Charles Ellicott Commentary Exodus 16

JOURNEY FROM ELIM.—THE MANNA GIVEN.

They took their journey from Elim. The stay at Elim was probably for some days. “Sin” was reached exactly one month after the departure from Egypt, yet there had been only five camping-places between Sin and Rameses, and one journey of three days through a wilderness (Exodus 15:22). Long rests are thus clearly indicated, and probably occurred at Ayun Musa, at Marah, and at Elim. The places named were the head-quarters of the camp on each occasion, but the entire host must have always covered a vast tract, and the flocks and herds must have been driven into all the neighbouring valleys where there was pasture. Wadys Useit, Ethal, and Tayibeh are likely to have been occupied at the same time with Wady Ghurundel.

All the congregation ... came unto the wilderness of Sin. — “All the congregation” could only be united in certain favourable positions, where there happened to be a large open space. Such an open space is offered by the tract now called El Markha, which extends from north to south a distance of twenty miles, and is from three to four miles wide in its more northern half. To reach this tract, the Israelites must have descended by Wady Useit or Wady Tayibeh to the coast near Ras Abu Zenimeh, and have then continued along the coast until they crossed the twenty-ninth parallel. This line of march is indicated in Numbers 33:10-11, where we are told that “they removed from Elim, and encamped by the Red Sea; and they removed from the Red Sea, and encamped in the wilderness of Sin.”

The whole congregation ... murmured. —This is the third “murmuring.” The first was at Pi-hahiroth, on the appearance of the host of Pharaoh (Exodus 14:11–12); the second was at Marah, when the water proved undrinkable (Exodus 15:24); the third, in the wilderness of Sin, was brought about by no special occurrence—unless it were the exhaustion of the supplies of grain which had been brought out of Egypt—but seems to have resulted from a general dissatisfaction with the conditions of life in the wilderness, and with the prospects which lay before them.

Would to God we had died. — In Hebrew, Would that we had died. There is no mention of “God.”

By the hand of the Lord. — There is, perhaps, an allusion to the last of the plagues: “Would that we had not been spared, but had been smitten, as the Egyptians were! A sudden death would have been far better than a long and lingering one” .

When we did eat bread to the full. — The Israelites had been well fed in Egypt. They had been nourished with flesh, fish, bread, and abundant vegetables, especially cucumbers, melons, leeks, onions, and garlic (Numbers 11:5). It was the habit of the Egyptians to feed well those whom they employed in forced labours (Herod. ii. 125), just as slave-owners commonly do their slaves. The remembrance of the past abundance intensified the pain felt at the present want.

To kill this whole assembly with hunger. — It is difficult to imagine that there could have been as yet any real danger of starvation. The cattle may have suffered considerably in the passage through the wilderness of Shur, but the bulk of them survived (Exodus 17:3), and there were lambs enough for the whole nation to observe a Passover a few months later at Sinai (Numbers 9:1–5). But it may well be that a considerable number of the Israelites had no cattle; others may have lost what they had, or consumed them.

Want may have stared some in the face, and the nation generally may have come to see that the prospect before them was a dismal one.

Even supposing that the desert was anciently four or five times as productive as it is now, it could not possibly have afforded sufficient pasturage to maintain such flocks and herds as would have been requisite to support a population of two million on their milk and flesh.

It may have been brought home to the people that their flocks and herds were rapidly diminishing, and they may have realized the impending danger of ultimate starvation after all the cattle were gone.

I will rain bread from heaven for you. — This first announcement at once suggests that the supply is to be supernatural. “Bread from heaven” was not simply “food out of the air” (Rosenmüller), but a celestial, that is, a Divine supply of their daily needs.

A certain rate every day. — Heb., a day’s meal each day — sufficient, that is, for the wants of himself and his family for a day.

That I may prove them. — Human life is a probation. God proves and tries those most whom He takes to Himself for His “peculiar people,” and the trial is often by means of positive precepts. These precepts are especially calculated to test the presence or absence of a spirit of humble and unquestioning obedience.

Our first parents were tested by a positive precept in Paradise. The family of Abraham was tested by a positive precept—circumcision on the eighth day. The Israelites were tested, both in the wilderness and afterwards throughout their career as a nation, by a number of positive precepts, of which this concerning the manna was one.

Christians are tested by positive precepts with respect to common worship, prayer, and sacraments. The object in all cases is to see whether men will walk in God’s law or no. Men are very apt to prefer their own inventions to the simple rule of following both the letter and the spirit of God’s commandments.

On the sixth day —i.e., the sixth day after the first giving of the manna (Kalisch). Although in Babylonia, from a time certainly earlier than the Exodus, a Sabbath was observed on the seventh, fourteenth, twenty-first, and twenty-eighth day of each month (Sayce: Records of the Past, vol. vii., pp. 157-167), yet we have no evidence that the year was divided into weeks, much less that the several days of the week were known as the first, second, third, fourth, etc. In Egypt, the week of seven days was at this time unknown.

They shall prepare. — On the method of preparation, see Numbers 11:8.

It shall be twice as much. — Some suppose this to be a command—“You are to gather twice as much;” but it is more natural to take it as an announcement of a fact—“You will find that what you have gathered turns out to be twice as much.” (So Kurtz, Kalisch, and Knobel.) A miraculous doubling of the quantity seems to be intended. .