Keluaran 2:1-5

The Birth of the Deliverer

2:1 ¹ A man from the household ²  of Levi married ³  a woman who was a descendant of Levi. ⁴  2:2 The woman became pregnant ⁵  and gave birth to a son. When ⁶  she saw that ⁷  he was a healthy ⁸  child, she hid him for three months. 2:3 But when she was no longer able to hide him, she took a papyrus basket ⁹  for him and sealed it with bitumen and pitch. She put the child in it and set it among the reeds along the edge of the Nile. ¹⁰  2:4 His sister stationed herself ¹¹  at a distance to find out ¹²  what would ¹³  happen to him.

2:5 Then the daughter of Pharaoh ¹⁴  came down to wash herself ¹⁵  by the Nile, while her attendants were walking alongside the river, ¹⁶  and she saw the basket among the reeds. She sent one of her attendants, ¹⁷  took it, ¹⁸ 

Keluaran 2:16-20

2:16 Now a priest of Midian had seven daughters, and they came and began to draw ¹⁹  water ²⁰  and fill ²¹  the troughs in order to water their father’s flock. 2:17 When some ²²  shepherds came and drove them away, ²³  Moses came up and defended them ²⁴  and then watered their flock. 2:18 So when they came home ²⁵  to their father Reuel, ²⁶  he asked, “Why have you come home so early ²⁷  today?” 2:19 They said, “An Egyptian man rescued us ²⁸  from the shepherds, ²⁹  and he actually ³⁰  drew water for us and watered the flock!” 2:20 He said ³¹  to his daughters, “So where is he? ³²  Why in the world ³³  did you leave the man? Call him, so that he may eat ³⁴  a meal ³⁵  with us.”

[2:1]  ¹ sn The chapter records the exceptional survival of Moses under the decree of death by Pharaoh (vv. 1-10), the flight of Moses from Pharaoh after killing the Egyptian (vv. 11-15), the marriage of Moses (vv. 16-22), and finally a note about the Lord’s hearing the sighing of the people in bondage (vv. 23-25). The first part is the birth. The Bible has several stories about miraculous or special births and deliverances of those destined to lead Israel. Their impact is essentially to authenticate the individual’s ministry. If the person’s beginning was providentially provided and protected by the Lord, then the mission must be of divine origin too. In this chapter the plot works around the decree for the death of the children – a decree undone by the women. The second part of the chapter records Moses’ flight and marriage. Having introduced the deliverer Moses in such an auspicious way, the chapter then records how this deliverer acted presumptuously and had to flee for his life. Any deliverance God desired had to be supernatural, as the chapter’s final note about answering prayer shows.

[2:1]  ² tn Heb “house.” In other words, the tribe of Levi.

[2:1]  ³ tn Heb “went and took”; NASB “went and married.”

[2:1]  ⁴ tn Heb “a daughter of Levi.” The word “daughter” is used in the sense of “descendant” and connects the new account with Pharaoh’s command in 1:22. The words “a woman who was” are added for clarity in English.

[2:1]  sn The first part of this section is the account of hiding the infant (vv. 1-4). The marriage, the birth, the hiding of the child, and the positioning of Miriam, are all faith operations that ignore the decree of Pharaoh or work around it to preserve the life of the child.

[2:2]  ⁵ tn Or “conceived” (KJV, ASV, NAB, NASB, NRSV).

[2:2]  ⁶ tn A preterite form with the vav consecutive can be subordinated to a following clause. What she saw stands as a reason for what she did: “when she saw…she hid him three months.”

[2:2]  ⁷ tn After verbs of perceiving or seeing there are frequently two objects, the formal accusative (“she saw him”) and then a noun clause that explains what it was about the child that she perceived (“that he was healthy”). See GKC 365 §117.h.

[2:2]  ⁸ tn Or “fine” (טוֹב, tov). The construction is parallel to phrases in the creation narrative (“and God saw that it was good,” Gen 1:4, 10, 12, 17, 21, 25, 31). B. Jacob says, “She looked upon her child with a joy similar to that of God upon His creation (Gen 1.4ff.)” (Exodus, 25).

[2:3]  ⁹ sn See on the meaning of this basket C. Cohen, “Hebrew tbh: Proposed Etymologies,” JANESCU 9 (1972): 36-51. This term is used elsewhere only to refer to the ark of Noah. It may be connected to the Egyptian word for “chest.”

[2:3]  ¹⁰ sn The circumstances of the saving of the child Moses have prompted several attempts by scholars to compare the material to the Sargon myth. See R. F. Johnson, IDB 3:440-50; for the text see L. W. King, Chronicles concerning Early Babylonian Kings, 2:87-90. Those who see the narrative using the Sargon story’s pattern would be saying that the account presents Moses in imagery common to the ancient world’s expectations of extraordinary achievement and deliverance. In the Sargon story the infant’s mother set him adrift in a basket in a river; he was loved by the gods and destined for greatness. Saying Israel used this to invent the account in Exodus would undermine its reliability. But there are other difficulties with the Sargon comparison, not the least of which is the fact that the meaning and function of the Sargon story are unclear. Second, there is no outside threat to the child Sargon. The account simply shows how a child was exposed, rescued, nurtured, and became king (see B. S. Childs, Exodus [OTL], 8-12). Third, other details do not fit: Moses’ father is known, Sargon’s is not; Moses is never abandoned, since he is never out of the care of his parents, and the finder is a princess and not a goddess. Moreover, without knowing the precise function and meaning of the Sargon story, it is almost impossible to explain its use as a pattern for the biblical account. By itself, the idea of a mother putting a child by the river if she wants him to be found would have been fairly sensible, for that is where the women of the town would be washing their clothes or bathing. If someone wanted to be sure the infant was discovered by a sympathetic woman, there would be no better setting (see R. A. Cole, Exodus [TOTC], 57). While there need not be a special genre of storytelling here, it is possible that Exodus 2 might have drawn on some of the motifs and forms of the other account to describe the actual event in the sparing of Moses – if they knew of it. If so it would show that Moses was cast in the form of the greats of the past.

[2:4]  ¹¹ tn Or “stood.” The verb is the Hitpael preterite of יָצַב (yatsav), although the form is anomalous and perhaps should be spelled as in the Samaritan Pentateuch (see GKC 193 §71). The form yields the meaning of “take a stand, position or station oneself.” His sister found a good vantage point to wait and see what might become of the infant.

[2:4]  ¹² tn Heb “to know”; many English versions have “to see.”

[2:4]  ¹³ tn The verb is a Niphal imperfect; it should be classified here as a historic future, future from the perspective of a point in a past time narrative.

[2:5]  ¹⁴ sn It is impossible, perhaps, to identify with certainty who this person was. For those who have taken a view that Rameses was the pharaoh, there were numerous daughters for Rameses. She is named Tharmuth in Jub. 47:5; Josephus spells it Thermouthis (Ant. 2.9.5 [2.224]), but Eusebius has Merris (Praep. Ev. ix. 27). E. H. Merrill (Kingdom of Priests, 60) makes a reasonable case for her identification as the famous Hatshepsut, daughter of Thutmose I. She would have been there about the time of Moses’ birth, and the general picture of her from history shows her to be the kind of princess with enough courage to countermand a decree of her father.

[2:5]  ¹⁵ tn Or “bathe.”

[2:5]  ¹⁶ sn A disjunctive vav initiates here a circumstantial clause. The picture is one of a royal entourage coming down to the edge of a tributary of the river, and while the princess was bathing, her female attendants were walking along the edge of the water out of the way of the princess. They may not have witnessed the discovery or the discussion.

[2:5]  ¹⁷ tn The word here is אָמָה (’amah), which means “female slave.” The word translated “attendants” earlier in the verse is נַעֲרֹת (na’arot, “young women”), possibly referring here to an assortment of servants and companions.

[2:5]  ¹⁸ tn The verb is preterite, third person feminine singular, with a pronominal suffix, from לָקַח (laqakh, “to take”). The form says literally “and she took it,” and retains the princess as the subject of the verb.

[2:16]  ¹⁹ tn The preterites describing their actions must be taken in an ingressive sense, since they did not actually complete the job. Shepherds drove them away, and Moses watered the flocks.

[2:16]  ²⁰ tn The object “water” is not in the Hebrew text, but is implied.

[2:16]  ²¹ tn This also has the ingressive sense, “began to fill,” but for stylistic reasons is translated simply “fill” here.

[2:17]  ²² tn The definite article here is the generic use; it simply refers to a group of shepherds.

[2:17]  ²³ tn The actions of the shepherds are subordinated to the main statement about what Moses did.

[2:17]  sn The verb is וַיְגָרְשׁוּם (vaygorshum). Some shepherds came and drove the daughters away. The choice of this verb in the narrative has a tie with the name of Moses’ first son, Gershom. Moses senses very clearly that he is a sojourner in a strange land – he has been driven away.

[2:17]  ²⁴ sn The verb used here is וַיּוֹשִׁעָן (vayyoshi’an, “and he saved them”). The word means that he came to their rescue and delivered them. By the choice of words the narrator is portraying Moses as the deliverer – he is just not yet ready to deliver Israel from its oppressors.

[2:18]  ²⁵ tn The verb means “to go, to come, to enter.” In this context it means that they returned to their father, or came home.

[2:18]  ²⁶ sn The name “Reuel” is given here. In other places (e.g., chap. 18) he is called Jethro (cf. CEV, which uses “Jethro” here). Some suggest that this is simply a confusion of traditions. But it is not uncommon for ancients, like Sabean kings and priests, to have more than one name. Several of the kings of Israel, including Solomon, did. “Reuel” means “friend of God.”

[2:18]  ²⁷ tn The sentence uses a verbal hendiadys construction: מִהַרְתֶּן בֹּא (miharten bo’, “you have made quick [to] come”). The finite verb functions as if it were an adverb modifying the infinitive, which becomes the main verb of the clause.

[2:18]  sn Two observations should be made at this point. First, it seems that the oppression at the well was a regular part of their routine because their father was surprised at their early return, and their answer alluded to the shepherds rather automatically. Secondly, the story is another meeting-at-the-well account. Continuity with the patriarchs is thereby kept in the mind of the reader (cf. Gen 24; 29:1-12).

[2:19]  ²⁸ sn Continuing the theme of Moses as the deliverer, the text now uses another word for salvation (נָצַל, natsal, “to deliver, rescue”) in the sense of plucking out or away, snatching out of danger.

[2:19]  ²⁹ tn Heb “from the hand of the shepherds” (so NASB); NAB “saved us from the interference of the shepherds.” Most recent English versions translate simply “from the shepherds.”

[2:19]  ³⁰ tn The construction is emphatic with the use of the perfect tense and its infinitive absolute: דָלָה דָּלֹה (daloh dalah). B. Jacob says, “They showed their enthusiasm through the use of the infinitive absolute – And think of that, he even drew water for us; a man did this for us girls” (Exodus, 41).

[2:20]  ³¹ tn Heb “And he said.”

[2:20]  ³² tn The conjunction vav (ו) joins Reuel’s question to what the daughters said as logically following with the idea, “If he has done all that you say, why is he not here for me to meet?” (see GKC 485 §154.b).

[2:20]  ³³ tn This uses the demonstrative pronoun as an enclitic, for emphasis (R. J. Williams, Hebrew Syntax, 24, §118). The question reads more literally, “Why [is] this [that] you left him?”

[2:20]  ³⁴ tn The imperfect tense coming after the imperative indicates purpose.

[2:20]  ³⁵ tn Heb “bread,” i.e., “food.”