Monday, June 5th, 2023
the Week of Proper 4 / Ordinary 9
the Week of Proper 4 / Ordinary 9
The Pulpit Commentaries The Pulpit Commentaries
These files are public domain.
Text Courtesy of BibleSupport.com. Used by Permission.
These files are public domain.
Text Courtesy of BibleSupport.com. Used by Permission.
Exell, Joseph S; Spence-Jones, Henry Donald Maurice. "Commentary on Exodus 18". The Pulpit Commentary. https://www.studylight.org/
commentaries/ eng/ tpc/ exodus-18.html. 1897.
Exell, Joseph S; Spence-Jones, Henry Donald Maurice. "Commentary on Exodus 18". The Pulpit Commentary. https://www.studylight.org/
- Henry's Complete
- Clarke Commentary
- Bridgeway Bible Commentary
- Coffman's Commentaries
- Barnes' Notes
- Bullinger's Companion Notes
- Calvin's Commentary
- College Press
- Smith's Commentary
- Dummelow on the Bible
- Constable's Expository Notes
- Ellicott's Commentary
- Expositor's Dictionary
- Hole's Commentary
- Meyer's Commentary
- Gaebelein's Annotated
- Morgan's Exposition
- Gill's Exposition
- Everett's Study Notes
- Haydock's Catholic Commentary
- Commentary Critical
- Commentary Critical Unabridged
- Gray's Concise Commentary
- Parker's The People's Bible
- Sutcliffe's Commentary
- Trapp's Commentary
- Kretzmann's Commentary
- Lange's Commentary
- Grant's Commentary
- Wells of Living Water
- Henry's Complete
- Henry's Concise
- Pett's Commentary
- Peake's Commentary
- Preacher's Homiletical
- Poor Man's Commentary
- Benson's Commentary
- The Biblical Illustrator
- Coke's Commentary
- The Expositor's Bible Commentary
- The Pulpit Commentaries
- Treasury of Scripture Knowledge
- Wesley's Notes
- Whedon's Commentary
- Henry's Complete
- Keil & Delitzsch
- Mackintosh's Notes
- Kelly Commentary
JETHRO'S VISIT TO MOSES.
JETHRO'S VISIT TO MOSES. It has been noticed, in the comment on Exodus 4:1-31; that shortly after the circumcision of Eliezer, Moses' second son, he sent back his wife, Zipporah, to her own kinsfolk, the Midianites, together with her two sons, Eliezer and Gershom. Reuel, Zipporah's father, was then dead (Exodus and had been succeeded in his priesthood and headship of the tribe by Jethro, probably his son, and therefore the brother-in-law, and not the father-in-law, of Moses. (The Hebrew word used, as already observed, has both meanings.) Jethro gave protection to his sister and her children until he heard of the passage of the Red Sea, when he set forth to meet and congratulate his kinsman, and to convey back to him his wife and his sons. The meeting took place "at the mount of God" (verse 5), or in the near vicinity of Sinai, probably in some part of the plain Er-Rahah, which extends for five miles, or more, to the north-west of the Sinaitic mountain-group.
Jethro, the priest of Midian, Moses' father-in-law. Rather, "Jethro, priest of Midian, Moses' brother-in-law." See the comment on Exodus 3:1; and note that the Seventy use the ambiguous word γαμβρός, while the Vulgate has cognatus. And that. Rather "in that." The clause is exegetical of the preceding one.
After he had sent her back. Literally "after her dismissal." It is curious that the fact of the dismissal had not been previously mentioned, yet is here assumed as known. Some commentators (as Knobel) find, in what is said of Zipporah, the trace of two distinct writers who give two contradictory narratives; but the difficulties and obscurities of the history are sufficiently intelligible, if we hear in mind—
1. That Moses was addressing immediately those who knew the facts; and
2. That he was studious of brevity.
And her two sons. That Zipporah had borne Moses at least two sons before his return to Egypt from Midian, had appeared from Exodus 4:20. The name of the one, Gershom, and the ground of it, had been declared in Exodus 2:22. The repetition here may be accounted for by the present chapter having been originally a distinct and separate composition, written on a distinct roll, and subsequently incorporated by Moses into his great work.
Eliezer. Eliezer had not been previously mentioned by name; but he was probably the son circumcised by Zipporah, as related in Exodus 4:25. We learn from 1 Chronicles 23:15-17, that he grew to manhood, and had an only son, Rehabiah, whose descendants were in the time of Solomon very numerous. For the God of my father, said he, was my help. Eliezer means literally, "My God (is my) help." It would seem that Zipporah, when she circumcised her infant son, omitted to name him; but Moses, before dismissing her, supplied the omission, calling him Eliezer, because God had been his help against the Pharaoh who had sought his life (Exodus 2:15), and of whose death he had recently had intelligence (Exodus 4:19). Thus the names of the two sons expressed respectively, the despondency natural to an exile, and the exultant gratitude of one who had just learned that by God's goodness, the term of his banishment was over.
The wilderness. This term, which has the article, seems to be here used in that wide sense with which we are familiar from Exodus 3:18; Exodus 4:27; Exodus 5:3; Exodus 7:16; etc. It is not" the wilderness of Sin," or "the wilderness of Sinai," that is intended, but generally the tract between Egypt and Palestine. Jethro, having entered this tract from Midian, had no difficulty in discovering from the inhabitants that Moses was encamped at the mount of God,—i.e; Sinai, and there sought and found him. There is no trace of any previous "engagement" to meet at a particular spot.
And he said. It is suspected that the true reading here is, "and they said,"—i.e; some one said—"to Moses, behold thy father-in-law" (or "brother-in-law"), "Jethro, is come unto thee." So the LXX; and many moderns, as Kennicott, Geddes, Boothroyd, Canon Cook, and others. But the explanation, that Jethro, on arriving in the vicinity of Moses, sent a messenger to him, who spoke in his name (Rosenmuller, Patrick, Pool, Kalisch, Keil, etc.) is at any rate plausible, and removes all necessity of altering the text.
Moses went out to meet his father-in-law. Oriental ideas of politeness require such a movement in case of an honoured or even of a welcome visitor (see Genesis 18:2; Genesis 19:1; Genesis 32:6; Genesis 33:1; Luke 15:20; etc.). It was evidently the intention of Moses to receive Jethro with all possible marks of honour and respect. He not only went out to meet him, but did obeisance to him, as to a superior. They asked each other of their welfare. Rather "exchanged salutations;" addressed each other mutually with the customary phrase "Peace he unto you." Came into the tent—i.e; went together into the tent of Moses, which had been already glanced at in the word "encamped" (Exodus 18:5).
Moses told his father-in-law. Jethro had heard in Midian the general outline of what had happened (Exodus 18:1). Moses now gave him a full and complete narrative (misphar) of the transactions. Compare Genesis 24:66; Joshua 2:23; where the same verb is used. All the travail. Literally, "the weariness." Compare Malachi 1:13, where the same word is used. The Lord delivered them. The Septuagint adds "from the hand of Pharaoh and from the hand of the Egyptians.
Blessed be the Lord. Compare Genesis 14:20; Genesis 24:27. The heathen blessed God no loss than the Israelites; but Jethro's blessing the Lord (i.e. Jehovah) is unusual As, however, Moses had attributed his own deliverance, and that of Israel, entirely to Jehovah (Genesis 24:8), Jethro, accepting the facts to be as stated, blessed the Lord. Who hath delivered you. Kalisch takes the plural pronoun to refer to Moses and Aaron; but Aaron seems not to nave been present, since he afterwards "came" (Genesis 24:12). It is better to regard Jethro as addressing all those who were in the tent with Moses. From them he goes on in the last clause to "the people." And out of the hand of Pharaoh.—i.e; especially out of the hand of Pharaoh, who had especially sought their destruction (Exodus 14:6, Exodus 14:8, etc.).
Now know I that the Lord is greater than all gods. It would seem that Jethro, like the generality of the heathen, believed in a plurality of gods, and had hitherto regarded the God of the Israelites as merely one among many equals. Now, he renounces this creed, and emphatically declares his belief that Jehovah is above all other gods, greater, higher, more powerful. Compare the confessions of Nebuchadnezzar (Daniel 2:47; Daniel 3:26, Daniel 3:27) and Darius the Mede (Daniel 6:26). For in the thing wherein they dealt wickedly he was above them. There is no "he was above them" in the original, nor is the clause a distinct sentence from the preceding one. It is merely a prolongation of that clause, without any new verb; and should be translated, "Even in the very matter that they (the Egyptians) dealt proudly against them "(the Israelites). The superiority of Jehovah to other gods was shown forth even in the very matter of the proud dealing of the Egyptians, which was brought to shame and triumphed over by the might of Jehovah. The allusion is especially to the passage of the Red Sea.
Jethro took a burnt offering. Or "brought a burnt offering;" as the same verb is rendered in Exodus 25:2. It is not distinctly related that he offered the victim; but as no other offerer is mentioned, and as he was a priest (Exodus 3:1; Exodus 18:1), we may assume that he did so. Moses, Aaron, and the elders, partook of the sacrificial meal, regarding the whole rite as one legitimately performed by a duly qualified person, and so as one in which they could properly participate. Jethro, like Melchisedek (Genesis 14:18), was recognised as a priest of the true God, though it would seem that the Midianites generally were, a generation later, idolaters (Numbers 25:18; Numbers 31:16). To eat bread … before God. This expression designates the feast upon a sacrifice, which was the universal custom of ancient nations, whether Egyptians, Assyrians, Phenicians, Persians, Greeks, or Romans. Except in the case of the "whole burnt offering" (ὁλοκαύτωμα), parts only of the animals were burnt, the greater portion of the meat being consumed, with bread, at a meal, by the offerer and his friends and relatives
The blessedness of family reunions, when rightly ordered.
The family is God's ordinance, and among the most sacred and blessed of his ordinances. All fatherhood is based upon his (Ephesians 3:15); and human family ties reproduce those of the celestial region. Upon earth partings must and will occur, the family bond being thereby not broken, but strained and impaired. Sometimes necessity breaks up the household. Wife and children may not go whither the husband and father is ordered to proceed, as in the naval and military services. Sometimes prudential considerations assert themselves, and the children must quit the domestic hearth to get their own living, or even the wife and husband must seek separate employments with the same object. Occasionally, the husband, having to go on a difficult or dangerous mission, where wife and children would be encumbrances, has to part from them temporarily, and to provide for their support and sustenance during his absence. This last was the case of Moses. In returning to Egypt, and coming forward as the champion of his nation, he confronted great dangers. The presence of wife and children would have hampered him, and, therefore, he resolved to return alone. Zipporah and his infant sons were left with her nearest male relative. But now the time had come for re-union. We may note as blissful elements in the re-union—
I. THAT IT WAS COMPLETE, NO DEATHS HAVING OCCURRED SINCE THE PARTING. The bitterness of parting is especially in the uncertainty whether we shall ever see again in this life the individuals from whom we part. Death comes suddenly, and without warning; infants are especially subject to his attack; and when Moses, having recently parted from Jethro (Exodus 4:8), sent back his wife and two young sons to be under his charge, he must have felt that it was exceedingly doubtful whether there would ever again be a meeting of the five near relations. But God brought it to pass. Jethro, with a promptitude which indicates a warm heart, no sooner heard of his kinsman's safe arrival in the region of the "wilderness," than he put himself to the trouble of a long journey, partly to congratulate him, but mainly to restore to him the wife and children, whom he had received as a sacred trust. He could not be content unless he himself delivered them safe into the hands of Moses, and thus "gave a good account of his stewardship." And he was fortunate in being able to deliver them all safe and sound, and apparently in good health. No insidious disease had nipped the life of either child in the bud; no unlucky accident had removed either from the land of the living. Moses was able to greet, at one and the same moment, his wife, his two sons, and his brother-in-law. Doubtless, he felt that God had been specially good and gracious to him in restoring to him all his treasures.
II. THAT IT WAS CHARACTERISED BY COURTESY AND GOOD FEELING, AND FREE FROM ANY REPROACH ON EITHER SIDE. Jethro sent a message to announce his arrival, which was a courteous act, not strictly necessary. He relieved at once any anxiety which Moses might naturally feel, by letting him know that he had brought with him his wife and both his sons. That they had been able to make the long journey implied that they were well. Moses, on his part, responded by going out to meet his brother-in-law, thus requiting courtesy with courtesy; when he met him, he "did obeisance," not standing upon his own present dignity; having done obeisance, he rose and "kissed him," thus showing tender affection. Greetings by word of mouth followed, and then friendly conversation. The great leader had much to relate, and gave a full account, both of his perils and hair-breadth escapes, and of his divinely-wrought deliverances. Hereat Jethro "rejoiced." No word of reproach or blame seems to have been uttered on either side. No discord marred the perfect harmony. Over the still tenderer meeting of the husband and father with his wife and children, the sacred historian, with a wise reticence, draws the veil. There are scenes which are at once too private and too sacred for description; and this was one of them.
III. THAT IT WAS CROWNED BY AN ACT OF RELIGIOUS THANKFULNESS AND ACKNOWLEDGMENT OF THE GOODNESS OF GOD. The sense that God has been good to us should lead in all cases to an act of acknowledgment. Jethro was not content with mere words of joy and gratitude—not even with a solemn ascription of praise and blessing to Jehovah (Exodus 18:10). He must shew his feelings by an act; so, in accordance with the ritual of the time, he "took a burnt-offering and sacrifices." Christians should similarly signalise their own re-unions, and other important events in their lives, by joining together in the highest act of Christian worship-the Holy Communion. Joint participation in the "bread of life" and "cup of the Lord" brings home to us the sense of family oneness, as nothing else has the power to do. Prayers uttered side by side bind men's hearts together in indissoluble union; participation in the same precious gifts gives the sense of unity in him who is the source of unity to all who are his. Aaron and the elders do well to join; their presence does not mar the family concord; it does but enlarge the family circle, and add new links to the chain that binds Heaven to earth. Some day the whole Church will be one family, of which all the members will worship God perpetually in the Father's house. The nearest approach to happiness on earth is that anticipation of the final bliss which Holy Communion furnishes.
HOMILIES BY J. ORR
The visit of Jethro.
When Jethro "heard of all that God had done for Moses,"—a hint that the news of the great events of the past few weeks had spread far and wide through the Sinaitic peninsula,—and when he learned that the Israelites were encamped at the Mount of God, within reachable distance of the Midianitish settlement (cf. Exodus 3:1), he at once resolved on paying his former friend, who had so suddenly blazed into an unexpected greatness, a personal visit. He came, accordingly, accompanied by Moses' wife and two sons.
I. JETHRO'S COMING (Exodus 18:1-7). This visit of Jethro to Moses may be considered with reference to the following particulars. He came—
1. Cordially recognising the honour which God had put on Moses (Exodus 18:1). Moses had stood to Jethro for years in a relation of dependence. He had kept the priest's flocks (Exodus 3:1). Yet Jethro was not offended or made envious by this sudden greatness which had fallen to the lot of his old associate. The proverb was for once falsified that "a prophet is not without honour, save in his own country, and in his own house" (Matthew 13:5-7), for Jethro heartily acknowledged and rejoiced in all that the Lord had done for Moses and for Israel. It might have been otherwise. He might, like the Nazarenes in their slighting of Christ, have asked—"Was not this my shepherd? Is not his wife called Zipporah? and his sons, Gershom and Eliezer, are they not with us? Whence then hath this man all these things?" But a far different spirit possessed him. In this, Jethro showed his freedom from a very common littleness of nature.
2. As an act of personal friendship. A large part of the joy of life springs from friendship. We see friendship at its best in the case of those who are thrown much into each other's society, and who cherish for each other, under the conditions which most of all reveal and test character, a cordial respect and esteem. "Friendship," says Cicero, "is nothing else than a perfect concurrence on all subjects Divine and human, accompanied by a feeling of kindness and attachment, and I am not sure that any better boon than this, with the exception of wisdom, could be conferred on man by the immortal Gods." The bond of attachment thus created between good men makes association a pleasure, and, of necessity, causes pain at parting. While separation lasts, longings do not cease to be felt for a renewal of the prized intercourse, and when, after years of severance, an opening for such renewal of intercourse is presented, the opportunity is eagerly and joyfully embraced. Such friendship may be presumed, to have existed between Jethro and Moses. The two had lived in close intimacy for the space of forty years. According to the text, Moses was Jethro's son-in-law; according to the more probable view, his brother-in-law. Jethro, with his stores of practical wisdom, his desert courtesy, and his evidently sincere piety, was a man whom Moses would early learn to respect, and with whom he would find it pleasant and profitable to associate; and the Midi-anitish priest, in turn, would never weary of the companionship of Moses, whose learning was so ripe, whose spirit was so excellent, whose early life had been spent under such different conditions from his own, and who had consequently so much to tell, which he (Jethro) would delight to hear. This intercourse had been suddenly broken up by Moses' determination to return to Egypt (Exodus 4:18); but an opportunity now presented itself of renewing it, and of this Jethro gladly availed himself.
3. Desirous of hearing more perfectly of the wonderful works of God. This, as is apparent from the sequel (Exodus 18:8), was another motive of Jethro's visit. He had come to be more fully and exactly instructed in the wonders which God had wrought "for Moses, and for Israel, his people" (Exodus 18:1). Something of these "mighty acts" he had heard from current report, but what he had heard only whetted his appetite to hear more. It is the mark of the good man that he earnestly desires to grow in the knowledge of God and of his ways.
4. With the intention of restoring to Moses his wife and two sons (Exodus 18:2-6). In taking this earliest opportunity of bringing Zipporah and her two sons to Moses, Jethro acted rightly. A wife's proper place is with her husband. Sons, again, in view of the special responsibility resting on the father in connection with their proper up-bringing, should be as much as possible under direct paternal influence. The kingdom of God, doubtless, is to be more to us than father, or mother, or wife, or child; and should its interests imperatively demand separation, this must be submitted to (Matthew 8:21, Matthew 8:22): but relationships are not thereby dissolved, and the active discharge of the duties connected with them should be resumed at the earliest opportunity. For the sake of Moses himself, reunion was desirable. He was not a man who spurned the joys of domestic existence, but, like Peter, led about a wife (cf. Numbers 12:1; 1 Corinthians 9:5). It would contribute to his happiness to have his family beside him. Attention is anew called to the significant names of his sons (Exodus 18:3, Exodus 18:4). These noteworthy names would be perpetual reminders to Moses of the lessons of his stay in Midian. The one spoke of human weakness, the other of Divine aid. If the one embalmed the memory of his heart-loneliness in a strange land, the other told of how God had been his help even there. The one recalled trials, the other mercies. While in both was embodied a memorial of the heart-discipline, of the solitary communion with God, of the lonely days and nights of prayer, watching, and spiritual meditation, which had helped so largely during the forty years of that weary but precious exile, to make him the man he was.
II. JETHRO AND MOSES (Exodus 18:7-13). The visit here described is a model of brotherly and religious intercourse. Christians would do well to study and imitate it. Observe—
1. The courtesy of their greeting (Exodus 18:7). The two men stood on a very different moral and intellectual level, but, in their exchanges of civility, Jethro is treated as the superior, and is received by Moses with every outward demonstration of respect. As on Jethro's side there is no trace of mortification or jealousy at finding Moses, once the keeper of his sheep, in so exalted a position, so, on the side of Moses now Israel's deliverer and leader, there is an utter absence of pride and hauteur, and a painstaking desire to put Jethro—a plain wilderness priest—as fully as possible at his ease. Everything is real. The greetings of the friends are unaffectedly cordial—their behaviour towards each other studiously polite. Lesson—the duty of courtesy. Courtesy is an essential part of what has been defined as the outward grace of life. "By the grace of life is meant all that embellishes, softens, and brightens our present existence. It is that which is to human life what the shape and bloom and odour are to the plant. The flower is not simply useful. It is pleasing. There is grace about it … . The grace of life has its simplest manifestation in our external behaviour—in our manners. There is a joy to observed and observer in graceful motion and pleasant phrase Politeness is the science and art of the outward grace of life. It enunciates that strange code of salutations and farewells—those buffers which soften approach, and with a last gentle touch make parting easy. Under the fiction of giving information as to the weather, one spirit expresses to its fellow respect and continued friendship. That spirit, in turn, under the form of confirming the afore said meteorological intelligence, reciprocates the kindly feeling. In such queer fashion is human kindliness flashed from heart to heart." (Rev. David Burns.)
2. Their affectionate interest in each other's welfare. "They asked each other of their welfare" (Exodus 18:7). Burdened as he was, almost beyond endurance, with "the cumbrance, and burden, and strife" (Deuteronomy 10:12) of the congregation, Moses could unbend to show his kindly interest in what was taking place in the quiet tents at Midian. This is a point of greatness. The greatest man is not he who occupies so serene an elevation of spirit, or whose mind is so engrossed with the duties of an exalted station, that he cannot stoop to share in, and, as occasion offers, to testify his sympathy with, the joys and sorrows of humbler people. No deficiency of this kind is seen in Moses—or in Jesus. It is well to cultivate the habit of putting ourselves in the place of others, however remote in station from ourselves, and of trying to feel a kindly interest in all that concerns them. This will prevent us from becoming self-absorbed and egoistic. Their lives, we should remember, are of as much importance to thegn as ours are to us, and the interest we show in them will be proportionately valued. A minister once wrote in his note-book: "Don't pretend an interest in the members of your congregation, but try to feel it." "Be kindly affectioned one to another with brotherly love" (Romans 12:10).
3. The theme of their converse. "Moses told his father-in-law (brother-in-law) all that the Lord had done to Pharaoh, etc. (Exodus 18:8). As under a former head we had a model meeting, so here we have a model conversation. Jethro and Moses conversed on the affairs of God's kingdom. No greater subject could have occupied their thoughts. It is the subject of deepest and most central interest in history—the grandest in its essential nature, the widest in its relations, the most momentous in its issues. All other movements in time are side issues as compared with this one. In considering it man passes out of sight, and the only question is, What hath God wrought! (Numbers 23:23). We renew this conversation of Jethro and Moses every time we "speak of the glory of (God's) kingdom and talk of (his) power" (Psalms 145:11). Cf. the conversation of Christian with Prudence, Piety, and Charity in the House Beautiful:—"Now the table was furnished with fat things, and wine that was well refined; and all their talk at the table was about the Lord of the Hill; as, namely, about what he had done, and wherefore he did what he did," etc. (Pilgrim's Progress.) Converse in heaven will turn on the same themes. Note—
(1) It is profit able for Christians to exchange experiences as to the manner of the Lord's dealings with them. Few but can tell something of "the travail that has come upon them by the way, and how the Lord delivered them."
(2) It is a mark of grace to feel an interest in what relates to God's work, and to the progress of his kingdom at home and abroad. This will show itself in a desire to read, hear, and converse on such subjects, and in the interest discovered, and zeal shown, in the general work of the Church, in special spiritual movements, in the success of missions, in spiritual operations in our own town and neighbourhood.
(3) Some are called to more active service in God's work than others. There are those that fight the battle, and there are those who tarry at home and divide the spoil (Psalms 68:12). And those who have been personally engaged in God's work—especially those who have returned from the high places of the field (missionaries, etc.)—have always much to tell which it is of interest to hear, and which will enkindle our hearts with new ardour in the cause of the Gospel. We should seek the society of such, and take the opportunity of hearing them when they are to be heard, that we may be instructed and profited. What a thrilling history, e.g; is that of Christian missions, but what an additional interest it gives to its narrations when we hear the story from the lips of the men who have actually fought the battles!
(4) Christian workers cannot converse together on the plans, methods, difficulties, conflicts, and successes of their work without being mutually helped and edified.
4. Jethro's joy in the relation (Exodus 18:9-11). We are reminded of Barnabas, who, "when he came" to Antioch, "and had seen the grace of God, was glad For he was a good man, and full of the Holy Ghost and of faith" (Acts 11:23). The history which Moses gave to Jethro—
(1) Filled Jethro with joy;
(2) Strengthened his faith in God—"Now i know that the Lord is greater than all gods" (Exodus 18:11);
(3) Incited him to praise—"And Jethro said, Blessed be the Lord," etc. (Exodus 18:10). It will be observed how distinctly in Exodus 18:11 Jethro seizes the point in the contest between Jehovah and Pharaoh, and draws the proper inference from it. God had chosen as a field for the display of his perfections a case in which all the pride and power of man were arrayed against him in a determined effort to resist, oppose, and make void his will, and he had demonstrated his supremacy by completely annihilating that opposition, and overwhelming the Egyptians, who embodied it, in the Red Sea. The army of Egypt was in some sense the country's pride and boast, so that (though the translation in Exodus 18:11 is apparently incorrect) it was literally true that "in the thing wherein they dealt proudly" Jehovah was "above them." God exalts himself by discomfiting his enemies in what they deem their points of special strength. "Poor perfection which one sees an end of! yet such are all those things in this world which pass for perfections. David, in his time, had seen Goliath, the strongest, overcome; Asahel, the swiftest, overtaken; Ahithophel, the wisest, befooled; Absalom, the fairest, deformed" (M. Henry on Psalms 119:96). "It is written, I will destroy the wisdom of the wise, and will bring to nothing the understanding of the prudent" (1 Corinthians 1:19).
5. The sacrificial feast (Exodus 18:16). We have here—
(1) Friendship cemented by an act of worship;
(2) Religious converse culminating in devotion;
(3) A feast sanctified by the enjoyment of the Divine presence—"before God;"
(4) A foreshadowing of the union of Jews and Gentiles in the fellowship of the church;
(5) An instance of catholicity in worship. Moses did not scruple to join in sacrifice or to sit down at the same festival board with the Midianitish Jethro. The lesson is thus enunciated by Peter: "Of a truth I perceive that God is no respecter of persons; but in every nation he that feareth him, and worketh righteousness, is accepted with him" (Acts 10:34, Acts 10:35).—J.O.
HOMILIES BY H. T. ROBJOHNS
The claims of home.
"And Jethro, Moses' kinsnian (not father-in-law) came with his sons and his wife unto Moses into the wilderness, where he encamped at the mount of God" (Exodus 18:5).
I. CIRCUMSTANCES MAY JUSTIFY THE TEMPORARY REMISSION OF HOME RESPONSIBILITIES UPON OTHERS (Exodus 18:2). For example—and the history of Moses will illustrate each point—we may be justified by—
1. The nature of external duty. We may be providentially called away from home; or the discharge of public responsibilities nay for the time be incompatible with our usual attention to the interests of the domestic circle, e.g; Moses going to Egypt (Exodus 4:1-31. compare with Exodus 18:2).
2. The probability of danger.
3. Defective sympathy. It is clear that Zipporah was not in sympathy with the religious object of Moses, nor yet with his specific mission, indeed, however, to be on our guard against making this a reason for withdrawal permanently from home responsibility. Want of perfect compatibility in domestic life makes marriage to be an occasion for self-discipline, and is thus converted into a means of grace. (Ephesians 5:25-27.)
II. CIRCUMSTANCES SCARCELY EVER JUSTIFY THE PERMANENT REMISSION. There are a few cases, perhaps, in which this responsibility may be devolved: e.g; the case of the missionary who must, fur various reasons, send home from his station his children to be educated; and not seldom the wife with them. Other cases there are, no doubt. But generally the father may not devolve this obligation. It is one—
1. Of necessity. No one else can meet the responsibility as the natural head of the family—this is true in all cases—even in that of the missionary named above—for the children suffer.
2. Of duty:—
(1) To ourselves. We owe it to our own convictions of truth, as to thought, life, and work, to perpetuate them.
(2) To dependents. Whether wife, children, or servants. [On this point some valuable suggestions in Dr. Taylor's "Moses the Lawgiver," pp. 173-176.]
(3) To our generation; and
(4) to the Great Father in heaven.
III. IF TEMPTED TO THIS REMISSION GOD WILL BRING HOME TO US OUR DUTY. Probably by some providence, may be painful or otherwise. At such a time, on such an occasion (Moses face to face with Sinai and the giving of the law) in such a place, Jethro re-introduced to Moses wife and children. Even such duties as his could not exempt him from domestic responsibility.—R.
HOMILIES BY J. URQUHART
The Consolations of those who suffer loss for the Kingdom of God.
I. THE REUNION OF THE SEPARATED. To Moses, who had to leave behind him wife and children because God's errand would brook no delay, these are now restored.
1. There is no loss to those who suffer for the kingdom of God's sake.
2. God fills the cup of his servants with consolations. God's care had been exercised not only over him in Egypt, but also over wife and children in Midian.
II. THE THEME OF THOSE WHO FEAR GOD. God's marvellous works (Exodus 18:8, Exodus 18:9). It was not the subject of public discourse or formal greeting, but of private converse within "the tent." This is a mark of the true servant of God; to him God and his goodness are the most real and wondrous of all things.
III. THE RESULT OF THE TESTIMONY.
1. Jethro's confession of Jehovah.
2. His sacrifice to him. The stranger makes a feast before Israel's God for the princes of Israel. Those whom we bring to God make a feast, in their faith and love, for our soul before the Lord.—U.
HOMILIES BY H. T. ROBJOHNS
Friendship in its loftiest form.
"They asked each other of their welfare." Exodus 18:7. The visit of Jethro comes between the agony of Rephidim and the solemnities of "Sinai," like the insertion of a sweet pastoral poem between two tragedies. Something may be learnt from it as to what should characterise friendship in its highest form, that is, between two devout souls, as consecrated and elevated by religion.
I. CONSTANCY. Moses and Jethro met as in the earlier years; no assumption with Moses, no sycophancy with Jethro.
II. COURTESY. Exodus 18:7. The nearer our relations to each other, the more indispensable this grace.
III. MUTUAL SOLICITUDE. Exodus 18:7.
IV. INTERCHANGE OF EXPERIENCE. Exodus 18:8-11. Happy time, when the deeper experiences (religious) can be exchanged to mutual advantage.
V. COMMUNION IN WORSHIP. Exodus 18:12. It is clear that Jethro and Moses were one as to Monotheism, in their common possession of the great Divine traditions of the race. Jethro spiritually was in the descent of Abel, Enoch, Noah, and Melchisedek. For him but one God, the God of heaven and earth, and therefore the God of Israel. Contrast with Amalek! Hence the sacrifice and the sacrificial feast.
VI. FIDELITY IN GIVING COUNCIL. Exodus 18:14, Exodus 18:17-23. Great courage required.
VII. HUMILITY IN RECEIVING IT. This the moral attitude of Moses.
VIII. AN ULTIMATE REFERENCE IN ALL INTERCOURSE TO THE DIVINE FRIEND. Exodus 18:23. "And God commanded thee so."
IX. SYMPATHY AS TO GREAT OBJECT. Jethro knew the destiny of Israel, and was concerned for the realisation.
X. PEACEFUL PARTING AT LIFE'S DIVERGING PATHS. Exodus 18:27. Apply this to moral and intellectual cross-roads; and to that which is so difficult—agreeing to differ—and that with mutual respect and affection. All in view and hope of the Perfect and immortal amity that is beyond the sky.—R.
HOMILIES BY D. YOUNG
Jethro's visit-Moses in his domestic relations.
In this visit of Jethro three persons are brought prominently before us—Moses, Jethro, his father-in-law, and Zipperah, his wife. Let us consider the details of the visit in their bearing on all these three Persons.
I. ON MOSES. Moses is usually seen either in the presence of God or in the presence of the people; but here we get a peep at his private and domestic life, and nothing is revealed but what adds dignity and beauty to his character. A servant of God must have the same character, in all circumstances. It is not every public man that could afford to have his private life laid open; and only too often an earnest plea for pity has to be based on the remembrance of how frail and infirm a thing human nature is. But in the instance of Moses neither veil nor plea are needed. This meeting with Jethro has to take place, and there was no reason to evade it; it had also to be mentioned, and there was no reason to conceal it. Moses had done nothing in his past residence in Midian to make him ashamed or afraid of returning to it. He had been a faithful shepherd to Jethro; a loving husband to Zipporah; an equally loving father to Gershom and Eliezer. It was Zipporah who had forsaken him, and not he Zipporah. He returned as a prophet into what, in a certain sense, was his own country, and, if not exactly honoured neither could he be dishonoured. Again we behold Moses showing, in the most practical way, his respect for the family relation and the ties of kinship generally. The importance of the family relation we have seen already brought out in the institution of the Passover and the provision of the manna. Here Moses puts emphasis on the relation by his own example. He showed himself one who regarded domestic obligations as of the first importance Zipporah has failed him once, and that in circumstances of great perplexity; but he does not make this a plea for getting rid of her. He knows his duties towards her, and by undertaking them in a manful and conscientious way, he may bring her to a full recognition of her duty towards him. A truly great nation, having a strong and beneficial society, is only possible by an aggregation of households where household claims are respected by all. And evidently he who must lead the way in acknowledging the claim is he who stands at the head. So Moses did here. Lastly, Moses makes clear by his reception of Jethro and Zipporah that he was the same kind of man as in the old shepherd days. Altered circumstances with all their temptations had not made alterations for the worse in character. How many there are who while lifted in one way are lowered in another! They become bigger men; but, alas! not better. Everything that reminds them of former and humbler scenes is as wormwood to the taste. To all such Moses, by his conduct here, teaches a most powerful lesson. His strength among the thousands of Israel was not that of a human ruler who was to be girt about with all the paraphernalia of government, in order to overawe the populace. Moses can step out of his tent, as if he were one of the humblest of Israel, not only in character, but also in position. He can go out and welcome his kindred, show to Jethro the outward signs of filial respect, talk to them all in the old familiar way, and do it without the slightest fear that his authority as leader is in any way affected. And this conduct would be all the more beautiful if, as we may easily imagine, Zipporah came back to him rather lifted up because of her husband's new position, and disposed with feminine vanity to make the most of it for her own satisfaction.
II. ON JETHRO. This chapter, full as it is of Jethro, is another forcible illustration as to how much revelation of character the Scripture record can put into a small space. Jethro, hitherto known only as the near connection of Moses, stands before us here as a noble, pious, and truly affectionate and considerate man. Much, indeed, he has had to try and perplex him. Moses, who had made his first acquaintance with him under prepossessing circumstances, who had become his brother-in-law and faithful shepherd, all at once comes to him, without any previous notice, and asks his permission to return to Egypt. Moses, we know, had been sternly shut up to this course by Jehovah, and to Jethro it must have seemed entirely inexplicable. He had to part with his near relations; and a great void must thus have been left in his heart. Then presently Zipporah returns, with her sons, in a very sore and rebellious frame of mind. All Jethro can yet see is that this departure of Moses has brought nothing but domestic discord. And yet it is impossible for him to say that Moses has not done right. He can only wait for the unfoldings of time, listening meanwhile with what patience he can muster to reproaches from neighbours and daughter and perhaps grandsons, with respect to the unaccountable vagaries of Moses. And at last relief comes, and not only relief, but abundant justification. The information is such as to make Moses stand out in the esteem of his father-in-law more highly than ever. All suspense as to Zipporah's duty is removed; she must rejoin her husband. It was Moses and not Jethro who was responsible for her; and, besides, Moses and Zipporah had a joint responsibility for their offspring. Jethro is commonly set before us, in contrast to Amalek, as the illustration of heathenism, looking favourably and amicably upon Israel. But even more let us look upon him as the great illustration of those noble souls who strive to unite what sin divides. Jesus in his teaching had occasion to lay emphasis on the dividing effect of discipleship to himself. He intimated that the acceptance of himself would only too often rupture, or at least strain, natural ties. But this of course was not presented as a thing to cause satisfaction, it was only another sad evidence of how sin turns to evil what God meant for good. And yet here we see the other side, reunion as well as separation. The liberation of Israel, glorious in its total result, and lifting Moses to high eminence in respect of personal character, has vet involved at the same time the wreck of his domestic peace. Whatever the comforts of wife and children in this world may be, he has lost them. But now these comforts are coming again, and coming in the most satisfactory of all ways, by the voluntary entrance of his old friend Jethro on the scene. Blessed are the peacemakers; and surely of all peacemaking, that is not the least fruitful of good which reunites and reconstitutes a separated family. Moses acting with a single eye to what is right has to part from his wife, and let her go back to her own family. Jethro acting in the same spirit, brings the wife to her husband again. Often we may have to become agents and helpers in division; but if we only go on, union and harmony will return. What Zipporah's future was we know not; but Jethro had done his utmost to put matters right.
III. ON ZIPPORAH Her name occurs but little, and her appearance hitherto has not been such as to make us think she would prove a helpful companion to Moses (Exodus 4:25, Exodus 4:26). Still we must not judge too hastily from silence. It is not for Zipporah's sake she happens to be mentioned here. It is sufficient to learn, by the way, that an opportunity for repentance and for devotion to him who had such a burden to bear, was now given her.—Y.
HOMILIES BY G. A. GOODHART
Ye are come unto Mount Zion.
The way in which we view facts depends a great deal on the eyes through which we look at them. Here, as regards Moses and the Israelites in the wilderness, we may look on them through the eyes of Jethro, or of Zipporah, or of the children; for a change let us use the children's eyes, and enquire how they transmit the facts to us. Sketch previous history of the children, their stay in Midian, and journey to the camp. Notice:—
I. WHAT THE CHILDREN SAW AND HEARD. As they came they would notice, first, the mountains, then the camp in the plain, then, perhaps, people moving about and cloudy pillar suspended over all. At last, one man comes to meet them; their father is the leader of the host.
1. A new flock. In the old days Gershom must often have looked out for his coming home; then (cf. Exodus 3:1) he had sheep to care for, now his flock is of another kind (Psalms 77:20). No longer Jethro's shepherd, but the shepherd of Jehovah. Not really changed his profession—still the same kind of work—only, having served his apprenticeship with Jethro, he has been called to a higher grade of service.
2. A memorable spot. How had he come to change his service? The very place would remind them of the answer. There is the rough hill-side—there, perhaps, the very bush where the angel appeared. The whole scene a fulfilment of God's promise and a pledge of his faithfulness (cf. Exodus 3:12).
3. New-found relatives. A new uncle and aunt, never seen before—could tell them about the old life in Egypt, their father's birth and escape—the cruel slavery of their kindred—all the past would seem more real now that they were confronted by these witnesses to its reality. Comparing the past with the present, a suggestive commentary on Eliezer's name; Moses had good reason for saying, "my God is a help."
II. PARALLEL WITH OURSELVES. (Cf. Hebrews 12:22-24.) We, too, like the sons of Moses, have been brought into new relations with our Father. As we approach him, what may we see and hear?
1. We find him in a holy place. Not a camp of wanderers in the wilderness, but a holy city, one which hath foundations, the settled home of its redeemed inhabitants. Pleasant for Gershom and his brother to find their father, but they still had to look on to the day when they should find their home; for us homo is our Father's house in the holy city upon the holy mountain.
2. He introduces us to holy fellowships. As Moses' children found new relatives, so do we: "an innumerable company, the general assembly of the angels, and the Church of the first-born, and the spirits of the justified." We may picture the interest with which Gershom and Eliezer must have viewed the camp and listened to the story of deliverance; but the company to which they had come was very different to that to which we have come; the deliverance of which they heard was but a first step to freedom. They, no doubt, learnt to sing, perhaps from Miriam, the song of Moses; from those with whom we have communion we may learn the song of the Lamb.
Conclusion. After all, the children, amid all the new sights, would rejoice most at meeting their father—at seeing him, and remaining with him. As Jethro led them towards the mount, their father was, doubtless, the subject of their talk; all else derived its interest only from its relation to him. Just so, too, with us. Heaven is our Father's house; it is our Father's presence that makes it home to us. As our Lord leads us thitherward, it is still of the Father whom he speaks. Those whom the Father has given into his care he will bring to their' journey's end in safety.—G.
JETHRO'S ADVICE TO MOSES, AND ITS ADOPTION. The office of ruler in ancient times, whether exercised by a king, a prince, or a mere chieftain, was always understood to include within it the office of judge. In the Greek ideal of the origin of kingly government (Herod. 1.96), the able discharge of judicial functions marks the individual out for sovereignty. The successors of Moses, like the chief rulers of Carthage, bore the title of "Judges" (shophetim, suffetes). Moses, it appears, had from the time when he was accepted as leader by the people (Exodus 4:29-31), regarded himself as bound to hear and decide all the causes and complaints which arose among the entire Israelite people. He had net delegated his authority to any one. This can scarcely have been because the idea had not occurred to him, for the Egyptian kings ordinarily decided causes by judges nominated ad hoc. Perhaps he had distrusted the ability of his countrymen—so recently slaves—to discharge such delicate functions. At any rate, he had reserved the duty wholly to himself (verse 18). This course appeared to Jethro unwise. No man could, he thought, in the case of so great a nation, singly discharge such an office with satisfaction to himself and others. Moses would "wear himself away" with the fatigue; and he would exhaust the patience of the people through inability to keep pace with the number of cases that necessarily arose. Jethro therefore recommended the appointment of subordinate judges, and the reservation by Moses of nothing but the right to decide such cases as these judges should, on account of their difficulty, refer to him (verse 22) On reflection, Moses accepted this course as the best open to him under the circumstances, and established a multiplicity of judges, under a system which will be discussed in the comment on verse 25.
On the morrow. The day after Jethro's arrival. Moses sat to judge the people. Moses, i.e; took his seat in an accustomed place, probably at the door of his tent, and. was understood to be ready to hear and decide causes. The people stood by Moses. A crowd of complainants soon collected, and kept Moses employed incessantly from the morning, when he had taken his seat, until the evening, i.e; until nightfall. It is conjectured that many complaints may have arisen out of the division of the spoil of the Amalekites.
Why sittest thou thyself alone etc. A perverse ingenuity has discovered that the emphatic words in this passage are "sittest" and "stand," Jethro having blamed Moses for humiliating the people by requiring them to stand up while he himself sat! But the context makes it abundantly clear that what Jethro really blames, is Moses sitting alone and judging the whole people single-handed.
And Moses said … Because the people come unto me, to inquire of God. To inquire of God is certainly not a mere "juridical phrase," meaning to consult a judge (Kalisch), nor, on the other hand, is it necessarily "to consult God through an oracle." It cannot, however, mean less than to seek a decision from some one regarded as entitled to speak for God; and it is certainly assigned by Moses as the reason why he judged all the causes himself, and did not devolve the duty upon others. They could not be supposed to know the mind of God as he knew it. Jethro, however, points out, that it is one thing to lay down principles, and another to apply them. Moses might reserve the legislative function—the inculcation of principles—to himself, and so still, "be for the people to Godward" (Exodus 18:19); but he might find "able men" among the congregation, quite capable of applying the principles, and delegate to them the judicial function (Exodus 18:21, Exodus 18:22).
I judge … and I do make them know the statutes of God. As the Israelites were, up to this time, without any code of written laws, Moses took the opportunity furnished by such cases as came before him, to lay down principles of law, and enjoin them upon the people; thus making them to know the statutes of God and his eternal unwritten laws. Such a practice would not have been necessary after the giving of the law on Mount Sinai; and its existence at the time of Jethro's visit helps to fix that visit as occurring before the giving of the law.
The thing … is not good—i.e; not expedient, and so not the right thing to do. It is a man's duty to have regard to his health, and not unnecessarily overtask his strength.
Thou wilt surely wear away. Literally, "Wasting thou wilt waste away," Thy strength, i.e; will not long hold out, if thou continuest this practice. Both thou, and this people. The people's strength and patience will also fail, if, owing to the number of the complaints, they have—some of them—to wait all day at the tribunal before they can obtain a decision.
I will give thee counsel, and God shall be with thee. Rather—"And may God be with thee!" May God incline thine heart to accept my counsel and act upon it. Be thou for the people to God-ward, etc. "Continue," i.e; as at present, to be the intermediary between God and the people—still be the whole and sole source of legislative power (Exodus 18:20), and still be the fount and origin of judicial authority; but commit the actual decision of the lighter causes to others chosen by thyself for the office (Exodus 18:21, Exodus 18:22). The separation of the legislative and judicial functions was well known in Egypt, where the kings alone made new laws, but causes were ordinarily determined by a body of judges. Bring the causes unto God. In difficult cases, Moses actually laid the cause before God, and obtained directions from God as to the manner in which he was to decide it. See Numbers 27:5-11.
Thou shalt teach them ordinances and laws. Or, "statutes and laws," as in Exodus 18:16. It is not quite clear how these differ. Some regard "statutes" as connected with religion, and laws as regulations with respect to civil and social matters. Others explain the first as "specific" and the second as "general enactments." The way wherein they must walk. The general line of conduct which all are bound to pursue. The work that they must do. The special task which each has to perform individually.
Able men. Literally, "men of might"—i.e; of capacity or ability—men competent for the office of judge; who are further defined to be, such as possess the three qualities of piety, veracity, and strict honesty, or incorruptness. Jethro's conception of the true judicial character leaves little to be desired. If among every ten Israelites there was one such person, the moral condition of the nation cannot have been so much depressed by the Egyptian servitude as is sometimes represented. Place such over them to be rulers of thousands, etc. A decimal organisation naturally presents itself to men's minds as the simplest in a simple state of society, and was probably already in use among the Arab tribes with whom Jethro was familiar. The graduated series—rulers of tens, of fifties, of hundreds, and of thousands, implies a power of three-fold appeal, from the "ruler of ten" to the "ruler of fifty"—from him to the "ruler of a hundred"—and from him to the "ruler of a thousand." Whether there was an appeal from the last-named to Moses, is doubtful. Probably there was not; Moses deciding those cases only which the "rulers of thousands" reserved for him as being specially difficult or important.
Let them judge the people at all seasons. Instead of occasional court-days, on which Moses sat from morning to evening hearing causes, judgments were to be given continually by the rulers of tens, fifties, etc; the accumulation of untried causes being thus avoided, and punishment following promptly on the committal of an offence. The elaborately minute organisation was only suited for the period of the wanderings, and was of a semi-military character, such as might have suited an army on the march When the Israelites became settled dwellers in Palestine, such a multiplicity of judges was unnecessary, and was discontinued. So shall it be easier. Literally, "So make it easier." Compare Exodus 18:18.
And God command thee so. Jethro does not suppose that Moses will take his advice without further consultation. He assumes that the matter will be laid by Moses before God, and God's will learnt concerning it. The entire narrative supposes that there was some established means by which the Israelite leader could refer a matter to Jehovah and obtain a decision upon it. This can scarcely have been as yet the Urim and Thummim. Probably Moses held frequent communication with Jehovah by means of waking visions. Thou shalt be able to endure—i.e; "the work will not be too much for thee—thou wilt be able to bear it." This people shall also go to their place in peace. The "place" intended would seem to be Palestine. Keil supposes that the word "peace" is to be taken literally, and concludes from it that breaches of the peace had previously been frequent, the people having "often taken the law into their own hands on account of the delay in the judicial decision;" but this is to extract from the words more than they naturally signify. "In peace" means "cheerfully, contentedly." If the changes which he recommends are carried out, Jethro thinks that the people will make the rest of the journey to Canaan quietly and contentedly, without complaint or dissatisfaction.
So Moses hearkened. Moses took the advice tendered him, not immediately, but after the law had been given at Sinai, and the journeying was about to be resumed. See Deuteronomy 1:9-15.
Moses chose able men. It appears from Deuteronomy 1:13, that instead of selecting the men himself, which would have been an invidious task, Moses directed their nomination by the people, and only reserved to himself the investing them wit h their authority. Heads over the people. From the time of their appointment, the "rulers" were not merely judges, but "heads" of their respective companies, with authority over them on the march, and command in the battle-field (Numbers 31:14). Thus the organisation was at once civil and military.
At all seasons. See the comment on Exodus 18:22. The hard causes they brought unto Moses. It must have been left to the discretion of the judges to determine whether a cause was hard or easy, a great or a little matter. Probably only those causes which seemed "hard" to the "rulers of thousands" were brought before Moses for decision.
The unwisdom of a monopoly of power.
The principle of the division of labour, which is essential to progress in the arts, was well known in Egypt, and was applied there, not to the arts only, but also to government and administration. Moses, who had resided forty years at the court of a Pharaoh (Acts 7:23), must have been thoroughly acquainted with the fact that, in a well-ordered community, judicial functions were separated kern legislative and administrative, and entrusted to a large number of persons, not monopolised by a single individual. But it had appeared to him that the condition of his own people was exceptional. Just released from the cruel bondage of a hard and pitiless slavery, without education, without habits of command or self-control, without any knowledge of the principles of law or experience in the practice of courts, they seemed to him unfit for the exercise of the judicial office—especially as he understood it. For his view was, that each particular decision should be made an occasion of educating the people in the principles of law and justice (Exodus 18:16), and upon these it was his habit to descant in connection with each judgment that he delivered. As he felt that he alone among all the Israelites was equal to this task, he had undertaken to discharge singly the office of judge in a community consisting of above two millions of persons. Jethro, on visiting him, was struck with the unwisdom of such an attempt, and honestly gave expression to his feelings. Jethro saw—
I. THAT TO MONOPOLISE THE JUDICIAL FUNCTION IN SO LARGE A COMMUNITY WAS UNWISE, AS AN UNDUE STRAIN UPON THE MENTAL AND PHYSICAL POWERS OF THE MONOPOLISER. SO numerous were the causes brought before him that Moses had to sit "from morning to evening"—probably from early dawn until the dusk of the evening twilight—hearing them. At eighty years of age, or more (Exodus 7:7), his physical strength was not equal to this exertion. Our physical powers have to be considered. No one is justified in overtaxing them unnecessarily. The body needs change of attitude and employment, air, gentle exercise, freedom from restraint, confinement, tension. No one could habitually sit at any one task for twelve hours continuously without its telling on his bodily frame and injuring his constitution. Again, the mental strain must have been injurious to him, and if not actually impairing his faculties, must have interfered with their due exercise and rendered him unfit to perform the delicate duties of a judge late in the day. Had necessity been laid upon him, had God appointed him to be the sole judge of the people, or had there actually been no one else among the Israelites competent to the performance of any part of the work, he would have been right in acting as he did, for health is not the first consideration; but this was not so. God had not spoken upon the point; and there was an abundance of men in the congregation, quite competent to perform raider judicial functions, as Jethro clearly perceived, and as he himself also saw when it was pointed out to him. Thus he was exhausting himself unnecessarily, a proceeding which cannot be justified.
II. THAT IT WAS ALSO UNWISE, AS UNDULY TAXING THE PATIENCE OF THE PEOPLE. One man could not keep pace with the number of constantly arising causes, which must have tended to accumulate, whence would arise a delay of justice. It was inconvenient enough to have to wait from the morning until the evening before obtaining a hearing; but probably the ease was not uncommon of a cause being put off to the next court-day, which, if the people were on the march, might be several days distant. The convenience of suitors is an important consideration in the administration of justice, which should be prompt as well as sure, to content men's natural sense of what is fitting.
III. THAT, FURTHER, IT TENDED TO CRAMP THE EXERCISE BY THE PEOPLE OF POWERS WHICH THEY POSSESSED, AND THE EMPLOYMENT OF WHICH WOULD HAVE ELEVATED THEM. There were in Israel and will always be in every community, "able men," well fitted to take part in the decision of causes. Such men will commonly be very numerous; and if they have no part in the administration of justice, a large section of the community will at once be dissatisfied with the slight passed upon them, and debarred from an employment which would have tended to their moral education and elevation. The jury system of modern states is a recognition of the fact, that judicial capacity is widely spread, and that society ought to provide a field for its exercise. It is important to utilise the powers possessed by all members of the community, both for their own contentation and for the general welfare of the community itself. The world is over-full of despots and monopolists, persons who desire to grasp as much power as possible, and are unwilling to share their office with others. We may acquit Moses of such selfishness; but we cannot acquit all those who follow in his footsteps. It would be well if persons in positions of authority nowadays sought generally to associate others in their work—to call out latent talent, exercise it, and so educate its possessors.
The necessary qualifications of such as are to exercise the office of judges.
Few positions in life are more important than that of the judge. Not only are the lives and liberties of individual citizens at his disposal, but the very existence of the State depends on him, since unless justice is in the main administered states fly to pieces. It has been said that the whole elaborate machinery of the British Constitution has been designed and arranged with the ultimate object of putting twelve honest men together into a jury box. Where the functions to be discharged are so important, it is of the utmost moment that qualifications should be laid down in theory, and strictly adhered to in practice. Jethro saw that judges ought to be—
I. MEN OF ABILITY. Ordinary, common-place powers are not enough. "Non ex quovis ligno Mercurius fit." Something above the average is necessary. Jethro thought one man in ten among the Israelites might possess sufficient intelligence and discrimination to judge the lowest class of causes, those of the least account. This was a somewhat sanguine estimate. In modern communities, which boast of their general enlightenment, considerably less than one-tenth of the citizens have their names inscribed upon the jury lists. The standard of intelligence however varies in different ages and countries, so that no hard-and-fast line can be laid down on the subject. All that can be insisted upon is this—the judge should be a person recognised to possess ability for his office, i.e; sagacity and practical discernment. If he has not these gifts, it is no use his possessing others, as learning, scholarship, artistic or scientific attainments. He will not be respected; no confidence will be felt in him; his decisions will carry no weight, and will injure rather than benefit the community.
2. MEN OF PIETY. "Provide out of all the people such as fear God," said Jethro. It is greatly to be feared that this qualification is in modern times but slightly regarded. How seldom do we hear it asked of any newly-appointed judge—Is he a religious man? And yet unless God is feared, there can be no security that justice will be done even by the judge of the greatest possible intelligence. If a man be not God-fearing, he may allow prejudice, passion, even caprice to sway his judgments, he may gradually become like the "unjust judge," who "feared not God neither regarded man." Or, again, he may have to pronounce judgment in matters concerning religion, for such will often come before courts, and then what weight can he expect his decisions to have? It is a wise and venerable custom which makes it incumbent on our "judges of assize" to preface the opening of their commission in each assize town by attendance at Divine service and hearing of God's word preached by a minister of the Gospel. It would be still better if those who nominate judges would follow Jethro's counsel, and take care in each instance to select for the office "such as fear God"—i.e; sincerely religious persons. The reality of religion is preferable to the show of it; and the only security for righteous judgments is that the judge be himself a righteous man.
3. MEN OF TRUTH. There can be no real piety without truthfulness, so that this qualification is, in fact, included in the last. But there is a semblance of piety which is not over-scrupulous with regard to truth, or "pious frauds" would not have passed into a bye-word. Truth, the love of it, the honest desire to search it out, and make it manifest, is so essential a quality in a judge, that it deserves separate mention, and can never be dispensed with, whatever other qualifications a man may have. Let there be any suspicion of a man's truthfulness, and then, whatever reputation for piety may attach to him, he is not fitted to be a judge, and ought not to be selected for the judge's office.
4. MEN OF PROBITY, who would scorn to take a bribe. The "corrupt judge" is the opprobrium of debased nations, the disgrace of his calling, the destroyer of the state to which he belongs. In many ancient kingdoms corruption, when detected in a judge, was punished by instant execution. Where it has been regarded as venial and punished inadequately, as at Rome, society has rapidly deteriorated and a revolution has shortly supervened. We may congratulate ourselves that judges in our own country are not only incorrupt, but beyond suspicion, so far above taking a bribe that no one would dare to offer them one. In the East, on the contrary, according to the universal testimony of travellers, it is scarcely possible to find the office of judge exercised by any one who is not notoriously open to corrupt influence, who does not expect, and is not anxious to receive, bribes. Among the Jews, judicial corruption is first noticed among the sons of Samuel, who "turned aside after lucre, and took bribes, and perverted judgment'' (1 Samuel 8:3). In the decline of the nation, the evil grew and increased, and is frequently denounced by the prophets (Isaiah 1:23 : Jeremiah 5:28; Ezekiel 22:27; Micah 3:11; Micah 7:3, etc.).
HOMILIES BY J. ORR
The appointment of judges.
During the few days that Jethro was with Moses, he did the latter an essential service, and initiated nothing short of a revolution in the manner of conducting judicial business. Besides its immediate lessons (noted below), this incident of the appointment of judges is valuable as illustrating—
1. The scope left in the arrangements of Israel for the independent action of the human mind. Various examples of this occur in the history—e.g; the retention of Hobab as a guide in the wanderings (Numbers 10:31), and the suggestion of the spies (Deuteronomy 1:22).
2. The truth that in God's ways of dealing with Israel, existing capabilities were utilised to the utmost. We have seen this in regard to the miracles, ,rod again in the conflict with Amalek; it is now to be noted in the formation of a polity. The same principle probably applies to what is said in Exodus 18:16 of Moses making the people to "know the statutes of God and his laws." That Moses, in giving forth these statutes, acted under supernatural direction, and frequently by express instruction of God, is not to be denied; but it is equally certain that existing usages, embodying principles of right, were taken advantage of as far as they went. We cannot err in supposing that it is this same case-made law which, in its completed form, and under special Divine sanction, is embodied in the code of chs. 21-23. But neither in substance nor in form is this code, so various in its details, a direct Divine product. It grew up under Moses' hand in these decisions in the wilderness. Traditional materials were freely incorporated into it.
3. The assistance which a man of moderate gifts is often capable of rendering to another, greatly his superior. Jethro's was certainly a mind of no ordinary capacity; but we do this excellent man no injustice in speaking of his gifts as moderate in comparison with the splendid abilities of Moses. Yet his natural shrewdness and plain common-sense enabled him to detect a blunder in Moses' system of administration of which the lawgiver himself was apparently oblivious, and furnished him, moreover, with the suggestion of a remedy. The greatest minds are in this way often dependent on the humblest, and are, by the dependence, taught humility and respect for the gifts of others. There is no one who is not his neighbour's superior in some matter—none from whom his neighbour may not learn something. The college-bred man may learn from the rustic or mechanic, the merchant from his clerk, the statesman from the humblest official in his department, the doctor of divinity from the country minister, studious men generally, from those engaged in practical callings. Let no man, therefore, despise another. Jethro could teach Moses; and the plainest man, drawing on the stores with which experience has furnished him, need not despair of being of like service to those above him. It is for our own good. that God binds us together in these relations of dependence, and we should be thankful that he does so. "The eye cannot say to the hand, I have no need. of thee: nor, again, the head to the feet, I have no need of thee," etc. (l Corinthians 12- Exodus 14:31). Observe—
I. MOSES' ERROR (Exodus 23:13). He took upon himself the whole burden of the congregation. He sat from morning till evening to hear their causes. We naturally wonder that the suggestion of appointing judges was left to come from Jethro—that so obvious an expedient for getting rid of the difficulty did not occur to Moses himself. It is astonishing, however, how wise a man may be in great things, and yet miss some little bit of sense which is right before his vision, and which is picked up at once by another and possibly a more ordinary mind. It is of Sir IsaActs Newton the story is told, that being troubled by the visits of a cat and kitten, he fell on the expedient of making two holes in his study door to admit of their entrance and exit—a large hole for the cat, and a small hole for the kitten! Moses' error, we may be sure, did not arise from that which is a snare to so many in responsible positions—an exaggerated idea of his own importance. He would not fancy that everything must be managed by himself, because no one else was able to do it so well. But:—
1. The burden which now pressed upon him had probably grown from small beginnings. It is proverbially easier to set a system in operation, than to get rid of it again, when it presses and becomes inconvenient.
2. Moses probably accepted the position of judge and arbiter, as inseparable from the peculiar relation in which he stood to the people. They naturally looked to him, God's delegate, and in some sense their spiritual father, as the proper person to hear their causes, and settle their disputes. He felt the burden, but submitted to it as inevitable.
3. It was a further difficulty in the situation that no code of laws had as yet been formed; he was making the law as well as deciding cases. This may have seemed a bar in the way of the appointment of deputies.
4. The method by which the reform could be accomplished was not obvious. Jethro's scheme exactly met the case; but it had not as yet been suggested. Even had it occurred to Moses, he might have shrunk from entertaining it. There is always a hesitancy felt in entering on reforms which necessitate a large recasting of the frame-work of society, which involve new and untried arrangements. Difficulties might have been anticipated in finding the requisite number of men, in imparting to them the requisite amount of instruction, in making the scheme popular among the people, etc. It is useful to observe that when the scheme was actually set on foot, these difficulties did not prove to be insuperable. Nor, when Jethro made his proposal, do the difficulties seem to have been much thought of. Moses saw the wisdom of the plan, and readily adopted it. We are often thus kept back from useful undertakings by the ghosts of our own fears.
II. JETHRO'S EXPOSTULATION (Exodus 23:14-19). If Moses did not see the mistake he was committing, Jethro did. To his clearer vision, the evils of the system in vogue were abundantly apparent, he saw:—
1. That Moses was taking upon himself a task to which his strength was quite unequal (Exodus 23:18).
2. That, notwithstanding his exertions, the work was not being done.
3. That the time and energy which Moses was expending in these labours could be bestowed to infinitely better purpose (Exodus 23:20).
4. Above all, that this expenditure of strength on subordinate tasks was unnecessary, seeing that there were men in the camp as capable as Moses himself of doing a large part of the work (Exodus 23:21). On these grounds he based his expostulation. The lessons taught are of great importance.
(1) The neglect of division of labour in Christian work leads to serious evils. The work is not overtaken, the strength of those engaged in it is greatly overtaxed, while energy is bestowed on inferior tasks which might be applied to better purpose.
(2) The adoption of division of labour in Christian work secures obvious advantages. It relieves the responsible heads, expedites business and promotes order, secures that the work is better done, and utilises a great variety of talent which would otherwise remain unemployed. These are important considerations, and the application of them to hard wrought clergymen, and to others in responsible positions, is sufficiently obvious. Not a little work is heaped by congregations on ministers which could he far better done by persons among themselves, and the doing of which by laymen would leave the minister free in mind and heart for the discharge of his higher and proper duties.
III. THE PROPOSAL OF THE APPOINTMENT OF JUDGES (Exodus 23:19-27). Jethro's scheme had every merit which a scheme of the kind could have. It relieved Moses, provided for the overtaking of the work, and secured that, while being overtaken, the work would be done with greater efficiency. It was a bold, comprehensive measure, yet withal perfectly workable. It would also have an important effect in welding the nation together. It is to be noted concerning it:—
1. That it reserved to Moses various important duties (Exodus 23:19, Exodus 23:20). he was still to be the teacher of the people in the ordinances and laws of God, and had the duty of trying and of deciding upon causes of special difficulty. This would fully occupy his powers, while his relation to the people, as God's vicegerent, would be better preserved by his retaining a position apart, and keeping himself from their petty strifes.
2. That special stress is laid upon the character of the men to be selected as judges (Exodus 23:21). Ability is not overlooked, but peculiar importance is attached to their being men that fear God, love truth, and hate covetousness. Happy the country which has such judges! Jethro's insistance on these particulars shows him to have been a man of true piety, and one who had an eye to the true interests of the people, as well as to the good of Moses.
3. The scheme, before being adopted, was to be submitted for God's approval (Exodus 23:23). This should be done with all our schemes. Jethro, having accomplished this useful bit of work, returned to his home in peace (Exodus 23:27).—J.O.
HOMILIES BY H. T. ROBJOHNS
The Christian in Public Paths.
"Moses sat to judge the people: and the people," etc. (Exodus 18:13). Explain with accuracy the work of Moses. On such a text might be based a homily on the functions, work and bearing of a civil magistrate or judge. But it is better to give the subject a wider application, and to treat it under Christian lights.
I. THE FUNCTIONS OF A CHRISTIAN. Moses sat as a prophet, expounding the Divine will, as revealed to his exalted soul by the Spirit of God; and as a judge, deciding controversies. Indeed the two functions were blended; in giving legal decisions, he treated the suitors as intelligent and moral beings, assigning the principles on which they were based. These functions of Moses may suggest what should be those of a Christian in the public paths of life.
1. To expound the mind and will of God: i.e; his truth and his law.
2. To promote peace: i.e; in all the relations of life (Matthew 5:9).
II. THE MANNER OF THEIR DISCHARGE.
1. With patience. "From the morning unto the evening."
2. In the spirit of brotherhood. "The people stood by Moses." No airs of superiority.
3. With diligence. Moses went on with his work, though
(1) He had distinguished visitors. Jethro might have been an excuse for a vacation or a short session. No! "on the morrow" he went on with duty, and worked as long as it was light. "Necessary business must always take the place of ceremonious attention. It is too great a compliment to our friends to prefer the enjoyment of their company before our duty to God."
(2) He had come to great honour. Moses did not take his ease and throw the burdens upon others. "Noblesse oblige." It is the honour of angels to minister (Hebrews 1:14; Matthew 20:28).
(3) He had received great provocation.
(4) Advancing in years. To life's last hour Moses worked for the public good.—R.
The Economy of Force.
"The thing that thou doest is not good," etc. Exodus 18:17, Exodus 18:18. In the error of Moses, and the amendment suggested by Jethro, are to be discovered most valuable lessons. This day in the life of Moses was a microcosm of all his days. His whole life was service. So with all true life. But in such a life mistakes are possible. We inquire then what are the Divine conditions of a life of true ministry?
I. CHARACTER. The elements were laid down by Jethro as qualifications of the new judges. Certain that Moses possessed them. So must all who aim at usefulness (Exodus 18:21).
1. Ability. Strange that ability comes first; but so it must be. Piety without ability can adorn only obscurity. Service and responsibility demand the man of power. Ability may be natural; but is also to be acquired. Hence duty of hard work, especially in morning of life.
2. Piety. Ability is the engine of the soul, the fear of God the helm. Richard Cobden was wont to say:—"You have no security for a man who has no religious principle." Said his colonel to Hedley Vicars, offering him in 1852 the adjutancy of his regiment:—"Vicars, you are the man I can best trust with responsibility.''
II. ECONOMY, i.e; of force and of resource (Exodus 18:17, Exodus 18:18). Remark:—
1. That the most earnest are likely to neglect it. It is not the hack but the thoroughbred that needs to be held in. The energy of Moses led him into error. So earnestness kills itself with excess of work.
2. That there is necessity for economy. As with money, one must not spend 25s. a week, if one has only 20s.; so there is a limitation as to strength (of every kind), time, and opportunity.
3. That the economy is easy. The Christian worker should not attempt that which is above, beside, or beneath his power or vocation. Nor all that is on the level of his ability.
4. That the consequences will be abundant and rich. The result of division of labour in a factory; so with spiritual enterprise, the effects will be the enrichment of the Church, and the largest service for the world.
III. CONCENTRATION. The more we withdraw effort from that which is not within our own province, the more must we accumulate and concentrate energy upon that which is.—R.
HOMILIES BY J. URQUHART
Good counsel well taken.
I. ZEAL MAY OUTRUN DISCRETION.
1. Moses' strength was overtaxed, his spirit needlessly burdened.
2. There was delay for the people with its vexation and loss. The most self-sacrificing love will not of itself make our methods the best and wisest.
II. WHAT IS NEEDFUL FOR THE GIVING OF ADVICE.
1. Affectionate interest and care. The people's need and Moses' burden both weigh upon Jethro's spirit.
2. Wisdom. A better way is clearly conceived, all the requirements of the case are grasped and met.
3. Honest plainness.
4. Piety. He asked Moses to take his advice only so far as God will command him.
III. WHAT IS NEEDFUL FOR PROFITING BY GOOD COUNSEL.
1. Readiness to listen. There is on Moses' part no proud resenting of a stranger's interference. The voice was heard as if it rose up within his own bosom.
2. Obedience to conviction. He not only heard and assented, he went and did it.—U.
HOMILIES BY D. YOUNG
In considering this passage it is desirable to form some distinct opinion as to the time of Jethro's visit to Moses. How comes this episode to be mentioned at all, and what is its point of attachment to the main course of the history? Evidently it would not have been inserted unless as explaining how these rulers of thousands, hundreds, fifties and tens, had first been appointed. The origin of this appointment is then seen to be traceable to Jethro's prudent and sagacious suggestions. It has then to be further explained how Jethro happens to be in the camp at all. And so we have another illustration of how things which seem utterly disconnected from one another yet have a very real connection. See Zipporah on the way from Midian to Egypt rebelling against the ordinance of the Lord; and then look on all this orderly and careful provision for the administration of justice through the tribes of Israel. What connection should there be between these? Yet one leads to the other. As to the time of the visit, any exact determination is of course out of the question, but this much at least may be guessed that the visit was alter the giving of the law. What if it happened just about the time of Miriam's jealousy against Moses, and was in some measure the cause of it? (Numbers 12:1-16.) Such a supposition too would better harmonise with the reference in Exodus 18:16, when Moses represents himself as explaining the statutes of God and his laws. May we not almost say that if this chapter were inserted somewhere in the earlier part of the book of Numbers, and from it we looked back on all the mass of legislation in Exodus and Leviticus, it would read with far greater force?
I. WE HAVE GOD'S PEOPLE PRESENTED TO US AS ABOUNDING IN OCCASIONS OF DISPUTE AMONG THEMSELVES. This appears as a certain consequence of that spirit of self-seeking so manifest and strong among them. The law from Sinai of course conflicted with many old and honoured traditions. That law had been given to secure in the first place a nation devoted to the service of God; and in the second place the mutual prosperity of all the members of that nation. If only every Israelite had obeyed these laws from the heart, and entered into the spirit of them, then the prosperity of all would have been ensured. But as a matter of fact most part of the Israelites wanted to conform to the laws just so far as suited their convenience and no further. Laws were to be interpreted very strictly when such interpretations were for their advantage, ant[ very loosely when the contrary. The disputes, misunderstandings, and lawsuits of society are a great reproach, and ought to be a great humiliation. Think of all the machinery which is in daily operation through such a land as England to secure, as far as may be, the doing of right between man and man. And yet this machinery, expensive and elaborate as it is, works in a very unsatisfactory way; indeed that which is meant to work justice very often works injustice, and certainly very seldom ensures the exact attainment of right. Hence, however pleased we are to look on Jethro's suggestions here, and see them carried out with a measure of success, we feel that they must not he suffered to hide an end more desirable still. Law reformers cry out, and with ample cause, for the adoption of such means as will secure a cheap and speedy settlement of all disputes. But how much more would be gained if only there was a universal acceptance of the Gospel, with all its powers and principles! That Gospel puts into man a loving and unselfish heart and a spirit of brotherliness, which, if allowed fair play, would soon do away with litigation and all that leads to it. A world of Christians would be a simple-hearted, plain-living people, ever acting towards one another in truth, kindness, and goodwill. Cheap justice is good; but the new heavens and the new earth, wherein dwelleth righteousness, are much better.
II. WE SEE MOSES DOING HIS BEST, BY INDIVIDUAL EFFORT, TO RECONCILE AND SATISFY THESE DISPUTANTS. We get the impression of a man whose hands are full with his judicial work. When his own dear kinsfolk come in such affecting and pressing circumstances, he can only spare for them a brief interval; and a large part of that interval seems to have been occupied with religious exercises. With the morning light Moses settles down to what he must have found a weary and discouraging work. Many a perjury, many an impudent claim, many a reckless slander, many a pitiful story of oppression and extortion he would have to listen to. It is the daily work of judges and magistrates to deal with the seamy side of human nature, but then this is their business; they look for it, they get used to it, above all they are paid for it. Perhaps they would say, most of them, that it is no affair of theirs to ask too curiously whence all this disputing comes and how it is to be cured. They are there to administer laws and not to make them. But Moses was more than a judge. He had not only to settle these disputes by the way, but also to guide the disputers towards Canaan. We are perfectly certain, too, that the great bulk of those against whom justice compelled him to decide would become his enemies. Yet he struggled on, accepting the responsibility, and trying to get the laws of God for Israel more and more accepted among the people. He indeed sets us, in this matter, a noble example. The pressure which was upon him will never rest upon us, for all men sought him; but we also have our limited opportunity, larger alas! than we seek to use, of advancing the things that make for peace. There is so much to promote discord, so much to excite partisan spirit; there are so many to tear every rent wider, instead of putting in the little stitch in time that saves nine, that we may well ask for grace, gentleness, fidelity, and impartiality, in order to put in our intervening word when such a word may be possible and acceptable. The more we think of all that there is in this world acting, often alas! consciously and deliberately, to spite, separate, and irritate, the more let us determine to form part of a reuniting and cementing force.
III. NOTICE THE TIMELY PRESENCE AND COUNSEL OF JETHRO. Truly there is appearance here of something unaccountable in the dealings of God. Such a seemingly important matter as the judicial system of Israel owes its existence to the suggestion of an outsider. And yet it might have been thought that this was exactly one of the things which Jehovah would provide for by express enactments. When it is a matter of making the tabernacle, he is very particular as to measurements and materials, but when it is a matter of judging causes, he leaves it to be determined by the advice of an apparently casual visitant to the camp. There is nothing really strange in all this, if we remember that God only instructs us where we cannot make discoveries for ourselves. Revelation does not supersede, it rather assumes and requires the exercise of common sense and natural judgment. We find a somewhat parallel case to this in the New Testament when the deacons were appointed. Common sense told the apostles they were becoming burdened with work which did not properly belong to them, and only hindered them in the doing of work for which they were specially responsible; and so here the common sense of Jethro steps in to suggest to Moses a more excellent way. Why did not Moses think of it himself? The very fact that he did not shed a great deal of light on his character. His strength lay not in personal initiation, but in complete waiting and dependence on God. If God had commanded the institution of these rulers, he would very quickly have had the command in operation; but he never thought of proposing the plan himself. But when another proposes it, he can see at once that it is a wise, practicable, and necessary one. Moses is not to be blamed as wanting in sagacity in that he failed to see this remedy before. Great discoveries are simple enough when once they are made; and then everyone wonders they were not made long before.
IV. OBSERVE THE DETAILS OF JETHRO'S ADVICE. Not only does he suggest the obtaining of help from somewhere, but taking in the whole situation at a glance, he can suggest exactly the best thing to be done. Probably as a priest in Midian he had seen a great many disputings and helped to some extent in the settlement of them. We cannot but feel as we read. through the details of the counsel, that whatever may be lacking in Jethro's formal standing, he acquits himself as one who is really and opportunely the messenger of God. He speaks as a good and true man ought to speak both for the relief of his kinsman and for the abiding good of the whole people. He judges that in Israel itself there are resources enough to meet the emergency, if only properly searched out and arranged. Given 600,000 men, surely among them there will be a fair proportion who have the qualities required. Notice that Jethro aims at a high standard (verse 21); able men are wanted, and wherein does the ability consist? No doubt a certain acuteness and general power of mind was required, hut the chief elements of the ability lay in those qualities which Jethro went on to specify. An efficient judge between man and man must be also one who fears God. The fear of man that bringeth a snare must not be allowed to enter his mind. He must measure things by Divine standards, ever asking what God would wish his judgments to be. He must be a man of truth, sparing no effort and avoiding no danger; in order to get at it he must try to keep his mind clear from prejudices. If he has fallen into any error he will promptly confess it, feeling that the interests of truth are more important than a reputation for consistency. And he must be free from covetousness. No suspicion of a bribe will cling to his judgments, nor will he be infected with that worldliness of spirit which looks to the property of men a great deal more than to the interest and comfort of their persons. But now the half-incredulous question cannot be kept out of the mind, "where shall such judges be found?" At all events let them be sought for. We cannot find perfect men; but we know the direction in which to seek. Probably, in the course of a long life, Jethro has discovered that men are both better and worse than he thought at first; and he is perfectly certain that men can be found to do all that is indispensably requisite for the present need. Moses was wearing himself out with duties which many in Israel were quite competent to perform; but who of them all could do the work which had been rut specially into his hands?—Y.
HOMILIES BY G. A. GOODHART
The eye cannot say unto the hand, I have no need of thee.
Men may make a channel for the stream, but they cannot make the stream. Water-power is a grand natural agency; but it is by means of human agency that it may be applied to the best advantage. So also in other matters; power comes from God; the way to use and economise power it is left for man to discover and to act upon. Consider here:—
I. THE DIVINE POWER. "God shall be with thee," said Jethro. The history shows how God had been with him already, how he was with him all through his life. Especially we may notice—
1. His relation to Pharaoh. The shepherd facing the king. Whence his boldness? He had shrunk beforehand at the mere prospect; when the hour came Pharaoh quailed before him. It was not Moses, it was the power which manifested itself through Moses, that humbled Pharaoh. Moses was but the visible rod in the outstretched hand of the invisible Jehovah.
2. His relation to the people. Harder to face a fickle multitude than to face an obstinate and Powerful monarch. Here too the Divine Power was manifested; the glory of Jehovah was, as it were, reflected from the face of his servant. It was the radiancy of the reflected glory which again and again cowed the rebels to submission. As with Jeremiah (Jeremiah 1:4-8), Zerubbabel (Zed. Jeremiah 4:6), St. Paul (2 Corinthians 12:9, 2 Corinthians 12:10), so also with Moses; human weakness the more evidently testified to Divine power.
II. THE HUMAN COUNSEL. Notice:—
1. The need of it. Men are so weak that they are soon unhinged by a great trust reposed in them. Their attention is so fixed upon the one thing, that other things are seen out of perspective. Moses was so filled with the consciousness of a Divine power working through him, that he failed at first to realise the fact that he was unequal to the friction necessitated by such a power. He realised the effect of the power in prospect more accurately than he could do after it possessed him (cf. Jeremiah 4:1-31.). As the mediator between God and Israel, had it not been for Jethro's counsel, he must soon have been worn out through forgetting the necessities of his own nature. Lives are still wasted and shortened through a like oversight. The man who feels that he is the channel of Divine power is, for the time, so God-intoxicated, that it does not occur to him to share his responsibilities. He must be both head and hands in everything, and the head in consequence soon grows heavy, and the hands hang down. Under the force of inspiration, common-sense is in abeyance; all the more need for wise counsel from those who occupy a neutral stand-point.
2. The wisdom of it. Jethro saw that the great thing was not that Moses should do all the work, but that all the work should be done. The power to do it, was no doubt lodged with Moses (cf. water-power lodged with keeper of sluice gates). The work, however, might be best done by a distribution of the power through selected agents. Moses need not to be head and hands; he might choose other hands, making them responsible to himself as head. Moses showed his wisdom by accepting the wise counsels of Jethro; many men would have shown their folly by setting them aside as the suggestions of ignorance.
Concluding considerations. Inspiration is a grand thing; but it may be best utilised by common-sense. God's power enables for action; but that power is best applied when the counsels of Jethro are attended to. All men have not the same gifts; and those who have what seem to be the higher gifts, are apt to set too small a value upon advice given by those less gifted. Even the gift of faith, however, needs the gift of wisdom to direct it. Moses was able to do more than he otherwise could have done because he was wise enough to hearken to the voice of Jethro, his father-in-law. ― G.
DEPARTURE OF JETHRO. The time of Jethro's departure, and indeed of his entire visit, has been matter of controversy. Kurtz is of opinion that Jethro waited till the news of Israel's victory over Amalek reached him, before setting out from his own country. Hence he concludes, that "a whole month or more may easily have intervened between the victory over Amalek and the arrival of Jethro," whose arrival in that case "would not even fall into the very earliest period of the sojourn at Sinai, but after the promulgation of the first Sinaitic law." Those who identify Hobab with Jethro find in Numbers 10:29-32 a proof that at any rate Jethro prolonged his visit until after the law was given, and did not "depart to his own land" before the removal of the people from the wilderness of Sinai to that of Paran, "in the 20th day of the second month of the second year" (ib, Numbers 10:11). The position, however, of Numbers 18:1-32; together with its contents—beth what it says and what it omits—are conclusive against this view. Jethro started on his journey when he heard "that the Lord had brought Israel out of Egypt" (Numbers 18:1), not when he heard that Israel had been victorious over Amalek. His conversation with Moses (Numbers 18:7-11) ranged over the entire series of deliverances from the night of the departure out of Egypt to the Amalekite defeat, but contained no allusion to the giving of the law. The occupation of Moses on the day after his arrival (Numbers 18:13) is suitable to the quiet period which followed the Amalekite defeat, but not to the exciting time of the Sinaitic manifestations. It may be added that the practice of inculcating general principles on occasion of his particular judgments, of which Moses speaks (Numbers 18:16), is suitable to the period anterior to the promulgation of the law, but not to that following it. The argument from Numbers 10:29-32 fails altogether, so soon as it is seen that Jethro and Hobab are distinct persons, probably brothers, sons of Reuel (or Raguel), and brothers- in-law of Moses.
Moses let his father-in-law depart. Literally, "dismissed him," "sent him away." This single expression is quite enough to prove that the Hobab, whom Moses made strenuous efforts to keep with him after Sinai was left, is not the Jethro whom he was quite content to let go. He went his way into his own land. He returned to Midian, probably crossing the Elanitic gulf, which divided Midian from the Sinaitic region. The exact time of the departure is uncertain; but it was probably before the main events related in Exodus 19:1-25.
Jethro the model of a friendly adviser.
A man's friends often hesitate to offer advice, from the fear of its being ill received. Jethro showed himself superior to this weakness, and risked being rebuffed for officiousness, confident in his singleness of purpose and honest intentions. He had all the qualities of a good adviser. He was—
1. SAGACIOUS. There can be no doubt that he rightly forecast the results, if Moses had continued his unwise monopoly of the judicial office, or that he suggested a prudent course in place of that whereof he disapproved. His reservation of a certain judicial power to Moses (Exodus 18:20-22) was especially wise, since had he not done so, it is highly probable that his counsel would not have been followed;—
2. SYMPATHETIC. Kindness and. warm feeling breathed in his warning words:—"Thou wilt surely wear away, both thou and this people … for this thing is too heavy for thee; thou art not able to perform it thyself alone." He feels for Moses; he feels for the people; he has no thought for himself; he is solely anxious, and deeply anxious, to save others from unnecessary suffering;—
3. STRAIGHTFORWARD. He does not use periphrases, or beat about the bush, but goes straight to his point, making his purpose clearly intelligible, and indeed unmistakable—"The thing that thou doest is not good"—"provide out of the people able men."
4. WHOLLY DISINTERESTED. The advice which he tenders can do him no good. He asks no employment, no place for himself. He will not even participate in the general prosperity of Israel if good results follow the adoption of his counsel; for he is not about to cast in his lot with the Israelites. On the contrary, he is bent on withdrawing at once into his own country. Moses will not find him that keen annoyance, an ever-present friend, who because his advice has been taken once, regards himself as entitled to obtrude it whenever he pleases, and to feel aggrieved if it is not in every case followed. If advisers generally acted in the spirit of Jethro, there would be far less unwillingness than there is to ask advice, and far more gratitude felt towards those who volunteer it.
HOMILIES BY D. YOUNG
I. JETHRO DEPARTS AFTER A MOST SATISFACTORY VISIT. That visit was made not perhaps without some anxiety and doubt as to the results, but still under the clear dictation of duty. Therefore, it would have been satisfactory even if less successful. Moses might, conceivably, have looked on Zipporah coldly and. received her reluctantly; but there would have remained to Jethro the priceless satisfaction that he had done the right thing. But Jethro, we have seen, had more even than the satisfaction of a good conscience; he had been successful, and successful beyond all that he could have anticipated when he set out. To a man of Jethro's disposition, that would indeed be a joyous visit, which had proved so useful to Moses, to Zipporah, to their children, to Israel, and may we not add, towards the glorifying of Jethro himself? Keep ever in the path that is clearly right, and you have Jethro's experience to encourage you in the expectation that it may also be the path of noble and joyous opportunities.
II. JETHRO DEPARTS, AND MOSES IS MADE TO FEEL, MORE THAN EVER, THAT JEHOVAH REMAINS. Very helpful are human counsel and sympathy, and especially when they come from old friends. There are no friends like old friends, and Jethro was a very old friend t o Moses. But Jethro's abilities and opportunities as adviser extended only a little way. Like Moses we may all have our Jethros whom we may love, cherish and venerate; for God distributes such men everywhere about the world to be, as it were, fellow-workers with trim in giving stability and illumination to the perplexed. But we cannot keep them; we may lose them at any moment; and while it is great wisdom to listen to them, it would be great folly to put them in the place of God. Though Jethro was very decided in the counsels he gave, he knew equally when to stop. We may look at him as coming in here to teach us that what we can expect from the most competent and loving of human friends is but a trifle compared with the great total of our needs. We are allowed to have but small expectations from the brother sinner, the brother mortal, the brother who is liable to ignorance and error, just as much as we are ourselves. When Jethro went away, Moses would feel himself all the more shut up to Jehovah. When the earthly is dumb, misleading, estranged, or dead, then the heavenly will speak in clear and loving accents to all who have ears to hear.
III. Jethro departs into his own land, for HE HAD DOUBTLESS PRESSING CLAIMS UPON HIM THERE. He was just the kind of man to make his presence, as long as he lived, a kind of necessity to his neighbours, he had come on a matter of urgency, not for his own pleasure or ease; and we may imagine he went back as soon as he conveniently could to finish such affairs at home as had been left unfinished. Note, however, that in going back to his own land, and away from Moses, he did not therefore retire from the service of God and the reach of God's blessings. Jethro and Moses seemed to be going different ways; but they only differed in external circumstances. Moses does not seem even to have asked Jethro to stay with him; whereas we know that he pressed and urged Hobab. Perhaps he felt that he had no sufficient reason for asking Jethro, or that it would be of no use.—Y.