The Pulpit Commentary — Exodus — Volume 1 — Section 113

(2 Cor. xii. 7-10). Paul was a man "rude in speech" (2 Cor. xi. 6), and came not with eloquence of words (1 Cor. ii. 1); but his defects of speech only made the Divine power which resided in bis utterances the more conspicuous (2 Cor. ii. 4, 6). II. A GnAcrous rnoMrSE. God would be with his mouth, a.nd teach him what to my (ver. 11). The Maker of speech, he might be trusted to aid its powers when these were needed in his service. So Christ promises his disciples to give them in their hour of need what they shall speak (Matt. x. 19). Lips touched by Divine grace possess a simple, natural eloquence of their own, far excelling the attempts of studied oratory. Then there is the other fact, that gifts of speech are often latent till grace comes t-0 evoke them. Moses' original awkwardness was no index to what, assisted by God's grace, he might ultimately have become, even as a speaker. His gift. would probably have grown ~ith the necessity. 'l'he greatest preachers of the Gospel with Paul at their head, have not been men naturally eloquent. If they became so'after- wards, it was grace that made them. Thus, we are told of Luther that at first he dared not enter the pulpit. "Luther, who subsequently preached with so much power,-who gave a new direction, and a force and elevation never before attained, to the whole system of German preaching,-who is still the unparalleled master of all who hope to effect more by the internal demonstrativeness of a discourse than by its external ornamentation,-this Luther wa.s·too humble, too modest, to take the place of a preacher. It was only at the solicitation ·of'Slauptitz that he fi.na.lly consented to preach-at first in the oratory of the convent, and afterwards in church" (Hagenba.ch). Knox was equally diffident about"the exercise of his gifts, and when an unexpected. appeal was made to him, at the age of forty-two-" the said John, abashed, burst forth in most abundant tears, and withdrew bi'mself to his chamber" (Knox's 'History'). All !:lay not be eloquent like these; but anyone possessed of earnest feeling and intense convictions, who is conttnt·to deliver a plain •message with directness and simplicity, will be surprised at what God can sometimes make even of rude and unskilled lips. III. A sr!>:FUL sIIBI:S-KilS'G FROM DUTY (ver. 13). The continued reluctance of Moses, after so gracious an assurance, w~.s not to be excused. 1t was a direct a.et of disobedience, and argued, besides a want of :lai.th, a certain measure of stubbornness. G.od was angry -with him, yet forbore with his infirmity. And.if God forbore with Moses, it is surely not fur us to blame him. who a.re so often in" the same condemna- tion." Let hlm who has ne,er shrunk from unwelcome duties, or who has never stumbled in believing that Divine grace will. under trying circumstances, be made sufficient for his needs, cast the first stone. Admire rather in this incident-I. The patience and forbearance of God in stooping to hie servant's weakness, and 2. The "exceeding greatness" of the power which accomplished such mighty results by so unwilling an instrumentality. Nothing proves more clearly that the work of Israel's delivera!lce was not of man, but of God, than this almost stubborn reluctance of Moses to have anything to do with it. IV. A SEC01'"D-BEST ARRANGEMENT (vers. 14-17). The appointment of Aaron as spokesman to his brother, while in one view of it an a.et of condescension, and a removal of Moses' difficulty, was in another aspect of it a punishment of his disobedience. It took from Moses the privilege of speaking for God in his own person, and committed the delivery of the message to more eloquent, perhaps, but also to less sanctified, lips. 1. Tl,e arrangement had its advantagf!li. (1) It supplied one's defect by another's gift. (2) It utilised a talent lying unemployed. (3) It gave Aaron a share in the honour of being God's messenger. (4) It formed a new link of sympathy between the brothers. But-2. It was not tlw best. (1) It prevented the development of the gift of speech in Moses himself. Had he relied on God's promise, he would doubtless have acquired a power of speech to which he was at first a stranger. (2) The message would lose in force by being delivered tLr,_,•Jgh an intermediary. This of necessity. How much of the power of speech lies in its being a direct emanation from the mind and heart of the speaker-something instinct with his own personality I As delivered by Aaron, the messages of God would lose much of their impressiveness. Fluency has its disadvan- tages. A !Illlld burdened with its message, and struggling with words to give it utter- ance, conveys a greater impression of force than ready delivery charged with a messaga that is not its own. (3) Moses would be haropered in his work by the constanc1 of Oll, IV, 11-17.) THE BOOK OF EXODUS.