And the Egyptians pursued, and went in after them to the midst of the sea, even all Pharaoh's horses, his chariots, and his horsemen. The Egyptians pursued. From the darkness caused by the intercepting cloud, it is probable that they were not aware on what ground they were driving: they heard the sound of the fugitives before them, and they pushed on with the fury of the avengers of blood, without dreaming that they were on the bared bed of the sea.
Verse 24. In the morning watch - i:e., at sunrise.
The Lord looked ... through ... cloud, and troubled the host of the Egyptians. We suppose the fact to have been, that the side of the pillar of cloud toward the Egyptians was suddenly, and for a few moments, illuminated with a blaze of light, which, coming as it were in a refulgent flash upon the dense darkness which had preceded, so frightened the horses of the pursuers that they rushed confusedly together and became unmanageable. Josephus mentions a storm of thunder and lightning (cf. Psalms 77:16-18). "Let us flee," was the cry that resounded through the broken and trembling ranks; but it was too late-all attempts at flight were vain (Bush).
Verse 25. Took off their chariot wheels, that they drave them heavily. The plunging of the terrified horses seems to have thrown the chariots off the axles. This confusion seems to have been produced as if to prevent their overtaking the Israelites, while still in the bed of the sea.
Verse 27. Moses stretched forth his hand over the sea, and the sea returned to his strength, х lª'eeytaanow (H386)] - to perpetuating its ceaseless flow. What circumstances could more clearly demonstrate the miraculous character of this transaction than that at the waving of Moses' rod the dividing waters left the channel dry, and on his making the same motion on the opposite side, they returned, commingling with instantaneous fury. Is such the character of any ebb tide?
The Egyptians fled against it; and the Lord overthrew the Egyptians in the midst of the sea. The east wind would cease first on the western or Egyptian shore, so that, when the waters were rushing back to their accustomed channel, the Egyptians encountered the returning billows.
Verse 28. There remained not so much as one of them. Although the historian does not expressly say that Pharaoh perished, it is surprising that, with such a declaration, some intelligent writers can maintain there is no evidence of the destruction of Pharaoh himself (Exodus 14:17-18; see the note at Exodus 15:19; also, Osburn, 'Mon. Hist.,' 2:, p. 605).
Verse 30. Israel saw the Egyptians ... The tide threw them up, and left multitudes of corpses on the beach, a prey to jackals and other rapacious animals (Psalms 74:13-14) - a result that brought greater infamy on the Egyptians, that tended on the other hand to enhance the triumph of the Israelites, and doubtless enriched them with arms, which they had not before.
The locality of this famous passage has not yet been, and probably never will be, satisfactorily fixed. Some place it in the immediate neighbourhood of Suez-either above it, as Niebuhr and the Rationalists do, across a very narrow inlet, which is fordable at ebb tide, and about two-thirds of a mile wide-or immediately below it, where there are extensive shallows, also fordable at ebb; where, they say, the part of the sea is most likely to be affected by 'a strong northeast wind;' where the road from the defile of Migdol (now Muktala) leads directly to this point, and where the sea, not above two miles broad, could be crossed in a short time. This is Dr. Robinson's theory ('Biblical Researches,' vol. 1:, pp. 81-86) of the passage, which he describes as a semi-miraculous event, produced on the curvature at the head of the gulf, by a northeast wind; because the Hebrew term denotes any wind from the eastern quarter. 'A strong northeast wind, acting here upon the ebb tide,' says he, 'would necessarily have the effect to drive out the waters from the small arm of the sea, which runs up by Suez, and also from the end of the gulf itself, leaving the shallower portions dry; while the more northern part of the arm, which was anciently both broader and deeper than at present, would still remain covered with water.' In this way-namely, by the wind acting with supernatural impetus upon the ebb tide, and driving out the waters during the night to a far greater extent than usual-he thinks the passage was effected.
It was an extraordinary ebb, produced by natural means supernaturally increased. But being nothing more than an unusual ebb, it could not be above three or four hours' duration; and although the Israelites had probably been prepared, the moment the ford promised safe footing, to march forward; yet, as the action of the wind must have been continued a considerable time before that required effect took place, the passage could not be commenced until midnight, and by sunrise it was completed-thus occupying only two hours. 'As the Israelites numbered more than two million persons, besides flocks and herds, they would of course be able to pass but slowly. If the part left dry were broad enough to enable them to cross in a body 1,000 abreast, which would require a space of more than half a mile in width (and is perhaps the largest supposition admissible), still the column would be more than 2,000 persons in depth, and, in all probability could not have extended less than two miles. It would then have occupied at least an hour in passing over its own length, or in entering the sea; and deducting this from the largest time intervening before the Egyptians must also have entered the sea, there will remain only time enough, under the circumstances, for the body of the Israelites to have passed, at the most, over a space of three or four miles.'
With all respect for the opinion of this learned and reflecting traveler, who is supported by Havernick, Ritter, Wilkinson, Stanley, etc., we cannot accept his solution of this important question, which seems to leave out of view a number of circumstances-minute, indeed, but essential to the full consideration of the case. The sea at the point where the passage was made must have been much broader than it is at Suez, because both the Israelites and the Egyptians were on its bared bed at one time. There is no reason to suppose the lapse of a considerable period before the violent action of the wind produced the intended effect; because the result seems to have been immediately consequent on the lifting up of Moses' rod both at the beginning and the end. Instead of the waters being driven out by its resistless impulsion further than during an ordinary ebb, they were divided, or diagonally cut х yibaaqª`uw (H1234), avert themselves. The word bears the signification of cleaving by a blow or violence. Septuagint, eschisthee to hudoor, seas to be a "wall unto the Israelites on their right hand and on their left."
There is an inscription on the rocks at Sinai which, if Foster renders it aright, is to this effect, 'Turned into dry land the sea, the Hebrews flee through the sea' ('Sinai Photographed'). And although it is said that "a strong east wind was used instrumentally, it seems to have been employed not so much for the separation of the waters, as to dry the wet sand.
Kadim denotes the character rather than the quarter of the gale-a parching wind, a shurkiyeh, and hence, it is rendered Notos by the Septuagint-not an ordinary or periodical wind, but a special miraculous agent. A sufficient time would thus be afforded, from sunset to sunrise, to conduct over the bed of the sea the mighty multitude of men, women, and children, with their flocks and herds.
Influenced by these views, the vast majority who have examined the spot reject the theory of Robinson, and fix the passage about 10 or 12 miles further down the shore, at Wady Tawarik, where the sea, reckoning by a straight line from the base of Jebel Attakah, at the northern corner of the Badiyah to the Ras Mesallah, on the eastern or Arabian shore, is from 6 1/2 to 8 geographical miles. The time of the miracle was the whole night, at the season of the year, too, when the night would be about its average length. There was thus ample time for the passage of the Israelites from any part of the valley, especially considering their excitement and animation by the gracious and wonderful interposition of Providence in their behalf (Wilson's 'Lands,' vol. 1:,
p. 154), Strabo, Diodorus Siculus, Trogus Pompeius in Justin, 36:, 2; Artapanus in Eusebius, 9:, 27, record the tales told by the ancient inhabitants of the place respecting the marvelous passage of the Israelites through the divided waters). Local tradition also confirms this view; because the names still given to the most prominent objects in the neighbourhood bear a direct reference to the passage of the Israelites. Wady Tawarik is called also by the Arabs Wady Musa. Jebel Attakah signifies, in Arabic, 'the mount of deliverance;' the Wady Badiyah, 'the valley of the miraculous;' Wady el Tih, 'the valley of wandering,' etc. The locality of this famous passage, however, it must be acknowledged, is still an unsolved problem; for, from the many geological changes that have taken place in the bed, as well as on the shores, of the Gulf of Suez, even those who have carefully explored the topography of that region, have come to very different conclusions; so that the actual spot at which the Israelites entered on the bared channel remains, and probably will forever remain, a questio vexata in Biblical literature.
It is a favourite idea with Rationalistic writers that this record is not strictly historical. 'The narrative of the passage of the Red Sea must not be viewed as literal history. Later traditions exaggerated the event, surrounding it with wonder' (see Davidson's 'Introduction,' vol. 1:, p. 225). Accordingly, they endeavour in two ways to impugn the miraculous character of this passage, either by averting that Moses took advantage of a strong ebb tide to transport his people to the Arabian strand, or by comparing it with Alexander's crossing over the Bay of Pamphylia, in his Persian Expedition. In regard to the first, who can be so credulous as to suppose that a stranger like Moses possessed a familiar acquaintance with the time and extent of the flux and reflux of the tide, which enabled him to calculate with confidence on profiting by them on a sudden and perilous emergency, while the king of Egypt and his whole army, though native inhabitants of the country, knew nothing of any expected extraordinary subsidence of the waters. With respect to the other point, there was evidently nothing miraculous in the passage of the Macedonian hero, as Josephus, who relates it, clearly insinuates; but Callisthenes, adverting to a favourable breeze from the north, which drove away the water in the shallows, thereby affording an easy passage, represented it, with courtly adulation, as the wind doing homage to Alexander as a demigod, by pioneering his way, (Eustathius, 'Notes on Iliad,' 3:)
Assuming the veracity of Moses, however, it seems impossible for the human mind to evade the force of this miracle; and from the numerous allusions made to it in Scripture-the profound and awe-inspiring impression it produced upon contemporary nations, as well as the figurative use which the bards of Israel make of it in describing the greatness of Almighty power-it must have been a miracle of stupendous character-or unparalleled magnitude.
What was the design of it? There was no absolute need of the Israelites being led through the Red Sea; because there is a route vastly more expeditious, as well as practicable, by which modern travelers are every season penetrating the depths of the Arabian desert. Still there was a necessity for this miracle-not, indeed, a physical, but a moral necessity-the completion of the work which the preceding plagues on Egypt had to a certain extent accomplished, by the revelation of the power and grace of the true God; and the nations were to be taught that the gods of the pagan, even those of the civilized Egyptians, were nothing compared to Yahweh, the Creator and Governor of the whole earth. The Israelites could have been led to Canaan without a miracle; but there would have been no such striking manifestations of God's omnipotence-of His grace and His paternal interest in them.
The divine legation of Moses was authenticated by the silent but emphatic testimony of Heaven. The confidence of the Israelites in his mission and authority was strongly, though with many of them but temporarily awakened; and in the astonishing phenomena of that eventful night terminated by the judicial destruction of the Egyptians, demonstration was made to the senses of two million people, of which the effect described was natural and legitimate. "Israel saw that great work which the Lord did upon the Egyptians: and the people feared the Lord, and believed the Lord, and his servant Moses" (Exodus 14:31).
The apostle Paul, referring to this memorable fact in the history of the ancient Church, says that the Israelites were all "baptized unto Moses in the cloud and in the sea" (1 Corinthians 10:2). The conjunction of the cloud with the sea suggests that in these words there may be a literal reference to the spray, which might fall upon the people from the o'er-canopying cloud, and from the liquid walls on their right and their left. But the import of this apostolic declaration is, that the Israelites were baptized unto Moses as unto a typical Mediator, and consequently, by that dedication were bound to yield obedience to the divine dispensation which was soon to be inaugurated with them by his ministry.
Further, it also clearly denotes that, in the passage of the literal Israel through the Red Sea, we have a figure of the same kind with the initiatory seal of the covenant of grace-a type of "the washing of regeneration," and sprinkling of the blood of Jesus, of which baptism is only the sign. (See Jamieson's 'Use of Sacred History,' vol. 1:, p. 292.)