The Pulpit Commentary — Exodus — Volume 1 — Section 81

<lcsert, this would not unfit him; since, in the first place, Egyptian manners and custom& were unch:i.nging; and secondly, life in the desert is at no time e. bad school-of manners. Arabian ,shepherds are not like European ones. As much politeness is often seen in the tent of a Bedouin as in the drawingroom of an empress. Moses probably thougM that his forty years1of seclusion rendered him less suited for thelatmosphere of n court, but he was probably mistaken. What he may have lost in polish he gained in sim- J>licity, directness, and general force of character. Moses, again, could speak with the Pharaoh almost as an equal, since as the adopted son of a princess he had been accounted a prince, and may eVE''l, before his flight, have met Menephthe.h in the royal palace on terms of social equality. On the education and "wisdom" of Moses we have already descanted, and it will scarcely be questioned that in these respects he was eminently fitted for the part assigned to him by Providence. His character, too, as chastened and ripened in Midie.n, made him exceptionally fit. Audacity, high aspirations, strong sympathies, a burning zeal, had shown themselves 'in the conduct that led to his exile. These had been disciplined and brought under control by the influences of desert life, which had made him calm, self-contained, patient, persevering, considerate, without quenching his zeal or taming his high spirit. And of his religious principle there is no question. If he angered God once by" speaking unadvise<ily" (Ps. cvi. 33; Num. xx. 10), this does but show the.t he was human, and therefore not perfect. Apart from this one occasion his conduct as leader of the people is,. as nearly as possible, blameless. And his piety is everywhere conspicuous. 3. No ONE BUT Mosm, POSSESSED THE l."ECESSARY QUALITIES. With the limited knowledge that we possess, the !!egative is incapable of positive proof. But, so far as our historical knowledge goes, there is no one who can be named as possessing any one of the necessary qualities in a higher degree than Moses, much less as uniting them all. No Hebrew but Moses had had. so far as we know, the advantages of education and position enjoyed by Moses. No Egyptian would have been trusted by the Hebrew nation and accepted as their leader. No one who was neither Egyptian nor Hebrew would have had any weight with either people. Thus Moses was the one and only possible deliverer, eirnctly fitted by Providence for the position which it was intended he should take : raised np,,saved, educated, trained by God to be his instrument in delivering his people, and so exactly fitted for the purpose. Vers. 11-12.-Moses' timidity wtwithstanding his fitness. It is not often that those are most confident of their powers who are fittest for God's work. Gr~t capacity is constantly accompanied by a humble estimate of itself. Jeremia~s reply when God called him was : " Ah! Lord God, I cannot speak, for I am a child" (Jer. i. 6). Newton seemed to himself a. child gathering shells upon the shores of the ocea.n of Truth. The exclama.tion of Moses, " Who am I that I should go," etc. has been echoed by thousands. If, however, God's call is clear, the voice of self- depreciation is not to be much listened to. He knows best whether we are fit to work out..his purposes, or no. Whether the call is to be an ordinary minister, or a missionary, or a bishop, or a. civil leader, the foremost in a. political movement, or a. general a.t the crisis of a war, or anything else, too much timidity·ought not to be shown. There is cowardice in shrinking from responsibility. If the call be, clearly from without, not courted by ourselves, not sought, not angled for, not assignable to any unworthy motive, then it is to be viewed as God's call; and the proper- answer is "Speak, Lcrd, for thy servant heareth." Unfit as we may-think ourselves, we may be sure that he will not leave us to ourselves-his grace will be sufficient for us-he will give us all the strength we need. Vers. 13-15.-God's revelation of himself under the name Jehovah, and the meaning of it. At first sight the name by which God shall be called may seem unimportant, as it is unimportant whether a man be called Tully or Cicero. But, originally, each ,name that is given to God is significant; a.nd according as one name or another is commonly used, o::ie idea or another of the Divine nature will be pr~valent. Hitherto God had been known mainly to the Semites as El, Eliun, Elohim, "Exalted, Lofty," or Shaddai, "Strong, ,Powerful." Another name known to them, but rarely used, was• JHVH, "Ex:istent." (The·vocalisation of the name has been lost, and is uncertain.) God was OIL Ill 16-18.) 'rHE BOOK OF EXODUS. 63