John Calvin Commentary Exodus 7:12

"For they cast down every man his rod, and they became serpents: but Aaron`s rod swallowed up their rods." — Exodus 7:12 (ASV)

For they cast down every man. The number of the magicians is not stated; and although Paul names two, Jannes and Jambres⁸⁶ (2 Timothy 3:8), it is probable that they were not the only ones, but the chief and, so to speak, the ringleaders. But I will not dispute this questionable point. Paul’s admonition is more to the point: that as Jannes and Jambres withstood Moses, so also there would always be false teachers who would oppose Christ’s true ministers and indeed should wax worse and worse (2 Timothy 3:13).

It is a grave fact that such free rein was given to these magicians that they contended with Moses in an almost equal contest. But the world’s ingratitude deserves to bear the same punishment of blindness. God elsewhere testifies that when He permits false prophets to work miracles to deceive, it is to prove men’s hearts (Deuteronomy 13:3).

And truly, unless our own hypocrisy were like a veil obscuring the distinction between black and white, Satan would achieve nothing by such arts and deceptions. Instead, we ourselves, as if devoted to destruction, willingly cast ourselves into his nets. But especially against the reprobate, who stubbornly seek opportunities for error, God casts this final thunderbolt: He makes the delusion effective and simultaneously deprives them of their senses, so that they do not protect themselves from obvious destruction.

Many, indeed, would excuse Pharaoh because, being deceived by his magicians, he did not free himself from the error which he could not escape. For what could he do when he saw the contest equally maintained? But it must be thoroughly understood that none are so carried away except those whom God intends to resist. Especially, the spirit of confusion and mental blindness seizes those who have been stubborn in their wickedness.

Nor should the distinguishing mark be overlooked: that the rod of Moses swallowed up the rods of the magicians. How then was it that Pharaoh did not perceive Moses to be victorious? How was it that he instead turned aside to his own impostors? How was it, in short, that he did not acknowledge God’s servant who had been superior in the contest, except that the wicked maliciously close their eyes against the manifested power of God? Whoever aims at the right mark will certainly never lack God as their guide. Therefore, Pharaoh is justly blamed because, due to the hardness of his heart, he would not pay attention.

The objection that the Papists advance is too frivolous: that the serpent is called the rod of Moses, just as the bread transubstantiated into the body of Christ retains the name of bread.⁸⁷ For they unskillfully confuse two altogether different things. In the mystery of the Lord’s Supper, the analogy between the sign and the thing signified always remains; in this miracle, the case is entirely different.

Again, because the change was only temporary, Moses properly called that a rod to which its previous form was soon to be restored. Besides, in comparing the true serpent with the fictitious ones, he was unwilling to use different names. But, to pass all this over, the Papists will achieve nothing until they have shown that the bread is transubstantiated into the body.⁸⁸

Indeed, what they foolishly twist to use against us, we may retort upon them: namely, that the bread is called the body of Christ although it remains bread, just as the serpent that then appeared is called the rod.

⁸⁶ C. has . has Mambres, the reading of the Vulgate., the reading of the Vulgate.

⁸⁷ “This is a metonymy,” says Corn.. a Lapide in loco, “for things are often called by the name of what they were, or of that into which they are changed. So Philo, St. Augustine, etc. For a similar or better reason, (however Calvin may here rail,) the , “for things are often called by the name of what they were, or of that into which they are changed. So Philo, St. Augustine, etc. For a similar or better reason, (however Calvin may here rail,) the flesh of Christ in the holy Sacrament is called of Christ in the holy Sacrament is called bread, (, (1 Corinthians 11:26, and , and John 6:31; ) for the Jews call all sorts of food, and even flesh, by the name of ;) for the Jews call all sorts of food, and even flesh, by the name of bread, especially since in the Eucharist the accidents of bread and wine remain, and are seen; thus, judging as men by their eyesight and senses, they rightly call it , especially since in the Eucharist the accidents of bread and wine remain, and are seen; thus, judging as men by their eyesight and senses, they rightly call it bread, because they see and touch the , because they see and touch the species of bread.”of bread.”

⁸⁸ This clause is inverted in the Fr., “Que le corps est transubstantie au pain.”., “Que le corps est transubstantie au pain.”