the training of his boyhood.
4. He worked out the providence of God.
5. He worked out the dictates of his conscience. (J. S. Exell, M. A.)
Discord and strife
In the ringing of bells, whilst every one keeps his due time and order, what a sweet and harmonious sound they make! All the neighbouring villages are cheered with the sound of them; but when once they jar and check each other, either jangling together or striking preposterously, how harsh and unpleasing is that noise. So that as we testify our public rejoicings by an orderly and well-timed peal, when we would signify the town is on fire, we ring the bells back.ward in a confused manner. It is just thus in the Church. When every one knows his station, authority, and keeps his due rank, there is melodious concert of comfort and contentment; but when either states or persons will be clashing with each other, the discord is grievous and prejudicial. (J. Hall.)
Results of physical degradation
The Israelites had sunk into brute insensibility under oppression. It is a remarkable fact we cannot too earnestly reflect on, always and everywhere true, that extreme physical degradation dulls the intellect, and destroys moral sensibility. Some persons complain, that the very poorest classes of the community, who live in underground cellars and upper garrets, are unthankful. But it is because we are undutiful. Physical degradation has a most pernicious effect upon the moral, spiritual, and intellectual feelings of mankind. It brutalizes and barbarizes. I believe that our missions, with all their value--our city missionaries and our Scripture readers, doing a most noble work--are here vastly obstructed in their work. I believe a great physical and social amelioration in poor men’s homes must be made, before a substantial moral and spiritual one begins in their hearts. We must raise the masses above the level of the brutes, before we can raise them to the level of Christians. You must make them men, before you can make them, by the grace of God, Christians. (J. Gumming, D. D.)