11 ¶ And it came to pass in those days, fwhen Moses was grown, that he went out unto his brethren, f Acts 7. 23, 24. Hebr. 11. 24, 25, 26.

משה

גדל

g ch. 1. 11.

νοησας τον πονον αυτών, considered their labor. Chal. Saw their servitude.' Verbs of the senses often imply in the

we cannot doubt that there is a real 11. When Moses was grown. Heb. though covert allusion to the history 3 yigdal, had become great, not of Moses in the vision, Ch. 12, of the in stature only, but in repute, infludragon, the sun-clad woman, and the ence, and consideration at court. This child to which she gave birth. The is in several unequivocal instances the dragon's standing before the woman force of the original, and it is said of ready to devour her child as soon as it him by Stephen that he was mighty should be born, is strikingly in analogy both in word and deed,' as well as that he with the bloody edict of Pharaoh, whom had attained the full age of forty years. the prophets denominate the Egyptian ¶ Went out unto his brethren, and dragon, Ezek. 29. 3, while the child's looked on their burdens. Heb. 19 being caught up to God and his throne, va-yar besiblotham. Gr. κaraonbon has an equally distinct reference to the | wonderful preservation and elevation of Moses as here described.-T She called his name Moses. Heb. Scripture idiom a connected working of Mosheh, from the verb mashah, the emotions or affections of the heart. to draw out, a term occurring Ps. 18. 16, Here looking upon' is viewing with 'He sent from above, he took me; he sympathy and compassion, having his drew me (yamsheni) out of heart touched with the spectacle. Gen. many waters;' where the Psalmist 29. 32, And Leah conceived and bare a seems to liken his preservation to that son, and she called his name Reuben : of Moses, unless indeed, which we for she said, surely the Lord hath lookrather incline to believe, he is giving ed upon my afflictions ;' i. e. hath meran allegorical history of the church cifully regarded. Eccl. 1. 16, "My heart from its earlier periods, and has here a had great experience of wisdom and designed but mystic allusion to the very knowledge;' Heb. 'My heart saw wisperson and deliverance of Moses, in dom and knowledge.' Eccl. 2.1, 'I said whose preservation that of Israel was in my heart, go to now, I will prove concentrated. It has indeed been a mat- thee with mirth, therefore enjoy pleater of dispute among critics whether the sure; Heb. 'see pleasure.' Ps. 118. 7. name were truly of Hebrew or Egyptian 'Therefore shall I see (my desire) upon origin. Yet the former is most proba- them that hate me.' We must regard ble, as a Hebrew etymology seems to this as the incipient working of that be designedly given it by the sacred noble spirit which finally prompted writer. Although the Egyptians did Moses to forego the honors of the court not speak the Hebrew language, yet as of Egypt, and cast in his lot with the it appears from Ex. 11. 2, that the two despised people of Israel. Ease and people lived in a great measure inter- affluence generally tend to deaden the mingled together, the language of each sensibilities of the heart to the wants might have been to a considerable ex- and woes of others. But Moses seems tent understood by the other; and in never to have forgotten his extraction, the present case it would not be unnat- nor to have lost his sympathies with ural that a Hebrew child should have the chosen race. He remembered that bestowed upon it a Hebrew name. the oppressed and suffering Israelites

him, it might have been regarded as the effect of a rash 'excitement, as a sudden sally of the buoyant temperament of his age, and one which he would afterwards have regretted or condemned. Had it occurred later in life, when the powers and energies of his mind were on the wane, when the pursuits of ambition and the prospects of pleasure had vanished, it might have been stigmatized as the act of an old worn-out courtier, whose disgusted satiety of this world's good had driven him to the sorry refuge of seeking something better in another. It might easily have been characterised as the mean compromise of a man in his dotage with an uneasy conscience, for having squandered his youthful prime and his manly meridian in the service of the world to the neg lect of his Maker. But every such im

were his nearest and dearest relations, and though now ignorant perhaps of the part which he was destined to act in their deliverance, he was unable to relish a solitary selfish joy, while they were eating the bread and drinking the water of affliction. He therefore goes out to look upon their misery, or as Stephen says, Acts, 7. 23,' It came into his heart to visit his brethren,' and though for the present he can neither remove nor alleviate it, yet he is determined to evince his willingness to be a partaker in it. But the most fitting commentary upon this passage is found in the words of the apostle, Heb. 11. 23-26, By faith Moses, when he was come to years, refused to be called the son of Pharaoh's daughter; choosing rather to suffer affliction with the people of God, than to enjoy the pleasures of sin for a season; esteeming the re-putation is cut off by the facts of the proach of Christ greater riches than the treasures in Egypt: for he had respect unto the recompense of the reward.' By hisrefusing to be called the son of Pharaoh's daughter,' we are not probably to understand that he rejected the nominal appellation, but according to the true force of the orignal, which has reference rather to the reality of things than to their denomination, he refused to be treated as her son, he positively declined all the honor and aggrandizement which was implied in that relation. This was his deliberate choice, and perhaps no man was ever called to make a choice under circumstances more trying, or made one which redounded more to his credit and glory than this of Moses. It is to be remembered that he was at this time of mature age,' full forty years old,' says Stephen. He had reached the grand climacteric of life, all his faculties perfectly ripened, and his judgment calm, unclouded, and dispassionate. Were not this the case, had he been now just emerging from youth, with all the sanguine and enthusiastic ardor of dawning manhood upon

case. It was not a step prompted by the precipitate ardor of youth, nor one dictated by the timid 'or sordid policy of age. It was a decision formed under circumstances in which deep principle, and not a passionate impulse, must have been the ruling motive; for while in a worldly sense he had nothing to hope from a transfer of himself, he had, on the other hand, every thing to lose. We have only to appeal to our knowledge of human nature to learn the dif ficulty, and consequently the virtue, of such a sacrifice as Moses now made. When we compare the respective states of the Egyptian and the Israelitish people, it would seem to human view that the lot of the meanest Egyptian was preferable to that of the highest Israelite. Yet Moses voluntarily gave up the one for the other; the honors of the palace for the ignominy of the brick-yard.' Though he was the adopted son of Pharaoh's daughter, and, for aught that appears to the contrary, was the presumptive heir to the crown, yet he refused not to come down from this preeminent distinction, and to cast in his lot with

the despised and embondaged seed of Jacob. History affords us some few instances where kings have laid aside their purple and abdicated their thrones. But in all such cases they have descended to a rank in private life which was surrounded by ease, affluence, and continued respectability; so that their sacrifices were relieved by many countervailing considerations. But Moses descended from the dignity of a court to the degradation of a slave. What was there in the vaunted condescension of Dioclesian or Charles the Vth. to be compared with this? And where, in all the annals of time, shall we find such a surrender måde from such motives?

understood this to be the fact. It is however worthy of note that Diodorus Siculus informs us that a law existed in Egypt, which might have been at this time in force. That whoever saw his fellow-creature either killed by another, or violently assaulted, and did not either apprehend the murderer, or rescue the oppressed if he could; or if he could not, made not an information thereof to the magistrate, himself should be put to death.' For aught that can be affirmed to the contrary, Moses might have been warranted on this ground alone in proceeding to the extremity he did. The act however cannot be pleaded as a precedent on occasions that are not similar. It bore a striking resemblance to the conduct of Phineas on another occasion,

certainly approved of God. If it be objected that the secrecy observed by Moses both in performing the act and in disposing of the body, is scarcely consistent with the idea of his being empowered by the call and authority of God to execute his pleasure on this occasion, it may be observed, that as his calling, though clear to himself, had not yet been publicly manifested or accredited, it was fitting that a temporary concealment should be drawn over the present occurrence. Thus Ehud, Judg. 3. 21, though moved by an influence from above, slew Eglon king of Moab in a private chamber; and Gideon, Judg. 6. 27, before his office of deliverer was publicly known, demolished the altar of Baal by night. Again, if it be asked what reason Moses had to sup

T Spied an Egyptian smiting an Hebrew. Probably one of the task-masters. As the original word for smiting (Num. 25. 7, 13, a conduct which was makkeh) is the same with that rendered slew (yak) in the next verse, it is to be presumed that the Egyptian was actually attempting to kill the Hebrew, and that had it not been for the intervention of Moses, he would have effected his purpose. Thus Ps. 136. 17, 'To him which smote (makkeh) great | kings;'i. e. that slew. It is important to view this incident in connexion with what Stephen says of it, Acts, 7. 23-25, 'And when he was full forty years old, it came into his heart to visit his brethren the children of Israel. And seeing one of them suffer wrong, he defended him, and avenged him that was oppressed, and smote the Egyptian: for he supposed his brethren would have understood how that God by his hand would deliver them: but they understood not.' It is undoubtedly to be suppose that his brethren would have unposed that Moses was now acting under a divine commission, and that an immediate impulse from the Spirit of God prompted him to the deed here recorded. This is to be inferred from the words of Stephen, for he supposed his brethren would have understood how that God by his hand would deliver them' unplying that Moses himself

derstood that he was acting by a divine commission, it may be answered, that the marvellous circumstances of his birth and preservation, and subsequent training in the court of Pharaoh, were doubtless matters well known and much talked of among the nation of Israel, from which they might reasonably infer that he was raised up for some extraordi

12 And he looked this way and that way, and when he saw that there was no man, he hslew the Egyptian, and hid him in the sand. 13 And when he went out the second day, behold, two men of the Hebrews strove together: and he said to him that did the wrong,

h Acts 7. 24. i Acts 7. 26.

nary end. It was before this time, that Stephen's testimony assures us he had 'become mighty in words and in deeds.' And when he was seen to come forth alone, and take vengeance on one of their oppressors, it might have been presumed that he regarded himself as directed by God in what he had undertaken. But the result showed that the expectation of being recognized in his true character was premature.

12. He looked this way and that way, &c. Evidently implying that he was not exempt from some inward wavering of spirit in thus entering upon his mission. But if oppression maketh a wise man mad, we may easily perceive that his natural indignation, joined to a conscious impulse from above, was sufficient to urge him forward to the act recorded.

Moses administered reproof by a mortal blow, but he tries to gain a contending brother by mild and gentle means. In the former instance he acted more as a judge; in the present, as a peace maker. His question has indeed the air of being sternly proposed, but there was nothing in it which could not or should not have been said by one Israelite to another; and we ought never to think it going beyond the bounds of charity or duty, where we are satisfied on which side the wrong lies, to call an offender to account by an equally plain interrogation. Every man should look upon himself as at least so far appointed a guardian of the general interests of justice and of right as to expostulate in pointed terms with the injurious and overbearing.

14. Who made thee a prince and a judge over us? Heb. 'Who set thee 13. Behold, two men of the Hebrews for a man a prince and a judge over us?? ` strove together. Heb. nitzim, Moses intended merely to administer a fighting. Whatever were the occasion | mild and friendly reproof, and yet how of this unhappy contest, it must have roughly is his admonition received. been mortifying to Moses to behold it. The man could not easily have given As if they had not enemies enough in a plainer testimony of his guilt than by their common cruel taskmasters, they such a choleric reply. What authority fall into strife with each other! Alas, did Moses assume in thus gently rethat sufferings in common should fail to proving a manifest outrage? Does one unite the professing people of God in need a commission to perform an act the strictest bonds of brotherhood. of real kindness, and to endeavor to THe said to him that did the wrong. make friends of apparent enemies? Yet Heb. larasha, to the wicked one. how boldly does he challenge his auThe Gr. however renders very correctly thority as if he were imperious and preby To adikovvтi, to the wrong-doer, and suming. It is rare virtue ingenuously Stephen confirms the same version, to confess our faults and to receive corActs, 7. 26, 'Sirs, ye are brethren, why rection with meekness! -¶ Intendest ye wrong (adikɛITɛ) one to another?' thou to kill me, as thou killedst the In the case of the offending Egyptian Egyptian? Heb. 28 7737 |

do

τω

הלהרגני אתה אמר

15 Now when Pharaoh heard | face of Pharaoh, and dwelt in the this thing, he sought to slay Mo- land of Midian: and he sat down ses. But Moses fled from the by ma well.

1 Acts 7. 29. Hebr. 11. 27.

m Gen. 24. 11. & 29. 2.

marked as the victim of his wrath. This was perhaps not so much with a view to avenge the death of a single individual of the Egyptian race, as because Moses had by this act discovered himself to be a friend and favorer of the oppressed Israelites, and given the

halḥorgani attaḥ omer, sayest thou to kill me? See Note on Gen. 20. 11. We here behold a striking specimen of the base constructions which an ill mind will put upon the best words and actions. What right had he to charge Moses with a murderous intention? He had indeed slain an Egyptian, but an Egypt-king reason to suspect that he was seian was not a Hebrew, nor had he any grounds to suppose that Moses would go farther than the provocation warranted. The occasion called simply for a reproof, and a reproof was the head and front of his offending; yet the aggressor would turn away the force of his rebuke by pretending that he aimed at nothing less than his life! Besides, why should he cast the slaying of the Egyptian in Moses' teeth, when he had really done it from his regard to his own countrymen? Should not this quarrelsome Hebrew have taken it rather as a proof of Moses' favorable feelings towards himself than as an evidence of a wish to harm him? If he had not loved the Hebrews would he have dispatched one of their enemies? But reason and humanity speak in vain to those whom a guilty conscience leads to pervert the wisest and the kindest counsels. -T Surely this thing is known; i. e. his slaying the Egyptian. Heb. haddabar, this word. See Note on Gen. 15. 1. Moses was satisfied from this that the Hebrew whom he had liberated the day before by slaying the Egyptian, had divulged the circumstance, and not doubting that it would soon come to the ears of the king, began to be in dread of his life.

15. When Pharaoh heard this thing, &c. He soon learnt that his fears were well founded. Pharaoh was apprised of the fact of his having put an Egyptian to death, and Moses was at once

cretly cherishing the purpose of one day attempting to effect their liberation. His only safety therefore was in flight. This would subject him to great trials and privations, and had his heart been less firmly fixed in the great purpose which he had adopted, he would have sought rather to make his peace with the king, his benefactor, and to retain his place at court. But he had made his election, and now chose rather to wander through dreary deserts than to be reconciled to the enemies of his people. The providence which thus withdrew the destined agent of deliverance from the field of action in the very outset of his work, would seem at first view extremely mysterious and adverse. But infinite wisdom saw that he needed a quite different training from that which he would receive in a luxurious court, in order to fit him for the hard services which awaited him. He sends him to school therefore for forty years in the desert to qualify him the better for leading his people through their forty years sojourn in the desert. God,' says Henry, fetches a wide compass in his plans, but his eye is continually upon the grand point at which he aims.'-It is not to be supposed that there is any real discrepancy between this passage and Heb. 11. 27,

By faith he forsook Egypt, not fearing the wrath of the king.' The Apostle alludes not to his flight into Midian, but to his final departure from Egypt at