(2.) The act of self-denial — rjpvi^craTo Xeyeadai, ' He refused to be called.' He would not so much as be called so, a pert and open pro- fession : and this not by compulsion ; he was not cast out or dis- owned, but he refused. He might have held the honour of this adoption still, if it had so liked him ; but he would rather be called an Hebrew than Pharaoh's grandchild. This was the language of his heart, not so much of his words. We do not read he made a formal renunciation of his kindred ; but indeed he left the court, and joined himself to God's people.
(3.) Here is the greatness of the temptation ; what would he not be called ? — ' The son of Pharaoh's daughter.' Pharaoh bore full sway at that time in Egypt ; and the condition of the worst Egyptian was better than of the best Israelite ; yet even then he would not be called the son of Pharaoh's daughter ; he would not yield to an honour so high, so great. His daughter was Thermutis, Josephus tells us ; that Pharaoh had no other child, and she no other heir ; so probably he might have succeeded in the throne ; and that when he was gone to the Israelites, that Pharaoh should say, I intended to make this child partaker of tlie kingdom. If this be uncertain, there is enough in what the Holy Ghost sets down to make it a glorious instance of faith. Thus I have opened the words.
2. For the vindication of the act. You will say, Why would Moses do this ? Or what great business was there in this ? Joseph had faith as well as Moses, and he did not leave the court, but lived theretill he died. I answer, Their conditions were not alike, nor their occasions
VeR. 24.] SERMONS UPON HEBREWS XL 429
alike. God raised up Joseph to feed his people in Egypt, therefore his abode in the court was necessary under kings that favoured them ; but. Moses was called, not to feed his people in Egypt, but to lead them out of Egypt ; and the king of Egypt was now become their enemy, and kept them under bitter bondage. To remain in an idolatrous court of a pagan prince is one thing; but to remain in a persecuting court, where he must be accessary to their persecutions, is another thing. However, this is notable too, that Joseph, though he retained his honour to his death, yet he was willing that his family should take his lot with the people of God.
Ohj. But Moses' act might seem ingratitude or folly. It was not in- gratitude to his foster-mother ; it was not any silly discontent, or un- worthy incivility to her, who had compassion on him, to save him when he was ready to perish, and had manifested singular love to him, and special care of him in his education and advancement. But it was a free and noble act of his divine and sanctified soul, whereby he being illuminated from heaven, did by faith see the baseness, uncertainty, and danger of a great estate, of honour, wealth, and power ; and upon this account alone he was willing to part with them for better delights and greater good, and that he might be faithful to God and his people. All relations must give way to the conscience of our duty to God. God's right is the first, and our greatest relation is to him ; therefore, Luke xiv. 26, ' If any man come to me, and hate not his father and mother, and wife and children, and brethren and sisters, yea, and his own life also, he cannot be ray disciple.' God hath done more for us than any other hath done, therefore our obligation is the greater. Our Lord Christ when they taxed him for want of respect to his earthly parents, said, Luke ii. 19, ' Wist ye not, that I must be about my Father's business?' There is a higher authority, and a higher relation which must take place, and all other relations must give way to it.
But then would not this seem folly, for to do as Moses did, who had an opportunity of saving himself and his own stake, or of soliciting the good of the people of Israel at the court of Pharaoh ? I answer, An opportunity to do good is to be valued ; yet when it cannot be lawfully enjoyed, we must prefer God's command even before not only our safety, but those seeming opportunities we have of doing good to others, and expect a supply from his providence ; for God is not tied to means. Now this was the case here. Moses would continue no longer there without sin ; for it is said, ver. 25, ' Choosing rather to suffer affliction with the people of God, than to enjoy the pleasures of sin.' The contentments of that estate he now had was called 'the pleasures of sin ;' either because those delights began to be snares, to besot his mind, and so keep him from a sense of his brethren's afflic- tions ; or by the contagion of example he might be ready to be en- tangled in them ; or God would no longer dispense with his living without ordinances, or out of the communion of his people ; or from the impulse that was upon his heart, which was very great, he being now fit for business, and to tarry longer were to delay his obedience to the divine calling ; or else, as the court was then constituted, Moses could 00 longer live there without being used as an instrument to oppress his own countrymen. Whether this or that were the reason.