Notes on

Exodus
2 0 2 1 E d i t i o n
Dr. Thomas L. Constable

TITLE

The Hebrew title of this book (we'elleh shemot) originated from the ancient
practice of naming a Bible book after its first word or words. "Now these
are the names of" is the translation of the first two Hebrew words.

"The Hebrew title of the Book of Exodus, therefore, was to

remind us that Exodus is the sequel to Genesis and that one of
its purposes is to continue the history of God's people as well
as elaborate further on the great themes so nobly introduced
in Genesis."1

Exodus cannot stand alone, in the sense that the book would not make
much sense without Genesis. The very first word of the book, translated
"now," is a conjunction that means "and."

The English title "Exodus" is a transliteration of the Greek word exodus,

from the Septuagint translation, meaning "exit," "way out," or "departure."
The Septuagint translators gave the book this title because of the major
event in it, namely, the Israelites' departure from Egypt.

"The exodus is the most significant historical and theological

event of the Old Testament …"2

DATE AND WRITER

Moses, who lived from about 1525 to 1405 B.C., wrote Exodus (17:14;
24:4; 34:4, 27-29). He could have written it, under the inspiration of the

1Ronald Youngblood, Exodus, pp. 9-10.

2Eugene H. Merrill, Kingdom of Priests, p. 57.
Copyright Ó 2021 by Thomas L. Constable
www.soniclight.com
2 Dr. Constable's Notes on Exodus 2021 Edition

Holy Spirit, any time after the events recorded (after about 1444 B.C.). He
may have written it during the year the Israelites camped at the base of
Mt. Sinai. He might have done so during the 38-year period of wandering in
the wilderness, following the Israelites' failure to enter the land from
Kadesh Barnea (cf. Num. 13-14; ca. 1443-1405 B.C.). On the other hand,
he may have written it on the plains of Moab, just before his death (cf.
16:35).1

These dates tie in with the date of the Exodus of the Israelites from Egypt,
which will be discussed in the exposition of chapter 12 below.

The founding president of Brandeis University wrote the following about

Moses:

"Yet of his life, of his very existence, we have no conclusive

proof. Not a contemporaneous document, not a stele, not a
shred of evidence, has been found to authenticate his
historicity. Perhaps some day his existence, too, will be
scientifically demonstrated, as Hammurabi's was, when, in
1902, the tablets of his laws were discovered."2

"… most critics accept his [Moses'] historical existence, as a

member of the Levi-Simon-Judah tribes, and, while discounting
the subsequent idealization of his character and career, place
him among the great religious leaders of all time."3

1On the date of the Exodus, see my note at the end of 12:37-42; Tremper Longman III
and Raymond B. Dillard, An Introduction to the Old Testament, pp. 65-69; or John D.
Hannah, "Exodus," in The Bible Knowledge Commentary: Old Testament, pp. 104-5. On
the Mosaic authorship of Exodus, see my note on the writer of Genesis and the sources
referred to there, in my notes on Genesis. Kenneth Kitchen, "The Old Testament in its
Context: 2 From Egypt to the Jordan," Theological Students' Fellowship Bulletin (1971):4-
8, also has helpful background information on the Mosaic authorship of Exodus, Leviticus,
Numbers, and Deuteronomy, as does Gleason L. Archer, "Old Testament History and
Recent Archaeology from Moses to David," Bibliotheca Sacra 127:506 (April-June
1970):99-106.
2Abram Sachar, A History of the Jews, p. 16.
3Ibid., p. 20.
2021 Edition Dr. Constable's Notes on Exodus 3

SCOPE

Exodus embraces about 431 years of history, from the arrival of Jacob and
his family in Egypt (ca. 1876 B.C.) to the erection of the tabernacle in the
wilderness of Sinai (ca. 1445 B.C.). However, 1:1-7 is a review of Jacob's
family. If we eliminate this section, the narrative resumes the story of the
Israelites where Genesis ends, after the death of Joseph. About 364 years
elapsed between the death of Joseph and the building of the tabernacle.
The bulk of the book (chs. 3—40) deals with only two of those years, the
year before and the year after the Exodus from Egypt. The Exodus event
is clearly the focus of this book.

The Israelites lived in Egypt 430 years (12:40). Genesis 15:13 has the
rounded number "400 years" as the total time of Israel's oppression in
Egypt.1

PURPOSE

"The purpose of the Book of Exodus is to celebrate God's

gracious deliverance of His chosen people Israel from Egyptian
slavery to the freedom of covenant relationship and fellowship
with Him."2

GENRE

Like Genesis, Exodus contains a mixture of literary genres, including

narrative, poetry, legal, and cultic.3 As a whole, however, it seems best to
classify the whole book as theological instructional history.4

1See the "Chronology Chart for Exodus" in John Davis, Moses and the Gods of Egypt, p.
14.
2Eugene H. Merrill, in The Old Testament Explorer, p. 41.
3Herbert M. Wolf, An Introduction to the Old Testament Pentateuch, p. 127.
4Longman and Dillard, p. 72
4 Dr. Constable's Notes on Exodus 2021 Edition

IMPORTANCE

"No other biblical book surfaces elsewhere in the OT as

frequently as the Book of Exodus does; in the NT only the
Books of Psalms and Isaiah are cited more, and that for the
fairly obvious reasons of liturgy and messianism."1

"The deliverance of Israel out of Egypt by Yahweh in the Old

Testament is parallel in importance to the resurrection of
Christ in the New Testament. The historicity of these events
is a critical foundation for a proper understanding of the rest
of the Bible."2

OUTLINE

I. The liberation of Israel 1:1—15:21

A. God's preparation of Israel and Moses chs. 1—4

1. The growth of Jacob's family 1:1-7

2. The Israelites' bondage in Egypt 1:8-22
3. Moses' birth and education 2:1-10
4. Moses' flight from Egypt to Midian 2:11-15
5. Moses' life in Midian 2:16-25
6. Moses' call 3:1—4:18
7. Moses' return to Egypt 4:19-31

B. God's demonstrations of His sovereignty chs. 5—11

1. Pharaoh's response to Moses and Aaron's initial request

5:1— 6:1
2. Moses and Aaron's equipment as God's messengers
6:2—7:7
3. The attestation of Moses and Aaron's divine mission 7:8-
13
4. The first three plagues 7:14—8:19
5. The fourth, fifth, and sixth plagues 8:20—9:12

1John I. Durham, Exodus, p. xxiii.

2J. Daniel Hays, "An Evangelical Approach to Old Testament Narrative Criticism,"
Bibliotheca Sacra 166:661 (January-March 2009):13.
2021 Edition Dr. Constable's Notes on Exodus 5

6. The seventh, eight, and ninth plagues 9:13—10:29

7. The proclamation of the tenth plague ch. 11

C. God's redemption of His people 12:1—13:16

1. The consecration of Israel as the covenant nation 12:1-

28
2. The death of the firstborn and the release of Israel
12:29-36
3. The exodus of Israel out of Egypt 12:37-42
4. Regulations concerning the Passover 12:43-51
5. The sanctification of the firstborn 13:1-16

D. God's completion of Israel's liberation 13:17—15:21

1. The journey from Succoth to Etham 13:17-22

2. Israel's passage through the Red Sea ch. 14
3. Israel's song of deliverance 15:1-21

II. The adoption of Israel 15:22—40:38

A. God's preparatory instruction of Israel 15:22—18:27

1. Events in the wilderness of Shur 15:22-27

2. Quails and manna in the wilderness of Sin ch. 16
3. The lack of water at Rephidim 17:1-7
4. The hostility of the Amalekites 17:18-36
5. The friendliness of Jethro the Midianite ch. 18

B. The establishment of the Mosaic Covenant 19:1—24:11

1. Preparation for the Covenant ch. 19

2. The Ten Commandments 20:1-17
3. The response of the Israelites 20:18-21
4. The stipulations of the Book of the Covenant 20:22—
23:33
5. The ratification of the Covenant 24:1-11

C. Directions regarding God's dwelling among His people 24:12—

31:18

1. The revelation of these directions 24:12-18

6 Dr. Constable's Notes on Exodus 2021 Edition

2. Contributions for the construction of the sanctuary

25:1-9
3. The tabernacle furnishings 25:10-41
4. The tabernacle structure ch. 26
5. The tabernacle courtyard 27:1-19
6. The investiture of the priests 27:20—28:43
7. The consecration of the priests 29:1-37
8. The service of the priests 29:38—30:38
9. The builders of the tabernacle 31:1-11
10. The sign of the Sabbath 31:12-18

D. The breaking and renewing of the covenant chs. 32—34

1. The failure of Israel ch. 32

2. The re-establishment of fellowship ch. 33
3. The renewal of the covenant ch. 34

E. The construction and dedication of the objects used in Israel's

worship chs. 35—40

1. Preparations for construction 35:1—36:7

2. Execution of the work 36:8—39:43
3. The erection and consecration of the tabernacle ch. 40

In an interesting and original chart of Exodus, Ted Grove suggested the

following structural outline of Exodus.1

I. Israel's liberation chs. 1—18

A. Israel's affliction (Israel is Egypt's possession) 1:1—2:14

B. Deliverance 2:15—18:27

Ted saw the following chiastic structure in this section.

A Midian: Moses' commission 2:15—4:28

B Enemy: Egypt defeated 4:29—15:21

C Water: bitter to sweet and 12 springs 15:22-27

1Ted was a student in my Old Testament History I course in the spring of 1991.
2021 Edition Dr. Constable's Notes on Exodus 7

D Food: manna and quail ch. 16

C' Water: out of rock 17:1-7

B' Enemy: Amalek defeated 17:8-16

A' Midian: Moses accepts wisdom ch. 18

II. Israel's adoption chs. 19—40

A. Covenant delivered 19:1—24:11

B. Sanctuary planned 24:12—31:18
C. Covenant broken ch. 32
D. Covenant renewed chs. 33—34
E. Sanctuary's construction 35:1—40:33
F. Covenant sealed (Israel is God's possession) 40:34-38

Ted also saw a chiasm in this part of the book.

A Covenant delivered 19:1—24:11

B Tabernacle planned 24:12—27:21

C Priestly instructions chs. 28—30

D Craftsmen's direction 31:1-11

E Sabbath instructions 31:12-18

F Covenant broken ch. 32

F' Covenant renewed chs. 33—34

E' Sabbath reminded 35:1-3

D' Craftsmen and construction 35:4—38:31

C' Priests prepared ch. 39

B' Tabernacle completed 40:1-33

A' Covenant sealed 40:34-38

The center of the first chiasm is the "manna." The center of the second
chiasm is the "tablets (covenant) of the Law." These were the two items
8 Dr. Constable's Notes on Exodus 2021 Edition

God instructed Moses to preserve in the ark of the covenant. Ted saw the
key verse of the book as 34:9.

MESSAGE

The great contribution of this book is the revelation that Yahweh is the
sovereign God who provides deliverance for man from the slavery in which
he finds himself.

The major teaching of Exodus is primarily threefold: the sovereignty of God,

the salvation of man, and the methods by which the sovereign God effects
man's salvation.

First, Exodus teaches the sovereignty of God:

In Genesis, we learn that the only way we can realize the purpose for which
God created us, is through faith in a trustworthy God that expresses itself
in obedience. In Exodus, we learn that the God with whom we can have a
relationship is not only trustworthy, but He is also sovereign. This
realization should produce within us the double effect of worship and
obedience.

"Sovereignty" is the attribute of God that expresses the fact that Yahweh
is the ultimate ruler of the universe. There is no one higher in authority
than He. As "Sovereign," He has all power. "Sovereignty" does not refer to
how God rules, the method by which He governs. In particular, it does not
imply that God controls every detail of life immediately (directly). God
exercises His sovereignty by allowing human beings certain freedoms. He
does not control us like puppets on strings, but as a father controls his
children. We have freedom, but within certain limits. A biblical definition of
sovereignty is very important.

We can see God's sovereignty clearly in His superiority over all the so-called
"gods of Egypt." He displayed His great power in all of His activity (miracles
and 10 plagues), that resulted in the liberation of the Israelites, and His
adoption of them as His special people. Scripture teaches both the
sovereignty of God and the responsibility of man. No one has been able to
explain this mystery to the satisfaction of all of God's people.

Second, Exodus teaches the salvation of man:

2021 Edition Dr. Constable's Notes on Exodus 9

In Genesis, we see the need for salvation (i.e., the Fall and the repeated
failures of man). Even people of faith need salvation (deliverance). In
Exodus, God initially revealed His method of salvation and explained the
consequences of salvation. Exodus teaches that God provides salvation for
man. Man does not provide it for himself. It also reveals that man
appropriates what God has provided by faith.

Two activities become prominent as major expressions of faith in Exodus:

worship and obedience. Worship and obedience are the God-ward and the
man-ward expressions of faith, respectively. They are the opposite of
idolatry and self-assertiveness—two characteristics that are prominent in
Genesis. God's instruction for Israel's obedience was the Mosaic Law. His
instruction for her worship was the tabernacle. Much of Exodus deals with
the Mosaic Law and the tabernacle.

"Worship" consists of putting God at the center of life (cf. Rom. 6:12-13;
12:1-2). Worship was to characterize the Israelites nationally and
personally. God illustrated the importance of placing Him at the center of
life by locating the ark of the covenant in the center of the tabernacle, and
by placing the tabernacle in the center of the Israelite camp. Obedience
consists of arranging all the parts of life in proper relation to God, who is
at the center. If something in life does not orient toward God properly,
there is disobedience. In this way, Exodus deepens the revelation
concerning obedience that God gave in Genesis.

Third, Exodus teaches the methods by which the sovereign God effects
man's salvation:

God's method of dealing with the human race generally (outside Israel) was
by creating a pattern, namely: the nation of Israel. God created the nation
of Israel so He could demonstrate through Israel, for all other nations and
peoples to see, how glorious it can be to live under God's government.
God's election of Israel was not the selection of a "pet" that God would
favor at the expense of all others. It was the construction of a pattern.
Israel was to be a demonstration to all the world of how wonderful life can
be under the rule of Sovereign Yahweh (cf. 19:5-6).

God's method of dealing with Israel was by revealing a person, namely:

Himself. In many revelations to the Israelites, God sought to deepen their
understanding of and appreciation for Himself and His will. The special
privilege of receiving the revelation was a blessing to them, and should
10 Dr. Constable's Notes on Exodus 2021 Edition

have resulted in their being a blessing to the whole world. Israel was to do
this by demonstrating how good it is to live under God's "kingship."

Some of the most important revelations of God occur in the following

passages: 3:4-16; 6:2-8; 19:3-6; 20:1-7; 24:1, 9-11; 34:5-8; and 40:34-
35. They are not all different, but God intended them to have the
cumulative effect of enriching the Israelites' concept of Himself. They came
to the people like waves beating on the shore. All the details of the Mosaic
Code, which begins in Exodus and continues through Numbers, reinforce
the main point of this revelation, which is the character of God. Look for
this revelation as you read Exodus 20—Numbers 10.

God's method of dealing with individuals was by providing opportunities and

choices. We can see this most easily in God's dealing with the two major
characters in Exodus: Moses and Pharaoh. God's method of dealing with
both men was the same, but their responses were different and,
consequently, so were their fates.

Pharaoh was a strong, worldly-wise leader who acted wholly by sight rather
than by faith in Yahweh. He is typical of people of the world. God's method
of dealing with him was to give him opportunities to make the right choices,
and so experience the blessing of God. Pharaoh chose not to trust God, and
his disobedience resulted in personal tragedy for himself and national
tragedy for Egypt, which he led.

Moses, on the other hand, was also a strong, wise leader, but he acted by
faith rather than by sight—eventually (Heb. 11:27). God's method of
dealing with him, in Exodus, was the same as His method of dealing with
Pharaoh. That is, He gave Moses opportunities to make the right choices,
and so experience God's blessing. Moses chose to trust and obey God, and
his life is a story of personal triumph and national triumph for Israel, which
he led.

In both cases, God patiently worked with these representative individuals,

and gently encouraged them to do His will. Moses developed into a noble
character, because he chose to submit to God's government, even though
he was faulty, fearful, and failing. Pharaoh was a more "admirable" person
in some worldly respects, but he sank into destruction, because he chose
to refuse to submit to God's government (authoritative rule).
2021 Edition Dr. Constable's Notes on Exodus 11

Exodus teaches that individuals are personally responsible under God, and
their choices determine their destinies. There is ample New Testament
evidence for this in John 1:12; 3:16, 36; 5:24; 6:29, 40, 47; 20:31; et al.
Divine sovereignty does not negate human responsibility. Charles Haddon
Spurgeon is reported to have said about the sovereignty/freedom
antinomy, "I never try to reconcile friends." These revelations harmonize.

Many people, including many Christians, try to understand divine revelation

(the Bible) within the parameters of human reason. They filter what the
Bible says through the grid of what they understand to be true and
reasonable. This approach has led many people to reject the Bible, or parts
of the Bible, as unreasonable, illogical, or unscientific.

The other option is to let revelation sit in judgment on what is reasonable.

This is the approach of faith. (Really, both positions are faith positions. We
either have faith in what is generally accepted as true, or we have faith in
what God has said is true.) I'm not suggesting that we should stop using
our minds when reading and interpreting Scripture, but we should filter all
information through the grid of Scripture. This is what Paul was talking
about when he wrote about renewing our minds (Rom. 12:2). Essentially
the question is, "Which is more reliable, revelation or reason?" We believe
revelation is, because it is the Word of God.

God, in His infinity (infinite wisdom and knowledge), has revealed only a
portion of total reality. We, in our fallen finiteness (limited understanding),
can only understand a portion of what He has revealed, not all of reality.
God has made His revelation available to people in nature and in Scripture.
In nature, He has revealed His power and deity—so much so that every
human being with normal mental powers can see that there is a God (Ps.
19; Rom. 1). In Scripture, God has revealed His plan of salvation. Trying to
fit all of revelation into a rational system is an exercise in futility. It is like
trying to pour the Pacific Ocean into a one-gallon jug. Therefore we must
humble ourselves before God, and submit our reasons to His revelation,
rather than living the other way around.

If we look at the record of God's activity in Exodus, we see progress. The

unbelief of His enemies does not frustrate Him. His ultimate purposes for
Israel came to fruition. However, if we look at the record of man's activity
in this book, we see failure. Even Moses, Aaron, and the Israelites, who
trusted God, constantly failed. We observe this in the lives of the
characters in Genesis as well.
12 Dr. Constable's Notes on Exodus 2021 Edition

While man constantly falls short of what God requires, human failure does
not frustrate God's ultimate purposes. This proves that God is indeed
sovereign.

My dad was a very wise man, as well as being in a place of authority over
me as my father. He gave me a certain amount of freedom, but he still
controlled me. He knew how to "push my buttons." God does the same
thing with us, only perfectly.

In Genesis, we see the importance of faith in God for success in life. In

Exodus, we see that true faith manifests itself in worship of God and
obedience to God.1

1Adapted from G. Campbell Morgan, Living Messages of the Books of the Bible, 1:1:29-
45.
2021 Edition Dr. Constable's Notes on Exodus 13

I. THE LIBERATION OF ISRAEL 1:1—15:21

"The story of the first half of Exodus, in broad summary, is

Rescue. The story of the second half, in equally broad
summary, is Response, both immediate response and
continuing response. And binding together and undergirding
both Rescue and Response is Presence, the Presence of
Yahweh from whom both Rescue and Response ultimately
derive."1

"In recent years a popular theological movement, both in

American and Latin American countries, has been 'liberation
theology.' This is no mere academic movement. In fact, most
Americans who are tuned in to their culture can see occasional,
albeit veiled, references to it. Although there are differing
nuances of liberation theology (varying from theologian to
theologian or from issue to issue), what they all have in
common is the notion that God is, without qualification, on the
side of the oppressed and that relief from oppression is the
true goal of all Christian work. …

"Liberation theology tends to overlook the real purpose for

which Israel was delivered. Moses does not say, 'Let my people
go,' but 'Let my people go, so that they may worship me in
the desert' (7:16)."2

A. GOD'S PREPARATION OF ISRAEL AND MOSES CHS. 1—4

1. The growth of Jacob's family 1:1-7

The purposes of this section are three at least:

1. These verses introduce the Israelites ("sons of Israel") who are the
focus of attention in Exodus.

1Durham, p. xxiii.
2Peter Enns, Exodus, pp. 143-44.
14 Dr. Constable's Notes on Exodus 2021 Edition

2. They also tie the Israelites back to "Jacob," and explain their
presence in Egypt.

3. This section also accounts for the numerical growth of the Israelites,
during the 360 years that elapsed between Genesis and Exodus,
following Joseph's death and preceding Moses' birth.

Moses used the rounded number "70" for the total number of Jacob's
descendants when the patriarch entered Egypt (v. 5; cf. Gen. 46:27).1 The
writer's purpose was to contrast the small number of Israelites that entered
Egypt, with the large number that existed at the time Exodus begins (vv.
8ff.), about two million individuals (cf. 12:37; 38:26; Num. 1:45-47). It is
quite easy to prove mathematically that Jacob's family of 70 that moved
into Egypt, could have grown into a nation of two million or more individuals
in 430 years.2

The "fruitfulness" (prosperity and fast growth) of the Israelites in Goshen,

and their vast increase in number ("multiplied"), was due to God's blessing,
as He was fulfilling His promises to the patriarchs (v. 7).

2. The Israelites' bondage in Egypt 1:8-22

This pericope serves a double purpose: It introduces the rigorous slave-

driving conditions under which the Egyptians forced the Israelites to live,
and it sets the stage for the birth of Moses.

1:8-14 This "new king" (v. 8) may have been "Ahmose" (Gr. Amosis),
who founded the eighteenth dynasty and the New Kingdom,
and ruled from 1570 to 1546 B.C.3 However, he was probably
one of Ahmose's immediate successors, Amenhotep I or, most
likely, Thutmose I. (This was not the famous King Tut, or
Tutankhamen, who ruled Egypt from 1360 to 1351 B.C.,
during the Judges Period of Israel's history, nor was he the
much-later "Pharaoh," who was confronted by the Prophet

1For a good short history of Egypt, see Hannah, pp. 105-7; Youngblood, pp. 20-25, or
Siegfried Schwantes, A Short History of the Ancient Near East, pp. 51-109.
2See Ralph D. Winter, "The Growth of Israel in Egypt (The Phenomenon of Exponential

Growth)," a paper published by the Institute of International Studies, Pasadena, Ca., 14

April 1993.
3Joseph P. Free, Archaeology and Bible History, p. 84.
2021 Edition Dr. Constable's Notes on Exodus 15

Moses giving the famous ultimatum, "Let My people go," and

who received the plagues on Egypt.)

However, the identity of this king, Israel's oppressor, was not

important enough for the writer to identify. His emphasis was
rather on the oppression of the Israelites, the awful condition
out of which God would redeem His people.1

Leon Wood argued that this king was one of the Hyksos rulers.2
The Egyptian capital at this time was "Zoan" (Gr. Tanis).
Ahmose was the first native Egyptian Pharaoh for many years.

Preceding him was a series of Hyksos rulers.3 The name

"Hyksos" probably means "rulers of foreign lands,"4 though
the ancient Egyptian historian Manetho wrote that it meant
"shepherd-kings."5 They were a Semitic people from the
northern part of the Fertile Crescent, from the area around
Paddan-aram, where Laban, Leah and Rachel's brother, lived.

"Aryan [people speaking an Indo-European

language] elements were discovered among the
Hyksos, who founded a great empire in Syria and
for many years held Egypt."6

The Hyksos had invaded Egypt about 1670 B.C., and they ruled
until Ahmose expelled them. The New Kingdom (ca. 1570-
1085 B.C.) that Ahmose inaugurated was the period of
greatest imperial might in Egypt's long history.

1For a brief history of Egypt through the time of David and Solomon, see Charles H. Dyer
and Gregory A. Hatteberg, The New Christian Traveler's Guide to the Holy Land, pp. 158-
64.
2Leon J. Wood, A Survey of Israel's History, pp. 34-38.
3See Aharon Kempinski, "Jacob in History," Biblical Archaeology Review 14:1 (January-

February 1988):42-47.
4John Van Seters, The Hyksos, p. 187.
5Cited by Flavius Josephus, Against Apion, 1:14. See also Jack Finegan, Light from the

Ancient Past, p. 94.

6A. T. Olmstead, History of the Persian Empire, p. 11.
16 Dr. Constable's Notes on Exodus 2021 Edition

MEDITERRANEAN SEA
100 miles

Zoan
(Tanis) Raamses
LOWER (Avaris)
EGYPT
Pithom
(Heliopolis)
Memphis
MIDIAN

GULF OF GULF OF
SUEZ AQABAN
ANCIENT
EGYPT

Mt. Horeb
UPPER (Sinai)
EGYPT
RED SEA
Tell el Amarna

To summarize, Jacob moved from Canaan to Egypt about

1876 B.C., during the reign of Pharaoh Senusert III (Sesostris,
ca. 1878-1871).1

"His predecessor, Senusert II (1894-1878), would

have been the man whose dream Joseph
interpreted and who made Joseph his vizier."2

The Hyksos invaded Egypt about 1670, approximately 200

years after Jacob relocated there. Ahmose expelled the Hyksos
about 1570, ending their 100-year domination of Egypt.
Moses was born about 1525, or about 50 years after Ahmose
had restored Egyptian sovereignty.

"In the Late Bronze Age [ca. 1500-1200 B.C.],

Egypt entered her period of Empire, during which
she was unquestionably the dominant nation of
the world. Architects of the Empire were the
Pharaohs of the Eighteenth Dynasty, a house that
was founded as the Hyksos were expelled from

1Wood, pp. 113-14.

2Ibid., p. 114.
2021 Edition Dr. Constable's Notes on Exodus 17

Egypt and that retained power for some two

hundred and fifty years (ca. 1570-1310), bringing
to Egypt a strength and a prestige unequaled in
all her long history."1

The title "Pharaoh" means "Great House." It originally

designated the Egyptian king's residence and household. It
became a title for the king himself, for the first time, in the
eighteenth dynasty.2

The implication of the statement that Pharaoh "did not know

Joseph," in the Hebrew text, is that he did not know him
because he did not want to know about him. It seems that the
early kings of the eighteenth dynasty wanted to solidify
control of Egypt in the hands of native Egyptians. After a long
period of control by foreigners, they did not want to
acknowledge the greatness of Joseph, who was, of course, also
a foreigner and a Semite.

"Forgetfulness of Joseph brought the favour

shown to the Israelites by the kings of Egypt to a
close."3

Identifications of Significant Pharaohs after Joseph

and in Exodus 4

SECOND INTERMEDIATE PERIOD (dynasties 15-16; ca. 1674-1567 B.C.).

Capital: Avaris (Raamses). Period of Hyksos rule.

NEW KINGDOM (dynasties 17-20; ca. 1570-1085 B.C.). Capital: Tanis

(Zoan). Period of imperial supremacy.

Ahmose (Amosis; 1570-1546 B.C.; 1st Pharaoh of 18th dynasty)

expelled the Hyksos and re-established native Egyptian rule.

1John Bright, A History of Israel, p. 98.

2Walter C. Kaiser Jr., "Exodus," in Genesis-Numbers, vol. 2 of The Expositor's Bible
Commentary, p. 288.
3C. F. Keil and Franz Delitzsch, Biblical Commentary on the Old Testament: Pentateuch,

1:421.
4Based on the Cambridge Ancient History. All identifications are probable. See also

Finegan, ch. 2: "The Panorama of Egypt."

18 Dr. Constable's Notes on Exodus 2021 Edition

Amenhotep I (1546-1526 B.C.; 2nd Pharaoh of 18th dynasty)

Thutmose I (Thutmosis I; 1525-ca. 1512 B.C.; 3rd Pharaoh of 18th

dynasty) practiced genocide on Hebrew male babies (Exod. 1:15-
22).

Hatshepsut (1503-1482 B.C.; 5th Pharaoh of the 18th dynasty) was

the daughter of Pharaoh Thutmose I who drew Moses out of the Nile
and later ruled as Queen (Exod. 2:5).

Thutmose III (1504-1450 B.C.; 6th Pharaoh of the 18th dynasty)

was the Pharaoh of the oppression who tried to kill Moses and from
whom Moses fled into Midian (Exod. 2:15).

Amenhotep II (1450-1425 B.C.; 7th Pharaoh of the 18th dynasty)

was the Pharaoh of the plagues and the Exodus (Exod. 3:10—15:19).

Pharaoh launched three successive plans to reduce the threat

of the sizable Hebrew population, that had then become larger
and stronger than the Egyptian ruling class (v. 9).

The first plan (plan A) was to make the Hebrews toil hard in
manual labor. Normally a population grows more slowly under
oppression than in prosperous times. However, the opposite
took place in the case of the Israelites ("the more they
afflicted them, the more they multiplied"; v. 12). Physical
oppression also tends to crush the spirit, and in this objective
the Egyptians were somewhat successful (2:23-24).

Verse 10 should read as follows. "Let us (the entire Egyptian

ruling class) deal wisely with them (the Israelites) lest they …
in the event of war (with enemies, the Hyksos, or any other)
… join themselves to those who hate us and fight against us
and depart from the land."1

"Thutmose I was involved in enlarging Egypt's

borders, which meant that most of his army was
out of the country for extensive periods of time.
He did not want this foreign people to increase

1See Gleason L. Archer Jr., "Old Testament History and Recent Archaeology from Abraham
to Moses," Bibliotheca Sacra 127:505 (January-March 1970):24-25.
2021 Edition Dr. Constable's Notes on Exodus 19

and become still a greater threat while his home

force was so small."1

This plan remained in effect for some time. It probably took

years to build the cities of "Pithom" and "Raamses" (Ramses,
Rameses), which the Egyptians used to store goods ("storage
cities"; cf. 1 Kings 9:19; 2 Chron. 8:6; 17:12). Pithom may be
identified as Tell el Maskhuta, Tell er-Retabeh, or Heliopolis,
instead of Tanis; and Raamses may have been Qantir or Tanis,
rather than Tell el-Maskhota, the popular critical
identifications.2 These Israelites built "cities," not the
pyramids—some of which stood even back in Abraham's day.

"Ruins of great brick buildings are found in all parts

of Egypt."3

According to Josephus, the Israelites also dug many channels

for the Nile.4

"The name 'Rameses' for one of the store cities

seems to point unquestionably to Rameses II [ca.
1300-1234 B.C.]. But it is probable that this city,
which already existed under the Hyksos (the
foreigners who ruled Egypt several centuries
before the nineteenth dynasty), was rebuilt by
Rameses II and that 1:11 refers to the city by its
later name …"5

There are several instances of the writer or a later editor using

more modern names for older sites in the Pentateuch, such as
"Dan" in Genesis 14:14.

1Wood, p. 116.
2See Longman and Dillard, p. 67; Kaiser, p. 289; Free, pp. 85-86; Charles F. Aling, "The
Biblical City of Ramses," Journal of the Evangelical Theological Society, 25:2 (June
1982):128-37.
3Robert Jamieson, A. R. Fausset, and David Brown, Commentary Practical and Explanatory

on the Whole Bible, p. 54.

4Flavius Josephus, Antiquities of the Jews, 2:9:1. Josephus reflected some traditional

Jewish traditions and should not be considered completely reliable.

5William H. Gispen, Exodus, p. 22. Cf. Wolf, pp. 143-45. See also my note on Gen. 47:11.
20 Dr. Constable's Notes on Exodus 2021 Edition

"The brick was the staple of Egyptian

architecture, as only the temples and palaces
were constructed of stone."1

This first plan failed to reduce the threat that the Israelites
posed to Pharaoh, so the Egyptians then adopted a second
approach.

1:15-22 Plan B consisted of ordering the Hebrew midwives to kill all the
male Hebrew babies at birth. "Shiphrah" means "Beautiful
One," and "Puah" means "Splendid One." Albright confirmed
that these women's names were Semitic.2 Evidently these two
women were officials in the Egyptian government who were
responsible for all the midwives.

"They were to kill them, of course, secretly, in

such a way that the parents and relatives would
be unaware of the crime, and would think that the
infant had died of natural causes either before or
during birth."3

"Infanticide was commonly practiced by the

nations of antiquity."4

As I mentioned, plan A (vv. 9-14) may have been in effect for

several years. Because of the chronology of Moses' life, many
evangelical commentators felt that "the Pharaoh" the writer
referred to in verses 15-22 was Ahmose's successor,
"Amenhotep I" (1546-1526 B.C.). More likely, though, he was
the man who followed him, "Thutmose I" (1525-ca. 1512
B.C.).

"Although the biblical term 'Hebrew' [v. 15] is

probably cognate to the similar word 'apiru (found
in Egyptian, Babylonian, and Canaanite texts), the

1F. B. Meyer, Devotional Commentary on Exodus, p. 19.

2W. F. Albright, "Northwest-Semitic Names in a List of Egyptian Slaves from the Eighteenth
Century B.C.," Journal of the American Oriental Society 74 (1954):233. See also Finegan,
pp. 93-94.
3Umberto Cassuto, A Commentary on the Book of Exodus, p. 12.
4Meyer, p. 20.
2021 Edition Dr. Constable's Notes on Exodus 21

latter was applied to a population element that

was ethnically diverse and that had in common
only a generally inferior social status. The word
'Hebrew' is almost always used by Gentiles to
distinguish Israelites ethnically from other peoples
and apparently denotes descent from Eber (Gen.
10:24-25; 11:14-17), whose ancestor was
Noah's son Shem (Gen. 10:21)."1

The two "midwives" mentioned by name ("Shiphrah" and

"Puah"; v. 15) were probably the chief midwives, who were
responsible for other midwives under them.2

Ancient Near Easterners preserved national identity through

the males, and it is for this reason that Pharaoh ordered the
baby boys' deaths. In contrast, modern Jews trace their ethnic
identity through their mother. This change evidently took
place during the Middle Ages. One writer suggested that
Pharaoh spared the girls, "perhaps to serve later as harem
girls."3

The midwives' fear of God (vv. 17, 21) led them to disobey
Pharaoh's command to practice genocide ("the midwives
feared God, and did not do as the king … commanded"). They
chose to "obey God rather than man (men)" (cf. Acts 5:29),
since Pharaoh's order contradicted a fundamental divine
command (cf. Gen. 1:28; 9:1, 7). All life belongs to God, so He
is the only person who has the right to take it, or to command
when others should take it. The midwives' fear of God resulted
in their having reverence for human life. Their explanation of
their actions ("the Hebrew women … give birth before the
midwife can get to them," v. 19) may have been completely
truthful, or it may not have been entirely truthful.

"Even though these women lied to Pharaoh (which

the Bible, as is often the case, does not stop to

1Youngblood, p. 27.
2See Watson E. Mills, "Childbearing in Ancient Times," Biblical Illustrator 13:1 (Fall
1986):54-56; and Nahum M. Sarna, "Exploring Exodus—The Oppression," Biblical
Archaeologist 13:1 (June 1986):77-79.
3Gispen, p. 36.
22 Dr. Constable's Notes on Exodus 2021 Edition

specifically condemn at this point), they are

praised for their outright refusal to take infant
lives."1

God blessed these women with families of their own

("established households for them," v. 21), in spite of their
deceit, if they practiced it, because they feared God.

This second plan "miscarried" too.

The intent of plan C was also to do away with the male Hebrew
babies (v. 22). However, instead of relying on the Hebrew
midwives, Pharaoh called on "all his subjects (people)" to
throw "every" Hebrew boy ("son") that was "born into the
Nile" River. Since the Egyptians regarded the Nile as a
manifestation of deity, perhaps Pharaoh was making obedience
to his edict an act of worship for the Egyptians. This plan
evidently failed too. The Egyptians do not appear to have
cooperated with Pharaoh. Even Pharaoh's daughter did not
obey this command (2:6-8). This plan, too, may very well have
continued in effect for many years.

The "Pharaoh" Moses referred to in verse 22 was probably

"Thutmose I".2

"The central idea [in this pericope] is that God faithfully fulfills
His covenant promises in spite of severe and life-threatening
opposition. Even Pharaoh, the most powerful man on earth
could do nothing to thwart God's purpose. In fact, God actually
used Pharaoh's opposition as a means of carrying out His
promises."3

"It is interesting to note that the author has placed two quite
similar narratives on either side of his lengthy treatment of the
Exodus and wilderness wanderings. The two narratives are
Exodus 1—2, the Egyptian king's attempt to suppress Israel,
and Numbers 22—24, the Moabite king's attempt to suppress

1Kaiser, p. 306.
2See Davis, p. 51.
3Gordon H. Johnston, "I Will Multiply Your Seed [Exodus 1]," Exegesis and Exposition 1:1

(Fall 1986):27.
2021 Edition Dr. Constable's Notes on Exodus 23

Israel. Both narratives focus on the futility of the nations'

attempts to thwart God's plan to bless the seed of Abraham
…"1

"The Lord rules despite appearances."2

"The suffering of Abraham's descendants in Egypt (Exodus 1)

was not a direct result of any sin… Not all suffering should be
seen as God's displeasure, and there is the possibility of
blessing in the midst of suffering as part of God's plan."3

3. Moses' birth and education 2:1-10

"Whilst Pharaoh was urging forward the extermination of the

Israelites, God was preparing their emancipator."4

"… among other things, the Pentateuch is an attempt to

contrast the lives of two individuals, Abraham and Moses.
Abraham, who lived before the law (ante legem), is portrayed
as one who kept the law [Gen. 26:5], whereas Moses, who lived
under the law (sub lege), is portrayed as one who died in the
wilderness because he did not believe [Num. 20:12]."5

2:1-5 The names of Moses' parents were "Amram" and "Jochebed"

(6:20). Amram was the sixth generation from Abraham, of the
"house (clan) of Levi," and Moses was the seventh (1 Chron.
6:1-2).

"At this point Scripture's aim is to inform us that

from an ordinary man, … and from an ordinary
woman, … whose names there was no need to

1John H. Sailhamer, The Pentateuch as Narrative, p. 242.

2Enns, p. 50.
3Stephen J. Bramer, "Suffering in the Pentateuch," in Why, O God? Suffering and Disability

in the Bible and the Church, p. 93.

4Keil and Delitzsch, 1:426.
5John H. Sailhamer, "The Mosaic Law and the Theology of the Pentateuch," Westminster

Theological Journal 53 (Fall 1991):243.

24 Dr. Constable's Notes on Exodus 2021 Edition

mention [at this point], God raised up a redeemer

unto his people."1

It is not clear from the text if Moses was an unusually

"beautiful" child physically, or if he was distinctive in some
other respect (v. 2). Some commentators translated
"beautiful" as "healthy."2 The phrase used to describe him in
Hebrews 11:23, as well as the Hebrew word used here, tob,
can have a broader meaning than physical beauty. The NRSV
translates the word "fine baby."

This description of Moses as tob reminds us of Genesis 1:4,

10, 12, 18, 21, 25, and 31, where Moses used the same
Hebrew word to describe God's creation as "good." Thus we
see that in the birth of Moses God also created something that
was "good," as time would tell.

Josephus claimed that God had revealed to Amram in a dream

that Moses would humble the Egyptians.3 There is no scriptural
support for this tradition; it may or may not be true.

Jochebed and Amram "hid" Moses because they trusted God

(v. 3; Heb. 11:23-26). The same Hebrew word translated
"wicker basket" in this verse (tehvah) reads "ark" or "boat" in
English translations of Genesis 6:14. As Noah's ark was God's
instrument for preserving one "savior" of the human race,
Moses' ark proved to be His means of preserving another
"savior" of the Israelites. Moses' parents obeyed Pharaoh and
put Moses in the river (1:22), but they also trusted God who
delivered their baby.

"Ironically Jochebed, putting her son into the Nile,

was in one sense obeying the Pharaoh's edict to
'throw' baby boys into the river! (Ex. 1:22)"4

1Cassuto, p. 17.
2E.g.,
Brevard Childs, The Book of Exodus, p. 18; J. Vernon McGee, Thru the Bible with J.
Vernon McGee, 1:205; The NET Bible note on 2:2.
3Josephus, Antiquities of …, 2:9:3.
4Hannah, p. 109.
2021 Edition Dr. Constable's Notes on Exodus 25

"There is abundant warrant, afforded by this

narrative, for Christian parents to cast their
children upon God."1

Moses' older "sister" was probably "Miriam." She is the only

sister of Moses mentioned in Scripture (v. 4; Num. 26:59; 1
Chron. 6:3).

The "daughter of Pharaoh" (Thutmose I) was probably

"Hatshepsut," who was a very significant person in Egyptian
history (v. 5).2 Josephus identified her as "Thermuthis."3 She
later assumed co-regency with Thutmose III, and ruled as the
fifth Pharaoh of the eighteenth dynasty (1503-1482 B.C.).
The ruling class in Egypt was male-dominated, and it took a
very forceful woman to rise and rule. Queen Hatshepsut
adopted certain male mannerisms to minimize objections to
her rule, including the wearing of a false beard that appears on
some Egyptian pictures of her.4

"God often raises up friends for his people even

among their enemies."5

It was not uncommon for Pharaohs and other Egyptians to

bathe ceremonially in the sacred Nile River, as many Indians do
today in the Ganges River. The Egyptians believed that the
waters of the Nile possessed the ability to impart fruitfulness
and to prolong life.

Several women were involved in the events surrounding Moses'

birth: the midwives, Pharaoh's daughter, her maid, Moses'
sister, and Jochebed. How ironic it was that women, whom
Egyptian and Israelite men looked down on as less significant
than themselves, should have been responsible for saving
Israel's savior! Truly the hand of God is evident. The Gospel

1Meyer, p. 26.
2See Finegan, pp. 97-98; Wood, pp. 117-19; Free, p. 86, n. 9.
3Josephus, Antiquities of …, 2:9:5.
4See Merrill F. Unger, Archaeology and the Old Testament, pp. 144-45; Francis Nichol, ed.,

The Seventh-Day Adventist Bible Commentary, 1:502.

5Matthew Henry, Commentary on the Whole Bible, p. 73.
26 Dr. Constable's Notes on Exodus 2021 Edition

writers also recorded that several women ministered to Jesus

Christ, the Savior of the world, during His first advent.

2:6-10 As the adopted son of Pharaoh's daughter, Moses enjoyed the

highest privileges in his education. In commenting on Moses'
training, Stephen said that he became "a man of power in
words and deeds" (Acts 7:21-22). Josephus wrote that Moses
was "a general" in the Egyptian army that defeated the
Ethiopians, and that he married the daughter of the king of
Ethiopia.1 We cannot prove the accuracy of this statement,
but it suggests that Moses may have risen high in Egyptian
society before he fled Egypt.

The nature of God's deliverance is sometimes surprising and

unexpected. God's deliverance of Moses prefigures His
surprising and unexpected deliverance of the Israelites (cf.
Rom. 8:28).

Moses' name was probably Egyptian, but "Moses" became a

popular Hebrew name. It relates obviously to the names of
other great Egyptians of that period (e.g., Ahmose, Thutmose,
et al.). The "mose" part of the name means "is born" or "one
born of," and "mo" means "water."2

"The phrase 'drew him out' (v. 10) is a Hebrew

pun on the name, emphasizing the baby's rescue
from the waters of the Nile."3

This name became even more appropriate as Moses' great life

work of drawing the Israelites out of Egypt took shape.

"The one who was drawn out of water would be

the means of drawing the Israelite nation out of
water [i.e., the waters of the Red Sea]."4

Ancient Near Easterners regarded the "waters of the sea" to

be a very hostile enemy because they could not control them.

1Josephus, Antiquities of …, 2:10:1-2.

2SeeFinegan, p. 134.
3Youngblood, p. 30.
4The Nelson Study Bible, p. 101.
2021 Edition Dr. Constable's Notes on Exodus 27

The Egypt of Moses' day was such a hostile foe for the
Israelites. In this sense Moses' name proved prophetic. Moses'
name may have been longer, and may have had some
connection with the name of an Egyptian god, as the other
"mose" compound names referred to above did. If this was the
case, "in refusing to 'be called the son of Pharaoh's daughter'
Moses was actually refusing reference to an Egyptian deity."1

Josephus quoted Manetho, an ancient Egyptian historian, as

follows:

"… he [Moses] was by birth of Heliopolis; and his

name was Osarsiph, from Osiris, the god of
Heliopolis, but … he changed his name, and called
himself Moses."2

"Moses' birth story is just one example of a common Old

Testament theme. At various crucial junctures the birth of a
child is instrumental to God's plan of delivering his people from
some dire situation [cf. the births of Isaac, Obed (Ruth 4:21-
22), Samson, Samuel, John the Baptist, and Jesus]."3

The fact that Moses later chose to identify with the Israelites, rather than
the Egyptians, is remarkable in view of his Egyptian privileges and
background. His parents must have had a strong influence on him beginning
very early in his life (cf. Joseph). We should never underestimate the power
of parental influence even early in life. Note too that the faith of a child can
grow stronger when tested by an ungodly environment.

4. Moses' flight from Egypt to Midian 2:11-15

Moses was "approaching the age of 40" (Acts 7:23) when he took his stand
for his Hebrew brethren (v. 11). The reference to the Hebrew man as "one
of his brethren" suggests that Moses' motivation, in acting as he did, was
love that sprang from faith in God's promises to the patriarchs. The writer

1Nichol, 1:504.
2Josephus, Against Apion, 1:28; cf. 1:26, 29. Josephus was critical of Manetho as a
historian, however.
3Enns, p. 65.
28 Dr. Constable's Notes on Exodus 2021 Edition

of the Epistle to the Hebrews stated this motivation explicitly in Hebrews

11:24-26.

Moses' desire to help his brethren was admirable, but his methods were
deplorable (v. 12; cf. Acts 7:23-29). He trusted in his own ability to liberate
the Israelites, and sought to bring this about by natural means. He even
resorted to sinful means, and seized authority, rather than waiting for God
to bestow it on him.

"Moses looked this way, and he looked that way. Isn't it

interesting? He didn't look up, did he?"1

"… there is in the [Hebrew] text no suggestion that Moses

meant to kill the Egyptian, any more than that the Egyptian or
the Hebrew man was attempting to kill his adversary."2

"You can never redress a nation's wrongs by offering brute

force to brute force, or by a number of rash, violent acts."3

The Hebrew who rejected Moses' deliverance (v. 14) gave the typical
reaction of the later Israelites to those whom God sent to deliver them
(including Jesus): he rejected and opposed this "prince" and "judge."

God had to teach Moses that he must not trust in his own ability, but
instead rely on God's strategy and strength, and obey His commands. So
God drove Moses out of Egypt, through the circumstances described here,
to "the desert (land) of Midian," where He proceeded to teach His servant
these lessons. God gave Moses a B.D. degree (Backside of the Desert).4 He
made him "a prince" and "a judge" (v. 14) eventually. In this episode, Moses
rescued an Israelite from an Egyptian who was beating him, but later he
rescued all the Israelites from the Egyptians who were oppressing them
(3:10).

"If the Hebrews had taken the hint, and come in to Moses as
their head and captain, it is probable that they would have
been delivered now; but, despising their deliverer, their

1Charles R. Swindoll, Moses: A Man of Selfless Dedication, p. 43.

2Durham, p. 19. Cf. Warren W. Wiersbe, The Bible Exposition Commentary/Pentateuch, p.
182.
3Meyer, p. 32.
4McGee, 1:200.
2021 Edition Dr. Constable's Notes on Exodus 29

deliverance was justly deferred, and their bondage prolonged

forty years, as afterwards their despising Canaan kept them
out of it forty years more."1

The Pharaoh referred to here was probably "Thutmose III" (v. 15; 1504-
1450 B.C.), whose reign included a period of 21 years as co-regent with
Hatshepsut.2 Pharaoh probably "tried to kill Moses" by having him brought
to justice through normal legal channels.

The "land of Midian" lay to the east of the Sinai Peninsula, and probably
flanked the Gulf of Aqabah on both sides.3 (Josephus wrote that Moses fled
to "the city of Midian, which lay upon the Red Sea."4) Moses ran a long way.
The Midianites were descendants of Abraham through Keturah (Gen. 25:1-
2).

"Midianites were employed in the copper mines of the Sinai

Peninsula by Egyptian kings since the very first dynasties."5

"When the self-life has run its course, we settle in a desert. …

When the self-life finally sits down, the well of a new life lies
near [cf. Ps. 46:10]."6

Moses' faith is obvious in his desire to identify with God and His people. He
probably struggled in his younger years, with whether he could do more for
the Israelites, by working for them within the Egyptian hierarchy, or
without. He chose to identify with the faithful, and relied on the power of
God—taking the role of a humble shepherd-prophet holding a staff, rather
than on the power of Pharaoh as an Egyptian prince—to accomplish his
goals. It was Moses' faith in God that led him to give up Egypt (Heb. 11:24-
26).

Whereas Moses took matters into his own hands in Egypt and killed the
Egyptian (v. 12), in Midian he took matters into his own hands and delivered
Reuel's daughters and blessed their family (v. 19). Note the change in his

1Henry, p. 74.
2See Wood, p. 121; Free, p. 88.
3On the difficulty of locating Midian exactly, see Durham, p. 20.
4Josephus, Antiquities of …, 2:11:1.
5Schwantes, p. 158.
6Swindoll, p. 49. Italics omitted.
30 Dr. Constable's Notes on Exodus 2021 Edition

character. In both cases he anticipated his later role of deliverer of the

Israelites.

God commands all who trust Him to separate from the world system that
opposes and excludes Him (Rom. 12:2; et al.). This may or may not involve
physical separation, depending on God's will. For Moses it involved physical
separation, but for Joseph and Daniel it did not. The will of God is not the
same for everyone in this respect.

5. Moses' life in Midian 2:16-25

This section introduces some of the secondary characters in Exodus and

sets the stage for Moses' call. Its purpose is primarily transitional.

Moses provided water for Jethro's daughters and their sheep in the
wilderness (vv. 16-17). Forty years later, he provided water for God's
people and their flocks in the wilderness (cf. 17:6; Num. 20:7-11). This was
the third time Moses sought to deliver others from harm (v. 17; cf. vv. 12-
13). "Zipporah " means "Bird."

As "the priest of Midian" (v. 16), Reuel ("Friend of God," v. 18) was the
spiritual head of his branch of the Midianites. Moses' father-in-law had at
least two names: "Reuel" (or "Raguel," 2:18; Num. 10:29) and "Jethro" (or
"Jether," 3:1; 4:18; 18:1, 2, 5, 6, 9, 10, 12). "Jethro" (lit. "excellence")
may have been his title and "Reuel" (lit. "friend of God") his given name.1
He appears to have been a "worshipper of the true God," like Melchizedek
(cf. 18:12-23; Gen. 14:18-20). At this time, however, he may simply have
been a God-fearing Semite.

Moses' years in Midian were years of bitter humiliation. He gave expression

to his feelings by naming his first son "Gershom" (v. 22), meaning
"Banishment" or "A Stranger There."

"The pride and self-will with which he had offered himself in

Egypt as the deliverer and judge of his oppressed brethren,
had been broken down by the feeling of exile."2

1Wiersbe, p. 182.
2Keil and Delitzsch, 1:435.
2021 Edition Dr. Constable's Notes on Exodus 31

"Egypt accomplished him as a scholar, a gentleman, a

statesman, a soldier, but yet he lacked one thing, in which the
court of Egypt could not befriend him. He must know what it
was to live a life of communion with God; and in this he would
be greatly furthered by the solitude and retirement of a
shepherd's life in Midian."1

Moses lived in Midian "many days" (v. 23) before Pharaoh (Thutmose III)
died. Stephen said it was a period of 40 years (Acts 7:30).

"… Moses is at home in the author's view because he has come

at last to a people who worship the God of his fathers. The
Moses-Midian connection is theological. Suggested deftly in
this climactic section of the narrative of chap. 2, that
connection will be affirmed in chaps. 3—4 and 18."2

The prayers ("cry for help") of the Israelites in their bondage touched God's
heart ("God heard their groaning"), and He began anew to act for them
("God remembered … God took notice"; cf. 3:7-9). This is another of the
many references in Scripture that indicate that prayer affects some of
God's actions. Remembering His covenant with the patriarchs, God acted
for the Israelites by commissioning Moses.

God graciously and sovereignly used Moses' sin (evidently manslaughter, v.

12) to bring ultimate blessing for His chosen people (cf. Rom. 5:20). This
is important to observe as we seek to understand God's ways.

6. Moses' call 3:1—4:18

3:1-12 "Horeb" (lit. "Desolate Place") is another name for Sinai (v. 1).
It probably indicates a range of mountains rather than a
particular mountain peak. The writer called it "the mountain of
God" because it was the place where God later gave the Mosaic
Law to Israel. The traditional site of Mt. Sinai and the Horeb
range is in the southern Sinai Peninsula. However, some
Scripture references cast this location into question (cf. Deut.

1Henry, p. 74.
2Durham, p. 22.
32 Dr. Constable's Notes on Exodus 2021 Edition

33:2; Gal. 4:25). These references suggest that the site may
have been somewhere on the east side of the Gulf of Aqabah.1

Here "the [A]ngel of the LORD" is clearly God (Yahweh, v. 2; cf.

vv. 4, 6, 7). He was not an angelic messenger but God Himself.

A burning thorn-bush was then and is still today not uncommon

in the Sinai desert.2 These bushes sometimes burst into flame
spontaneously. This "bush" was unusual, however, because
even though it "was burning," it did "not burn up" (v. 3). The
monastery of St. Catherine is supposed to be on the exact site
of "Moses' burning bush," according to ancient tradition.3

Jewish and Christian interpreters have long seen "the bush" in

this incident as a symbol of "the nation of Israel," ignoble or
common in relation to other nations (cf. Judg. 9:15). The "fire"
probably symbolized the affliction of Egyptian bondage (cf.
Deut. 4:20). The Israelites were suffering as a result of this
hostility, but God did not allow them to be "consumed," i.e.,
suffer extinction as a people, from it. Because Israel has
frequently been in the furnace of affliction throughout history,
though not consumed, Jews have identified "the burning bush"
as a symbol of their race. This symbol often appears on the
walls of synagogues or in other prominent places, not only in
modern Israel, but also in settlements of Jews around the
world. The fire probably also symbolized the presence of God
dwelling among His people (cf. Gen. 15:17; Exod. 19:18;
40:38).4 God was with His people in their affliction (cf. Deut.
31:6; Josh. 1:5; Dan. 3:25; Heb. 13:5). Some interpreters
believe that it was also a picture of what God had planned for
Moses: "he was the weak bush but God was the empowering
fire (19:18; 24:17; Deut. 4:24; Judg. 13:20; Heb. 12:29."5

1However, see Gordon Franz, "Mt. Sinai Is Not Jebel El-Lawz in Saudi Arabia," a paper
presented at the Annual Meeting of the Evangelical Theological Society, 15 November
2001, Colorado Springs, Colo.
2Cassuto, p. 31.
3See Philip C. Johnson, "Exodus," in The Wycliffe Bible Commentary, p. 54.
4See Milton S. Terry, Biblical Hermeneutics, pp. 347-68, on the interpretation of symbols.
5Wiersbe, p. 183.
2021 Edition Dr. Constable's Notes on Exodus 33

"This episode, then, presages the upheaval of the

natural phenomena in the plagues and the
crossing of the Red Sea."1

This was the first time that God had revealed Himself to Moses,
or anyone else as far as Scripture records, for over 430 years
(v. 4). When Moses turned aside, God called to him (cf. James
4:8). Later in history, God broke another 400-year long period
of prophetic silence, when John the Baptist and Jesus
appeared to lead an even more significant "exodus." God raised
up Jesus, another outcast, to lead His people out of bondage.

The custom of removing one's shoes out of respect is very old

(v. 5). It was common at that time in the ancient world, and is
still common today.2 For example, when one enters a Moslem
mosque he must remove his shoes.

"God begins his discourse with Moses by warning

him not to come near to him because he is holy
(v. 5). As we will later see, the idea of God's
holiness is a central theme in the remainder of the
book. Indeed, the whole structure of Israel's
worship of God at the tabernacle is based on a
view of God as the absolutely Holy One who has
come to dwell in their midst. We should not lose
sight of the fact, however, that at the same time
that God warns Moses to stand at a distance, he
also speaks to him 'face to face' (cf. Nu 12:8).
The fact that God is a holy God should not be
understood to mean that he is an impersonal
force—God is holy yet intensely personal. This is
a central theme in the narratives of the Sinai
covenant that follow."3

God proceeded to explain the reason for His revelation (vv. 7-

10): The suffering of His people had touched His heart ("I am
aware of their sufferings"). He had "heard their cries" and

1Enns, p. 97.
2Keil and Delitzsch, 1:437-40.
3Sailhamer, The Pentateuch …, p. 245. See Peter J. Gentry, "The Meaning of 'Holy' in the

Old Testament," Bibliotheca Sacra 170:680 (October-December 2013):400-17.

34 Dr. Constable's Notes on Exodus 2021 Edition

"seen their affliction." Now He purposed to deliver them. The

compassion of God stands out in these verses.

"The anthropomorphisms (i.e., the descriptions of

God's actions and attributes in words usually
associated with mankind) in vv. 7-8 of God's
'seeing,' 'hearing,' 'knowing' (= 'be concerned
about'), and 'coming down' became graphic ways
to describe divine realities for which no
description existed except for partially analogous
situations in the human realm. But these do not
imply that God has corporeal and spatial
limitations; rather, he is a living person who can
and does follow the stream of human events and
who can and does at times directly intervene in
human affairs."1

"Is there no discrepancy between these two

announcements ["I have come down to deliver,"
v. 8, and "I will send you," v. 10]? If God has
Himself come down to do the work of redemption,
what need of Moses? Would not a word from
those almighty lips be enough? Why summon a
shepherd, a lonely and unbefriended man, a man
who has already failed once, and from whom the
passing years have stolen his manhood's prime, to
work out with painful elaboration, and through a
series of bewildering disappointments, the
purposed emancipation? But this is not an isolated
case. Throughout the entire scheme of Divine
government, we meet with the principle of
mediation. God ever speaks to men, and works for
them, through the instrumentality of men. Chosen
agents are called into the inner circle, to catch the
Divine thought and mirror the Divine character,
and then sent back to their fellows, to cause them
to partake."2

1Kaiser, p. 316.
2Meyer, p. 43.
2021 Edition Dr. Constable's Notes on Exodus 35

When people fail to acknowledge what the Scriptures teach

about divine election, they limit their appreciation of divine
grace (cf. Luke 7:47; John 15:16). God chose even a few
murderers to serve Him, so that they would appreciate His
grace all the more (e.g., Moses, David, Paul).

The description of Canaan as a land "flowing with milk and

honey" (vv. 8, 17) is a common biblical one. It pictures an
abundance of grass, fruit trees, and flowers—where cows,
goats, and bees thrive—and where the best drink and food
abound. The operative word in the description is "flowing."
This is a picture of a land in contrast to Egypt, where sedentary
farming was common. In Canaan, the Israelites would
experience a different form of life, namely, a pastoral lifestyle.
Canaan depended on rainfall, whereas Egypt did not; it
depended on the Nile River.1

"This formula was at first coined by the nomadic

shepherds to denote a land blessed with pastures
for cattle producing milk and with trees whose
boughs afforded man, without the necessity for
hard toil, food as nourishing and as sweet as bees'
honey. In the course of time the signification of
the phrase was extended to include also land that
yielded rich harvests as a result of human
labour."2

Some people have argued that the Promised Land was not
large enough to sustain over two million Israelites plus
Canaanites. Thus the number of Israelites who entered and
lived there must have been considerably smaller. Perhaps the
solution to this problem is the extraordinary fruitfulness of the
land. We may underestimate the extreme agricultural
productiveness of the land when we read that it "flowed with
milk and honey."

Often Moses listed seven distinct, idol-worshipping tribes as

possessing Canaan (e.g., Deut. 7:1), but he also named six (v.

1Barry J. Beitzel, The Moody Atlas of Bible Lands, p. 49.

2Cassuto, p. 34.
36 Dr. Constable's Notes on Exodus 2021 Edition

8), 10 (Gen. 15:19-21), and 12 (Gen. 10:15-18) tribes, as the

resident inhabitants, in various Scripture passages.

"At the death of Pharaoh, Egyptian authorities

dropped all pending charges, even in capital cases
(see 4:19)."1

This was why Moses could now return to Egypt. The Pharaoh
to whom Moses referred here (v. 10) was very likely
"Amenhotep II," who succeeded Thutmose III, and ruled from
1450 to 1425 B.C.2 He ruled during the very zenith of Egypt's
power, prestige, and glory as a world government.

"Coming to the throne at the age of 18 in 1450

B.C., he would have been about 22 in 1446 B.C.
and in his fourth year of rule."3

Moses had become genuinely humble during his years as a

mere shepherd in Midian (v. 11; cf. Num. 12:3). Earlier an
Israelite had asked Moses, "Who made you a prince or a judge
over us?" (2:14). Now Moses asked the same thing of God:
"Who am I that I should … bring the sons of Israel out of
Egypt?"

"Some time before he had offered himself of his

own accord as a deliverer and judge; but now he
had learned humility in the school of Midian, and
was filled in consequence with distrust of his own
power and fitness. The son of Pharaoh's daughter
had become a shepherd, and felt himself too weak
to go to Pharaoh."4

Moses was reluctant to serve God because he was too self-

conscious, and not God-conscious enough. We need to balance

1The Nelson …, p. 102.

2See Gleason L. Archer Jr., A Survey of Old Testament Introduction, p. 223; Free, p. 90.
3Wood, p. 123, n. 56.
4Keil and Delitzsch, 1:440-41. See Frederick Holmgren, "Before the temple, the thornbush:

an exposition of Exodus 2:11—3:12," The Reformed Journal 33:3 (March 1983):9-11; and
Robert J. Voss, "Who Am I That I Should Go? Exodus 3:11 (Exod. 2:25—4:18)," Wisconsin
Lutheran Quarterly 80:4 (Fall 1983):243-47.
2021 Edition Dr. Constable's Notes on Exodus 37

the truth of John 15:5 ("Without me you can do nothing.")

with that of Philippians 4:13 ("I can do all things through Christ
who strengthens me."). Our success as God's servants does
not depend on our natural abilities, as much as on our trust
and obedience. As the sign on the church marquee proclaimed:
"God doesn't call the qualified. He qualifies the called."

"In these verses [11-12], the presentation of the

tetragrammaton is only introduced. Moses
objected, … 'Who am I, … that I … that I … ?' and
God answers, … 'the point is I AM with you.' Who
Moses is is not the question; it is rather, who is
with Moses?"1

"The truth is, any old bush will do as long as God

is in the bush."2

"As long as a man holds that he is easily able to

do some great deed of heroism and faith, he is
probably incompetent for it, but when he protests
his inability, and puts away the earliest proposals,
though made by the Almighty Himself, he gives
the first unmistakable sign that he has been
rightly designated."3

God gave Moses "a sign" to inspire his courage and confidence
that God would make his mission a success (v. 12; cf. Gen.
37:5-11). This sign was evidently the burning bush, though
other signs would follow. God also gave Moses a promise that
he would return with the Israelites to the very mountain where
he stood then. This promise required faith on Moses' part, but
it was also an encouragement to him. As surely as God had
revealed Himself to Moses there once, He promised to bring
Moses back to Horeb to worship Him, a second time, with the
Israelites. The punctuation in the NASB may be misleading.

"… the experience of Moses in 3:1-12 is an exact

foreshadowing of the experience of Israel, first in

1Durham, p. 33.
2Swindoll,p. 106.
3Meyer, p. 45.
38 Dr. Constable's Notes on Exodus 2021 Edition

Egypt, then in the deprivation of the wilderness,

and finally at Sinai."1

God called Moses to be the first in a long line of mediatorial

rulers in the nation of Israel. Significantly, God prepared Moses
as He prepared David: by first making him a shepherd of sheep.
God called the Israelites "My people," but Moses fulfilled the
role of their human leader as their virtual king.2

"Moses exercised the office of a king; he

represented the invisible King."3

"Viewed from the Biblical standpoint, the one

divine kingdom of Old Testament history began
with Moses, not with Saul."4

3:13-22 Moses' first objection amounted to "I don't think I can do this"
(v. 11). His second objection was, "No one else will think I can
do this, either." Moses' fear that the Israelite elders would not
accept him is understandable (v. 13). God had not revealed
Himself to His people for over 400 years. When Moses asked
how he should answer the Israelites' question, "What is His
name?", he was asking how he could demonstrate and prove
to them that it was their God who had sent him. Since the
Israelites had lived in polytheistic Egypt for over 400 years,
and since the Egyptians worshipped hundreds, if not thousands
of gods, it seems likely that Moses expected them to ask him
which one of those gods was he talking about.

"According to the conception prevailing in the

ancient East, the designation of an entity was to
be equated, as it were, with its existence:
whatever is without an appellation does not exist,
but whatever has a denomination has existence."5

1Durham, p. 30.
2See Alva J. McClain, The Greatness of the Kingdom, pp. 56-60: "Moses—First Mediatorial
Ruler of Israel."
3Oswald T. Allis, Prophecy and the Church, p. 59.
4McClain, p. 103.
5Cassuto, pp. 36-37.
2021 Edition Dr. Constable's Notes on Exodus 39

"What Moses asks, then, has to do with whether

God can accomplish what he is promising. What is
there in his reputation (see Num 6:27; Deut 12:5,
11; 16:2-6; Pss 8:1, 74:7; Amos 5:8, 9:5-6; Jer
33:2) that lends credibility to the claim in his call?
How, suddenly, can he be expected to deal with a
host of powerful Egyptian deities against whom,
across so many years, he has apparently won no
victory for his people?"1

The Israelites would ask for proof that the God of their fathers
was with Moses. One suggestion is that God was explaining and
elaborating on the name by which He made Himself known to
Abraham ("the LORD who brought you out of Ur of the
Chaldeans"; Gen. 15:7).

"The repetition of the same word [I am] suggests

the idea of uninterrupted continuance and
boundless duration."2

Yet it means more than this.

"To the Hebrew 'to be' does not just mean to exist
as all other beings and things do as well—but to
be active, to express oneself in active being, 'The
God who acts.' 'I am what in creative activity and
everywhere I turn out to be,' or 'I am (the God)
that really acts.'"3

"I am that I am" means "God will reveal Himself in

His actions through history."4

Other translations are, "I will be what I will be," "I am the
existing One," and "I cause to be what comes to pass."5 One

1Durham, p. 38.
2Keiland Delitzsch, 1:442-43.
3Sigmund Mowinckel, "The Name of the God of Moses," Hebrew Union College Annual 32

(1961):127.
4Charles Gianotti, "The Meaning of the Divine Name YHWH," Bibliotheca Sacra 142:565

(January-March 1985):45.
5Johnson, pp. 54-55.
40 Dr. Constable's Notes on Exodus 2021 Edition

writer paraphrased God's answer, "It is I who am with you."1

Another, "What does it matter who I am?"2 In other words, the
One who had promised to be with the descendants of
Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob had sent Moses to them. The
Hebrew word translated "I AM" is similar to the Hebrew name
"Yahweh."

"The answer Moses receives [in verse 14] is not,

by any stretch of the imagination, a name. It is an
assertion of authority, a confession of an essential
reality, and thus an entirely appropriate response
to the question Moses poses."3

Moses had asked, "Who am I?"—implying his complete

inadequacy for his calling. God replied, "I AM WHO I AM!"—
implying His complete adequacy. The issue was not who Moses
was, but who God is. I believe God was saying, "I am the God
of your forefathers, who proved Myself long ago as completely
adequate for all their needs; so it really doesn't matter who
you are, Moses!" Moses would learn the complete adequacy of
God Himself in the events that followed. Later, Pharaoh would
say, "Who is the LORD?" (5:2), and God's response was, "I am
the LORD!" (6:2, 6, 8). Pharaoh, too, then learned God's
complete adequacy. The real issue, then, was, and still is, who
God is.

There is an interesting interchange involving identity in this

conversation. Moses said, "Who am I?" implying that he was
nobody. He said the Israelites would ask, "Who is He?" implying
that the One who had sent Moses to them was unknown to
them. The Lord replied, "I AM WHO I AM," clarifying that He
was the God who had been, and who always would be, the
same God that their forefathers worshipped (v. 6). In effect,
God was saying, "It's Me!" The Israelites and Moses had heard
about their God, but He had not revealed Himself to them for
over 400 years. Now He had reappeared, and would

1Cassuto,p. 38.
2Cornelis
Houtman, Exodus, 1:367.
3Durham, p. 38.
2021 Edition Dr. Constable's Notes on Exodus 41

demonstrate to them Who He was—in the plagues and the

Exodus to come!

"… I AM WHO I AM' can be understood … as a near

refusal to dignify Moses' question with an answer:
'I AM WHO I AM, they know very well who I am. What
a question!"1

To summarize, in verse 14a, God explained to Moses that the

issue was not who Moses was (v. 11) but who He (God) was:
He was who He was. In verse 14b, God told Moses to tell the
Israelites that this "I AM" had sent him (Moses). This becomes
a new name for God. In verse 15, God gave them His older
name by which they had known Him: "The LORD, the God of
your fathers, the God of Abraham, the God of Isaac, and the
God of Jacob. This (name) is My name forever, and this is My
memorial name to all generations." In verse 16, God repeated
this older name.

Verse 16 is also the first reference to "the elders of Israel."2

The "elders" were the leaders of the various groups of
Israelites.

God told Moses to request Pharaoh's permission for the

Israelites to leave Egypt (v. 18).

"The sequel shows that there was no element of

deceit in the request for 'a three days' journey
into the wilderness,' i.e., right out of contact with
the Egyptian frontier guards. Pharaoh knew
perfectly well that this implied no return; indeed,
since Israel was a tolerated alien people, he would
have no claim on their return, once they had left
his territory."3

1Enns, p. 103.
2See Leslie Hoppe, "Elders and Deuteronomy," Eglise et Theologie 14 (1983):259-72.
3H. L. Ellison, Exodus, p. 22.
42 Dr. Constable's Notes on Exodus 2021 Edition

"Moses' demand for complete freedom, though

couched in polite words, is there from the start."1

Another possibility, which I prefer, is that the request to leave

Egypt for only three days was sincere; at first, God gave
Pharaoh this option. However, God knew, and He told Moses,
that Pharaoh would not grant this request. So, after Pharaoh
refused, God told Moses to "up the stakes" and request a
complete and final liberation of the Israelites.

The miraculous signs God proceeded to give Moses would

demonstrate to the Israelites that their God was again actively
working for them (v. 20; cf. 4:2-9). God reassured Moses that
the Israelites would believe him (v. 18).

Probably there were several reasons the Israelites were to ask

their Egyptian neighbors for jewelry ("articles of silver and
articles of gold") and "clothing" (v. 22). By doing so, they
would humiliate the Egyptians further. They would also obtain
materials and tools needed for the wilderness march and the
construction of the tabernacle. Moreover, they would receive
partial payment for the labor the Egyptians had stolen from
them during their years of slavery (cf. Deut. 15:12-15).

The writer stated God's sovereignty over Pharaoh in verses 14-

22. God demonstrated it in the plagues that followed (chs. 5—
11).2

"With the name 'Yahweh' revealed and explained

and with the proof of this explanation illustrated,
at least in prospect, Moses can have no further
question about God's authority. The narrative
deals next with Moses' own authority, and how
that is to be made clear."3

4:1-9 "He [Moses] was so worried about what might

happen, he didn't hear God tell him what would

1R.Alan Cole, Exodus: An Introduction and Commentary, p. 72.

2See ibid., pp. 19-40, for an exposition of the character of God as revealed in Exodus.
3Durham, p. 41.
2021 Edition Dr. Constable's Notes on Exodus 43

happen. His mind was filled with imaginary

scenarios."1

God gave Moses the ability to perform three miracles, in order

to convince the Israelites that the God of their fathers had
appeared to him. They also served to bolster Moses' faith.
Moses had left Egypt and the Israelites with a clouded
reputation, under the sentence of death, and he had been
away for a long time. He needed to prove to his brethren that
they could trust and believe him. Not only were these miracles
strong proofs of God's power, but they appear to have had
special significance for the Israelites as well (cf. v. 8).2

God probably intended the first miracle, of the staff and

serpent (vv. 2-5), to assure Moses and the Israelites that He
was placing the satanic power of Egypt under God's and Moses'
authoritative control. This was the power before which Moses
had previously fled. Moses' humble shepherd "staff" now
became a symbol of authority in his hand, a virtual "scepter."

"Pharaoh had turned the rod of government into

the serpent of oppression, from which Moses had
himself fled into Midian; but by the agency of
Moses the scene was altered again."3

The "serpent" represented the deadly satanic power of Egypt,

that sought to kill the Israelites, and Moses in particular. The
Pharaohs wore a religiously symbolic metal cobra around their
heads. It was a common symbol of Egyptian royal authority.4
However, the serpent also stood for the great enemy of man
behind that power—Satan—who had been the foe of the seed
of the woman since the Fall (Gen. 3:15). Moses' ability to turn
the serpent into his "staff"—by seizing its "tail"—would have
encouraged the Israelites. With these miraculous proofs, they
ought to have believed that God had enabled him to overcome
the cunning and might of Egypt, and to exercise authority over

1Swindoll, p. 119.
2See Johnson, p. 55; et al.
3Henry, p. 76.
4Enns, p. 109.
44 Dr. Constable's Notes on Exodus 2021 Edition

its fearsome power. This was a sign that God would bless
Moses' leadership.

The second miracle, of the leprous hand (vv. 6-7), evidently

assured Moses that God would bring him and the Israelites out
of their defiling environment—and heal them. But first, He
would punish the Egyptians with crippling afflictions (the
plagues). Presently the Israelites were unclean because of their
confinement in wicked Egypt. Moses' hand was the instrument
of his strength. As such, it was a good symbol of Moses,
himself being the instrument of God's strength in delivering
the Israelites, and Israel, God's instrument for blessing the
world.1 Moses' leprous hand miracle would also have suggested
to Pharaoh that Yahweh could afflict or deliver through His
representative at will. The miraculous restoration to health of
Moses' hand may have also attested to God's delegation of
divine power to him.

The third miracle, of the water turned into blood (v. 9),
provided assurance that God would humiliate the Egyptians by
spoiling what they regarded as a divine source of life. The
Egyptians identified the Nile River with the Egyptian god Osiris,
and credited it with all good and prosperity in their national
life. "Blood" was and is a symbol of life poured out in death
(cf. Lev. 17:11). Moses possessed the power to change the
life-giving water of the Nile into blood. (Josephus wrote that
the color of the water was that of blood, "but it brought upon
those that ventured to drink of it, great pains and bitter
torment."2) The Israelites would have concluded from this sign
that Moses also had the power to destroy the gods of Egypt,
and to punish the land with death (cf. 7:14-24).

"Like Abel's blood that cried out from the ground,

so would the infants' whose lives had been
demanded by Pharaoh (1:22)."3

1For an explanation of the Septuagint's omission of "leprous" from verse 6, see Cornelis
Houtman, "A Note on the LXX Version of Exodus 4, 6," Zeitschrift für die Alttestamentliche
Wissenschaft 97:2 (1983):253-54.
2Josephus, Antiquities of …, 2:12:3 and 2:14:1.
3Kaiser, p. 326.
2021 Edition Dr. Constable's Notes on Exodus 45

Each of these signs attested to Yahweh's creative power.

Normally at least two witnesses were necessary to establish
credibility under the Mosaic Law (Deut. 19:15; et al.). A third
witness further strengthened the veracity of the testimony.
Here, God gave Moses three "witnesses" to confirm His
prophet's divine calling and enablement. God entrusted Moses
with His powerful word and endowed him with His mighty
power. Moses was the first prophet with the power to perform
miracles.

4:10-17 Rather than inspiring confidence in Moses, God's commission

frightened him (vv. 10-12). Moses' claim to be "slow of speech
and … of tongue" (not handicapped, but lacking in eloquence)
was a thinly veiled excuse, by which Moses hoped to escape
his calling. Stephen said Moses was "eloquent" (Acts 7:22).
Apparently Moses felt he did not have sufficient oratorical
ability to persuade the Israelite elders or Pharaoh ("I have
never been eloquent," v. 10). So Moses' limitation was
psychological, not physical.1 God assured Moses that He would
enable Him to communicate effectively. Again God reminded
Moses that He was the Creator.

"This claim of inadequacy is a recurring one in OT

passages having to do with God's call and
commission (cf., e.g., Judg 6:14-15; 1 Sam
10:20-24; 1 Kgs 3:5-9; Isa 6:5-8; Jer 1:4-10; see
also Habel …2 Whatever its connection to
prophetic and royal traditions of the word and the
messenger, its more important rootage is in the
OT pattern of the weak become strong, the least
become great, the mean become mighty, the last
become first (cf., e.g., Judg 6:11-24; 1 Sam 16:1-
13; 17:19-54; Amos 7:14-15; Isa 6:1-13; Jer 1:4-
19; and even Isa 52:13-53:12). This pattern is a
metaphor of theological assertion in the Bible, and
everywhere it occurs, its fundamental message is
the same: God's word, God's rule, God's teaching,

1McGee, 1:222.
2N. Habel, "The Form and Significance of the Call Narratives," Zeitschrift für die
Alttestamentliche Wissenschaft 77 (1965):316-23.
46 Dr. Constable's Notes on Exodus 2021 Edition

God's deliverance come not from man, no matter

who that man may be, but from God. Even the
election of Israel makes this point. Indeed that
election is probably the most convincing of all the
occurrences of the pattern."1

"Cherish the lowliest thought you choose of

yourself, but unite it with the loftiest conception
of God's All-Sufficiency. Self-depreciation may
lead to the marring of a useful life. We must think
soberly of ourselves, not too lowly, as not too
extravagantly. The one talent must not be buried
in the earth."2

Swindoll restated Moses' four objections to God's call: "I don't

have all the answers" (3:13), "I may not have their [the
Israelites'] respect" (4:1), "I'm slow in my expressions" (4:10),
and "I'm not as qualified as others" (4:13).3

Unable to excuse himself, Moses finally admitted that he did

not want to obey God ("send the message by whomever [else]
You will"; vv. 13-16). God became angry with Moses because
he refused to obey. However, the sovereign Lord would not let
His reluctant servant go (cf. Jonah). Instead, He provided a
"mouthpiece" for Moses, a press secretary, a human
loudspeaker, in his older brother by three years, Aaron ("he will
be as a mouth for you"; cf. 7:7). This act was both an aid to
Moses and a discipline for his disobedience. On the one hand,
Aaron was an encouragement to Moses, but on the other, he
proved to be a source of frustration as a mediator (e.g., ch.
32).

"The prophet had one job: to represent accurately

the message of the one who sent him or her.
Moses would be as God to Aaron because he

1Durham, p. 49.
2Meyer, p. 71.
3Swindoll, pp. 116, 118, 121, 124.
2021 Edition Dr. Constable's Notes on Exodus 47

would tell him what to say, just as God would tell

Moses what to say."1

"The mouth of Moses may well be heavy and

clumsy, slow and halting in speech. It would not
matter if it were dumb altogether, and Aaron's
mouth, as well. Yahweh will be there, and Yahweh
will take responsibility for both the message and
the messengers. The staff in the hands of Moses
and Aaron is a symbol of this powerful Presence."2

Apparently Aaron was to speak for Moses only "to the people"
of Israel (vv. 14-16, cf. v. 30), not to Pharaoh. It was only later
that God told Moses to speak to Pharaoh (v. 21). This explains
the fact that when Moses stood before Pharaoh it was he, not
Aaron, who did the speaking.

As time passed, Moses grew more confident and

communicative, and increasingly took his proper place as
Israel's leader.

"Christ sent his disciples two and two, and some

of the couples were brothers."3

4:18 Moses' pessimism concerning the welfare of the Israelites

comes out in his request that "Jethro" (the "Reuel" of 2:18;
cf. 3:1) let him return to Egypt. Was Moses lying to Jethro?
After all, God had told him to return to Egypt, not to see how
the Israelites were faring, but to lead them out of Egypt. I
believe what Moses told Jethro was one motive in Moses' mind,
and so what he said was not a lie. He just did not mention his
divine commission. Perhaps Moses concluded that, if he told
Jethro about his commission, his father-in-law would have
opposed his return more strongly.

This section makes it possible for us to gain great insight into Moses'
feelings about God's promises to his forefathers and about his own life.
Moses had become thoroughly disillusioned. He regarded himself as a

1The Nelson …, p. 105.

2Durham, p. 51.
3Henry, p. 76.
48 Dr. Constable's Notes on Exodus 2021 Edition

failure, the objects of his ministry as hopeless, and God as unfaithful,

uncaring, and unable to deliver His people. He had learned his own inability
to deliver Israel, but he did not yet believe in God's ability to do so. Even
the miraculous revelation of God at the burning bush, and the miracles that
God enabled Moses to perform, did not convince him of God's purpose and
power.

One supernatural revelation, even one involving miracles, does not usually
change convictions that a person has built up over years of experience. We
not only need to believe in our own inability to produce supernatural
change, as Moses did, but we also need to believe in God's ability to
produce it. Moses had not yet learned the second lesson, which God
proceeded to teach him.

7. Moses' return to Egypt 4:19-31

4:19-23 Moses did not return immediately to Egypt, when he arrived

back in Midian following his encounter with God at Horeb, and
requested Jethro's permission and blessing to return (v. 19).
God may have spoken to him again, this time in Midian, and
sent him back to Egypt, assuring His servant that everyone
who "[was] seeking" his "life" earlier was "dead." Compare
Abram's stalling in Haran, until God again urged him to press
on to the unknown Promised Land (Gen. 11:31—12:4).
Another possibility is that we should translate "the LORD said"
(NASB) as "the LORD had said" (NIV). The Hebrew language has
no pluperfect tense. In this case, verse 19 precedes verse 18
chronologically.

Verse 19 may sound like God had to wait until all the people
who were seeking to kill Moses had died before He could send
Moses back to Egypt. This is hardly in harmony with the
revelation of God's sovereign control over all events that runs
throughout Exodus. Perhaps God's statement was an
announcement to Moses that the first installment of the
Exodus had commenced.1 In other words, it was an
encouragement to Moses rather than an indication of God's
limited sovereignty.

1Enns, pp. 128-29.

2021 Edition Dr. Constable's Notes on Exodus 49

Verse 20 describes what Moses did after God's full revelation

to him, in Midian, that continues in verses 21-23. We learn here
for the first time that Moses had "sons" (plural; cf. 2:22;
18:4).

"The likely reason why only Gershom's name was

mentioned in chapter 2 is because the etymology
of his name served the writer's theological
purpose in that context. He wished to highlight
Moses' sojourning in a foreign land (see 2:22)."1

Later we will read that Jethro brought Moses' wife and two
sons from Midian to Moses in the wilderness (18:2-7).
Evidently Moses had sent his family back to Midian sometime
after they arrived in Egypt.

In chronological order, verse 20 follows verse 23. In verses 21-

23, God gave Moses a preview of all that would take place in
his dealings with Pharaoh (vv. 21-23). This is the first mention
in Exodus that Moses was to perform signs before Pharaoh.
When God said that He would "harden [Pharaoh's] heart" (v.
21), He was not saying that Pharaoh would be unable to
choose whether he would release the Israelites. God made
Pharaoh's heart progressively harder as the king repeatedly
chose to disobey God's will (cf. Lev. 26:23-24).

"The hardening of Pharaoh is ascribed to God, not

only in the passages just quoted [14:4, 17; 7:3;
and 10:1], but also in 9:12; 10:20, 27; 11:10;
14:8; that is to say, ten times in all; and that not
merely as foreknown by Jehovah, but as caused
and effected by Him. In the last five passages it is
invariably stated that 'Jehovah hardened …
Pharaoh's heart.' But it is also stated just as often,
viz. ten times, that Pharaoh hardened his own
heart, or made it heavy or firm; e.g., in 7:13, 22;
8:15; 9:35; … 7:14; … 9:7; … 8:11, 28; 9:34; …
13:15. …

1Ibid., p. 129.
50 Dr. Constable's Notes on Exodus 2021 Edition

"According to this, the hardening of Pharaoh was

quite as much his own act as the decree of God.
But if, in order to determine the precise relation
of the divine to the human causality, we look more
carefully at the two classes of expressions, we
shall find that not only in connection with the first
sign, by which Moses and Aaron were to show
their credentials as the messengers of Jehovah,
sent with the demand that he would let the people
of Israel go (7:13-14), but after the first five
penal miracles, the hardening is invariably
represented as his own. … It is not till after the
sixth plague that it is stated that Jehovah made
the heart of Pharaoh firm (9:12). … Looked at
from this side, the hardening was a fruit of sin, a
consequence of self-will, high-mindedness, and
pride which flowed from sin, and a continuous and
ever increasing abuse of that freedom of the will
which is innate in man, and which involves the
possibility of obstinate resistance to the word and
chastisement of God even until death. …

"… God not only permits a man to harden himself;

He also produced obduracy, and suspends this
sentence over the impenitent. Not as though God
took pleasure in the death of the wicked! No; God
desires that the wicked should repent of his evil
way and live (Ezek. 33:11); and He desires this
most earnestly, for 'He will have all men to be
saved and to come unto the knowledge of the
truth' (1 Tim. 2:4; cf. 2 Pet. 3:9). As God causes
His earthly sun to rise upon the evil and the good,
and sendeth rain on the just and the unjust (Matt.
5:45), so He causes His sun of grace to shine upon
all sinners, to lead them to life and salvation.

"'The sun, by the force of its heat, moistens

the wax and dries the clay, softening the
one and hardening the other; and as this
produces opposite effects by the same
2021 Edition Dr. Constable's Notes on Exodus 51

power, so, through the long-suffering of

God, which reaches to all, some receive
good and others evil, some are softened
and others hardened' (Theodoret).

"It is the curse of sin, that it renders the hard

heart harder, and less susceptible to the gracious
manifestations of divine love, long-suffering, and
patience. In this twofold manner God produces
hardness, not only permissive but effective; i.e.,
not only by giving time and space for the
manifestation of human opposition, even to the
utmost limits of creaturely freedom, but still more
by those continued manifestations of His will
which drive the hard heart to such utter obduracy
that it is no longer capable of returning, and so
giving over the hardened sinner to the judgment
of damnation. This is what we find in the case of
Pharaoh."1

See Romans 1:24-32 for the New Testament expression of this

truth. Even though God's hardening of Pharaoh's heart was
only the complement of Pharaoh's hardening his own heart,
God revealed only the former action in verse 21. God's purpose
in this revelation was to prepare Moses for the opposition he
would face. He also intended to strengthen Moses's faith, by
obviating any questions that might arise in his mind—
concerning God's omniscience—as his conflict with Pharaoh
intensified.2

1Keiland Delitzsch, 1:453-456. Johnson, p. 56; Walter C. Kaiser Jr., Toward Old
Testament Ethics, p. 255; Nahum M. Sarna, Exodus, p. 23; Robert B. Chisholm, "Divine
Hardening in the Old Testament," Bibliotheca Sacra 153:612 (October-December
1996):411, 429; and Dorian G. Coover Cox, "The Hardening of Pharaoh's Heart in Its
Literary and Cultural Contexts," Bibliotheca Sacra 163:651 (July-September 2006):292-
311, took essentially the same position.
2F. E. Deist, "Who is to blame: the Pharaoh, Yahweh or circumstance? On human

responsibility, and divine ordinance in Exodus 1—14," OTWSA 29(1986):91-110, argued

that documents J, D, and P each give a different answer to the question of the relationship
between divine sovereignty and human responsibility.
52 Dr. Constable's Notes on Exodus 2021 Edition

"Egyptians believed that when a person died his

heart was weighed in the hall of judgment. If one's
heart was 'heavy' with sin, that person was
judged. A stone beetle scarab was placed on the
heart of the deceased person to suppress his
natural tendency to confess sin which would
subject himself to judgment. This 'hardening of
the heart' by the scarab would result in salvation
for the deceased.

"However, God reversed this process in Pharaoh's

case. Instead of his heart being suppressed so
that he was silent about his sin and thus delivered,
his heart became hardened, he confessed his sin
(Ex. 9:27, 34; 10:16-17), and his sinfully heavy
heart resulted in judgment. For the Egyptians
'hardening of the heart' resulted in silence
(absence of confession of sin) and therefore
salvation. But God's hardening of Pharaoh's heart
resulted in acknowledgment of sin and in
judgment."1

The real question that God's dealings with Pharaoh raises is:
"Does man have a free will?" Man has limited freedom, not
absolute freedom. We have many examples of this fact in
analogous relationships: A child has limited freedom under his
or her parent. An adult has limited freedom under his or her
human government. Likewise, individuals have limited freedom
under divine government. God is sovereign, but we are
responsible for the decisions God allows us to make (cf. John
1:12; 3:16, 36; 5:24; 6:47; 20:31; Rom. 9:14-21; Jer. 18:1-
6).2

"Childs suggests that the matter of causality in

the heart-hardening is a side-track; that those
critics, for example, who have seen here a
theological dimension of predestination and
freewill, have been wrong. I would say, No, they

1Hannah, pp. 114-15.

2See C. S. Lewis, Mere Christianity, pp. 52-53.
2021 Edition Dr. Constable's Notes on Exodus 53

have been right (at least in principle) to sense

such a dimension, but wrong to see the question
of divine determination in human affairs arising
only in connection with Pharaoh's heart-
hardening. For the whole story may be seen in
these terms—Moses and the people, as well as
Pharaoh, exist and act within a framework of
divine 'causality.' With them, too, the question
arises, Are they independent agents? Are they
manipulated by God? (Have they freewill? Are
they 'pre-destined?') The story is about freedom;
but freedom turns out to involve varieties of
servitude.

"Thus Isbell's observation bears repeating: the

story is above all one about masters, especially
God. No one in the story entirely escapes God's
control or its repercussions, whether directly or
indirectly. Moses who sits removed in Midian finds
himself forced by Yahweh into a direct servitude
but is nevertheless allowed to develop a measure
of freedom. Pharaoh (Egypt) exalts his own
mastery and is cast into a total and mortal
servitude. The people of Egypt and Israel are
buffeted this way and that in varying indirect roles
of servitude. …

"God himself is depicted as risking insecurity,

because that is the price of allowing his servants
a dimension of freedom. An exodus story that saw
no murmuring, no rebellion (or potential for
rebellion) by Moses and by Israel, would indeed be
a fairy tale, a piece of soft romance. But to talk of
God and 'insecurity' in the same breath is also to
see that the gift of human 'freedom' (to some if
not to others) itself creates external pressures on
God which in turn circumscribe his own action.
Egypt/Pharaoh must be made an example of,
spectacularly, so that Israel, the whole world, may
freely come to recognize that Yahweh is indeed
54 Dr. Constable's Notes on Exodus 2021 Edition

master, one who remembers his obligations as well

as one who demands 'service' (labour!). In short,
in his relations with humankind, God's freedom is
circumscribed by humankind just as the freedom
of humankind is circumscribed by God."1

Verses 22-23 summarize Moses' future messages to Pharaoh

on several different occasions.

Israel was God's "firstborn" son, in the sense that "he" was the
nation, among all others, on which God had chosen to place His
special blessing. Israel was first in rank and preeminence, by
virtue of God's sovereign choice to bless Abraham's seed.

"Since Israel is God's firstborn son, the

appropriate punishment against Egypt for harming
Israel is for God to harm Egypt's firstborn son."2

The essence of the conflict between Pharaoh and Yahweh was

the issue of sovereignty. Sovereignty refers to supreme power
and authority. Regarding God, it refers to the fact that He has
supreme power and authority, more than any other entity.
Sovereignty does not specify how one exercises supreme
power and authority. Specifically, it does not mean that God
exercises His sovereignty by directly controlling everything
that happens. Scripture reveals that this is not how He
exercises His sovereignty. Rather, He allows people some
freedom, yet maintains supreme power and authority.

Were Egypt's gods, or Israel's God, sovereign? This issue

stands out clearly in the following verses.

"The Egyptian state was not a man-made

alternative to other forms of political organization

1David Gunn, "The 'Hardening of Pharaoh's Heart': Plot, Character and Theology in Exodus
1-14," Art and Meaning: Rhetoric in Biblical Literature, pp. 88-89. For a more strongly
Calvinistic explanation of the hardening of Pharaoh's heart, see G. K. Beale, "An Exegetical
and Theological Consideration of the Hardening of Pharaoh's heart in Exodus 4-14 and
Romans 9," Trinity Journal 5NS:2 (Autumn 1984):129-54. For a helpful discussion of
several ways of explaining God's freedom and our freedom, see Axel D. Steuer, "The
Freedom of God and Human Freedom," Scottish Journal of Theology 36:2:163-180.
2Enns, p. 132.
2021 Edition Dr. Constable's Notes on Exodus 55

[from the Egyptian point of view]. It was god-

given, established when the world was created;
and it continued to form part of the universal
order. In the person of Pharaoh a superhuman
being had taken charge of the affairs of man. …
The monarch then was as old as the world, for the
creator himself had assumed kingly office on the
day of creation. Pharaoh was his descendant and
his successor."1

Pharaoh would not release Yahweh's metaphorical "son," Israel

("you [Pharaoh] have refused to let him go"). Therefore,
Yahweh would take (subdue) Pharaoh's metaphorical son,
namely, the Egyptians as a people, and even destroy his
physical son, thus proving His sovereignty.

4:24-26 This brief account raises several questions.

Evidently God afflicted Moses ("sought to put him to death";

perhaps making him very ill) because he had not been obedient
to Him; Moses had failed to circumcise at least one of his two
sons (18:3-4).

"Most likely, Moses had kept one of his sons

uncircumcised in order to please his Midianite
family. (The Midianites practiced circumcision on a
groom right before his marriage instead of
circumcising male infants.) … Many of Israel's
neighboring peoples practiced circumcision, but
none except Israel circumcised infants."2

The Egyptians practiced partial circumcision on adults.3 God's

sentence for this sin of omission (an Israelite failing to have his
son circumcised) was death ("cut off from his people," cf. Gen.
17:14). God was ready to carry out this sentence on Moses
for his failure (cf. 1 John 5:16). In doing this, God was making
Moses face his own incomplete obedience—which reflected his

1Henri Frankfort, Ancient Egyptian Religion, p. 30.

2The Nelson …, p. 106.
3J.M. Sasson, "Circumcision in the Ancient Near East," Journal of Biblical Literature 85
(1966):473-74.
56 Dr. Constable's Notes on Exodus 2021 Edition

lack of faith in God. God afflicted Moses, but whether He did

so naturally or supernaturally is unclear and unimportant. In
this incident, God was bringing Moses to the (spiritual) place
He brought Jacob to, when He wrestled with him at the Jabbok
(Gen. 32). He was getting him to acknowledge His
sovereignty.1

Zipporah performed the operation at her husband's insistence.

It is obvious that she did not approve of it. Most scholars
believe that Zipporah "cut off her son's foreskin and threw it
at Moses' feet." One writer believed that she touched Moses'
genitals with her son's foreskin.2 Another argued that she
threw it at the feet of the pre-incarnate Christ.3 Perhaps
because of Zipporah's resistance to do the will of God, Moses
sent her and his sons back to her father at this time. Or the
circumcision may have left the boy in such pain that he could
not continue the trip to Egypt.4 Moses may have sent her back
during or before the plagues, when his life might have been in
danger from the Egyptians. We have no record of exactly when
Moses sent his wife and sons back to Midian, but we read of
them rejoining Moses later at Sinai (18:2).

The "bridegroom of blood" figure (v. 26) evidently means the

following: Apparently Zipporah regarded her act of
circumcising her son as the factor that removed God's hand of
judgment from Moses, and restored him to life and to her
again. It was as though God had given Moses a second chance,
and he had begun life as her husband all over again, as a
bridegroom (cf. Jonah).5 She had accepted Yahweh's authority
and demands, and was now viewing Moses in the light of God's
commission. She therefore abandoned her claim on Moses, and
made him available (dedicated or consecrated him) to
Yahweh's service.6 "You are a bridegroom of blood to me,"

1See M. J. Oosthuizen, "Some thoughts on the interpretation of Exodus 4:24-26," OTWSA

29(1986):22-28.
2Durham, p. 58.
3Ronald B. Allen, "The 'Bloody Bridegroom' in Exodus 4:24-26," Bibliotheca Sacra 153:611

(July-September 1996):259-69.
4Swindoll, p. 142.
5Cassuto, pp. 59-61.
6Oosthuizen, p. 26.
2021 Edition Dr. Constable's Notes on Exodus 57

may have been an ancient marital relationship formula recalling

circumcision as a premarital rite.1

"Moses has been chosen and commissioned by

God, but he has shown himself far from
enthusiastic about confronting the Pharaoh and
threatening him with the death of his son. YHWH
sets about showing Moses that although he is safe
from other men (Ex. iv 19) he faces a much
greater danger to his life in the wrath of the God
whom he is so reluctant to serve (iv 14). Like
Jacob before him, Moses must undergo a night
struggle with his mysterious God before he can
become a worthy instrument of YHWH and can
enjoy a completely satisfactory relationship with
his brother. In all this, Moses, like Jacob, is not
only an historical person, but also a paradigm. The
Israelite people, the people whom YHWH has
encountered and whom he will slay with pestilence
and sword if they go not out into the wilderness
to serve him (v. 3), must ponder this story with
fear and trembling.

"If Israel is to survive the wrath of YHWH, it must,

our text implies, be by virtue of the spilling of
atoning blood … Gershom's blood saves Moses,
just as the blood of the Passover lamb will save
the Israelites. Since for the sin of the Pharaoh his
son's blood will be shed, it is appropriate that the
blood which saves Moses should not be his own,
but that of his son. It is also fitting that this blood
should be blood shed during the rite of
circumcision. Since before the Passover lamb is
eaten the participants must all be circumcised, it
is right that the neglect of Gershom's circumcision
(though this omission is not the cause of the
attack) should be repaired. The boy cannot be
circumcised by his father, who is otherwise

1T.C. Mitchell, "The Meaning of the Noun HTN in the Old Testament," Vetus Testamentum
19 (1969):94-105, 111-12.
58 Dr. Constable's Notes on Exodus 2021 Edition

engaged, so Zipporah takes it upon herself, acting

on behalf of her absent father, Jethro (hence the
words to Moses 'You are my son-in-law by virtue
of blood, the blood of circumcision'), to perform
the rite, thus showing herself to be a worthy
member of the elite class typified by Rahab the
Canaanite harlot and Ruth the Moabitess—the
foreign woman who puts Israelites to shame and
earns the right to be held up as a model for
imitation. Why does she touch Moses' raglayim
["feet"] with the severed foreskin? Although, as I
have argued, Moses is to be thought of as already
circumcised, this action of his wife is, I have
suggested, to be construed as a symbolic act of
re-circumcision: Moses as representative of the
people as a whole is thus symbolically prepared for
the imminent Passover celebration. The vocation
of the Israelite is a matter of high moment. One's
reluctance to serve YHWH wholeheartedly has to
be broken down in a fearsome lone struggle in the
darkness, and even then before one can meet
YHWH there must be a twofold shedding of blood,
the blood of circumcision and that of the Passover
lamb. Furthermore, the pride of the male Israelite
in his high vocation must needs be qualified, by
reflecting that in his mysterious strategies for the
world YHWH often employs in major roles those
who are neither male nor even Israelite."1

These few verses underscore a very important principle:

Normally, before God will use a person publicly, he or she must
first be obedient to God at home (cf. 1 Tim. 3:4-5).

"This story of Moses shows that God would rather

have us die than take up His work with
unconsecrated hearts and unsurrendered wills."2

1Bernard P. Robinson, "Zipporah to the Rescue: A Contextual Study of Exodus IV 24-6,"

Vetus Testamentum 36:4 (October 1986):459-61.
2Meyer, p. 81.
2021 Edition Dr. Constable's Notes on Exodus 59

Verses 18-23 anticipate the consequences of Egypt's not

obeying God, and verses 24-26 anticipate the consequences
of Israel's not obeying God.

4:27-31 Aaron was apparently in Egypt when God told him to "Go to
meet Moses in the wilderness," and subsequently directed him
to Horeb (v. 27). Moses was apparently on his way from Midian
back to Egypt when Aaron met him. Compare the reunion of
Jacob and Esau (Gen. 33). Note that it was Aaron, not Moses,
who spoke to the Israelites (cf. vv. 14-16). Evidently Moses
performed the signs (cf. v. 17).

The Israelites "believed" what Aaron told them, and what

Moses' miracles confirmed. They believed that the "God of
their fathers" had appeared to Moses, and had sent him to lead
them out of Egypt and into the Promised Land (v. 31; cf. 3:6—
4:9).

The relationship of faith and worship is clear in verse 31: "the

people believed … they bowed low and worshiped." Worship is
an expression of faith.

B. GOD'S DEMONSTRATIONS OF HIS SOVEREIGNTY CHS. 5—11

God permitted the conflict between Moses and Pharaoh for five reasons at
least:

1. In this conflict, God displayed His superior power and sovereignty

over Pharaoh and the gods of Egypt.

2. God strengthened the faith of His people, so that they would trust
and obey Him, and thereby realize all of His gracious purposes for
them as a nation.

3. God also used these events to heighten anticipation of, and

appreciation for, the redemption He would provide. The Israelites
would forever after look back on the Exodus as the greatest
demonstration of God's love at work for them.
60 Dr. Constable's Notes on Exodus 2021 Edition

4. These conflicts show how divine sovereignty works with human

freedom. God exercises His sovereignty by allowing people a measure
of freedom to make choices, for which he holds them responsible.

5. They also clarify how God hands people over to the consequences of
the sins they insist on pursuing—as punishment for their sins.

"It is impossible to find a more exact illustration of the truth

of Rom. i. than that presented in this story of Pharaoh's
conflict with Jehovah."1

1. Pharaoh's response to Moses and Aaron's initial request

5:1—6:1

5:1-9 At Moses and Aaron's first audience with Pharaoh, they simply
presented God's command ("Let My people go …," v. 1).2 They
did not perform miracles yet, but only asked for permission to
leave Egypt temporarily.

"The Voice of God is the most powerful force in nature, indeed the only
force in nature, for all energy is here only because the power-
filled Word is being spoken."3

By Egyptian law, the Israelites could have worshipped only the

gods of Egypt while in the land, but they had to leave Egypt
to worship a non-Egyptian God. Moses' request was a request
to exercise a basic human right, namely, freedom of worship.
Verse 1 does not contradict 3:18: "… say to him [Pharaoh],
"… please let us go a three days' journey into the wilderness,
that we may sacrifice to the LORD our God.'" Celebrating a
"feast" (v. 1) would have involved sacrifices.

"Exodus 5:1-5 introduces another aspect of

labour in Egypt: claims for time off work, and
specifically for worship or religious holidays. On
this topic, useful background comes from the
extensive, fragmentary and often very detailed

1Ibid.,
p. 90.
2For an introduction to Liberation Theology, see Wolf, pp. 130-31.
3A. W. Tozer, The Pursuit of God, p. 74.
2021 Edition Dr. Constable's Notes on Exodus 61

records kept for the activities of the royal

workmen (who lived at the Deir el-Medina village),
who cut the royal tombs in the Valleys of the
Kings and Queens in Western Thebes, c. 1530-
1100 B.C.

"Daily notes were kept for the men's attendances

at work or of their absences from it. Sometimes
reasons for absence are given. … The entire
workforce might be off for up to 8 or 14 days,
especially if interruptions, official holidays and
'weekends' came together. In Ancient Egypt—as
elsewhere—major national festivals (usually main
feasts of chief gods) were also public holidays.
Then, each main city had its own holidays on main
feasts of the principal local god(s). Besides all this,
the royal workmen at Deir el-Medina can be seen
claiming time off for all kinds of reasons, including
'offering to his god,' '(off) for his feast'; even
'brewing for his feast' or for a specific deity. Not
only individuals but groups of men together could
get time off for such observances. And a full-scale
feast could last several days.

"What was true in Thebes or Memphis would apply

equally at Pi-Ramesse (Raamses). So, when Moses
requested time off from Pharaoh, for the Hebrews
to go off and celebrate a feast to the Lord God, it
is perhaps not too surprising that Pharaoh's
reaction was almost 'not another holiday!'"1

Pharaoh was not only "the king of Egypt," but the Egyptians
regarded him as a divine person; he was worshipped as "a god"
(v. 2).2 Consequently when Moses and Aaron asked Pharaoh to
accede to the command of Yahweh, Pharaoh saw this request
as a threat to his sovereignty. He knew (i.e., had respect for)
the gods of Egypt, but he did "not know" (have respect for)

1Kenneth Kitchen, "Labour Conditions in the Egypt of the Exodus," Buried History
(September 1984):47-48.
2See Frankfort, ch. 2: "The Egyptian State."
62 Dr. Constable's Notes on Exodus 2021 Edition

Yahweh, the God of his foreign slaves. If Yahweh had identified

Himself with these slaves, and if He had not, by now, already
delivered them, why should Pharaoh fear and obey Him?

"It required no ordinary daring to confront the

representative of a long line of kings who had been
taught to consider themselves as the
representatives and equals of the gods. They were
accustomed to receive Divine titles and honours,
and to act as irresponsible despots. Their will was
indisputable, and all the world seemed to exist for
no other reason than [to] minister to their
state."1

"These words ["Who is the LORD that I should obey

His voice to let Israel go? I do not know the LORD
…"] form the motivation for the events that
follow, events designed to demonstrate who the
Lord is.

"Thus as the plague narratives begin, the purpose

of the plagues is clearly stated: 'so that the
Egyptians will know that I am the LORD' (7:5).
Throughout the plague narratives we see the
Egyptians learning precisely this lesson (8:19;
9:20, 27; 10:7). As the narratives progress, the
larger purpose also emerges. The plagues which
God had sent against the Egyptians were 'to be
recounted to your son and your son's son … so
that you may know that I am the LORD.'"2

"The point is clear from the chapter: when the

people of God attempt to devote their full service
and allegiance to God, they encounter opposition
from the world."3

In their second appeal to Pharaoh, Moses and Aaron used

milder terms (v. 3). They presented themselves not as

1Meyer, p. 88.
2Sailhamer, The Pentateuch …, pp. 249-50.
3The NET Bible note on 5:1.
2021 Edition Dr. Constable's Notes on Exodus 63

ambassadors of Yahweh but as representatives of their

brethren. They did not mention the name "Yahweh," that was
unknown to Pharaoh, or "Israel," that would have struck him as
arrogant. They did not command but requested ("Please …").
Moreover, they gave reasons for their request: their God had
appeared to them ("met with us"), and they feared His wrath
if they disobeyed Him ("He will fall upon us with pestilence or
with sword").

"Moses … appealed to him [Pharaoh] almost

precisely as, centuries after, Paul addressed the
assembly on Mars Hill … [cf. Acts 17:22-23]."1

The Egyptians regarded the sacrifices that the Israelites would

offer as unacceptable, since almost all forms of life were
sacred in Egypt. They believed their gods manifested
themselves through cows, goats, and many other animals.

"The Egyptians considered sacred the lion, the ox,

the ram, the wolf, the dog, the cat, the ibis, the
vulture, the falcon, the hippopotamus, the
crocodile, the cobra, the dolphin, different
varieties of fish, trees, and small animals, including
the frog, scarab, locust, and other insects. In
addition to these there were anthropomorphic
gods; that is, men in the prime of life such as
Annen, Atum, or Osiris."2

"Where did Moses get the idea that they should

have a pilgrim feast and make sacrifices? God had
only said they would serve Him in that mountain.
In the OT the pilgrim feasts to the sanctuary three
times a year incorporated the ideas of serving the
LORD and keeping the commands. So the words
here simply use the more general idea of
appearing before their God. And, they would go to

1Meyer, p. 107.
2William Ward, The Spirit of Ancient Egypt, p. 123.
64 Dr. Constable's Notes on Exodus 2021 Edition

the desert because there was no homeland yet.

Only there could they be free."1

Pharaoh's reply to Moses and Aaron's second appeal was even

harsher than his response to their first command (v. 5; cf. v.
1). Their aggressive approach may have been what God initially
used to cause Pharaoh to harden his heart.

5:10-21 "Stubble" was the part of the corn or grain stalk that remained
standing after field hands had harvested a crop (v. 12). From
then on, the Israelites chopped up stubble and mixed it with
the clay to strengthen their bricks, because they were no
longer provided "straw" for this purpose.

"In 2:23 the cry of the people went up before God.

By contrast, here in 5:15 the cry of the people is
before Pharaoh. It is as if the author wants to
show that Pharaoh was standing in God's way and
thus provides another motivation for the plagues
which follow."2

"This Pharaoh, so unreasonable with men and so

stingy with straw, is about to be shown up before
Yahweh as no more than a man of straw."3

"An ancient Egyptian document, the Papyrus

Anastasi, contains the lament of an officer who
had to erect buildings on the frontier of Egypt,
probably in the region of the present day Suez
Canal. He could not work, for he says, 'I am
without equipment. There are no people to make
bricks, and there is no straw in the district.' This
document, then, definitely indicates that the
overseer of building operations could not progress
in his work because of lack of straw for
brickmaking."4

1The NET Bible note on 5:3.

2Sailhamer, The Pentateuch …, p. 250.
3Durham, p. 66.
4Free, pp. 91-92.
2021 Edition Dr. Constable's Notes on Exodus 65

"The lowest ebbs go before the highest tides; and

very cloudy mornings commonly introduce the
fairest days, Deut. xxii. 36."1

The Israelites now turned on Moses, just as the Israelites in

Jesus' day turned against their Savior.

"The Lord God brought a vine out of Egypt, but

during the four hundred years of its sojourn there,
it had undeniably become inveterately degenerate
and wild."2

5:22—6:1 Moses' prayer of inquiry and complaint reveals the immaturity

of his faith at this time ("Why have You brought harm to this
people? Why did You ever send me? … Why have You not
delivered Your people at all?"). He, too, needed the
demonstrations of God's power that followed.

"By allowing us to listen to Moses' prayer to God,

the author uncovers Moses' own view of his
calling. It was God's work, and Moses was sent by
God to do it."3

This section climaxes with the apparent failure of Yahweh's plan to rescue
Israel. This desperate scenario provides the pessimistic backdrop, and the
bleak circumstances, for the supernatural demonstrations of Yahweh's
power that follow.

"Man's extremity is God's opportunity of helping and saving."4

2. Moses and Aaron's equipment as God's messengers

6:2—7:7

The writer gave the credentials of God and His representatives, Moses and
Aaron, in these verses.

1Henry, p. 77. See also Enns, p. 161.

2Meyer, p. 18.
3Sailhamer, The Pentateuch …, p. 250.
4Henry, p. 78.
66 Dr. Constable's Notes on Exodus 2021 Edition

6:2-9 God explained to Moses that He would indeed deliver Israel out
of Egypt—in spite of the discouragement that Moses had
encountered so far. God proceeded to remind Moses of His
promises to the patriarchs, and to reveal more of Himself by
expounding another one of His names:

"During the patriarchal period the characteristic

name of God was 'God Almighty' (6:3; see, for
example, Gen. 17:1), the usual translation of the
Hebrew El Shaddai, which probably literally means
'God, the Mountain One.' That phrase could refer
to the mountains as God's symbolic home (see Ps.
121:1), but it more likely stresses His invincible
power and might. …

"But during the Mosaic period the characteristic

name of God was to be 'the LORD,' the meaning of
which was first revealed to Moses himself (Exod.
3:13-15). Exodus 6:3 is not saying that the
patriarchs were totally ignorant of the name
Yahweh."1

The occurrences of "El Shaddai" in Genesis are in 17:1; 28:3;

35:11; 43:14; 48:3; and partially in 49:3. The name occurs 30
times in Job. "Shaddai" may come from the Hebrew sd
("breast"), or from the Ugaritic tdy ("mountain"). In the
former case, it would mean "God the Nourisher," and in the
latter "God of the Mountain."2

"Thus though the name YHWH existed well before

the time of Moses, the meaning of that name was
not revealed until the time of Moses."3

"Yahweh" reveals God as "the absolute Being working with

unbounded freedom in the performance of His promises."4 It
emphasizes God's power at work for His people, as He was

1Youngblood, p. 41.
2See Kaiser, "Exodus," p. 340.
3Gianotti, p. 39. See Johnson, p. 56; and Robert Dick Wilson, "Yahweh (Jehovah) and

Exodus 6:3," in Classical Evangelical Essays in Old Testament Interpretation, pp. 29-40.
4Keil and Delitzsch, 1:467.
2021 Edition Dr. Constable's Notes on Exodus 67

about to demonstrate it. This was a name by which the

Israelites knew God; it was not a new name. The Israelites knew
Yahweh, but they did not know him as they would know Him
as He revealed Himself in the Exodus. Similarly, Pharaoh knew
of Israel's God, but he did not know Him as he was about to in
the Exodus (cf. 1:8; 5:2).

"… the significance of the name is going to be

understood at this most pivotal time in Israel's
history."1

"Whatever the situation or need (in particular, the

redemption from Egypt, but also future needs),
God will 'become' the solution to that need."2

Moses was having a terrible day; things were going from bad
to worse, but the LORD reminded Moses five times to keep
focused on who He was (vv. 2, 6, 7, 8, 29).

"Time after time He punctuated His message to

Moses by saying, 'Look, Moses, your eyes are in
the wrong place (again). Get our eyes back on Me
(again). Remember who I am (again).'

"Until your eyes are fixed on the Lord, you will not
be able to endure those days that go from bad to
worse."3

The LORD reminded Moses five time that He was "I am," and He
told him eight times "I will" (vv. 1, 6 [3 times], 7 [twice], and
8 [twice]. In this revelation, God promised to do three things
for Israel:

1. He would deliver the Israelites from their Egyptian

bondage (v. 6). Moses communicated this in a threefold
expression, suggesting the completeness of the
deliverance: "I will bring you out from under the burdens
of the Egyptians … I will deliver you from their bondage

1Enns,p. 174.
2Gianotti, p. 46. See also the note on verse 3 in the NET Bible.
3Swindoll, p. 165. Italics omitted.
68 Dr. Constable's Notes on Exodus 2021 Edition

… I will redeem you with an outstretched arm and with

great judgments."

2. He would adopt Israel as His nation ("I will take you for
My people, and I will be your God," v. 7). This took place
at Sinai (19:5).

3. He would bring Israel into the Promised Land ("I will bring
you to the land … and I will give it to you for a
possession," v. 8).

Note the repetition of the phrase "I will" seven times in these
verses, emphasizing the fact that God would certainly do these
things for Israel. The Jews regarded "seven" as the symbolical
number of the covenant.1 The whole revelation occurs within
the bookend statements "I am the LORD" (vv. 2, 8), which
formalize it, and further stress the certainty of these promises.

"So this passage effectively paves the way for the

transition from the simple covenant with Abraham
to the complex new (Mosaic) covenant with the
people as a whole."2

"This small section of narrative also sketches out

the argument of the whole Pentateuch. God made
a covenant with the patriarchs to give them the
land of Canaan (Ex 6:4). He remembered his
covenant when he heard the cry of the Israelites
in Egyptian bondage (v. 5). He is now going to
deliver Israel from their bondage and take them to
himself as a people and be their God (v. 6). He will
also bring them into the land which he swore to
give to their fathers (v. 8). The die is cast for the
remainder of the events narrated in the
Pentateuch."3

1Alfred Edersheim, The Temple, p. 132, f. 1.

2Jonathan Magonet, "The Rhetoric of God: Exodus 6:2-8," Journal for the Study of the Old
Testament 27 (October 1983):66.
3Sailhamer, The Pentateuch …, p. 251.
2021 Edition Dr. Constable's Notes on Exodus 69

6:10-13 Moses continued to claim lack of persuasive skill in speech ("I

am unskilled in speech," v. 12; cf. v. 30). He failed to grasp
the full significance of what God had just revealed to him.
Jesus' disciples, and we, had and have the same problem. It
was God, not Moses, who would bring the people out of Egypt.

"Seven distinct objections were raised by Moses

as reasons why he should not undertake the
arduous task to which he was called. They have
been thus epitomised [sic]: Lack of fitness, 'who
am I, that I should go?' (iii. 11); lack of words,
'what shall I say?' (iii. 13); lack of authority, 'they
will not believe me' (iv. 1); lack of power of
speech, 'I am not eloquent' (iv. 10); lack of special
adaptation, 'Send by whom Thou wilt send' (iv.
13); lack of success at his first attempt, 'neither
hast Thou delivered Thy people at all' (v. 23); lack
of acceptance, 'the children of Israel have not
hearkened unto me' (vi. 12)."1

MOSES’ FAMILY TREE (EXOD. 6:14-27)

Reuben Simeon Levi Judah

Gershon Kohath Marari

Libni Shimei Amram Izhar Hebron Uzziel Mahli Mushi

Aaron Moses Korah Nephez Zichri Michael Elzaphan Sithri

Nadab Abihu Eleazar Ithamar Assir Elkanah Abiasath

Phinehas

6:14-27 The selective genealogy (cf. Num. 3:27-28) of Moses and

Aaron, in these verses, accredits these men as God's divinely
appointed messengers (prophets) to the Israelites. Moses'

1Meyer, p. 62.
70 Dr. Constable's Notes on Exodus 2021 Edition

father, Amram, married his father's sister, Jochebed ("God Is

Your Glory"). She must have been a remarkable woman.1

"The point of this genealogy in this context seems

to be to establish Aaron as a worthy partner in the
deliverance of Israel from Egypt, particularly in his
role as Moses' mouthpiece—a role reiterated in
6:28—7:7."2

6:28-30 These verses essentially repeat 6:10-12. They emphasize that

it was the LORD who was sending Moses to Pharaoh ("I am the
LORD, speak to Pharaoh all that I speak to you."), and they
repeat Moses' excuse for not going ("I am unskilled in speech.).

7:1-7 Moses was "as God" to Pharaoh, in that he was the person who
revealed God's will and sovereignly gave Pharaoh orders (v. 1).
Pharaoh was to be the executor of that will.

"In Egyptian royal ideology, the pharaoh was

considered to be a divine being. So by calling
Moses God, Yahweh is beating Pharaoh at his own
game. It is not the king of Egypt who is god;
rather, it is this shepherd and leader of slaves who
is God."3

Aaron would be Moses' "prophet" as he stood between Moses

and Pharaoh, and communicated Moses' and God's will to the
king. Verse 1 helps us identify the essential meaning of the
Hebrew word nabhi ("prophet"; cf. 4:10-16; Deut. 18:15-22;
Isa. 6:9; Jer. 1:7; Ezek. 2:3-4; Amos 7:12-16). This word
occurs almost 300 times in the Old Testament, and "in its
fullest significance meant 'to speak fervently for God.'"4

1See Alexander Whyte, Bible Characters, 1:142-43.

2Enns, p. 178.
3Ibid., p. 181.
4Leon J. Wood, The Prophets of Israel, p. 63.
2021 Edition Dr. Constable's Notes on Exodus 71

"The pith of Hebrew prophecy is not prediction or

social reform but the declaration of divine will."1

Verses 1 and 2 repeat 4:10-17. Repetition is a feature of

Hebrew prose that shows emphasis. God referred to the
miracles Moses would do as "signs" (i.e., miracles with special
significance) and "wonders" (miracles producing wonder or
awe in those who witnessed them, v. 3).2 The text usually calls
them "plagues," but clearly they were also "signs"—miracles
that signified God's sovereignty.

The ultimate purpose of God's actions was His own glory ("The
Egyptians shall know that I am the LORD"; v. 5). The glory of
God was at stake. The Egyptians would acknowledge God's
faithfulness and sovereign power—in His delivering the
Israelites from their bondage and fulfilling their holy calling.
God's intention was to bless the Egyptians through Israel (Gen.
12:3), but Pharaoh would make that impossible by his
stubborn refusal to honor God. Nevertheless the Egyptians
would, in the final analysis, acknowledge Yahweh's sovereignty.

The writer included the ages of Moses and Aaron (80 and 83
respectively) as part of God's formal certification of His
messengers (v. 7).3

"It is a common feature of biblical narratives for

the age of their heroes to be stated at the time
when some momentous event befalls them …"4

"D. L. Moody wittily said that Moses spent forty

years in Pharaoh's court thinking he was
somebody; forty years in the desert learning he
was nobody; and forty years showing what God

1Norman Gottwald, A Light to the Nations, p. 277. See also Edward J. Young, My Servants
the Prophets, ch. III: "The Terminology of Prophetism," for discussion of how the Old
Testament used the Hebrew words for prophets.
2See Ken L. Sarles, "An Appraisal of the Signs and Wonders Movement," Bibliotheca Sacra

145:577 (January-March 1988):57-82.

3See G. Herbert Livingston, "A Case Study of the Call of Moses," Asbury Theological

Journal 42:2 (Fall 1987):89-113.

4Cassuto, pp. 90-91.
72 Dr. Constable's Notes on Exodus 2021 Edition

can do with somebody who found out he was

nobody."1

3. The attestation of Moses and Aaron's divine mission 7:8-

13

Earlier, God gave three signs to the Israelites to authenticate Moses as

God's spokesman: Moses' staff became a serpent, his hand became leprous
and then normal, and water from the Nile became blood (4:1-9). Now, God
gave 10 plagues to the Egyptians (primarily) to authenticate Himself as the
only true God.2 But before the plagues began, Moses performed another
sign—Aaron's staff became a serpent—before Pharaoh to authenticate
Moses and Aaron as His spokesmen.

Pharaoh requested that Moses and Aaron perform "a miracle" to prove their
divine authority, since they claimed that God had sent them (vv. 9-10).

"What we refer to as the ten 'plagues' were actually judgments

designed to authenticate Moses as God's messenger and his
message as God's message. Their ultimate purpose was to
reveal the greatness of the power and authority of God to the
Egyptians (7:10—12:36) in order to bring Pharaoh and the
Egyptians into subjection to God."3

The Jews preserved the names of the chief "magicians," even though the
Old Testament did not record them. Paul said they were "Jannes" and
"Jambres" (2 Tim. 3:9). These were not sleight-of-hand artists, but "wise
men" who were evidently members of the priestly caste (cf. Gen. 41:8).
The power of their demonic gods lay in their "secret arts" (v. 11). They
were able to do miracles in the power of Satan (1 Cor. 10:20; cf. Matt.
24:24; 2 Thess. 2:9-10; Rev. 13:13-14).4 The superiority of the Israelites'
God is clearly shown in the superiority of Aaron's serpent over those of the
Egyptian magicians (v. 12). The rod ("staff"), again, represented regal

1Bernard Ramm, His Way Out, p. 54.

2See Bruce K. Waltke, An Old Testament Theology, p. 379, for a table showing the literary
structure of the plagues.
3J. Dwight Pentecost, Thy Kingdom Come, p. 83.
4See Merrill F. Unger, Biblical Demonology, p. 139; idem, Demons in the World Today, pp.

38-39, 75-96.
2021 Edition Dr. Constable's Notes on Exodus 73

authority, and implied that Yahweh, not Pharaoh, was sovereign (cf. 4:2-
5).

There are at least three possibilities regarding the Egyptian magicians' rods
becoming snakes: First, the magicians may have received power to create
life from Satan, with God's permission. Second, God may have given them
this power directly. Third, their rods may have actually been rigid snakes
that, when cast to the ground, were seen to be what they were: "serpents."
Pharaoh's sorcerers may have drugged or somehow stunned the serpents
so that they only appeared to be rods.

Some interpreters believe the Hebrew word tannin ("serpent"; cf. Deut.
32:33; Ps. 91:13; Isa. 27:1) should be translated "crocodile."1 It is also
translated "sea monster" (Gen. 1:21; Job 7:12; Ps. 74:13; 148:7),
"dragon" (Neh. 2:13; Isa. 51:9), "monster" (Jer. 51:34), and "jackal" (Lam.
4:3) in the NASB. This is not a popular view. Probably these were regular
snakes, which were symbols of the Egyptian royalty.

"The Hebrew word translated 'to swallow' (bala') is used in

Exodus only here and in 15:12, where the sea swallows up the
Egyptian army. The final demise of the Egyptians is already
hinted at in 7:13."2

In Genesis 1, God overcame chaos when He created the universe. The

Hebrew word tannin (translated "sea monsters" in Gen. 1:21, and "serpent"
in Exod. 7:8-13) often referred to the chaotic forces that God overcame in
creation, in the Old Testament and in ancient Near Eastern literature. Thus
Aaron's staff (turned serpent) swallowing up the Egyptians' serpents
appears to be another example of the theme of God overcoming chaos.
There are several recurrences of this theme in the plagues that follow; in
them we have a series of creation reversals.

"The theological significance of turning a staff into a snake is

that, like the plagues to follow, it is a manipulation of nature.
God battles Egypt by controlling creation; it does his bidding."3

1E.g., McGee, 1:223.

2Enns, p. 196.
3Ibid., p. 197.
74 Dr. Constable's Notes on Exodus 2021 Edition

Aaron's miracle should have convinced Pharaoh of Yahweh's sovereignty,

but he chose to harden his heart in unbelief and disobedience. Consequently
God sent the plagues that followed.

"The point of this brief section is that Yahweh's proof of his

powerful Presence to the Pharaoh and thus to the Pharaoh's
Egypt will be miraculous in nature."1

4. The first three plagues 7:14—8:19

Psalm 78:43 places the scene of the plagues in northern Egypt near Zoan.

The plagues were penal; God sent them to punish Pharaoh for his refusal to
obey God, and to move (persuade) him to obey Yahweh. They involved
natural occurrences rather than completely unknown phenomena. At
various times of the year: gnats, flies, frogs, etc., were a problem to the
Egyptians. Even the pollution of the Nile, darkness, and death were common
to the Egyptians.

Some interpreters have concluded that the plagues, the parting of the Red
Sea, and the pillar of cloud and fire were the result of purely natural
occurrences, such as the presence of a comet.2 However, evidence that
the plagues were not just phenomena of nature is as follows: Some were
natural calamities that God supernaturally intensified (frogs, insects,
murrain, hail, darkness). Moses set the time for the arrival and departure of
some. Some afflicted only the Egyptians. The severity of the plagues
increased consistently. They also carried a moral purpose (9:27; 10:16;
12:12; 14:30).3

"The plagues were a combination of natural phenomena known

to both the Egyptians and Israelites alike (due to their long
sojourn in Egypt) heightened by the addition of supernatural
factors."4

This was the first of four periods of miracles in biblical history that
continued through the ministry of Joshua. The others were: the miracles of

1Durham, p. 92.
2E.g.,Immanuel Velikovsky, Worlds in Collision, pp. 63-104, 181.
3Free, p. 95.
4Ramm, p. 62.
2021 Edition Dr. Constable's Notes on Exodus 75

Elijah and Elisha, Christ and the apostles, and the two witnesses in the
Tribulation. God has done miracles throughout history, and He still does
miracles today. But these were periods when He gave select individuals the
ability to do them in order to authenticate His messages. Here the plagues
were signs to Pharaoh and the Egyptians that the God of the Israelites had
spoken. God designed these miracles to teach the Egyptians that Yahweh
sovereignly controls the forces of nature (i.e., everything).1 The Egyptians,
however, attributed this control to their gods.

"Up to now the dominate [sic] theme has been on preparing

the deliverer for the exodus. Now, it will focus on preparing
Pharaoh for it. The theological emphasis for exposition of the
entire series of plagues may be: The sovereign Lord is fully able
to deliver his people from the oppression of the world so that
they might worship and serve him alone."2

The Lord also used the plagues to teach the Israelites that He is the only
true and living God. Ezekiel 20:1-9 tells us that some of the Israelites had
begun to worship the gods of Egypt. Psalm 106:7 says that they did not
understand God's wonders in Egypt or remember His many mercies.

Some writers have offered a possible schedule for the plagues, based on
the times of year certain events mentioned in the text would have normally
taken place in Egypt. For example, lice and flies normally appeared in the
hottest summer months. Barley formed into ears of grain and flax budded
(9:31) in January-February. Locusts were a problem in early spring. (The
Jews continued after the Exodus to celebrate the Passover in the spring.)
This schedule suggests that the plagues began in June and ended the
following April.3

"The Egyptians were just about the most polytheistic people

known from the ancient world. Even to this day we are not
completely sure of the total number of gods which they

1See R. Norman Whybray, Introduction to the Pentateuch, p. 72; and Sailhamer, The
Pentateuch …, pp. 252-53.
2The NET Bible note on 7:14.
3Flinders Petrie, Egypt and Israel, pp. 35-36; and Greta Hort, "The Plagues of Egypt,"
Zeitschrift für die Alttestamentliche Wissenschaft 69 (1957):84-103; ibid., 70
(1958):48-59.
76 Dr. Constable's Notes on Exodus 2021 Edition

worshipped. Most lists include somewhere in the neighborhood

of eighty gods …"1

Many students of the plagues have noticed that they appeared in sets of
three. The accounts of the first plague in each set (the first, fourth, and
seventh plagues) each contain a purpose statement in which God explained
to Moses His reason and aim for that set of plagues (cf. 7:17; 8:22; 9:14).
These plagues also all took place in the morning, possibly suggesting a new
beginning. God had announced His overall purpose for the plagues in 7:4-
5.2 The last plague in each set of three came on Pharaoh without warning,
but Moses announced the others to him beforehand. The first set of three
plagues apparently affected both the Egyptians and the Israelites, whereas
the others evidently touched only the Egyptians.

The plagues became increasingly destructive to the Egyptians, and thus

gave them a growing appreciation for Yahweh's sovereignty. The first three
caused inconvenience, the second three were more annoying, the third
three proved costly, and the last one was devastating. The first, second,
and fourth plagues involved the Nile River, Egypt's lifeline. The Egyptian
magicians were able to duplicate only the first two plagues, but not the
remaining eight, and in the sixth one they were incapacitated and could not
stand. Pharaoh granted Moses some permission after the second, fourth,
sixth, seventh, eighth, ninth, and tenth plagues, reflecting their growing
severity. Only the last and worst plague involved a divinely sent angel who
executed God's will; God accomplished all the previous ones through Moses
and Aaron.

The water turned to blood (the first plague) 7:14-25

The first mighty act of God serves in the narrative as a paradigm of the
nine plagues that follow. The beginning and ending of Israel's deliverance
involved a mighty act of God involving water: the water turned to blood,
and the drowning of the Egyptian army in the Red Sea. These events
bracket the story of Israel's deliverance.

1Davis, p. 86. Cf. Frankfort, p. 4. Other studies have discovered more than 1,200 gods.
See E. A. W. Budge, The Gods of the Egyptians, pp. ix-x; and B. E. Shafer, ed., Religion in
Ancient Egypt: Gods, Myths, and Personal Practice, pp. 7-87.
2Kaiser, "Exodus," pp. 348-49. Cf. C. J. Labuschagne, The Incomparability of Yahweh in

the Old Testament, pp. 74-75, 92-94.

2021 Edition Dr. Constable's Notes on Exodus 77

Striking the Nile with the rod suggested dominion over creation and all the
gods of Egyptian mythology. The Egyptians linked many of their gods with
the life-giving force of the Nile. The tenth plague is unique, in that it is both
a part of the narrative of Exodus as a whole, and is a mighty act of God in
itself.1

Evidently Pharaoh had his morning "devotions" on the "bank of the [sacred]
Nile" River. Bathing in the Nile supposedly empowered Pharaoh.2 Moses and
Aaron met him there as he prepared to honor the gods of the river (v. 15).

"That creature which we idolize God justly removes from us,

or embitters to us. He makes that a scourge to us which we
make a competitor with him."3

We could perhaps interpret the statement that the "water … turned to

blood" (v. 20) in the same way we interpret Joel's prophecy that the moon
will turn to blood (Joel 2:31 cf. Rev. 6:12). Moses may have meant that
the water appeared to be blood.4 Nevertheless something happened to the
water to make the fish die. The Hebrew word translated "blood" means
blood, so a literal meaning is possible.5 Furthermore, the passage in Joel is
poetry, and therefore figurative, whereas the passage here in Exodus is
narrative, and may be understood literally.6 Note too that this plague
affected all the water in "pools" and "reservoirs" formed by the overflowing
Nile, as well as the water of the Nile ("rivers") and its estuaries ("streams,"
canals; v. 19). Arguments for the Nile not turning to literal blood follow:

"(1) The first nine plagues form a set. Each of these is a natural
event that occurs in a miraculous way, in quantity or timing.
The change of the waters into blood would not be a natural
event. (2) The plagues grow in severity with each successive
one, coming to a climax with the tenth. A change of the water
to actual blood would be out of step with this pattern. (3) The
Hebrew word translated blood can refer to a red color, as in
Joel 2:31. An appropriate miracle of natural timing might be
that God caused torrential rains to flood and pollute the

1Durham, p. 95.
2The Nelson …, p. 110.
3Henry, p. 79.
4The New Bible Dictionary, s.v. "Plagues of Egypt," by Kenneth A. Kitchen, pp. 1001-3.
5Durham, p. 97.
6Sailhamer, The Pentateuch …, p. 254.
78 Dr. Constable's Notes on Exodus 2021 Edition

sources of the Nile to create this plague at the time it was

needed. Red soil and algae would make the waters of the Nile
red, unfit for drinking and deficient in oxygen for the fish."1

Understood figuratively or literally, either way, a real miracle took place, as

is clear from the description of the effects this plague had on the Egyptians,
and on the fish in the Nile. The Egyptian wizards were seemingly able to
duplicate this wonder, but they could not undo its effects.

"The explanation for this apparent duplication must be sought

in one of two directions. One is trickery. … The other is
demonic power."2

"Perhaps the tricksters of Pharaoh were able secretly to color

containers of water in an attempt to duplicate the sign of the
Lord in the Nile River (7:11)."3

"The most that can be said for their miracle-working is that it

is a copy of what Moses and Aaron have accomplished and that
it actually makes matters worse for their master and their
people."4

"It was appropriate that the first of the plagues should be

directed against the Nile River itself, the very lifeline of Egypt
and the center of many of its religious ideas. The Nile was
considered sacred by the Egyptians. Many of their gods were
associated either directly or indirectly with this river and its
productivity. For example, the great Khnum was considered
the guardian of the Nile sources. Hapi was believed to be the
'spirit of the Nile' and its 'dynamic essence.' One of the
greatest gods revered in Egypt was the god Osiris who was the
god of the underworld. The Egyptians believed that the river
Nile was his bloodstream. In the light of this latter expression,
it is appropriate indeed that the Lord should turn the Nile to
blood! It is not only said that the fish in the river died but that
the 'river stank,' and the Egyptians were not able to use the
water of that river. That statement is especially significant in

1The Nelson …, p. 110.

2Wood, A Survey …, pp. 124-25.
3The Nelson …, p. 110.
4Durham, p. 98.
2021 Edition Dr. Constable's Notes on Exodus 79

the light of the expressions which occur in the 'Hymn to the

Nile': 'The bringer of food, rich in provisions, creator of all
good, lord of majesty, sweet of fragrance'.1 With this Egyptian
literature in mind, one can well imagine the horror and
frustration of the people of Egypt as they looked upon that
which was formerly beautiful only to find dead fish lining the
shores and an ugly red characterizing what had before
provided life and attraction. Crocodiles were forced to leave
the Nile. One wonders what worshipers would have thought of
Hapi the god of the Nile who was sometimes manifest in the
crocodile. Pierre Montet relates the following significant
observation:

"'At Sumenu (the modern Rizzeigat) in the Thebes

area, and in the central district of the Fayum, the
god Sepek took the form of a crocodile. He was
worshipped in his temple where his statue was
erected, and venerated as a sacred animal as he
splashed about in his pool. A lady of high rank
would kneel down and, without the slightest trace
of disgust, would drink from the pool in which the
crocodile wallowed. Ordinary crocodiles were
mummified throughout the whole of Egypt and
placed in underground caverns, like the one called
the Cavern of the Crocodiles in middle Egypt.'2

"Surely the pollution of the Nile would have taken on religious

implications for the average Egyptian. Those who venerated
Neith, the eloquent warlike goddess who took a special interest
in the lates, the largest fish to be found in the Nile, would have
had second thoughts about the power of that goddess. Nathor
was supposed to have protected the chromis, a slightly smaller
fish. Those Egyptians who depended heavily on fish and on the
Nile would indeed have found great frustration in a plague of
this nature."3

1James B. Pritchard, ed., Ancient Near Eastern Texts Relating to the Old Testament, p.
272.
2Pierre Montet, Eternal Egypt, p. 172.
3Davis, pp. 94-95.
80 Dr. Constable's Notes on Exodus 2021 Edition

"Each year, toward the end of June, when the waters of the
Nile begin to rise, they are colored a dark red by the silt carried
down from the headwaters. This continues for three months,
until the waters begin to abate, but the water, meanwhile, is
wholesome and drinkable. The miracle of 7:17-21 involved
three elements by which it differed from the accustomed
phenomenon: the water was changed by the smiting of Moses'
rod; the water became undrinkable; and the condition lasted
just seven days (v. 25)."1

The commentators have interpreted the reference to blood—being

throughout all Egypt "in (vessels of) wood and in (vessels of) stone" (v.
19)—in various ways: Some believe this refers to water in exterior wooden
and stone water containers. Others think it refers to water in all kinds of
vessels used for holding water. Still others believe Moses described the
water in trees and in wells. However, this expression could refer to the
water kept in buildings, that the Egyptians normally constructed out of
wood and stone.

"In the Bible a totality is more often indicated by mentioning

two fundamental elements; see e.g., 'milk and honey' (Ex. iii 8,
etc.) and 'flesh and blood' (Matt. xvi 17)."2

This is a "synecdoche," a figure of speech in which a part stands for the

whole or the whole represents a part. The quotation above supports the
idea that God even changed the water stored in buildings to blood.

"It is fitting that the means by which the first pharaoh tried to
exterminate the Israelite threat—casting them into the Nile
(1:22)—should now become a source of trouble for the
Egyptians."3

"Each of the first nine of the mighty-act accounts may be said

to have the same fundamental point, expressed in much the
same way. That point, concisely summarized, is that Yahweh

1Johnson, p. 58.
2Cornelis Houtman, "On the Meaning of Uba'esim Uba'abanim in Exodus VII 19," Vetus
Testamentum 36:3 (1968):352.
3Enns, pp. 199-200.
2021 Edition Dr. Constable's Notes on Exodus 81

powerfully demonstrates his Presence to a Pharaoh prevented

from believing so that Israel may come to full belief."1

Frogs (the second plague) 8:1-15

Before the second plague, Moses gave Pharaoh a warning (v. 2), for the
first time, and for the first time the plague touched Pharaoh's person.

"The god Hapi controlled the alluvial deposits and the waters
that made the land fertile and guaranteed the harvest of the
coming season. These associations caused the Egyptians to
deify the frog and make the theophany of the goddess Heqt a
frog. Heqt was the wife of the great god Khnum. She was the
symbol of resurrection and the emblem of fertility. It was also
believed that Heqt assisted women in childbirth. … The frog
was one of a number of sacred animals that might not be
intentionally killed, and even their involuntary slaughter was
often punished with death."2

The goddess Heqt "… who is depicted in the form of a woman

with a frog's head, was held to blow the breath of life into the
nostrils of the bodies that her husband fashioned on the
potter's wheel from the dust of the earth …"3

"This second plague was not completely unrelated to the first,

for the Nile and the appearance of the frogs were very much
associated. The presence of the frogs normally would have
been something pleasant and desirable, but on this occasion
quite the opposite was true. The frogs came out of the rivers
in great abundance and moved across the land into the houses,
the bedchambers, the beds, and even moved upon the people
themselves (v. 3). One can only imagine the frustration
brought by such a multiplication of these creatures. They were
probably everywhere underfoot bringing distress to the
housewives who attempted to clear the house of them only to
find that they made their way into the kneading troughs and
even into the beds. It must have been a unique experience
indeed to come home from a long day's work, slip into bed only

1Durham, p. 99.
2Davis,p. 100.
3Cassuto, p. 101.
82 Dr. Constable's Notes on Exodus 2021 Edition

to find that it has already been occupied by slimy, cold frogs!

Whatever popularity the goddess Heqt must have enjoyed
prior to this time would have been greatly diminished with the
multiplication of these creatures who at this point must have
tormented her devotees to no end."1

"Since the frog or toad was deified as the Egyptian goddess

Heqt, who was believed to assist women in childbirth, there
may be a touch of irony in the statement that large numbers
of frogs would invade the Pharaoh's bedroom and even jump
on his bed (v. 3)."2

"A plague of frogs can be understood as an attack on the

Egyptian fertility goddess for the Egyptians' previous attempt
at eradicating the Israelites' male infant population (Ex. 1)."3

Aaron's rod ("staff," v. 5) was not a magician's wand; it was a symbol of

God's mighty power in the hand of His servant (cf. 4:1-8, 20; 7:9, 20; 8:16;
9:23; 10:13, 22; 14:16; 17:5, 9). The Egyptian magicians were able to
bring up frogs, too (v. 7), but they seem to have lacked the ability to make
them go away, since Pharaoh asked Moses to get rid of them (v. 8).
Pharaoh himself lacked this power. The cessation of these plagues was as
much a sign of Yahweh's power as the plagues themselves.

"They [the magicians] would better have shown their power

by removing the frogs."4

How the Egyptian magicians produced the frogs is a mystery, but it seems
that this was not just sleight-of-hand trickery. This may be an argument to
support the view that all of the magicians' "miracles" were supernatural.
Satanic power does not generally work for the welfare of humanity but is
basically destructive.

To impress upon Pharaoh that a personal God was performing these

miraculous plagues (v. 10), Moses asked the king to set the time when the

1Davis, pp. 100-101.

2Youngblood, p. 54.
3Enns, p. 205.
4Jamieson, et al., p. 60.
2021 Edition Dr. Constable's Notes on Exodus 83

frogs should depart (v. 9). Yahweh was in charge of the very territory over
which Pharaoh regarded himself as sovereign.

Here is another example of a reversal of creation. Man was created to rule

over the animals, but here animals dominated people.

Gnats (the third plague) 8:16-19

The Hebrew word translated "gnats" (kinnim) probably refers, not to lice
or fleas, but to gnats. Kaiser suggested that mosquitoes may be in view.1
The frogs had invaded the Egyptians' homes, but the gnats afflicted their
bodies.

They were "… a species of gnats, so small as to be hardly

visible to the eye, but with a sting which, according to Philo
and Origin, causes a most painful irritation of the skin. They
even creep into the eyes and nose, and after the harvest they
rise in great swarms from the inundated rice fields."2

"The dust … became gnats" (v. 17) probably means that the gnats rose
from the dust, resembled the dust in that they were so small, and were as
numerous as the dust. Moses evidently used the language of appearance
(here a metaphor).

"The dust, to which all flesh must return, becomes an

instrument that speeds the Egyptians on toward that
inexorable end."3

The first three plagues involved the three sections of the ecosystem:
water, land, and air. God controls them all.

The magicians failed to reproduce this miracle (v. 18). They had to confess
that it was of divine origin and not the result of Moses and Aaron's human
ability. The "finger of God" (v. 19) is a phrase denoting creative
omnipotence in Scripture (31:18; Ps. 8:3; Luke 11:20). It is probably
another synecdoche, as well as an anthropomorphism (a depiction of God
in human terms). Here the "finger of God," a part, represents the totality,

1Kaiser,"Exodus," p. 353.
2Keiland Delitzsch, 1:483.
3Enns, p. 209.
84 Dr. Constable's Notes on Exodus 2021 Edition

namely, all His power. See 1 Samuel 6:9 and Psalm 109:27, where the "hand
of God" also pictures His power.

"The new element introduced in the account of the third of the

mighty acts is the realization by Pharaoh's learned men that
God or a god is in the midst of what is happening in Egypt."1

"At this point in the narrative we, the readers, see that the
Egyptian magicians were using tricks in their earlier signs. Their
confession plays an important role in uncovering the writer's
real purpose in recounting these events."2

The magicians gave credit to "God" ([or "gods," Elohim), not Yahweh. They
did not ascribe this miracle to the God of the Israelites, but were only willing
to say it had some supernatural origin.

"It is not clear against what specific deities this particular

plague was directed. It is entirely possible, however, that the
plague was designed to humiliate the official priesthood in the
land, for it will be noted in verse 17 that these creatures
irritated both man and beast, and this included 'all the land of
Egypt.' The priests in Egypt were noted for their physical
purity. Daily rites were performed by a group of priests known
as the Uab or 'pure ones.' Their purity was basically physical
rather than spiritual. They were circumcised, shaved the hair
from their heads and bodies, washed frequently, and were
dressed in beautiful linen robes.3 In the light of this it would
seem rather doubtful that the priesthood in Egypt could
function very effectively having been polluted by the presence
of these insects. They, like their worshipers, were inflicted with
the pestilence of this occasion. Their prayers were made
ineffective by their own personal impurity with the presence
of gnats on their bodies.

"The priests in Egypt were a group of people to be reckoned

with not only religiously but economically and politically. They

1Durham, p. 109.
2Sailhamer, The Pentateuch …, p. 255.
3Montet, p. 177. See also G. Herbert Livingston, The Pentateuch in its Cultural
Environment, p. 107.
2021 Edition Dr. Constable's Notes on Exodus 85

controlled to a large degree, the minds and hearts of the

people."1

The Egyptian priests wore animal masks representing various gods, to help
the people understand which god the mask portrayed, and their activities.2
This practice continues in some pagan religions even today.

5. The fourth, fifth, and sixth plagues 8:20—9:12

"As the Egyptian magicians saw nothing more than the finger
of God in the miracle which they could not imitate, that is to
say, the work of some deity, possibly one of the gods of the
Egyptians, and not the hand of Jehovah the God of the
Hebrews, who had demanded the release of Israel, a distinction
was made in the plagues which followed between the Israelites
and the Egyptians, and the former were exempted from the
plagues: a fact which was sufficient to prove to anyone that
they came from the God of Israel. To make this the more
obvious, the fourth and fifth plagues were merely announced
by Moses to the king. They were not brought on through the
mediation of either himself or Aaron, but were sent by Jehovah
at the appointed time; no doubt for the simple purpose of
precluding the king and his wise men from the excuse which
unbelief might still suggest, viz. that they were produced by
the powerful incantations of Moses and Aaron."3

Flies (the fourth plague) 8:20-32

Moses announced this plague to Pharaoh like the first, in the morning beside
the Nile River (v. 20; cf. 7:15). Again, creatures that man was mandated
to control brought destruction and misery to the land as well as to the
Egyptians by the hand of Yahweh.

These insects were very annoying, even more bothersome than the gnats.

"When enraged, they fasten themselves upon the human body,

especially upon the edges of the eyelids. … [they] not only

1Davis, p. 103.
2Arelene Wolinski, "Egyptian Masks: the Priest and His Role," Archaeology 40:1 (January-
February 1987):22-29.
3Keil and Delitzsch, 1:484.
86 Dr. Constable's Notes on Exodus 2021 Edition

tortured, 'devoured' (Ps. 78:45) the men, and disfigured them

by the swellings produced by their sting, but also killed the
plants in which they deposited their eggs …"1

"The blood-sucking gadfly or dogfly was something to be

abhorred and may in part have been responsible for the great
deal of blind men in the land. … It might also be noted that the
Ichneuman fly, which deposits its eggs on other living things
upon which its larvae can feed, was regarded as the
manifestation of the god Uatchit."2

God demonstrated His sovereignty over space, as well as nature and time,
by keeping the flies out of "Goshen" and off the Israelites (v. 22). The
exact location of Goshen is still unknown, but its general location seems to
have been in either the eastern part of the delta region of Egypt (cf. Gen.
46:28-29, 33-34; 47:1-6, 11)3 or the western part.4 Some of the
commentators have assumed that the first three plagues did not afflict the
Israelites either, though the text does not say so explicitly (cf. 7:19; 8:2,
16, 17). God miraculously distinguished between the two groups of people,
primarily to emphasize to Pharaoh that Israel's God was the author of the
plagues, and that He was sovereign over the whole land of Egypt (v. 23).

For the first time, Pharaoh gave permission for the Israelites to sacrifice to
Yahweh (v. 25), but he would not allow them to leave Egypt. Pharaoh
admitted that Yahweh was specifically the God of Israel ("your God"), but
he did not admit that he had an obligation to obey Him.5

The Egyptians regarded the animals the Israelites would have sacrificed as
holy ("what is an abomination to the Egyptians" to sacrifice), and as
manifestations of their gods. Consequently the sacrifices would have been
an abomination.6

1Ibid.,
1:484-85.
2Davis,p. 106.
3Durham, p. 114.
4Wood, A Survey …, p. 112.
5Meyer, p. 121.
6Cassuto, pp. 108-09. Cf. Cole, p. 95.
2021 Edition Dr. Constable's Notes on Exodus 87

"… we know from excavations that this Pharaoh, Amenhotep

II, worshipped bulls."1

The "abomination" that the Israelites' sacrifice would have constituted to

the Egyptians, may have also consisted in the method by which the
Israelites would have sacrificed these animals. The Egyptians themselves
practiced animal sacrifices, but they had rigorous procedures for cleansing
their sacrificial animals before they killed them, which the Israelites would
not have observed.2

Pharaoh agreed to let the Israelites leave Egypt, to sacrifice temporarily in

the wilderness, after Moses reminded him of the problems involved in
sacrificing in Egypt (v. 28). Yet they were "not [to] go very far" from
Goshen. Again Pharaoh asked Moses to pray that his God would remove the
plague ("make supplication for me"; v. 28; cf. 8:9-10). Even though the
LORD graciously "removed the swarms of flies from Pharaoh," his "heart was
hardened" again, and he changed his mind (vv. 31-32).

"What is new in this fourth of the mighty acts, apart from the
nature of the miracle itself, is the separation of the land of
Goshen from the effects of miracle (there has been no mention
of Goshen's fate in the earlier accounts), the negotiations
between Pharaoh and Moses, with each of them setting
conditions, and the allusion to the antipathy of the Egyptians
to Israel worhsip [sic] (or to Israelite ways, and to Israelites in
general)."3

Murrain (the fifth plague) 9:1-7

This plague, apparently some kind of disease like anthrax, was more severe
than the preceding ones, in that it affected the personal property of the
Egyptians for the first time.

"The whole creation is bound together by invisible cords. None

can sin or suffer alone. No man liveth or dieth to himself. Our

1Gispen, p. 94.
2See Ernst Hengstenberg, Egypt and the Books of Moses, p. 114; and J. Philip Hyatt,
Exodus, p. 112.
3Durham, p. 115.
88 Dr. Constable's Notes on Exodus 2021 Edition

sins send their vibrations through creation, and infect the very
beasts."1

All the other plagues had caused the Egyptians irritation or pain to their
bodies, but now God began to reduce their wealth. This is also the first
plague that caused death.

"The religious implications of this plague are most interesting

and instructive. A large number of bulls and cows were
considered sacred in Egypt. In the central area of the Delta,
four provinces chose as their emblems various types of bulls
and cows. A necropolis of sacred bulls was discovered near
Memphis which place was known for its worship of both Ptah
and a sacred Apis bull. The Apis bull was considered the sacred
animal of the God Ptah; therefore, the associated worship at
the site of Memphis is readily understood. There was at any
one time only one sacred Apis bull. As soon as it died another
was chosen to take its place, an event that attracted a great
deal of attention in the area of Memphis.2 The sacred bull was
supposed to have been recognized by twenty-eight distinctive
marks that identified him as deity and indicated that he was
the object of worship.3

"Another deity whose worship would have been affected by

the impact of this plague was Hathor, the goddess of love,
beauty and joy represented by the cow. The worship of this
deity was centered mainly in the city of Denderah although its
popularity is witnessed by representations both in upper and
lower Egypt. This goddess is often depicted as a cow suckling
the king giving him divine nourishment. In upper Egypt the
goddess appears as a woman with the head of a cow. In
another town—Hathor was a woman, but her head was
adorned with two horns of a cow with a sun disc between
them. Another deity associated with the effects of the plague

1Meyer, p. 122.
2Montet, p. 172.
3Author not identified, Archaeology and the Bible, p. 181, cited by Davis.
2021 Edition Dr. Constable's Notes on Exodus 89

would be Mnevis, a sacred bull venerated at Heliopolis and

associated with the god Re."1

"Amenhotep II [the Pharaoh of the plagues] surpassed all his

predecessors in his fanatical devotion to the worship of
animals, and especially of the bull. In 1906 a statue made of
sandstone was excavated representing a cow and Amenhotep
II leaning his head under its head; he is also depicted kneeling
under a cow, drinking its divine milk. He is thus seen as child
and slave of the cow goddess. What a threat this must have
been to him!"2

The expression "all the livestock" (v. 6) evidently refers to all the
Egyptians' farm animals in the fields (v. 3). Some cattle survived this plague
(cf. vv. 19, 20, 22). Another view is that this is hyperbole.

The only new element in this fifth report is the notice that Pharaoh "sent"
(messengers) to Goshen to check on the predicted exclusion of the
Israelites' livestock from the epidemic (v. 7).

Boils (the sixth plague) 9:8-12

The "soot from a kiln" (v. 8) was significant in two respects. First, the soot
was black, and symbolized the blackness of skin in the disease, linking the
cause with the effect. Second, the "kiln" was probably one of the furnaces
in which the Israelites baked bricks for Pharaoh as his slaves. These furnaces
became a symbol of Israel's slavery (1:14; 5:7-19). God converted the
suffering of the Israelites in "the furnace of Egypt," so that they and what
they produced became a source of suffering to the Egyptians.

"The natural substratum of this plague is discovered by most

commentators in the so-called Nile-blisters, which come out in
innumerable little pimples upon the scarlet-coloured skin, and
change in a short space of time into small, round, and thickly-
crowded blisters. This is called by the Egyptians Hamm el Nil,
or the heat of the inundation. According to Dr. Bilharz, it is a
rash, which occurs in summer, chiefly towards the close at the
time of the overflowing of the Nile, and produces a burning and
pricking sensation upon the skin; or, in Seetzen's words, 'it

1Davis, pp. 113-15.

2Gispen, p. 96.
90 Dr. Constable's Notes on Exodus 2021 Edition

consists of small, red, and slightly rounded elevations in the

skin, which give strong twitches and slight stinging sensations,
resembling those of scarlet fever' (p. 209). The cause of this
eruption, which occurs only in men and not in animals, has not
been determined; some attributing it to the water, and others
to the heat."1

"This plague, like previous ones, most assuredly had

theological implications for the Egyptians. While it did not bring
death, it was serious and painful enough to cause many to seek
relief from many of the Egyptian deities charged with the
responsibility of healing. Serapis was one such deity. One is
also reminded of Imhotep, the god of medicine and the
guardian of healing sciences. The inability of these gods to act
in behalf of the Egyptian surely must have led to deep despair
and frustration. Magicians, priests, princes, and commoners
were all equally affected by the pain of this judgment, a
reminder that the God of the Hebrews was a sovereign God
and superior to all man-made idols."2

"In this plague account we learn that the magicians were still
hard at work opposing the signs of Moses [v. 11]. A new twist,
however, is put on their work here. Their problem now is not
that they cannot duplicate the sign—something which they
would not likely have wanted to do; rather, they cannot 'stand
before Moses because of the boils.' This is apparently intended
to show that, like the earlier plagues, this plague did not affect
the Israelites, represented here by Moses and Aaron. It also
provides a graphic picture of the ultimate failure of the
magicians to oppose the work of Moses and Aaron. The
magicians lay helpless in their sickbed before the work of
Moses and Aaron."3

This is the first time we read that "God (the LORD) hardened Pharaoh's
heart" (v. 12). If a person continues to harden his own heart, God will then
harden it further in judgment (cf. Rom. 1). It is also the first indication that
the Egyptian learned men ("magicians"; the best educated and most skilled

1Keil and Delitzsch, 1:487.

2Davis, pp. 116-17.
3Sailhamer, The Pentateuch …, p. 256.
2021 Edition Dr. Constable's Notes on Exodus 91

in their supposedly advanced system of higher knowledge and "secret

arts") could no longer resist Moses and his God. They could not even "stand
before" Moses and Aaron now (v. 11). This plague was probably the first
one that caused the Egyptians to fear for their lives.

"The lesson here is that when one ignores the prompting of

the Lord time and time again (see 7:13, 22; 8:15, 19, 32;
9:7), the Lord will confirm that resistance and make belief
impossible."1

6. The seventh, eighth, and ninth plagues 9:13—10:29

Moses announced the purpose of the following plagues to Pharaoh "in the
morning" (cf. 7:15; 8:20). This purpose was twofold: that Pharaoh
personally might know God's power (v. 14), and that the whole world might
know it (v. 16; cf. Rom. 9:17).

Hail (the seventh plague) 9:13-35

God sent the worst hailstorm Egypt had ever experienced ("a very heavy
hail," never before seen in Egypt; vv. 18, 24), and accompanied it with
"thunder," "fire" (lightning?), and "rain" (vv. 23, 34).2

"The recurring thunderclaps …, the lightning darting back and

forth …, and the severity of the storm … all suggest the
advent of Yahweh in theophany … and thus the Presence of
Yahweh in a more dramatic and intense coming than anywhere
in the mighty-act sequence to this point."3

"The fact that God was judging Pharaoh does not mean He was
unmerciful. The Lord could have destroyed Pharaoh and his
people in a moment (v. 15), but He did not. He could have
brought each plague without warning, but in most cases He
served notice (see 7:16). In anticipation of this plague, He

1Merrill,in The Old …, p. 49. Cf. Heb. 6:6.

2See Robert B. Chisholm Jr., "The Polemic against Baalism in Israel's Early History and
Literature," Bibliotheca Sacra 151:603 (July-September 1994):271-74.
3Durham, p. 128.
92 Dr. Constable's Notes on Exodus 2021 Edition

warned the Egyptians to gather their livestock so they might

be spared the hailstorm."1

Pharaoh's repentance was shallow, even though his words sounded sincere;
he acknowledged only his mistake and unfairness ("I have sinned … I and
my people are the wicked ones"), but he did not repent of his blasphemy
of Yahweh (v. 27). He did, however, acknowledge that Yahweh was "the
righteous one" (v. 27). He is the first person in the Bible to acknowledge
that God is righteous.2 Moses perceived Pharaoh's true attitude. The king
had not yet believed that Yahweh was sovereign ("that you may know that
the earth is the LORD's … I know that you do not yet fear the Lord God"; v.
29). Fearing Him means bowing in submission to Him as sovereign over all
the earth (v. 30; cf. 10:3).

"What would the worshippers of Nut have thought when they

looked skyward not to see the blessings of the sun and
warmth, but the tragedy of storm and violence. Nut was the
sky goddess. It was from her domain that this tragedy
originated. One reflects upon the responsibilities of both Isis
and Seth who also had responsibilities relating to agricultural
crops. The black and burned fields of flax were a silent
testimony to the impotence and incapability of wooden and
stone deities."3

The Egyptians used "flax" (v. 31) to make linen cloth, that they preferred
in their clothing over wool. The Egyptian priests, among other people,
dressed in linen. This plague was a judgment on them, therefore. The
Egyptians used "barley" (v. 31) to make beer, and as feed for their
livestock, but the poorer people also ate it.4 These two crops (flax and
barley) are in bud in late January and early February in lower (northern)
Egypt, which enables us to identify the time of year when this plague took
place.5

"As in the following plague (locusts), mention is made of the

effects of the plague on vegetation, and as such it seems to

1The Nelson …, p. 114.

2J. Carl Laney, God, p. 89.
3Davis, p. 120.
4Kaiser, "Exodus," p. 363.
5See also Jamieson, et al., p. 61.
2021 Edition Dr. Constable's Notes on Exodus 93

suggest another creation reversal. The world of plants is being

undone here."1

Locusts (the eighth plague) 10:1-20

Moses explained another purpose of God in sending further plagues, in this

context: namely, so the Israelites in future generations would believe in
Yahweh's sovereignty (v. 2)

"Those that will not humble themselves God will humble [v.
3]."2

Locusts were and still are a menace in Egypt, as well as in many other
countries of the world. The wind drove them from the wetter areas to the
whole land of Egypt—excluding Goshen—where they multiplied. They
consumed the remaining half of the crops and trees left by the hail.3 Among
their other gods, the Egyptians prayed to one manifested as a locust,
"who," they believed, would preserve them from attacks by this
devastating insect.4

Pharaoh's permission for the male Israelites to leave Egypt to worship God,
brought on by the urging of his counselors, was arbitrary. Egyptian females
worshipped with their husbands, so, to be fair, Pharaoh could have
permitted both men and women to worship Yahweh.

Pharaoh offered Moses three compromises, which the world still offers
Christians. First, he suggested that the Israelites stay in Egypt (8:25). He
said, in effect: "You can be who you are, but live as a part of your larger
culture; do not be distinctive." Second, he permitted them to leave Egypt,
but not to go far from it (8:28). He allowed them to separate from their
culture, but not drastically. Third, he gave permission for the males to
leave, but their women and children had to remain in Egypt (10:8-11). Even
godly parents are sometimes inclined to desire prosperity and worldly
position for their children.

1Enns,p. 222.
2Henry, p. 81.
3On the tremendously destructive power of locusts, see Davis, pp. 120-22.
4See Montet, pp. 39, 169.
94 Dr. Constable's Notes on Exodus 2021 Edition

"Wanting the 'best' of the world for their children is the most
subtle temptation that can come to Christian parents."1

A fourth compromise was yet to come (v. 24).

Pharaoh's "servants" seem to have been ready and willing to acknowledge

Yahweh as a god ("the LORD their God"), but for Pharaoh, this conflict had
greater significance. It was a test of sovereignty. The advice of Pharaoh's
servants reflects their extreme distress ("Let the men go, that they may
serve the LORD their God. Do you not realize that Egypt is destroyed?", v.
7). It also fulfilled God's prediction that the Egyptians would acknowledge
His sovereignty (7:5; cf. 8:19; 9:20; 12:33). Pharaoh's magicians had
abandoned him (8:19), and now his servants turned against him (v. 7).

"The king who … has a direct knowledge of the predestined

order of the universe, cannot consult mere mortals. His
decisions are represented as spontaneous creative acts
motivated by considerations which are beyond human
comprehension, although he may graciously disclose some of
them."2

Joseph had previously delivered the Egyptians from starvation, but now
Moses brought them to starvation. Both effects were the result of official
Egyptian policy toward Abraham's descendants (cf. Gen. 12:3).

Pharaoh's confession of sin and his request for forgiveness were also most
unusual, and seem even more genuine than his previous one (v. 16; cf.
9:27).

"The Egyptian viewed his misdeeds not as sins, but as

aberrations. They would bring him unhappiness because they
disturbed his harmonious integration with the existing world;
they might even be explicitly disapproved by one or another of
the gods, but these were always ready to welcome his better
insight. … It is especially significant that the Egyptians never
showed any trace of feeling unworthy of the divine mercy. For
he who errs is not a sinner but a fool, and his conversion to a

1McGee, 1:232.
2Frankfort, p. 56.
2021 Edition Dr. Constable's Notes on Exodus 95

better way of life does not require repentance but a better

understanding."1

"… the picture of a halting, confused Pharaoh plays well here

at the conclusion of the plague narratives. It shows that Moses
and Aaron were beginning to get on his nerves."2

The locusts perished in the Red Sea, as did the Egyptian soldiers later
(14:28). The "Red Sea" (v. 19) is the present Red Sea that lies to the east
and south of the delta region. Some students of Exodus have mistakenly
called it the "Sea of Reeds." This opinion is due to the large quantity of
papyrus reeds and seaweeds that, some scholars have claimed, grew on its
banks and floated on its waters. However, these particular "reeds" do not
grow in salt water.3

Darkness (the ninth plague) 10:21-29

Since the other plagues to this point seem to have been natural
phenomena, many commentators interpret this one as such too. The most
common explanation for the darkness that lasted "three days" (v. 22), and
which affected the Egyptians but not the Israelites ("all the sons of Israel
had light"; v. 23), is that it resulted from a dust storm.

A wind "… which generally blows in Egypt before and after the
vernal equinox and lasts two or three days, usually rises very
suddenly, and fills the air with such a quantity of fine dust and
course sand, that the sun loses its brightness, the sky is
covered with a dense veil, and it becomes … dark …"4

"In the light of Egyptian theology and practice, this [ninth]

plague was very significant. To a large degree it struck at the
very heart of Egyptian worship and humbled one of Egypt's
greatest gods. The sun god Re was considered one of the great
blessings in the land of Egypt. His faithfulness in providing the
warmth and light of sun day after day without fail caused them
to express great joy over the faithfulness of this deity. The

1Ibid., p. 73.
2Sailhamer, The Pentateuch …, pp. 256-57.
3See Bernard F. Batto, "Red Sea or Reed Sea?" Biblical Archaeology Review 10:4 (July-
August 1984):57-63, and my note on 14:2.
4Keil and Delitzsch, 1:498.
96 Dr. Constable's Notes on Exodus 2021 Edition

attitude of the Egyptians regarding the sun is perhaps best

expressed in what has been called 'a universalist hymn to the
sun' translated by John Wilson.

"'Hail to thee, beautiful Re of every day, who rises

at dawn without ceasing, Khepri wearying
(himself) with labor! Thy rays are in (one's) face,
without one knowing it. Fine gold is not like the
radiance of thee. Thou who has constructed
thyself, thou didst fashion thy body, a shaper who
was (himself) not shaped; unique in his nature,
passing eternity, the distant one, under whose
guidance are millions of ways, just as thy radiance
is like the radiance of heaven and thy color
glistens more than its surface.'1

"The faithful warmth and provision of the sun was something

fully enjoyed by both the Egyptian statesman and the laborer
who worked in the fields. They praised the sun because 'thou
presentest thyself daily at dawn. Steadfast is thy sailing which
carries thy majesty.'2

"Of particular significance with respect to this plague was the

prestige of the god Amun-Re, the chief deity of Thebes and a
sun god. In the New Kingdom period [when the plagues took
place] this god was the Egyptian national god, part of a very
important triad of deities including Amun-Re, his wife Mut, and
their son Khons. Amun-Re was commonly represented by
sacred animals such as the ram and the goose. A number of
other deities were associated with the sun, sky, and moon; for
example Aten was the deified sun disc. This god was
proclaimed to be the only god by [Pharaoh] Akhenaten with
emphasis on a special cult centered at Amarna. Atum was also
another important god in lower Egypt whose worship was
centered mainly at Heliopolis. He was the god of the setting
sun and was usually depicted in human form. Sacred animals
associated with this god were the snake and the lion. The god
Khepre who often appeared in the shape of the beetle

1Pritchard, pp. 367-68.

2Ibid., p. 368.
2021 Edition Dr. Constable's Notes on Exodus 97

(Scarabeus sacer) was a form of the sun god Re. Another very
important sun god was Horus often symbolized by a winged
sun disc. He was considered to be the son of Osiris and Isis but
also the son of Re and the brother of Seth. Harakhte, another
form of Horus and identified with the sun, was venerated
mainly at Heliopolis and was represented by the hawk.

"Among the deities affected by this tragic darkness was

Hathor a sky goddess and likewise the goddess of love and joy.
Hathor was the tutelary deity of the Theban necropolis. She
was venerated particularly at Dendera and depicted with cow
horns or was a human figure which was cow-headed. The sky
goddess Nut would also have been involved in the humiliation
of this plague. What of the prestige of Thoth, a moon god of
Hermopolis? He was also the god of writing and of the
computation of time.

"This list could be greatly extended involving a number of

other deities associated with the sun, stars, and light but the
above are sufficient to indicate the tremendous importance of
the sun and sunlight to the Egyptians. … One wonders what
the prestige of Pharaoh must have been at this point. Among
the divine attributes of Pharaoh was the fact that he was in
fact a representation of Re '… by whose beams one sees, he
is one who illuminates the two lands [Upper and Lower Egypt]
more than the sun disc.'"1

"Darkness is a 'chaos' word [as well as a symbol of death; cf.

1 Sam. 2:9; Job 15:30; 17:13; 18:18; Ps. 88:12, 18; 143:3].
It was the first thing God brought under control by introducing
light in Genesis 1:3. A reintroduction of darkness beings
creation back to its chaotic beginnings, which is a signal to the
Egyptians of what awaits them at the sea."2

Pharaoh still did not submit to Yahweh's sovereign demands (v. 24), and
this time he even threatened Moses ("Beware, do not see my face again,
for in the day you see my face you shall die!"), so a tenth plague followed.

1Davis, pp. 125-28. His last quotation is from Pritchard, p. 431.

2Enns, p. 229.
98 Dr. Constable's Notes on Exodus 2021 Edition

By excluding Moses from his presence, Pharaoh was effectively excluding

God from his presence.

Pharaoh's fourth compromise was that the families of the Israelites could
leave Egypt, but they had to leave their flocks and herds behind (v. 24).
Many a redeemed believer has escaped the enslavement of the world, but
still has his treasure in the world (cf. Matt. 6:19-20). Had Moses accepted
this compromise, many of the Israelites would have wanted to return to
Egypt to claim their possessions there.

"For the first time, Yahweh moves to make Pharaoh obstinate

during the negotiations. Heretofore he has made Pharaoh
stubborn after he has agreed to Moses' demands, after
Yahweh's mighty action has ceased and before Moses can
leave with the sons of Israel."1

"It is a sad farewell when God, in the persons of his servants,

refuses anymore to see the face of the wicked."2

The world had begun in total darkness (Gen. 1:2), and now Egypt had
returned to that chaotic state.3 Richard Patterson argued convincingly, that
the origin of much of the apocalyptic imagery later in the Old Testament
derives from this Exodus event (the darkness plague).4

7. The proclamation of the tenth plague ch. 11

Chapter 11 is really only the first part of the section of Exodus that deals
with the tenth plague. The whole section runs from 11:1 through 13:16.

"… the slaying of the first-born is both the culmination of the

plague narrative and the beginning of the passover tradition.
Chapter 11 as a literary unit, therefore, points both backward
and forward."5

1Durham, p. 143.
2George Bush, Notes on Exodus, 1:30.
3Sailhamer, The Pentateuch …, p. 257.
4Richard D. Patterson, "Wonders in the Heavens and on the Earth: Apolcalyptic Imagery in

the Old Testament," Journal of the Evangelical Theological Society 43:3 (September
2000):385-403.
5Childs, p. 161.
2021 Edition Dr. Constable's Notes on Exodus 99

Evidently Moses made this announcement to Pharaoh before leaving his

presence following the ninth plague (cf. 10:29; 11:4-8). Thus this chapter
unfolds the narrative in logical rather than chronological order. Verses 1
and 2 give the foundation for the announcement in verses 4-8.
Chronologically verses 1-3 point back to 3:19-22.

Whereas Moses and Aaron had been the mediators through whom God had
sent the first nine plagues, this last one came directly from God. (The
announcement by Moses was a verbatim message from God: "Thus says
the LORD …")

11:1-3 The NIV translated the first part of verse 1: "Now the LORD had
said to Moses," referring back to 4:21-23. This is legitimate,
since the Hebrew language has no pluperfect tense. The NASB
and NKJV translators rendered this phrase: "Now the LORD said
to Moses." In either case, the following statement (vv. 1b-2)
restates what God had previously told Moses.

The Israelites "asked" the Egyptians to give them the articles

mentioned, not to lend them with a view to getting them back
(v. 2).1 The Israelites, from this time on until they left Egypt,
received many such gifts from the Egyptians—enough to build
the tabernacle, its furniture, furnishings, and utensils, as well
as the priests' garments. This reflects the respect and fear the
Israelites enjoyed in Egypt following these plagues.

"The Egyptians thus are 'picked clean' (3:22 and

12:36) by Israel as a result of yet another action
by Yahweh in behalf of his people, demonstrating
the power of his Presence."2

11:4-8 The "firstborn" sons of Egypt (both man and beast), who were
not old enough to be fathers themselves, would "die" (v. 5).
This is a deduction supported by the following facts: Firstborn
sons were symbolic of a nation's strength and vigor (cf. Gen.
49:3). Firstborn sons were also those through whom the family
line descended. Sons old enough to be fathers, who had
themselves fathered sons, were members of the older

1Fora history of the interpretation of this controversial statement, see Yehuda T. Radday,
"The Spoils of Egypt," Annual of the Swedish Theological Institute 12 (1983):127-47.
2Durham, p. 148.
100 Dr. Constable's Notes on Exodus 2021 Edition

generation. The younger generation was the focus of this

plague. It was the male children of the Israelites that Pharaoh
had killed previously (1:15-22).

"Moses warned Pharaoh that the way he treated

God's firstborn would determine how God treated
Egypt's firstborn (Ex. 4:22-23). Pharaoh had tried
to kill the Jewish male babies, and his officers had
brutally mistreated the Jewish slaves, so in slaying
the firstborn, the Lord was simply paying Pharaoh
back with his own currency."1

Even "the firstborn of the cattle" would die, probably because

the Egyptians' cattle were object of their veneration.2

When God later claimed the "tribe of Levi" in place of Israel's

"firstborn," whom He spared in this plague (Num. 3:12-13; cf.
Exod. 22:29; 34:20), He chose only the males.

We owe God the "first fruits" of our labors, because He is the

source of all life and fruitfulness.

"In common with the rest of the ancient Near East,

the Hebrews believed that the deity, as lord of the
manor, was entitled to the first share of all
produce. The firstfruits of plants and the firstborn
of animals and man were his. The Lord
demonstrated that he gave Egypt its life and
owned it by taking its firstborn."3

Some critics of the Bible have challenged God's justice in

putting to death so many "innocent" children. Looked at one
way, a priori, whatever God does is right because He is God.
Looked at another way, God—as the Giver and Sustainer of
Life—is righteous in withdrawing "life" from any creature, at
any time, because life belongs to Him. He can take it as well as
give it at will. Furthermore, the fact that humans are all sinners,

1Wiersbe, p. 197.
2Sarna, Exodus, p. 52.
3Bruce K. Waltke, "Cain and His Offering," Westminster Theological Journal 48:2 (Fall
1986):368.
2021 Edition Dr. Constable's Notes on Exodus 101

and sin results in death (carries the death sentence), means

that God is just in requiring the punishment for any individual's
sin at any time. We do not have any claim on God's grace. God
graciously did not kill all the Egyptians.

When Pharaoh killed the Israelite children, he was really killing

the children of Yahweh, since God said, "Israel is My son, My
firstborn" (4:22).

Moses' "hot anger" reflected God's wrath against Pharaoh for

his stubborn rebellion (v. 8).

"To be in the presence of evil and not be angry is

a dreadful spiritual and moral malady."1

11:9-10 "These two verses are considered by many

commentators as redundant or misplaced. But
they can easily be explained as a summary and
epilogue of the Section of the Plagues.

"In the following section not only the course of

events will change, but also the background and
the dramatis personae. Till now the central theme
was the negotiations conducted by Moses and
Aaron on the one hand, and Pharaoh and his
servants on the other, in Pharaoh's palace or its
environs. But henceforth the principal hero of the
drama will be the people of Israel in its totality,
and the perspective will be enlarged. Moses and
Aaron will no longer be sent to Pharaoh but to the
Israelites, in order to prepare them for the exodus
and to implement it; nor will they be enjoined
again to perform acts for the purpose of bringing
the plagues, for the last plague will take place of
its own accord, through the instrumentality of the
angel of the Lord. Since the episode about to be
narrated represents a new theme, and one,
moreover, of fundamental importance, it is
desireable [sic] that before reading this account

1Kaiser, "Exodus," p. 370.

102 Dr. Constable's Notes on Exodus 2021 Edition

we should look back for a moment, and review

generally the events that have taken place thus
far, as well as the situation obtaining at the
conclusion of those events. This review is
provided for us in the verses under
consideration." 1

The theological lesson that Pharaoh and the Egyptians were to learn from
this plague, was that Yahweh would destroy the "gods" that the Egyptians'
gods supposedly procreated (i.e., all their firstborn sons). Pharaoh was a
supposed "god," and so was his firstborn son who would succeed him. The
Egyptians attributed the power to procreate to various gods. Fertility was
a "power" for which the Egyptians, as well as all ancient peoples, depended
on their gods. By killing the firstborn, Yahweh was demonstrating His
sovereignty once again. However, this plague had more far-reaching
consequences, and was therefore more significant than all the previous
plagues combined.

"Possibly no land in antiquity was more obsessed with death

than Egypt. The real power of the priesthood lay in its alleged
ability to guarantee the dead a safe passage to the 'Western
World' under the benign rule of Osiris. This terrible visitation
which defied and defies all rational explanation, showed that
Yahweh was not only lord of the forces of nature, but also of
life and death."2

"… it is by means of the account of the last plague that the

author is able to introduce into the Exodus narrative in a clear
and precise way the notion of redemption from sin and death.
The idea of salvation from slavery and deliverance from Egypt
is manifest throughout the early chapters of Exodus. The idea
of redemption and salvation from death, however, is the
particular contribution of the last plague, especially as the last
plague is worked into the narrative by the author. …

"By means of the last plague, then, the writer is able to bring
the Exodus narratives into the larger framework of the whole
Pentateuch and particularly that of the early chapters of

1Cassuto, pp. 134-35.

2Ellison, p. 60.
2021 Edition Dr. Constable's Notes on Exodus 103

Genesis. In the midst of the judgment of death, God provided

a way of salvation for the promised seed (Ge 3:15). Like Enoch
(5:22-24), Noah (6:9), and Lot (19:16-19), those who walk in
God's way will be saved from death and destruction."1

This tenth plague brought Yahweh's concentrated "education" of both the

Egyptians and the Israelites to a climactic conclusion.

"In short, therefore, what were the essential purposes of these

ten plagues? First of all, they were certainly designed to free
the people of God. Second, they were a punishment upon
Egypt for her portion in the long oppression of the Hebrews
[cf. Gen. 15:13]. Third, they were designed to demonstrate
the foolishness of idolatry. They were a supreme example both
for the Egyptians and for Israel. It was by these that Jehovah
revealed His uniqueness in a way that had never before been
revealed (6:3; cf. 10:2). Finally, the plagues clearly
demonstrated the awesome, sovereign power of God. In the
Book of Genesis, God is described as the Creator of the
heavens and the earth and all the laws of nature. In the Book
of Exodus the exercise of that creative power is revealed as it
leads to the accomplishment of divine goals. God's sovereignty
is not only exercised over the forces of nature, but is also
revealed against evil nations and their rulers."2

"They [the plagues] touched every phase of nature: mineral,

animal, vegetable, human. They affected persons and
property, and included all, from the highest to the lowest."3

"A few clues exist for determining the length of time between
the first and last plagues. While no certain conclusion can be
reached, the probable time is just under six months."4

These plagues came upon Egypt when this nation was at the apex of its
imperial supremacy, under Amenhotep II. Interestingly, several of the
judgments in the Great Tribulation, especially the bowl judgments (Rev.
16), are similar to these plagues in Egypt. God will again do similar acts of

1Sailhamer, The Pentateuch …, p. 258.

2Davis,pp. 151-52.
3W. H. Griffith Thomas, Through the Pentateuch Chapter by Chapter, p. 87.
4Wood, A Survey …, p. 126.
104 Dr. Constable's Notes on Exodus 2021 Edition

judgment and demonstrate His sovereignty in the future, but on a

worldwide scale.

C. GOD'S REDEMPTION OF HIS PEOPLE 12:1—13:16

Scholars differ in their opinions as to when Israel actually became a nation.

Many have made a strong case for commencing national existence with the
institution of the Passover, which this section records.1 The proper
translation of the Hebrew word pasah is really "hover over" rather than
"pass over."2

"… properly understood, the Exodus also is precisely the event

and the moment that coincides with the historical expression
of God's election of Israel. The choice of Israel as the special
people of Yahweh occurred not at Sinai but in the land of
Goshen. The Exodus was the elective event; Sinai was its
covenant formalization."3

Other scholars regard the ratification ceremony, when the Israelites

received and agreed to keep the Mosaic Covenant, as the historical
beginning of the nation (24:4-8).4

God gave the Israelites a national calendar that set them apart from other
nations (v. 2). They also received instructions for two national feasts that
they were to perpetuate forever thereafter (vv. 14, 17, 24). Also, Moses
revealed and explained, here, the event that resulted in their separation
from Egypt (the tenth plague, the death of all Egypt's firstborn).

1. The consecration of Israel as the covenant nation 12:1-

28

"The account of the final proof of Yahweh's Presence in Egypt

has been expanded by a series of instructions related to cultic

1E.g., Jamieson, et al., pp. 64-65; Edersheim, p. 209; Arno C. Gaebelein, The Annotated
Bible, 1:1:135.; Kaiser, Toward an …, p. 105.
2Meredith G. Kline, "The Feast of Cover-over," Journal of the Evangelical Theological

Society 37:4 (December 1994):497-510.

3Eugene H. Merrill, "A Theology of the Pentateuch," in A Biblical Theology of the Old

Testament, p. 31. Cf. Sailhamer, The Pentateuch …, p. 259; Enns, p. 230.

4E.g., Wood, A Survey …, p. 145.
2021 Edition Dr. Constable's Notes on Exodus 105

[ritual worship] requirements designed to commemorate that

proof and the freedom it purchased."1

Directions for the Passover 12:1-14

The Jews called their first month, their "beginning of months," "Abib" (v.
2). After the Babylonian Captivity, they renamed it "Nisan" (Neh. 2:1; Esth.
3:7). It corresponds to our "March-April." "Abib" means "ear-month,"
referring to the month when the grain was "in the ear."

"The reference to the Passover month as the 'lead month,'

'the first of the year's months' is best understood as a double
entendre. On the one hand, the statement may be connected
with an annual calendar, but on the other hand, it is surely an
affirmation of the theological importance of Yahweh's
Passover."2

"… the sense of the verse [v. 2] is: you are now beginning to
count a new year, now the new year will bring you a change of
destiny."3

The spring was an appropriate time for the Exodus because it symbolized
new life and growth. Israel had two calendars: one religious (this one) and
one civil (23:16). The civil year began exactly six months later in the fall.
The Israelites used both calendars until the Babylonian Captivity. After that,
they used only the civil calendar.4

"While in Egypt the Hebrews may have conformed to the solar

year of 12 months, each of 30 days + 5 additional days, i.e.
365 days (Herodotus, ii. 4), but if so a change was made
thereafter and the 'beginning of months' or first month of the
year was fixed in the spring (Ex. xii. 2; Dt. xvi. 1, 6). Thereafter
the Hebrew year followed the West Semitic Calendar with a
year of 12 lunar months (1 Ki. iv. 7; 1 Ch. xxvii. 1-15). It is not
certain whether the commencement of the year in spring
(Nisan) was for use only in the ritual, since there is some

1Durham, p. 152.
2Ibid.,
p. 153.
3Cassuto, p. 137.
4See James F. Strange, "The Jewish Calendar," Biblical Illustrator 13:1 (Fall 1986):28-32.

Also see Appendix 1 of these notes for a chart of the Hebrew calendar.
106 Dr. Constable's Notes on Exodus 2021 Edition

evidence for the year for civil purposes being sometimes

reckoned from the autumn month of Tishri (see CHRONOLOGY OF
THE OLD TESTAMENT)."1

"The Egyptians had early learned that the sun's year is

approximately 365 days; they therefore added to the twelve
[lunar] months of thirty days five extra days to form a year
whose deviation from the true solar year would not be
discovered for several generations. The Babylonians were
content to retain the year of twelve months, intercalating a
new month when it was observed that the seasons were out
of order."2

"Hebrew months were alternately 30 and 29 days long. Their

year, shorter than ours, had 354 days. Therefore, about every
3 years (7 times in 19 years) an extra 29-day month, Veadar,
was added between Adar [February-March] and Nisan [March-
April]."3

The Passover was a communal celebration. The Israelites were to observe

it with their redeemed brethren, not alone (v. 4). They celebrated the
corporate redemption of the nation corporately (cf. Luke 22:17-20; 1 Cor.
11:23-29).

Some critics of the Bible claim that Israel's Passover was merely an
adaptation of a pagan agricultural festival, presumably Canaanite. This view
has been refuted by archaeological discoveries.

"Every fresh publication of Canaanite mythological texts

makes the gulf between the religions of Canaan and of Israel
increasingly clear."4

Since the "lamb" chosen for the Passover meal was a substitute sacrifice,
its required characteristics are significant (v. 5; cf. John 1:29; 1 Cor. 5:7;
1 Pet. 1:19).

1The New Bible Dictionary, s.v. "Calendar," by F. F. Bruce, pp. 176-79. See also Finegan,
pp. 564-80, for more information about the Egyptian, Babylonian, and Israelite calendars.
2Olmstead, p. 6.
3The Nelson …, p. 318.
4William F. Albright, "Recent Progress in North-Canaanite Research," Bulletin of the

American Schools of Oriental Research, 70 (April 1938):24. Quoted by Free, p. 97.

2021 Edition Dr. Constable's Notes on Exodus 107

"Freedom from blemish and injury not only befitted the

sacredness of the purpose to which they were devoted, but
was a symbol of the moral integrity of the person represented
by the sacrifice. It was to be a male, as taking the place of the
male first-born of Israel; and a year old, because it was not till
then that it reached the full, fresh vigour of its life."1

"During the days preceding Passover, our Lord's enemies

questioned Him repeatedly, waiting for Him to say something
they could attack. During His various trials and interrogations,
Jesus was repeatedly questioned, and He passed every test.
Jesus knew no sin (2 Cor. 5:21), did no sin (1 Peter 2:22), and
in Him there was not sin (1 John 3:5). He's the perfect Lamb
of God."2

Some of the ancient rabbis taught that God wanted the Jews to sacrifice
the Passover lamb exactly at sunset, because of the instructions in verse
6 and Deuteronomy 16:6. However, "at twilight" literally means "between
the two evenings." The more widely held Jewish view, was that the "first
evening" began right after noon, and the "second evening" began the same
day when the sun set.3 In Josephus' day, which was also Jesus' day, the
Jews slew the Passover lamb in mid-afternoon.4 The Lord Jesus Christ died
during this time (i.e., about 3:00 p.m., Matt. 27:45-50; Mark 15:34-37;
Luke 23:44-46; 1 Cor. 5:7).

The sprinkling of "the blood" of the lamb on the sides and the top
("doorposts and lintel") of the doorway into the house was a "sign"
(symbolizing, to the passing death angel, that God's redemptive protection
applied to the household, and to the occupants, that they and their
firstborn sons must be "passed over" because of the blood; "when I see
the blood I will pass over you"; v. 7; cf. v. 13). It had significance to the
Jews. The door (doorway, the doorposts and lintel) represented the house
(cf. 20:10; Deut. 5:14; 12:17; et al.). The smearing of "the blood" on the
doorposts and lintel with "hyssop" was an act of "expiation" ("cleansing";

1Keiland Delitzsch, 2:10.

2Wiersbe, p. 198.
3Gispen, p. 117.
4Josephus, Antiquities of …, 14:4:3.
108 Dr. Constable's Notes on Exodus 2021 Edition

cf. Lev. 14:49-53; Num. 19:18-19). This act consecrated the houses of
the Israelites as altars. They had no other altars in Egypt.

They were not to apply the blood to the other member of the doorframe,
the threshold, because someone might tread on the blood there. The
symbolic value of the blood would have made this action (treading on the
blood) inappropriate. The entire ritual signified to the Jews that "the
[lamb's] blood" ("life poured out"; cf. Lev. 17:11) of a sinless, divinely
appointed substitute, cleansed their sins and resulted in their setting apart
(sanctification) to God. The application of the blood—as directed—was a
demonstration of the Israelites' faith in God's promise that He would pass
over them (v. 13; cf. Heb. 11:28).

"God will not leave small children behind at the time of the
Rapture any more than He left them behind when the Israelites
were redeemed and left the land of Egypt."1

The method of preparing and eating the lamb was also significant (vv. 8-
11). God directed that they "roast" it in the manner common to nomads,
rather than eating it raw as many of their contemporary pagans ate their
sacrificial meat (cf. 1 Sam. 2:14-15). They were "not" to "boil" the lamb
either (v. 9). Roasting enabled the host to place the lamb on the table,
undivided and unchanged in its essential structure and appearance (v. 9).
This would have strengthened the impression of the "substitute" nature of
the lamb. It looked like and was intended to signify an entire animal, rather
than just meat.

The "unleavened bread" was bread that had not risen (cf. 12:34). The
"bitter herbs"—perhaps endive, chicory, and or other herbs native to
Egypt—would later recall to the Israelites who ate them, the bitter
experiences of life in Egypt. However, the "sweetness" (savory flavor) of
the lamb overpowered the bitterness of the herbs. The Israelites were not
to eat any uneaten parts of this meal again as leftovers (v. 10). It was a
special sacrificial meal, not just another dinner. Moreover, they were to eat
it "in haste" (v. 11), as a "memorial" of the events of the night when they
first ate it, the night when God provided deliverance for His people.2

1McGee, 1:237.
2Foran explanation of the history and modern observance of the Passover by Jews, the
Seder, or "order of service," see Youngblood, pp. 61-64. For an account of a Seder
observance held in Dallas on April 2, 1988, see Robert Andrew Barlow, "The Passover
Seder," Exegesis and Exposition 3:1 (Fall 1988):63-68.
2021 Edition Dr. Constable's Notes on Exodus 109

Evidently the Israelites normally went barefoot in their homes, and would
lay their staffs aside when they entered their dwellings. God told them to
eat the Passover with their "sandals on [their] feet" and their "staff in
[their] hand" (v. 11). This reinforced the sense of urgency with which they
had to eat the meal.

"Those consuming the meat were not to be in the relaxed

dress of home, but in traveling attire; not at ease around a
table, but with walking-stick in hand; not in calm security, but
in haste, with anxiety."1

In slaying the king's son and many of the firstborn animals, God smote
(crushed; utterly defeated) the corresponding "gods of Egypt" that these
living beings represented (v. 12). This was the final proof of Yahweh's
sovereignty.2 It was the Lord Himself who went through the land, killing the
Egyptians and their cattle, not one of His angels ("For I will go through …
and will strike all the firstborn … when I see the blood I will pass over …
when I strike …"; cf. vv. 12-13).

"The firstborn of Pharaoh was not only his successor to the

throne, but by the act of the gods was a specially born son
having divine property. Gods associated with the birth of
children would certainly have been involved in a plague of this
nature. These included Min, the god of procreation and
reproduction, along with Isis who was the symbol of fecundity
or the power to produce offspring. Since Hathor was not only
a goddess of love but one of seven deities who attended the
birth of children, she too would be implicated in the disaster of
this plague. From excavations we already have learned of the
tremendous importance of the Apis bull, a firstborn animal and
other animals of like designation would have had a tremendous
theological impact on temple attendants as well as commoners
who were capable of witnessing this tragic event. The death
cry which was heard throughout Egypt was not only a wail that
bemoaned the loss of a son or precious animals, but also the

1Durham, p. 154.
2See Bramer, pp. 93-94.
110 Dr. Constable's Notes on Exodus 2021 Edition

incapability of the many gods of Egypt to respond and protect

them from such tragedy."1

Egyptian religion and culture valued sameness and continuity very highly.
The Egyptians even minimized the individual differences between the
Pharaohs.

"The death of a king was, in a manner characteristic of the

Egyptians, glossed over in so far as it meant a change."2

The Egyptians had to acknowledge the death of Pharaoh's son, however,

as an event that Yahweh had brought to pass.

Note that God said that when He saw the blood He would pass over the
Jews (v. 13). He did not say when they saw it. The ground of their security
was "propitiation" (God's satisfaction with the blood-sacrifice of the lamb).
The blood satisfied God. Therefore the Israelites could rest. The reason we
can have peace with God is that Jesus Christ's blood satisfied God. Many
Christians have no peace because the blood of the Lamb of God does not
satisfy them, or they doubt, because of a guilty conscience, that the blood
has been "applied" in their case. They think something more has to
supplement His work (i.e., human good works). However, God says the
blood of the sacrifice He provided is enough (cf. 1 John 2:1-2).

The New Testament identifies the Passover lamb as a type of the Person
and work of Jesus Christ, God's "Lamb." At the beginning of Jesus' public
ministry, John the Baptist announced that Jesus was "the Lamb of God who
takes away the sin of the world" (John 1:29). Paul wrote: "Christ, our
Passover, was sacrificed for us" (1 Cor. 5:7). Peter also identified Jesus as
the "lamb without blemish and without spot" (1 Pet. 1:19).3

The Passover anticipated the death of Christ in at least seven particulars:

(1) The Passover lamb had to be "without blemish" (v. 5), and Jesus was
without sin. (2) The Passover lamb had to be "a male" (v. 5), and Jesus
was a male. (3) The Passover lamb had to be young ("a year old"; v. 5),
and Jesus was a young man. (4) The Passover lamb had to be examined
over a period of four days from its selection to its killing ("you shall keep
it until the fourteenth day"; v. 6), and Jesus lived a meticulously examined

1Davis,p. 141.
2Frankfort,p. 102.
3The Nelson …, p. 118.
2021 Edition Dr. Constable's Notes on Exodus 111

life. (5) The Passover lamb had to be slain in public (before "the whole
assembly of the congregation"; v. 6), and Jesus died in public. (6) The
"blood" of the Passover lamb on the Israelites' doorposts was "a sign" that
God would not destroy the family's firstborn (v. 7), and Jesus' blood is the
sign of His death, and that through that death, believers are saved from
coming judgment. (7) None of the bones of the Passover lamb were to be
broken (vv. 5, 46), and none of Jesus' bones were broken when He died
(Ps. 34:20; John 19:33, 36), despite the brutality of His death.1

One writer believed that the first Passover was the origin of the concept
of "the day of the Lord," which is so prominent in the writing prophets. The
"day of the Lord" that they referred to was likewise an instance of divine
intervention, similar to what God did at the first Passover, involving
judgment and blessing.2

Directions for the Feast of Unleavened Bread 12:15-20

The Feast of Unleavened Bread began with the Passover meal, and
continued for seven more days (v. 15). The bread that the Jews used for
these feasts contained no leaven (yeast), which made it like a cracker
rather than cake in its consistency. The Old Testament often uses leaven
as a symbol of sin. Leaven gradually permeates dough, and it affects every
part of the dough. Here it not only reminded the Israelites, in later
generations, that their ancestors fled Egypt in haste, before their dough
could rise—it also reminded them that their lives should resemble the
"unleavened bread" as redeemed people. Bread is "the staff of life" and
represents life. The "life" of the Israelites was to be separate from sin, since
they had received "new life" as a result of God's provision of the Passover
lamb. Eating "unleavened bread" for a week ("until the seventh day"), and
"removing [all] leaven from their houses" would have impressed the
necessity of a holy life upon the Israelites.

"For us the leaven must stand for the selfness which is

characteristic of us all, through the exaggerated instinct of
self-preservation and the heredity received through
generations, which have been a law to themselves, serving the
desires of the flesh and of the mind. We are by nature self-

1Ibid.
2Benno Jacob, The Second Book of the Bible: Exodus, p. 315.
112 Dr. Constable's Notes on Exodus 2021 Edition

confident, self-indulgent, self-opinionated; we live with self as

our goal, and around the pivot of I our whole being revolves."1

Anyone who refused to abide by these rules repudiated the spiritual lesson
contained in the symbols, and was therefore "cut off from Israel." This
phrase means to experience separation from the rights and privileges of
the nation through excommunication or, more often, death (cf. Gen. 17:14;
Exod. 30:33, 38; 31:14; et al.).2

"For willful, conscious, high-handed profanity, whether in

reference to the Temple or to God, the law does not appear to
have provided any atonement or offering [cf. Heb. 10:26-
27]."3

The Mosaic Law later specified two types of punishment that are easy to
confuse:

"The one, often referred to in the warning 'that he die not,' is

called by the Rabbis, 'death by the hand of Heaven or of God;'
the other is that of being 'cut off [e.g., Exod. 30:33, 38;
31:14; Lev. 7:20, 21, 25, 27; 17:4; et al.].' It is difficult to
distinguish exactly between these two. Tradition enumerates
thirty-six offences to which the punishment of 'cutting off'
attaches. From their graver nature, as compared with the
eleven offences on which 'death by the hand of God' was to
follow, we gather that 'cutting off' must have been the severer
of the two punishments, and it may correspond to the term
'fiery indignation [Heb. 10:27].' Some Rabbis hold that 'death
by the hand of God' was punishment which ended with this life,
while' cutting off' extended beyond it. But the best authorities
maintain, that whereas death by the hand of Heaven fell upon
the guilty individual alone, 'the cutting off' extended to the
children also so that the family would become extinct in
Israel."4

1Meyer, pp. 138-39.

2Cf. Keil and Delitzsch, 1:224; and Gordon J. Wenham, The Book of Leviticus, pp. 241-2.
3Edersheim, p. 65.
4Ibid., p. 66.
2021 Edition Dr. Constable's Notes on Exodus 113

"Playing fast and loose with God's prescribed practices is to

show disrespect for God's honor and dignity."1

The Israelites celebrated the Passover on the "fourteenth" of Abib, and the
Feast of Unleavened Bread continued through the "twenty-first" (v. 18).
God's call to the Israelites to live holy lives arose from what God had done
for them. Consecration follows redemption; it is not a prerequisite for
redemption. Similarly, God calls us to "be holy," in view of what He has done
for us (cf. Rom. 12:1-2). He does not say we can experience redemption if
we become holy first.

Sunset ended one day and began the next for the Jews (cf. Gen. 1:5; et
al.).

The communication and execution of the directions concerning the

Passover 12:21-28

"Hyssop" grew commonly on rocks and walls in the Near East and Egypt (v.
22). If it was the same plant that we identify as "hyssop" today, masses
of tiny white flowers and a fragrant aroma characterized it. The Jews used
it for applying blood to the door in the Passover ritual because of its
availability and suitability as an applicator of liquids something like a paint
brush. They also used it in the purification rite for lepers (Lev. 14:4, 6),
the purification rite for a plague (Lev. 14:49-52), and for the red heifer
sacrifice ritual (Num. 19:2-6).

"The hairy surface of its leaves and branches holds liquids well
and makes it suitable as a sprinkling device for purification
rituals."2

"The people were instructed that the only way they could
avert the 'destroyer' was to put the blood of the lamb on their
doorposts. Though the text does not explicitly state it, the
overall argument of the Pentateuch … would suggest that
their obedience to the word of the Lord in this instance was
an evidence of their faith and trust in him [cf. Heb. 11:28]."3

1Waltke, An Old …, p. 466.

2Youngblood, p. 61.
3Sailhamer, The Pentateuch …, p. 263.
114 Dr. Constable's Notes on Exodus 2021 Edition

God, through Moses, stressed the significance and the importance of

perpetuating the Passover (v. 26).

"The Israelitish child will not unthinkingly practice a dead

worship; he will ask: What does it mean? and the Israelitish
father must not suppress the questions of the growing mind,
but answer them, and thus begin the spiritualizing [the
explanation of the spiritual significance] of the paschal rite."1

"As detailed in the earliest Jewish record of ordinances—the

Mishnah—the service of the Paschal Supper was exceedingly
simple. … 'The Passover lamb means that God passed over the
blood-sprinkled place on the houses of our fathers in Egypt;
the unleavened bread means that our fathers were delivered
out of Egypt (in haste); and the bitter herbs mean that the
Egyptians made bitter the lives of our fathers in Egypt.'"2

Worship and obedience occur together again here (vv. 27-28). These are
the two proper responses to God's provision of redemption. They express
true faith. These are key words in Exodus.

"The section closes with one of those rare notices in Israel's

history: they did exactly what the Lord had commanded (v.
28)—and well they might after witnessing what had happened
to the obstinate king and people of Egypt!"3

"By this act of obedience and faith, the people of Israel made
it manifest that they had put their trust in Jehovah; and thus
the act became their redemption."4

2. The death of the firstborn and the release of Israel

12:29-36

"The LORD" and His angel "struck" the Egyptians "at midnight," the symbolic
hour of judgment (v. 29; cf. Matt. 25:5-6), when they were asleep "… to

1J. P. Lange, "Exodus or the Second Book of Moses," in Lange's Commentary on the Holy
Scripture, 1:2:39-40.
2Edersheim, pp. 236, 237, quoting Rabbi Gamaliel in Pes. 10:15 of the Mishnah.
3Kaiser, "Exodus," p. 376.
4Johnson, p. 62.
2021 Edition Dr. Constable's Notes on Exodus 115

startle the king and his subjects out of their sleep of sin."1 Pharaoh had
originally met Moses' demands with contemptuous insult (5:4). Then he
tried a series of compromises (8:25, 28; 10:8-11, 24). All of these
maneuvers were unacceptable to God.

There is evidence from Egyptology that the man who succeeded

Amenhotep II, the pharaoh of the plagues, was not his firstborn son.2 His
successor was Thutmose IV (1425-1417 B.C.), a different son of
Amenhotep II, but evidently not his firstborn. Thutmose IV went to some
pains to legitimatize his right to the throne. This would not have been
necessary if he had been the firstborn. So far scholars have found no
Egyptian records of the death of Amenhotep II's firstborn son.

"Thutmose IV claimed that when he was still a prince he had a

dream in which the sun god promised him the throne; this
implies that he was not the one who would be expected to
succeed to the throne under normal circumstances."3

Remember Joseph's dreams.

In contrast to the former plagues, this one was not just a heightened and
supernaturally directed natural epidemic, but a direct act of God Himself
(cf. vv. 12, 13, 23, 27, 29).

We need to understand "no home" in its context (v. 30). There was no
Egyptian home in which there was a firstborn son, who was not a father
himself, that escaped God's judgment of physical death.

"This series of five imperative verbs [in v. 31], three meaning

'go' (dlh is used twice) and one meaning 'take,' coupled with
five usages of the emphatic particle mg 'also' …, marvelously
depicts a Pharaoh whose reserve of pride is gone, who must
do everything necessary to have done with Moses and Israel
and the Yahweh who wants them for his own."4

1Keil and Delitzsch, 2:23.

2See Unger, Archaeology and …, pp. 142-44; Gleason Archer, A Survey …, pp. 229-30;
Pritchard, p. 449.
3Gispen, p. 113. Cf. Wood, A Survey …, p. 128.
4Durham, p. 167.
116 Dr. Constable's Notes on Exodus 2021 Edition

Pharaoh's request that Moses would "bless" him is shocking, since the
Egyptians regarded Pharaoh as a god, and a "god," obviously, would not
humble himself having a need to be blessed (v. 32; cf. Gen. 47:7).

The reader sees God in two roles in this section, representing the two parts
of Israel's redemption. He appears as the Judge, satisfied by the blood of
the innocent sin-bearer, and He is the Deliverer of Israel, who liberated the
nation from its slavery.

Redemption involves the payment of a price. What was the price of Israel's
redemption? It was the lives of the lambs, that God provided as the
substitutes for Israel's firstborn sons, who would have died otherwise (cf.
Isaac in Gen. 22, and Jesus Christ, the only-begotten of the Father). The
firstborn sons remained God's "special portion" (Num. 8:17-18). The
Egyptian firstborn sons died as a punishment on the Egyptians. The
Egyptians had enslaved God's people and had not let them go, and they
had executed an enormous number of male Israelite babies (possibly
millions; 1:15-22), possibly over the last 80 years.1

God owns all life; He just leases it to His creatures. God paid the price of
Israel's redemption to Himself. He "purchased" the nation to be a special
treasure for Himself, and for a special purpose (19:5). This redemption
resulted in Israel's liberation and adoption.

"The Israelites march out of Egypt through the front door, with
dignity—not like dogs crawling through the back fence, but like
God's people. This exaltation of Israel is another humiliation for
Egypt."2

3. The exodus of Israel out of Egypt 12:37-42

"Out of the events which manifest God's coming into history

faith has selected and, as a faithful interpreter of Yahweh's
plan, has retained two main ones, the first at the beginning,
the second at the end of history—the Exodus and the Day of
Yahweh: between these two extremes there are, of course,
many interventions of Yahweh but they only serve to confirm

1Ramm, p. 79.
2Enns, p. 250.
2021 Edition Dr. Constable's Notes on Exodus 117

and make explicit the initial revelation of the Exodus or to

announce the future kingship of Yahweh."1

12:37-39 The record of Israel's sojourn in the wilderness really begins

here.

"Rameses" is probably the same city as "Raamses," also called

"Avaris" (v. 37; cf. 1:11). Many critical scholars date the
Exodus in the thirteenth century B.C. because of this reference
to Rameses. Rameses II ruled Egypt at that later date.
However, "Rameses" may very well be a later name for this
site.2 This may be another instance of later scribal updating.

"The most likely explanation is that the name

Raamses had already been used by the Hyksos
kings many years before the Nineteenth
Dynasty."3

"Rameses" was the city from which the Israelites left Egypt,
and it lay somewhere east of the Nile delta in the land of
Goshen. Archaeologists have not identified "Succoth" with
certainty, either. However, from the context, it seems that
Succoth was only a few miles from Rameses. It may have been
a district rather than a town.4 Perhaps Cassuto was right when
he wrote the following:

"Succoth was a border town named in Egyptian

Tkw. Here the name appears in a Hebrew or
Hebraized form. Apparently it was situated at the
tell called by the Egyptians today Tell el-
Maskhuta."5

Many commentators concluded that, since there were about

600,000 Israelite men (Heb. hageberim), the total number of
Israelites must have been about two million. Though the

1Edmond Jacob, Theology of the Old Testament, p. 190.

2Unger,Archaeology and …, p. 149.
3Wood, A Survey …, p. 93.
4Edward Naville, The Store-City of Pithom and the Route of the Exodus, p. 23; Kaiser,

"Exodus," p. 379.
5Cassuto, 147.
118 Dr. Constable's Notes on Exodus 2021 Edition

Hebrew word translated "thousand" (eleph) can also mean

"family," "clan," "military unit," or something else, most
translators have preferred "thousand" (cf. Exod. 38:26; Num.
1:45-47). In view of the incongruities posed by such a large
number (cf. Exod. 13:17; 14:21-31; 16:3-4; 17:8-13; 18:14-
16; 23:29-30; Num. 14; Deut. 7:7, 22; Josh. 7:5; et al.), eleph
may have meant "hundred" or "unit of ten" or some other
number smaller than "thousand," though the evidence to
support this theory is presently weak, in my opinion.1

"God will not leave small children behind at the

time of the Rapture any more than He left them
behind when the Israelites were redeemed and left
the land of Egypt."2

Moses referred to the "mixed multitude" often, in the account

of the wilderness wanderings that follows. This group probably
included Egyptian pagans and God-fearers (v. 38; cf. 9:20),
and an assortment of other people, including other enslaved
Semites. For one reason or another, these people took this
opportunity to leave or escape from Egypt along with the
Israelites. This group proved to be a source of trouble in Israel,
and led the Israelites in complaining and opposing Moses (e.g.,
Num. 11:4).

12:40-42 The text is very definite that Israel was in Egypt "430 years,
to the very day" (v. 41). This probably refers to the time,
beginning when Jacob entered Egypt with his family (1876
B.C.), to the day of the Exodus (1446 B.C.). (Josephus wrote
that it was from the time Abraham entered Canaan, and that
it was only 215 years after Jacob relocated into Egypt, but
this seems incorrect.3 Gaebelein wrote that it was from the
day on which Abraham left Ur, but this too seems inaccurate.4)
Galatians 3:17 also refers to "430 years." This figure, however,
probably represents the time from God's last reconfirmation of

1See Wood, A Survey …, pp. 154-55.

2McGee, 1:237.
3Josephus, Antiquities of …, 2:15:2.
4Gaebelein, 1:1:138. See Wood, A Survey …, pp. 83-88, for a thorough discussion of

these options.
2021 Edition Dr. Constable's Notes on Exodus 119

the Abrahamic Covenant to Jacob, at Beersheba (1875 B.C.;

Gen. 46:2-4), to the giving of the Mosaic Law at Sinai (1446
B.C.; Exod. 19). Genesis 15:13, 16 and Acts 7:6 give the time
of the Israelites' enslavement in Egypt as "400 years" (1846-
1446 B.C.). The "about 450 years," spoken of in Acts 13:19,
includes the 400-year sojourn in Egypt, the 40 years of
wilderness wanderings, and the seven-year conquest of the
land (1875-1395 B.C.).1

"God never fulfils His promises without first

leading His people to expect the fulfilment [cf.
Gen. 15:13]."2

Why would God allow His chosen people to suffer for so long
in Egypt before He delivered them? Undoubtedly it was so that
they would learn to detest Egypt and long for the Promised
Land. Similarly, God allows sinners to suffer to wean them from
the world and make them long for a better "land."

REFERENCES TO ISRAEL’S YEARS IN EGYPT

1875 1845 1446 1395

The 430 year sojourn in Egypt
(Exod. 12:40-41; Gal. 3:17)

The 400 years of bondage in Egypt

(Gen. 15:13, 16; Acts 7:6)

The “about” 400 years of bondage, wandering, and conquest

(Acts 13:19-20)
Jacob Israelites The Exodus The
moves enslaved and the Conquest
to Egypt giving of completed
the Mosaic
Covenant

Many modern liberal scholars deny that the Exodus ever took place, often
because there is little—if any, they say—extra-biblical evidence to support
it. However, Josephus believed that it happened, and refuted Manetho, an

1Harold W. Hoehner, "The Duration of the Egyptian Bondage," Bibliotheca Sacra 126:504
(October-December 1969):306-16, presented three other ways to reconcile these
references.
2George Wagner, Practical Truths from Israel's Wanderings, p. 3.
120 Dr. Constable's Notes on Exodus 2021 Edition

ancient Egyptian writer, who also believed that it happened, but incorrectly
represented it.1

"… Egypt has afforded us no direct evidence of the sojourn of

the Israelites, but it has revealed much which makes that
sojourn and the Exodus which followed entirely credible. There
are many connections between life in Egypt as known from
archaeology and the details of the biblical narrative at this
point."2

"The Mosaic tradition is so consistent, so well attested by

different pentateuchal documents, and so congruent with our
independent knowledge of the religious development of the
Near East in the late second millennium B. C., that only
hypercritical pseudo-rationalism can reject its essential
historicity."3

Scholars have debated hotly and still argue about the date of the Exodus.
Many conservatives hold a date very close to 1446 B.C.4 Their preference
for this date rests first on 1 Kings 6:1, that states that the Exodus took
place 480 years before the fourth year of Solomon's reign. That year was
quite certainly 967 B.C. Second, this view harmonizes with Judges 11:26,
that says 300 years elapsed between Israel's entrance into Canaan and the
commencement of Jephthah's rule as a judge.5 Third, the length of the
Judges Period argues for this date. Fourth, this date harmonizes better with
events in Egyptian history.

Most liberals, and many evangelicals, hold to a date for the Exodus about
1290 B.C.6 This opinion rests on the belief that the existence of the city

1Josephus, Against Apion, 1:15. Cf. ibid., 2:1-3, 41.

2Finegan, p. 134.
3W. F. Albright, Archaeology and the Religion of Israel, p. 96.
4See, for example, Wolf, pp. 141-48; Free, pp. 98-99.
5See Ronald Youngblood, "A New Look at an Old Problem: The Date of the Exodus,"

Christianity Today 26:20 (Dec. 17, 1982):58, 60; Charles Dyer, "The Date of the Exodus
Reexamined," Bibliotheca Sacra 140:559 (July-September 1983):225-43; Archer, "Old
Testament History …," pp. 106-9; and Bruce K. Waltke, "Palestinian Artifactual Evidence
Supporting the Early Date of the Exodus," Bibliotheca Sacra 129:513 (January-March
1973):33-47.
6E.g., R. K. Harrison, Introduction to the Old Testament, pp. 315-25; Kenneth Kitchen,

Ancient Orient and Old Testament, pp. 73-75; Kathleen Kenyon, The Bible and Recent
Archaeology, p. 30; Durham, p. xxvi; and James K. Hoffmeier, "What Is the Biblical Date
2021 Edition Dr. Constable's Notes on Exodus 121

of Raamses (1:11; et al.) presupposes the existence of Pharaoh Ramses II

(ca. 1300-1234 B.C.).1 Also, followers of this view point to supposed
similarities between the times of Pharaoh Ramses II and the Exodus period.2
Another possible reason for dating the Exodus to the thirteenth century
B.C. is the archaeological remains in Palestine that have been attributed to
the conquest. However, there is good reason to identify these ruins with
the destruction that took place during the Judges Period of Israel's history.3

Another view has also been popularized that places the Exodus about 1470
B.C.4

The generally recognized oldest extra-biblical reference to Israel is on the

Merneptah Stele, dated quite precisely to somewhere between 1210 and
1205 B.C.5 This stele is in the Egyptian Museum in Cairo. However, an older
reference to Israel has now been claimed to exist on a gray granite slab, 18
inches high and 15 1/2 inches wide, in the Egyptian Museum of Berlin. This
stone is 200 years older than the Merneptah Stele.6

4. Regulations regarding the Passover 12:43-51

Before any male could eat the Passover, he had to undergo circumcision.
Moses stressed this requirement strongly in this section. The rationale
behind this rule, was that before anyone could observe the memorial of
redemption, he first had to exercise faith in the promises God had given to
Abraham. Furthermore, he had to demonstrate that faith by submitting to

for the Exodus? A Response to Bryant Wood," Journal of the Evangelical Theological
Society 50:2 (June 2007):225-47. For refutation of the late date theory, see Bryant G.
Wood, "The Rise and Fall of the 13th-Century Exodus-Conquest Theory," Journal of the
Evangelical Theological Society 48:3 (September 2005):475-89; and idem, "The Biblical
Date for the Exodus is 1446 BC: A Response to James Hoffmeier," Journal of the
Evangelical Theological Society 50:2 (June 2007):249-58.
1See my comments on 1:11 above.
2See Finegan, pp. 113-21.
3Longman and Dillard, pp. 65-66.
4See John J. Bimson, Redating the Exodus and the Conquest; and idem, "Redating the

Exodus," Biblical Archaeology Review 13:5 (September-October 1986):40-53, 66-68. See

Livingston, The Pentateuch …, pp. 41-50; or L. Wood, A Survey …, pp. 88-109, for further
discussion of the date of the Exodus.
5See Frank J. Yurco, "3,200-Year-Old Picture of Israelites Found in Egypt," Biblical

Archaeology Review 16:5 (September/October 1990):22-38; and Finegan, pp. 115-17.

6Hershel Shanks, "When Did Ancient Israel Begin?" Biblical Archaeology Review 38:1

(January/February 2012):59-62, 67.

122 Dr. Constable's Notes on Exodus 2021 Edition

the rite of circumcision, the sign of the Abrahamic Covenant. This

requirement should have reminded the Israelites, and all other believers who
partook of the Passover, that the Passover rite did not make a person
acceptable to God. Faith in the promises of God did that. Foreigners who
were non-Israelites could and did become members of the nation—by faith
in the Abrahamic Covenant promises. Participation in the rite of
circumcision was a testimony to that faith. There were both circumcised
and uncircumcised foreigners who lived among the Israelites during the
wilderness march.

Here Moses revealed the requirement that the Passover host was not to
"break a (any) bone" of the paschal lamb (v. 46; cf. vv. 3-9). Not a bone
of the Lamb of God was broken either (John 19:36).

What did the Israelites have to believe to be saved eternally? Though this
is nowhere explained explicitly in Scripture, I believe they obtained eternal
salvation by believing that God provided redemption for them in the
sacrificial lambs at the Passover in Egypt. Throughout the Old Testament,
the prophets reminded the Israelites of the Exodus as God's great saving
act for them; and, of course, the Exodus was the result of the Passover.

Similarly, we who are New Testament believers believe that God provided
redemption for us, in the sacrificial Lamb of God at Calvary. The New
Testament writers continually reminded us of Calvary as God's great saving
act for us. To participate in the annual Passover feast, an Israelite male had
to be circumcised. Circumcision was the sign that he had personally placed
his faith in God, just as circumcision for Abraham expressed his personal
faith in God. Water baptism is a similar sign of faith in God today, if it is
"believers' baptism." I do not believe there is adequate evidence in the Old
Testament, or in the New Testament, that the Israelites were saved by
"faith in a coming Messiah."

"If I were asked what is the greatest story in all the Old
Testament, I should say it is the story of the Passover …"1

The basis of salvation is always the "death of Christ"; no one is saved

except by what He accomplished for us at Calvary. The requirement for
salvation is always "faith"; it is never works. The object of faith is always
"God." The content of faith is always "a promise" from God.

1G. Campbell Morgan, The Unfolding Message of the Bible, p. 20.

2021 Edition Dr. Constable's Notes on Exodus 123

"So what was the content of the saving faith of people in Old
Testament times? It was in believing two things: God delivered
His people from Egypt, and this deliverance was for 'us' as well
as for them."1

The promise of God differed from age to age: For example, I think that
Adam probably believed God's promise that He would eventually overcome
Satan (Gen. 3:15). Abraham probably believed that God would fulfill His
promises to Him regarding seed, land, and blessing (Gen. 15:6). The
Israelites had to believe God's promise that the blood of the Passover lamb
delivered them (Exod. 12:13). Christians have to believe that the blood
(death) of the Lamb of God satisfied God's righteous claims against them
(John 3:16; cf. 1 John 2:2).

In the ancient biblical world, women were regarded as participating in the

acts of the male who was in authority over them: her father if a single
woman, or her husband if married. So if a woman's father or husband
trusted in God's substitute sacrifice, she was counted as doing the same
thing. This was customary in the ancient Near Eastern world.

Was the Old Testament believer eternally secure? Yes, because justification
is always a judicial decision (Gen. 15:6; Deut. 25:1; cf. Rom. 5:1). When
God declares a person righteous, His declaration remains in effect
regardless of the justified person's subsequent behavior. We do not obtain
salvation by being good, and we do not lose our salvation by being bad.
Salvation is a work that God does for sinners in or based on His grace. It is
not something that we can obtain—or retain—by our actions. When we
trust Him, He transfers us "from the kingdom (power) of darkness" to "the
kingdom of His dear Son" (Col. 1:13, KJV). Having been born again into His
family, we can never be unborn; we remain His children forever (cf. Rom.
8:31-38). When we sin, He disciplines us as His sons, but He does not throw
us out of His family (cf. Heb. 12:6-7).

5. The sanctification of the firstborn 13:1-16

This section is somewhat repetitive, but the emphasis is on the Lord's right
to the firstborn in Israel, and how the Israelites were to acknowledge that
right. The repetition stresses its importance.

1Ronald B. Allen, The Wonder of Worship, p. 66.

124 Dr. Constable's Notes on Exodus 2021 Edition

13:1-2 "Every" refers to the "firstborn" males only (v. 2). This is clear
from the Hebrew word used and the context (vv. 12, 13).

13:3-10 The Passover Feast ("it," cf. v. 3) was to be "a sign" to the
Israelites of God's powerful work for them.

13:11-16 The dedication of every firstborn Israelite male baby was to

take place after the nation had entered the Promised Land (vv.
5, 11-12). This was originally to be a memorial of God's
redemption from Egyptian slavery, as were the feasts of
Passover and Unleavened Bread (cf. 12:14). However, God
took the Levites for His special possession in place of the
firstborn. This happened at Mt. Sinai (Num. 3:12-13).
Consequently, this "firstborn dedication" never took place, but
the Israelites did circumcise their sons and observe the
Passover when they first entered the Promised Land (Josh.
5:4-7).

God may or may not have intended that the Jews should
literally wear the "phylacteries" (lit. frontlet-bands, or head-
bands, v. 16; Heb. tephilin).

"The line of thought referred to merely expresses

the idea, that the Israelites were not only to retain
the commands of God in their hearts, and to
confess them with the mouth, but to fulfil them
with the hand, or in act and deed, and thus to
show themselves in their whole bearing as the
guardians and observers of the law. As the hand
is the medium of action, and carrying in the hand
represents handling, so the space between the
eyes, or the forehead, is that part of the body
which is generally visible, and what is worn there
is worn to be seen. This figurative interpretation
is confirmed and placed beyond doubt by such
parallel passages as Prov. iii. 3, 'Bind them (the
commandments) about thy neck; write them upon
2021 Edition Dr. Constable's Notes on Exodus 125

the tables of thine heart' (cf. vers. 21, 22, iv. 21,
vi. 21, 22, vii. 3)."1

"For two thousand years and more, observant

Jews have taken those passages literally. The
paragraphs that form their contexts (Exod. 13:1-
10; 13:11-16; Deut. 6:4-9; 11:13-21) are written
on four strips of parchment and placed in two
small leather boxes, one of which the pious Jewish
man straps on his forehead and the other on his
left arm before he says his morning prayers. The
practice may have originated as early as the
period following the exile to Babylon in 586 B.C.

"It hardly needs to be said that there is nothing

inherently wrong with such a custom. The boxes,
called 'phylacteries' are mentioned in Matthew
23:5, where Jesus criticizes a certain group of
Pharisees and teachers of the law for wearing
them. Our Lord, however, condemns not the
practice as such but the ostentatious use of 'wide'
phylacteries as part of a general statement about
those who flaunt their religiosity in public:
'Everything they do is done for men to see.'

"But although the proper and modest use of

phylacteries might be spiritually legitimate, it is
probably best to understand the references from
Exodus and Deuteronomy as figures of speech,
since similar statements are found elsewhere in
the Old Testament."2

John Durham divided the Book of Exodus into two parts, and he believed
that the first part ends here:

"With Yahweh's Presence promised, then demonstrated, then

given to Israel in theophany at Sinai, the first half of Exodus
ends. The second half of the book is preoccupied with

1Keil and Delitzsch, 2:37.

2Youngblood, pp. 66-67.
126 Dr. Constable's Notes on Exodus 2021 Edition

response to that Presence, in life, in covenant, in worship, and

even in disobedience. The largest part of that second half has
to do with the communication to Israel of the reality of that
Presence, through a series of set-apart places, set-apart
objects and set-apart acts, all of them intimately connected,
in one way or another, with Yahweh's Presence."1

D. GOD'S COMPLETION OF ISRAEL'S LIBERATION 13:17—15:21

The Israelites now began their migration from Goshen to Canaan.

Critics of the Bible have claimed that there never was an exodus of the
Israelites from Egypt, because there is no record of it in Egyptian
antiquities.

"A study of the monuments, however, shows that the

Egyptians did not record matters uncomplimentary to
themselves. … Furthermore, when something was recorded
which proved to be uncomplimentary or distasteful to a later
regime, it was effaced at the first opportunity."2

1. The journey from Succoth to Etham 13:17-22

"The way of the land of the Philistines" refers to the most northern of three
routes travelers took from Egypt to Canaan (v. 17). The others lay farther
south. The Egyptians had heavily fortified this caravan route, also called
the Via Maris (the way of the sea). The Egyptians would have engaged
Israel in battle had the chosen people gone that way.

"When you were weak, and yet very unconscious of your

weakness [as the Israelites were at this time], God would not
suffer you to encounter the Philistines. It would have been too
much for you …"3

The people marched in an orderly fashion (v. 18). This is the meaning of
"martial array." Moses had not yet organized them as an army.

1Durham, p. 501.
2Free,
p. 98.
3Wagner, p. 28.
2021 Edition Dr. Constable's Notes on Exodus 127

"Succoth" was evidently north and west of the Bitter Lakes (v. 20). Today
the Suez Canal connects the Red Sea with the Mediterranean by way of the
Bitter Lakes. Archaeologists have not yet identified with certainty the sites
referred to here such as Succoth and Etham, as well as many others of
those mentioned in the records of the Israelites' journey (e.g., Num. 33).
Consequently it is virtually impossible to pin down their exact locations.
Many of these sites were nothing more than stopping points or oases; they
were not established towns. Kaiser wrote concerning their locations,
"Everyone is guessing!"1 The only stopping-place in the wilderness
wanderings that scholars have been able to identify without dispute is
Kadesh Barnea.2

LAKE
MENZALEH CANAAN

Zoan
Raamses
GOSHEN Succoth?
Etham?
BITTER LAKES
Pi-hahiroth? WILDERNESS OF SHUR

EGYPT
Marah
GULF OF GULF OF
Elim? AQABAN
SUEZ
100 miles WILDERNESS
OF SIN?
Rephidim? Mt. Sinai?
ISRAEL’S JOURNEY
FROM EGYPT TO SINAI
RED SEA

The "wilderness" referred to in verse 20 would have been the "Wilderness

of Shur" located to the east of the Nile delta.

There was only one cloudy/fiery pillar ("pillar of cloud by day … pillar of fire
by night"; v. 21; cf. 14:24). John Sailhamer believed there was one pillar

1Kaiser, "Exodus," p. 385.

2See various Bible Atlases for supposed routes.
128 Dr. Constable's Notes on Exodus 2021 Edition

of cloud and a second and different pillar of fire, but this is a rare
interpretation.1

"Like the burning bush (3:2), the pillar was the visible symbol
of God's presence among His people. The Lord Himself was in
the pillar (13:21; 14:24) and often spoke to the people from
it ([chs. 19—20;] Num. 12:5-6; Deut. 31:15-16; Ps. 99:6-7).
The later hymn-writers of Israel fondly remembered it (Pss.
78:14; 105:39). A similar cloud of smoke came to represent
the glory of the Lord in the sanctuary throughout much of
Israel's history (Exod. 40:34-35; 1 Kings 8:10-11; Isa. 4:5;
6:3-4)."2

"Some make this cloud a type of Christ. The cloud of his human
nature was a veil to the light and fire of his divine nature. Christ
is our way, the light of our way and the guide of it."3

The pillar of cloud and fire, the token of God's presence, remained over the
Israelites until they entered Canaan under Joshua's leadership (v. 22; cf.
3:2; 20:18). Perhaps it appeared as Meyer imagined it:

"When the excessive heat made it necessary for Israel to

march at night, the light of the Fiery Pillar was enough to light
the way: and when in the day the scorching glare of the sun
was blinding, the cloud spread itself abroad like a great
umbrella, so that the women and children could travel in
comparative comfort [cf. Ps. 84:11]."4

"Thus, brethren, it is evident that there was no exercise of

faith whatever as to what was the will of God concerning them.
The only exercise of faith to which they were called was to do
that will made manifest by the pillar of fire and cloud, and
follow Jehovah's merciful guidance with unfaltering and
contented hearts. It was in this that they were so often tried,
and in this that they so often failed. We, brethren, live under
an advanced dispensation,—the dispensation of the Spirit; and

1Sailhamer, The Pentateuch …, p. 269.

2Youngblood, pp. 74-75. See also Richard D. Patterson, "The Imagery of Clouds in the
Scriptures," Bibliotheca Sacra 165:657 (January-March 2008):24-25.
3Henry, p. 86.
4Meyer, p. 158.
2021 Edition Dr. Constable's Notes on Exodus 129

are therefore called to higher exercises of faith,—of that faith

which discerns the will of God in circumstances of difficulty, as
well as that which walks in it when discerned."1

2. Israel's passage through the Red Sea ch. 14

14:1-4 Scholars have not been able to locate definitely the sites
referred to in verse 2.

"Both Pi-hahiroth and Migdol are found mentioned

in Egyptian inscriptions, but have not been
identified."2

"An Egyptian papyrus associates Baal Zephon with

Tahpahnes … a known site near Lake Menzaleh in
the northeastern delta region."3

However, it seems that the crossing took place farther south

in view of the implication that it took the Israelites no less and
no more than three days to reach Marah (15:22-23). The
evidence for the location of Marah seems a bit stronger.

"Yahweh's first intention was to give the

appearance that Israel, fearful of the main road,
then fearful of the wilderness, was starting first
one way and then another, not knowing where to
turn and so a ready prey for recapture or
destruction. Yahweh's second intention was to
lure the Egyptians into a trap, first by making
Pharaoh's mind obstinate once again, and then by
defeating Pharaoh and his forces, who were
certain to come down in vengeance upon an
apparently helpless and muddled Israel."4

1Wagner, p. 31.
2L.Wood, A Survey …, p. 130, n. 78.
3Youngblood, p. 75.
4Durham, p. 187.
130 Dr. Constable's Notes on Exodus 2021 Edition

"Like a master chess player, God induces Pharaoh

to move his king into checkmate, and he doesn't
even realize it."1

The Hebrew phrase yam sup, that Moses used to describe the
body of water through which the Israelites passed
miraculously, means "Red Sea," not "Reed Sea."

"If there is anything that sophisticated students

of the Bible know, it is that yam sup, although
traditionally translated Red Sea, really means Reed
Sea, and that it was in fact the Reed Sea that the
Israelites crossed on their way out of Egypt.

"Well it doesn't and it wasn't and they're wrong!"2

In the article quoted above, the writer explained that the word
sup did not originate in the Egyptian language but in Hebrew.
Many scholars have claimed it came from an Egyptian root
word meaning "reed." But this writer showed that it came from
a Hebrew root word meaning "end." Yam is also a Hebrew word
that means "sea." The "yam sup" is then the "Sea at the End."
The ancients used the name yam sup to describe the body of
water that lay beyond the farthest lands known to them. It
meant the sea at the end of the world. It clearly refers to the
Red Sea often in the Old Testament (Exod. 15:4; Num. 21:4;
33:8; Josh. 2:10; 4:23; 1 Kings 9:26; Jer. 49:21; et al.). The
Greeks later used the same term, translated into Greek, to
refer to the Persian Gulf and the Indian Ocean. The translation
of yam sup as "Reed Sea" is evidently both inaccurate and
misleading. It implies that the Israelites simply crossed some
shallow marsh when they left Egypt. Such an interpretation
lacks support in the inspired record of Israel's Exodus.3

"The Hebrew word sup, which corresponds closely

to the Egyptian tjuf ('papyrus'), refers to the
reeds along the bank of the Nile in Exodus 2:3 and

1Enns, p. 271.
2Batto, p. 57.
3For a summary of views on the site of crossing, see Davis, pp. 168-71, or Hyatt, pp. 156-

61.
2021 Edition Dr. Constable's Notes on Exodus 131

to the seaweed in the Mediterranean in Jonah 2:5

[HB 2:6]. Since there are a series of lakes with
abundant supplies of reeds and papyrus north of
the Red Sea (the Gulf of Suez)—such as Lake
Menzaleh and Lake Timsah—it is felt that one of
these may have been the 'Reed Sea' crossed by
the Israelites."1

"The rendering [']the Red Sea['] comes from the

Septuagint, the Greek translation of the Old
Testament completed about 150 B.C.; the
Hebrew phrase means 'Sea of Reeds.'"2

Moses recorded that God "hardened Pharaoh's heart" three

times in this chapter (vv. 4, 8, 17).

"Pharaoh and Egypt are ever-speaking witnesses

of the danger of neglecting the first proffers of
mercy, and of the sure end of that presumption
which leads sinful man to oppose the will of God."3

"Our Father always gets glory when we let Him put

us where only He can deliver us. Then we can sing
His glorious praise as Israel did (Exod. 15; Ps.
116:12, 13; 40:1-3)."4

14:5-14 "This is the first time we read of the people of

Israel crying out to God en masse. Isn't it
remarkable what a predicament will do to your
proud, independent spirit?"5

This is also one of the first of Israel's many complaints against

Moses and Yahweh that Moses recorded in Scripture. It is
probably the first of ten incidents of complaining that
culminated in God's judgment of them at Kadesh Barnea (v.

1Wolf, p. 140. "HB" refers to Hebrew Bible. See also The New Bible Dictionary, s.v. "Red
Sea," by Kenneth A. Kitchen, pp. 1077-78; and L. Wood, A Survey …, p. 130.
2The Nelson …, p. 122.
3Wagner, p. 8.
4William R. Newell, Studies in the Pentateuch, p. 124.
5Swindoll, p. 217.
132 Dr. Constable's Notes on Exodus 2021 Edition

11; Num. 14:22-23). However, we have already seen that the

Israelites occasionally opposed Moses and, behind him, God
(2:14; 5:20-21).

"The suffering of Israel in the wilderness is

recorded in Exodus 14—18. The purposes of the
wilderness suffering—and this was before they
reached Mount Sinai—varied. God wanted to test
them to see if they would trust him (15:25b-26).
And he wanted to challenge them to be his people
and to live differently than all the other nations so
that all peoples would know he is the Lord God
(19:5-6). He wanted to teach them how to
worship him in a manner different from that of
other nations (Exodus 25—40). All of this occurs
in the God-planned circumstances of suffering and
subsequent necessary trusting."1

"God is not only in the business of saving us by

getting us out of Egypt. He is also in the business
of getting Egypt out of us as we navigate the
wilderness, so that we can get to the Promised
Land in the end."2

"God brings us into straits that he may bring us to

our knees."3

"This is the first example in the Old Testament of

what some scholars call 'holy war' or 'Yahweh
war.' That is, this war was undertaken by the Lord
in defense of His own reputation, promises, and
self-interest (14:10-14; see also, for example,
15:3; Deut. 1:30; 3:22; 20:4). It is to be
distinguished from 'ordinary' war that Israel might
undertake on her own (Num. 14:39-45)."4

1Bramer, p. 94.
2Charles R. Swindoll, The Swindoll Study Bible, p. 107.
3Henry, p. 86.
4Merrill, in The Old …, p. 54.
2021 Edition Dr. Constable's Notes on Exodus 133

Josephus wrote that the Egyptians pursued the Israelites with

600 chariots, 50,000 horsemen, and 200,000 footmen, all
armed.1 This may or may not be accurate (Moses wrote: "600
select chariots, and all the other chariots of Egypt with officers
… all the horses and chariots of Pharaoh, his horsemen and his
army," vv. 7, 9).

"You know the human response to panic? First, we

are afraid. Second, we run. Third, we fight. Fourth,
we tell everybody. God's counsel is just the
opposite. Don't be afraid. Stand still. Watch Him
work. Keep quiet. It's then that He does it. He
takes over! He handles it exactly opposite the way
we'd do it. The Lord just taps His foot, waiting for
us to wait."2

14:15-25 The time to act had come. Moses needed to stop praying and
"go forward" (cf. Josh. 7:6-13).

"It is quite certain, brethren, that there can be no

progress in the Christian life without prayer,—
without real and transforming communion with
God; but you may also rest assured, brethren, that
very much depends upon our 'going forward' at
the right moment. … Are you naturally hasty,
imperious? ready to decide upon duty at once?
Then you must make it a rule always to pray,
before you give counsel, and act. Or are you
naturally disposed to think, to deliberate and
doubt? Then you must try to cultivate decision in
action; you must 'go forward,' as well as 'pray.'"3

The strong east wind that God sent (v. 21) recalls the wind
from God that swept over the face of the primeval waters in
creation (Gen. 1:2). One wonders if this wind may have been a
tornado or hurricane, and although tornados and hurricanes are
usually non-occurring weather events in that part of the world,

1Josephus, Antiquities of …, 2:15:3.

2Swindoll, Moses, p. 219.
3Wagner, p. 43.
134 Dr. Constable's Notes on Exodus 2021 Edition

this was a time in history when unusual weather events were

happening.

"The parting of the water at Moses' command is

the ultimate creation reversal [cf. Gen. 1:9]."1

The cloud became a source of "light" to the fleeing Israelites,

but "darkness" to the pursuing Egyptians (vv. 19-20).

"Thus the double nature of the glory of God in

salvation and judgment, which later appears so
frequently in Scripture, could not have been more
graphically depicted."2

The angel switched from guiding to guarding the Israelites. The

"strong east wind" was another miracle like those that
produced the plagues (v. 21; cf. Ps. 77:16-19).

The two million Israelites could have passed through the sea in
the time the text says ("all night," perhaps 6 to 8 hours)—if
they crossed in a wide column, perhaps as much as a half-mile
wide (v. 22). Some tornados and hurricanes have been known
to cut a swath of devastation this wide. Some interpreters take
the "wall of water" literally, and others interpret it figuratively.

"The metaphor [water like a wall] is no more to be

taken literally than when Ezra 9:9 says that God
has given him a 'wall' (the same word) in Israel. It
is a poetic metaphor to explain why the Egyptian
chariots could not sweep in to right and left, and
cut Israel off; they had to cross by the same ford,
directly behind the Israelites."3

Nevertheless nothing in the text precludes a literal wall of

water.4 This seems to be the normal meaning of the text.

1Enns, p. 274.
2Kaiser, "Exodus," p. 389.
3Cole, p. 121. Cf. Cassuto, pp. 167-69.
4Davis, pp. 163-68, listed several ways of understanding what happened.
2021 Edition Dr. Constable's Notes on Exodus 135

The text does not say that Pharaoh personally perished in the
Red Sea (cf. vv. 8, 10, 28; Ps. 106:7-12; 136:13-15).1

14:26-31 Evidently the Lord sent a rainstorm after the Israelites had
crossed safely (Ps. 77:17-18). This may have been part of the
tornado or hurricane, if that is what the Lord used. The wet
seabed would then account for the fact that the Egyptians'
chariot wheels swerved (v. 26).

"They are drowned in the sea for drowning the

Israelite children in the Nile."2

This miraculous deliverance produced "fear" (reverential trust)

in Yahweh among the Israelites (v. 31). Their confidence in
Moses as well as in God revived (cf. v. 10-12).

"… whenever confidence in Moses increases, as

here and at Sinai, it is because of an action of
Yahweh."3

"In view of the importance of the concept of faith

and trust in God for the writer of the Pentateuch,
we should take a long look at these verses. Just
as Abraham believed God and was counted
righteous (Ge 15:6), so the Israelites, under the
leadership of Moses, also believed God. It seems
reasonable that the writer would have us conclude
here in the wilderness the people of God were
living a righteous life of faith, like Abraham. As
they headed toward Sinai, their trust was in the
God of Abraham who had done great deeds for
them. It is only natural, and certainly in line with
the argument of the book, that they would break
out into a song of praise in the next chapter. On
the negative side, however, we should not lose
sight of the fact that these same people would
forget only too quickly the great work of God,

1Cole, p. 120. Cf. Jack Finegan, Let My People Go, p. 87; and Oliver Blosser, "Did the
Pharaoh of the Exodus Drown in the Red Sea?" It's About Time, (July 1987):11.
2Enns, p. 272.
3Durham, p. 197.
136 Dr. Constable's Notes on Exodus 2021 Edition

make a golden calf (Ps 106:11-13), and thus

forsake the God about whom they were now
singing."1

"This great, climactic verse [v. 31] speaks of the

genuine faith of the people of Israel at the end of
their experience of God's saving works and at the
beginning of their journey of faith. When we read
[']so the people feared the LORD['] and the words
that follow, we are meant to understand that the
community had come to saving faith and so were
a reborn people. They [']believed the LORD['] (the
same wording used of Abraham's saving faith in
Gen. 15:6; see Paul's comments, Rom. 4."2

"Here [v. 31] the title of 'servant' is given to

Moses. This is the highest title a mortal can have
in the OT—the 'servant of Yahweh.' It signifies
more than a believer; it describes the individual as
acting on behalf of God. For example, when Moses
stretched out his hand, God used it as his own (Isa
63:12). Moses was God's personal
representative." 3

Many critics, who have sought to explain away God's supernatural

deliverance of Israel, have attacked this story. They have tried by various
explanations to account for what happened in natural terms, exclusively. It
is obvious from this chapter, however, that regardless of where the
crossing took place—enough water was present to drown the "entire army"
of Egyptians that pursued Israel (v. 28). Immediately after this deliverance,
the Israelites regarded their salvation as supernatural (15:1-21), and they
continued to do so for generations (e.g., Ps. 106:7-8). The people of
Canaan heard about and believed in this miraculous deliverance, and it
terrified them (Josh. 2:9-10; 9:9).

The critics' problem may be moral rather than intellectual. Some of the
critics do not want to deal with the implications of an occurrence of

1Sailhamer, The Pentateuch …, p. 270.

2The Nelson …, p. 124.
3The NET Bible note on 14:31.
2021 Edition Dr. Constable's Notes on Exodus 137

supernatural phenomena, so they try to explain them away. The text clearly
presents a supernatural deliverance, and even states that God acted as He
did in order to prove His supernatural power (vv. 4, 18).

"From the start of the exodus, it becomes clear, Yahweh has

orchestrated the entire sequence."1

The Lord finished the Israelites' liberation when He destroyed the Egyptian
army. The Israelites' slavery ended when they left Egypt, but they only
began to experience true freedom after they crossed the Red Sea. The ten
plagues had broken Pharaoh's hold on the Israelites, but the Red Sea
deliverance removed them from his reach forever. God redeemed Israel on
the Passover night, but He fully liberated Israel from slavery, finally, at the
Red Sea.2 In Christian experience, these two works of God—redemption and
liberation—occur at the same time; they are two aspects of the same
salvation, two sides of the same coin.

Archaeologists have discovered the mummified remains of Amenhotep II in

the Valley of the Tombs of the Kings. Evidently he personally did not lead
the Egyptian army into the Red Sea. The biblical text says that he pursued
the Israelites, but it does not say that he personally perished in the Red
Sea (cf. v. 6). He lived 22 years after this.3

3. Israel's song of deliverance 15:1-21

"The song is composed of three gradually increasing strophes,

each of which commences with the praise of Jehovah, and ends
with a description of the overthrow of the Egyptian host (vv.
2-5, 6-10, 11-18). The theme announced in the introduction
in v. 1 is thus treated in three different ways; and whilst the
omnipotence of God, displayed in the destruction of the
enemy, is the prominent topic in the first two strophes, the
third depicts with prophetic confidence the fruit of this

1Durham, p. 198.
2See William D. Ramey, "The Great Escape (Exodus 14)," Exegesis and Exposition 1:1 (Fall
1986):33-42.
3L. Wood, A Survey …, p. 134.
138 Dr. Constable's Notes on Exodus 2021 Edition

glorious event in the establishment of Israel, as a kingdom of

Jehovah, in the promised inheritance."1

"This song as a whole is a textbook example of the divine

warrior imagery so prevalent in the Old Testament [cf. Judg.
5; 2 Sam. 22:1-51]."2

Cassuto divided the strophes better, I believe, as vv. 1-6, vv. 7-11, and vv.
12-16, with an epilogue in vv. 17-18.3 Kaiser proposed a similar division:
1b-5, 6-10, 11-16a, and 16b-18.4

"It is not comparable to any one psalm, or song or hymn, or

liturgy known to us anywhere else in the OT or in ANE [ancient
Near Eastern] literature."5

"Yahweh is both the subject and the object of this psalm; the
hymn is about him and to him, both here and in the similar
usage of Judg 5:3 …"6

It is interesting that Moses described the Egyptian pursuers as being

"thrown (hurled) into the sea" (vv. 1, 4), and sinking "like a stone" (v. 5)
and "lead" (v. 10). The same image—of God reaching down and tossing
each soldier of the Egyptian army into the water, one by one—describes
Pharaoh's earlier order to throw the Hebrew babies into the Nile River
(1:22). God did to the Egyptians what they had done to the Israelites.7

"It is difficult to exaggerate the importance of God's name

Yahweh in the Bible ([v. 3; cf.] 3:14, 15). Other supposed gods
had secret names that only guilds of priests knew. By knowing
a god's secret name, a priest supposedly had special access to
that god. But the living God has made His name known to all,
and salvation is found in His name alone."8

1Keil and Delitzsch, 2:50.

2Enns, p. 298.
3Cassuto, 173. See also Jasper J. Burden, "A Stylistic Analysis of Exodus 15:1-21: Theory

and Practice," OTWSA 29 (1986):34-70.

4Kaiser, "Exodus," p. 393-96.
5Durham, p. 203.
6Ibid., p. 205.
7Sailhamer, The Pentateuch …, p. 271.
8The Nelson …, p. 125.
2021 Edition Dr. Constable's Notes on Exodus 139

This hymn is a fitting climax to all of God's miracles performed on behalf of

the Israelites in leading them out of Egypt.1 It is a "song of praise" that
focuses on God Himself, and attributes to Him the superiority over all other
gods that He had demonstrated (cf. v. 11). Undoubtedly the Israelites sang
this inspired song many times during their wilderness wanderings, and for
generations from then on.2

The first part of the song (vv. 1-12) looks back on God's destruction of
the Egyptian army, and the second part (vv. 13-18) predicts Israel's
entrance into the Promised Land. The divine name appears ten times.
"Redeemed" (v. 13) comes from a Hebrew word (ga'al) that has to do with
protecting family rights. It refers to "the responsibility of a close relative
to buy back family land that had been sold because of debt (Lev. 25:25)."3
This hymn closes by alluding to God's coming "reign" on earth over His
redeemed people (v. 18).

"Miriam" was a "prophetess," in that she spoke authoritatively for God and
led the Israelites in worship (cf. 1 Chron. 25:1).4 Other female prophetesses
in Israel's history were Deborah (Judg. 4:4), Isaiah's wife (Isa. 8:3), and
Huldah (2 Kings 22:14). The New Testament evangelist Philip also had four
daughters who prophesied (Acts 21:9).

"The event at the Red Sea, when the Egyptian army was
drowned, was celebrated as a great military victory achieved
by God (Exodus 15:1-12). It was that event, wherein a new
dimension of the nature of God was discovered by the Hebrews
(the new understanding is expressed forcefully by the
explanation 'the Lord is a man in battle' [v. 3]), that opened
to their understanding the real possibility, if not necessity, of
taking possession of the promised land by means of military
conquest (Exodus 15:13-18)."5

"The Exodus was one of the foundational events of Israel's

religion. It marked the liberation from Egyptian slavery, which

1See Richard D. Patterson, "Victory at Sea: Prose and Poetry in Exodus 14—15,"
Bibliotheca Sacra 161:641 (January-March 2004):42-54.
2See Jeffrey E. MacLurg, "An Ode to Joy: The Song of the Sea (Exodus 15:1-21)," Exegesis

and Exposition 1:1 (Fall 1986):43-54.

3The Nelson …, p. 126.
4See L. Wood, The Prophets …, pp. 140-43.
5Peter C. Craigie, The Problem of War in the Old Testament, p. 67.
140 Dr. Constable's Notes on Exodus 2021 Edition

in turn made possible the formation of a relationship of

covenant between Israel and God. And nowhere is the Exodus
given more powerful expression than in the Song of the Sea
(Exodus 15:1-18), a great victory hymn celebrating God's
triumph over Egypt at the sea. To this day, the ancient hymn
continues to be employed in the synagogue worship of
Judaism. Its continued use reflects the centrality of its theme,
that of God's control over the forces of both nature and
history in the redemption of his people.

"When one reads the Song of the Sea, one immediately gains
an impression of the joy and exhilaration expressed by those
who first used its words in worship. But what is not
immediately evident to the modern reader is the subtle manner
in which the poet has given force to his themes by the
adaptation of Canaanite mythology. Underlying the words and
structure of the Hebrew hymn are the motifs of the central
mythology of Baal; only when one understands the fashion in
which that mythology has been transformed can one go on to
perceive the extraordinary significance which the poet
attributed to the Exodus from Egypt.

"The poet has applied some of the most central motifs of the
myth of Baal. These motifs may be summarized in certain key
terms: conflict, order, kingship, and palace-construction.
Taking the cycle of Baal texts as a whole (see further Chapter
IV), the narrative begins with conflict between Baal and Yamm
('Sea'); Baal, representing order, is threatened by the chaotic
Yamm. Baal's conquest of Yamm marks one of the steps in the
process of creation; order is established, and chaos is subdued.
Baal's victory over Yamm is also the key to his kingship, and
to symbolize the order and consolidate the kingship, Baal
initiates the construction of his palace. And then, in the course
of the myth, conflict breaks out again, this time between Baal
and Mot. Baal is eventually victorious in this conflict,
establishing once again his kingship and the rule of order. It is
important to note not only the centrality of these motifs in the
Baal myth, but also their significance; the motifs as a whole
establish a cosmological framework within which to interpret
the Baal myth. It is, above all, a cosmology, developing the
2021 Edition Dr. Constable's Notes on Exodus 141

origins and permanent establishment of order in the world, as

understood and believed by the Canaanites. Its central
celebration is that of creation.

"In the Song of the Sea, the poet has developed the same
central motifs in the structure of his song. The song begins
with conflict between God and Egypt (Exodus 15:1-12), but
the way in which the poet has transformed the ancient motifs
is instructive. 'Sea' is no longer the adversary of order, but God
uses the sea (Hebrew yam) as an instrument in the conquest
of chaos. After the conquest, God is victorious and establishes
order; his kingship is proclaimed in a statement of his
incomparability (verse 11). But then the theme of conflict is
resumed again, as future enemies are anticipated (verses 14-
16). They, too, would be conquered, and eventually God's
palace and throne would be established as a symbol of the
order achieved in his victory (verse 17). Finally, God's kingship
would be openly declared, as a consequence of his victories:
'the Lord shall reign for ever and ever' (verse 18). The Hebrew
expression for this statement of kingship is yhwh ymlk, directly
analogous to the celebration of Baal's kingship in the Ugaritic
texts: b'l ymlk.

"It is one thing to trace the motifs of the Baal myth in the Song
of the Sea; it is another to grasp their significance. The primary
significance lies in the cosmological meaning of the motifs; the
Hebrew poet has taken the symbolic language of creation and
adapted it to give expression to his understanding of the
meaning of the Exodus. At one level, the Exodus was simply
the escape of Hebrews from Egyptian slavery; at another level,
it marked a new act of divine creation. Just as Genesis 1
celebrates the creation of the world, so too Exodus 15
celebrates the creation of a new people, Israel. And when one
perceives this underlying significance of the poetic language
employed in the Song of the Sea, one is then in a position to
understand better another portion of the biblical text, namely,
the reasons given for the observation of the sabbath day."1

1Idem, Ugarit and the Old Testament, pp. 88-89. See also Frank M. Cross Jr., "The Song
of the Sea and Canaanite Myth," in God and Christ: Existence and Province, pp. 1-25.
142 Dr. Constable's Notes on Exodus 2021 Edition

"Throughout the poem, however, the picture of God's great

deeds foreshadows most closely that of David, who defeated
the chiefs of Edom, Philistia, and Canaan and made Mount Zion
the eternal home for the Lord's sanctuary (v. 17)."1

"The poem of Exod 15 celebrates Yahweh present with his

people and doing for them as no other god anywhere and at
any time can be present to do. As such, it is a kind of summary
of the theological base of the whole of the Book of Exodus."2

"This song is, by some hundred years, the oldest poem in the
world."3

Worship was the result of redemption. Though Moses was their human
leader, it was clear that Yahweh was their "true King" ("The LORD shall reign
forever and ever," v. 18). The people looked back at their deliverance, in
this worshipful song, and forward to God's Promised Land. At this point,
their joy was due to their freedom from slavery. However, the desert lay
ahead. The family of Abraham had become a nation, and God was now
"dwelling" among them in the cloud.4 God's presence with the nation
introduced the need for holiness in Israel. The emphasis on holiness began
with God's "dwelling" among His people in the cloud. This divine presence
and appreciation of God's holiness increased, when God later descended on
the tabernacle and ark of the covenant.

The parallel that exists between Abraham's experiences and Israel's is also
significant. God first called Abram out of pagan Ur. Then He blessed him
with a covenant, after the patriarch first obeyed God and went where
Yahweh led him. God did the same thing with Israel. This similarity suggests
that God's dealings, with both Abram and Israel, may be programmatic and
indicative, generally, of His method of dealing with His elect.

"There is a definite parallel between the supernatural

preparation for the kingdom in history under Moses and the
supernatural judgments which shall be poured out upon a
rebellious world in preparation for the future millennial kingdom

1Sailhamer, The Pentateuch …, p. 272.

2Durham, p. 210.
3Jamieson, et al., p. 67.
4Josephus wrote Against Apion partially to refute the idea that the Jews were not

originally Egyptians. See idem, 2:2, 3.

2021 Edition Dr. Constable's Notes on Exodus 143

of our Lord Jesus Christ at His second advent. There is the

same insolent challenge to the true God on the part of the
Gentile powers (Ps. 2:1-3). There will be a similar gracious but
infinitely greater preliminary miracle—the Rapture of the
Church—warning men of the supremacy of Jehovah and the
ultimate defeat of all who rebel against Him. There will be the
same swift progression in the severity of the divine judgments
(cf. Rev. 6 through 18). There will be the same victorious
outcome, the destruction of the antichrist and his armies in
the judgment of Armageddon, and the deliverance of the
people of Israel (Rev. 19). There will be another song of
victory, significantly referred to as 'the song of Moses … and
the song of the Lamb' (Rev. 15:1-3)."1

II. THE ADOPTION OF ISRAEL 15:22—40:38

The second major section of Exodus records the events associated with
God's adoption of Israel as His chosen people. Having redeemed Israel out
of slavery in Egypt, the LORD now made the nation His privileged "son."
Redemption is the end of one journey but the beginning of another.

A. GOD'S PREPARATORY INSTRUCTION OF ISRAEL 15:22—18:27

The events in this section of the text record God's preparation of His people
for the revelation of His gracious will for them at Mt. Sinai.

1. Events in the wilderness of Shur 15:22-27

15:22-26 The Wilderness of Shur was a section of semi-desert to the

east of Egypt's border. It occupied the northwestern part of
the Sinai Peninsula, and it separated Egypt from Palestine (v.
22).

"… wilderness does not imply a waste of sand, but

a broad open expanse, which affords pasture
enough for a nomad tribe wandering with their
flocks. Waste and desolate so far as human

1McClain, p. 56.
144 Dr. Constable's Notes on Exodus 2021 Edition

habitations are concerned, the traveller [sic] will

only encounter a few Bedouins. But everywhere
the earth is clothed with a thin vegetation,
scorched in summer drought, but brightening up,
as at the kiss of the Creator, into fair and beautiful
pastures, at the rainy season and in the
neighbourhood of a spring."1

This area has not changed much over the centuries.

Moses had asked Pharaoh's permission for the Israelites to take

a three-day journey into the wilderness (3:18; 5:3; 8:27), but
now, having traveled "three days," the people "found no
water" suitable for drinking. The water at the oasis they
reached, later named "Marah," was brackish (vv. 23-24). This
circumstance caused the people to complain again (cf. 14:11-
12). In just three days, they had forgotten God's miracles at
the Red Sea, not to mention the plagues. This failure to depend
on God should prove that miracles do not result in great faith.
Rather, great faith comes from a settled conviction that God
is trustworthy.

"When the supply fails, our faith is soon gone."2

"… we may in our journey have reached the pools

that promised us satisfaction, only to find them
brackish. That marriage, that friendship, that new
home, that partnership, that fresh avenue of
pleasure, which promised so well turns out to be
absolutely disappointing. Who has not muttered
'Marah' over some desert well which he strained
every nerve to reach, but when reached, it
disappointed him!"3

1Meyer, p. 178.
2MartinLuther, quoted by Keil and Delitzsch, 2:58.
3Meyer, p. 181.
2021 Edition Dr. Constable's Notes on Exodus 145

"Nothing so thoroughly sifts the heart as

disappointment—bright and lofty anticipations
suddenly cast to the ground."1

Some commentators have seen the "tree" cast into the water
as a type of the cross of Christ or Christ Himself that, applied
to the bitter experiences of life, makes them sweet (cf. John
4:10; 6:35). What is definitely clear, is that by using God's
specified means and obeying His word, the Israelites learned
that God would heal them (v. 25). Throwing the wood into the
water did not magically change it, but it did make the miracle
easier to perceive. This was a symbolic act, similar to Moses
lifting his staff (also wood) over the sea (14:16; cf. 17:9). God
changed the water. He is able to turn "bitter water" into
"sweet water" for His people. We should seek God first when
we get sick. God often uses physicians, but He is the "healer."

The "statute and regulation" that God made for Israel were
that He would deliver them from "all" their troubles
("diseases"), as long as they would follow Him and obey His
commandments. Therefore they could always count on His
help. God's "test" involved seeing whether they would rely on
Him or not (cf. James 1).

The words of God in verse 26 explain the statute and

regulation just given. The Israelites would not suffer the
"diseases" God had "sent (put) on the Egyptians" (i.e.,
experience His discipline)—if they continued to obey His word
as they had just done. They had by simply casting the tree into
the pool obeyed God.

God was teaching His people that He was responsible for their
physical—as well as their spiritual—well-being. While doctors
diagnose and prescribe, only God can heal.2

"We do not find Him [God] giving Himself a new

name at Elim, but at Marah. The happy
experiences of life fail to reveal all the new truth

1Wagner, p. 51.
2See Jay D. Fawver and R. Larry Overstreet, "Moses and Preventive Medicine," Bibliotheca
Sacra 147:587 (July-September):285.
146 Dr. Constable's Notes on Exodus 2021 Edition

and blessing that await us in God [cf. Gen. 15:1;

Exod. 17:15]."1

This is one of the verses in Scripture that advocates of the

"prosperity gospel" like. They use it to prove their contention
that it is never God's will for anyone to be sick (along with
23:25; Ps. 103:3; Prov. 4:20-22; Isa. 33:24; Jer. 30:17; Matt.
4:23; 10:1; Mark 16:16-18; Luke 6:17-19; Acts 5:16 and
10:38). One advocate of this position wrote as follows:

"Don't ever tell anyone sickness is the will of God

for us. It isn't! Healing and health are the will of
God for mankind. If sickness were the will of God,
heaven would be filled with sickness and
disease."2

15:27 At "Elim," Israel learned something else about God. Not only
would He deliver them (v. 3) and heal them (v. 26), but He
would also provide refreshing drink ("twelve springs of water")
and nourishing food ("seventy date palms") for them as their
Shepherd (cf. Ps. 23:2). Likewise, we should learn to look to
God first to provide for our needs. God often uses jobs, gifts,
and scholarships, but He is the Provider.

Marah, with its bitter waters, intervenes between

the triumphant song at the Red Sea, and Elim, with
its twelve wells of water. What a picture this of
the Christian's life, in which dark hours often
follow, and are followed by bright ones!"3

"If life were nothing but tests, we would be

discouraged. If life were all pleasure, we would
never learn discipline and develop character. The
Lord knows how to balance the experiences of life,
for He brought His people to Elim where the found
plenty of water and opportunity for rest. Let's be

1Meyer, pp. 183-84.

2Kenneth Hagin, Redeemed from Poverty, Sickness and Death, p. 16. For a critique of this
view, see Ken L. Sarles, "A Theological Evaluation of the Prosperity Gospel," Bibliotheca
Sacra 143:572 (October-December 1986):329-52.
3Wagner, p. 54.
2021 Edition Dr. Constable's Notes on Exodus 147

grateful that the Lord give us enough blessings to

encourage us and enough burdens to humble us,
and that He knows how much we can take."1

One method of God's dealing with the Israelites as His people, that He
frequently employed, stands out clearly in these incidents. God did not lead
the Israelites around every difficulty. Instead He led them into many
difficulties, but He also provided deliverance for them in their difficulties.
This caused the Israelites to learn to look to Him for the supply of their
needs. He still deals with His children the same way.2

2. Quails and manna in the wilderness of Sin ch. 16

This chapter records another crisis in the experience of the Israelites, as

they journeyed from Goshen to Mt. Sinai, that God permitted and used to
teach them important lessons.

16:1-3 The "wilderness of Sin" evidently lay in the southwestern part

of the Sinai peninsula (v. 1). Its name relates to "Sinai," the
name of the mountain range located on its eastern edge.
Aharoni believed that "Paran" was the original name of the
entire Sinai Peninsula.3

This was Israel's third occasion of "grumbling" (v. 2; cf. 14:11-

12; 15:24). The reason this time was not fear of the Egyptian
army or lack of water, but lack of food (v. 3).

"Whenever we are tempted to murmur, there are

always two things at least that we forget. First we
forget what we deserve at the hands of God,—
nothing but punishment; and then we forget all
the mercy and love which He has shewn [sic] us in
His acts and His promises."4

1Wiersbe, p. 209.
2See Allen P. Ross, "When God Gives His People Bitter Water (Exodus 15:22-27)," Exegesis
and Exposition 1:1 (Fall 1986):55-66.
3Y. Aharoni, "Kadesh-Barnea and Mount Sinai," in God's Wilderness: Discoveries in Sinai,

pp. 165-70.
4Wagner, p. 58.
148 Dr. Constable's Notes on Exodus 2021 Edition

"A pattern is thus established here that continues

throughout the narratives of Israel's sojourn in the
wilderness. As the people's trust in the Lord and
in Moses waned in the wilderness, the need grew
for stricter lessons."1

16:4-12 God's purpose was to "test" the Israelites (v. 4): to prove what
they were, not to tempt them to sin (cf. 15:25; 20:20).

"Godliness isn't the automatic result of reading

books and attending meetings; it also involves
bearing burdens, fighting battles, and feeling
pain."2

One manifestation of God's glory (His faithfulness and love)

was His regular provision of manna, that began the next day
and continued for 40 years (v. 7). The "glory of the LORD" here
(His majesty and power) was the evidence of His presence "in
the [cloudy pillar]" (v. 10). This was probably a flash of light
and possibly thunder, both of which later emanated from the
cloud over Mt. Sinai (cf. 19:18).3

16:13-21 "These [quail still] fly in such dense masses that

the Arab boys often kill two or three at a time, by
merely striking at them with a stick as they fly. …
But in spring the quails also come northwards in
immense masses from the interior of Africa, and
return in autumn, when they sometimes arrive so
exhausted, that they can be caught with the hand
…"4

Egyptian art pictures people catching the birds in hand nets.5

The Hebrew word man, translated into Greek as manna, and

transliterated from Greek into the English word "manna," is an
interrogative particle that means "What?" The Greek word

1Sailhamer, The Pentateuch …, p. 273.

2Wiersbe, p. 209.
3See J. Dwight Pentecost, The Glory of God, for how God has and will manifest His glory.
4Keil and Delitzsch, 2:66-67.
5Hannah, p. 134.
2021 Edition Dr. Constable's Notes on Exodus 149

manna means "grain" or "bread." From this has come the idea
that the manna was similar to bread (cf. Ps. 105:40). An
"omer" is about two quarts dry measure (v. 16). The "omer"
is mentioned only in this chapter in the Bible.

"There have been many attempts to explain

manna as a naturally occurring substance that still
might be found in the desert. Some have identified
it as insect or plant secretions. The wording of
these verses [vv. 14, 15] belies every one of
these approaches. The description of the manna
in these two verses (see also [vv. 22-26 and] v.
31) is necessary precisely because it was not a
naturally occurring substance (see the description
in Num. 11:1-15)."1

"… it is evident, from the process of baking into

cakes, that it could not have been the natural
manna of the Arabian desert, for that is too
gummy or unctuous to admit of being ground into
meal."2

"They [the Israelites] probably published Mother

Moses' Cookbook with 1001 [manna] recipes."3

Jesus Christ compared "Himself" to the "manna" (John 6:32-

33, 35, 47-51, 53-58), so it is a type (a divinely intended
illustration) of Christ. Our Lord gave Himself unreservedly, but
each Christian has no more of Him experientially than he or she
appropriates by faith.

"The manna was Israel's only food during forty

years in the wilderness. Christ is the only food of
our souls during our journey towards our promised
rest; nothing else can nourish them—nothing else

1The Nelson …, p. 128.

2Jamieson, et al., p. 119.
3McGee, 1:254.
150 Dr. Constable's Notes on Exodus 2021 Edition

can sustain spiritual life, or enable us to put forth

spiritual strength."1

"It is in the early morning, before the occupations

of the day commence, that the gentle dew of the
Spirit, and with it the bread of life, descends. It is
early in the morning, brethren, that we must go
out to gather it. There is no time for gathering so
good as that [cf. Ps. 5:3]."2

Manna also represents Christ in His humiliation, in the giving of

His flesh so that we might have life (John 6:49-51). To
meditate on Him is to feed on the "True Manna" (John 6:38-
40).

Students of Exodus have explained verse 18 in various ways.

Some old Jewish commentators said it describes what
happened when each family had finished collecting the manna,
and had gathered in their tent to pool their individual amounts.
Each time they did this, they discovered that they had
collected just the right quantity for their needs. Some Christian
commentators have suggested that the Israelites gathered all
the manna each day in one central place, and from there each
family took as needed. There was always enough for everyone.
The former explanation seems to fit the context better.

16:22-30 The Israelites had not yet observed the "Sabbath" or a day of
rest before now (v. 23). This is probably one reason they had
not immediately started observing it faithfully as a special day.
As slaves in Egypt, they had probably worked seven days a
week. However, God was blessing them with a day of rest, and
was now preparing them for the giving of the fourth
commandment (20:8-11). This is the first reference to the
Sabbath as such in Scripture ("'the LORD has given you the
Sabbath … let no man go out of his place on the seventh day.'
So the people rested on the seventh day").3

1Wagner, p. 61.
2Ibid.,
p. 63.
3See Lewis Sperry Chafer, Grace, pp. 183-220, for a full discussion of the Sabbath.
2021 Edition Dr. Constable's Notes on Exodus 151

16:31-36 Evangelical commentators generally have felt that the manna

was a substance unique from any other edible food (v. 31).
Some interpreters believe it was the sap-like secretion of the
tamarisk tree, or the secretion of certain insects common in
the desert.1 In the latter case, the miracle would have been
the timing with which God provided it, as well as the abundance
of it. Normally this sap only flows in the summer months. If this
is the explanation, it was a miracle similar to the plagues, a not
totally unknown phenomenon, but divinely scheduled and
reinforced. Even though there are similarities between these
secretions and the manna, the differences are more
numerous—and point to a unique provision.2 Josephus wrote
that "even now, in all that place, this manna comes down in
rain …"3 But Joshua 5:12 says that the manna "ceased" just
before the Israelites crossed the Jordan River and entered the
Promised Land, and Josephus, apparently inconsistently,
agreed.4

The "Testimony" ("covenant" NRSV) was the tablets of the

Mosaic Law that Aaron later kept in the ark of the covenant
(cf. 25:16). Moses told Aaron to preserve "a pot (jar) [with]
an omerful of manna" before the Lord's presence (vv. 33-34;
cf. Num. 17:10-11).5 These physical objects memorialized
God's faithful provision of both spiritual and physical foods (cf.
Deut. 8:3).

The Israelites were not completely separate from other people during their
years in the wilderness. As they traveled the caravan routes, they would
meet travelers and settlements of nomadic or local tribes from time to
time. They evidently traded with these people (cf. Deut. 2:6-7).
Consequently their total diet was not just manna, milk, and a little meat,
though manna was one of their staple commodities.6

1E.g., F. S. Bodenheimer, "The Manna of Sinai," Biblical Archaeologist 10:1 (February

1947):2-6; John Gray, Joshua, Judges, Ruth, p. 78.
2Cf. Ellison, pp. 89-90; and Davis, pp. 181-83.
3Josephus, Antiquities of …, 3:1:6.
4Ibid., 5:1:4.
5See Sailhamer, The Pentateuch …, pp. 274-75.
6See Itzhaq Beit-Arieh, "Fifteen Years in Sinai," Biblical Archaeology Review 10:4 (July-

August 1984):28-54.
152 Dr. Constable's Notes on Exodus 2021 Edition

God sought to impress major lessons on all of His people through the events
recorded in this chapter. These included His ability and willingness to
provide regularly for their daily needs, and His desire that they experience
His blessing. He gave them Sabbath rest to refresh and strengthen their
spirits, as well as ample, palatable food for their bodies: manna in the
mornings and quail in the evenings. God still provides for His people in both
extraordinary (manna) and ordinary (quail) ways. We should not limit Him
by refusing to accept His provisions—however He may provide for our
needs.

While I was going through seminary, God provided for many of my

classmates by sending them unexpected checks in the mail. He never did
this for me, as far as I recall, though the first four automobiles I owned
were gifts to me. He is infinitely creative in His giving.

3. The lack of water at Rephidim 17:1-7

Again the Israelites complained, this time because there was "no water" to
drink when they "camped at Rephidim" (cf. 15:24). At Marah there was
bad water, but now there was none.

"… the supreme calamity of desert travellers [sic] befell

them—complete lack of water."1

"Every difficulty God permits us to encounter will become

either a test that can make us better or a temptation that can
make us worse, and it's our own attitude that determines
which it will be."2

Rephidim was near the "wilderness of Sinai (Sin)" (v. 1; cf. 19:2; Num.
33:15) and the "Horeb" (Sinai) range of mountains (v. 6). Israel made at
least two stops between the "wilderness of Sin" and "Rephidim": Dophkah
and Alush (Num. 33:12-14), but no recorded events happened there.

The Israelites' grumbling demonstrated lack of faith, since God had

promised to supply their needs (v. 2). They wanted Him to act as they
dictated, rather than waiting for Him to provide as He had promised. This
was how they tested or challenged the Lord (cf. 1 Cor. 10:10). It was

1Cassuto, p. 201.
2Wiersbe, pp. 212-13.
2021 Edition Dr. Constable's Notes on Exodus 153

proper for God to test them (15:25; 16:4), but it was improper for them
to test Him, in the sense of trying His patience. However, they attacked
Moses in their anger (v. 3).

"Here, then, brethren, we see the danger and the sure result
of trusting in man [cf. 1 Cor. 1:12]."1

"One of Moses' most characteristic and praiseworthy traits

was that he took his difficulties to the Lord (v. 4; 15:25;
32:30; 33:8; Num 11:2, 11; 12:13; 14:13-19 et al.)."2

By using his "staff" (v. 5), Moses proved that God was still enabling him to
perform miracles, as he had done in Egypt. He still had divine regal
authority, and the power of God was still with him. The "elders" apparently
accompanied Moses, since they represented the people, and since the
whole nation could not get close enough to witness the miracle.

"Horeb" may refer to the mountain range at the southern tip of the Sinai
Peninsula (v. 6; cf. Deut. 1:2; 1 Kings 19:8), which is also called "Mt. Sinai,"
or "Sinai" may be the name of a particular mountain in that range. This is
the traditional site, but I question it (cf. Deut. 33:2; Gal. 4:25). Wherever
the Horeb range may have been, Moses struck "the rock at Horeb,"
somewhere near these mountains.3

"The striking of the rock pictured the coming death of the

Savior. Water to satisfy the people's thirst came from the rock
that was struck. One day, living water to satisfy spiritual thirst
would come from the death of Jesus, our Rock [cf. Deut.
32:30-31, 37; Isa. 53:10; Zech. 13:7; John 4:10, 14; 7:37; 1
Cor. 10:4]."4

How could water flowing out of a rock satisfy the thirst of millions of
Israelites? Perhaps the water flowed into a bowl-like depression and created
a reservoir, from which such a vast crowd could obtain enough water to
satisfy them.

1Wagner, p. 69.
2Kaiser,"Exodus," p. 406.
3See Aviram Perevolotsky and Israel Finkelstein, "The Southern Sinai Exodus Route in

Ecological Perspective," Biblical Archaeology Review 11:4 (July-August 1985):26-41.

4The Nelson …, p. 130.
154 Dr. Constable's Notes on Exodus 2021 Edition

"Massah" means "testing" or "proof," and "Meribah" means "murmuring,"

"dissatisfaction," or "contention" (v. 7). Except for Joshua 9:18 and Psalm
59:15, all the other references to grumbling in the Old Testament occur in
six chapters of the Pentateuch: Exodus 15, 16, 17, and Numbers 14, 16,
and 17.1 The first name, Massah, commemorated the Israelites' testing of
God, and the second name, Meribah, their quarreling with Moses. They failed
to believe that the Lord was among them as He had promised He would be.

"In our own time the same demand is made, the same
challenge repeated. Men are not satisfied with the moral
evidences of the Being and providence of God, they point to
the physical evils around, the hunger and thirst, the poverty
and misery, the pollution and self-will of our times, crying—If
there be a God, why does He permit these things? Why does
He allow suffering and sorrow? Why does He not interpose?
And then, when the heavens are still silent, they infer that
there is no God, that the sky is an empty eye-socket, and that
there is nothing better than to eat and drink, because death is
an eternal sleep."2

God had assured the Israelites in Egypt that He would bring them into the
Promised Land (3:8, 17; 13:5, 11). Consequently all their grumbling
demonstrated a lack of faith. This second instance of complaining about
lack of water was more serious than the first, because God had previously
provided good water for them in the desert (15:25).

4. The hostility of the Amalekites 17:8-16

Whereas the Israelites had feared the possibility of having to battle the
Egyptians (14:10), they now actually did engage in battle with the
Amalekites.

As with all of Israel's experiences after leaving the Red Sea and before
arriving at Mt. Sinai, God was using this encounter to teach the Israelites
how they were to live as His chosen people. They were not to expect God
to continue to operate as He had during the plagues but were to trust and

1Kaiser, "Exodus," p. 398.

2Meyer, p. 196.
2021 Edition Dr. Constable's Notes on Exodus 155

obey Him on the basis of all His previous revelations to them. God did not
deal with the Amalekites as He had dealt with the Egyptians.

"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."1

George Wagner saw many parallels between Israel's experiences from Egypt
to the Promised Land and the Christian's experiences. At this point he
noted that Amalek's opposition to Israel is similar to the flesh's opposition
to the Christian.2

17:8-13 Moses used the name "Amalek" to represent the Amalekites,

as he often used "Israel" for the Israelites (v. 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 that the Israelites now occupied. They also
inhabited an area in southern Canaan (cf. Gen. 14:7). They
evidently confronted Israel in battle because they felt that
Israel was a threat to their security. Josephus called the
Amalekites "… the most warlike of the nations that lived
thereabout …"3

This is the first biblical reference to "Joshua" (v. 9). Moses

selected him to lead Israel's army of warriors. Moses' "staff"
was the means God used to accomplish miracles for Israel, and
to identify those miracles as coming from Himself (cf. v. 5, et
al.).

"Hur" was the "son of Caleb" (v. 10; 1 Chron. 2:19; this was
not the well-known "Caleb" of later fame in the Books of
Numbers and Joshua), and possibly the grandfather of Bezalel,
the architect of the tabernacle (31:2, et al.). Josephus said

1Durham, p. 234.
2Wagner, pp. 77-86.
3Josephus, Antiquities of …, 3:2:1.
156 Dr. Constable's Notes on Exodus 2021 Edition

Hur was the husband of Miriam.1 He was an important man in

Israel (cf. 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
ver. 11 merely speaks of the raising and dropping
of the hand (in the singular), yet, according to ver.
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."2

"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."3

Moses' actions suggest that he was engaging in intercessory

prayer, although any reference to prayer is absent in the text.
The emphasis is on the rod ("staff") 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

1Ibid.,
3:2:4.
2Keiland Delitzsch, 2:79.
3Durham, p. 236.
2021 Edition Dr. Constable's Notes on Exodus 157

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."1

"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 …"2

"We see here, then brethren, the beautiful

combination of active energy with prayer. One
part of Israel is fighting, the other is praying—both
at the same time. Which, it might be asked, gained
the victory? Both contributed towards it. To have
prayed alone without fighting would have been
presumption. To have fought without prayer
would have been still worse; it would have been
self-dependence. It is easy, however, to see which

1Keil and Delitzsch, 2:79-81.

2Gispen, p. 169.
158 Dr. Constable's Notes on Exodus 2021 Edition

contributed most towards the victory. Which was

felt to be the most important? It was prayer."1

"Not everybody can be a Moses or Joshua, a D. L.

Moody or Billy Graham, but all Christians can be
like Aaron and Hur and help hold their hands as
they obey God."2

Weaker members of the body of Christ can and should sustain

those who are stronger.

"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!"3

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

1Wagner, p. 82.
2Wiersbe, pp. 214-15.
3Meyer, p. 202.
2021 Edition Dr. Constable's Notes on Exodus 159

those means of grace with which it had been

entrusted."1

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 (cf. John 15:5). He was their
Victor, their Champion.

"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."2

Josephus wrote that no Hebrews died in this battle, but

innumerable Amalekites perished.3 However, the Bible does not
substantiate his claim.

17:14-16 This is the first of five instances in the Pentateuch where we

read that Moses wrote down something at the LORD's command
("Write this in a book as a memorial'; cf. 24:4, 7; 34:27; Num.
33:1-2; Deut. 31:9, 24).4 Clearly Moses could write, which
some critics of the Bible have questioned.

God promised the eventual destruction of the Amalekites ("I

will utterly blot out the memory of Amalek"), in order to
strengthen Joshua's faith in God's help against all of Israel's
enemies (v. 14). Later God commanded him to exterminate
("blot out the memory of") the Amalekites after he had
conquered Canaan (Deut. 25:19). The Bible mentions the
Amalekites for the last time in 1 Chronicles 4:43, when a
remnant of them perished in Hezekiah's day. Some
commentators have identified Haman, called an Agagite in the
Book of Esther, with the Amalekites.5 "Agag" was evidently an

1Keil and Delitzsch, 2:81. Cf. Zech. 4:6; John 15:5.

2D. 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.
3Josephus, Antiquities of …, 3:2:5.
4Kaiser, "Exodus," p. 409.
5E.g., Hyatt, p. 183.
160 Dr. Constable's Notes on Exodus 2021 Edition

Amalekite name or title (cf. 1 Sam. 15:32-33). There is serious

question, however, whether Haman was a descendant of the
Amalekites, as some of the better commentaries on Esther
point out.

The "altar" commemorated God's victory, as well as His self-

revelation as the One who would provide victory for Israel
against her enemies ("the LORD will have war against Amalek
from generation to generation," v. 15). The "banner" was a
flag that the victor could raise over his defeated foe. "The LORD
is My Banner" was the name of the altar, not a name for God.

"The sight of Moses so blessing Israel and judging

Amalek would symbolize Yahweh, by whom all
blessing and all cursing were believed to be
empowered; thus the altar was named not 'Moses
is my standard,' or 'The staff of Elohim is my
standard,' but 'Yahweh is my standard.'"1

God set Himself against (predetermined the destruction of)

the Amalekites because they set themselves against His
people and His purposes through them (v. 16).2

"The battle between Yahweh and Amalek will

continue across the generations because the
Amalekites have raised a hand against Yahweh's
throne, that is, they have challenged his
sovereignty by attacking his people."3

"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. … Whereas he [Moses] 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

1Durham, p. 237.
2On God's use of war against His enemies, see Craigie, The Problem …, and John Wenham,
The Goodness of God.
3Durham, p. 237.
2021 Edition Dr. Constable's Notes on Exodus 161

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 [sic
weapon] of prayer."1

"I am convinced beyond any doubt that virtually

all advances for Christ come because of believers
who understand and practice prayer."2

In all the various crises the Israelites had faced since they left Egypt, God
was teaching them to look to Him. They should look to Him for deliverance
from their enemies (at the Red Sea), for health and healing (at Marah), and
for food and guidance (in the wilderness of Sin). They should also look to
Him for water and refreshment (at Massah-Meribah), and for victory over
their enemies in battle (at Rephidim). He was teaching them how dependent
they were on Him, and that they should turn to Him in any and every need
(cf. John 15:5).

Much of the grumbling, distress, and failure that they experienced later,
came on them because they forgot these basic lessons. God had promised
to meet their needs, and had done so faithfully in the past. Likewise, we
get into trouble when we forget these basic lessons. God Himself is a
sufficient resource for His people.

Once again the Lord provided for His people, continued to provide for them,
and proved His presence again to Israel and to Israel's enemies.3

"The present narrative in Exodus 17 appears to have been

shaped by its relationship to the events recorded in Numbers
21:1-3, the destruction of Arad. The two narratives are
conspicuously similar. Here in Exodus 17, the people murmured
over lack of water and Moses gave them water from the rock
(vv. 1-7). They were attacked by the Amalekites but went on
to defeat them miraculously while Moses held up his hands (in
prayer?). So also in the narrative in Numbers 21, after an
account of Israel's murmuring and of getting water from the

1Keiland Delitzsch, 2:78.

2R.Kent Hughes, Living on the Cutting Edge, p.11.
3Durham, p. 238.
162 Dr. Constable's Notes on Exodus 2021 Edition

rock (20:1-13), Israel was attacked but miraculously went on

to defeat the Canaanites because of Israel's vow, which the
narrative gives in the form of a prayer (21:1-3).

"The parallels between the two narratives suggest an

intentional identification of the Amalekites in the Exodus
narratives and [(with)] the Canaanites in Numbers 21:1-3."1

Sailhamer charted the parallel literary structures of the two incidents,

similar to what follows:

A Manna and quail (Exod. 16:4-34)

B 40 years (Exod. 16:35)

C Water from the rock (Exod. 17:1-7)

D Joshua, the next leader (Exod. 17:8-13)

E Battle with the Amalekites (Exod. 17:14-16)

A' Manna and quail (Num. 11:4-34)

B' 40 years (Num. 14:21-22)

C' Water from the rock (Num. 20:1-12)

D' Eleazar, the next priest (Num. 20:23-29)

E' Battle with the Canaanites (Num. 21:1-16)2

5. The friendliness of Jethro the Midianite ch. 18

As a Midianite, "Jethro" was a descendant of Abraham, as was Amalek.

Therefore both were blood relatives of the Israelites. Nevertheless the
attitudes of the Amalekites and Jethro were very different, although Midian
as a nation was hostile to Israel. Set next to each other in the text, as they
are, the experiences of Israel with Amalek and with Jethro illustrate two
different attitudes that other individuals and groups have also held toward

1Sailhamer, The Pentateuch …, pp. 279-80.

2Adapted from ibid., p. 278.
2021 Edition Dr. Constable's Notes on Exodus 163

Israel. These differences have characterized the attitudes of outsiders

toward God's elect throughout history.1

18:1-12 The names of Moses' sons ("Gershom" and "Eliezer"; vv. 3-4)
reflect his personal experiences in the providence of God.
However, not all biblical names carry such significance.

"It is a very precarious procedure to attempt to

analyze the character or disposition of an Old
Testament character on the basis of the
etymology of his name alone."2

Many names were significant (e.g., Abraham, Isaac, Jacob,

Israel, etc.), but not all were.

The "mount of God" (v. 5) is the mountain where God revealed

Himself and His law to Israel: Mt. Sinai. "The wilderness" was
the wilderness near Sinai.

"Moses' summary [vv. 8-10] is a proof-of-

Presence summary, a confession of Yahweh's
powerful protection of and provision for Israel."3

Jethro acknowledged the sovereignty of God ("the LORD is

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

1Cf.Kaiser, "Exodus," p. 408.

2Davis,p. 187.
3Durham, p. 244.
164 Dr. Constable's Notes on Exodus 2021 Edition

18:13-23 Moses was attempting to judge and settle all the disputes in
Israel, and was beginning to experience a crisis of overwork (cf.
Acts 6:1-7). Previously he had had to cope with a lack of food
and a lack of water. This section explains how he overcame the
present crisis. It also explains the beginning of Israel's
legal/justice system. Here we see how the requirements and
instructions of the Mosaic Covenant became accessible to the
ordinary Israelite, and applicable to the problems that arose as
the Israelites oriented their lives to that code.1

Clearly, Israel already at this time had a body of revealed law

(v. 16; cf. 15:26). I shall say more about older ancient Near
Eastern law codes in my comments on 21:1—23:19. God
greatly expanded this with the giving of the Mosaic Covenant.

Evidently the people were becoming unruly, because Moses

was not dispensing justice quickly enough ("If you do this …
all these people also will go to their place in peace" [emphasis
added], i.e., his situation was more stressful than he could
manage; v. 23). Jethro's counsel was wise and practical, and
he presented it as a suggestion, subject to the will of God ("If
God so commands you"; v. 23). Moses may not have realized
the seriousness of the problem he faced. Moses seems to have
been a gifted administrator, who would not have consciously
allowed Israel's social welfare to deteriorate. However, his
"efficiency expert" father-in-law pointed out how he could
manage his time better.

"The fact that Moses acted on Jethro's advice is

almost certain evidence that he recognized that
God was speaking to him through this man."2

Sometimes, when we labor under great stress, we need to

reorganize our activities and time, and delegate some of our
responsibilities.

Notice the importance of modeling and delegating men of

integrity in verse 21 ("men who fear God, men of truth, those

1Ibid.,p. 248.
2G. Campbell Morgan, An Exposition of the Whole Bible, p. 41. See McGee, 1:260-61, for
the view that Jethro's suggestion was not God's will.
2021 Edition Dr. Constable's Notes on Exodus 165

who hate dishonest gain"). Integrity means matching walk with

talk, practicing what one preaches. This has always been an
important qualification for leaders.

"Mr. [Dwight L.] Moody said shrewdly: It is better

to set a hundred men to work, than do the work
of a hundred men. You do a service to a man when
you evoke his latent faculty. It is no kindness to
others or service to God to do more than your
share in the sacred duties of Church life."1

18:24-27 Moses allowed the people to nominate wise, respected men of

integrity from their tribes, whom he appointed as "judges"
("heads"; v. 25; cf. Deut. 1:12-18). These men handled the
routine disputes of the Israelites, and this kept Moses free to
resolve the major problems.

Jethro returned to his native land (v. 27), but he later visited
Moses and his daughter and grandchildren again (cf. Num.
10:29), and perhaps often did so during the following 40
years.

"In times of great crises God always provided men

to lead the way to deliverance. Moses is an
eloquent example of this very fact. The hand of
God providentially prepared this man for this very
moment. He was cognizant of Egyptian manners
and was therefore able to articulate demands
before the King of Egypt. Moses had been trained
in military matters and was therefore capable of
organizing this large mass of people for
movement across the deserts. His training in
Egypt had given him the ability to write and
therefore provided a means by which these
accounts would be recorded for eternity. Forty
years of desert experience had given Moses the
know-how of travel in these areas as well as the
kind of preparation that would be needed to
survive the desert heat. All of this a mere accident

1Meyer, p. 210.
166 Dr. Constable's Notes on Exodus 2021 Edition

of history? No indeed. The history before us is a

supreme example of God's sovereign ability to
accomplish His purposes for His people. Those
who belong to Him have every reason to be
confident that that which God has promised He
will perform."1

"The present narrative has many parallels with the accounts in

Genesis 14 and 15. Just as Melchizedek the priest of Salem
(salem) met Abraham bearing gifts as he returned from the
battle with Amraphel (Ge 14:18-20), so Jethro the Midianite
priest came out with Moses' wife and sons to offer peace
(salom, 18:7; NIV 'they greeted each other') as he returned
from the battle with the Amalekites. … The purpose of these
parallels appears to be to cast Jethro as another Melchizedek,
the paradigm of the righteous Gentile. It is important that
Jethro have such credentials because he plays a major role in
this chapter, instructing Moses, the lawgiver himself, how to
carry out the administration of God's Law to Israel. Thus, just
as Abraham was met by Melchizedek the priest (Ge 14) before
God made a covenant with him in Genesis 15, so Moses is met
by Jethro the priest (Ex 18) before God makes a covenant with
him at Sinai (Ex 19)."2

Melchizedek (Gen. 14:17-24) Jethro (Exod. 18:1-27)

He was a Gentile priest of Salem He was a Gentile priest of Midian

(Gen. 14:18). (Exod. 18:1).

He met Abraham bearing gifts as He met Moses as Moses returned

Abraham returned from defeating from defeating the Amalekites
the Mesopotamians (Gen. 14:18). (Exod. 18:5).

He brought gifts to Abraham (Gen. He brought Moses' wife and sons

14:18). to Moses (Exod. 18:2-6).

1Davis, pp. 189-90.

2Sailhamer, The Pentateuch …, pp. 280-81.
2021 Edition Dr. Constable's Notes on Exodus 167

He was king of peace (Heb. salem, He offered Moses peace (Heb.

Gen. 14:18). salom, Exod. 18:7).

Abraham's heir was Eliezer ("God is Moses' heir was Eliezer ("God is my
my help," Gen. 15:2). help," Exod. 18:4).

Melchizedek praised God for Jethro praised God for rescuing

rescuing Abraham from the Moses from the Egyptians (Exod.
Amalekites (Gen. 14:19-20). 18:10-11).

He offered bread and wine (Gen. He offered sacrifices and ate bread
14:18). with Moses (Exod. 18:12).

In summary, Moses recorded seven experiences that the Israelites had as

they traveled between the Red Sea and Mount Sinai:

1. They praised God with the Song of Moses at the Red Sea (15:1-21).

2. They found no good water at Marah in the wilderness of Shur (15:22-

26).

3. They found food and drink at Elim (15:27).

4. God provided manna and quails in the wilderness of Sin (16:1-36).

5. They found no water at Rephidim (17:1-7).

6. They defeated Amalek in battle at Rephidim (17:8-16).

7. Jethro advised Moses at Mt. Sinai (18:1-27).

B. THE ESTABLISHMENT OF THE MOSAIC COVENANT 19:1—24:11

The Lord had liberated Israel from bondage in Egypt, but now He adopted
the nation into a special relationship with Himself.

"Now begins the most sublime section in the whole Book. The
theme of this section is supremely significant, playing a role of
168 Dr. Constable's Notes on Exodus 2021 Edition

decisive importance in the history of Israel and of humanity as

a whole."1

At Sinai, Israel received the Law and the tabernacle. The Law facilitated the
obedience of God's redeemed people, and the tabernacle facilitated their
worship. Thus the Law and the tabernacle deal with the two major
expressions of the faith of the people redeemed by the grace and power
of God: obedience and worship.

Here begins the fifth dispensation, the dispensation of the Law. It ended
with the death of Christ, who alone fulfilled all its requirements and, as a
"second Moses," superseded it with His own teaching. God gave the
Israelites the law "because of [their] transgressions" (Gal. 3:19), which we
have seen they committed after their redemption. The law taught the
wayward Israelites, and teaches all readers of this history, the awesome
holiness of God (19:10-25) and the exceeding sinfulness of man (Rom.
7:13; 1 Tim. 1:8-10). It also taught and teaches the necessity of obedience
(Jer. 7:23-24), the universality of human failure (Rom. 3:19-20, 23), and
the marvel of God's grace, which provided a way whereby redeemed sinners
could have ongoing relationship with God (Rom. 3:21-22).

The Law did not change the provisions of, or abrogate the promises that
God gave in the Abrahamic Covenant. God did not give it as a means of
justification for unbelievers (Acts 15:10-11; Gal. 2:16, 21; 3:3-9, 14, 17,
24-25), but as a means of sanctification, rules for living, for a redeemed
people. It clarified for them that purity and holiness should characterize
their lives as the people of God. It was "child training," through disciplinary
restriction and correction, designed to prepare them for the coming of
Christ when they as a people would "come of age" (Deut. 6:24; Gal. 3:24,
26; 4:1-7; Titus 2:11-13). The Israelites, however, misinterpreted the
purpose of the Law, and sought to obtain righteousness by their good
deeds and ceremonial ordinances (Acts 15:1; Rom. 9:31—10:3; 1 Tim. 1:8-
10). Israel's history was one long record of violating the Law, even to the
point of rejecting their own Messiah—whom Moses told them to heed
(Deut. 18:15).

Some years ago, a pastor told me that he encouraged his people to follow
the Mosaic Covenant, because the New Testament says it was intended to

1Cassuto, p. 223.
2021 Edition Dr. Constable's Notes on Exodus 169

lead people to Christ (Gal. 3:24). This is a tragic misunderstanding of the

Christian's relationship to the Mosaic Law, to be discussed later.

The Mosaic Covenant is an outgrowth of the Abrahamic Covenant, in the

sense that it was a significant, intimate agreement between God and
Abraham's descendants. By observing it, the Israelites could achieve their
purpose as a nation. This purpose was to both experience God's blessing,
and to be a blessing to all the nations of the earth (Gen. 12:2). In contrast
to the Abrahamic Covenant, Israel now had responsibilities to fulfill in order
to obtain God's promised blessings (v. 5). The Mosaic Covenant was,
therefore, a conditional covenant. The Abrahamic Covenant—as well as the
Davidic and New Covenants that contain expansions of the promises in the
Abrahamic Covenant—was unconditional.

A further contrast is this:

"Whereas the Sinaitic covenant was based on an already

accomplished act of grace and issued in stringent stipulations,
the patriarchal covenant rested only on the divine promise and
demanded of the worshipper only his trust (e.g., ch. 15:6)."1

"The covenant with Israel at Sinai is to bring Israel into a

position of mediatorial service."2

"The major difference between the Mosaic covenant and the

Abrahamic covenant is that the former was conditional and
also was ad interim, that is, it was a covenant for a limited
period, beginning with Moses and ending with Christ. …

"In contrast to the other covenants, the Mosaic covenant,

though it had provisions for grace and forgiveness,
nevertheless builds on the idea that obedience to God is
necessary for blessing. While this to some extent is true in
every dispensation, the Mosaic covenant was basically a works
covenant rather than a grace covenant. The works principle,
however, was limited to the matter of blessing in this life and

1Bright,pp. 91-92.
2Eugene H. Merrill, "The Mosaic Covenant: A Proposal for Its Theological Significance,"
Exegesis and Exposition 3:1 (Fall 1988):29.
170 Dr. Constable's Notes on Exodus 2021 Edition

was not related at all to the question of salvation for

eternity."1

Suppose that a father tells his son that, if he does his chores faithfully, he
will reward him with a bicycle at Christmastime. The son is already in the
family, so doing his chores faithfully has nothing to do with becoming a
member of the family. It is simply a way by which the son can enjoy blessing
in the family. Similarly, God told His children, the Israelites, that if they
carried out the responsibilities that He was laying on them, they could enjoy
blessings from His hand.

The Mosaic Covenant is the heart of the Pentateuch.

"First, it should be pointed out that the most prominent event

and the most far-reaching theme in the Pentateuch, viewed
entirely on its own, is the covenant between Yahweh and Israel
established at Mount Sinai. …

"1) The author of the Pentateuch wants to draw a connecting

link between God's original plan of blessing for mankind and his
establishment of the covenant with Israel at Sinai. Put simply,
the author sees the covenant at Sinai as God's plan to restore
his blessing to mankind through the descendants of Abraham
(Gen 12:1-3; Exod 2:24).

"2) The author of the Pentateuch wants to show that the

Covenant at Sinai failed to restore God's blessing to mankind
because Israel failed to trust God and obey his will.

"3) The author of the Pentateuch wants to show that God's

promise to restore the blessing would ultimately succeed
because God himself would one day give to Israel a heart to
trust and obey God (Deut 30:1-10)."2

The writer interrupted the narrative sections of Exodus with blocks of other
explanatory, qualifying, and cultic material in the chapters that follow.3

1John F. Walvoord, "The New Covenant," in Integrity of Heart, Skillfulness of Hands, pp.
191-92.
2John H. Sailhamer, "Exegetical Notes: Genesis 1:1—2:4a," Trinity Journal 5 NS (Spring

1984):75, 76.
3Durham, p. 258.
2021 Edition Dr. Constable's Notes on Exodus 171

Narr. Other Narr. Other Narr. Other Narr. Other Narr.

19:1- 19:3b- 19:10- 19:19b- 20:1- 20:22— 24:1- 25— 32—

3a 9 19a 25 21 23:33 18 31 34

Another scholar observed the following chiastic structure in chapters 19—

24.1

A Narrative: the covenant offered (19:3-25)

B Law: the Decalogue (20:1-17)

C Narrative: the people's fear (20:18-21)

B' Law: the Book of the Covenant (20:22—23:33)

A' Narrative: the covenant accepted (24:1-11)

1. Preparation for the Covenant ch. 19

Moses revealed God's purpose for giving the Mosaic Covenant in this
chapter.

19:1-6 The Israelites arrived and "camped" at the base of ("in front
of") "the mountain," where God would give them the Law,
about three months after they had left Egypt, in May-June (v.
1). The mountain in the Sinai range, that most scholars have
regarded as the mountain peak referred to in this chapter,
stands in the southeastern part of the Sinai Peninsula. Its name
in Arabic is Jebel Musa, "Mountain of Moses."2 There is a
natural slope to the land to the southeast of this peak, and
another plain to the north, which would have afforded Israel a
good view of the mountain if the people camped there.

1Joe M. Sprinkle, "Law and Narrative in Exodus 19—24," Journal of the Evangelical
Theological Society, 47:2 (June 2004):242.
2SeeIsrael Finkelstein, "Raider of the Lost Mountain—An Israeli Looks at the Most Recent
Attempt to Locate Mt. Sinai," Biblical Archaeology Review 15:4 (July-August 1988):46-
50.
172 Dr. Constable's Notes on Exodus 2021 Edition

"Only the southern peak of this mountain is Jebel

Musa (7363 feet high), while the northern peak is
called Ras es-safsafeh (6540 feet). Before each
peak stretches a plain adequate for the Israelite
encampment, but scholars generally favor the one
before Jebel Musa as the one used."1

However, the location of biblical Mt. Sinai continues to be

uncertain. Josephus described it as follows:

"… mount Sinai, which is the highest of all the

mountains that are in that country, and is not only
very difficult to be ascended by men, on account
of its vast altitude, but because of the sharpness
of its precipices also …"2

The nation stayed at Mt. Sinai 11 months (Num. 10:11). The

record of their experiences here continues through Numbers
10:10.3

Many reliable scholars have considered verses 3-6 to be the

very heart of the Pentateuch, because they contain the classic
expression of the nature and purpose of the theocratic
covenant that God made with Israel, the Mosaic Covenant.
Some scholars believe the covenant referred to is the
Abrahamic Covenant.4 Most believe, rightly I think, that it is
the Mosaic Covenant. The covenant in view was obviously
conditional (v. 5), which the Mosaic Covenant was but the
Abrahamic Covenant was not.

"The meaning of this covenant is expounded in the

introductory verses of chapter 19: the covenant
is an election, 'you belong to me from among all
peoples'; it is a bond, the people will have with
Yahweh the particularly close bond of belonging
which characterizes the priestly function; it is an
obedience, for if Yahweh is king, the members of

1L. Wood, A Survey …, p. 143.

2Josephus, Antiquities of …, 3:5:1.
3See Appendix 2 for a diagram of Moses' Trips Up Mt. Sinai at the end of these notes.
4E.g., William J. Dumbrell, Creation and Covenant, pp. 80-9-; Enns, p. 387.
2021 Edition Dr. Constable's Notes on Exodus 173

the people can only be the subjects who will follow

him everywhere he leads (Ex. 15.18; Num. 23.21;
Dt. 33.5; Jg. 8.23)."1

God gave the Mosaic Law specifically "to the house of Jacob
… the sons of Israel" (v. 3).2

"The image of the eagle [v. 4] is based on the fact

that the eagle, when its offspring learns [sic] to
fly, will catch them on its wings when they fall."3

"Without doubt Exodus 19:4-6 is the most

theologically significant text in the book of
Exodus, for it is the linchpin between the
patriarchal promises of the sonship of Israel and
the Sinaitic Covenant whereby Israel became the
servant nation of Yahweh."4

God's promise to Israel here (vv. 5-6) went beyond what He

had promised Abraham. If Israel would be obedient to God, He
would do three things for the nation (cf. Josh. 24:15):

1. Israel would become God's special treasure ("My own

possession," i.e., royal property;5 v. 5). This means that
Israel would enjoy a unique relationship with God
compared with all other nations. This was not due to any
special goodness in Israel, but strictly to the sovereign
choice of God.6

2. Israel would become a "kingdom of priests" (v. 6). This

is the first occurrence in Scripture of the word

1Jacob, p. 212.
2For an illustration of the confusion that failure to observe this fact can create in teaching
on the Christian's relationship to the Law, see Sakae Kubo, "Why then the Law?" Ministry
(March 1980), pp. 12-14.
3Gispen, p. 179.
4Merrill, "A Theology …," p. 32. Cf. Dumbrell, pp. 80-81.
5Enns, p. 388.
6See Charlie Trimm, "Did YHWH Condemn the Nations When He Elected Israel? YHWH's

Disposition Toward Non-Israelites in the Torah," Journal of the Evangelical Theological

Society 55:3 (September 2012):521-36.
174 Dr. Constable's Notes on Exodus 2021 Edition

"kingdom" as referring to God's rule through men on

earth.

"This is to be no ordinary kingdom where

men will rule upon earth in their own right,
but rather a kingdom 'unto me,' that is,
unto Jehovah. In other words, whatever else
its characteristics may be, it is to be, first
of all, God's kingdom."1

A priest stands between God and people. Israel could

become a nation of "mediators" standing between God
and the other nations, responsible for bringing them to
God and God to them. Israel would not be a kingdom run
by politicians, depending on strength and wit, but one of
priests, depending on faith in Yahweh: a "servant nation"
rather than a ruling nation.2

3. Israel would become "a holy nation" (v. 6). "Holy" means
"set apart" and therefore "different." The Israelites
would become different from other peoples, because
they would devote themselves to God, and separate
from sin and defilement as they obeyed the law of God.
In these notes, I have capitalized "Law" when referring
to the Pentateuch, the Law of Moses, or the Ten
Commandments—and have used the lowercase "law" for
all other references to law.

In short, Israel could have become a testimony to the whole

world, of how glorious it can be to live under the government
of God. The people experienced these blessings only partially,
because their obedience was partial. Israel's disobedience to
the Mosaic Covenant did not invalidate any of God's promises
to Abraham, however. Those promises did not rest on Israel's
obedience, as these did (cf. Gen. 15:17-21 and Exod. 19:5-
6).3 I do not believe that God was giving the Israelites a choice

1McClain, p. 61.
2Durham, p. 263.
3See Arnold G. Fruchtenbaum, "Israel and the Church," in Issues in Dispensationalism, pp.

113-15, for a good discussion of Israel's national election and how this relates to the
individual election of Israelites.
2021 Edition Dr. Constable's Notes on Exodus 175

between living under grace or under law, as some have

advocated.1

19:7-15 The reaction of the Israelites to God's promises was

understandably positive, and God approved it (Deut. 5:27-28).
They wanted what God offered them. However, they
overestimated their own ability to keep the covenant, and they
underestimated God's standards for them. This twin error is
traceable to a failure to appreciate their own sinfulness and
God's holiness. The Mosaic Law would teach them to
appreciate both more realistically (cf. Deut. 5:29).

"Man naturally believes in, and depends on,

himself. And he must learn, at bitter cost often,
of his own helplessness."2

God designed the procedures He specified in verses 10-15 to

help the people realize the difference between their holy God
and their sinful selves. Notice that God separated Himself from
the Israelites spatially and temporally.

"It becomes us to appear in clean clothes [v. 10]

when we wait upon great men; so clean hearts are
required in our attendance on the great God, who
sees them as plainly as men see our clothes."3

The temporary prohibition against normal sexual relations ("do

not go near a woman"; v. 15) seems intended to impress the
importance of this occasion on the Israelites and to help them
concentrate on it. We should not infer from this command that
a married couple's normal sexual relations are sinful (cf. Gen.
1:28; 9:1, 7). Abstention was for ritual cleanness, not moral
cleanness.

19:16-25 God again used the symbol of fire to reveal Himself on this
mountain (3:2-5). "Fire" is a symbol of His holiness that
enlightens, purges, and refines. The "smoke" and "quaking"
that accompanied the fire further impressed this awesome

1E.g.,
McGee, 1:262.
2Newell, p. 163.
3Henry, p. 92.
176 Dr. Constable's Notes on Exodus 2021 Edition

revelation on the people. The "very loud trumpet sound"

evidently came from heaven (cf. Matt. 24:31; 1 Cor. 15:52; 1
Thess. 4:16; Rev. 8:13). Immanuel Velikovsky proposed that a
volcanic eruption took place with accompanying trumpet-like
sounds, though he acknowledged that the traditional Mt. Sinai
is not volcanic.1

The "priests" referred to (vv. 22, 24) were evidently young

men (firstborn?) who offered sacrifices before God appointed
the Aaronic priests to this service (cf. 24:5).

Comparative ancient Near Eastern studies have revealed that the covenant
form and terminology that God used to communicate His agreement with
Israel were common in Moses' day. There were two basic types of formal
covenants in the ancient Near East: parity (between equals) and suzerainty
(between a sovereign and his subjects). The Mosaic Covenant was a
suzerainty treaty. Such agreements characteristically contained a preamble
(v. 3), historical prologue (v. 4), statement of general principles (v. 5a),
consequences of obedience (vv. 5b-6a), and consequences of disobedience
(omitted here). In 1977, Kenneth Kitchen wrote the following:

"Some forty different [suzerainty] treaties … are known to us,

covering seventeen centuries from the late third millennium BC
well into the first millennium BC, excluding broken fragments,
and now additional ones still to be published from Ebla."2

Thus the form in which God communicated His covenant to Moses and Israel
was undoubtedly familiar to them. It enabled them to perceive better the
nature of the relationship into which they were entering.3

The Mosaic Law consisted of three classes of requirements: those

governing moral life (the Ten Commandments), those governing religious
life (the ceremonial ordinances), and those governing civil life (the civil
statutes). The commandments expressed the righteous will of God (Exod.
20), the judgments governed Israel's social life (Exod. 21:1—24:11), and

1Velikovsky,pp. 108-11.
2Kenneth Kitchen, The Bible In Its World, p. 79.
3See George E. Mendenhall, Law and Covenant in Israel and the Near East; Meredith Kline,

The Treaty of the Great King; and F. C. Fensham, "Extra-biblical Material and the
Hermeneutics of the Old Testament with Special Reference to the Legal Material of the
Covenant Code," OTWSA 20 & 21 (1977 & 78):53-65.
2021 Edition Dr. Constable's Notes on Exodus 177

the ordinances determined Israel's religious life (Exod. 24:12—31:18). God

gave the whole Law specifically for the nation of Israel (v. 3). It is very
important to recognize how comprehensive the Mosaic Law was, and not
limit it to the Ten Commandments.1 The rabbis, after Maimonides, counted
613 commands, 248 positive and 365 negative, in the law.2 Maimonides
was a Jewish philosopher and exegete who lived in the twelfth century A.D.
and wrote Sepher Mitzvoth ("Book of the Commandments"), the definitive
Jewish list of laws in the Pentateuch.3

"'From Moses to Moses there arose none like unto Moses,' was
the verdict of posterity upon Maimonides, the most influential
Jewish thinker in the Middle Ages. As an expounder of Judaism,
as a philosopher, as a lover of learning, as a gentle, human
character, few have surpassed him in Jewish history."4

There were three categories of law in Israel:

1. "Crimes" were actions that the community prohibited under the will
of God and punished in its name. Murder (Exod. 21:12), adultery
(Lev. 20:10; Deut. 22:22), and the kidnapping of persons for sale
outside Israel (Exod. 21:16) are examples of crimes. These offenses
resulted in the punishment of the guilty party by the community as
a community (Exod. 21:12-16).

2. "Torts" were civil wrongs that resulted in an action by the injured

party against the party who had wronged him. Assault (Exod. 21:18-
27), the seduction of an unmarried or betrothed girl (Exod. 22:16-
17), and theft of animals or other property (Exod. 22:1-4) are
examples of torts. Conviction resulted in the guilty party paying
damages to the injured party (Exod. 21:18-27).

3. "Family law" did not involve the courts, but the head of the
household administered it in the home. Divorce (Deut. 24:1-4), the
making of slavery permanent (Exod. 21:1-6), and adoption (cf. Gen.
15:2; 30:3; 48:5, 12; 2 Sam. 7:14; Ps. 2:7) are examples. In these

1See McClain, pp. 65-90: "The Constitution and Laws of the Kingdom in History."
2Edersheim, p. 129, f. 5.
3For a summary of Maimonides' list, see the Appendix in Sailhamer, The Pentateuch …,

pp. 481-516.
4Sachar, p. 178.
178 Dr. Constable's Notes on Exodus 2021 Edition

cases, the head of the household acted unilaterally. He did not,

however, have the power of life or death.1

God gave the Mosaic Law to the Israelites for several purposes:

1. To reveal the holiness of God (1 Peter 1:15)

2. To reveal the sinfulness of man (Gal. 3:19)

3. To reveal the standard of holiness required of those in fellowship with

God (Ps. 24:3-5)

4. To supervise physical, mental, and spiritual development of

redeemed Israelites until they should come to maturity in Christ (Gal.
3:24; Ps. 119:71-72)

5. To be the unifying principle that made the establishment of the

nation possible (Exod. 19:5-8; Deut. 5:27-28)

6. To separate Israel from the nations in order to enable them to

become a kingdom of priests (Exod. 19:5-6; 31:13)

7. To make provision for forgiveness of sins and restoration to

fellowship (Lev. 1—7)

8. To make provision for a redeemed people to worship by observing

and participating in the yearly festivals (Lev. 23)

9. To provide a test that would determine whether one was in the

kingdom (theocracy) over which God ruled (Deut. 28)

10. To reveal Jesus Christ.

J. Dwight Pentecost concluded his article on the purpose of the Law, from
which I took the preceding 10 points, by pointing out the following:

1See Anthony Phillips, Ancient Israel's Criminal Law; and idem, "Some Aspects of Family
Law in Pre-Exilic Israel," Vetus Testamentum 23 (1973):349-361, for further discussion
of these categories.
2021 Edition Dr. Constable's Notes on Exodus 179

"… there was in the Law that which was revelatory of the
holiness of God…" There was also" … that in the Law which
was regulatory."1

"It is extremely important to remember that the Law of Moses

was given to a redeemed people, not to redeem a people."2

"… it is also possible that the Pentateuch has intentionally

included this selection of laws for another purpose, that is, to
give the reader an understanding of the nature of the Mosaic
Law and God's purpose in giving it to Israel. Thus it is possible
to argue that the laws in the Pentateuch are not there to tell
the reader how to live but rather to tell the reader how Moses
was to live under the law.

"This understanding of the purpose of the laws in the

Pentateuch is supported by the observation that the
collections of laws in the Pentateuch appear to be incomplete
and selective. The Pentateuch as such is not designed as a
source of legal action. That the laws in the Pentateuch are
incomplete is suggested by the fact that many aspects of
ordinary community life are not covered in these laws."3

John Calvin understood the function of the moral part of the Mosaic law as
being threefold: to convict people of their unrighteousness, to restrain
people by fear of punishment, and to educate people concerning God's will
for them.4 J. Sidlow Baxter gave three reasons why God gave Israel the
Mosaic Law: to provide a standard of righteousness, to expose and identify
sin, and to reveal the Divine holiness.5

A movement that has gained some followers, especially in the United

States, is the "Christian Reconstruction" movement, also known as the
"theonomy" movement, and the "Chalcedon school." Its central thesis is
that God intended the Mosaic Law to be normative for all people for all
time. Its advocates look forward to a day when Christians will govern

1J. Dwight Pentecost, "The Purpose of the Law," Bibliotheca Sacra 128:511 (July-
September 1971):233. See also idem, Thy Kingdom …, pp. 88-93.
2Ibid., p. 87. Cf. Johnson, p. 68.
3Sailhamer, "The Mosaic …," pp. 244, 245.
4John Calvin, Institutes of the Christian Religion, 2:7:6, 10, and 12.
5J. Sidlow Baxter, Explore the Book, 1:87.
180 Dr. Constable's Notes on Exodus 2021 Edition

everyone using the Old Testament as the law book. Reconstructionism

rests on three foundational points: presuppositional apologetics,
"theonomy" (lit. "the rule of God"), and postmillennialism. The main flaw in
this system, from my perspective, is failure to distinguish God's purposes
for Israel from His purposes for the church.1

"Theonomy used to be an attractive lens through which to

read Scripture for many Christians, particularly in Reformed and
Pentecostal circles in the 1970s and into the 1990s, among
those who looked with horror at the secularization of society
and longed for a more powerful Christian influence.
Fortunately, as we begin the twenty-first century this
movement has lost significant influence."2

The whole Mosaic Law, in all of its parts, was given to the nation of Israel,
not to the church (cf. 19:3). Israel was a physical nation: with a homeland,
a capital city (eventually), citizens composed of Jews and naturalized
proselytes, and believers and nonbelievers. The church is a spiritual nation:
with no homeland on this earth, no capital city on earth, citizens composed
of Jews and Gentiles without distinction, and believers only.

What is the Christian's relationship to the Mosaic Law? We are not under it
(Rom. 10:4; 1 Cor. 9:20; Gal. 5:18; Heb. 7:12). It is not the code that
regulates the behavior of believers today, though 9 of the Ten
Commandments have been incorporated into (repeated in) the covenant
under which we live, the exception being the fourth commandment. Are
Christians under any code of laws, like the Israelites were? Yes. Paul
referred to our code of laws as the Law of Christ (Gal. 6:2; 1 Cor. 9:21).
Other names are the Law of Liberty (James 1:25; 2:12) and the New
Covenant (2 Cor. 3:6; Heb. 8:8, 13; 12:24).

1Fora popular introduction to this movement, see Gary DeMar, The Debate over Christian
Reconstruction, pp. 13-55; Rodney Clapp, "Democracy as Heresy," Christianity Today
(February 20, 1987), pp. 17-23. See also Robert Lightner, "Theological Perspectives on
Theonomy," Bibliotheca Sacra 143:569 (January-March 1986):26-36; 143:570 (April-
June 1986):134-45; and 143:571 (July-September 1986):228-45, for a scholarly
dispensational critique; and Meredith Kline, "Comments on an Old-New Error," Westminster
Theological Journal 41:1 (Fall 1978):172-89, for a scholarly reformed evaluation of the
movement. The essay by Douglas Chismar and David Raush, "Regarding Theonomy: An
Essay of Concern," Journal of the Evangelical Theological Society 27:3 (September
1984):315-23, is also helpful.
2Longman and Dillard, p. 76.
2021 Edition Dr. Constable's Notes on Exodus 181

There are similarities and differences between the Law of Moses and the
Law of Christ. They both contain positive and negative commands. Some
of the commands in both are identical, but other commands appear in one
code but not the other. Similarly, there are many of the same commands
in English law as there are in American law. For example, it is illegal to
commit murder under both codes of law. But there are also significantly
different commands. For example, under English law it is illegal to drive on
the right hand side of the road, but under American law it is illegal to drive
on the left side. The empowerment of the Holy Spirit is not the only
difference between the two covenants, as some Christians assume.

What value does the Mosaic Law have for Christians today? All Scripture is
profitable (2 Tim. 3:16), and the Mosaic Law is part of Scripture. The
Mosaic Code had two main purposes: regulatory and revelatory. Calvin
called these their ceremonial and moral purposes. The Mosaic Law does not
regulate or rule over the lives of Christians, as it did the lives of the
Israelites (Gal. 4:8-11), but it does reveal much about God, man, and our
relationship. Therefore we should read and study this portion of Scripture,
even though we are not obligated to keep all of the commands (i.e.,
observe all its ceremonies).

We can tell which ones we are to keep by comparing the Law of Moses with
the Law of Christ. The "Law of Christ" consists of all the teaching that
Christ gave, both during His earthly ministry, and through His apostles and
prophets after He went back to heaven (cf. Acts 1:1-2). Principles revealed
in the Mosaic Law can help us to clarify our responsibilities as well. For
example, we can learn what it means to "love our neighbor" by observing
how God wanted the Israelites to treat non-Israelites.

Were the Israelites saved by keeping the Mosaic Law? No. They were saved
by faith, not by works (Rom. 3:18-30).

Two brothers were crossing the Atlantic Ocean on a ship. They had decided
to immigrate to America from their European homeland. Standing by the
rail, looking out over the water, one brother said to the other, "How are we
going to become citizens of the United States?" His brother replied, "I think
you have to keep all the laws of the land to become a citizen." That, of
course, is not true. One has to go through a naturalization process to
become a citizen; he or she does not need to keep all the laws of the land.
Yet many people believe that in order to become a citizen of heaven, one
must keep all the rules that God has laid out for His people. On the contrary,
182 Dr. Constable's Notes on Exodus 2021 Edition

though, He has established a naturalization process, which involves trusting

in the Person and work of His Son.

The biblical covenants are the basis for our understanding God's great plans
and purposes for humanity throughout history. Dispensationalists
emphasize the biblical covenants (Abrahamic, Mosaic, Davidic, New, et al.).
The theological covenants (redemption, works, grace) are also explanations
of how God is working with humanity. Covenant theologians put much
emphasis on these covenants. Dispensational explanations are more
persuasive to me.

2. The Ten Commandments 20:1-17

"We now reach the climax of the entire Book, the central and
most exalted theme, all that came before being, as it were, a
preparation for it, and all that follows, a result of, and
supplement to it."1

There are two types of law in the Old Testament, and these existed
commonly in the ancient Near East.

Apodictic laws are commands with the force of categorical imperatives.

They are positive or negative. The Ten Commandments are an example of
this type of law, which occurs almost exclusively in the Old Testament, and
rarely in other ancient Near Eastern law codes. "Thou shalt …" and "Thou
shalt not …" identify this type of law.

Casuistic laws are commands that depend on qualifying circumstances.

They are also positive or negative, and there are many examples in the
Mosaic Law (e.g., 21:2-11, et al.), as well as in other ancient Near Eastern
law codes. This type of law is identifiable by the "If … then …" construction.

Compared with other ancient Near Eastern codes, the Decalogue (Ten
Commandments) is positive and concise.

"Six [other ancient Near Eastern codes] are known: (1) the Ur-
nammu code, c. 2050 B.C., from the Third Dynasty of Ur; (2)
the code of Balalama, c. 1925 B.C., from Eshnunna; (3) the
code of Lipit-Ishtar, c. 1860 B.C., from Isin; (4) the code of

1Cassuto, p. 235.
2021 Edition Dr. Constable's Notes on Exodus 183

Hammurabi, c. 1700 B.C., from Babylon; (5) the Hittite code,

c. 1450 B.C., from Boghazkoi; and (6) the Assyrian code, c.
1350 B.C., from Assur."1

God allowed the Israelites much freedom. There were comparatively few
restrictions on their personal behavior (cf. Gen. 1:29-30; 2:16-17).

"The Ten Commandments were unique in Old Testament times

because they possessed prohibitions in the second person
singular and because they stressed both man's exclusive
worship of one God and man's honoring the other person's
body, rights, and possessions. Breaking these commandments
would result in spiritual confusion and in human exploitation."2

The Ten Commandments use verbs, not nouns. Nouns leave room for
debate, but verbs do not. God gave His people ten commandments, not
ten suggestions. They were designed to bring order back into life following
the chaos that sin and enslavement produce.3

Though Moses did not mention it here, angels played some part in
mediating the law from God to the Israelites through him (cf. Deut. 33:2;
Gal. 3:19; Heb. 2:2).

Preface 20:1-2

These verses form a preamble and historical background to the Decalogue

that follows. They provide a frame of mind with which the Israelites were
to understand what follows. The Israelites were to obey God on the double
basis of who He is ("I am the LORD your God") and what He had done ("who
brought you out of the land of Egypt") for them.

"The law, in other words, is connected to grace. It is based on

God's gracious act of saving his people; it is not a condition of
becoming God's people, for that has already happened in the
Exodus."4

1L. Wood, A Survey …, pp. 149-50. See also Mendenhall; and Pritchard, pp. 159-98.
2Livingston, The Pentateuch …, p. 158.
3See Terence E. Fretheim, Exodus, p. 204; Enns, p. 411.
4Ibid., p. 412.
184 Dr. Constable's Notes on Exodus 2021 Edition

Most scholars have divided the Ten Commandments (cf. Deut. 5:6-18) into
two groups, but in two different ways:

The older Jewish method, called "Philonic" after the Jewish scholar Philo,
was to divide them in two groups of five commandments each. The Jews
believed that this was how God divided them on the two tablets of stone.1

The newer Christian method, called "Augustinian" after the church father
Augustine (who followed Origin in this view), divided them into the first
four and the last six commandments.2 The basis for this division is subject
matter. The first four commands deal with man's relationship with God, and
the last six with his relationship with other people (cf. Matt. 22:36-40). (A
similar arrangement exists in Jesus' teaching on the Lord's Prayer [Matt.
6:9-13; Luke 11:2-4].)

Some scholars believe that each tablet originally contained all ten
commandments, in keeping with the ancient Near Eastern custom of
making duplicate copies of covenant documents.3

"Before the discovery of ancient treaty patterns and their

relation to the Ten Commandments, many people assumed
that the two tables of the Law (see 34:1) were divided on the
basis of laws relating to God and those relating to other
people. In this approach the fifth command, in this verse
[v.12], would begin the second tablet. Following our
understanding of ancient treaties, however, it is probable that
each of the tablets contained all ten commandments. In the
ancient world, one copy of a treaty would be placed in the
principal temple of each contracting party. Here both copies
were kept together before God and the people in the Most Holy
Place."4

One of the questions that readers of the Ten Commandments often have
is: "Why were these particular commands chosen, rather than some

1See Josephus, Antiquities of …, 3:5:8.

2So also did Calvin, 2:8:12.
3Kline, Treaty of …, ch. 2: "The Two Tables of the Covenant," pp. 13-26; idem,

"Deuteronomy," in The Wycliffe Bible Commentary, p. 161; and Jack S. Deere,

"Deuteronomy," in The Bible Knowledge Commentary: Old Testament, p. 270.
4The Nelson …, p. 136.
2021 Edition Dr. Constable's Notes on Exodus 185

others?" For example, why did God prohibit "false witness" rather than
"lying" (Exod. 20:16)? Calvin answered this question as follows:

"… God has set forth by way of example the most frightful and
wicked element in every kind of transgression, at the hearing
of which our senses might shudder, in order that he might
imprint upon our minds a greater detestation of every sort of
sin."1

This explanation concludes that God had more in mind than just bearing
false witness, for example. Jesus clarified, in the Sermon on the Mount, that
this was indeed God's intent (cf. Matt. 5:21-22, 27-28, et al). In the
exposition to follow, I will record what Calvin understood to be the larger
meaning of each commandment and its rationale.

Additionally, these commandments were given to the Israelites as a

community. God intended them to govern the life of the nation, not just
the behavior of individual Israelites.

The first commandment 20:3

"The Lutheran and Roman Catholic churches follow Augustine

in making verses 2-6 the first commandment, and then dividing
verse 17, on covetousness, into two. Modern Judaism makes
verse 2 the first commandment and verses 3-6 the second.
The earliest division, which can be traced back at least as far
as Josephus, in the first century A.D., takes 20:3 as the first
command and 20:4-6 as the second. This division was
supported unanimously by the early church, and is held today
by the Eastern Orthodox and most Protestant churches."2

Some scholars have argued that the first commandment comprises verses
3-6, the second commandment verse 7, etc., and the tenth commandment
begins, "You shall not covet your neighbor's wife" in verse 17b.3 Most
scholars do not accept this view.

This commandment was a call to monolatry (the worship of only one God)
and faithfulness to the Lord. Israel was to have "no other gods" besides

1Calvin, 2:8:10.
2Johnson, p. 69.
3E.g., Sailhamer, The Pentateuch …, pp. 284-85.
186 Dr. Constable's Notes on Exodus 2021 Edition

Yahweh. He was not just to be the first among several (henotheism) since
He is the only God (monotheism; cf. 1 Cor. 10:31; 1 Tim. 2:5; Acts 14:15;
James 2:19; 1 John 5:20-21)!

"Yahweh had opened himself to a special relationship with

Israel, but that relationship could develop only if Israel
committed themselves to Yahweh alone. Yahweh had rescued
them and freed them, delivered them and guided them, then
come to them. The next step, if there was to be a next step,
belonged to them. If they were to remain in his Presence, they
were not to have other gods."1

"The purpose of this commandment is that the Lord wills alone

to be pre-eminent among his people, and to exercise complete
authority over them. To effect this, he enjoins us to put far
from us all impiety and superstition, which either diminish or
obscure the glory of his divinity. For the same reason he
commands us to worship and adore him with true and zealous
godliness. The very simplicity of the words well-nigh expresses
this. For we cannot 'have' God without at the same time
embracing the things that are his. Therefore, in forbidding us
to have strange gods, he means that we are not to transfer to
another what belongs to him. Even though there are
innumerable things that we owe to God, yet they may be
conveniently grouped in four headings: (1) adoration (to which
is added as an appendix, spiritual obedience of the
conscience), (2) trust, (3) invocation, (4) thanksgiving."2

The second commandment 20:4-6

"As the first commandment forbids any association with other

gods to those who would be Yahweh's, the second
commandment and the two that follow it set special
dimensions of their relationship with him."3

1Durham, p. 285.
2Calvin,
2:8:16.
3Durham, p. 285.
2021 Edition Dr. Constable's Notes on Exodus 187

"In the first commandment worshipping a false god is

forbidden; in this, worshipping the true God in a false manner."1

This command was a prohibition against making images ("an idol") or

"likeness[es]" of Yahweh, or any other thing as an object of worship. God
did not forbid making pictures or images of angels, people, animals, or other
creatures. The rationale behind this command is that any likeness of God
demeans Him, and hinders—rather than advances—His worship.2

"It can hardly be doubted that this rejection of any formal

representation of Yahweh voices a conviction that God, though
always close at hand, cannot be adequately presented under
any form derived from Nature."3

Furthermore, by making an image of a god, people put themselves in a

position of sovereignty over the deity represented by the image. God
wanted His people to accept their place as the "creatures" of the Creator.
The Israelite who made an image of Yahweh would put himself or herself in
the position of "the creator," and Yahweh in the place of a created thing.
Also, he or she would face the temptation to confuse the image with God,
and worship it rather than Him.

"We may not make images of God for He has already done so!
We are His images; it is we who are in His likeness. This is the
reason God values people so much: We are made to reflect His
majesty on earth."4

Human sinfulness obscures God's image in man, but we learn what God is
like by observing human beings and human behavior. The perfect man,
Jesus Christ, manifested God perfectly (Col. 1:15).

"The purpose of this commandment, then, is that he does not

will that his lawful worship be profaned by superstitious rites.
To sum up, he wholly calls us back and withdraws us from petty
carnal observances, which our stupid minds, crassly conceiving
of God, are wont to devise. And then he makes us conform to

1Thomas Watson, The Ten Commandments, p. 59.

2See Calvin, 1:11:1 and 2; J. I. Packer, Knowing God, pp. 38-44..
3Walther Eichrodt, Theology of the Old Testament, 1:215.
4The Nelson …, p. 5.
188 Dr. Constable's Notes on Exodus 2021 Edition

his lawful worship, that is, a spiritual worship established by

himself. …

"The commandment has two parts. The first restrains our

license from daring to subject God, who is incomprehensible,
to our sense perceptions, or to represent him by any form. The
second part forbids us to worship any images in the name of
religion."1

"Our religious worship must be governed by the power of faith,

not by the power of imagination."2

The consequences of disobedience to this command would continue for a

few ("the third or fourth") "generation[s]," as the later history of Israel
illustrated. However, obedience to it would result in blessing for limitless
generations ("to thousands"; cf. Deut. 7:9-10). Disobedience to this
commandment, indeed all of them, had societal consequences.

"Yahweh's jealousy is a part of his holiness (Exod 34:14) and

is demanded by what he is. It is justified by the fact that it
comes only upon those who, having promised to have no God
but him, have gone back on that promise. Those who do so
show that they 'hate' him, that they hold him in contempt:
upon them in result must come a deserved judgment, across
four generations."3

"The use of images and the human control of the god that was
a part of their use would infringe on the freedom of Yahweh to
manifest himself when and how he sovereignly determined. By
prohibiting the one means by which the gods of the people
around Israel supposedly manifested themselves Israel was
protected from the assimilation of foreign religious values, and
the prohibition of images played a significant role in the
successful survival of Israel's religion. It seems clear that the
prohibition of images both in practice and in its theological
basis is but another example of the fundamentally different

1Calvin,
2:8:17.
2Henry,p. 93.
3Durham, p. 287. See also Packer, pp. 151-58.
2021 Edition Dr. Constable's Notes on Exodus 189

religious value-system that distinguished Israel from her

ancient Near Eastern contemporaries."1

"Through sacrifice to the idol, large amounts of material

productivity were funneled into the control of the Canaanite
priestly and royal classes. The idol was therefore a kind of tax
or tribute gathering device. In this context, Israelite hostility
to cultic images yields to a possible two-fold interpretation.
First, by repudiating the cultic image, Israel rid itself of an
important source of wealth for the ruling classes, thereby
thwarting possible internal programs seeking to re-establish
political hierarchy. Second, frontier Israel was insuring [sic
ensuring] that agricultural goods used in cultic sacrifice would
be circulated back into the producing community [cf. Deut.
12:5-7; 26:12-15]. An imageless cult was one way of
enhancing political and economic self-sufficiency."2

The third commandment 20:7

Taking God's "name … in vain" (emptily, carelessly, or profanely) means

using the name of God in a common way. The name of God represents the
Person of God. The Israelites were to show respect for the Person of God
by their use of His name. They were not to use it simply for emphasis, or
for any unworthy objective in their speech (cf. Matt. 5:33-37; James 5:12).

"The third commandment is directed not toward Yahweh's

protection, but toward Israel's. Yahweh's name, specifically the
tetragrammaton but in principle all Yahweh's names and titles,
must be honored, blessed, praised, celebrated, invoked,
pronounced, and so shared. To treat Yahweh's name with
disrespect is to treat his gift lightly, to underestimate his
power, to scorn his Presence, and to misrepresent to the family
of humankind his very nature as 'The One Who Always Is.'"3

The "tetragrammaton" refers to the four-letter Hebrew name "YHWH."

1Edward M. Curtis, "The Theological Basis for the Prohibition of Images in the Old
Testament," Journal of the Evangelical Theological Society 28:3 (September 1985):287.
2James M. Kennedy, "The Social Background of Early Israel's Rejection of Cultic Images: A

Proposal," Biblical Theology Bulletin 17:4 (October 1987):138.

3Durham, p. 288.
190 Dr. Constable's Notes on Exodus 2021 Edition

"The purpose of this commandment is: God wills that we hallow

the majesty of his name. Therefore, it means in brief that we
are not to profane his name by treating it contemptuously and
irreverently. …

"We must, in my opinion, diligently observe the three following

points: First, whatever our mind conceives of God, whatever
our tongue utters, should savor of his excellence, match the
loftiness of his sacred name, and lastly, serve to glorify his
greatness. Secondly, we should not rashly or perversely abuse
his Holy Word and worshipful mysteries either for the sake of
our own ambition, or greed, or amusement; but, as they bear
the dignity of his name imprinted upon them, they should ever
be honored and prized among us. Finally, we should not defame
or detract from his works, as miserable men are wont abusively
to cry out against him, but whatever we recognize as done by
him we should speak of with praise of his wisdom,
righteousness, and goodness. That is what it means to hallow
God's name."1

"We take God's name in vain, [1] By hypocrisy, making a

profession of God's name, but not living up to that profession.
Those that name the name of Christ, but do not depart from
iniquity, name it in vain. [2] By covenant-breaking; if we make
promises to God, binding our souls with those bonds to that
which is good, and yet perform not to the Lord our vows, we
take his name in vain (Matt. v. 23). [3] By rash swearing,
mentioning the name of God as a by-word, to no purpose at
all, or to no good purpose. [4] By false swearing. One part of
the religious regard the Jews were taught to pay to their God
was to swear by his name, Deut. x. 20. But they affronted him,
instead of doing him honour, if they called him to be witness
to a lie."2

Taking God's name in vein also includes saying something false about God,
and using His name to curse others.3

1Calvin,2:8:22. See his discussion of oaths in 2:8:23-27.

2Henry, p. 94.
3Enns, p. 417.
2021 Edition Dr. Constable's Notes on Exodus 191

The fourth commandment 20:8-11

The "Sabbath (lit. "Rest") day" was the seventh day of the week, Saturday.
This day was to be a day of rest for Israel, because God ceased from His
creation activity on the seventh day (Gen. 2:3). To "remember" the day
does not mean simply to recall it from memory but to act appropriately in
view of the significance of the day.

"If the miracle of creation was not finished within six literal
twenty-four-hour days, there is no foundation for keeping the
fourth commandment."1

God "blessed" the Sabbath day and "made it holy" (v. 11), in that He made
it special and different from the other days of the week for Israel.

"Who must observe it: Thou, and thy son, and thy daughter;
the wife is not mentioned, because she is supposed to be one
with the husband and present with him."2

This is the only one of the Ten Commandments not reiterated for the
church in the New Testament. Traditionally, the church has celebrated the
first day of the week as a memorial to Jesus Christ's resurrection, which
event is the ground of our rest (Rom. 4:25).3

"The purpose of this commandment is that, being dead to our

own inclinations and works, we should meditate on the
Kingdom of God, and that we should practice that meditation
in the ways established by him. …

""First, under the repose of the seventh day the heavenly

Lawgiver meant to represent to the people of Israel spiritual
rest, in which believers ought to lay aside their own works to
allow God to work in them. Secondly, he meant that there was
to be a stated day for them to assemble to hear the law and

1Paul Gregor, "Creation Revisited: Echoes of Genesis 1 and 2 in the Pentateuch," in The
Genesis Creation Account and Its Reverberations in the Old Testament, ed. Gerald A.
Klingbeil, p. 134.
2Henry, p. 94.
3See Arnold G. Fruchtenbaum, "The Sabbath Controversy," Biblical Research Monthly 49:4

(July-August 1984):15-16; Gerhard Hasel, "The Sabbath in the Pentateuch," in The

Sabbath in Scripture and History, pp. 21-43; and Merrill F. Unger, "The Significance of the
Sabbath," Bibliotheca Sacra 123:489 (January 1966):53-59.
192 Dr. Constable's Notes on Exodus 2021 Edition

perform the rites, or at least to devote it particularly to

meditation upon his works, and thus through this
remembrance to be trained in piety. Thirdly, he resolved to
give a day of rest to servants and those who are under the
authority of others, in order that they should have some
respite from toil."1

"… there is no doubt that by the Lord Christ's coming the

ceremonial part of this commandment was abolished. …
Although the Sabbath has been abrogated, there is still
occasion for us: (1) to assemble on stated days for the hearing
of the Word, the breaking of the mystical bread, and for public
prayers [cf. Acts 2:42]; (2) to give surcease from labor to
servants and workmen."2

The fifth commandment 20:12

"The first four commandments set forth the principles guiding

Israel's relationship to Yahweh; and the last six commandments
set forth the principles guiding Israel's relationship with the
covenant community, and more broadly, with the human
family. As the second, third, and fourth commandments are in
many ways extensions of the first commandment, the first four
commandments are the foundation for the final six
commandments. And all of the commandments, as principles
governing covenant relationships, are founded on the ultimate
OT statement of relationship, which stands as prologue to the
ten commandments: 'I am Yahweh, your God' … Because
Yahweh is, and is Israel's God, Israel both is and must become
a certain and special people."3

All Israelites were to "honor" their parents ("your father and your mother"),
because parents are God's representatives to their children in God's
administrative order. Thus the fifth commandment is as foundational to
commandments six through ten, as the first commandment is to
commandments two through four. The Israelites were to honor God
because He had given them life, and they were to honor their parents

1Calvin,2:8:28.
2Ibid.,
2:8:32.
3Durham, p. 290.
2021 Edition Dr. Constable's Notes on Exodus 193

because they were His instruments in giving them life.1 The promise of long
life "in the [Promised] Land" is a reminder that God gave the command to
Israelites.

"This 'promise' is not personal blessing, but a blessing for a

people to possess a land under God's rule and thus become a
light to the nations."2

The Apostle Paul repeated this responsibility as binding on the church in

Ephesians 6:1-3, but changed the verb to "obey," as well as the promise
(cf. Matt. 15:3-4; Col. 3:20).3

"The purpose is: since the maintenance of his economy pleases

the Lord God, the degrees of pre-eminence established by him
ought to be inviolable for us. This, then, is the sum: that we
should look up to those whom God has placed over us, and
should treat them with honor [cf. Exod. 21:17; Lev. 20:9; Prov.
20:20], obedience [cf. Deut. 21:18-21; Eph. 6:1-3; Col. 3:20],
and gratefulness [cf. Matt. 15:4-6]. It follows from this that
we are forbidden to detract from their dignity either by
contempt, by stubbornness, or by ungratefulness. For the
word 'honor' has a wide meaning in Scripture. … Accordingly,
he has put forward as an example that kind of superiority which
is by nature most amiable and least invidious, because he could
thus more easily soften and bend our minds to the habit of
submission. By that subjection which is easiest to tolerate, the
Lord therefore gradually accustoms us to all lawful subjection,
since the reason of all is the same."4

The sixth commandment 20:13

God did not forbid "killing" per se. In fact, He commanded capital
punishment and some war, both of which involve killing. The Hebrew word
used here specifies "murder," not just killing ("You shall not murder"). The
Israelites were to execute murderers and others under the Mosaic Law.

1See Charlie Trimm, "Honor Your Parents: A Command for Adults," Journal of the
Evangelical Theological Society 60:2 (June 2017):247-63.
2Enns, p. 421.
3See Maurice E. Wagner, "How to Honor Your Parents When They've Hurt You," Psychology
for Living 28:6 (June 1986):12-14.
4Calvin, 2:8:35.
194 Dr. Constable's Notes on Exodus 2021 Edition

However, God prohibited taking a human life without divine authorization.

This included suicide.1

"The purpose of this commandment is: the Lord has bound

mankind together by a certain unity; hence each man ought to
concern himself with the safety of all. To sum up, then, all
violence, injury, and any harmful thing at all that may injure our
neighbor's body are forbidden to us. … Therefore this law also
forbids murder of the heart, and enjoins the inner intent to
save a brother's life [cf. 1 John 3:15; Matt. 5:22]."2

"Scripture notes that this commandment rests upon a twofold

basis: man is both the image of God, and our flesh. Now, if we
do not wish to violate the image of God, we ought to hold our
neighbor sacred. And if we do not wish to renounce all
humanity, we ought to cherish his as our own flesh."3

The seventh commandment 20:14

"Adultery" is sexual intercourse when one or both partners are married (or
engaged, under Israelite law; cf. Deut. 22:23-29) to someone else. Adultery
destroys marriage and the home, the foundations of society (cf. Matt.
5:27-28; 1 Cor. 6:9-20). Adultery is an act, not a state. People commit
adultery ("You shall not commit adultery"); they do not live in adultery,
except in the sense that they may continually practice it.

"The purpose of this commandment is: because God loves

modesty ["purity of heart joined with chastity of body"4] and
purity, all uncleanness must be far from us. To sum up, then:
we should not become defiled with any filth or lustful
intemperance of the flesh. To this corresponds the affirmative
commandment that we chastely and continently regulate all
parts of our life. But he expressly forbids fornication, to which
all lust tends, in order through the foulness of fornication,

1See J. P. Morgan, "The Morality of Suicide: Issues and Options," Bibliotheca Sacra
148:590 (April-June 1991):214-30; Charles C. Ryrie, Biblical Answers to Tough Questions,
ch. 7: "The Question of Suicide," pp. 87-94.
2Calvin, 2:8:39.
3Ibid., 2:8:40.
4Ibid., 2:8:43
2021 Edition Dr. Constable's Notes on Exodus 195

which is grosser and more palpable, in so far as it brands the

body also with its mark, to lead us to abominate all lust.

"… From this it is clear that any other union apart from
marriage is accursed in his sight; and that the companionship
of marriage had been ordained as a necessary remedy to keep
us from plunging into unbridled lust [cf. 1 Cor. 7:9]. Let us not
delude ourselves, then, when we hear that outside marriage
man cannot cohabit with a woman without God's curse."1

Thomas Watson gave 16 helpful suggestions for avoiding adultery.2

The eighth commandment 20:15

Since stealing of any kind and under any circumstances was wrong ("You
shall not steal"), clearly God approved of private ownership of goods in
Israel. Israel was somewhat socialistic economically, but it was not
communistic (cf. Eph. 4:28).3

"The purpose of this commandment is: since injustice is an

abomination to God, we should render to each man what
belongs to him [Rom. 13:7]. To sum up: we are forbidden to
pant after the possessions of others, and consequently are
commanded to strive faithfully to help every man to keep his
own possessions.

"We must consider that what every man possesses has not
come to him by mere chance but by the distribution of the
supreme Lord of all. For this reason, we cannot by evil devices
deprive anyone of his possessions without fraudulently setting
aside God's dispensation."4

"This command forbids us to rob ourselves of what we have

by sinful spending, or of the use and comfort of it by sinful
sparing, and to rob others by removing the ancient landmarks,
invading our neighbour's rights, taking his goods from his
person, or house, or field, forcibly or clandestinely, over-

1Ibid.,2:8:41.
2Watson, pp. 158-62.
3See McClain, pp. 75-81: "The Economical Aspect of the Historical Kingdom."
4Calvin, 2:8:45.
196 Dr. Constable's Notes on Exodus 2021 Edition

reaching in bargains, not restoring what is borrowed or found,

withholding just debts, rents, or wages, and (which is worst of
all) to rob the public in the coin or revenue, or that which is
dedicated to the service of religion."1

The ninth commandment 20:16

Social order depends on truthful speech ("You shall not bear false witness
against your neighbor"; cf. Lev. 19:11; Col. 3:9-10).

"The purpose of this commandment is: since God (who is

truth) abhors a lie, we must practice truth without deceit
toward one another. To sum up, then: let us not malign anyone
with slanders or false charges, nor harm his substance by
falsehood, in short, injure him by unbridled evilspeaking [sic]
and impudence [cf. Exod. 23:1, 7; Lev. 19:11, 16] … Surely
there is no doubt that, as he forbade cruelty, shamelessness,
and avarice in the preceding commandments, here he bars
falsehood. … For we must always come back to this: one
particular vice is singled out from various kinds as an example,
and the rest are brought under the same category, the one
chosen being an especially foul vice. Yet it is more generally
expedient to extend it to include slanders and perverse
detraction by which our neighbors are unfairly hurt."2

The tenth commandment 20:17

It is specifically what belongs to one's neighbor and is not for sale,

contrasted with something for sale, that is the focus of this command
("You shall not covet …"). A legitimate desire is not the same as coveting,
which is an obsessive desire. "Coveting" is a root attitude, from which
spring many sins in word and deed against a neighbor (cf. Eph. 5:3). Note
that the first and the tenth commandments deal with what is in the heart,
while the other eight focus on actions that begin in the heart.3 God wanted
His people to turn away from evil thoughts, that, if they failed to turn away
from, would naturally lead to evil actions, as well as the evil actions
themselves. The five categories ("house," "wife," "servant," animal ["ox"

1Henry,pp. 94-95.
2Calvin,
2:8:47.
3Wiersbe, p. 223.
2021 Edition Dr. Constable's Notes on Exodus 197

or "donkey'], "anything [else] that belongs to your neighbor"), of the most

valuable possessions the neighbor could have, represent all that he has.

Were women free to covet their neighbor's husbands? I think not. As with
many of God's commands, the male or husband is addressed, since he is
the "head" of his wife and family. It is assumed that the command applies
to the other members of the family.

"The purpose of this commandment is: since God wills that our
whole soul be possessed with a disposition to love, we must
banish from our hearts all desire contrary to love. To sum up,
then: no thought should steal upon us to move our hearts to
a harmful covetousness that tends to our neighbor's loss. To
this corresponds the opposite precept: whatever we conceive,
deliberate, will, or attempt is to be linked to our neighbor's
good and advantage."1

Here are some concluding observations:

"Now it will not be difficult to decide the purpose of the whole

law: the fulfillment of righteousness to form human life to the
archetype of divine purity [cf. Lev. 11:44-45; 1 Pet. 1:16]."2

"… none of the Ten Commandments reappear in the New

Testament for this age of grace as Mosaic legislation. All of the
moral principles of the ten laws do reappear in the New
Testament in a framework of grace."3

"The Christian must think through contemporary ethical issues

with the Ten Commandments as a guide. How does the
commandment not to steal apply to computer theft? How

1Calvin, 2:8:49. Italics are mine.

2Ibid.,2:8:51.
3Roy L. Aldrich, "The Mosaic Ten Commandments Compared to Their Restatements in the

New Testament," Bibliotheca Sacra 118:471 (July 1961):257. I have added italicizing for
emphasis. See also Charles C. Ryrie, "The End of the Law," Bibliotheca Sacra 129:495
(July-September 1967):239-47, for an excellent explanation of the Christian's relationship
to the Ten Commandments. Mark Rooker, Leviticus, pp. 67-77, also included a good
discussion of the New Testament and the Law.
198 Dr. Constable's Notes on Exodus 2021 Edition

does the commandment not to kill apply to the abortion pill?

Nuclear arms?"1

"The influence of the Ten Words on Western morality and law

is beyond calculation. They have come to be recognized as the
basis of all public morality."2

In view of this fact, it is especially tragic that it is now illegal to post a copy
of the Ten Commandments in any American public school classroom.3 A
fuller exposition of the Ten Commandments follows in my notes on
Deuteronomy 5.4

3. The response of the Israelites 20:18-21

The rest of this section contains the record of the Israelites' reaction to
the giving of the Law, and God's reason for giving it as He did—with all the
accompanying fearsome phenomena. He wanted the people to reverence
("fear") Him, and therefore "not [to] sin" (v. 20).

"It can be argued that in the present shape of the Pentateuch,

the Decalogue (Ex 20:1-17) is intended to be read as the
content of what Moses spoke to the people upon his return
from the mountain in 19:25. After the Decalogue, the narrative
in 20:18-21 looks back once again to the people's fear in

1Longman and Dillard, p. 76.

2Ramm, p. 127.
3See Joyce G. Baldwin, "The Role of the Ten Commandments," Vox Evangelica 13

(1983):7-18, for a good synopsis of the role of the Decalogue as the Reformers and the
Old Testament and New Testament writers saw it. Childs' commentary deals with the
Decalogue in more detail than most others on pp. 385-439, as does Davis', pp. 196-210.
Ezekiel Hopkins wrote a classic explanation of the Decalogue in 1701 from the Puritan
viewpoint that has been reprinted: "Understanding the Ten Commandments," in Classical
Evangelical Essays in Old Testament Interpretation, pp. 51-58. For a dispensational
exposition of the Ten Commandments, see Steve Minter, "Ten Timeless Words (Exodus
20:1-17)," Exegesis and Exposition 1:1 (Fall 1986):67-80. For argumentation for the
Mosaic origin of the Decalogue as opposed to a later origin, see Harold H. Rowley, "Moses
and the Decalogue," Bulletin of the John Rylands Library of the University of Manchester
34:1 (September 1951):81-118.
4See also Lehman Strauss, The Eleven Commandments, for expositions of these 10 and

Jesus' commandment in John 13:34.

2021 Edition Dr. Constable's Notes on Exodus 199

19:16-24. In retelling this incident, the second narrative fills

the important 'gaps' in our understanding of the first."1

Similarly, Genesis 2 retells the story of the Creation in Genesis 1, in order

to fill in important gaps.

"The Book of the Covenant begins technically with Exodus

20:22, having been separated from the Decalogue by a brief
narrative (vv. 18-21) describing the people's response to the
phenomena accompanying Moses' encounter with Yahweh on
Sinai (cf. 19:16-25). The technical term 'ordinances'
(mispatim), which describes the specific stipulations of the
covenant, does not occur until 21:1, so 20:22-26 serves as an
introduction to the stipulation section. This introduction
underlines Yahweh's exclusivity, His self-revelation to His
people, and His demand to be worshiped wherever He localizes
His name and in association with appropriate altars."2

God evidently "spoke" the Ten Commandments in the hearing of all the
Israelites (19:9; 20:19, 22)—accompanied with "thunder," "lightning
flashes," "sound of the trumpet," and "smoking mountain"—in order to
cause them to "fear" Him (v. 20). The people were so awestruck and
frightened by this revelation, that they asked Moses to relay God's words
to them from then on ("Speak to us yourself," v. 20), which he did (v. 21).

"This verse [v. 20] contrasts two types of 'fear': tormenting

fear (which comes from conscious guilt or unwarranted alarm
and leads to bondage) or salutary fear (which promotes and
demonstrates the presence of an attitude of complete trust
and belief in God; cf. the 'fear of the LORD God' beginning in
Gen 22:12). This second type of fear will keep us from sinning
and is at the heart of the OT's wisdom books (cf. Prov 1:7;
Eccl 12:13 et al.)."3

"Whereas 19:16-24 looks at the people's fear from a divine

perspective, 20:18-21 approaches it from the viewpoint of the
people themselves. What we learn from both narratives,
therefore, is that there was a growing need for a mediator and

1Sailhamer, The Pentateuch …, pp. 56.

2Merrill, "A Theology …," p. 41.
3Kaiser, "Exodus," p. 427.
200 Dr. Constable's Notes on Exodus 2021 Edition

a priesthood in the Sinai covenant. Because of the people's

fear of God's presence, they are now standing 'afar off'
(20:21). Already, then, we can see the basis being laid within
the narrative for the need of the tabernacle (Ex 25—31). The
people who are 'afar off' must be brought near to God. This is
the purpose of the instructions for the tabernacle which follow
this narrative."1

4. The stipulations of the Book of the Covenant 20:22—

23:33

"It is worth noting that the stipulations are enfolded within

matching frames that stress the exclusivity of Yahweh (Ex.
20:22-23; cf. 23:24-25, 32-33), His presence in specified
places (20:24; cf. 23:14-17, 20, 28-31), and a proper
protocol and ritual by which He may be approached by His
servant people (20:24-26; cf. 23:18-19). It is within the
context of a vertical covenant relationship, then, that the
horizontal, societal, and interpersonal relationships of the Book
of the Covenant take on their ultimate meaning."2

"The section before us has something to say about each of

the ten commandments, even if only incidentally."3

The basic principles of worship in Israel 20:22-26

God did not just condemn forms of worship that were inappropriate, but He
instructed the Israelites positively on how they were to worship Him.

"The point of the section is this: those who worship this holy
God must preserve holiness in the way they worship—they
worship where he permits, in the manner he prescribes, and
with the blessings he promises."4

This pericope serves as an introduction to 42 judgments in 21:1—23:12.

A similar section to this introduction, following the 42 judgments section,

1Sailhamer,The Pentateuch …, pp. 56-57.

2Merrill,
"A Theology …," p. 41.
3Youngblood, p. 101.
4The NET Bible note on 20:22.
2021 Edition Dr. Constable's Notes on Exodus 201

repeats the emphases of the introduction, and forms a conclusion to the

judgments (23:13-19).1

Prohibition of idolatry 42 judgments Prohibition of idolatry

(20:22-23) (21:1—23:12) (23:13)

Proper forms of Proper forms of

worship worship

(20:24-26) (23:14-19)

20:22-23 Verse 22 is a preamble and historical background for what

follows. On the basis of God's revelation on the mountain, the
Israelites were to obey Him as follows:

The Israelites were not to make idols representing gods other

than Yahweh ("other gods besides Me"), nor were they to
represent Yahweh by making idols to help them worship Him
("gods of silver or gods of gold"; v. 23).

20:24-26 Yahweh permitted His people to build commemorative worship

altars at the locations where He granted special theophanies,
that is, manifestations of His presence.2 These were in addition
to the altars at Israel's central sanctuary (the tabernacle and
later the temple; cf. Judg. 6:25-27; 13:15-20; 1 Sam. 9:11-
14; 16:1-5; 1 Kings 18:30-40). They were to build these
special altars, both for formal worship and for special occasions
(e.g., Josh. 8:30; Judg. 6:25-26), out of earth or uncut stone.
The Canaanites used "cut" or "dressed" stones for their altars,
and it was probably to distinguish the two that God directed
Israel as He did.

Israel's altars were "not" to have "steps," as many Canaanite

altars did, so that the naked flesh (private parts) of the priests

1Sailhamer, The Pentateuch …, p. 289.

2Marten H. Woudstra, The Book of Joshua, p. 166.
202 Dr. Constable's Notes on Exodus 2021 Edition

would not be exposed as they mounted them to make their

offerings.

"Possibly the verse intends to oppose the practice

of certain peoples in the ancient East, like the
Sumerians for instance, whose priests … used to
perform every ritual ceremony in a state of
nakedness. Likewise the Egyptian priests … used
to wear only a linen ephod, a kind of short,
primitive apron."1

"This simple description of true worship is

intended to portray the essence of the Sinai
covenant in terms that are virtually identical to
that of the religion of the patriarchs—earthen
altars, burnt offerings, and simple devotion rather
than elaborate rituals. A simple earthen altar is
sufficient. If more is desired (e.g., a stone altar),
then it should not be defiled with carved stones
and elaborate steps. The ultimate purpose of any
such ritual is the covering of human nakedness
that stems from the Fall (Ex 20:26b; cf. Ge 3:7).
The implication is that all ritual is only a reflection
of that first gracious act of God in covering human
nakedness with garments of skin (Ge 3:21)."2

The fundamental rights of the Israelites 21:1—23:12

It is very important to note that various law codes already existed in the
ancient Near East—before the giving of the Mosaic Covenant. These
included the laws of the Akkadian civilization (located in Mesopotamia) in
the twentieth century B.C. (e.g., the Laws of Eshnunna).3 There were also
the laws of the Sumerian civilization in the nineteenth century (e.g., the
Code of Lipit-Ishtar).4 Moreover the laws of the Babylonian civilization, that
followed in the eighteenth century (e.g., the Code of Hammurabi),5 still

1Cassuto, p. 257.
2Sailhamer, The Pentateuch …, p. 289.
3Pritchard, pp. 161-63.
4Ibid., pp. 159-61.
5Ibid., pp. 163-80.
2021 Edition Dr. Constable's Notes on Exodus 203

existed, as did others.1 People living in the Near East at the time of the
Exodus (fifteenth century) knew these laws, and lived by them, more or
less.

"Continued use of Hammurabi's collection was possible for well

beyond a millennium, since it was not a detailed code
demanding constant amendment but was merely a list of key
decisions whose precedents might be considered eternally
valid."2

The Mosaic Covenant presupposes this cumulative body of legal literature.

So it was not given as a comprehensive legal system to a people living
without any laws. Rather, it was a series of instructions God gave—as
Israel's King—for His people to govern their behavior in certain specific
matters. This fact explains why the Torah (lit. "Instruction," i.e., the Law
of Moses) does not contain fundamental instruction in many basic areas of
law, such as monogamy. The instructions in the Law of Moses confirmed
certain existing laws, cancelled other laws, and changed still others, for the
Israelites, as the will of God for them.3

Moses revealed the laws that follow analogically (i.e., on the basis of the
association of ideas). Analogical thinking has been more characteristic of
eastern cultures, and rational thinking more typical of western cultures,
generally speaking, throughout history.

Introduction 21:1

The "ordinances" in these chapters were not laws, in the usual sense of
that word, but actually the "rights" of those living within Israel. The "Book
of the Covenant" (20:22-23:33) was Israel's "Bill of Rights."

"A selection of 'judgments' is provided as a sample of the

divine judgments which Moses gave the people. A total of
forty-two 'judgments' is given. [The 42 judgments appear in
the following passages in Exodus: 21:2-6, 7-11, 12-13, 14,
15, 16, 17, 18-19, 20-21, 22-23, 24-26, 27, 28-32, 33-34,
35-36; 22:1-4, 5, 6, 7-9, 10-13, 14-15, 16-17, 18, 19, 20,
21, 22-24, 25-27, 28, 29-30, 31; 23:1, 2-3, 4, 5, 6, 7a, 7b,

1See Finegan, Light from …, pp. 53-62; Albright, Archaeology and …, pp. 31.
2Olmstead, p. 121.
3For further explanation, see Cassuto, pp. 257-64.
204 Dr. Constable's Notes on Exodus 2021 Edition

8, 9, 10-11, 12.] The number forty-two apparently stems from

the fact that the Hebrew letters in the first word of the
section, 'and these' (w'lh), add up precisely to the number
forty-two (7 x 6). (There may also be a desire to have seven
laws for each of the six days of work [cf. Ex 20:11]). This
suggests that the laws in 21:1—23:12 are to be understood
merely as a representative selection of the whole Mosaic Law.
It is not an attempt at a complete listing of all the laws. The
purpose of the selection was to provide a basis for teaching
the nature of divine justice. By studying specific cases of the
application of God's will in concrete situations, the reader of
the Pentateuch could learn the basic principles undergirding
the covenant relationship. Whereas the 'ten words' provided a
general statement of the basic principles of justice which God
demanded of his people, the examples selected here further
demonstrated how those principles, or ideals, were to be
applied to real life situations."1

Slavery 21:2-6

21:2-4 The ancients practiced slavery widely in the Near East. These
Mosaic laws protected slaves in Israel better than the laws of
other nations protected slaves in those countries.2

We should read verse 4 with the following condition added at

the end of the verse: "unless he pays a ransom for them." This
was a possible interpretation of the text, as is clear from the
instructions regarding the redemption of people that follow.

Why did God permit slavery at all? Slavery as a social institution

becomes evil when others disregard the human rights of
slaves. God protected the rights of slaves in Israel. Likewise,
the Apostle Paul did not urge Philemon to set his slave
Onesimus free, but to treat him as a "brother" (Philemon 15-
17). As amended by the Torah, "slavery" became "indentured
servitude" in Israel, for all practical purposes, similar to
"household servanthood" in Victorian England. Mosaic law

1Sailhamer, The Pentateuch …, p. 290.

2See Robert Gnuse, "Jubilee Legislation in Leviticus: Israel's Vision of Social Reform,"
Biblical Theology Bulletin 15:2 (April 1985):44.
2021 Edition Dr. Constable's Notes on Exodus 205

provided that male slaves in Israel should normally serve as

slaves no more than "six years," and then go free. In other
nations, by contrast, slaves often remained enslaved for life.

"We can then conclude that Exodus 21:2-4 owes

nothing to non-Biblical law. Rather it is a
statement of belief about the true nature of
Israelite society: it should be made up of free men.
Economic necessities may lead an Israelite to
renounce his true heritage, but his destiny is not
in the end to be subject to purely financial
considerations. Exodus 21:2 is no ordinary
humanitarian provision, but expresses Israel's
fundamental understanding of its true identity. No
matter how far reality failed to match the ideal,
that ideal must be reaffirmed in successive
legislation. So, in gradually worsening economic
conditions both Deuteronomy (15:1-18) and the
Holiness Code (Lev. 25:39-43) reiterate it. It is
the male Israelite's right to release (Exod. 21:2-4)
which explains why the laws of slavery (21:2-11)
head that legislation which sought to come to
terms with Israel's new found statehood with all
its consequent economic problems under the
united monarchy."1

Presumably female as well as male slaves could experience

redemption from their condition at any time.

21:5-6 The Code of Hammurabi decreed that the master of a

rebellious slave could cut off the ear of that slave. So the
condition of the ear (v. 6)—whether intact, pierced, or
missing—evidently marked the status of a slave in the ancient
Near East (cf. Ps. 40:6). By boring the ear with an awl against
a door or doorpost, the master symbolized that the servant
was permanently attached to the house (household).

1Anthony Phillips, "The Laws of Slavery: Exodus 21:2-11," Journal for the Study of the
Old Testament 30 (October 1984):62.
206 Dr. Constable's Notes on Exodus 2021 Edition

Betrothal of a female 21:7-11

Females did not enjoy as much freedom as males, in the ancient Near East
or in Israel. They were subject to the fathers or husbands in authority over
them, as well as to God (cf. Eph. 5:22-24; Col. 3:18). Verses 7-11 describe
a girl whom her father sells as a "servant" (Heb. 'amah, v. 7) for marriage,
not for slavery.1 In such a case, the girl would become the "servant" (maid)
of the father of her husband-to-be, who would then give ("designate")
"her" to "his son" as his wife. She would remain in her prospective father-
in-law's household, unless or until someone redeemed her before the
consummation of her marriage. If, for some reason, her prospective father-
in-law became "displeased" with her, he was to allow someone to "redeem"
her (set her free by the payment of a price). Her "redeemer" could be
herself or someone else (cf. Deut. 24:1). Her master was not to sell her
like a slave to some other person, a "foreign" person in that sense (v. 8).
Such treatment would be unfair to her, because it would have violated her
legitimate human rights. "Conjugal rights" (v. 10) here refers to her living
quarters and other support provisions, not sexual intercourse. This passage
is not discussing marriage as such (after physical consummation)—as the
NIV and AV imply.

Homicide 21:12-17

21:12-14 The Torah upheld capital punishment for murder (v. 12), which
God commanded of Noah (Gen. 9:6), and people in the Near
East practiced it from then on. Moses' law did not permit
capital punishment in the case of manslaughter
(unpremeditated murder, v. 13), which the Code of Hammurabi
allowed.2

In the ancient East, whoever sought sanctuary in a sacred

place was safe from punishment, even if he or she had
deliberately murdered someone. The Torah removed that
protection in the case of murder. God regarded the sanctity of
human life greater than the sanctity of a place (v. 4).

21:15-17 The Code of Hammurabi specified that the person who struck
his father should have his hands cut off.3 The Torah took a

1Kaiser, "Exodus," p. 430.

2Code of Hammurabi, section 229, in Pritchard, pp. 163-80.
3Ibid., section 195.
2021 Edition Dr. Constable's Notes on Exodus 207

stronger position, requiring the "death" of the person who

struck either parent. The reason seems to be that, by doing
so, the striker did not honor his parents, but had revolted
against God's ordained authority over him or her (v. 15; cf.
20:12).

"In the first place age is not a factor in the

determining of a delinquent in the ancient Near
East: age is never mentioned in the [non-biblical]
texts. A minor, for all intents and purposes, was
one who was living in his or her parent's house.
There he or she has duties and responsibilities
which place him directly under the authority of the
parent. Responsibility for a minor's behavior
rested solely with the parent. Any anti-social act
committed by the minor was considered also an
offense against the parent who dealt with it
accordingly. When proceedings are initiated
against a minor, as we shall see, it is the parent,
not the courts, who institutes the proceedings. …

"In ancient times no provision was made for a

minor committing a criminal act, that is, there was
no special protection extended to juveniles
convicted in criminal cases: the penalty for both
an adult and a minor was the same. This
represents a striking difference from our judicial
system whereby a minor is not held to be as
criminally responsible for his conduct as an adult.
In effect he is granted a certain amount of
protection by the courts, and his sentence is not
as severe as an adult's would be in a similar case.
It is curious that in the few examples we have of
felonies committed by minors in the ancient Near
East the opposite situation prevails. A minor
receives a more severe sentence than an adult
would in a comparable case. …

"At this point we should not get too exercised

over whether or not these punishments were ever
carried out. It is considered today most unlikely
208 Dr. Constable's Notes on Exodus 2021 Edition

that these types of punishments, or talionic

punishment in general, were ever put into practice
in the ancient Near East.1 What is important here
is the severity accorded these offenses in the light
of other offenses listed in the same legal corpus.
It is most significant that in both cases the assault
is against a parent. Assault against another
person would subject the minor to a lesser
penalty. In Mesopotamian law a minor striking
someone other than his parent would not have his
hand cut off; depending on his status he would be
fined or flogged.2 Likewise, in ancient Israel he
would be fined and not subject to the death
penalty (Exod. 21:18-19). Thus we have a
situation where striking a non-parent makes one
subject to regular criminal law, but striking a
parent makes one subject to a 'juvenile
delinquent' law which carries a more severe
penalty."3

Kidnapping was also a capital offense (v. 16; 20:15; Gen.

37:28), as was cursing (dishonoring) one's parents (v. 17; cf.
20:12). Verse 15 deals with a criminal offense, but verse 17
describes a civil offense (cf. Lev. 20:9; Deut. 27:16; Prov.
20:20; 30:11). Marcus went on to distinguish this type of
offense as follows:

"Turning now to non-criminal acts, civil or status

offenses, we review the salient points of the
modern definition of a juvenile delinquent as one
who is incorrigible, ungovernable, or habitually
disobedient. The operative word in most modern
definitions is 'habitual.' An isolated occurrence
does not make a child delinquent. Note that the
New York State definition speaks of the child as
being 'habitually disobedient,' and the California

1Encyclopaedia Judaica, s.v. "Cuneiform Law," by J. Finkelstein, 16:1505i.

2Code of Hammurabi, sections 202-4.
3David Marcus, "Juvenile Delinquency in the Bible and the Ancient Near East," Journal of

the Ancient Near Eastern Society of Columbia University 13 (1981):32-34.

2021 Edition Dr. Constable's Notes on Exodus 209

one terms the delinquent as one who 'habitually

refuses to obey.' We shall see that a number of
ancient Near Eastern legal texts make this
distinction as well. This is important because it
enables us to distinguish what is clearly
delinquency from what is only what we call
'generation gap' disagreements. The ancients
were well aware of this generation gap between
parents and children."1

All of these crimes were worthy of death (in vv. 12-17), and were serious
in God's eyes. They either violated a basic right of a human being created
in God's image, or were expressions of rebellion against God's revealed
authority in the home, the basic unit of society.

"Life, in essence, is the property of God; the possession of it

is leased to human beings for a number of years. This lease
can be extended or contracted in accordance with God's will.
(Cf. 1 Kings 21:27-29; 2 Kings 20:1-6; Job 1:12-19.) When a
man arrogates to himself the right of ownership in the life of
human beings and interferes with the right of enjoyment of life
by taking it away—that is, killing it—he has violated one of the
essential laws of God and therefore forfeits his own right to
the possession of life."2

Bodily injuries 21:18-32

Moses cited five cases in this section, as was true in the preceding one (vv.
12-17).

21:18-19 The Torah made no distinction in the penalty assessed based

on the aggressor's intentions (vv. 18-28). The inferior
Hammurabi Code adjusted the penalty, by permitting the
assailant to pay less damage if he claimed no intent to cause
injury.3

1Ibid., pp. 35-36. For an evaluation of modern American penological philosophies in the
light of the Mosaic Law, see Gary R. Williams, "The Purpose of Penology in the Mosaic Law
and Today," Bibliotheca Sacra 133:529 (January-March 1976):42-55.
2Davis, p. 221.
3Code of Hammurabi, section 206.
210 Dr. Constable's Notes on Exodus 2021 Edition

21:20-21 As with other people, slaves also enjoyed protection from

murderers (v. 20; cf. v. 12). However, the slave owner likewise
experienced protection from execution, if his punishment of a
slave was not the direct cause of the slave's death. In such a
case, the law regarded the loss of the slave as sufficient
punishment of the master (v. 21).

21:22 Manslaughter of an unborn child carried a fine (v. 22). The

reason seems to have rested on two assumptions. First,
accidental killing is not as serious a crime as deliberate killing.
Second, a fetus, though a human life, does not have the same
status as a self-sufficient human being.1

"The most significant thing about abortion

legislation in Biblical law is that there was none. It
was so unthinkable that an Israelite woman should
desire an abortion that there was no need to
mention this offense in the criminal code."2

Pro-abortion advocates frequently appeal to Exodus 21:22 to

support their claim that a fetus is not a person and, therefore,
abortion is not murder.

"In other words, if you cause the death of the

fetus, you merely pay a fine; if you cause the
death of the woman, you lose your own life. Thus
the Bible clearly shows that a fetus is not
considered a person. If the fetus were considered
to be a person, then the penalty for killing it would

1See Sandra Lubarsky, "Judaism and the Justification of Abortion for Non-Medical
Reasons," Journal of Reform Judaism 31:4 (Fall 1984):1-13, which contains helpful
information on the rabbinic teaching on abortion, though the author's conclusion, "…
Judaism not only permits abortions for medical reasons, but also supports abortion for
non-medical reasons" (p. 12), contradicts the spirit of Old Testament teaching.
2Meredith Kline, "Lex Talionis and the Human Fetus," Simon Greenleaf Law Review 5

(1985-86):75. See also Josephus, Against Apion, 2:25; Bruce K. Waltke, "Reflections from
the Old Testament on Abortion," Journal of the Evangelical Theological Society 19:1
(Winter 1976):3-13; and Robert N. Congdon, "Exodus 21:22-25 and the Abortion
Debate," Bibliotheca Sacra 146:582 (April-June 1989):132-47.
2021 Edition Dr. Constable's Notes on Exodus 211

be the same as for killing the woman—death.

Abortion, then, is not murder."1

However, other Scriptures present the fetus as a person, a real

human being (Job 10:8-12; 15:14; Ps. 51:5; 58:3; 139:13-16;
Eccles. 11:5; Jer. 1:5; Gal. 1:15). This was the prevailing
opinion in the ancient Near East as well.2

In contrast to other ancient Near Eastern law codes, the Torah

made no differentiation on the basis of the woman's social
class. It treated all equally. Also, only the man who caused the
injury was liable, not other members of his family, who could
suffer punishment for his offense, and often did, in other
ancient Near Eastern societies. Principles explained elsewhere
in the Torah determined the amount of penalty the guilty party
had to pay.3

21:23-25 God intended the "eye for eye" provision to limit punishment,
rather than to give free reign to it. The "law of retaliation"
(Latin lex talionis) became common in the ancient Near East.
It sought to control the "revenge tendency" of someone, who
had only suffered a minor injury, to take major revenge. For
example, a man might kill the person who beat up his brother
(cf. Gen. 4:23). God forbade such excessive vengeance among
His people, and was limiting them, so that they would only
exact equal compensation for offenses committed against
them and no more.

1Graham Spurgeon, "Is Abortion Murder?" in The Religious Case for Abortion, p. 16. For
the same view, see also Shalom Paul, Studies in the Book of the Covenant in the Light of
Cuneiform and Biblical Law, p. 71; Lloyd Kalland, "Fetal Life," Eternity, February 1971, p.
24; and Dolores E. Dunnett, "Evangelicals and Abortion," Journal of the Evangelical
Theological Society 33:2 (June 1990):217.
2See the excellent discussion by Russell Fuller, "Exodus 21:22-23: The Miscarriage

Interpretation and the Personhood of the Fetus," Journal of the Evangelical Theological
Society 37:2 (June 1992):169-84. Fuller also evaluated and rejected the popular
evangelical view that this verse does not refer to a miscarriage but to a premature birth.
See also Ryrie, Biblical Answers …, ch. 8: "The Question of Abortion,' pp. 95-104.
3See Stanley Isser, "Two Traditions: The Law of Exodus 21:22-23 Revisited," Catholic

Biblical Quarterly 52:1 (January 1990):30-45, for some ancient abortion laws and the
views of Jewish rabbis and translators on this passage.
212 Dr. Constable's Notes on Exodus 2021 Edition

"This law of the talion, for a long time thought to

be a more primitive kind of penalty, the reflection
of a barbaric law form, has been shown by more
recent comparative studies to be a later
development, designed to remedy the inevitable
abuses made possible by monetary payment for
physical injury."1

"It is one of the cruel features of the lex talionis

[as applied outside the Mosaic Law], that if the
real murderer can not [sic] be reached, the
avengers of blood have a right to kill any other
member of the family, then any relation, no
matter how remote, and, finally, any member of
this blood confederation."2

"According to Num. xxxv 31 it is only from a willful

murderer that it is forbidden to accept ransom
[payment in place of punishment]; this implies
that in all other instances the taking of a ransom
is permitted. …

"This being so, the meaning here in our paragraph

of the expression life for life [v. 23] is that the
one who hurts the woman accidentally shall be
obliged to pay her husband the value of her life if
she dies, and of her children if they die."3

21:26-27 In contrast to verse 27, the Code of Hammurabi prescribed

that, in such a case, the offender had to pay the slave's master
half the price of the slave.4 If a master blinded his own slave,
Hammurabi's code required no penalty. The Torah, on the
other hand, shows greater concern for the slave. This law
would have discouraged masters from physically abusing their
slaves.

1Durham, p. 324.
2W. M. Thomson, The Land and the Book, 1:448.
3Cassuto, p. 277.
4Code of Hammurabi, section 199.
2021 Edition Dr. Constable's Notes on Exodus 213

21:28-32 The Hammurabi Code specified the death of the ox owner's

son, if the ox killed the son of another man (v. 31).1 The Torah
required the owner's life or else just a ransom (v. 30),
depending on the ox's previous tendencies. Note, too, that
verses 31 and 32 value the lives of male and female slaves the
same. The value of an adult slave under the Torah was 30
shekels of silver (cf. Matt. 26:15). Under the Code of
Hammurabi, it was 1/3 of a mina of silver (about 17 shekels).2
The ox also died by stoning. With this law, God was teaching
His people that they should view even slaves as created in His
image (cf. Gen. 9:5). The goring ox (vv. 28-32) is the typical
example of death caused by cattle or domestic animals.

"The fate of the ox gives clear evidence of the

theological principle of the subordination of the
animal world to human sovereignty. That the fatal
goring of one ox by another required only
compensation shows the relative insignificance of
the animal-to-animal relationship (vv. 35-36)."3

Property damage 21:33—22:15

21:33-34 The "pit" causing accidental injury or death represents a

typical case of damage caused by an inanimate object or
natural phenomenon. These specific cases doubtless served as
precedents for other, similar cases.

"Mischief done in malice is the great

transgression; but mischief done through
negligence is not without fault."4

"I have been astonished at the recklessness with

which wells and pits are left uncovered and
unprotected all over this country [i.e. Palestine].
It argues a disregard of life which is highly criminal.
I once saw a blind man walk right into one of these
unprotected wells. He fell to the bottom, but, as

1Ibid.,section 230.
2Ibid.,section 252.
3Merrill, "A Theology …," p. 43.
4Henry, p. 96.
214 Dr. Constable's Notes on Exodus 2021 Edition

it was soft sand, he was not so much injured as

frightened."1

21:35-36 The law concerning a cattle or oxen fight is the same as one in
the Laws of Eshnunna, a twentieth century B.C. Akkadian law
code.2 However, the Torah differentiated between an ox that
gored habitually, and one that did not, in the case of one ox
goring another. Thus the Torah showed higher regard for the
rights and responsibilities of individuals.

22:1-4 According to the Code of Hammurabi, a thief should be

executed if he could not repay what he had stolen,3 or if he
stole by breaking in.4 The Torah modified this law by annulling
the death penalty, and substituted, in its place, the penalty of
being sold into slavery, in the first case. In the second case,
where the thief breaks in, the Torah annulled the death penalty
and protected the life of the victim, counting him innocent
because he was simply defending his home and property. The
"second" case actually involves two cases in the Torah: the
second case, where the thief is killed, and a third case, where
the thief is injured but survives.

Verses 1 and 4 of chapter 22 go together, and deal with theft

generally. The reason for the harsh fivefold ("pay five oxen for
the ox") and fourfold ("pay … four sheep for the sheep")
penalties, appears to be that the thief was taking the means
of another person's livelihood.5

Verses 2 and 3, which deal with breaking and entering, address

a special type of theft (breaking in, burglary). Perhaps the law
assumed that the burglar-thief's intent was murder as well as
theft, if he broke in at night, but only theft if he broke in in
daylight. If so, we might assume that, if his intentions turned
out to have been otherwise, the law would deal with him
accordingly. The text gives only the typical case. Perhaps the
logic was that at night, the victim's life was in greater danger,

1Thomson, 1:519.
2Laws of Eshnunna, section 53.
3Code of Hammurabi, section 8.
4Ibid., section 21.
5Kaiser, "Exodus," p. 436.
2021 Edition Dr. Constable's Notes on Exodus 215

so the law allowed him to use more force in resisting his

assailant than in the daytime.

22:5-6 The fourth case involves damage due to grazing or burning. In

the first instance (v. 5), the Torah required restitution from
"the best" of the offender, whereas the Code of Hammurabi
required only restitution.1 These two examples further
illustrate God's respect for the rights of others.

22:7-15 Next we have four cases involving property held in custody. In

the Hammurabi Code, the penalty for losing or allowing a thief
to steal what someone else had committed to one's trust, was
death,2 as was falsely accusing someone of this crime.3 The
Torah required only twofold payment in both situations (v. 9).

Second, if what someone entrusted to his neighbor for

safekeeping perished by accident (vv. 10-13), the neighbor
was not responsible to make restitution. The law was the same
under the Code of Hammurabi.4

Third, if someone borrowed something, and it then suffered

damage or it died (v. 14-15a), the borrower was responsible
to make restitution. This was the procedure, unless the owner
(lender) was present when the damage or death took place. In
that case, the lender was responsible for his own property.

Fourth, if someone rented something and then damaged it, or

it died (v. 15b), the borrower was not responsible to make
restitution, since the fee he had paid covered his liability. The
Code of Hammurabi specified no liability in either of these last
two instances.5

Crimes against society 22:16-31

22:16-17 Next we have a case of consensual sexual intercourse resulting

from seduction. Here the girl is viewed as the property of her

1Code of Hammurabi, section 57.

2Ibid., section 9.
3Ibid., section 11.
4Ibid., sections 263-67.
5Ibid., section 249.
216 Dr. Constable's Notes on Exodus 2021 Edition

father. If a young couple had premarital sex, the young man

had to marry the young woman, and give his future father-in-
law the customary payment (i.e., a dowry) in order to do so.
The girl's father could refuse this offer, however, in which case
the boy would not get to marry the girl—but would still have
to pay the dowry. This law pertained to situations in which
seduction (persuasion), not rape, had resulted in intercourse.
Other Torah passages indicating that premarital sex is sinful
include Genesis 2:24 and Deuteronomy 22:13-29. Moses did
not comment on other similar situations here. Israel was
evidently to function in harmony with previously existing law
in these cases.1

"As many scholars recognize, the second half of

the Book of the Covenant begins at Exodus 22:18
and the stipulations undergo a change in content
to match what is clearly a change in form. The first
half (Ex. 20:22—22:17) is fundamentally
casuistic, whereas the latter half [22:18—23:33]
is not.2 That is, the stipulations now are expressed
as prescriptions or prohibitions with little or no
reference to the penalty attached to violation in
each case."3

22:18-20 God prohibited three more practices, each of which brought

the death penalty. All three involve idolatry.

In the ancient world, people made a distinction between black

and white magic (witchcraft or sorcery). The former sought to
harm someone, and the latter did not. The Hammurabi Code
prohibited the former only,4 but the Torah outlawed both
types of witchcraft, without distinction. Sorcery (witchcraft)
constituted an attempt to override God's will. Probably Moses
mentioned only the "sorceress" (v. 18), because women at
that time were particularly active in the practice of sorcery.

1Cassuto, pp. 288-89.

2Childs, p. 477.
3Merrill, "A Theology …," p. 44.
4Code of Hamurabi, section 2.
2021 Edition Dr. Constable's Notes on Exodus 217

Probably the law would have dealt with a "sorcerer" the same
way.1

Having intercourse with animals ("bestiality," v. 19) was

something the Canaanites and Mesopotamians attributed to
their gods, and which they practiced when worshipping those
gods. Whereas some Near Eastern law codes imposed the
death penalty for having intercourse with certain animals, the
Torah prohibited this practice completely, covering any and all
animals.

The third ordinance (v. 20) prohibited offering any

"sacrifice[s]" to idols ("to any god").

22:21-27 The next collection of laws deals with various forms of

oppression. The first section deals with care and concern for
the poor and needy. While the Israelites were not to tolerate
the idolatrous customs of foreigners, they were to manifest
practical love (care and concern) toward the foreigners
("strangers") particularly, as well as toward the "poor" and
needy ("widow or orphan") generally. The Israelites were to
remember the oppression they had endured in Egypt, and were
to thereby refrain from oppressing others. They were not only
to refrain from doing evil, but were to do positive good ("lend,"
give; vv. 26-27; cf. Matt. 5:44; Rom. 12:14).

22:28 This verse urges reverence toward God ("You shall not curse
God") and the leaders of the community ("nor curse a ruler of
your people"). Having dealt with proper behavior toward
people on a lower social level, God also specified how to deal
with those on higher levels of authority.

22:29-30 The law for "first-fruits" required the Israelites to offer several
offerings to the LORD (sons, animals, crops). Perhaps the
purpose of allowing animals to stay with their mothers for the
first seven days of their lives was to allow them to develop

1See Roy B. Zuck, "The Practice of Witchcraft in the Scriptures," Bibliotheca Sacra
128:512 (October-December 1971):352-60.
218 Dr. Constable's Notes on Exodus 2021 Edition

safely.1 It may also have been to give natural relief to the

"dam" (mammary glands) by suckling its offspring.2

22:31 Animal "flesh torn … in the field" before humans ate it was
both unsuitable and, from then on, unlawful for Israelite
consumption. Not only might the animal have died from a
communicable disease, but "second-rate" food like this was
inappropriate for a people set apart to a holy God.
Furthermore, the blood had not been drained from such an
animal (cf. Lev. 3:17).

Justice and neighborliness 23:1-9

This section appeals for justice toward all people. The subject of the
legislation now shifts from "love for all" to "justice for all." The Israelites
should treat all people justly, not only the rich but also the poor (v. 3), the
enemy as well as the friend (v. 4). Jezebel later did to Naboth what verse
7 warns against (cf. 1 Kings 21:9-14).

"If we must bring back our neighbours' cattle when they go

astray [v. 4], much more must we endeavor, by prudent
admonitions and instructions, to bring back our neighbours
themselves, when they go astray in any sinful path, see Jam.
V. 19, 20. And, if we must endeavor to help up a fallen ass,
much more should we endeavor to help up a sinking spirit,
saying to those that are of a fearful heart, Be strong."3

Rest 23:10-12

"Till now the text dealt with positive and negative precepts
that are valid at all times; now we have a series of precepts
that are to be observed at given times, commandments that
apply to seasons that are specifically dedicated to the service
of the Lord, and are intended to remind the Israelites of the
covenant that the Lord made with them, and of the duty
resting upon them to be faithful to this covenant."4

1Durham, p. 330.
2Kaiser,"Exodus," p. 440.
3Henry, p. 97.
4Cassuto, p. 300.
2021 Edition Dr. Constable's Notes on Exodus 219

23:10-11 The people were to observe the sabbatical year ("let [the land]
rest and lie fallow" every "seventh year"; cf. Lev. 25:2-7; Deut.
15:1-3). The Israelites' failure to observe 70 sabbatical years,
which amounted to 490 straight years without rest, resulted
in God removing Israel from the Promised Land to Babylon—
for 70 years—to give the land its "rest" (2 Chron. 36:20-21).

"… it may be desirable briefly to refer to the

observance of the Sabbatical year, as it was
strictly enforced at the time of Christ. It was
otherwise with the year of Jubilee."1

23:12 God intended Sabbath observance to give His people, and even
their laboring animals, needed "rest" (v. 12).

The reiteration of basic principles of worship 23:13-19

23:13 This verse is a summary warning against idolatry ("do not

[even] mention the name of other gods" [emphasis added];
cf. 20:22-23).

"The continual return to the theme of idolatry

throughout this section of the book is preparation
and background for an appreciation of the incident
of the golden calf (Ex 32)."2

23:14-17 "All" the "male" Israelites had to make a pilgrimage to the

sanctuary (tabernacle) "three times a year," for the feasts of
"Unleavened Bread," "Harvest of the First Fruits" (Weeks,
Pentecost), and "Ingathering" (Booths, Tabernacles). Women
and children would have normally accompanied the males on
the tri-yearly pilgrimages. This requirement fostered the
maintenance of the national and social unity of the 12 tribes
of Israel, as well as their spiritual unity.

23:18 "The first part of this verse has nothing to do with

eating anything leavened. Rather it means that
individual Israelites were not to kill the Passover
lamb while leaven was still in their houses. The

1Edersheim, p. 189. Cf. Josephus, Antiquities of …, 13:8:1.

2Sailhamer, The Pentateuch …, p. 293.
220 Dr. Constable's Notes on Exodus 2021 Edition

second half of the verse makes no reference to

fat as such; but as the parallel verse in 34:25b
says, the 'sacrifice from the Passover Feast' (here
lit., 'sacrifice of my feast') shall not 'remain until
morning' (cf. 12:10)."1

The "fat" means "the best part," here referring to the whole
sacrifice.

23:19 The commentators have accounted for the prohibition against

"boiling a kid (young lamb) in its mother's milk" in many
different ways. Some scholars believe it was the opposition to
commingling life with death, a source of life with its product,
or Israel with the nations, that was the basis for this prohibition
(cf. Lev. 22:27-28; Deut. 22:6).2 Another view is that it was
a way of specifying that only weaned animals were acceptable
as sacrifices (cf. 34:18-26).3

"Many of the Mosaic precepts are evidently

designed to cultivate gentle and humane feelings;
but 'kid in his mother's milk' is a gross,
unwholesome dish, calculated also to kindle up
animal and ferocious passions, and, on these
accounts, Moses may have forbidden it. Beside, it
is even yet associated with immoderate feasting,
and originally, I suspect, was connected with
idolatrous sacrifices."4

Other scholars argued that it was "A prohibition

against imitating the superstitious rites of the
idolaters in Egypt, who, at the end of their
harvest, seethed a kid in its mother's mild and
sprinkled the broth as a magical charm on their

1Kaiser,"Exodus," p. 445.
2Jacob Milgrom, "'You Shall Not Boil a Kid in It's Mother's Milk,'" Bible Review 1:3 (Fall
1985):48-55; Merrill, in The Old …, p. 63.
3Sailhamer, The Pentateuch …, p. 294.
4Thomson, 1:135.
2021 Edition Dr. Constable's Notes on Exodus 221

gardens and fields, to render them more

productive the following season."1

The most popular explanation is that this was a pagan practice

that showed disrespect for the God-given relationship between
parent and offspring.2 The "Ras Shamra" tablets have shown
that boiling sacrificial kids in their mother's milk was a common
ritual practice among the Canaanites.3 This view has been
refuted effectively, however.4 Matthew Henry claimed that the
pagans "sprinkled that milk-potage, in a magical way, upon
their gardens and fields, to make them more fruitful next
year."5

This ordinance is the basis for the separation, that strict Jews
make in their kosher diet, of not mixing dairy and meat
products. Observant Jews even provide separate equipment
and kitchens for the preparation of these dishes.

Yahweh's relation to Israel 23:20-33

In this final part of the Book of the Covenant (20:22—23:33), God gave
the Israelites promises and precepts relating to their conquest of the
Promised Land. Suzerainty treaties normally concluded with an explanation
of the benefits that would come to the vassals if they obeyed the king's
commands, and the difficulties they would experience if they disobeyed.
That is characteristic of this section of the covenant, though the emphasis
is positive.

"Similar opening [20:22-26] and closing remarks are also

found in the codes of Hammurabi and Lipit-Istar."6

"Following the text of the covenant code Yahweh assures His

people of His ongoing commitment. He had not brought them
out of Egypt and made covenant with them only to forget

1Jamieson, et al., p. 72.

2E.g.,Meyer, p. 270.
3See Charles F. Pfeiffer, Ras Shamra and the Bible. For other views, see Kaiser, "Exodus,"

p. 445.
4See Jacob Milgrom, Leviticus 1—16, pp. 737-38.
5Henry, p. 98.
6Cassuto, p. 305.
222 Dr. Constable's Notes on Exodus 2021 Edition

them in the wilderness. He had promised to give them land, so

now He speaks of the process by which they would enter the
land and the circumstances they would face there (Ex. 23:20-
33)."1

23:20-23 God stressed the importance of obedience in these verses. The

"angel" referred to, also called "My angel," was undoubtedly
"the Angel of the LORD" (cf. Josh. 5:13-15).

23:24-26 Moses again stressed the "worship" of the true God as

opposed to the idols ("gods") of "the Canaanites." Note the
repeated emphasis on obedience and worship also in verses
20-26.2

23:27-28 God promised His people various provisions if they would be

obedient. We should probably understand the "hornet(s)" (v.
28) figuratively, though some interpreters take it literally (cf.
Deut. 7:20; Josh. 24:12).3 There is no reference in the text to
God using real "hornets" to drive out the Canaanites, but He
did use other hornet-like forces.

"Perhaps 'the hornet' is a symbol of Egypt, just as

Isaiah 7:18 uses the 'fly' and the 'bee' as symbols
of Egypt and Assyria, respectively."4

23:29-30 God told the Israelites that they would not drive out all their
enemies "in a single year," i.e., the first year after they entered
the land (v. 29). They did not. However, Israel was less
successful than she might have been, due to incomplete
obedience.

"'Little by little' does the work of God proceed

through the individual soul. 'Little by little' do the
conquests of the Cross win over the world. 'Little

1Merrill,"A Theology …," p. 47.

2On the promise that God would give the Israelites good health, see my comments on
15:26.
3E.g., Wiersbe, p. 393.
4Kaiser, "Exodus," p. 447.
2021 Edition Dr. Constable's Notes on Exodus 223

by little' is the unfolding purpose of Redemption

made manifest to men and angels."1

23:31 God further promised a wide "boundary" or land area. It

stretched from the Red Sea (probably the Gulf of Aqabah, the
southeastern boundary) to the Mediterranean Sea (the
western boundary). It also ran from the wilderness (probably
the northeast edge of the Sinai wilderness, the southwest
boundary) to the Euphrates River (the northeastern boundary;
cf. Gen. 15:18). Some writers believed that this is a reference
to the river that now forms the border between modern
Lebanon and Syria.2 Yet in the Hebrew Bible, "the river" or "the
great river" usually refers to the Euphrates. Israel did not
occupy all of this territory due to her disobedience to God.

23:32-33 These verses contain a final warning. Israel was to "make no

covenant[s] with" the Canaanites or "their gods," because she
already had a covenant with Yahweh. The Israelites failed here
too (e.g., Josh 9:3-15).

"The Decalogue begins with the command that Israel have no

god other than Yahweh. The Book of the Covenant begins
(20:23) and ends (23:32-33) with that same command, and
all that lies between that beginning and that ending is designed
to assure its obedience."3

It is very important to observe that God conditioned obtaining, all that He

promised the Israelites as an inheritance, on their obedience. They could
only "enter into it" by obeying God. Their "inheritance," like our future
reward, was something different from their "salvation," which came to
them—as to Christians—only by faith in God (Gen. 15:6; Exod. 12:13;
14:31). The New Testament, likewise, teaches that "justification" comes
solely by faith in God, but only obedient Christians will obtain the "full
inheritance (reward)" that God has promised them (cf. Heb. 3:12—4:14).4

1Meyer, pp. 281-82.

2E.g.,Kaiser, "Exodus," p. 447.
3Durham, p. 337.
4For a good explanation of the Old and New Testament teaching on the subject of the

believer's inheritance, see Joseph C. Dillow, The Reign of the Servant Kings, pp. 43-110.
224 Dr. Constable's Notes on Exodus 2021 Edition

5. The ratification of the Covenant 24:1-11

"The great event in chapter 24 is the climax of the Book of

Exodus."1

24:1-8 The remaining verses in this section contain God's directions

to Moses personally. First, "Moses," "Aaron," Aaron's two
oldest sons ("Nadab" and "Abihu"), and "70 of the elders of
Israel" were to ascend the mountain to worship God—"at a
distance." Then God permitted only Moses to approach Him
closely ("Moses alone … shall come near to the LORD"),
however.

Moses first related the content of God's covenant with Israel

orally, and the people submitted to it. The people promised to
do all that God commanded them ("All the words which the
LORD has spoken we will do"; v. 3; cf. 19:8). (Incredibly,
Josephus wrote: "… the Hebrews did not transgress any of
those laws …"2) Then Moses "wrote out (down)" God's
"words" to preserve them permanently for the Israelites (v. 4).
The "altar" he "built" memorialized the location for all time as
the place where God had revealed Himself to His people. The
"12 pillars" were probably not part of the altar, but separate
from it. They probably represented the unique permanent
relationship of the 12 tribes with God, which God Himself
established when He made this covenant.

"In the ceremony to be performed, the altar will

represent the glory of the Lord, whilst the pillars
will represent the tribes of Israel; the two
contrasting parties will stand facing each other."3

The 12 pillars may also have served as memorial standing

stones to commemorate the occasion (cf. Gen. 31:45).4 The
"young men" (v. 5) were probably assistants to Moses, chosen

1Ramm, p. 139.
2Josephus, Antiquities of …, 3:8:10.
3Cassuto, p. 311.
4John W. Hilber, "Theology of Worship in Exodus 24," Journal of the Evangelical

Theological Society 39:2 (June 1996):181.

2021 Edition Dr. Constable's Notes on Exodus 225

for this special occasion to serve as priests ("they offered

burnt offerings and sacrificed young bulls"; cf. 19:22, 24).

"In the blood sprinkled on the altar [v. 6], the

natural life of the people was given up to God, as
a life that had passed through death, to be
pervaded by His grace; and then through the
sprinkling upon the people [v. 8] it was restored
to them again, as a life renewed by the grace of
God. In this way the blood not only became a bond
of union between Jehovah and His people, but by
the blood of the covenant, it became a vital
power, holy and divine, uniting Israel and its God;
and the sprinkling of the people with this blood
was an actual renewal of life, a transposition of
Israel into the kingdom of God, in which it was
filled with the powers of God's spirit of grace, and
sanctified into a kingdom of priests, a holy nation
of Jehovah (19:6)."1

"The throwing of half of the blood of the offerings

against the altar, which represented the Lord, and
half on the people, or that which represented
them, signifies a joining together of the two
contracting parties (communio), and symbolized
the execution of the deed of covenant between
them.

"Between one blood-throwing and the other, the

content of the covenant was finally and solemnly
ratified by Moses' reading from the Book of the
Covenant and by the people's expression of
consent."2

This ritual—sprinkling half the blood on the altar and half on

the people—constituted the formal ratification of the Mosaic
Covenant, by which Yahweh adopted Israel as His "son" (cf.

1Keil and Delitzsch, 2:158.

2Cassuto, p. 312.
226 Dr. Constable's Notes on Exodus 2021 Edition

Gen. 15). The parallel with the inauguration of the New

Covenant is striking (cf. Matt. 26:28; 1 Cor. 11:25).

"In all such ceremonies the oath of obedience [v.

7] implied the participants' willingness to suffer
the fate of the sacrificed animals if the covenant
stipulations were violated by those who took the
oath."1

"Virtually every sovereign-vassal treaty

incorporated a list of deities before whom the
solemn oaths of mutual fidelity were sworn. These
'witnesses' could not, of course, be invoked in the
case of the biblical covenants, for there were no
gods but Yahweh and no higher powers to whom
appeal could be made in the event of covenant
violation. The counterpart of this is not lacking,
however, for the ceremony of covenant-making
described in Exodus 24 clearly includes 'witnesses'
to the transaction. These are in the form of the
altar, which represented Yahweh, and the twelve
pillars, which represented the twelve tribes.
Although there is no explicit word to the effect
that these objects were witnesses as well as
representations, the use of inanimate objects in
that capacity elsewhere certainly allows for that
possibility here."2

"This is the covenant meal, the peace offering,

that they are eating there on the mountain. To eat
from the sacrifice meant that they were at peace
with God, in covenant with him. Likewise, in the
new covenant believers draw near to God on the
basis of sacrifice, and eat of the sacrifice because
they are at peace with him, and in Christ they see
the Godhead revealed."3

1Youngblood, p. 110.
2Merrill,
"A Theology …," pp. 34-35. Cf. Deut. 4:26; 30:19; 31:28. See also Kline, The
Treaty …, p. 15.
3The NET Bible note on 24:11.
2021 Edition Dr. Constable's Notes on Exodus 227

There is some disagreement among the commentators about

the meaning of "the Book of the Covenant" (v. 7). Most take
it to mean the "Bill of Rights" that God had just given (20:22—
23:33).1 Some feel it included "the whole corpus of Sinai
laws."2 Others hold that "… it denotes a short general
document, a kind of testimony and memorial to the making of
the covenant."3 I prefer the view that it refers to the covenant
stipulations God had made known to the Israelites at this time,
including the Decalogue and the "Bill of Rights." This seems
most consistent with other references to this "book" in the
text.4

Some scholars believe that this was the day that Israel became
a nation.5

24:9-11 The ratification ceremony concluded with a meal ("they ate

and drank"; vv. 9-11), not a picnic lunch but a sacrificial meal
("sacrificed young bulls"; v. 5).

"'They ate and drank' describes a covenant meal

celebrating the sealing of the covenant described
in vv. 3-8 [cf. Gen. 31:44-54]."6

We must understand the statement that the leaders of Israel

"saw … God" ("the God of Israel"; v. 10) in the light of other
passages (33:20-23; Isa. 6:1; John 1:18). Perhaps they only
saw His feet or, more exactly, a "representation" of part of
God in human form (cf. Isa. 6:1; Rev. 4:2, 6). The "pavement
of [clear] sapphire" contributed to the vision of God as the
supra-terrestrial sovereign (cf. Ezek. 1:22; Rev. 4:6; 12:2).

"… what Moses and his companions experience is

a theophany of the Presence of God, not a vision
of his person, and what they see, bowed before
even that awesome reality, is what could be seen

1Wolf, p. 153.
2Childs, p. 506; Johnson, p. 74.
3Cassuto, p. 312.
4See Kaiser, "Exodus," p. 449.
5E.g., L. Wood, A Survey …, p. 145.
6Kaiser, "Exodus," p. 450.
228 Dr. Constable's Notes on Exodus 2021 Edition

from a position of obeisant prostration, the

surface on which his Presence offered itself. …
The reference in v 10 may therefore be a double
one, calling up the deep dark blue of an endless
sky and the building materials of legendary divine
dwelling-places."1

God in mercy did not consume ("stretch out His hand against")
the sinners before Him. Rather, He allowed them to eat in His
presence, thus symbolizing the fact that He was taking on the
responsibility for their safety and welfare (cf. Gen. 31:44-46).2

"We have argued that the awkward surface structure of the

narrative [in chapters 19—24], which results in the non-linear
temporal ordering of events, can be explained when one takes
into account the sequence structure of the narrative,
particularly the use of the literary device called resumptive
repetition. As a result of this literary device we have
demonstrated that the narrative contains two different
perspectives of the theophany. First, there is the perspective
of Yahweh which emphasizes the preparation and execution of
the covenant as well as highlighting the holiness of God, which
is a key to understanding the relationship that exists between
Yahweh and His people. Second, there is the perspective of the
people, which is elaborated upon in the two resumptive
narratives in 20, 18-21 and 24, 1-8. The first resumptive
narrative in 20, 18-21, which elaborates in detail the fear of
the people, serves as a preface and introduction to the
Decalogue and Covenant Code. In addition, it also acts as a
causal link between the fear of the people and their sinful acts
below the mountain in Exod 32. The second resumptive
narrative in 24, 1-8 elaborates in detail the ratification of the
covenant and also leads into the subsequent ascent of Moses
to the mountain where he receives the rest of God's
regulations."3

1Durham, p. 344.
2See Livingston, p. 157.
3G. C. Chirichigno, "The Narrative Structure of Exod. 19-24," Biblica 68:4 (1987):478-79.
2021 Edition Dr. Constable's Notes on Exodus 229

C. DIRECTIONS REGARDING GOD'S DWELLING AMONG HIS PEOPLE 24:12—

31:18

Having given directions clarifying Israel's obedience in the Book of the

Covenant (20:22-23:33), God now summoned Moses up on the mountain
again, to receive His directions regarding Israel's worship. The Book of the
Covenant specified how the Israelites were to live with one another, but
the tabernacle showed them how God wanted them to worship Him.1 The
giving of directions regarding the tabernacle logically follows the
ratification of the Mosaic Covenant. God would now dwell among His people.

"The establishment of a covenant relationship necessitated a

means whereby the vassal party could regularly appear before
the Great King to render his accountability. In normal historical
relationships of this kind between mere men, some sort of
intercession was frequently mandatory and, in any case, a
strict protocol had to be adhered to.2 How much more must
this be required in the case of a sinful people such as Israel,
who must, notwithstanding, communicate with and give
account to an infinitely transcendent and holy God."3

Why did Moses record God's instructions for the tabernacle before the
people sinned by making the golden calf? It was, after all, the golden calf
incident that led to the giving of the priestly laws.

"… according to the logic of the narrative, it was Israel's fear

that had created the need for a safe approach to God, that is,
one in which the people as such were kept at a distance and a
mediator was allowed to represent them. It was precisely for
this reason that the tabernacle was given to Israel."4

1. The revelation of the directions 24:12-18

Moses stayed in the heights of the mountain "40 days and 40 nights," while
God gave him the "stone tablets" of "the law" and all the details of the
tabernacle and its worship. Thus Moses was completely dependent on God.

1Cf. Davis, p. 192.

2For Hittite practice, see O. R. Gurney, The Hittites, pp. 74-75.
3Merrill, "A Theology …," pp. 48-49.
4Sailhamer, The Pentateuch …, p. 58.
230 Dr. Constable's Notes on Exodus 2021 Edition

Now that Israel had entered into a blood covenant with God, God purposed
to dwell among His people (cf. John 1:14). Correspondingly, God now dwells
among Christians by His Holy Spirit, since Jesus Christ has ratified the New
Covenant by shedding His blood.

As in 19:12-25, only Moses went up into God's presence; the rest of the
Israelites remained below. We find the same separation in the tabernacle
and temple, where only authorized persons were permitted to approach
God closely.

The spectacular vision of "the glory of the LORD" on the mountain, "like a
consuming fire" (v. 17), should have given the Israelites greater respect
for God's revelation than they demonstrated later (cf. 32:1-8). There were
three symbols of God's glory: the cloud, the fire, and the voice.

The Hebrew word translated "rested" ("settled" NIV) in verse 16 is

transliterated shekinah in English (cf. 25:8; 40:35). The Jews called the
cloud that indicated the special presence of God the shekinah (lit. the
"abode" or "residence," i.e., of God). This term does not appear in the Old
Testament but in the Targums. The Targums are explanations of the
Hebrew Scriptures, written later in the Aramaic language for the benefit of
Jews who, because of the Babylonian Captivity, had not learned Hebrew.

2. Contributions for the construction of the sanctuary

25:1-9

"In contrast to Egypt and other countries where many temples

existed, Israel was to have only one place of worship."1

The people gave freely to build the tabernacle. This shows that they valued
the privilege of having an intimate relationship with God. However, the
Israelites found it easier to give to the construction of the tabernacle than
to obey God faithfully. The same is true today. But God desires obedience
more than sacrifice (1 Sam. 15:22-23).

1L. Wood, A Survey …, p. 150.

2021 Edition Dr. Constable's Notes on Exodus 231

"Only voluntary gifts were acceptable as materials for the

Lord's house (25:2; 35:3, 21-22, 29), since love rather than
compulsion is the basis of all truly biblical giving (2 Cor. 9:7)."1

"We should ask, not only, 'What must we do?' but, 'What may
we do for God?'"2

Moses usually employed one of four different terms to describe the

"tabernacle," each of which emphasizes one of its purposes, though other
names also appear:

1. "Sanctuary" (25:8) means "place of holiness," and stresses the

transcendence of Israel's God as an Exalted Being who is different
from His people. One of the purposes of this structure was to
manifest the glory of God.3 However, this verse also states that such
a God would "dwell among" His people.4

2. "Tabernacle" (25:9) means "dwelling place," and emphasizes God's

purpose of abiding near His people. The tabernacle looked like the
other nomads' tents that the Israelites lived in. They would have
thought of it as "God's tent" among their tents. It had furniture, just
as their tents did.

"Just as they lived in tents, so God would condescend

to 'dwell' in a tent."5

3. "Tent of Meeting" (26:36; 29:42-43; 35:21) also stresses the

immanence of God. God "met" with Moses and the Israelites in this
tent. The verb translated "meeting" means a deliberate prearranged
rendezvous, rather than a casual accidental meeting. Some scholars
believe that the "tent of meeting" was a different structure than the
"tabernacle," and that it was always outside the camp of Israel.6

4. "Tabernacle (or Tent) of Testimony" (38:21; Num. 9:15; 17:7, 8)

indicates that the structure was the repository of the Law wherein

1Youngblood, p. 113.
2Henry, p. 100.
3J. N. Darby, Synopsis of the Books of the Bible, 1:107.
4See Angel Manuel Rodriguez, "Sanctuary Theology in the Book of Exodus," Andrews

University Seminary Studies 24:2 (Summer 1986):127-45.

5Youngblood, p. 114.
6E.g., Eugene H. Merrill, Deuteronomy, p. 401.
232 Dr. Constable's Notes on Exodus 2021 Edition

God testified of His will. Moses sometimes referred to the ark of the
covenant as the "ark of the testimony" (25:22), because it
contained the "two tablets of the testimony" (31:18), on which were
inscribed the Ten Commandments. The Ten Commandments are the
"testimony." They were the essential stipulations of the Mosaic
Covenant, the "heart" of the relationship between God and His
people.

God specifically designed the tabernacle structure, and all its furnishings,
to teach the Israelites about Himself—and how they as sinners could have
a relationship with Him. It is interesting that in the chapters to follow we
have few explanations of specifically what the plan, pieces, and purposes
signified. Later revelation helps, but interpreters of this material have had
to do a lot of guessing.

"The thoughts of God concerning salvation and His kingdom,

which the earthly building was to embody and display, were
visibly set forth in the pattern shown [to Moses]."1

"The tabernacle also provided a prophetic prefigurement of

the redemptive program of God as focused in Jesus Christ. …
[It] was a remarkable picture of the high priestly work of Christ
both here on earth and His eternal work in the heavens."2

"Probably the conception of the tabhnith, the 'model' (Exodus

25:9), also goes back ultimately to the idea that the earthly
sanctuary is the counterpart of the heavenly dwelling of a
deity."3

"Commentators for centuries have noticed that the phrase

'the LORD said to Moses' occurs seven times in chapters 25—
31. The first six concern the building of the tabernacle and its
furnishings (25:1; 30:11, 17, 22, 34: 31:1), while the final
introduces the Sabbath command (31:12). It seems clear that
the purpose of this arrangement is to aid the reader in making

1Keil and Delitzsch, 2:167.

2Davis, pp. 245-56.
3Frank M. Cross Jr., "The Tabernacle," Biblical Archaeologist 10:3 (September 1947):62.

For a good introduction to the background of the tabernacle, see G. Ernest Wright, "The
Significance of the Temple in the Ancient Near East," Biblical Archaeologist 7:4 (December
1944):65-77. Cf. Exod. 25:40; Heb. 8:5.
2021 Edition Dr. Constable's Notes on Exodus 233

the connection between the building of the tabernacle and the

seven days of creation, both of which involve six creative acts
culminating in a seventh-day rest."1

Is there a literal tabernacle in heaven? Verses like Hebrews 8:5, and 9:23
and 24, have led some interpreters to answer: Yes.2 Most believe that
heaven itself is this tabernacle.

"… the tabernacle is an earthly representation of a heavenly

reality—a portable Mount Horeb/Sinai."3

3. The tabernacle furnishings 25:10-40

One writer identified three major problems the interpreter faces as he or

she seeks to understand God's revelation concerning the tabernacle4:

1. What was the length of the cubit, the standard measure of length?
This is a problem, because the various ancient nations had different
lengths for their cubits. A "cubit" was usually the distance between
the elbow and the middle fingertip. The length ranged from about 17
inches to 21 inches, but there is good reason to believe that the
"Hebrew cubit" at that time was 17.5 inches, or about one and a half
feet.

2. What about the information omitted in the text? Anyone who has
tried to make a model or detailed drawing of the tabernacle and its
furnishings has experienced frustration. The data given in the text is
incomplete. Undoubtedly God revealed all the details to Moses.
However, He has preserved only those details necessary for our
understanding of the fundamental significance and functioning of the
tabernacle in Scripture.

3. What was the exact shape of the tabernacle? The text does not
enable us to know for certain if it had a flat roof or a gabled roof
formed by a ridgepole. Both possibilities have problems connected
with them, but the flat roof design seems more probable, all things

1Enns, p. 509. See also pp. 507, 521, 550.

2E.g.,McGee, 1:279.
3Enns, p. 532.
4Davis, pp. 246-51.
234 Dr. Constable's Notes on Exodus 2021 Edition

considered. A gabled roof would have increased the measurement of

the roof beyond the specified width of 15 feet, so that the curtains
over the roof and sides would not have fully covered the sides.

Another problem is the extent of typological teaching that God intended.

A "type" is a divinely intended illustration.1 Thus all types are illustrations,
but not all illustrations are types.2 How much detail did God intend to
illustrate His character and relationship with His people?

We know that the major aspects of the tabernacle and its furnishings are
types, because the New Testament writers identified them as such (Heb.
3:4-5; 8:5; 9:8-9, 23-24; 10:20). However, the amount of detail Moses
preserved, and the obvious correspondence of certain details not identified
as types, have led many commentators to conclude that God intended
these details to be instructive, too. Some commentators have taken this
teaching to extend even to the numbers and colors used that, in some
cases in Scriptural usage, do have symbolic significance.

"Everything in the tabernacle speaks of either the person or

work of Christ. Every covering, every thread, and every article
of furniture reveals some facet of the Savior."3

"There are more types of Christ in this book than perhaps in

any other book of the Old Testament; for Moses wrote of him,
John v. 46."4

Some commentators have taken this too far, in the judgment of other
students of Exodus.

I prefer a cautious approach myself. It seems to me that there are many

illustrations of New Testament truth in the Old Testament. This seems clear
in view of the amount of detail God preserved here. It also seems clear,
since the illustrative significance of some features of the tabernacle is so
obvious, even though the New Testament does not identify them as types.5

1Charles C. Ryrie, The Holy Spirit, p. 23.

2See Terry, pp. 334-46; Baxter, 1:53-62; Paul L. Tan, The Interpretation of Prophecy, pp.
166-74; Roy B. Zuck, Basic Bible Interpretation, pp. 169-84.
3McGee, 1:285. See also idem, The Tabernacle: God's Portrait of Christ.
4Henry, p. 72.
5See Gerald R. McDermott, "Typology in Creation," Bibliotheca Sacra 175:697 (January-

March 2018):5-16, for an argument for extensive typology.

2021 Edition Dr. Constable's Notes on Exodus 235

An extremely conservative approach would be to identify as "types" only

those things that the New Testament calls "types" (Gr. typos, cf.
antitypos).1 These would include Adam (Rom. 5:14), the wilderness
wanderings of Israel (1 Cor. 10:6, 11), the holy place in the tabernacle and
temple (Heb. 9:24), and the flood in Noah's day (1 Pet. 3:21). We could
refer to other foreshadowings simply as illustrations.2

Josephus, following Philo, interpreted the tabernacle, its furniture, and the
priests' garments symbolically. He wrote that the seven branches of the
lampstand represent the courses of the planets. The colors of the curtains
and clothing represent the four elements (earth, water, air, and fire). The
two shoulder stones stand for the sun and moon. The 12 breastplate
stones represent the 12 months or the 12 signs of the Greek zodiac.3
Josephus' suggestions, however, do not seem to be the best
interpretations of the significance of these things.

Note that the order in which Moses described the things associated with
the tabernacle in the text, is not what one would normally expect. For
example, we would expect that after the description of the altar of burnt
offerings, we would have a description of the laver. The altar of burnt
offerings was the major piece of furniture in the courtyard, and the first
one the Israelite would meet as he entered the courtyard. Then the laver
was the second most prominent item, because it would catch the Israelite's
eye next. It was also the object between the altar and the tabernacle.
However, instead, we read about the altar of burnt offerings, then the
priestly vestments, then the consecration of Aaron, and then finally the
laver.

This order is due, I believe, to the two emphases in the revelation: First,
Moses was describing things that primarily manifest God, and second,
things dealing with His people's fellowship with God. So the author was first
describing things in the "holy of holies (Most Holy Place)" where God dwelt,
then things in the "Holy Place," and then finally things in the courtyard.
This order, therefore, focuses attention on the presence of Yahweh among

1See J. Barton Payne, The Theology of the Older Testament, p. 357.

2See Paul Lee Tan, Principles of Literal Interpretation of the Bible, pp. 36-39. Examples of
extensive typological interpretation are Edward Dennett, Typical Teachings of Genesis; C.
H. M[ackintosh], Notes on the Pentateuch, vols. 3-5; A. J. Pollock, The Tabernacle's Typical
Teaching; Samuel Ridout, Lectures on the Tabernacle; and H. W. Soltau, The Tabernacle,
the Priesthood and the Offerings.
3Josephus, Antiquities of …, 3:7:7.
236 Dr. Constable's Notes on Exodus 2021 Edition

His people, which was the most important feature of Israel's life. The
tabernacle itself also reflects the importance of Yahweh's presence at the
center of His people.

"Perhaps we might take another view of the general

arrangement of these courts. May we not say that there is
something here to remind us of each person of the Godhead?
In yonder Holy of holies, behind the veil, in light inaccessible, is
the symbol of the Father. Then, at yonder gate, meeting the
view of every inquirer, is the Altar of Sacrifice, the symbol of
the Son, who said, 'Lo, I come.' And between stands the laver
of pure water, the symbol of the Holy Ghost. The whole might
be called Ephesians ii. 18 written in sacred hieroglyphics—
'Through Him we both have access by one Spirit unto the
Father.'"1

"The tabernacle was built on a ratio of 2:1 and on a radiating

decrease value of metal: gold, silver, bronze, from the center
[where God dwelt] to the outer edges."2

The metals, woods, and fabrics that the Israelites were to use in the
construction of the tabernacle and its worship, were the finest and rarest
available. This reflected the fact that nothing but the best was appropriate
for the worshippers' response to Yahweh. What was at the center of
priestly concern, was not a building or a ritual—but the LORD Himself, being
present as a gift to His people.3

The ark of the covenant 25:10-22

The "ark" was the "throne" of Yahweh on earth, where He dwelt in a

localized way, and met with the Israelites through their high priest. It was
the "seat" of His sovereignty, but also the place where He met with His
people (v. 22). This is why directions for its construction come first.

"In determining the significance of the Ark the overwhelmingly

probable assumption from which to start is that it represents

1Andrew A. Bonar, A Commentary on Leviticus, p. 151.

2Livingston,p. 178.
3Durham, p. 355.
2021 Edition Dr. Constable's Notes on Exodus 237

the 'unoccupied throne of the deity', a class of sacred objects

of which instances are to be found outside Israel."1

The "testimony" (tablets inscribed with the Ten Commandments, vv. 16,
22) lay inside the ark, which was a hollow box. God's dwelling among His
people, and His relationship with them, thus, quite literally, rested on the
Ten Commandments. The "mercy seat" (v. 17) was the removable "lid" of
this box, and was "solid (pure) gold." It was there that the high priest
offered sacrificial blood once a year, sprinkling the blood to atone for
(cover) the sins of the Israelites as a nation. This offering made
"propitiation" (satisfaction) for their sins for one year (cf. Lev. 16).

The Greek word here in the Septuagint, used to translate "mercy seat"
(hilasterion), is another form of the word used to describe Jesus Christ as
our "propitiation" (hilasmos) in 1 John 2:2. The mercy seat was for the
Israelites, temporarily, what Jesus Christ is for all people, permanently: the
place where God found satisfaction.

"It [mercy] is a sweet word! A seat of mercy, baptised [sic] in

mercy, from which mercy flows forth. Not wrath, not
judgment, not indignation, but mercy is pouring forth from its
original fountain in the heart of God."2

The "cherubim" (v. 18) were special angels, and the gold cherubim on the
mercy seat represented real angels—in God's presence—who "apparently
have to do with the holiness of God as violated by sin."3 They may have
looked like winged human-headed lions.4 Josephus wrote that Moses saw
these creatures around God's throne when he was on Mt. Sinai.5

1Eichrodt, 1:107-8.
2Meyer, p. 307.
3Unger's Bible Dictionary, s.v. "Cherub," by Merrill F. Unger, pp. 191-92.
4Youngblood, p. 122; cf. Kaiser, "Exodus," p. 455.
5Josephus, Antiquities of …, 3:6:5. See John T. Bunn, "The Ark of the Covenant," Biblical
Illustrator 9:4 (Summer 1983):50-53. Geoffrey Kind, "Where Is the Ark of the Covenant?"
Prophetic Witness 8:2 (February 1984):9-10, suggested several possible answers to the
title question. See also A. H. Tolhurst, "Whatever Happened to the Ark?" Ministry (June
1984), pp. 13-15.
238 Dr. Constable's Notes on Exodus 2021 Edition

THE PLAN OF THE TABERNACLE

WEST

Ark of the
Covenant
Holy of
Holies
Altar of
Incense

Lampstand Table of
Showbread
SOUTH NORTH
Holy
Place

Lavar
Alter of
Burnt
Offerings

EAST

"The cherubim are connected with the throne as its guardians

and/or bearers [e.g., 1 Sam. 4:4; 2 Sam. 6:2; Ps. 80:1; 99:1].
In other cultures cherubim are minor deities protective of
2021 Edition Dr. Constable's Notes on Exodus 239

palaces and temple; in Israel they symbolized angelic guardians

of the invisible throne of God."1

"As with the tabernacle in general, the ark also has ancient
Near Eastern parallels. In King Tut's tomb, for example, was
found a cedar chest complete with rings and poles. Depositing
the law inside a sacred place (cf. 25:16, 21) is also known from
other ancient sources. The same is true of the cherubim that
sit atop the cover of the ark. These were common symbols in
the ancient world, and the Israelites were no doubt familiar
with them."2

This probably explains in part why we do not have more detail given in
Exodus: The Israelites who first received this revelation knew some things
that we do not know today and could fill in the gaps in the Lord's
instructions.

Some have seen the composition of the ark as illustrative of the person of
Christ: wood (His humanity) overlaid with gold (His deity). The mercy seat
was pure gold, suggesting the perfection of Christ's work of atonement.3

The table of showbread 25:23-30

This piece of furniture stood on the north side of the holy place, the right
side as the priest entered from the courtyard. The priests placed twelve
loaves (large pieces) of unleavened4 bread, called "the bread of the
Presence," in two rows5 or piles6 on this table, where they remained for
seven days. Evidently the bread was stacked in two piles, like pancakes.
The priests substituted twelve fresh loaves for the old bread each Sabbath
(Lev. 24:5-8). The term "bread of the Presence" (v. 30) means that these

1Waltke, An Old …, p. 460.

2Enns, pp. 511-12.
3McGee, Thru the …, 1:280-81.
4Josephus, Antiquities of …, 3:6:5.
5Henry, p. 100; William L. Lane, Hebrews 9—13, p. 220.
6Josephus, Antiquities of …, 3:6:6; Jamieson, et al., p. 74; Edersheim, p. 185; Bill Mitchell,

"Leviticus 24:6: The bread of the presence—rows or piles?" The Bible Translator 33:4
(October 1982):447-48.
240 Dr. Constable's Notes on Exodus 2021 Edition

loaves lay before God's presence in the tabernacle.1 The Israelites did not
offer this food for Yahweh to eat, as the pagans offered food to their gods.2

They did so "as a symbol of the spiritual food which Israel was
to prepare (John 6:27; cf. 4:32, 34), a figurative
representation of the calling it had received from God."3

"Ancient symbolism, both Jewish and Christian, regarded 'the

bread of the Presence' as an emblem of the Messiah."4

"The twelve loaves constituted a perpetual thank offering to

God from the twelve tribes for the blessings that they received
from Him day by day."5

"By its opulence as by the containers and the food and drink
placed continuously upon it and periodically renewed, this
Table announces: 'He is here,' and here as one who gives
sustenance."6

"The bread and the wine, situated as they are just outside the
Most Holy Pace, are a continual reminder of the covenant that
the holy God, who is located behind the curtain just several
feet away, has made with his people."7

Perhaps "the bread" signified both God's provisions and Israel's "vocation,"
since Israel was to be a source of spiritual food for the world (19:5-6).

"… the table and the bread of the Presence have been taken
as a type of the church which stands in Christ's (the ark)
presence."8

1See Edersheim, p. 182, for discussion of the origin of the old word "shewbread."
2Kaiser, "Exodus," p. 456.
3Keil and Delitzsch, 2:171.
4Edersheim, p. 186. Cf. McGee, Thru the …, 1:282.
5Davis, p. 255.
6Durham, p. 362.
7Enns, p. 514.
8Sailhamer, The Pentateuch …, p. 302.
2021 Edition Dr. Constable's Notes on Exodus 241

The lampstand 25:31-40

This piece of furniture was probably similar in size to the table of showbread
(v. 39). It stood "opposite [that] table" (26:35) in the holy place, against
the south (left) wall. It weighed about 75 pounds ("a talent of pure gold").
The tabernacle craftsmen fashioned it in the form of a stylized plant or
tree, probably an almond tree. It connoted life and fertility.

"The signification of the seven-armed candlestick is apparent

from its purpose, viz. to carry seven lamps, which were
trimmed and filled with oil every morning, and lighted every
evening, and were to burn throughout the night (chap. xxvii.
20, 21, xxx. 7, 8; Lev. xxiv. 3, 4). As the Israelites were to
prepare spiritual food in the shew-bread in the presence of
Jehovah, and to offer continually the fruit of their labour in the
field of the kingdom of God, as a spiritual offering to the Lord;
so also were they to present themselves continually to
Jehovah in the burning lamps, as the vehicles and media of
light, as a nation letting its light shine in the darkness of this
world (cf. Matt. v. 14, 16; Luke xii. 35; Phil. ii. 15). The oil,
through which the lamps burned and shone, was, according to
its peculiar virtue in imparting strength to the body and
restoring vital power, a representation of the Godlike spirit, the
source of all the vital power of man; whilst the oil, as offered
by the congregation of Israel, and devoted to sacred purposes
according to the command of God, is throughout the
Scriptures a symbol of the Spirit of God, by which the
congregation of God was filled with higher light and life. By the
power of this Spirit, Israel, in covenant with the Lord, was to
let its light shine, the light of its knowledge of God and spiritual
illumination, before all the nations of the earth. In its seven
arms the stamp of the covenant relationship was impressed
upon the candlestick; and the almond-blossom with which it
was ornamented represented the seasonable offering of the
flowers and fruits of the Spirit, the almond-tree deriving its
name … from the fact that it is the earliest of all the trees in
both its blossom and its fruit (cf. Jer. 1:11, 12). The symbolic
character of the candlestick is clearly indicated in the
Scriptures. The prophet Zechariah (chap. 4) sees a golden
candlestick with seven lamps and two olive-trees, one on either
242 Dr. Constable's Notes on Exodus 2021 Edition

side, from which the oil-vessel is supplied; and the angel who
is talking with him informs him that the olive-trees are the two
sons of oil, that is to say, the representatives of the kingdom
and priesthood, the divinely appointed organs through which
the Spirit of God was communicated to the covenant nation.
And in Rev. 1:20, the seven churches, which represent the new
people of God, i.e., the Christian Church, are shown to the holy
seer in the form of seven candlesticks standing before the
throne of God."1

"In company with the Table attesting Yahweh's Presence in

bounty and the Ark attesting Yahweh's Presence in mercy and
revelation, the Lampstand symbolized Yahweh's Presence in
perpetual wakefulness, through the reminder of the almond
tree and the continual brightness of the living fire (cf. Num
17:16-26 [17:1-11]). The watcher over Israel never nodded,
much less slept (Ps 121:4)."2

Like the showbread, the burning "lamps" may have symbolized both the
character of God and the calling of Israel. The seven-branched "lampstand"
(menorah) has been, and still is, a popular symbol of Judaism and Israel
around the world. A bas relief of the lampstand that stood in Herod's
Temple is still visible on an inside panel of the Arch of Titus that stands in
Rome. The Romans built this arch following Titus' destruction of Jerusalem
in A.D. 70.

"The lampstand is commonly taken to be a type of Christ,

usually on the basis of Revelation 1:4 [cf. vv. 12-13]. It has
also been taken as a symbolic image of the Law."3

4. The tabernacle structure ch. 26

The tabernacle walls consisted of rigid supports—a framework of "boards"

or "frames" supported and held together by sockets, bars, tenons, and
rings—with curtains hung over the entire framework. These draperies, that
made up the tabernacle's tent-coverings, on its sides, also evidently formed
its ceiling. Most commentators believe that the tabernacle was a single

1Keil and Delitzsch, 2:174-75.

2Durham, p. 365.
3Sailhamer, The Pentateuch …, p. 302.
2021 Edition Dr. Constable's Notes on Exodus 243

unified structure, but a few believe it consisted of three separate

structures, one on top of the other. These three "structures" were: the
tabernacle proper (the supporting framework of boards and connecting
sockets, rings, bars, and tenons), a first tent over it made of goat hair, and
a second tent of skins that covered both of these structures.1

The tabernacle as a whole illustrates four different things according to

Scripture. It represents "the heavens where God dwells," from which He
manifests Himself (Heb. 4:14; 9:23-24), the "work of Christ" (John 2:19-
21; Heb. 3:3-4; 8:2; 9:11-12), the "individual believer" (1 Cor. 6:19), and
"the church" (1 Tim. 3:15; Heb. 3:6; 10:21).

"The tabernacle seems to represent a microcosm of creation

itself. The splendor and beauty of the materials used—fine
fabrics, precious metals, and stones—affirm the goodness of
the created world. The precise and perfect dimensions of the
tabernacle indicate a sense of order amid chaos. …

"in the midst of a fallen world, in exile from the Garden of

Eden—the original 'heaven on earth'—God undertakes another
act of creation, a building project that is nothing less than a
return to pre-Fall splendor. … If this is a correct understanding
of the tabernacle, we begin to see why the writer of Exodus
devotes so much space to its description."2

The curtains 26:1-14

The extent to which these curtains were visible from inside the tabernacle
is not clear in the text, and has been the subject of debate by
commentators. They were of four colors that some writers have interpreted
as having symbolic significance, on the basis of other biblical references to
and uses of these colors. The colors were "white" (holiness), "blue"
(heavenly origin and character), "purple" (royal glory), and "crimson"
(blood and vigorous life).3 "Blue" was also the color of garments that
certain people of high social standing wore (the high priest, 28:31; people
of royalty or nobility, 1 Sam. 18:4; 24:4).

1Ibid.,pp. 302-3.
2Enns, pp. 521-22.
3E.g., McGee, Thru the …, 1:285.
244 Dr. Constable's Notes on Exodus 2021 Edition

"Woven into the fabric of the curtains were images of

cherubim, apparently intended to recall the theme of 'paradise
lost' by alluding to the cherubim which guarded the 'Tree of
Life' in Genesis 3:24."1

Another view is that the cherubim were to remind the Israelites that angels
surrounded them.2 Likewise the clasps that joined the separate curtains
together (v. 6) may have been intended to remind them that, though they
were many (individual tribes, clans, and families), they were joined together
as one nation and people of God (cf. Eph. 2:21-22; 4:16).3

Some interpreters have seen the "goats' skins" as signifying separation

from evil. The later prophets in Israel, who dressed in goatskins, called the
people to holiness and separation from evil. Incidentally, it was the
"scapegoat" who carried away the sins of the nation, separating the sins
from the people in "its own skin," into the wilderness. Some have felt that
the "rams' skins dyed red" taught the Israelites the importance of devotion
to God, since He specified the use of "rams" in some offerings of worship.
A slightly different interpretation follows:

"Within the sanctuary, moving from the inside out, the curtains
of fine linen were visible only to the priests who served in the
presence of him who is purity and righteousness itself. The
curtains of goats' hair were reminders of the daily sin offering
that was a kid from the goats (Num 28:15) and of our
cleansing from sin (Lev 16). The covering of rams' skins also
recalled the sacrifice used in consecrating the priesthood (Lev.
8); and it was deliberately dyed red, showing that the
priesthood was set apart by blood. Finally, the protective
coating of the sea cows' [NIV; porpoise or dolphin, NASB;
badger, AV, NKJV; goat, RSV] hides marked a protective
separation between the dwelling place of God and the world."4

J. Vernon McGee saw different meanings in these curtains:

"This [first embroidered linen] covering could not be seen from

the outside at all and, frankly, the beauty of the Lord Jesus

1Sailhamer, The Pentateuch …, p. 303.

2Henry, p. 101.
3Ibid.
4Kaiser, "Exodus," p. 459.
2021 Edition Dr. Constable's Notes on Exodus 245

Christ can not be seen by the world. … The second curtain was
made of goats' hair and it touched the ground. This curtain
speaks of Christ's worth for sinners. It is symbolic of the death
of Christ, and this is the message that is to be given to the
world. … The third covering was made of rams' skin dyed red.
This curtain speaks of the strength and vigor of Christ and His
offering on the cross. This curtain shows the outward aspect
of His offering as our substitute. … The fourth curtain was
made of badgers' skins (sealskins). … This covering speaks of
Christ's walk before men."1

The total area covered by these tapestries was 45 feet long by 15 feet
wide by 15 feet high. The Most Holy Place was a 15-foot cube, and the
Holy Place was 30 by 15 by 15 feet. Thus, the tabernacle structure was
only about one and a half modern parking spaces wide, and a little more
than two parking spaces long.

The boards 26:15-25

It is not clear whether these "boards" were solid planks, or simply "frames"
(NIV). The meaning of the Hebrew word (garesh, "boards") is uncertain.
The latter view of "frames" might be more probable.2 However, Josephus
wrote that "the joints [of the boards] were invisible, and both [boards on
either side of these joints] seemed to be one entire and united wall."3 If
they were solid, the priests would not have been able to see, from within,
the colorful curtains hanging down over the outside of the tabernacle. If
these boards were "frames," though, they could have seen them, or at
least the most interior covering, through the walls. The embroidered
curtains at least seem to have been visible overhead, in either case, and
likely reminded the priests of God's celestial throne.

The bars 26:26-30

These "bars" were evidently rods that the priests threaded through the
boards, actually through the rings attached to the boards—horizontally—
to give the boards stability like a solid wall, and to hold them upright. These
"bars" or rods may have had significance to the Israelites, which some

1McGee, Thru the …, 1:285. Paragraph divisions omitted.

2Durham, p. 372.
3Josephus, Antiquities of …, 3:6:3.
246 Dr. Constable's Notes on Exodus 2021 Edition

commentators have speculated upon, or they may have simply served a

practical purpose.

The veil 26:31-35

The "veil" and curtains were alike in design and construction, both woven
with three colored fabrics: blue, purple, and scarlet. Arthur W. Pink wrote
some interesting comments about these colors:

"This order 'blue, purple and scarlet' is repeated over twenty

times in Exodus, and is never varied. … The 'blue' is the color
of heaven, and speaks of Christ as the Son of God. The 'scarlet'
is both the color of sacrifice and human glory. The 'purple' is a
color produced by the mixing together of blue and scarlet.
Without the purple, the blue and the scarlet would have
presented too vivid a contrast to the eye; the purple coming
in between them shaded off the one extreme from the other.

"Now the antitype of these colors is found in the incarnate

Christ. He was both God and man, and yet these two vastly
dissimilar natures unite in one perfect Person. The 'purple,'
then, coming in between the 'blue' and the 'scarlet' tells of the
perfect blending or union of His two natures."1

The veil was hung in order to serve as an interior wall, separating the holy
and most holy places into two rooms. Some extrabiblical references to "a
second veil" between the holy and most holy places have created
confusion.2 The Old Testament is clear that there was just one. The Book
of Hebrews used "the veil in the temple," which replaced this one in the
tabernacle, as a symbol of Jesus Christ's body. Literally torn in His
crucifixion, both Christ and, symbolically, the temple veil, opened the way
for access into God's presence (Heb. 10:20; cf. Matt. 27:50-51; Mark
15:37-38; Luke 23:45-46).

"The veil was hung upon four pillars and speaks of the
humanity of Jesus Christ. The pillars were made of shittim
[acacia] wood covered with gold, with silver sockets attached.

1Arthur W. Pink, Exposition of the Gospel of John, 2:192.

2See Henry van der Meulen, "One or two veils in front of the holy of holies?" Theologia
Evangelica 18:1 (March 1985):22-27.
2021 Edition Dr. Constable's Notes on Exodus 247

These speak of deity taking hold of earth through

redemption."1

"Some students see a parallel between the four Gospels and

the four pillars that supported the veil with the four colors.
Purple speaks of royalty—the Gospel of Matthew, the Gospel
of the King. Scarlet reminds us of sacrifice—the Gospel of
Mark, the Gospel of the Suffering Servant. White speaks of the
perfect Son of Man—the Gospel of Luke, and blue points to
heaven—the Gospel of John, the Gospel of the Son of God who
came from heaven to die for our sins."2

The screen 26:36-37

The "screen" was a drapery—woven like the veil and curtains from blue,
purple, and scarlet fabrics—that served as the front door-flap to the
tabernacle.

"The techniques used for the Tabernacle—gilded frames and

beams, with coverings—were those used for 'prefab'
structures (religious and otherwise) in Egypt for up to fifteen
centuries before Moses."3

5. The tabernacle courtyard 27:1-19

In this section, Moses described the altar of burnt offerings, the courtyard
itself, and the oil for the lamps on the lampstand, that the priests evidently
prepared in the courtyard.

"As you get closer to God, the emphasis is on the person of

Christ. As you move farther out, the emphasis is on the work
of Christ."4

The altar of burnt offerings 27:1-8

The "height" of this altar was four and a half feet ("3 cubits"). This height
has led some commentators to suggest that a step-like bench or ledge may

1McGee, Thru the …, 1:286.

2Wiersbe, p. 238.
3Kitchen, The Bible…, pp. 85-86.
4McGee, Thru the …, 1:286.
248 Dr. Constable's Notes on Exodus 2021 Edition

have surrounded it, on which the priests stood when they offered
sacrifices.1 In view of the command prohibiting steps up to Israel's altars
(20:26), a ramp seems more probable (cf. Lev. 9:22). However, there may
have been neither a ramp nor steps. The altar had "four horns" (v. 2), one
on each corner, to which the priests applied blood ritually (29:12). People
occasionally clung to this altar, holding onto the horns, as a place of refuge
(cf. 1 Kings 1:50-51; 2:28). The priests also bound some animals to these
horns when they sacrificed them (Ps. 118:27). There was a grate ("grating
of network of bronze," v. 4) halfway to the ground, inside the altar, that
allowed air to circulate under the sacrifices, and ashes to fall to the ground
below. The "ledge" apparently projected out from the altar, about halfway
up its sides. Perhaps the priests stood on this ledge while placing the
offerings on the altar, and the ledge may have also extended inside of the
altar to hold the grate. Since steps up to the altar were forbidden, this
"ledge" may have been a sloping mound of earth or ramp.

This bronze altar "received" (i.e., in God's behalf) the offerings of the
Israelites.

"We present to Him our bodies (Rom. 12:1-2), or material

wealth (Phil. 4:18), praise and good works (Heb. 13:15-16),
and a broken heart (Ps. 51:17)."2

God met the Israelite where he was, in the courtyard, rather than where He
was, within the veil. Nevertheless the Israelite had to make a special effort
to approach God, by entering the courtyard to present his offering (cf. 2
Cor. 5:18-20). There was only one entrance (cf. John 10:9; 14:6).

"The position of the Altar just inside the entrance to the court
made it as clear as symbology could that the beginning of
fellowship between God and man must be in sacrifice."3

"It speaks of the cross of Christ, and of the fact that He is

actually the One who died in man's stead. … The cross was
God's chosen altar of sacrifice."4

1E.g.,
Keil and Delitzsch, 2:186-87.
2Wiersbe, p. 237.
3Meyer, p. 349.
4McGee, Thru the …, 1:287.
2021 Edition Dr. Constable's Notes on Exodus 249

The Book of Hebrews viewed this "altar" as a prototype of the better

"Altar," which is Jesus Christ (Heb. 13:10).

The courtyard 27:9-19

The courtyard ("court") was "50 cubits" wide by "100 cubits" long (75
feet by 150 feet, half the length of an American football field). This area
is about the size of a modest home site in the United States. The curtains
that formed its perimeter were only half as high as those surrounding the
tabernacle structure (7 and a half feet instead of 15 feet). So the Israelites
outside the courtyard could see the top part of the tabernacle.

"All its vessels were of copper-brass, which, being allied to the

earth in both colour and material, was a symbolic
representation of the earthy side of the kingdom of God;
whereas the silver of the capitals of the pillars, and of the
hooks and rods which sustained the hangings, as well as the
white colour of the byssus-hangings, might point to the
holiness of this site for the kingdom of God."1

"The whole arrangement of the outer court, and in particular

the placement of the altar of sacrifice and the laver, speak
pointedly of man's approach to God."2

"… this structure provided the same kind of physical

separation between the holy God and his people as did the
mountain at Sinai (temporal separation is also provided in the
annual feasts and celebrations, e.g., the yearly Day of
Atonement, Lev 16)."3

"The court preserved the Tabernacle from accidental or

intentional profanation, and it gave the priests a certain
measure of privacy for the prosecution of their duties. Its
presence was a perpetual reminder that man should pause and
consider, before he rushes into the presence of the Most High
[cf. Eccles. 5:2]."4

1Keil and Delitzsch, 2:190.

2Davis, p. 263.
3Sailhamer, The Pentateuch …, p. 298.
4Meyer, p. 348.
250 Dr. Constable's Notes on Exodus 2021 Edition

"The courtyard is the place of worship where the people could

gather—they entered his courts. If the courtyard does not
interest us very much, it did the Israelites. Here the sacrifices
were made, the choirs sang, the believers offered their praises,
they had their sins forgiven, they came to pray, they appeared
on the holy days, and they heard from God. It was sacred
because God met them there; they left the 'world' so to speak
and came into his presence."1

Following is a diagram of the "Ground Plan of the Tabernacle" adapted from

the one in Jacob Milgrom's commentary on Leviticus.2 It effectively
emphasizes the symmetry of the whole tabernacle complex.

Ark Table

Outer Court

Entrance
Laver
Alter of
Burnt Offering
Alter of
Incense

Menorah

6. The investiture of the priests 27:20—28:43

Here begins the revelation of those things that related to the Israelites'
relationship with God (27:20—30:38). The preceding section (25:10—
27:19) emphasized the revelation of the things that revealed God's
character. The priesthood is the primary revelation in this new section. The
great amount of detail about the consecration of the priests suggests its
importance and significance. The closer the physical relationship with God,
the greater was the need for cleansing and holiness (setting apart to God).

1The NET Bible note on 27:19.

2Milgrom, Leviticus 1—16, p. 135.
2021 Edition Dr. Constable's Notes on Exodus 251

This is a principle that we can learn from this section of Exodus. Leviticus
will clarify this further.

"The approach to the Holy One, both within the biblical

tradition and outside it, has always included some kind of
mediatorial ministry, for it is inherent in any kind of 'high
religion' that an otherwise unbridgeable chasm exist between
ineffable deity and finite mankind.

"In earliest times, of course, Yahweh met directly with His

creation, which in turn communicated with Him in word and
act. With the passing of time and the rise of patriarchal familial
and clan structures, the father of the household functioned
also as its priest, the minister who stood between the family
and its God. Finally—and even before the covenant at Sinai—
there had developed some kind of order of priests, as Exodus
19:22 expressly declares."1

The responsibilities of the priests in Israel fell into four primary categories:

1. They were responsible to maintain the holy place of the tabernacle.

This included: burning incense each morning and evening, trimming
and refilling the lamps each evening, and replacing the showbread
each Sabbath.

2. The priests also maintained the tabernacle courtyard. This involved

offering sacrifices each morning and evening, and blessing the
congregation after the daily sacrifice. It also meant keeping the fire
on the brazen altar always burning, and periodically removing its
ashes.

3. They were also responsible to inspect and appraise people and

sacrifices. These included lepers, wives accused of adultery, and
things dedicated to the sanctuary.

4. Finally, the priests were to teach and counsel the people. They were
to communicate and explain the Mosaic Law to the congregation, and
decide difficult cases of law (cf. Lev. 11—27).

1Merrill, "A Theology …," pp. 49-50.

252 Dr. Constable's Notes on Exodus 2021 Edition

The oil 27:20-21

These instructions concern the "clear [olive] oil" that the priests were to
prepare for, and use in, the tabernacle "lamp[s]." They form a transition
from an emphasis on the tabernacle furnishings to the priests' ministry that
follows.

The priests had to trim the wicks and refill the oil in the lamps on the
lampstand, in the holy place, every evening—to make them "burn
continually." Thus there was "light" in the holy place all night long (cf. Lev.
24:3; 1 Sam. 3:3).

"Oil … is clearly a symbol of the Holy Spirit in Scripture."1

"It was a favourite saying of [Robert Murray] M'Cheyne when

discussing the method of pulpit preparation, that only beaten
oil might be used in the sanctuary, intimating that careful
preparation was required for all material presented for the
consideration of our hearers. It is not a light thing to speak to
men for God, and none of us should essay the holy task apart
from very careful preparation; but when we have done our
utmost in this, we must depend on the kindling of the Divine
fire. Ours is the beaten oil at the best, but what is that, unless
the High Priest Himself shall cause the lamp to burn?"2

The Spirit would, on the one hand, be a perpetual Source of light for them.
On the other hand, He would also empower God's people to be a perpetual
light to the nations (cf. Isa. 42:6).

The priests 28:1-5

Aaron had been functioning as a priest (Heb. cohen; 4:16). Now Moses
officially appointed him and his sons to this office. God apparently specified
Aaron "as (Israel's first high) priest," because he was the brother of Moses,
whom God had already designated as the covenant mediator.3 Josephus
wrote that God chose Aaron because he was "the most righteous person

1Davis, p. 264. See John F. Walvoord, The Holy Spirit, pp. 21-22; and Ryrie, The Holy …,
p. 27.
2Meyer, pp. 323-24.
3Merrill, "A Theology …," p. 50.
2021 Edition Dr. Constable's Notes on Exodus 253

among you" and "the most deserving of this honour."1 But this seems
unlikely in view of Aaron's character, as revealed in later incidents. God's
choice of Aaron was probably because of his relationship to Moses, and
because of God's grace.

Before the sinful priests could approach their holy God, they had to cover
their uncleanness (sinfulness), symbolically, with "holy garments." The
priests had to wear these garments—"a breast-piece and an ephod and a
robe and a tunic … a turban and a sash"—when they served in the
tabernacle ritual, but they could not wear them at other times (35:19; Lev.
16:4, 23, 24). The fact that the workmen (tailors) who made these
garments needed to be wise ("endowed with the spirit of wisdom") and
"skillful" (v. 3) indicates the importance that God placed on their
fabrication.

Aaron's priesthood prefigured that of Jesus Christ (Heb. 5:5; 7:26; 9:11).

"And these garments speak of Christ. … These garments were

set apart for the service of God. Anything that is set apart for
God is holy."2

The ephod 28:6-14

The "ephod" (a transliteration of the Hebrew word) was the most important
and outermost garment of the high priest. It was an apron-like piece of
clothing, made of "gold, of blue and purple and scarlet material," that fit
over his robe (vv. 31-35).

"The duty of the high priest was to enter into the presence of
God and make atonement for the people as their mediator. To
show that as mediator he brought the nation to God, the
names of the twelve tribes were engraved upon precious
stones on the shoulders of the ephod. The precious stones,
with their richness and brilliancy, formed the most suitable
earthly substratum to represent the glory into which Israel was
to be transformed as the possession of Jehovah (xix. 5); whilst
the colours and material of the ephod, answering to the colours
and texture of the hangings of the sanctuary, indicated the
service performed in the sanctuary by the person clothed with

1Josephus, Antiquities of …, 3:8:1.

2McGee, Thru the …, 1:288.
254 Dr. Constable's Notes on Exodus 2021 Edition

the ephod, and the gold with which the coloured fabric was
worked, the glory of that service."1

Josephus wrote that the names of Jacob's six oldest sons were on the
stone on the right shoulder, and the names of his six youngest sons were
on the stone on the left.2 He also claimed that one of these stones shone
when God was present at the sacrifice.3 But this lacks any biblical support.

The breastplate 28:15-30

The breastplate ("breast-piece") was attached to the ephod, forming a

pocket about 9 inches square ("a span" by "a span"), made of material of
the same fabric as the ephod. "Twelve" precious "stones," "set in gold
filigree," were fastened to the front of the breast-piece, in "four rows":
(1)"ruby, topaz, emerald"; (2) "turquoise, sapphire, diamond"; (3) "jacinth,
agate, amethyst"; (4) "beryl, onyx, jasper." Two objects, "the Urim and the
Thummim," which were probably stones also, lay within it.

The 12 jewels represented the 12 tribes. Each one was unique:

"extraordinary in largeness and beauty; and … of … immense value."4 God
later called the Israelites His jewels (Mal. 3:17). The high priest carried the
tribes on his heart (v. 30) as well as on his shoulders, like Christ does for
His people today. The heart refers to the seat of feelings and affections in
the Old Testament.

"The purpose of the breastpiece was 'for making decisions' (v.

15). The Urim and Thummim, deposited in the pouch, were
sacred lots used as the 'means of making decisions' (v. 30).
The word 'Urim' begins with the first letter of the Hebrew
alphabet and 'Thummim' begins with the last letter, so the lots
were probably restricted to giving either positive or negative
responses to questions asked of them. Strengthening that
likelihood is the fact that the phrase 'Urim and Thummim' is
best translated into English as 'curses and perfections,'
meaning that if 'Urim' dominated when the lots were cast the

1Keil and Delitzsch, 2:195.

2Josephus, Antiquities of …, 3:7:5.
3Ibid., 3:8:9.
4Ibid., 3:7:5.
2021 Edition Dr. Constable's Notes on Exodus 255

answer would be no but if 'Thummim' dominated the answer

would be yes."1

"We possess as [Christian] believers a gift in us to guide and

direct our steps; it is the Holy spirit. He is our Urim and
Thummim."2

The robe 28:31-35

The high priest also wore this garment, on which the ephod vest and
attached breastplate were both fixed in place. It was his basic outer
garment, made "all of blue," over which he put the ephod. It covered him
completely, so that his natural nakedness was not exposed (cf. Gen. 3:21).

God may have intended the "pomegranates" and "bells" on the hem of the
robe (vv. 33-34) to remind the Israelites of God's commandments. The
"pomegranate" was probably a symbol of the spiritually nourishing quality
of God's Word (cf. Prov. 25:11; Ps. 19:8-11; 119:25, 43, 50; Deut. 8:3;
Prov. 9:8; Eccles. 12:9-11, 13). The "bell" was evidently a symbol of the
sounding or proclamation of God's Word through testimony.3 Some
interpreters have felt that pomegranates and bells represented
"fruitfulness" and "joy," respectively. Others have seen them as
representing the "fruits" and "gifts" of God's Spirit.4 Josephus wrote that
the bells signified "thunder" and the pomegranates "lightning."5

"And these bells, like the bells in Zech. xiv. 20, speak to the
ear, giving notice of his approach; while the pomegranates
speak to the eye, telling that he comes laden with Canaan-fruit
for those that hunger and thirst for righteousness."6

"A popular Jewish interpretation of 28:35 taught that one end

of a long rope should be tied to the high priest's ankle before
he entered the Holy Place. Since his slightest movement would
cause the bells to tinkle, the people outside would assume that

1Youngblood, p. 127.
2Gaebelein, 1:1:164.
3See Keil and Delitzsch, 2:202-203; G. Campbell Morgan, An Exposition …, p. 45.
4Sailhamer, The Pentateuch …, p. 306, recorded several other possible explanations of

these decorations.
5Josephus, The Wars of the Jews, 5:5:7.
6Bonar, p. 158.
256 Dr. Constable's Notes on Exodus 2021 Edition

all was well as long as they could hear them. But if the bells
fell silent for a time, the people outside would naturally assume
that their priest had either fainted or died. They would then
tug on the end of the rope to pull him out, making it
unnecessary for unauthorized persons to enter the Holy Place
in order to remove his body."1

The gold plate 28:36-38

A plaque ("plate") "of pure gold" was attached to the front of the high
priest's turban. It bore the engraved words: "Holy to the LORD."

"Through this inscription, which was fastened upon his head-

dress of brilliant white, the earthly reflection of holiness, he
was crowned as the sanctified of the Lord (Ps. cvi. 16), and
endowed with the power to exterminate the sin which clung to
the holy offerings of the people on account of the unholiness
of their nature, so that the gifts of the nation became well-
pleasing to the Lord, and the good pleasure of God was
manifested to the nation."2

"It was necessary also that he should be a holy man. … It was

as though they said: 'We are conscious that our representative
may fail in personal holiness, but on that golden plate of purest
metal we have placed our ideal, the high-water mark, which we
desire our priest should attain.'"3

"'Set apart for Yahweh' refers not alone, indeed not even
primarily to 'Aaron' and his successors, as v 38 makes plain. It
is Israel that is 'set apart for Yahweh,' 'Aaron' of course [being]
among Israel and representing Israel …"4

1Youngblood, p. 128.
2Keiland Delitzsch, 2:204.
3Meyer, p. 359.
4Durham, p. 388.
2021 Edition Dr. Constable's Notes on Exodus 257

The tunic, turban, and sash 28:39

These items completed the high priest's wardrobe. The "tunic" was an
undergarment, the "turban" covered his head, and the "sash" served as a
belt.

The garments of the lesser priests 28:40-43

The clothing described in these verses—"tunics," "linen breeches," "caps,"

and "sashes"—appear to be the garments which the priests other than the
high priest wore. All the priests ministered barefoot out of reverence for
the holiness of God (cf. 3:5; Josh. 5:15).

"This prescription for undergarments alludes to and reminds

one of the clothing which God made for Adam and Eve in the
Garden of Eden to cover their nakedness (Ge 3:21)."1

"To us these garments typify, (1) The righteousness of Christ;

if we appear not before God in this, we shall bear iniquity and
die. (2) The armour of God prescribed, Eph. vi. 13."2

"The essential point of the priestly vestments is the central

point of all the instructions concerning the media of worship:
Yahweh is present, and Israel must respond to that Presence,
be guided in that response, and be reminded constantly in
worship as in life of the reality of the Presence and of the need
for response."3

"God wanted no nudity in the service for Him (and we should

keep this in mind for today). God wanted no display of the
flesh."4

"There is much that can be derived from this chapter to form

principles of spiritual leadership; but the overall point can be
worded this way: Those whom God selects to minister to the
congregation through intercessory prayer, divine counsel, and

1Sailhamer, The Pentateuch …, p. 306.

2Henry,p. 103.
3Durham, p. 389.
4McGee, Thru the …, 1:291.
258 Dr. Constable's Notes on Exodus 2021 Edition

sacrificial worship, must always represent the holiness of

Yahweh in their activities and demeanor."1

7. The consecration of the priests 29:1-37

The Israelites carried out the instructions given here at a later time. The
full record of this seven-day ritual appears in Leviticus 8. I shall defer
comment on this chapter, since Moses explained the offerings and
procedures, specified in this chapter, more fully in Leviticus. The fact that
God specified this ceremony in such detail, and that Moses recorded it at
such length, point to its importance for Israel and its instructive value for
us.

"To Israel had been granted the privilege of being a special

people; to Aaron and his sons was granted now the privilege
of being a special mediating instrument between that people
and Yahweh, their Lord. A covenant meal was always part of
such an arrangement (cf. 24:11; 32:6), and that is precisely
what is implied in the sharing of the ram of consecration by
Yahweh and the priests."2

All the priests bathed, representing the necessity of cleanliness before God.

"The washing is typical of regeneration [Tit. 3:5]."3

The priests had sacrificial blood applied to their right earlobes, right
thumbs, and right big toes (v. 20). This symbolized their complete
consecration: to hear the word of God, to serve as mediators, and to walk
as an example to others. They also experienced sprinkling with blood,
signifying their complete sanctification. Their "anointing" with "oil" (v. 21),
that was also sprinkled on them, represented their endowment with power
by God's Spirit for divine service.

"The investiture of the high priest consisted of nine acts (Lev.

8:7-9), whereas that of the ordinary priests involved but
three."4

1The NET Bible note on 28:43.

2Merrill,
"A Theology …," p. 51.
3McGee, Thru the …, 1:292.
4Davis, pp. 278-79.
2021 Edition Dr. Constable's Notes on Exodus 259

8. The service of the priests 29:38—30:38

The daily burnt offering, meal offering, and drink offering 29:38-46

The priests began to offer these sacrifices as soon as the tabernacle was
completely constructed and set up (ch. 40).

Through the offering of a young lamb each morning and each evening—
with flour, oil, and wine—the Israelites consecrated their lives afresh daily
to the Lord. These were offerings of worship and expiation (i.e., the
removal of sin, Lev. 1:4). It ensured Israel's continuing communion with her
God.

"… thus the day was opened and closed with gifts to Yahweh,
from whom all gifts were believed to come."1

The altar of incense and the incense offering 30:1-10

The placement of this altar in the tabernacle has been a problem for some
readers of the Book of Hebrews. Hebrews 9:4 can be understood as
describing its location as being inside the "holy of holies" with the ark. But
the writer of Hebrews probably meant that the "second veil," not the holy
of holies, had the altar of incense and the ark of the covenant connected
(associated) with it (Heb. 9:3-4). These pieces of furniture were next to
the veil, one on either side of it. Describing it this way meant that the writer
was clarifying which veil between the holy place and the holy of holies
pertained to the altar of incense.

Old Testament passages say that the incense altar was inside the holy place
with the golden lampstand and the table of showbread (cf. 30:6; 40:3-5,
21-27). Most commentators on Exodus also locate it in the holy place.2
Furthermore, Leviticus 16:2 and Hebrews 9:7 say that the high priest went
into the holy of holies only once a year on the Day of Atonement. Another
view is that the altar of incense actually was in the holy of holies.3 One

1Durham, p. 396.
2E.g.,Cassuto, p. 391; Keil and Delitzsch, 2:208; Kaiser, "Exodus," p. 472; Hyatt, p. 292;
Cole, p. 205; Ellison, p. 162; Maxie D. Dunnam, Exodus, p. 327; Hannah, p. 154; and
Durham, p. 399. This is also the position of the writers of the articles on the tabernacle
and the temple in The New Bible Dictionary, the International Standard Bible Encyclopaedia,
and the Wycliffe Bible Encyclopedia.
3J. Dwight Pentecost, A Faith That Endures: The Book of Hebrews Applied to the Real

Issues of Life, pp. 139-40.

260 Dr. Constable's Notes on Exodus 2021 Edition

writer believed that the writer of Hebrews described the altar of incense
this way because, when he wrote, the veil between the holy place and the
most holy place had been torn in two (when Christ died).1

The priests would offer incense on this altar each morning and each
evening, and the incense would burn all the time. The priests presented the
daily burnt offering and the daily incense offering together each day:
"before sun-rising and at sun-setting," according to Josephus2 Both were
demonstrations of constant uninterrupted devotion to God. Students of
Exodus have almost universally recognized the offered "fragrant incense"
as a symbol of prayer that ascends to God (cf. Rev. 5:8). It was "a sweet
aroma in His nostrils," and was essential to the maintenance of the divine-
human relationship, just as talking to one's mate is essential to maintain
that relationship. Today, Jesus Christ ever lives to make intercession for
believers (Heb. 7:25), and believers are to "pray without ceasing" (1 Thess.
5:17).

"Morning and evening prayers have been the habit of all ages.
With the one we go forth to our labour till the evening, asking
that our Father will give us His God-speed and guidance and
protection. With the other we entreat forgiveness and
mercy."3

"He who offers no sacrifice in his prayer, who does not sacrifice
his self-will, does not really pray."4

"I have heard lots of people say, 'Now that I am saved, I can
go directly to God.' No, you cannot! You go to God through
Christ [1 Tim. 2:5]."

Only priests were permitted to offer incense at this altar. Similarly, only
priests can pray today, and every true believer is a priest. But only clean
priests could and can offer acceptable prayers (vv. 17-20).

1McGee, Thru the …, 1:295.

2Josephus, Antiquities of …, 3:8:3.
3Meyer, p. 375.
4Ibid., p. 387.
2021 Edition Dr. Constable's Notes on Exodus 261

The "horns" of this altar (v. 10), as well as the "horns" on the altar of burnt
offerings (the brazen altar), probably symbolized "strength."1

"Once a year" Aaron applied the atonement blood (from the yearly sin
offering) on this incense altar, to cleanse it afresh for another year (v. 10).
The description "most holy to the LORD" means the altar could not be used
for any other purpose than what is stated here.

The directions concerning the sanctuary (the tabernacle) conclude with

this section.

The atonement money 30:11-16

The directions regarding the tabernacle opened with instructions

concerning contributions for its construction (25:1-9). They close with this
directive that every Israelite, "20 years old and over," was to pay a flat fee
of "half a shekel" during Israel's "census" for the tabernacle's maintenance
(Num. 1:2; 26:2). Everyone was to pay the same amount ("the rich shall
not pay more and the poor shall not pay less"), because the cost of
everyone's "atonement" was the same in the Lord's sight.

"It was no ordinary tribute, therefore, which Israel was to pay

to Jehovah as its King, but an act demanded by the holiness
of the theocratic covenant. As an expiation for souls, it pointed
to the unholiness of Israel's nature, and reminded the people
continually, that by nature it was alienated from God, and could
only remain in covenant with the Lord and live in His kingdom
on the ground of His grace, which covered its sin."2

Israel's leaders collected this money whenever they took a census. In time,
it became a yearly "temple tax" (Matt. 17:24). A half shekel weighed .2
ounces (6 grams), and it was a piece of silver. "Money" in verse 16 is
literally "silver." In our Lord's day it amounted to two days' wages (Matt.
17:24). Evidently the taking of a census incurred some guilt (v. 12).
Perhaps it reflected a lack of complete trust in God to multiply the nation
as He had promised (cf. 2 Sam. 24).

1Margit Sring, "The Horn-Motifs of the Bible and the Ancient Near East," Andrews
University Seminary Studies 22:3 (Autumn 1984):334.
2Keil and Delitzsch, 2:212.
262 Dr. Constable's Notes on Exodus 2021 Edition

"Do you recognize that you belong to a redeemed world? Even

if all do not avail themselves of the Redemption which has been
achieved, yet it is available for all; and more benefits than we
can ever estimate are always accruing since God so loved the
world that He gave His only begotten Son."1

The brazen laver 30:17-21

The "laver" was a large reservoir for holding the "water" that the priests
used to "wash their hands" and "feet" as they performed their duties. It
stood between the brazen altar and the sanctuary. Its presence in that
position symbolized the fact that cleansing is necessary after the making
of atonement, but before the enjoyment of fellowship with God.

"God does not accept worship until it comes from a cleansed

heart nor will He accept service except from a cleansed
heart."2

"The necessity of daily cleansing on the part of those who are

engaged even in the most holy service, and of all who would
approach God, is so obvious as hardly to require comment. The
body washed with pure water has for its counterpart the daily
cleansing of the soul, without which no man may minister in
the Divine presence [cf. John 13:10]."3

"In Scripture, water for drinking is a picture of the Spirit of God

(John 7:37-39), while water for washing is a picture of the
Word of God (Ps. 119:19; John 15:3; Eph. 5:25-27)."4

The "base" (v. 18) was probably not a pedestal, but a smaller vessel or a
trough used to draw as much water out of the laver as the priest might
need to wash. The priests washed their "feet" as well as their "hands" (v.
21).

"When you go to church and do not enjoy the service, maybe

it is not just because the preacher is dull. Maybe you are a dirty

1Meyer, p. 391.
2McGee, Thru the …, 1:297.
3Meyer, p. 351.
4Wiersbe, p. 237.
2021 Edition Dr. Constable's Notes on Exodus 263

saint. When you have the combination of a dull preacher and a

dirty saint, you do not have a very exciting service."1

The holy anointing oil 30:22-33

The special mixture God specified here was for "holy" use only, in anointing
the tabernacle, its furnishings, its utensils, and the priests. Four fragrant
spices ("myrrh," "cinnamon," "fragrant cane," and "cassia") were blended
with olive oil to produce an excellent "perfume mixture," referred to as "the
holy anointing oil." It was "holy" (different), in that the Israelites used it
exclusively for this special purpose in the service of God. The priests could
use it for no other purpose in Israel.

"And inasmuch as this oil was composed of myrrh, cinnamon,

calamus, and cassia (Exod. xxx. 25), the variety of the Holy
Spirit's gifts and grace was shewn."2

The incense 30:34-38

As with the holy anointing oil, only a specially prescribed mixture of "four"
ingredients (three spices—'"stacte," "onycha," and "galbanum"—mixed
with "pure frankincense") was acceptable for use as "holy" and "fragrant
incense" for burning on the incense altar. Similarly, not just any prayer is
acceptable to God; only prayers offered as He has instructed will be
acceptable (cf. John 15:7; 16:24; 1 John 5:14).

"Stacte is a fragrant resin obtained from some species of

cistus, or 'rockrose.' Onycha is the horny plate that covers a
species of mussel found in the lakes of India which, when
burned, emits a musky odor. Galbanum is a pleasantly aromatic
gum resin derived from certain umbelliferous plants.
Frankincense (from the Old French for 'pure incense'), as used
by the Jews, Greeks, and Romans, was a gum resin now called
olibanum which was derived from certain trees of the genus
boswellia found growing on the limestone of South Arabia and
Somaliland. Thus, three of the four ingredients in the incense
burned on the golden altar were gum resins. Gum resins are
mixtures of gum and resin obtained from plants or trees by

1McGee, Thru the …, 1:296.

2Bonar, p. 166.
264 Dr. Constable's Notes on Exodus 2021 Edition

incision. Resins burn readily because they contain volatile

oils."1

"The Bible names some of the 'ingredients' of prayer—

adoration, confession, thanksgiving, petition, submission (1
Tim. 2:1; Phil. 4:6)—and even gives us a pattern to follow
(Matt. 6:5-15)."2

9. The builders of the tabernacle 31:1-11

Chapter 31 summarizes what God required for His people to approach Him:
the tabernacle altars, furniture, regulations, and worship procedures;
functions of the priests and their strict following of sacrifices and worship,
including their holy garments, holy anointing with holy oil, and continual
burning of holy incense; and the strict observance of the Sabbath by all
Israelites. God appointed two specific and specially-gifted men who would
be responsible over "all [the] skillful men," for interpreting Moses'
instructions about the tabernacle, as well as constructing it. He also "filled"
them with His "Spirit," so that they would make choices consistent with His
will (v. 3).

"Bezalel" ("In the Shadow of God"), a Judahite, was evidently Miriam's

grandson.3 "Oholiab" ("The Father is My Tent"), a Danite, was his assistant.
God endowed both men with natural ability, as well as with the Holy Spirit,
to do the work He had appointed for them (cf. Acts 6:3).

"Though they were skilled, the narrative emphasizes clearly

that they were to do the work of building the tabernacle by
means of the skills that the Spirit of God would give them.
There is an important parallel here with God's work of Creation
in Genesis 1. Just as God did his work of Creation by means of
his Spirit (Ge 1:2—2:3), so also Israel was to do their work of
building the tabernacle by God's Spirit.

"The parallels between God's work in Creation and Israel's work

on the tabernacle are part of the Pentateuch's larger emphasis
on the importance of the work of God's Spirit among his

1John V. Myers, "What Was 'Brimstone?'" Kronos 9:1 (Fall 1983):58.

2Wiersbe, p. 236.
3Josephus, Antiquities of …, 3:6:1.
2021 Edition Dr. Constable's Notes on Exodus 265

people. … It is of interest here to note that the two key

characters in the Pentateuch who provide a clear picture of
genuine obedience to God's will, Joseph and Joshua, are
specifically portrayed in the narrative as those who are filled
with the Spirit of God (Ge 41:38; Dt 34:9)."1

10. The sign of the Sabbath 31:12-18

"As a sign of the Noahic covenant is the rainbow (Gen. 9:13),

and as the sign of the Abrahamic covenant is circumcision
(Gen. 17:11), the sign of the Mosaic covenant is the
observance and celebration of the Sabbath day (Exod. 31:13,
17)."2

God intended this "sign"—"the Sabbath"—to teach Israel and the other
nations that, as His redeemed people, the Israelites had already entered
into a measure of "rest." They were partakers of God's rest.

Observance of the Sabbath was unique to Israel. It distinguished Israel from

all other nations. So important was its observance that any Israelite, who
failed to observe it ("whoever does any work on it") died (v. 15).

"By not keeping the Sabbath, the Israelite was showing that
he or she was not interested in 'know[ing] that I am the
LORD.'"3

This "sign" was to continue "throughout all (your) generations" (v. 13), as
long as God continued to work through Israel as His primary instrument (cf.
Rom. 10:4; Heb. 9:10).

"I would like to ask the people who claim to keep the Sabbath
if they keep it all the time. And are those of their number who
do not keep the Sabbath all the time put to death as the law
requires?"4

1Sailhamer, The Pentateuch …, p. 309.

2Youngblood, pp. 112-13. The sign of the New Covenant is the Lord's Supper (Matt.
26:26-28; Mark 14:22-24; Luke 22:19-20; 1 Cor. 11:23-25).
3Enns, p. 545.
4McGee, Thru the …, 1:299.
266 Dr. Constable's Notes on Exodus 2021 Edition

"The analogy between God's work of Creation and Israel's

construction of the tabernacle is made explicit by the
reference to the Sabbath at the close of the narrative."1

"The tabernacle is like no other place on earth. It is built

according to a divine plan to reflect a heavenly reality. It is a
piece of holy ground. To put it another way, the tabernacle is
holy space. The Sabbath, by contrast is holy time. … By
entering the tabernacle, Israel entered God's house; by keeping
the Sabbath, Israel entered God's rest."2

Whereas God did not command Christians to observe the Sabbath, the
Scriptures do teach the importance of periodic physical rest—regardless of
the dispensation in which they may live (cf. Mark 6:31; 14:41; Rev. 6:11).

"We don't have to be servants twenty-four hours a day, seven

days a week."3

This section concludes the record of all that Moses received from God,
during the "40 days and 40 nights" he was on the mountain, that began in
25:1 (v. 18). The "two tablets" that Moses received from the Lord were
made "of stone," to emphasize the permanence of the Word of God, and
their "testimony" was "written by the finger of God."

"Scholars of religion have long spoken of Israel's religious ideas

as its unique contribution to civilization, much as the Greeks
developed philosophy and the Romans displayed a genius for
organization and empire-building. Yet such a comparison
misses the point of Scripture. The Bible speaks not of the
genius of Israel, but of the finger of God. The Ten
Commandments were not the product of man, but the
revelation of the Lord."4

1Sailhamer, The Pentateuch …, p. 309.

2Enns, p. 546. Paragraph division omitted.
3John F. Alexander, "Sabbath Rest," The Other Side 146 (November 1983):8. See Jeffrey
Siker-Gieseler, "The Theology of the Sabbath in the Old Testament: A Canonical
Approach," Studia Biblica et Theologica 11:1 (April 1981):5-20, in which the author
brought together and interpreted the references to the Sabbath in the Old Testament.
4The Nelson …, p. 156.
2021 Edition Dr. Constable's Notes on Exodus 267

Moses wrote the instructions concerning the tabernacle in such a similar

form that they parallel what he wrote about the Creation. Note some of
the similarities in the narratives.1

Creation (Gen. 1—2) Tabernacle (Exod. 25—31)

The subject of the narrative is the The subject of the narrative is the
establishment of God's good re-establishment of God's good
creation. creation.

The heavens and earth are the The tabernacle is the arena for the
arena for the creation of divine- restoration of divine-human
human fellowship. fellowship.

God's Spirit was the enabling power God's Spirit was the enabling power
in creation (Gen. 1:2—2:3). in the construction of the
tabernacle (Exod. 31:3, 6).

Structurally the creation account Structurally the tabernacle account

consists of seven acts each marked consists of seven acts each
by divine speech ("And God said," introduced by divine speech ("And
Gen. 1:3, 6, 9, 14, 20, 24, 26). the LORD said," Exod. 25:1; 30:11,
17, 22, 34; 31:1, 12).

God made Adam and Eve according Moses made the tabernacle
to a specific pattern: the image of according to a specific pattern: a
God (Gen. 1:26-27). heavenly reality (Exod. 25:9).

The Garden of Eden contained gold The tabernacle contained gold and
and jewels, and cherubim guarded jewels, and cherubim guarded it
it (Gen. 2:12a, 12b; 3:24). (Exod. 25:3, 7, 18).

When creation was complete, God When the tabernacle was complete,
inspected and evaluated all that He Moses inspected and evaluated all
had done (Gen. 1:31) and uttered that was done (Exod. 39:43a) and
a blessing (Gen. 1:28). uttered a blessing (Exod. 39:43b).

1Adapted from Sailhamer, The Pentateuch …, pp. 289-90, 306, 309.

268 Dr. Constable's Notes on Exodus 2021 Edition

God rested on the seventh day at God told the Israelites to rest on
the end of the creation narrative the seventh day at the end of the
(Gen. 2:1-3). tabernacle narrative (Exod. 31:12-
18).

A fall followed the creation A fall followed the tabernacle

narrative (Gen. 3). narrative (Exod. 32).

This fall resulted in the breaking of This fall resulted in the breaking of
the Edenic Covenant (Gen. 3:14- the Mosaic Covenant (Exod. 33:1-
19). 5).

God covered Adam and Eve's God ordered the covering of the
nakedness (Gen. 3:21). priests' nakedness (Exod. 28:42).

D. THE BREAKING AND RENEWAL OF THE COVENANT CHS. 32—34

"If a narrative paradigmatic of what Exodus is really about were

to be sought, Exod 32—34 would be the obvious first choice.

"That these chapters are paradigmatic of Israel's relationship

with Yahweh throughout the OT is also obvious, and the
farthest thing from coincidence."1

1. The failure of Israel ch. 32

The scene now changes, and we see what was happening down in the
Israelite camp, while Moses was still up in the heights of Sinai receiving the
instructions for the Israelites' worship. The people were already
apostatizing and were devising their own form of worship.

Israel's apostasy 32:1-6

Apostasy means "to stand away from" something (Gr. apostasis). This
word describes a departure. An "apostate" is someone who has departed
from something. In the religious sense, the word refers to "extreme
departure" from God's will. "Apostate" is not necessarily a synonym for
unbeliever. The person who departs from God's will could either be a

1Durham, p. 418.
2021 Edition Dr. Constable's Notes on Exodus 269

believer or an unbeliever. The term refers to obedience, not salvation. Most

of the apostates in Israel were apparently believers, since the Bible
consistently regards Israel—as a whole—as "the people of God" (cf.
12:14). The great majority of Israelites at Mt. Sinai had been redeemed in
the Exodus.

"Throughout the remainder of the Pentateuch, the incident of

the worship of the golden calf cast a dark shadow across
Israel's relationship with God, much the same way as the
account of the Fall in Genesis 3 marked a major turning point
in God's dealing with humankind."1

"This is the first general act of disobedience on the part of

Israel, the nation that had committed itself to being God's
people and obeying him (Ex. 19:8[; 24:3, 7]). Often the first
act of disobedience receives full judgment so that every one
can know God's view of the matter (e.g., Achan in Joshua 7,
and Ananias and Sapphira in Acts 5). Many were killed, and in
Exodus 32:34 God refers to a 'day' when he will punish
wrongdoers."2

It has always been hard for God's people to wait for Him (cf. 1 Sam. 8:4-5;
Ps. 27:14; 37:7; 62:5; et al.). When Moses "lingered" ("delayed"; i.e., from
the people's perspective, not by his own choice but following God's
timetable) on the mountain, the people decided to worship "a [new] god"
(v. 1) and make a new covenant. They did not wait for guidance from God.
This reflects a shallow commitment both to Him and to their human leader,
Moses.

"Misinterpretations of our Redeemer's delays are the occasion

of a great deal of wickedness. Our Lord Jesus has gone up into
the mount of glory, where he is appearing in the presence of
God for us, but out of our sight; the heavens must contain him,
must conceal him, that we may live by faith. Weariness in
waiting betrays us to a great many temptations."3

Perhaps the people concluded that Moses had perished in the fire on Mt.
Sinai, and so they decided to select a new leader. Moses was a "god" to

1Sailhamer, The Pentateuch …, p. 310.

2Bramer, p. 94.
3Henry, p. 106.
270 Dr. Constable's Notes on Exodus 2021 Edition

Israel in the sense that he was their leader (4:16); he stood in God’s place
in relationship to them. Now they turned from Moses, as their leader, to
Aaron.

"Much is being said these days about 'meeting the felt needs
of people,' but here was a nation that didn't know what its
needs really were. They thought they needed an idol, but what
they really needed was faith in their great God who had
revealed Himself so powerfully to them."1

"The example of the Israelites shows the origin of idolatry to

be that men do not believe God is with them unless he shows
himself physically present."2

There is some question as to whether Aaron intended the golden calf to

represent a god other than Yahweh or Yahweh Himself.

"… when the god was represented in human form, it served as

a podium, but it is also found on its own as a symbol of the
deity."3

"In the present passage the term gods, or rather god [Elohim],
represented in the golden calf, seems to be understood as an
attempt to represent the God of the covenant with a physical
image. The apostasy of the golden calf, therefore, was
idolatry, not polytheism. Indeed, throughout Scripture Israel
was repeatedly warned about the sin of idolatry."4

"It is precisely the attempt to worship Yahweh by means he

has already declared totally unacceptable that makes the sin
of the golden calf so destructive, far more so than a simple
shift of allegiance to 'other' or 'foreign' gods."5

1Wiersbe, p. 245.
2Calvin,1:11:8.
3Eichrodt, 1:117.
4Sailhamer, The Pentateuch …, p. 311. See also Henry, p. 106; Keil and Delitzsch, 2:222;

Jamieson, et al., p. 79; and David E. Fass, "The Molten Calf: Judgment, Motive, and
Meaning," Judaism 39:2 (Spring 1990):171-83.
5Durham, p. 421.
2021 Edition Dr. Constable's Notes on Exodus 271

The other view is that the people were asking for other "gods" (elohim),
not the true God.1 Perhaps both views are correct, since various
speculations were likely present in such a large population.

"From Aaron's viewpoint it was merely a matter of

iconography, representing God by a bull and in that way holding
'a festival to I AM' (Exod. 32:5). But from the people's
viewpoint, as seen from the command to Aaron 'make us gods'
(v. 1), they were turning to a pantheon of gods, represented
by a bull god, to lead them."2

"Imagine the first high priest making an idol!"3

Probably the first view is correct.

“It is commonly accepted by Old Testament scholars today

that the ancients did not equate an idol with the god, but it
was some sort of earthly representation of that god.
Specifically, it was thought that calves or bulls functioned as
pedestals for the gods seated or standing over them. In this
sense, the calf is analogous to the ark (the fact that both are
made of gold strengthens this connection).”4

The "calf" provided a visible symbol that the Israelites could and did identify
with their "deliverer" ("This is [represents] your god [Heb. Elohim, the
Strong One], O Israel, who brought you up from the land of Egypt." v. 4).
The English word "idol" derives from the Greek eidolon, meaning
"something to be seen." The Apis bull was such a symbol in Egyptian
religion. The Egyptians viewed this animal, the bull, as the "vehicle" on
which a god rode in power, and as such they identified it as divine itself.
Sacred bulls or calves were common in the ancient Near East because of
this identification.5 Patterning their worship of Yahweh after the Egyptians'
worship of their god of the sun, Osiris, the Israelites were saying—by rising
early, sacrificing animals, sitting down to eat and drink, and "playing"—that
this was their way of worshipping Yahweh.

1The Nelson …, p. 156.

2Waltke, An Old …, p. 469.
3Wiersbe, p. 398.
4Enns,p. 569.
5See Velikovsky, pp. 188-91.
272 Dr. Constable's Notes on Exodus 2021 Edition

"The bull seems to have had manifold meanings in the

iconography of the Near East. It symbolized the god. It
expressed attributes of a god. It represented a pedestal for
the god. Each of these meanings is important in understanding
the cult of the golden calves in Israel's religious experience."1

Some commentators have interpreted Aaron's instruction, that the

Israelites should sacrifice their jewelry and ornaments (v. 2), as designed
to discourage their rebellion.2 If this was his intent, he failed (v. 3). It seems
more probable, going by a normal reading of the text, that Aaron approved
of their plan. Aaron later tried to pass the blame on to the people, rather
than admitting his own complicity in this sin (vv. 22-24). Compare Adam's
weak reply to God in Genesis 3:12.

The "altar" and the "feast" that accompanied the construction of the idol
(v. 5), support the contention that Aaron was leading the people in a
celebration of a new covenant. Aaron led the people in breaking the second
commandment: They had "made a graven image" to represent Yahweh (cf.
20:4-6). Aaron's disobedience to the second commandment (20:4-6),
which he had received by this time, resulted in his returning to an Egyptian
form of worship that repudiated Yahweh's will. The "play" that followed the
feast seems to have been wicked, involving "sexual immorality" (cf. 1 Cor.
10:7-8; "people were out of control," "were loose," v. 25).

"The verb translated 'to play' suggests illicit and immoral

sexual activity which normally accompanied fertility rights
found among the Canaanites who worshipped the god Baal."3

"That the sin of Aaron and the people was tantamount to

covenant repudiation is clear from the account of the making
of the calf. The calf was hailed as 'the god … who brought you
up out of Egypt' (Ex. 32:4), the exact language of the
historical prologue of the Sinaitic Covenant in which Yahweh
described the basis of His authority to be Israel's God (20:2).
Moreover, Aaron built an altar for the purpose of covenant

1Stephen Von Wyrick, "Israel's Golden Calves," Biblical Illustrator 13:1 (Fall 1986):10. This
is a very fine summary article. See also Amihai Mazar, "Bronze Bull Found in Israelite 'High
Place' From the Time of the Judges," Biblical Archaeology Review 9:5 (September-October
1983):34-40.
2See Kennedy, p. 138; Meyer, p. 421; and Benno Jacob, p. 940.
3Davis, p. 285.
2021 Edition Dr. Constable's Notes on Exodus 273

affirmation and ceremony (v. 5), precisely as Moses had done

previously on the people's commitment to the covenant
arrangement (24:4). Aaron's proclamation concerning a
festival and its implementation on the following day (32:5-6)
was again identical to the celebration that attended the mutual
acceptance of the covenant terms under Moses (24:11)."1

God’s intent was that His people worship Him at the altar revealed to
Moses, not at an altar constructed by Aaron. God’s intent was to dwell
among His people above the golden mercy seat above the ark, not above
a golden calf. It was His intent that His people celebrate the feasts that He
prescribed, not a feast involving pagan revelry. God’s intent was that Moses
should lead the people, not Aaron. Some of God’s intentions had not yet
been revealed to the people; Moses was still on the mountain receiving
these instructions. Their failure was running ahead of God in most of what
they did. They erred also in determining how Yahweh was to be worshipped
(like their neighbors worshipped), rather than worshipping God as He
dictated.

Many years later, Israel's King Jeroboam I re-established the worship of the
golden calves, and this practice became a great stumbling-block to Israel
(1 Kings 12:28-31).

"The calf represented Yahweh on their terms. Yahweh had

made clear repeatedly that he would be received and
worshiped only on his terms."2

Moses' intercession 32:7-14

God's recounting to Moses the news of the golden calf gives the reader the
divine perspective on Israel's sin. Moses stressed three points in this
pericope:

"These three points—idolatry of the golden calf, Israel's stiff-

necked refusal to obey, and God's compassion—provide the
basis of the subsequent narratives and God's further dealings
with this people. Though a great act of God's judgment follows
immediately (vv. 27-35), the central themes of the

1Merrill, "A Theology …," p. 53.

2Durham, p. 442.
274 Dr. Constable's Notes on Exodus 2021 Edition

subsequent narratives focus on God's compassion and a new

start for Israel."1

God called the Israelites Moses' ("your) people" (v. 7), probably because
they had repudiated the covenant, and God was therefore no longer their
God. God regarded the Israelites' sacrificing before the calf as worship of it
("They … have worshiped it and have sacrificed to it"; v. 8). This
constituted a violation of the first commandment.

"… just as soon as a visible form had been fashioned for God,
his power is also bound to it. Men are so stupid that they fasten
God wherever they fashion him; and hence they cannot but
adore. And there is no difference whether they simply worship
an idol, or God in the idol. It is always idolatry when divine
honors are bestowed upon an idol, under whatever pretext this
is done."2

God offered to "destroy" the rebellious Israelites ("them"), and to make

Moses' descendants into "a great nation" (v. 10). He may have meant that
He would only destroy that older generation of Israelites immediately,
instead of over the next 40 years, rather than wiping out the entire nation.
God was proposing an action (judgment) that would have been consistent
with His promises to the patriarchs and the conditions of the Mosaic
Covenant (cf. Num. 14:12).

This offer constituted a test of Moses' ministry as Israel's mediator. For

Moses this test was real, even though the proposed destruction of Israel
lay outside God's plan (cf. the promises to Abraham; Gen. 49:10). Similarly,
God had told Abraham to offer up Isaac, even though He had previously
told him that Isaac would be his designated heir. And Jesus would later
offer Himself to Israel as her King, even though His death on the cross,
according to "the predetermined plan and foreknowledge of God" (Acts
2:23), had to precede the establishment of His kingdom.

Moses passed the test. He did not forsake his people, but instead urged
God to have mercy on them.

“Earlier in Exodus Moses argued with God out of his own selfish,
almost petty motives (3:11—4:17). Now, however, he argues

1Sailhamer, The Pentateuch …, p. 312.

2Calvin, 1:11:9.
2021 Edition Dr. Constable's Notes on Exodus 275

with God on behalf of the people—he has learned to put their

interests first.”1

In his model intercessory prayer (vv. 11-13), Moses appealed to God on

the basis of several things: God's previous work for Israel (v. 11), God's
glory and reputation (v. 12), and God's word (v. 13).

The reference to God "chang[ing] His mind" (v. 14) has been a problem to
many Bible readers. The expression implies no inconsistency or mutability
in the character of God. He does not vacillate, but always does everything
in harmony with His own character. Within the plan of God, however, He
has incorporated enough flexibility so that, in most situations, there are a
number of options that are acceptable to Him. In view of Moses'
intercession, God proceeded to take a different course of action than He
had previously intended.2

Ephesians 1:11 says that God causes everything to work out the way He
wants it to (cf. Rom. 8:28). He foreordains what comes to pass, but
Scripture doesn't say that He foreordains how everything will come to pass,
or when it will come to pass, or by whom it will come to pass. Prayer and
evangelism are two of the means that God has ordained, that is, human
activity, whereby what He has foreordained comes to pass. In these
activities, people become partners with God in bringing His will to happen
in the world.

Occasionally, my wife has called me at work and asked me to pick up a

gallon on milk on my way home. When this happens, I take a different route
than I would normally, but I end up at home nonetheless. Perhaps this is
similar to how our praying affects God as He carries out His will.

"In only two of the thirty-eight instances in the OT is this word

used of men repenting. God's repentance or 'relenting' is an
anthropomorphism (a description of God in human forms [sic
form]) that aims at showing us that he can and does change
in his actions and emotions to men when given proper grounds
for doing so, and thereby he does not change in his basic

1Enns, p. 572.
2See John Munro, "Prayer to a Sovereign God," Interest 56:2 (February 1990):20-21;
Thomas L. Constable, "What Prayer Will and Will Not Change," in Essays in Honor of J.
Dwight Pentecost, pp. 99-113; and Robert B. Chisholm Jr., "Does God 'Change His Mind'?"
Bibliotheca Sacra 152:608 (October-December 1995):387-99; Hannah, p. 156.
276 Dr. Constable's Notes on Exodus 2021 Edition

integrity or character (cf. Pss 99:6; 106:45; Jer 18:8; Amos

7:3, 6; Jonah 3:10; James 5:16). The grounds for the Lord's
repenting are three: (1) intercession (cf. Amos 7:1-6); (2)
repentance of the people (Jer 18:3-11; Jonah 3:9-10); and (3)
compassion (Deut 32:36; Judg 2:18; 2 Sam 24:16[; 1 Chron.
21:15])."1

Advocates of the "openness of God" overemphasize this change in God,

and conclude that He did not simply relent from a previously proposed
course of action, but that He changed in a more fundamental way. They
say that He actually changed His mind and His plans, and took a completely
different direction that He had not anticipated previously. This view
stresses the free will of man, in this case Moses' intercession, at the
expense of the sovereignty of God.

Aaron's excuse 32:15-24

Possibly the “singing” of the people was like their singing when they had
crossed the Red Sea (ch. 15): not just happy singing, but singing in praise
of their “deliverer.”2

Moses broke ("shattered") the tablets of the law (v. 19), symbolizing the
fact that Israel had broken its covenant with Yahweh. He then proceeded
to destroy the golden calf, the symbol of the illicit covenant into which
they had entered (cf. 2 Kings 23:15). By treating the "calf" image as he
did ("burned … and ground it to powder," v. 20), Moses was dishonoring
as well as destroying it.

"… the biblical description of the destruction of the Golden

Calf constitutes an Israelite development of an early literary
pattern that was employed in Canaan to describe the total
annihilation of a detested enemy."3

Moses probably ordered the people to drink the polluted water for the
following reason:

1Kaiser,"Exodus," p. 479. See A. W. Tozer, The Knowledge of the Holy, pp. 55-60, for a
good discussion of the immutability of God.
2Enns, p. 573.
3Samuel Loewenstamm, "The Making and Destruction of the Golden Calf," Biblica 48

(1967):485.
2021 Edition Dr. Constable's Notes on Exodus 277

"… to set forth in a visible manner both the sin and its
consequences. The sin was poured as it were into their bowels
along with the water, as a symbolical sign that they would have
to bear it and atone for it, just as a woman who was suspected
of adultery was obliged to drink the curse-water (Num.
5:24)."1

"In this manner the thing they had worshiped would become a
product of their own waste, the very epitome of worthlessness
and impurity."2

Some writers have suggested that this water with the gold dust suspended
in it would have been red, and is a type of the blood of Christ.3 This view
lacks support in the text. The writer said nothing about Moses offering it
to the Lord to make atonement for the sins of the Israelites. The people
drank it as a punishment; they did not "offer it" to God ("He [Moses] …
made them drink it," v. 20).

Verse 24 suggests that Aaron may have formed the calf by casting it in a
mold ("I threw it into the fire … out came this calf"), but verse 4 gives the
impression that he carved it out of a shapeless mass.4 The best solution
seems to be that Aaron crafted this calf like similar Egyptian calf-idols were
produced. He probably built a wooden frame and then overlaid it with gold
that he shaped (cf. Isa. 30:22).

Aaron tried to shift the blame for his actions to the people ("you know the
people yourself, that they are prone to evil"; cf. Gen. 3:12-13).

"A woman of society and fashion will say, 'I admit that I am
not what I might be, but then look at my set; it is the furnace
that did it.' A man will doubt God, question the Bible and truth,
and excuse himself by saying, 'It is not I, it is the drift of

1Keil and Delitzsch, 2:226.

2Merrill,Deuteronomy, p. 196. Cf. Benno Jacob, p. 950.
3E.g., M. R. DeHaan, The Chemistry of the Blood and Other Stirring Messages, pp. 61-63.
4See Loewenstamm; idem, "The Making and Destruction of the Golden Calf—a Rejoinder,"

Biblica 56 (1975):330-43; and Stanley Gevirtz, "Heret in the Manufacture of the Golden
Calf," Biblica 65 (1984):377-81.
278 Dr. Constable's Notes on Exodus 2021 Edition

modern tendency; it is the furnace that did it.' 'There came

out this calf.'"1

The Levites' loyalty 32:25-29

The Levites ("sons of Levi") were Moses' closest kinsmen. Perhaps it was
for this reason, as well as their loyalty to the Lord, that they sided with
Moses. Their decision and obedience ("the sons of Levi did as Moses
instructed," v. 28) demonstrated their faith in God. They chose to go the
way of His appointed leader, Moses, instead of following their rebellious
brethren.

God's punishment of the rebels was severe (v. 27) because of the
seriousness of their offense. It was also merciful; only 3,000 of the
600,000 men died (v. 28).

It is interesting that on the Day of Pentecost 3,000 people were saved

(Acts 2:41). "The letter kills, but the Spirit gives life" (2 Cor. 3:6).

The Levites' "blessing" was God's later choosing of their tribe to be the
priestly tribe in Israel (Num. 3:12-13). The nation as a whole forfeited its
right to be a "kingdom of priests" (19:6) by its rebellion here. By contrast,
all Christians are "priests" (1 Pet. 2:5). This difference is one indication
that the church does not replace Israel in the plan of God.

"The idiom 'fill the hands' [the literal meaning of "dedicate

yourselves," NASB, or "you have been set apart," NIV, v. 29]
means 'institute to a priestly office,' 'install,' 'inaugurate,' and
the like."2

Moses' second intercession 32:30-35

To "make atonement" (v. 30) means "to obtain a covering for sin."

We see Moses' great love for the Israelites, as their mediator, in his
willingness to die for them (cf. Rom. 9:3). Being "blotted out of God's
book" probably refers to physical death. Alternatively, the "book" could
refer to the register of those loyal to Yahweh, and thereby deserving His
special blessing (cf. Ps. 69:28; Isa. 4:3; Ezek. 13:9; Dan. 12:1; Mal. 3:16).3

1Meyer,p. 422.
2Hyatt,p. 310.
3Durham, p. 432.
2021 Edition Dr. Constable's Notes on Exodus 279

God explained a principle of His dealings with people here: individual sin
brings individual responsibility, that in the end leads to individual judgment
(cf. Ezek. 18:4). God was not saying that everyone will bear the punishment
for his own sins, precluding substitution, but that everyone is responsible
for his own sins. He chose not to take Moses' life as a substitute for the
guilty in Israel, since this would not have been just. Moses, being a sinner
himself, could not have served as a "final" acceptable substitute for other
sinners, in any case.

God promised Moses that He would not abandon His people for their sin
("My angel shall go before you," v. 34), but when their rebellion was full
(at Kadesh Barnea, Num. 14:27-35), "then the LORD smote" those of them
who remained (v. 35).1 Perhaps God did not smite Aaron because his was
a sin of infirmity, whereas the sin of the people was presumptuous.2

2. The re-establishment of fellowship ch. 33

Breaking God's covenant resulted in the Israelites' separation from

fellowship with Him. It did not terminate their relationship with Him, but it
did hinder or "break" their fellowship with Him. Similarly, when Christians
sin, we do not cease to be God's people, but our fellowship with the Lord
suffers.

"Moses had now returned to Mount Sinai and there God spoke
with him again. The text has several indications that the author
now wants to show that Israel's relationship with God had been
fundamentally affected by their 'great sin' of worshiping the
golden calf. All was not the same. The narrative shows that
there was now a growing distance between God and Israel that
had not been there before. Each of the following sections of
narrative demonstrates specifically the changes that have
occurred in God's relationship to Israel. We should also note
that the Levites are chosen in this narrative; in Numbers 3 they
replace the firstborn Israelites as priests. This represents a

1See Jonathan Master, "Exodus 32 as an Argument for Traditional Theism," Journal of the
Evangelical Theological Society 45:4 (December 2002):585-98.
2Henry, p. 109.
280 Dr. Constable's Notes on Exodus 2021 Edition

further change in Israel's relationship with God in the Sinai

covenant."1

Notice some comparisons and contrasts, between the narrative of the

original giving of the covenant, and this narrative that describes the
renewal of the covenant.2

The Giving of the Covenant The Restoring of the Covenant

(Exod. 20—31) (Exod. 33—34)

All the people were to be priests Only the Levites would be priests
(19:5-6). (32:29).

Moses ascended Mt. Sinai and God Moses ascended Mt. Sinai and God
spoke with him there while the spoke with him there while the
people waited below (19:20). people waited below (32:31).

God sent His angel to destroy God sent His angel lest He destroy
Israel's enemies (23:23). Israel (33:2-5).

The tabernacle in the center of the Another "tent of meeting" outside

camp was to be the "tent of the camp was where God met with
meeting" where God would meet Moses and Joshua only (33:7).
with the people (25:8; 27:21;
28:43; 29:42-43).

God displayed His glory for all the Only Moses could see God's glory
people to see on Mt. Sinai (24:16- partially (33:18-23), and the
17). people only saw God's glory
reflected on Moses' face (34:29).

God covered Moses' face lest he Moses covered his face lest the
see too much of God's glory people see too much of God's glory
(33:18-23). (34:34-35).

God revealed His glory to test the God revealed His glory to show His
people and to keep them from grace and compassion (33:19;
sinning (20:20). 34:6-7).

1Sailhamer, The Pentateuch …, p. 313.

2Adapted from ibid., pp. 313-17.
2021 Edition Dr. Constable's Notes on Exodus 281

God wrote the Ten Commandments God wrote the Ten Commandments
on stone tablets (Deut. 10:1-4). on stone tablets (34:28).

God gave the Ten Commandments God gave the "ten words" (34:27-
(20:2-17). 28).

The structure of the narrative The structure of the narrative

begins and ends with warnings begins and ends with warnings
against idolatry (20:22-23; 23:13) against idolatry (34:11-17) and
and instructions for proper worship instructions for proper worship
(20:24-26; 23:14-19). (34:11-26).

Moses expressed amazement when The people expressed amazement

he saw the people (32:19). when they saw Moses (34:30).

33:1-6 God would not now dwell in the midst of the Israelites, as He
intended to do in the tabernacle, because they had repudiated
His covenant with them ("I will not go up with you," v. 3).

The announcement of the change in God's relation to Israel,

and the consequent loss of blessing, led the people to "mourn"
and sacrifice out of sorrow (vv. 4-6). They willingly gave up
the use of and stopped wearing the "ornaments" that they had
used in the rebellion, and that were therefore an offense to
God.

33:7-11 The "tent" referred to here, called "the tent of meeting,"

cannot be the tabernacle, since the Israelites had not yet built
it. It must have been a smaller tent that was used as a meeting
place for Moses, the people, and God—over which the "pillar
of cloud" was hovering ("would descend"). This tent served
some of the functions of the tabernacle that later replaced it.
Moses at this point moved the tent of meeting "outside the
camp," to symbolize the removal of God's presence from the
people's midst.1 Even though God moved away from the
people, He did not abandon them. Believers' sinful conduct

1See Henry Mowvley, "John 1:14-18 in the light of Exodus 33:7—34:35," The Expository
Times 95:5 (February 1984):135-37.
282 Dr. Constable's Notes on Exodus 2021 Edition

breaks their fellowship with God, but not their relationship with
God.

Moses' personal communion with God was uncommonly

intimate (v. 11; cf. Num. 12:6-8). One writer believed that the
"cloud" was Jesus.1 "Face to face" is an idiom that
communicates intimacy, not a theophany.2 However, Moses
probably spoke "face to face" with the Angel of the Lord (the
pre-incarnate Christ; cf. Gen. 18:1; Josh. 5:13-15; et al.).3

"Now daily oracles are not sent from heaven, for

it pleased the Lord to hallow his truth to
everlasting remembrance in the Scriptures alone
[cf. John 5:39]."4

33:12-16 God's withdrawal from Israel created problems for Moses as

Israel's mediator. If God was not going to enter into covenant
relationship to Israel as He had first described (13:21-22), how
could Moses lead the nation (cf. 3:11, 13)? This is the focus
of Moses' first request ("Let me know Your ways, that I may
know You," in other words, "Tell me what You want from me,
plus all Your plans and intentions, and how I can successfully
lead Your people," v. 13). He wanted reassurance that God
Himself would lead Israel in the wilderness.5

"Thus our Lord Jesus, in his intercession, presents

himself to the Father, as one in whom he is always
well pleased, and so obtains mercy for us with
whom he is justly displeased; and we are accepted
in the beloved."6

God assured Moses that He would continue to "go with" His

people, and would thus provide the "rest" that His "presence"
among them inspired (v. 14). As used elsewhere, this “rest” is

1Ronald B. Allen, "The Pillar of the Cloud," Bibliotheca Sacra 153:612 (October-December
1996):393.
2Durham, p. 443.
3McGee, Thru the …, 1:305.
4Calvin, 1:7:1.
5Durham, p. 446.
6Henry, p. 109.
2021 Edition Dr. Constable's Notes on Exodus 283

not peace of mind but freedom from engaging enemies in war

(cf. Deut. 3:20; 12:10; 25:10).

Moses' second request was that God might confirm him as

God's chosen mediator among the Israelites ("How then can it
be known that I have found favor in Your sight, I and Your
people?"). He also asked that God might confirm the nation as
His chosen people—in view of the change in the relationship
("Is it not by Your going with us … that we … may be
distinguished from all the other people on the face of the
earth?" v. 16).

33:17-23 God promised this too (v. 17).

Third, Moses requested a greater perception of God's essential

being than he had experienced thus far ("I pray You, show me
Your glory!" v. 18). This would also enable him to serve God
more effectively, in view of his altered relationship with God ("I
Myself … will proclaim the name of the LORD before you," vv.
18-19).1 However, God explained that no one can view Him
directly and live ("You cannot see My face, for no man can see
Me and live," v. 20).

"As our bodily eye is dazzled, and its power of

vision destroyed, by looking directly at the
brightness of the sun, so would our whole nature
be destroyed by an unveiled sight of the brilliancy
of the glory of God."2

God did grant Moses a greater revelation of Himself, even

though it was a limited revelation. This revelation helped Moses
fulfill his duty as a mediator, by giving him a greater
appreciation for the Person of Yahweh (cf. 2 Cor. 12:4). This
is what all the leaders of God's people need (cf. Phil. 3:8-10).

"… though Yahweh does indeed come to Moses in

theophany, what he gives to Moses is quite
specifically not the sight of this beauty, his glory,
his Presence—that, indeed, he pointedly denies.

1See Tozer, The Pursuit …, p. 6.

2Keil and Delitzsch, 2:237.
284 Dr. Constable's Notes on Exodus 2021 Edition

What he gives rather is a description, and at that,

a description not of how he looks but of how he
is."1

"When God's servants are discouraged and

disappointed because of the sins of their people,
the best remedy for a broken heart is a new vision
of the glory of God."2

God gave another dramatic revelation of Himself similar to the

one that He had formerly given at Sinai (vv. 21-23; cf. 19:9-
25).

3. The renewal of the covenant ch. 34

Moses had obtained God's promise to renew the covenant bond with Israel
(33:14). Now God directed him to restore the covenant revelation, by
having the Ten Commandments re-inscribed on two new stone tablets. God
both provided and wrote on the first tablets, but Moses provided and God
wrote on the second set of tablets.

"As Moses had restored the covenant through his energetic

intercession, he should also provide the materials for the
renewal of the covenant record, and bring them to God, for
Him to complete and confirm the record by writing the
covenant words upon the tables."3

Again Moses stayed "40 days and 40 nights" on the mountain (v. 28), but
this time Joshua did not accompany him.

"Israel's initial relationship with God at Sinai, characterized by

the patriarchal simplicity of the Covenant Code [Exod. 20:22—
23:33], is now represented by the complex and restrictive laws
of the Code of the Priests [Exod. 35—Lev. 16]."4

34:1-9 The text does not record what Moses saw of God's self-
revelation (of His "glory"; 33:18), but it does tell us the words

1Durham, p. 452.
2Wiersbe, p. 247.
3Keil and Delitzsch, 2:240.
4Sailhamer, The Pentateuch …, p. 48.
2021 Edition Dr. Constable's Notes on Exodus 285

he heard. Moses stressed the mercy of God in this exposition

of God's name, Yahweh ("compassionate and gracious …
abounding in lovingkindness … forgives iniquity … and sin"; cf.
29:5-6). This is the only place in Scripture where God lists His
own attributes.

"It never ceases to amaze me that the first thing

God revealed about Himself to Moses was His
compassion (Exod. 34:6)—not His holiness,
sovereignty, or love."1

"There is nothing more terrible than the way in

which sin clings to a man and dogs his footsteps.
Let a man once steal, and he is never trusted
again, even though he has made reparation for it.
Men look at their fallen brothers through their sin;
but God looks at man through the idealised [sic]
life, with a love that imputes to him every virtue
for Christ's sake."2

Moses' response to God's gracious revelation was submission

("made haste to bow low") and "worship" (v. 8).3

Encouraged by this revelation, Moses requested again (cf.

33:15) that God would dwell "in [the] midst" of Israel, and lead
His people into the Promised Land ("go along in our midst"; v.
9). He besought the Lord again to re-establish His covenant
("take us as Your own possession"), acknowledging the
sinfulness of the Israelites ("pardon our iniquity and our sin"),
with whom he humbly identified.

34:10-26 In response, God announced that He would restore the ("make

a") "covenant." That is, He would establish the covenant again.
Furthermore, He would "perform miracles" never before seen,
namely, when He would "drive out" the Canaanites (v. 10).

1Laney, p. 48.
2Meyer, pp. 448-49.
3See J. Carl Laney, "God's Self-Revelation in Exodus 34:6-8," Bibliotheca Sacra 158:629

(January-March 2001):36-51.
286 Dr. Constable's Notes on Exodus 2021 Edition

"The enormity of Israel's refusal to obey God's

command and conquer the land (see Num. 13; 14)
is to be seen in the light of this extraordinary
promise (see also Deut. 4:32-40)."1

To remind the Israelites of their duties in the covenant

relationship, God repeated two of the fundamental ordinances
(chs. 21—23) that would determine their attitude toward Him:

1. They were to "make no covenant" with the Canaanites,

but drive them out completely (vv. 11-16). The
Israelites were to live by only one covenant: their
covenant with Yahweh at Sinai.

2. They were to worship God as He had specified (vv. 17-

26)—observing the feasts of "Unleavened Bread,"
"Weeks" ("first fruits"), "Ingathering," and "Passover"—
rather than as they thought best. Their failure in this had
resulted in the worship of the golden calf.

34:27-28 God had re-established the Mosaic Covenant as soon as He had

set forth these principles.

"The tangible token of the renewal is the handing

over of two tables of the testimony like the first,
which had been shattered at the time when the
original covenant had been annulled. The
ceremony was to be similar to the first one, but
not so festive, just as the second wedding of one
who marries his divorced wife is not quite the
same as the first. The break has been healed, but
it is not possible to undo the fact that at some
time the break had existed."2

"A person can survive without food for weeks. But

no one can go without water for more than three
or four days. If Moses drank no water for forty

1The Nelson …, p. 162.

2Cassuto, pp. 437-38. On the practice of fasting, see Kent D. Berghuis, "A Biblical
Perspective on Fasting," Bibliotheca Sacra 158:629 (January-March 2001):86-103.
2021 Edition Dr. Constable's Notes on Exodus 287

days [v. 28], then we must view his continued

existence as a miracle of the Lord."1

34:29-35 The transformation that Moses experienced as a result of his

close fellowship with God showed in his physical appearance,
particularly in his "face" (cf. Matt. 17:1-3). This change made
the other Israelites uncomfortable around him. The evidence
of his close relationship with God convicted them. Evidently
Moses' shining face was evidence to the Israelites that he had
been in the Lord's presence, and that what he told them was
an "oracle" from God (a prophetic word directly from God).
The purpose of the "veil" that Moses wore over his face, while
speaking with the Israelites at other times, was to hide the fact
that "the glory was fading" (2 Cor. 3:13).

"The physical nature of this phenomenon must

remain a mystery, but its theological meaning is
crystal clear. Moses, as covenant mediator, was
authenticated as such by his resemblance to the
God of glory whom he represented. It is precisely
for this reason that Moses and Elijah shared the
radiance of the transfigured Jesus (Luke 9:31-
32)."2

The Hebrew word translated "shone" is unusual, and is related

to the word translated "horn," meaning "rayed." In the Latin
Vulgate, Jerome translated the clause in light of the basic
meaning of the root word: "horned." This led some ancient
painters to represent Moses in art with horns coming out of his
head.

"Henceforth, the covenant that God makes with

Israel will focus on the role of the mediator.
Through him God will display his glory to his
people."3

The covenant "as renewed" rested on the separation of the people from
the nations that God would drive out before them. The realization of the

1The Nelson …, p. 163.

2Merrill, "A Theology …," p. 56. Cf. Durham, p. 468.
3Sailhamer, The Pentateuch …, p. 317.
288 Dr. Constable's Notes on Exodus 2021 Edition

blessings that God promised depended on the Israelites' obedience to this

command ("make no covenant with the inhabitants of the land").

The blessing of God's people rests on the faithful lovingkindness of God

and the intercession of their leaders: Jesus Christ and human leaders. We
cannot stress too much the importance of the kind of intercession that
Moses modeled on this occasion. If God has given you a ministry of
leadership, your intercession for those you lead, or your lack of it, will
directly affect their welfare.

"In this tragic story [of the breaking and renewing of the
Mosaic Covenant] is the central message of the Bible: Despite
the repeated sinfulness of His people, God is merciful. He
forgives those who repent (Acts 2:38)."1

E. THE CONSTRUCTION AND DEDICATION OF THE OBJECTS USED IN ISRAEL'S

WORSHIP CHS. 35—40

The renewal of the covenant made the erection of the tabernacle possible.
Here begins what scholars refer to as the Code of the Priests (Exod. 35—
Lev. 16). Having broken the covenant once, God proceeded to give His
people more stringent requirements.

"… the Code of the Priests sought to ensure Israel's obedience

through an elaborate system of priestly requirements. As the
Sinai narrative [Exod. 19—Num. 10] unfolds, then, the simple
'everyman's' altar of the Covenant Code (Ex 20:24-25) gives
way to the singular and more elaborate bronze altar of the
tabernacle (Ex 27:1-8; 38:1-7), one that was to be used solely
by the priests (Lev 1ff.)."2

"The similarities of Exod 25—31 and 35—40 may all be

accounted for on the basis of their rootage in this all-
encompassing theme: both sections, each in its own way, are
preoccupied with Israel's need to experience the reality of
Yahweh's Presence."3

1The Nelson …, p. 157.

2Sailhamer, The Pentateuch …, pp. 58-59.
3Durham, p. 474.
2021 Edition Dr. Constable's Notes on Exodus 289

1. Preparations for construction 35:1—36:7

Following the restoration of the covenant, Moses announced God's

directions for the construction of the tabernacle. In building it, the Israelites
were to work only "six days" a "week." They were to "rest" on the Sabbath
every week, from then on, because it was a "holy day" (35:2-3).

"Kindling a fire receives special attention here because the

people thought that kindling a fire was not a work, but only a
preparation for some kind of work. But the Law makes sure
that this too was not done."1

"It would be very hard to carry on our society without someone

working on the Sabbath day, which is Saturday. Suppose no
fire was kindled on the Sabbath. This would cause great
problems in the frozen North. God's laws were made to suit
the land in which Israel lived."2

Next, Moses invited the people to bring their "contribution[s]" for the
construction (35:4-19; cf. 25:1-9). These materials would have been the
Israelites' own goods. Some were items or materials the Egyptians had
given them when they left Egypt, and others were possessions they had
obtained from traders they had met, during their travels since leaving
Egypt.

The people began to bring what the builders needed (35:20-29). Moses
again recognized "Bezalel" and "Oholiab" as unusually skillful artisans,
whom God had gifted and appointed to lead the construction work
(35:30—36:2).

"Following the blueprint [36:1] is very important because the

tabernacle is God's portrait of Christ."3

God's provision of Bezalel and Oholiab inspired the people to give even
more ("much more than enough"), so much "more" that Moses had to tell
the people to stop giving (31:3-7; cf. 2 Cor. 9:7). So the people proved

1The NET Bible note on 35:3.

2McGee, Thru the …, 1:309.
3Ibid., 1:311.
290 Dr. Constable's Notes on Exodus 2021 Edition

their commitment to the covenant—and to Yahweh—by their generous

contributions to the project that He had ordered.1

"God has an eye to the heart of the giver more than to the
value of the gift [cf. Mark 12:41-44]."2

Critics have objected that tahash ("porpoise," "dolphin," or "badger" skins)

would not have been available to the Israelites in the wilderness.

"While the seal and porpoise, as well as the dolphin and

dugong, are all found in the waters near Sinai, and are possible
candidates for the tahash, most recent writers favor the
dugong."3

2. Execution of the work 36:8—39:43

Moses described the directions for constructing the tabernacle and its
furnishings earlier (chs. 25—31). This section, which may appear redundant
to the modern reader, shows that the Israelites carried out everything that
God "had commanded"—just as He had specified to "Moses." Hebrew
writers repeated information to stress its importance. The text repeats "he
made" many times, referring to Bezalel (cf. 36:14, 31, 35; et al.) I will
simply give a breakdown of the individual items here with references and
parallel references (cf. also 35:11-19).

The tabernacle 36:8-38

The hangings and coverings 36:8-19 (cf. 26:1-14)

"The excavations in Egypt have brought forth many bronze

mirrors [v. 8}, not only showing their use in that time, but also
giving us the explanation as to why the Israelite women
happened to have such mirrors. They had just come out of
Egypt and would have had such mirrors as part of their
possessions. They may have had even more mirrors than they
would have ordinarily possessed, since the Egyptians gave

1See Dwayne H. Adams, "The Building Program that Works (Exodus 25:4—36:7 [31:1-
11])," Exegesis and Exposition 1:1 (Fall 1986):82-92.
2Henry, p. 112.
3Free, p. 107.
2021 Edition Dr. Constable's Notes on Exodus 291

them many gifts at the time of the Exodus (Exod. 12:35,

36)."1

The boards and bars 36:20-34 (cf. 26:15-30)

The veil and screen 36:35-38 (cf. 26:31-37)

"The order of recounting the construction of the parts of the

tabernacle is not the same as that of the instructions in Exodus
25—30. … The purpose for this change is perhaps to begin
with, and thus highlight, the part of the work that involved 'all
the skilled workers' before moving on to that work which
involved only Bezalel. Thus the picture given at the beginning
of the narrative is that of the total participation of all the
people."2

The furniture, vessels, and courtyard 37:1—38:20

The ark of the covenant 37:1-9 (cf. 25:10-22)

The table of showbread 37:10-16 (cf. 25:23-30)

The lampstand 37:17-24 (cf. 25:31-40)

The altar of incense 37:25-28 (cf. 30:1-10)

The anointing oil and incense 37:29 (cf. 30:22-28)

The brazen altar 38:1-7 (cf. 27:1-8)

The laver 38:8 (cf. 30:17-21)

"The mirrors spoken of here were made of brass which was

highly polished. Women have not changed; they carried mirrors
in that day, too. The laver was made from these mirrors. The
mirror represents the Word of God. It is the Bible that shows
the believer his need for cleansing. The laver was there for
cleansing. We have the same thing in our bathrooms to day.
We have a mirror, and beneath the mirror is a wash basin."3

1Ibid., p. 108.
2Sailhamer, The Pentateuch …, p. 318.
3McGee, Thru the …, 1:315.
292 Dr. Constable's Notes on Exodus 2021 Edition

The courtyard 38:9-20 (cf. 27:9-19)

The raw materials 38:21-31

Moses also recorded an estimate of the amount of precious metals used

(38:21-31). Coined money did not exist until the eighth century B.C., when
the Lydians in Anatolia (modern Turkey) invented it.1 Consequently the
"shekel" Moses referred to was a measure of weight (not quite half an
ounce).2 The materials included slightly over a ton of gold (v. 24), almost
four tons of silver (vv. 25-28), and about two and a half tons of bronze
(vv. 29-31). Peter Enns computed the total to be about 15,000 pounds.3

The priests' clothing 39:1-31

Moses described the preparation of the priests' clothes at length, as is

appropriate in view of their importance.4

The ephod 39:2-7 (cf. 28:6-12)

The breastplate 39:8-21 (cf. 28:15-29)

The robe 39:22-26 (cf. 28:31-34)

The other accessories 39:27-31 (cf. 28:39-40, 42)

Note the repetition of the fact that the craftsmen followed the Lord's
instructions to Moses precisely ("just as the LORD had commanded Moses";
vv. 1, 5, 7, 21, 26, 29, 31).

"This almost monotonous repetition of the fact that the work

was carried out according to the pattern is full of significance.
Everything was intended to teach the people that the one
simple basis of relationship between them and God must ever
be implicit obedience to the minutest detail of divine
instructions."5

1The New Bible Dictionary, s.v. "Money," by A. F. Walls, pp. 836-41.

2Ibid.,s.v. "Weights and Measures," by D. J. Wiseman and D. H. Wheaton, pp. 1319-25.
3Enns, p. 549.
4See John E. Johnson, "The Old Testament Offices as Paradigm for Pastoral Identity,"

Bibliotheca Sacra 152:606 (April-June 1995):182-200.

5G. Campbell Morgan, An Exposition …, p. 50.
2021 Edition Dr. Constable's Notes on Exodus 293

Presentation to Moses 39:32-43

The builders and craftsmen then presented the finished tabernacle items
to Moses. The fact that he listed them again in the text reflects their
importance. The statement that they did their work "just as the LORD had
commanded Moses" brackets the section (vv. 32, 42). As in the Creation
narrative (Gen. 1:28), a blessing concludes the tabernacle construction
narrative ("So Moses blessed them"; v. 43).

"The readiness and liberality with which the people had

presented the gifts required for this work, and the zeal which
they had shown in executing the whole of the work in rather
less than half a year (see at 40:17), were most cheering signs
of the willingness of the Israelites to serve the Lord, for which
they could not fail to receive the blessing of God."1

The sections of Exodus dealing with the tabernacle are a fruitful field for
study.2

3. The erection and consecration of the tabernacle ch. 40

The Israelites erected "the tabernacle of the tent of meeting" on the first
day of the first month, almost exactly one year after the Israelites left
Egypt (vv. 2, 17). This was about nine months after Israel had arrived at
Mt. Sinai (cf. 19:1).

"It is no surprise … that the tabernacle, itself a microcosm of

creation, is also set up one year later on the first day of the
first month. It, too, is a new creation."3

Here "the tent of meeting" does not refer to the smaller tent that preceded
the "tabernacle," as it does in some places earlier in Exodus (especially in
chapters 25 and 33), but to the "tabernacle" structure proper.

First, the text narrates God's command to erect the tabernacle (vv. 1-15).
Moses' obedience to this command follows (vv. 16-33). Seven times in this
chapter we read that Moses did exactly as ("according to all that" or "just

1Keil and Delitzsch, 2:255.

2See Paul F. Kiene, The Tabernacle of God in the Wilderness. This book contains many
color pictures of a model as well as explanations of the furniture, priestly garments, etc.
3Enns, p. 552.
294 Dr. Constable's Notes on Exodus 2021 Edition

as") the LORD had commanded him (vv. 19, 21, 23, 25, 26, 29, 32; cf. Heb.
3:5).

"The writer's careful attention to the chronology of the events

is important, for it shows that the restriction of the offering of
the Passover lamb to the central worship center (Dt 16:1-8)
could thus have already been carried out during this first
celebration of the Passover in the wilderness."1

When the tabernacle stood complete, God descended in "the cloud" that
so "filled the tabernacle," that neither Moses nor anyone else could enter
it (vv. 34-39; cf. 24:16; 25:8).

Finally God was dwelling among His people. His redemption of them was
now complete. He had liberated them from bondage in Egypt (chs. 1—15),
and had adopted them as His special treasure (chs. 15—40). He had made
a covenant with them, and now blessed them with His presence. He would
guide them from then on "throughout all their journeys" (vv. 36, 38). The
descent of God in the shekinah glory cloud, to take up residence in the
midst of His people, is therefore a fitting climax for closing this book.

Moses, however, was not able to enter the tabernacle because of the cloud
(v. 34). This indicates that more provisions were necessary before
fellowship with God could continue. Leviticus explains those provisions.

1Sailhamer, The Pentateuch …, pp. 321-22.

2021 Edition Dr. Constable's Notes on Exodus 295

The major message of this book is that "Yahweh" is the sovereign God who
provides deliverance for people from the slavery in which they find
themselves. Moses revealed God's methods of providing salvation in
Exodus.

God's method of dealing with the whole human race was to create a
pattern, in the nation of Israel, of how glorious it can be to live under the
government of Yahweh. His method of dealing with Israel was by revealing
Himself in power and glory. God intended this revelation to produce the
double reaction of obedience (horizontally) and worship (vertically) in the
Israelites. God's method of dealing with individuals was by providing
opportunities to obey and experience blessing, or to disobey and
experience chastisement.

God's purposes as revealed in Exodus are continually moving forward.

People's actions—such as disobedience, apostasy, and rebellion—affect
God's purposes, but they never frustrate them. Man's actions in Exodus fail
apart from God's grace. This fact demonstrates that in both his nature and
practice, man is a congenital sinner.

God's grace in choosing Israel, and blessing her with deliverance, adoption,
and His abiding presence, stands out clearly in Exodus, especially in view of
Israel's ingratitude and rebelliousness.

"Exodus contains some of the richest, foundational theology

of all the books in the OT. Preeminently, it lays the foundations
for a theology of God's revelation of his person, his
redemption, his law, and his worship. It also initiates the great
institution of the priesthood and the role of the prophet and
formalizes the covenant relationship between God and his
people."1

1Kaiser, "Exodus," p. 292.

296 Dr. Constable's Notes on Exodus 2021 Edition

The Hebrew Calendar1

Pre- Post- Sacred Civil Days Festival Modern Agricultural
exile exile Year Year of the month season
month month month month month

Abib Nisan 1 7 1 New Moon Mar/Apr Spring

Equinox

14 Passover Occasional
sirocco

15-21 Unleavened Latter

Bread rains; flood
season;
beginning
of barley
season

16 First-fruits Flax
Harvest

21 Holy
Convocation

Ziv Iyyar 2 8 Apr/May Dry season

begins;
apricots
ripen

Sivan 3 9 7 Pentecost May/ Wheat

(Feast of June harvest
Weeks) begins; dry
winds;
early figs;
grapes
ripen

1Davis, p. 142.
2021 Edition Dr. Constable's Notes on Exodus 297

Tammuz 4 10 June/ Hot, dry

July season;
grape
harvest

Ab 5 11 July/ Air still;

Aug heat
intense;
olive
harvest

Elul 6 12 Aug/ Dates and

Sept summer
figs

Ethanim Tishri 7 1 1 Blowing of Sept/ Early

Trumpets Oct (former)
rains

10 Day of Heavy
Atonement dews

15-21 Feast of Plowing;

Tabernacles seed time

22 Solemn
Assembly

Bul Heshvan 8 2 Oct/Nov Rains;

winter figs;
wheat and
barley
sown

Chislev 9 3 25 Dedication Nov/Dec Winter

begins;
pastures
become
green
298 Dr. Constable's Notes on Exodus 2021 Edition

Tebeth 10 4 Dec/Jan Coldest

month;
rains; snow
on high
ground

Shebat 11 5 Jan/Feb Growing

warm;
almond
trees
blossom

Adar 12 6 15 Feast of Feb/Mar Spring

Purim (latter)
rains begin;
citrus fruit
harvest
 AND THE ELDERS
MOSES

THE ISRAELITES
ON THE PLAIN BELOW

JOSHUA
AARON, NADAB, ABIHU,
TIME IN THE MOUNTAIN

IN THE MOUNTAIN ABOVE

ISRAEL CAMPS AT MT. SINAI

19:1-2
Exod.
?

TERMS OF THE COVENANT ANNOUNCED

19:3-6

ISRAEL COMMITS TO THE COVENANT

19:7-9
?

YAHWEH’S DESCENT ANNOUNCED

19:10-14

YAHWEH DESCENDS ON MT. SINAI

19:15-20
?

SEPARATION & CONSECRATION COMMANDED

19:21-25

THE DECALOGUE GIVEN

20:1-21
?

THE BOOK OF THE COVENANT GIVEN

23:33
20:22-

ISRAEL RECOMMITS TO THE COVENANT

24:1-8
Moses’ Trips Up Mt. Sinai

THE COVENANT RATIFIED

24:9-11

MOSES SUMMONED TO RETURN

24:12
&

THE TABERNACLE REVEALED

32:14
24:13-
40 days

40 nights

30
THE COVENANT BROKEN

32:15-
?

33:3

MOSES' INTERCESSION
FELLOWSHIP REESTABLISHED 32:31-

34:4
33:4-
THE COVENANT RENEWED &
40 days

34:5-29
40 nights
THE COVENANT EXECUTED

Nu m.
10:32
33:30-
299 Dr. Constable's Notes on Exodus 2021 Edition
300 Dr. Constable's Notes on Exodus 2021 Edition

Adams, Dwayne H. "The Building Program that Works (Exodus 25:4--36:7

[31:1-11])." Exegesis and Exposition 1:1 (Fall 1986):82-92.

Aharoni, Yohanan. "Kadesh-Barnea and Mount Sinai." In God's Wilderness:

Discoveries in Sinai, pp. 115-70. Edited by B. Rothenberg, Y. Aharoni,
and A Hashimshoni. New York: Thomas Nelson & Sons, 1962.

Aharoni, Yohanan, and Michael Avi-Yonah. The Macmillan Bible Atlas.

Revised ed. New York: Macmillan Publishing Co., 1977.

Albright, William Foxwell. Archaeology and the Religion of Israel. Fifth ed.
Baltimore: Johns Hopkins Press, 1968.

_____. The Archaeology of Palestine. 1949. Revised ed. Pelican

Archaeology series. Harmondsworth, Middlesex, England: Penguin
Books, 1956.

_____. "Northwest-Semitic Names in a List of Egyptian Slaves from the

Eighteenth Century B.C." Journal of the American Oriental Society
74 (1954):222-33.

Aldrich, Roy L. "The Mosaic Ten Commandments Compared to Their

Restatements in the New Testament." Bibliotheca Sacra 118:471
(July-September 1961):251-58.

Alexander, John F. "Sabbath Rest." The Other Side 146 (November

1983):8-9.

Aling, Charles F. "The Biblical City of Ramses." Journal of the Evangelical

Theological Society 25:2 (June 1982):129-37.

Allen, Ronald B. "The 'Bloody Bridegroom' in Exodus 4:24-26." Bibliotheca

Sacra 153:611 (July-September 1996):259-69.

_____. "The Pillar of the Cloud." Bibliotheca Sacra 153:612 (October-

December 1996):387-95.

_____. The Wonder of Worship: A New Understanding of the Worship

Experience. Swindoll Leadership Library series. Nashville: Word
Publishing, 2001.
2021 Edition Dr. Constable's Notes on Exodus 301

Allis, Oswald T. The Five Books of Moses. 2nd ed. Philadelphia: Presbyterian
and Reformed Publishing Co., 1949.

_____. Prophecy and the Church. Philadelphia: Presbyterian and Reformed

Publishing Co., 1945.

Anati, Emmanuel. "Has Mt. Sinai Been Found?" Biblical Archaeology Review
11:4 (July-August 1985):42-57.

Archer, Gleason L., Jr. "Old Testament History and Recent Archaeology
from Abraham to Moses." Bibliotheca Sacra 127:505 (January-March
1970):3-25.

_____. "Old Testament History and Recent Archaeology from Moses to

David." Bibliotheca Sacra 127:506 (April-June 1970):99-115.

_____. A Survey of Old Testament Introduction. Revised ed. Chicago:

Moody Press, 1964, 1974.

Bacchiocchi, Samuele. "Sabbatical Typologies of Messianic Redemption."

Journal for the Study of Judaism 17:2 (December 1986):153-76.

Baldwin, Joyce G. "The Role of the Ten Commandments." Vox Evangelica

13 (1983):7-18.

Barlow, Robert Andres. "The Passover Seder." Exegesis and Exposition 3:1
(Fall 1988):63-68.

Batto, Bernard F. "Red Sea or Reed Sea?" Biblical Archaeology Review 10:4
(July-August 1984):57-63.

Baxter, J. Sidlow. Explore the Book. 1960. One vol. ed. Grand Rapids:
Zondervan Publishing House, 1980.

Beale, G. K. "An Exegetical and Theological Consideration of the Hardening

of Pharaoh's Heart in Exodus 4-14 and Romans 9." Trinity Journal
5NS:2 (Autumn 1984):129-54.

Beit-Arieh, Itzhaq. "Fifteen Years in Sinai." Biblical Archaeology Review 10:4

(July-August 1984):28-54.

Beitzel, Barry J. The Moody Atlas of Bible Lands. Chicago: Moody Press,
1985.
302 Dr. Constable's Notes on Exodus 2021 Edition

Berghuis, Kent D. "A Biblical Perspective on Fasting." Bibliotheca Sacra

158:629 (January-March 2001):86-103.

Bimson, John J. "Redating the Exodus." Biblical Archaeology Review 13:5

(September-October 1986):40-53, 66-68.

_____. Redating the Exodus and the Conquest. JSOT supplement series.
Sheffield: University of Sheffield Press, 1978.

Blosser, Oliver R. "Did the Pharaoh of the Exodus Drown in the Red Sea?"
It's About Time (July 1987), pp. 8-12.

_____. "The Impact of the Ten Plagues and Mosaic Monotheism on the
Religion of Akenaton: Part I." It's About Time (July 1987), pp. 3-7.

Bodenheimer, F. S. "The Manna of Sinai." Biblical Archaeologist 10:1

(February 1947):2-6.

Bonar, Andrew A. A Commentary on Leviticus. 5th ed. Geneva Series

Commentary series. London: Banner of Truth Trust; reprint ed.,
1966.

Booij, Thijs. "Mountain and Theophany in the Sinai Narrative." Biblica 65:1
(1984):1-26.

Bramer, Stephen J. "Suffering in the Pentateuch." In Why, O God? Suffering

and Disability in the Bible and the Church, pp. 87-97. Edited by Larry
J. Waters and Roy B. Zuck. Wheaton: Crossway, 2011.

Brichto, Herbert Chanan. "The Worship of the Golden Calf: A Literary

Analysis of a Fable on Idolatry." Hebrew Union College Annual 54
(1983):1-44.

Bright, John. A History of Israel. Philadelphia: Westminster Press, 1959.

Budge, E. A. W. The Gods of the Egyptians. New York: Dover Press, 1969.

Bunn, John T. "The Ark of the Covenant." Biblical Illustrator 9:4 (Summer
1983):50-53.

Burden, Jasper J. "A Stylistic Analysis of Exodus 15:1-21: Theory and

Practice." OTWSA 29 (1986):34-70.
2021 Edition Dr. Constable's Notes on Exodus 303

Bury, J. B.; S. A. Cools; and F. E. Adcock, eds. The Cambridge Ancient

History. 12 vols. 2nd ed. Reprinted. Cambridge: University Press,
1928.

Bush, George. Notes on Exodus. 2 vols. Reprint ed. Minneapolis: James and
Klock, 1976.

Calvin, John. Institutes of the Christian Religion. The Library of Christian

Classics series, volumes 20 and 21. Edited by John T. McNeill.
Translated by Ford Lewis Battles. Philadelphia: Westminster Press,
1960.

Cassuto, Umberto. A Commentary on the Book of Exodus. Translated by

Israel Abrahams. Reprinted. English ed. Jerusalem: Magnes Press,
1983.

Chafer, Lewis Sperry. Grace. 2nd ed. Grand Rapids: Kregel Publications,
1922, 1995.

Childs, Brevard S. The Book of Exodus. The Old Testament Library series.
Philadelphia: Westminster Press, 1974.

Chirichigno, G. C. "The Narrative Structure of Exod 19-24." Biblia 68:4

(1987):457-79.

Chisholm, Robert B., Jr. "Divine Hardening in the Old Testament."

Bibliotheca Sacra 153:612 (October-December 1996):410-34.

_____. "Does God 'Change His Mind'?" Bibliotheca Sacra 152:608

(October-December 1995):387-99.

_____. "The Polemic against Baalism in Israel's Early History and

Literature." Bibliotheca Sacra 151:603 (July-September 1994):267-
83.

Chismar, Douglas E. and David A Raush. "Regarding Theonomy: An Essay of

Concern." Journal of the Evangelical Theological Society 27:3
(September 1984):315-23.

Clapham, Phillip. "In Search of the Exodus." Catastrophism and Ancient

History 8:2 (July 1986):97-133.
304 Dr. Constable's Notes on Exodus 2021 Edition

Clapp, Rodney. "Democracy as Heresy." Christianity Today 31:3 (February

20, 1987):17-23.

Cole, R. Alan. Exodus: An Introduction and Commentary. Tyndale Old

Testament Commentary series. Downers Grove: InterVarsity Press,
1973.

Congdon, Robert N. "Exodus 21:22-25 and the Abortion Debate."

Bibliotheca Sacra 146:582 (April-June 1989):132-47.

Constable, Thomas L. "What Prayer Will and Will Not Change." In Essays in
Honor of J. Dwight Pentecost. Edited by Stanley D. Toussaint and
Charles H. Dyer. Chicago: Moody Press, 1986.

Cox, Dorian G. Coover. "The Hardening of Pharaoh's Heart in Its Literary

and Cultural Contexts." Bibliotheca Sacra 163:651 (July-September
2006):292-311.

Craigie, Peter C. The Problem of War in the Old Testament. Grand Rapids:
Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., 1978.

_____. Ugarit and the Old Testament. Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans
Publishing Co., 1983.

Cross, Frank Moore, Jr. "The Song of the Sea and Canaanite Myth." In God
and Christ: Existence and Province, pp. 1-25. Edited by Robert W.
Funk. New York: Harper and Row, 1968.

_____. "The Tabernacle." Biblical Archaeologist 10:3 (September

1947):45-68.

Curtis, Edward M. "The Theological Basis for the Prohibition of Images in

the Old Testament." Journal of the Evangelical Theological Society
28:3 (September 1985):277-87.

Dalman, Rodger. "Egypt and Early Israel's Cultural Setting: A Quest for
Evidential Possibilities." Journal of the Evangelical Theological Society
51:3 (September 2008):449-88.

Darby, John Nelson. Synopsis of the Books of the Bible. Revised ed. 5 vols.
New York: Loizeaux Brothers Publishers, 1942.
2021 Edition Dr. Constable's Notes on Exodus 305

Davis, John J. Moses and the Gods of Egypt. Grand Rapids: Baker Book
House, 1971.

Deere, Jack S. "Deuteronomy." In The Bible Knowledge Commentary: Old

Testament, pp. 259-324. Edited by John F. Walvoord and Roy B.
Zuck. Wheaton: Scripture Press Publications, Victor Books, 1985.

DeHaan, Martin Ralph. The Chemistry of the Blood and Other Stirring
Messages. 2nd ed. Grand Rapids: Zondervan Publishing House, 1943.

Deist, F. E. "Who is to blame: the Pharaoh, Yahweh or circumstance? On

human responsibility, and divine ordinance in Exodus 1—14." OTWSA
29(1986):91-110.

DeMar, Gary. The Debate over Christian Reconstruction. Ft. Worth:

Dominion Press; and Atlanta: American Vision Press, 1988.

Dennett, Edward. Typical Teachings of Genesis. London: G. Morrish, n.d.

Dennison, James T., Jr. "The Exodus: Historical Narrative, Prophetic Hope,
Gospel Fulfillment." Covenant Seminary Review 8:2 (Fall 1982):1-12.

Dillow, Joseph C. The Reign of the Servant Kings. Miami Springs, Fl.:
Schoettle Publishing Co., 1992.

Dumbrell, William J. Covenant and Creation: A Theology of Old Testament

Covenants. Nashville: Thomas Nelson Publishers, 1984.

Dunnam, Maxie D. Exodus. The Communicator's Commentary series. Waco:

Word Books, 1987.

Dunnett, Dolores E. "Evangelicals and Abortion." Journal of the Evangelical

Theological Society 33:2 (June 1990):215-25.

Durham, John I. Exodus. Word Biblical Commentary series. Waco: Word

Books, 1987.

Dyer, Charles H. "The Date of the Exodus Reexamined." Bibliotheca Sacra

140:559 (July-September 1983):225-43.

Dyer, Charles H., and Gregory A. Hatteberg. The New Christian Traveler's
Guide to the Holy Land. Chicago: Moody Publishers, 2006.
306 Dr. Constable's Notes on Exodus 2021 Edition

Dyer, Charles H., and Eugene H. Merrill. The Old Testament Explorer.
Nashville: Word Publishing, 2001. Reissued as Nelson's Old
Testament Survey. Nashville: Thomas Nelson Publishers, 2001.

Edersheim, Alfred. The Temple: Its Ministry and Services As They Were at
the Time of Jesus Christ. Reprint ed. Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans
Publishing Co., 1972.

Eichrodt, Walther. Theology of the Old Testament. 5th ed. revised. 2 vols.
Translated by John A. Baker. The Old Testament Library series.
Philadelphia: Westminster Press, 1961 and 1967.

Ellison, H. L. Exodus. Daily Study Bible series. Philadelphia: Westminster

Press, 1982.

Encyclopaedia Judica. S.v. "Cuneiform Law," by J. Finkelstein, 16:1505i.

Enns, Peter. Exodus. The NIV Application Commentary series. Grand Rapids:
Zondervan, 2000.

Exum, J. Cheryl. "'You Shall Let Every Daughter Live': A Study of Exodus
1:8—2:10." Semeia 28 (1983):63-82.

Fass, David E. "The Molten Calf: Judgment, Motive, and Meaning." Judaism
39:2 (Spring 1990):171-83.

Fawver, Jay D., and R. Larry Overstreet. "Moses and Preventive Medicine."
Bibliotheca Sacra 147:587 (July-September):270-85.

Fensham, F. C. "Extra-Biblical Material and the Hermeneutics of the Old

Testament with Special Reference to the Legal Material of the
Covenant Code." OTWSA 20 & 21 (1977 & 78):53-65.

Finegan, Jack. Let My People Go. New York: Harper & Row Publishers, 1963.

_____. Light from the Ancient Past: The Archeological Background of

Judaism and Christianity. 2nd edition. Princeton University Press.
London: Oxford University Press, 1959.

Finkelstein, Israel. "Raider of the Lost Mountain—An Israeli Archaeologist

Looks at the Most Recent Attempt to Locate Mt. Sinai." Biblical
Archaeology Review 15:4 (July-August 1988):46-50.
2021 Edition Dr. Constable's Notes on Exodus 307

Frankfort, Henri. Ancient Egyptian Religion. New York: Columbia University

Press, 1948; reprint ed., New York: Harper and Row; Harper
Torchbooks, 1961.

Franz, Gordon. "Mt. Sinai Is Not Jebel El-Lawz in Saudi Arabia." A paper
presented at the Annual Meeting of the Evangelical Theological
Society, 15 November 2001, Colorado Springs, Colo.

Free, Joseph P. Archaeology and Bible History. 6th ed. Wheaton: Scripture
Press, 1950, 1959.

Fretheim, Terence E. Exodus. Interpretation series. Louisville: John Knox,

1991.

Fruchtenbaum, Arnold G. "Israel and the Church." In Issues in

Dispensationalism, pp. 113-30. Edited by Wesley R. Willis and John
R. Master. Chicago: Moody Press, 1994.

_____. "The Sabbath Controversy." Biblical Research Monthly 49:4 (July-

August 1984):14-16.

Gaebelein, Arno C. The Annotated Bible. 4 vols. Reprint ed. Chicago: Moody
Press, and New York: Loizeaux Brothers, 1970.

Gardner, Joseph L., ed. Reader's Digest Atlas of the Bible. Pleasantville,
N.Y.: Reader's Digest Association, 1985.

Gentry, Peter J. "The Meaning of 'Holy' in the Old Testament." Bibliotheca

Sacra 170:680 (October-December 2013):400-17.

Gevirtz, Stanley. "Heret, in the Manufacture of the Golden Calf." Biblica 65

(1984):377-81.

Gianotti, Charles R. "The Meaning of the Divine Name YHWH." Bibliotheca

Sacra 142:565 (January-March 1985):38-51.

Gispen, William H. Exodus. Translated by Ed van der Maas. Bible Student's

Commentary series. Grand Rapids: Zondervan Publishing House,
1982.

Gnuse, Robert. "Jubilee Legislation in Leviticus: Israel's Vision of Social

Reform." Biblical Theology Bulletin 15:2 (April 1985):43-48.
308 Dr. Constable's Notes on Exodus 2021 Edition

Goldberg, Michael. "Expository Articles: Exodus 1:13-14." Interpretation

37:4 (October 1983):389-91.

Gottwald, Norman. A Light to the Nations. New York: Harper & Bros., 1959.

Gray, John. Joshua, Judges and Ruth. New Century Bible Commentary
series. London: Thomas Nelson and Sons, 1967.

Gunn, David M. "The 'Hardening of Pharaoh's Heart': Plot, Character and

Theology in Exodus 1-14." In Art and Meaning: Rhetoric in Biblical
Literature, pp. 72-96. Edited by David J. A. Clines, David M. Gunn,
and Alan J. Hauser. Journal for the Study of the Old Testament
Supplement Series, vol. 19. Sheffield: University of Sheffield, 1982.

Gurney, O. R. The Hittites. Baltimore: Penguin Books, 1964.

Habel, N. "The Form and Significance of the Call Narratives." Zeitschrift für
die Alttestamentliche Wissenschaft 77 (1965):316-23.

Hagin, Kenneth E. Redeemed from Poverty, Sickness, and Death. Tulsa:

Faith Library Publications, 1983.

Hanna, Kenneth G. From Moses to Malachi: Exploring the Old Testament.

2nd ed. Edited by Roy B. Zuck. Bloomington, Ind.: CrossBooks, 2014.

Hannah, John D. "Exodus." In The Bible Knowledge Commentary: Old

Testament, pp. 103-62. Edited by John F. Walvoord and Roy B. Zuck.
Wheaton: Scripture Press Publications, Victor Books, 1985.

Harrison, R. K. Introduction to the Old Testament. Grand Rapids: Wm. B.

Eerdmans Publishing Co., 1969, 1974.

Hasel, Gerhard F. "The Sabbath in the Pentateuch." In The Sabbath in

Scripture and History, pp. 21-43. Edited by Kenneth A. Strand.
Washington: Review and Herald Publishing Association, 1982.

Hawkins, Ralph K. "The Date of the Exodus-Conquest Is Still an Open

Question: A Response to Rodger Young and Bryant Wood." Journal
of the Evangelical Theological Society 51:2 (June 2008):245-66.

Hays, J. Daniel "An Evangelical Approach to Old Testament Narrative

Criticism." Bibliotheca Sacra 166:661 (January-March 2009):3-18.
2021 Edition Dr. Constable's Notes on Exodus 309

Hengstenberg, Ernst W. Egypt and the Books of Moses. Translated by R. D.

C. Robbins. New York: M. H. Newman, 1843.

Henry, Matthew. Commentary on the Whole Bible. One volume ed. Edited
by Leslie F. Church. Grand Rapids: Zondervan Publishing Co., 1961.

Herodotus. The Histories. The Landmark Herodotus edition. Edited by

Robert B. Strassler. Translated by Andrea L. Purvis. Pantheon Books,
Random House: New York and Toronto, 2007.

Hiebert, D. Edmond. Working with God: Scriptural Studies in Intercession.

New York: Carlton Press, Hearthstone Book, 1987.

Hilber, John W. "Theology of Worship in Exodus 24." Journal of the

Evangelical Theological Society 39:2 (June 1996):177-89.

Hindson, Edward E. The Philistines and the Old Testament. Baker Studies in
Biblical Archaeology series. Grand Rapids: Baker Book House, 1983.

Hoehner, Harold W. "The Duration of the Egyptian Bondage." Bibliotheca

Sacra 126:504 (October-December 1969):306-16.

Hoffmeier, James K. "What Is the Biblical Date for the Exodus? A Response
to Bryant Wood." Journal of the Evangelical Theological Society 50:2
(June 2007):225-47.

Holmgren, Fredrick. "Before the Temple, the Thornbush: An Exposition of

Exodus 2:11—3:12." Reformed Journal 33:3 (March 1983):9-11.

Hopkins, Ezekiel. "Understanding the Ten Commandments." In Classical

Evangelical Essays in Old Testament Interpretation, pp. 41-58. Edited
by Walter C. Kaiser, Jr. Grand Rapids: Baker Book House, 1972.

Hoppe, Leslie J. "Elders and Deuteronomy." Eglise et Theologie 14

(1983):259-72.

Horn, Siegfried H. Biblical Archaeology: A Generation of Discovery.

Washington: Biblical Archaeology Society, 1985.

Hort, Greta. "The Plagues of Egypt." Zeitschrift für die Alttestamentliche

Wissenschaft 69 (1957):84-103; 70 (1958):48-59.
310 Dr. Constable's Notes on Exodus 2021 Edition

Houtman, Cornelis. Exodus. 3 vols. Translated by J. Rebel and S. Woudstra.

Kampen, Netherlands: Kok, 1993-1999.

_____."A Note on the LXX Version of Exodus 4,6." Zeitschrift für die
Alttestamentliche Wissenschaft 97:2 (1983):253-54.

_____. "On the Meaning of Uba'esim Uba'abanim in Exodus VII 19." Vetus
Testamentum 36:3 (1986):347-52.

Hughes, R. Kent. Living on the Cutting Edge. Westchester, Il.: Good News
Publishers, Crossway Books, 1987.

Hyatt, J. Philip. Exodus. New Century Bible Commentary series. London:

Marshall, Morgan and Scott, 1971; reprint ed., Grand Rapids: William
B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., 1983.

Isser, Stanley. "Two Traditions: The Law of Exodus 21:22-23 Revisited."

Catholic Biblical Quarterly 52:1 (January 1990):30-45.

Jamieson, Robert; A. R. Fausset; and David Brown. Commentary Practical

and Explanatory on the Whole Bible. Reprint ed. Grand Rapids:
Zondervan Publishing House, 1961.

Jacob, Benno. The Second Book of the Bible: Exodus. Hoboken: KTAV,
1992.

Jacob, Edmond. Theology of the Old Testament. Translated by Arthur W.

Heathcote and Philip J. Allcock. New York and Evanston, Ill.: Harper &
Row, 1958.

Johnson, John E. "The Old Testament Offices as Paradigm for Pastoral

Identity." Bibliotheca Sacra 152:606 (April-June 1995):182-200.

Johnson, Philip C. "Exodus." In The Wycliffe Bible Commentary, pp. 51-86.

Edited by Charles F. Pfeiffer and Everett F. Harrison. Chicago: Moody
Press, 1962.

Johnston, Gordon H. "I Will Multiply Your Seed." Exegesis and Exposition 1:1
(Fall 1986):19-32.

Josephus, Flavius. The Works of Flavius Josephus. Translated by William

Whiston. London: T. Nelson and Sons, 1866; reprint ed. Peabody,
Mass.: Hendrickson Publishers, 1988.
2021 Edition Dr. Constable's Notes on Exodus 311

Kaiser, Walter C., Jr. "Exodus." In Genesis—Numbers. Vol. 2 of The

Expositor's Bible Commentary. 12 vols. Edited by Frank E. Gaebelein
and Richard P. Polcyn. Grand Rapids: Zondervan Publishing House,
1990.

_____. Toward an Old Testament Theology. Grand Rapids: Zondervan

Publishing House, 1978.

_____. Toward Old Testament Ethics. Grand Rapids: Zondervan Publishing

House, 1983.

Kalland, Lloyd. "Fetal Life." Eternity, February 1971, pp. 18-21, 24.

Keil, C. F., and Franz Delitzsch. The Pentateuch. 3 vols. Translated by James
Martin. Biblical Commentary on the Old Testament. N.p.; reprint ed.,
Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., n.d.

Kempinski, Aharon. "Jacob in History." Biblical Archaeology Review 14:1

(January-February 1988):42-47.

Kennedy, James M. "The Social Background of Early Israel's Rejection of

Cultic Images: A Proposal." Biblical Theology Bulletin 17:4 (October
1987);138-44.

Kenyon, Kathleen M. The Bible and Recent Archaeology. Atlanta: John Knox
Press, 1978.

Kiene, Paul F. The Tabernacle of God in the Wilderness. Translated by John

S. Crandall. Grand Rapids: Zondervan Publishing House, 1977.

King, Geoffrey R. "Where Is the Ark of the Covenant?" Prophetic Witness

8:2 (February 1984):9-10.

Kitchen, Kenneth A. Ancient Orient and Old Testament. Downers Grove:

InterVarsity Press, 1966.

_____. The Bible In Its World. Downers Grove: InterVarsity Press, 1977.

_____. "Labour Conditions in the Egypt of the Exodus." Buried History

20:3 (September 1984):43-49.

_____. "The Old Testament in its Context: 2 From Egypt to the Jordan."
Theological Students' Fellowship Bulletin 60 (1971):3-11.
312 Dr. Constable's Notes on Exodus 2021 Edition

Kline, Meredith G. "Comments on an Old-New Error." Westminster

Theological Journal 41:1 (Fall 1978):172-89.

_____. "Deuteronomy." In The Wycliffe Bible Commentary, pp. 155-204.

Edited by Charles F. Pfeiffer and Everett F. Harrison. Chicago: Moody
Press, 1962.

_____. "The Feast of Cover-over." Journal of the Evangelical Theological

Society 37:4 (December 1994):497-510.

_____. "Lex Talionis and the Human Fetus." Simon Greenleaf Law Review
5 (1985-86):75-89.

_____. The Treaty of the Great King. Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans
Publishing Co., 1963.

Klingbeil, Gerald A., The Genesis Creation Account and Its

ed.
Reverberations in the Old Testament. Berrien Springs, Mich.: Andrews
University Press, 2015.

Kubo, Sakae. "Why then the law?" Ministry (March 1980), pp. 12-14.

Labuschagne, C. J. The Incomparability of Yahweh in the Old Testament.

Leiden: Brill, 1966.

Laney, J. Carl. God. The Swindoll Leadership Library series. Nashville: Word
Publishing, 1999.

_____. "God's Self-Revelation in Exodus 34:6-8." Bibliotheca Sacra

158:629 (January-March 2001):36-51.

Lange, John Peter, ed. Lange's Commentary on the Holy Scriptures. 12

vols. Reprint ed., Grand Rapids: Zondervan Publishing House, 1960.
Vol. 1: Genesis-Leviticus, by John Peter Lange and Frederic Gardiner.
Translated by Tayler Lewis, A. Gosman, and Charles M. Mead.

Lev, Mordecai J., ed. Sepher Mitzvoth. Jerusalem: Mossad Harav Kook,
1990.

Lewis, C. S. Mere Christianity. New York: Macmillan, 1958.

2021 Edition Dr. Constable's Notes on Exodus 313

Lightner, Robert P. "Theological Perspectives on Theonomy." Bibliotheca

Sacra 143:569 (January-March 1986):26-36; 570 (April-June
1986):134-45; 571 (July-September 1986):228-45.

Livingston, G. Herbert. "A Case Study of the Call of Moses." Asbury

Theological Journal 42:2 (Fall 1987):89-113.

_____.The Pentateuch in Its Cultural Environment. Grand Rapids: Baker

Book House, 1974.

Loewenstamm, Samuel E. "The Making and Destruction of the Golden Calf."

Biblica 48 (1967):481-90.

_____. "The Making and Destruction of the Golden Calf—a Rejoinder."

Biblica 56 (1975):330-43.

Longman, Tremper, III and Raymond B. Dillard. An Introduction to the Old

Testament. 2nd ed. Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 2006.

Lubarsky, Sandra B. "Judaism and the Justification of Abortion for Non-

Medical Reasons." Journal of Reform Judaism 31:4 (Fall 1984):1-13.

M[ackintosh], C. H. Notes on the Book of Exodus. American ed. New York:

Loizeaux Brothers, 1879.

MacLurg, Jeffrey E. "An Ode to Joy: The Song of the Sea (Exodus 15:1-
21)." Exegesis and Exposition 1:1 (Fall 1986):43-54.

Magonet, Jonathan. "The Rhetoric of God: Exodus 6.2-8." Journal for the
Study of the Old Testament 27 (1983):56-67.

Marcus, David. "Juvenile Delinquency in the Bible and the Ancient Near
East." Journal of the Ancient Near Eastern Society of Columbia
University 13 (1981):31-52.

Master, Jonathan. "Exodus 32 as an Argument for Traditional Theism."

Journal of the Evangelical Theological Society 45:4 (December
2002):585-98.

Mazar, Amihai. "Bronze Bull Found in Israelite 'High Place' from the Time of
the Judges." Biblical Archaeology Review 9:5 (September-October
1983):34-40.
314 Dr. Constable's Notes on Exodus 2021 Edition

McClain, Alva J. The Greatness of the Kingdom, An Inductive Study of the

Kingdom of God. Winona Lake, Ind.: BMH Books, 1959; Chicago:
Moody Press, 1968.

McDermott, Gerald R. "Typology in Creation." Bibliotheca Sacra 175:697

(January-March 2018):5-16.

McGee, J. Vernon. The Tabernacle: God's Portrait of Christ. Fourth ed.

Reprint from Bibliotheca Sacra. N.c: N.p, n.d.

_____. Thru the Bible with J. Vernon McGee. 5 vols. Pasadena, Calif.: Thru
The Bible Radio; and Nashville: Thomas Nelson, Inc., 1983.

Mendenhall, George E. Law and Covenant in Israel and the Ancient Near
East. Pittsburgh: Presbyterian Board of Colportage of Western
Pennsylvania, 1955.

Merrill, Eugene H. Deuteronomy. New American Commentary series. N.c.:

Broadman & Holman Publishers, 1994.

_____. Kingdom of Priests. Grand Rapids: Baker Book House, 1987.

_____. "The Mosaic Covenant: A Proposal for Its Theological Significance."

Exegesis and Exposition 3:1 (Fall 1988):25-33.

_____. "A Theology of the Pentateuch." In A Biblical Theology of the Old

Testament, pp. 7-87. Edited by Roy B. Zuck. Chicago: Moody Press,
1991.

Meyer, Frederick Brotherton. Devotional Commentary on Exodus. London:

Purnell, n.d.; reprint ed., Grand Rapids: Kregel Publications, 1981.

_____. Moses: God's Servant. A "One Evening" Condensed Book series.

Westchester, Ill.: Good New Publishers, 1961.

Milgrom, Jacob. Leviticus 1—16. Anchor Bible series. New York: Doubleday,
1991.

_____."'Thou Shalt Not Boil a Kid in It's Mother's Milk.'" Bible Review 1:3
(Fall 1985):48-55.

Mills, Watson E. "Childbearing in Ancient Times." Biblical Illustrator 13:1

(Fall 1986):54-56.
2021 Edition Dr. Constable's Notes on Exodus 315

Minter, Steve. "Ten Timeless Words (Exodus 20:1-17)." Exegesis and

Exposition 1:1 (Fall 1986):67-80.

Mitchell, Bill. "Leviticus 24.6: The Bread of the Presence—Rows or Piles?"

Bible Translator 33:4 (October 1982):447-48.

Mitchell, T. C. "The Meaning of the Noun HTN in the Old Testament." Vetus
Testamentum 19 (1969):93-112.

Montet, Pierre. Eternal Egypt. Translated by Doreen Weightman. New York:

New American Library, 1964.

Morgan, G. Campbell. An Exposition of the Whole Bible. Westwood, N.J.:

Fleming H. Revell Co., 1959.

_____. Living Messages of the Books of the Bible. 2 vols. New York:
Fleming H. Revell Co., 1912.

_____. The Unfolding Message of the Bible. Westwood, N.J.: Fleming H.

Revell Co., 1961.

Morgan, J. P. "The Morality of Suicide: Issues and Options." Bibliotheca

Sacra 148:590 (April-June 1991):214-30.

Mowinckel, Sigmund. "The Name of the God of Moses." Hebrew Union

College Annual 32 (1961):121-33.

Mowvley, Henry. "John 1:14-18 in the Light of Exodus 33:7—34:35."

Expository Times 95:5 (February 1984):135-37.

Munro, John "Prayer to a Sovereign God." Interest 56:2 (February

1990):20-21.

Myers, John V. "What Was Brimstone?" Kronos 9:1 (Fall 1983):57-60.

Naville, Edouard. The Store-City of Pithom and the Route of the Exodus.
London: Egypt Exploration Fund, 1885.

The Nelson Study Bible. Edited by Earl D. Radmacher. Nashville: Thomas

Nelson Publishers, 1997.

The NET (New English Translation) Bible. First beta printing. Spokane,
Wash.: Biblical Studies Press, 2001.
316 Dr. Constable's Notes on Exodus 2021 Edition

The New Bible Dictionary. Edited by J. D. Douglas. 1962 ed. S.v. "Calendar,"
by F. F. Bruce, pp. 176-79.

_____. S.v. "Money," by A. F. Walls, pp. 836-41.

_____. S.v. "Plagues of Egypt," by Kenneth A. Kitchen, pp. 1001-3.

_____. S.v. "Red Sea," by Kenneth A. Kitchen, pp. 1077-78.

_____. S.v. "Weights and Measures," by D. J. Wiseman and D. H. Wheaton,

pp. 1319-25.

Newell, William R. Studies in the Pentateuch. Reprint ed. Grand Rapids:

Kregel Publications, 1983.

Nichol, Francis David, ed. The Seventh-Day Adventist Bible Commentary. 7

vols. Washington: Review and Herald Publishing Assoc., 1953-57.

Nicholson, E. W. "The Decalogue As the Direct Address of God." Vetus

Testamentum 27 (October 1977):422-33.

Noordtzij, A. Numbers. Translated by Ed van der Maas. Bible Student's

Commentary series. Grand Rapids: Zondervan Publishing House,
1983.

Nowell, Irene. "Sabbath: Sign of the Covenant." The Bible Today 24:6
(November 1986):376-80.

Olmstead, A. T. History of the Persian Empire. Chicago: University of

Chicago Press, 1948.

Oosthuizen, M. J. "Some thoughts on the interpretation of Exodus 4:24-

26." OTWSA 29(1986):1-30.

Packer, J. I. Knowing God. 9th American printing. Downers Grove, Ill.: Inter-
Varsity Press, 1973, 1976.

Patterson, Richard D. "The Imagery of Clouds in the Scriptures." Bibliotheca

Sacra 165:657 (January-March 2008):13-27.

_____. "Victory at Sea: Prose and Poetry in Exodus 14—15." Bibliotheca

Sacra 161:641 (January-March 2004):42-54.
2021 Edition Dr. Constable's Notes on Exodus 317

_____. "Wonders in the Heavens and on the Earth: Apolcalyptic Imagery

in the Old Testament." Journal of the Evangelical Theological Society
43:3 (September 2000):385-403.

Paul, Shalom. Studies in the Book of the Covenant in the Light of Cuneiform
and Biblical Law. Leiden: Brill, 1970.

Payne, J. Barton. The Theology of the Older Testament. Grand Rapids:

Zondervan Publishing House, 1962.

Pentecost, J. Dwight. A Faith That Endures: The Book of Hebrews Applied

to the Real Issues of Life. Grand Rapids: Discovery House Publishers,
1992.

_____. The Glory of God. Portland, Ore.: Multnomah Press, 1978.

_____. "The Purpose of the Law." Bibliotheca Sacra 128:511 (July-

September 1971):227-33.

_____. Things to Come. Findlay, Ohio: Dunham Publishing Co., 1958, 1963.

_____. Thy Kingdom Come. Wheaton: Scripture Press Publications, Victor

Books, 1990.

Perevolotsky, Aviram, and Israel Finkelstein. "The Southern Sinai Exodus

Route in Ecological Perspective." Biblical Archaeology Review 11:4
(July-August 1985):26-41.

Petrie, Flinders. Egypt and Israel. New York: E. S. Gorham, 1911.

Pfeiffer, Charles F. Ras Shamra and the Bible. Grand Rapids: Baker Book
House, 1962.

Phillips, Anthony. Ancient Israel's Criminal Law. New York: Schocken, 1970.

_____. "A Fresh Look at the Sinai Pericope." Vetus Testamentum 34

(January 1984): 39-52; 34 (July 1984):282-94.

_____. The Laws of Slavery: Exodus 21:2-11." Journal for the Study of
the Old Testament 30 (October 1984):51-66.

_____. "Some Aspects of Family Law in Pre-Exilic Israel." Vetus

Testamentum 23 (1973):349-61.
318 Dr. Constable's Notes on Exodus 2021 Edition

Pink, Arthur W. Exposition of the Gospel of John. Swengel, Pa.: I. C.

Herendeen, 1945; 3 vols. in 1 reprint ed., Grand Rapids: Zondervan
Publishing House, 1973.

Pollock, Algernon J. The Tabernacle's Typical Teaching. London: Pickering

& Inglis, n.d.

Pritchard, James B., ed. Ancient Near Eastern Texts Relating to the Old
Testament. 3rd ed. Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1969.

Proffitt, T. D., III. "Moses and Anthropology: A New View of the Exodus."
Journal of the Evangelical Theological Society 27:1 (March
1984):19-25.

Radday, Yehuda T. "The Spoils of Egypt." Annual of the Swedish Theological

Institute 12 (1983):127-47.

Ramey, William D. "The Great Escape (Exodus 14)." Exegesis and Exposition
1:1 (Fall 1986):33-42.

Ramm, Bernard L. His Way Out. Glendale: Gospel Light Publications; Regal
Books, 1974.

Reviv, Hanoch. "The Traditions Concerning the Inception of the Legal

System in Israel: Significance and Dating." Zeitschrift fur die
Alttestamentliche Wissenschaft 94:4 (1982):566-75.

Richie, John. From Egypt to Canaan. John Richie Memorial Library series.
Reprint of 5th ed. Grand Rapids: Kregel Publications, 1982.

_____. Tabernacle in the Wilderness. John Richie Memorial Library series.

Reprint of 1891 ed. Grand Rapids: Kregel Publications, 1982.

Ridout, Samuel. Lectures on the Tabernacle. Bible Truth Library series. New
York: Loizeaux Brothers Publishers, n.d.

Robinson, Bernard P. "Symbolism in Exod. 15:22-27 (Marah and Elim)."

Revue Biblique 94:3 (July 1987):376-88.

_____. "Zipporah to the Rescue: A Contextual Study of Exodus IV 24-6."

Vetus Testamentum 36:4 (October 1986):447-61.
2021 Edition Dr. Constable's Notes on Exodus 319

Rodriguez, Angel Manuel. "Sanctuary Theology in the Book of Exodus."

Andrews University Seminary Studies 24:2 (Summer 1986):127-45.

Rooker, Mark F. Leviticus. The New American Commentary series. Nashville:

Broadman & Holman Publishers, 2000.

Ross, Allen P. "When God Gives His People Bitter Water." Exegesis and
Exposition 1:1 (Fall 1986):55-66.

Rowley, Harold H. "Moses and the Decalogue." Bulletin of the John Rylands
Library of the University of Manchester 34:1 (September 1951);81-
118.

Ryrie, Charles Caldwell. Biblical Answers to Tough Questions. Previously

published as Biblical Answers to Contemporary Issues. Chicago:
Moody Press, 1974, 1991. Ft. Worth: Tyndale Seminary Press, 2008.

_____. "The End of the Law." Bibliotheca Sacra 124:495 (July-September

1967):239-47.

_____. The Holy Spirit. Chicago: Moody Press, 1965.

Sachar, Abram Leon. A History of the Jews. 5th ed. New York: Alfred A.
Knopf, 1965.

Sailhamer, John H. "Exegetical Notes: Genesis 1:1—2:4a." Trinity Journal 5

NS (Spring 1984):73-82.

_____. "The Mosaic Law and the Theology of the Pentateuch."

Westminster Theological Journal 53 (Fall 1991):241-61.

_____. The Pentateuch as Narrative. Grand Rapids: Zondervan Publishing

House, 1992.

Sarles, Ken L. "An Appraisal of the Signs and Wonders Movement."

Bibliotheca Sacra 145:577 (January-March 1988):57-82.

_____ "A Theological Evaluation of the Prosperity Gospel." Bibliotheca

Sacra 143:572 (October-December 1986):329-52.

Sarna, Nahum M. Exodus. Philadelphia: Jewish Publication Society, 1991.

320 Dr. Constable's Notes on Exodus 2021 Edition

_____. "Exploring Exodus—The Oppression." Biblical Archaeologist 49:2

(June 1986):68-79.

Sasson, J. M. "Circumcision in the Ancient Near East." Journal of Biblical

Literature 85 (1966):473-76.

Schwantes, Siegfried J. A Short History of the Ancient Near East. Grand

Rapids: Baker Book House, 1965.

Shafer, B. E., ed. Religion in Ancient Egypt: Gods, Myths, and Personal
Practice. Ithica: Cornell University Press, 1991.

Shanks, Hershel. "When Did Ancient Israel Begin?" Biblical Archaeology

Review 38:1 (January/February 2012):59-62, 67.

Sheriffs, Deryck. "Moving on with God: Key motifs in Exodus 13—20."

Themelios 15:2 (January-February 1990):49-60.

Siker-Gieseler, Jeffrey. "The Theology of the Sabbath in the Old Testament:

A Canonical Approach." Studia Biblica et Theologica 11:1 (April
1981):5-20.

Soltau, Henry W. The Tabernacle, the Priesthood and the Offerings. London:
Morgan and Scott, n.d.

Speiser, E. A. "An Angelic 'Curse': Exodus 14:20." Journal of the American

Oriental Society 80 (1960):198-200.

Sprinkle, Joe M. "Law and Narrative in Exodus 19—24." Journal of the

Evangelical Theological Society 47:2 (June 2004):235-52.

Spurgeon, Graham. "Is Abortion Murder?" In The Religious Case for

Abortion, pp. 15-27. Edited by Hamilton Gregory. Asheville: Madison
and Polk, 1983.

Sring, Margit L. "The Horn-Motifs of the Bible and the Ancient Near East."
Andrews University Seminary Studies 22:3 (Autumn 1984):327-40.

Steuer, Axel D. "The Freedom of God and Human Freedom." Scottish

Journal of Theology 36:2:163-80.
2021 Edition Dr. Constable's Notes on Exodus 321

Stiebing, William H., Jr. "Should the Exodus and the Israelite Settlement in
Canaan Be Redated?" Biblical Archaeology Review 11:4 (July-August
1985):58-69.

Strange, James F. "The Jewish Calendar." Biblical Illustrator 13:1 (Fall

1986):28-32.

Strauss, Lehman. The Eleven Commandments. 2nd ed. Neptune, N.J.:

Loizeaux Brothers, 1975.

Student Map Manual. Jerusalem: Pictorial Archive (Near Eastern History)

Est., 1979.

Swindoll, Charles R. Moses: A Man of Selfless Dedication. Nashville: Word

Publishing, 1999.

_____. The Swindoll Study Bible. Carol Stream, Ill.: Tyndale House
Publishers, 2017.

Tan, Paul Lee. The Interpretation of Prophecy. Winona Lake, Ind.: BMH
Books, Inc., 1974.

_____. Principles of Literal Interpretation of the Bible. By the Author,

1967.

Terry, Milton S. Biblical Hermeneutics. Reprint of the 2nd ed. Grand Rapids:
Zondervan Publishing House, 1883, 1964.

Thomas, W. H. Griffith. Through the Pentateuch Chapter by Chapter. 1957.

Reprint ed. Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., 1973

Thomson, W. M. The Land and the Book. 2 vols. New York: Harper &
Brothers Publishers, 1873.

Tolhurst, A. H. "Whatever Happened to the Ark?" Ministry, June 1984, pp.

13-15.

Tozer, A. W. The Knowledge of the Holy. New York, et al.: Harper & Row
Publishers, 1961.

_____. The Pursuit of God. Harrisburg, Pa.: Christian Publications, 1948.

322 Dr. Constable's Notes on Exodus 2021 Edition

Trimm, Charlie. "Did YHWH Condemn the Nations When He Elected Israel?
YHWH's Disposition Toward Non-Israelites in the Torah." Journal of
the Evangelical Theological Society 55:3 (September 2012):521-36.

_____. "Honor Your Parents: A Command for Adults." Journal of the

Evangelical Theological Society 60:2 (June 2017):247-63.

Unger, Merrill F. Archaeology and the Old Testament. Grand Rapids:

Zondervan Publishing House, 1954.

_____. Biblical Demonology. 7th ed. Wheaton: Scripture Press, 1967.

_____. Demons in the World Today. Wheaton: Tyndale House Publishers,

1974.

_____. "The Significance of the Sabbath." Bibliotheca Sacra 123:489

(January-March 1966):53-59.

Unger's Bible Dictionary, Edited by Merrill F. Unger. 1957 ed. S.v. "Cherub,"
by Merrill F. Unger, pp. 191-92.

van der Meulen, Henry E. Faber. "One or two veils in front of the holy of
holies?" Theologia Evangelica 18:1 (March 1985):22-27.

Van Seters, John. The Hyksos. New Haven: Yale University Press, 1966.

Velikovsky, Immanuel. Worlds in Collision. Paperback ed. New York: Pocket

Books, Simon and Schuster, 1950.

von Rad, Gerhard. Old Testament Theology. 2 vols. Translated by D. M. G.

Stalker. New York and Evanston, Ill.: Harper & Row, 1962 and 1965.

Voss, Robert J. "Who Am I That I Should Go? Exodus 3:11 (Ex.

2:25--4:18)." Wisconsin Lutheran Quarterly 80:4 (Fall 1983):243-
47.

Wagner, George. Practical Truths from Israel's Wanderings. Reprint of The

Wanderings of the Children of Israel. London: J. Nisbet & Co.: 1862.
Grand Rapids: Kregel Publications, 1982.

Wagner, Maurice E. "How to Honor Your Parents When They've Hurt You."
Psychology for Living 28:6 (June 1986):12-14.
2021 Edition Dr. Constable's Notes on Exodus 323

Waltke, Bruce K. "Cain and His Offering." Westminster Theological Journal

48:2 (Fall 1986):363-72.

_____. An Old Testament Theology. Grand Rapids: Zondervan Publishing

House, 2007.

_____. "Palestinian Artifactual Evidence Supporting the Early Date of the

Exodus." Bibliotheca Sacra 129:513 (January-March 1972):33-47.

_____. "Reflections from the Old Testament on Abortion." Journal of the

Evangelical Theological Society 19:1 (Winter 1976):3-13.

Walvoord, John F. The Holy Spirit. Wheaton, Ill.: Van Kampen Press, 1954;
Findlay, Ohio: Dunham Publishing Co., 1958.

_____. "The New Covenant." In Integrity of Heart, Skillfulness of Hands,

pp. 186-200. Edited by Charles H. Dyer and Roy B. Zuck. Grand
Rapids: Baker Book House, 1994.

Ward, William A. The Spirit of Ancient Egypt. Beirut: Khayats, 1965.

Watson, Thomas. The Ten Commandments. 1692. Reprint ed. Edinburgh:

The Banner of Truth Trust, 1976.

Wenham, Gordon J. The Book of Leviticus. New International Commentary

on the Old Testament series. Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans
Publishing Co., 1979.

Wenham, John W. The Goodness of God. Downers Grove: InterVarsity Press,

1974.

Westcott, Brooke Foss. The Epistle to the Hebrews. Grand Rapids: Wm. B.
Eerdmans Publishing Co., n.d.

Whybray, R. Norman. Introduction to the Pentateuch. Grand Rapids: Wm. B.

Eerdmans Publishing Co., 1995.

Whyte, Alexander. Bible Characters. One-volume ed. Grand Rapids:

Zondervan Publishing House, 1973.

Wiersbe, Warren W. The Bible Exposition Commentary/Pentateuch.

Colorado Springs, Colo.: Cook Communications Ministries, 2001.
324 Dr. Constable's Notes on Exodus 2021 Edition

Williams, Gary R. "The Purpose of Penology in the Mosaic Law and Today."
Bibliotheca Sacra 133:529 (January-March 1976):42-55.

Wilson, Robert Dick. "Yahweh (Jehovah) and Exodus 6:3." In Classical

Evangelical Essays in Old Testament Interpretation, pp. 29-40. Edited
by Walter C. Kaiser, Jr. Grand Rapids: Baker Book House, 1972.

Wilson, Robert R. "The Hardening of Pharaoh's Heart." Catholic Biblical

Quarterly 41:1 (1979):18-36.

Winter, Ralph D. "The Growth of Israel in Egypt (The Phenomenon of

Exponential Growth)." Paper published by the Institute of
International Studies, Pasadena, Ca., 14 April 1993.

Wolf, Herbert M. An Introduction to the Old Testament Pentateuch.

Chicago: Moody Press, 1991.

Wolinski, Arelene. "Egyptian Masks: The Priest and His Role." Archaeology
40:1 (January-February 1987):22-29.

Wood, Bryant G. "The Rise and Fall of the 13th-Century Exodus-Conquest

Theory." Journal of the Evangelical Theological Society 48:3
(September 2005):475-89.

_____. "The Biblical Date for the Exodus is 1446 BC: A Response to James
Hoffmeier." Journal of the Evangelical Theological Society 50:2 (June
2007):249-58.

Wood, Leon J. The Prophets of Israel. Grand Rapids: Baker Book House,
1979.

_____. A Survey of Israel's History. Grand Rapids: Zondervan Publishing

House, 1970.

Woudstra, Marten H. The Book of Joshua. New International Commentary

on the Old Testament series. Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans
Publishing Co., 1981.

Wright, G. Ernest. "The Significance of the Temple in the Ancient Near

East." Biblical Archaeologist 7:4 (December 1944):65-77.

Wyatt, N. "The Significance of the Burning Bush." Vetus Testamentum 36:3

(July 1986):361-65.
2021 Edition Dr. Constable's Notes on Exodus 325

The Wycliffe Bible Encyclopedia. Edited by Charles F. Pfeiffer, Howard F.

Vos, and John Rea. 1975 ed. 2 vols.

Wyrick, Stephen Von. "Israel's Golden Calves." Biblical Illustrator 13:1 (Fall
1986):3-12.

Young, Edward J. My Servants the Prophets. Grand Rapids: Wm. B.

Eerdmans Publishing Co., 1952.

Young, Rodger C., and Bryant G. Wood. "A Critical Analysis of the Evidence
from Ralph Hawkins for a Late-Date Exodus-Conquest." Journal of the
Evangelical Theological Society 51:2 (June 2008):225-43.

Youngblood, Ronald F. Exodus. Everyman's Bible Commentary series.

Chicago: Moody Press, 1983.

_____. "A New Look at an Old Problem: The Date of the Exodus."
Christianity Today 26:20 (December 17, 1982):58, 60.

Yurco, Frank J. "3,200-Year-Old Picture of Israelites Found in Egypt."

Biblical Archaeology Review 16:5 (September/October 1990):22-
38.

Zuck, Roy B. Basic Bible Interpretation. Wheaton, Ill.: Victor Books, 1991.

_____. "The Practice of Witchcraft in the Scriptures." Bibliotheca Sacra

128:512 (October-December 1971):352-60.