John Calvin Commentary Exodus 18
John Calvin Commentary
Exodus 18
John Calvin Commentary
Exodus 18
"Now Jethro, the priest of Midian, Moses` father-in-law, heard of all that God had done for Moses, and for Israel his people, how that Jehovah had brought Israel out of Egypt." — Exodus 18:1 (ASV)
When Jethro, the priest of Midian. This chapter consists of two parts. First of all, the arrival of Jethro in the camp is related, and his congratulation of Moses for the prosperity of his enterprise, together with the praise and sacrifice offered to God. Secondly, his proposed form of government for the people is set forth, as a result of which judges and rulers were chosen, lest Moses sink under his heavy task.
Most commentators think that Zipporah, having been enraged because of her son’s circumcision, had turned back during their journey and gone to live with her father; but this does not seem probable to me. For Moses would never have allowed his sons to be deprived of the redemption of which he was the minister, nor would it have been consistent for them to be appointed priests later if God had not been their Redeemer. Besides, if he had left his wife and children in safety and had advanced alone to the contest, he would have been rightly suspected of deceit or of excessive cowardice. Therefore, I have no doubt that he, together with his family, endured that miserable yoke of bondage by which they were long oppressed, and by this proof demonstrated his faithfulness, so that greater authority might accompany his calling.
The statement, then, in the second verse, after he had sent her back, I interpret as referring to Moses, because he had sent his wife back from the wilderness to visit her father, either having yielded to a desire natural to her as a woman, or, motivated by his own piety, he had wished to show respect in this way to an old man closely related to him. There is something forced and cold in the interpretation that some would supply: “after he had sent back gifts.” The text reads very well this way: After Moses had sent back his wife, she was brought back by his father-in-law, thus returning and repaying his kindness.
"and her two sons; of whom the name of the one was Gershom; for he said, I have been a sojourner in a foreign land:" — Exodus 18:3 (ASV)
And her two sons. It was noted in its proper place what a distinguished proof not only of faith, but also of magnanimity and firmness Moses had demonstrated in giving these names to his sons. For we cannot doubt that he incurred the ill-will of his connections, as if he despised his wife's country, by calling the one (Gershom) “a strange land.” The name of his son continually cried out that even though he lived in Midian, he was still an alien in his heart, and though staying temporarily, would later seek another habitation.
From this, we may also conjecture that he took them with him into Egypt, rather than banish these two pledges of his piety from himself because of the sudden anger and reproaches of his wife, since by their names he was daily reminded that God’s covenant was to be preferred above all earthly advantages.
"And Jethro, Moses` father-in-law, came with his sons and his wife unto Moses into the wilderness where he was encamped, at the mount of God:" — Exodus 18:5 (ASV)
And Jethro, Moses’ father-in-law. It was not so much love for Moses as the fame of the miracles which drew this old man,195 bowed down with age, from his home into the wilderness. For it will later appear from the context that he was not induced by ambition; because, after he had offered sacrifice to God and, in solemn thanksgiving, had testified that he ascribed all the glory to God alone, he returned home again with the same simplicity in which he had come.
Moses, too, at the beginning of the chapter, has stated the cause of his coming, for he does not say that he had heard of the arrival of his son-in-law, but how wonderful God’s goodness and power had been in delivering Moses and the people. He desired, therefore, to be in some measure a spectator of the things of which he had heard, and not to neglect, by remaining at home, such illustrious instances of God’s bounty.
I have already explained why Mount Horeb is distinguished by the name of “the Mount of God.” The vision, indeed, which had already been granted to Moses there, rendered it worthy of this honorable title; but here, as before, reference is made rather to the promulgation of the Law, by which God consecrated the mountain to Himself.
195 “Ce bon veillard;” this good old man. — Fr..
"And Moses went out to meet his father-in-law, and did obeisance, and kissed him: and they asked each other of their welfare; and they came into the tent." — Exodus 18:7 (ASV)
And Moses went out. In the preceding verse, he had related what happened last, namely, that Jethro said, "I have come, and have brought to you your wife and children"; but this transposition is common in Hebrew. He then adds that Moses went to meet him and to pay him honor, and that they met each other with mutual kindness, and performed their respective duties of affection. “To ask each other of their peace,”196 is equivalent to inquiring if things were well and prosperous.
But the main point is that Moses told him how gracious God had been to His people. For this was the main purpose of his entire account: that when he had left his father-in-law, he had not yielded to a frivolous impulse but had obeyed the call of God, as had afterwards been proved by His extraordinary help and by heavenly wonders.
196 So in margin A. V.
"And Jethro said, Blessed be Jehovah, who hath delivered you out of the hand of the Egyptians, and out of the hand of Pharaoh; who hath delivered the people from under the hand of the Egyptians." — Exodus 18:10 (ASV)
And Jethro said, Blessed. From this it appears that although the worship of God was then everywhere profaned by strange additions, Jethro was not so devoted to superstition as to fail to acknowledge and honor the true God. Nevertheless, the comparison he adds, that Jehovah is greater than all gods, implies that he was not pure and free from all error.
For, although the Prophets often speak this way, it is with a different meaning. Sometimes God is exalted above the angels so that His unique eminence may appear, with every heavenly dignity being put in its proper order. Sometimes, too, He is improperly called “Greater”—not as if the false gods had any rank, but so that the greatness falsely and foolishly attributed to them in the world may be brought to nothing.
But Jethro here imagines, in accordance with the common notion, that a multitude of inferior gods are subordinate to the Most High. Thus, where the pure truth of God does not shine, religion is never uncorrupted and clear, but always has some dregs mixed with it.
At the same time, Jethro seems to have made some progress. In affirming that he now knows the power of God, he implies that he was better informed than before. However, one might perhaps prefer to understand this as experiential knowledge, which confirms even believers, so that they more willingly submit themselves to God, whom they already knew.
Meanwhile, there is no doubt that by the name of Jehovah he designates the God of Israel. For, although people everywhere boasted that they worshipped the eternal God, yet by asserting the true deity of the one God, Jethro places all others beneath Him. At any rate, he confesses that, through the account of their deliverance, he was assured of the immense power of God, who had manifested himself in Israel, leading him to despise, in comparison with God, whatever other deities were honored elsewhere in the world.
The latter clause197 of verse 11 is unfinished, for it reads: According to the word (or reason) wherein they dealt proudly against them; thus, the principal verb is missing that would express God repaid the Egyptians the just wages of their cruelty. This is just as He denounces judgment without mercy upon all who proudly and unmercifully mistreat their neighbors (James 2:13), according to the declaration of our Lord Jesus Christ, With what measure ye mete, etc. (Matthew 7:2).
The interpretation that some offer seems too limited—namely, that the Egyptians, who had drowned the infants in the river, were themselves drowned in the Red Sea. I prefer, therefore, to extend this to every instance of punishment they received.
197 S. M. has rendered this clause, In re qua insolenter egerunt contra illos [perierunt]; and in his note he says, “Hoc est, remensus est illis ea mensura qua ipsi mensi fuerunt Israelitis.” They drowned the little ones of Israel in the water, and they also perished in the waters. Thus Abraham Sepharadi expounds this passage: — “Alii sic exponunt; Propterea quod superbe egerunt contra eos, voluit quoque Deus se magnificum ostendere contra AEgyptios.” — has rendered this clause, In re qua insolenter egerunt contra illos [perierunt]; and in his note he says, “Hoc est, remensus est illis ea mensura qua ipsi mensi fuerunt Israelitis.” They drowned the little ones of Israel in the water, and they also perished in the waters. Thus Abraham Sepharadi expounds this passage: — “Alii sic exponunt; Propterea quod superbe egerunt contra eos, voluit quoque Deus se magnificum ostendere contra AEgyptios.” — W..
Jump to: