Keluaran 16:1--17:16
Konteks16:1 1 When 2 they journeyed from Elim, the entire company 3 of Israelites came to the Desert of Sin, which is between Elim and Sinai, on the fifteenth day of the second month after their exodus 4 from the land of Egypt. 16:2 The entire company 5 of Israelites murmured against Moses and Aaron in the desert. 16:3 The Israelites said to them, “If only we had died 6 by the hand of the Lord in the land of Egypt, when we sat by 7 the pots of meat, when we ate bread to the full, 8 for you have brought us out into this desert to kill 9 this whole assembly with hunger!”
16:4 Then the Lord said to Moses, “I am going to rain 10 bread from heaven for you, and the people will go out 11 and gather the amount for each day, so that I may test them. 12 Will they will walk in my law 13 or not? 16:5 On the sixth day 14 they will prepare what they bring in, and it will be twice as much as they gather every other day.” 15
16:6 Moses and Aaron said to all the Israelites, “In the evening 16 you will know that the Lord has brought you out of the land of Egypt, 16:7 and in the morning you will see 17 the glory of the Lord, because he has heard 18 your murmurings against the Lord. As for us, what are we, 19 that you should murmur against us?”
16:8 Moses said, “You will know this 20 when the Lord gives you 21 meat to eat in the evening and bread in the morning to satisfy you, because the Lord has heard your murmurings that you are murmuring against him. As for us, what are we? 22 Your murmurings are not against us, 23 but against the Lord.”
16:9 Then Moses said to Aaron, “Tell the whole community 24 of the Israelites, ‘Come 25 before the Lord, because he has heard your murmurings.’”
16:10 As Aaron spoke 26 to the whole community of the Israelites and they looked toward the desert, there the glory of the Lord 27 appeared 28 in the cloud, 16:11 and the Lord spoke to Moses: 16:12 “I have heard the murmurings of the Israelites. Tell them, ‘During the evening 29 you will eat meat, 30 and in the morning you will be satisfied 31 with bread, so that you may know 32 that I am the Lord your God.’” 33
16:13 In the evening the quail 34 came up and covered the camp, and in the morning a layer of dew was all around the camp. 16:14 When 35 the layer of dew had evaporated, 36 there on the surface of the desert was a thin flaky substance, 37 thin like frost on the earth. 16:15 When 38 the Israelites saw it, they said to one another, 39 “What is it?” because they did not know what it was. 40 Moses said to them, “It is the bread 41 that the Lord has given you for food. 42
16:16 “This is what 43 the Lord has commanded: 44 ‘Each person is to gather 45 from it what he can eat, an omer 46 per person 47 according to the number 48 of your people; 49 each one will pick it up 50 for whoever lives 51 in his tent.’” 16:17 The Israelites did so, and they gathered – some more, some less. 16:18 When 52 they measured with an omer, the one who gathered much had nothing left over, and the one who gathered little lacked nothing; each one had gathered what he could eat.
16:19 Moses said to them, “No one 53 is to keep any of it 54 until morning.” 16:20 But they did not listen to Moses; some 55 kept part of it until morning, and it was full 56 of worms and began to stink, and Moses was angry with them. 16:21 So they gathered it each morning, 57 each person according to what he could eat, and when the sun got hot, it would melt. 58 16:22 And 59 on the sixth day they gathered twice as much food, two omers 60 per person; 61 and all the leaders 62 of the community 63 came and told 64 Moses. 16:23 He said to them, “This is what the Lord has said: ‘Tomorrow is a time of cessation from work, 65 a holy Sabbath 66 to the Lord. Whatever you want to 67 bake, bake today; 68 whatever you want to boil, boil today; whatever is left put aside for yourselves to be kept until morning.’”
16:24 So they put it aside until the morning, just as Moses had commanded, and it did not stink, nor were there any worms in it. 16:25 Moses said, “Eat it today, for today is a Sabbath to the Lord; today you will not find it in the area. 69 16:26 Six days you will gather it, but on the seventh day, the Sabbath, there will not be any.”
16:27 On the seventh day some of the people went out to gather it, but they found nothing. 16:28 So the Lord said to Moses, “How long do you refuse 70 to obey my commandments and my instructions? 16:29 See, because the Lord has given you the Sabbath, that is why 71 he is giving you food for two days on the sixth day. Each of you stay where you are; 72 let no one 73 go out of his place on the seventh day.” 16:30 So the people rested on the seventh day.
16:31 The house of Israel 74 called its name “manna.” 75 It was like coriander seed and was white, and it tasted 76 like wafers with honey.
16:32 Moses said, “This is what 77 the Lord has commanded: ‘Fill an omer with it to be kept 78 for generations to come, 79 so that they may see 80 the food I fed you in the desert when I brought you out from the land of Egypt.’” 16:33 Moses said to Aaron, “Take a jar and put in it an omer full of manna, and place it before the Lord to be kept for generations to come.” 16:34 Just as the Lord commanded Moses, so Aaron placed it before the Testimony 81 for safekeeping. 82
16:35 Now the Israelites ate manna forty years, until they came to a land that was inhabited; they ate manna until they came to the border of the land of Canaan. 16:36 (Now an omer is one tenth of an ephah.) 83
17:1 84 The whole community 85 of the Israelites traveled on their journey 86 from the Desert of Sin according to the Lord’s instruction, and they pitched camp in Rephidim. 87 Now 88 there was no water for the people to drink. 89 17:2 So the people contended 90 with Moses, and they said, “Give us water to drink!” 91 Moses said to them, “Why do you contend 92 with me? Why do you test 93 the Lord?” 17:3 But the people were very thirsty 94 there for water, and they murmured against Moses and said, “Why in the world 95 did you bring us up out of Egypt – to kill us and our children and our cattle with thirst?” 96
17:4 Then Moses cried out to the Lord, “What will I do with 97 this people? – a little more 98 and they will stone me!” 99 17:5 The Lord said to Moses, “Go over before the people; 100 take with you some of the elders of Israel and take in your hand your staff with which you struck the Nile and go. 17:6 I will be standing 101 before you there on 102 the rock in Horeb, and you will strike 103 the rock, and water will come out of it so that the people may drink.” 104 And Moses did so in plain view 105 of the elders of Israel.
17:7 He called the name of the place Massah and Meribah, because of the contending of the Israelites and because of their testing the Lord, 106 saying, “Is the Lord among us or not?”
17:8 107 Amalek came 108 and attacked 109 Israel in Rephidim. 17:9 So Moses said to Joshua, “Choose some of our 110 men and go out, fight against Amalek. Tomorrow I will stand on top of the hill with the staff of God in my hand.”
17:10 So Joshua fought against Amalek just as Moses had instructed him; 111 and Moses and Aaron and Hur went up to the top of the hill. 17:11 Whenever Moses would raise his hands, 112 then Israel prevailed, but whenever he would rest 113 his hands, then Amalek prevailed. 17:12 When 114 the hands of Moses became heavy, 115 they took a stone and put it under him, and Aaron and Hur held up his hands, one on one side and one on the other, 116 and so his hands were steady 117 until the sun went down. 17:13 So Joshua destroyed 118 Amalek and his army 119 with the sword. 120
17:14 The Lord said to Moses, “Write this as a memorial in the 121 book, and rehearse 122 it in Joshua’s hearing; 123 for I will surely wipe out 124 the remembrance 125 of Amalek from under heaven. 17:15 Moses built an altar, and he called it “The Lord is my Banner,” 126 17:16 for he said, “For a hand was lifted up to the throne of the Lord 127 – that the Lord will have war with Amalek from generation to generation.” 128
Matius 20:17-34
Konteks20:17 As Jesus was going up to Jerusalem, 129 he took the twelve 130 aside privately and said to them on the way, 20:18 “Look, we are going up to Jerusalem, and the Son of Man will be handed over to the chief priests and the experts in the law. 131 They will condemn him to death, 20:19 and will turn him over to the Gentiles to be mocked and flogged severely 132 and crucified. 133 Yet 134 on the third day, he will be raised.”
20:20 Then the mother of the sons of Zebedee came to him with her sons, and kneeling down she asked him for a favor. 135 20:21 He said to her, “What do you want?” She replied, 136 “Permit 137 these two sons of mine to sit, one at your 138 right hand and one at your left, in your kingdom.” 20:22 Jesus 139 answered, “You don’t know what you are asking! 140 Are you able to drink the cup I am about to drink?” 141 They said to him, “We are able.” 142 20:23 He told them, “You will drink my cup, 143 but to sit at my right and at my left is not mine to give. Rather, it is for those for whom it has been prepared by my Father.”
20:24 Now 144 when the other ten 145 heard this, 146 they were angry with the two brothers. 20:25 But Jesus called them and said, “You know that the rulers of the Gentiles lord it over them, and those in high positions use their authority over them. 20:26 It must not be this way among you! Instead whoever wants to be great among you must be your servant, 20:27 and whoever wants to be first among you must be your slave 147 – 20:28 just as the Son of Man did not come to be served but to serve, and to give his life as a ransom 148 for many.”
20:29 As they were leaving Jericho, 149 a large crowd followed them. 20:30 Two 150 blind men were sitting by the road. When they heard that Jesus was passing by, they shouted, 151 “Have mercy 152 on us, Lord, Son of David!” 153 20:31 The 154 crowd scolded 155 them to get them to be quiet. But they shouted even more loudly, “Lord, have mercy on us, 156 Son of David!” 20:32 Jesus stopped, called them, and said, “What do you want me to do for you?” 20:33 They said to him, “Lord, let our eyes be opened.” 20:34 Moved with compassion, Jesus touched their eyes. Immediately they received their sight and followed him.
[16:1] 1 sn Exod 16 plays an important part in the development of the book’s theme. It is part of the wider section that is the prologue leading up to the covenant at Sinai, a part of which was the obligation of obedience and loyalty (P. W. Ferris, Jr., “The Manna Narrative of Exodus 16:1-10,” JETS 18 [1975]: 191-99). The record of the wanderings in the wilderness is selective and not exhaustive. It may have been arranged somewhat topically for instructional reasons. U. Cassuto describes this section of the book as a didactic anthology arranged according to association of both context and language (Exodus, 187). Its themes are: lack of vital necessities, murmuring, proving, and providing. All the wilderness stories reiterate the same motifs. So, later, when Israel arrived in Canaan, they would look back and be reminded that it was Yahweh who brought them all the way, in spite of their rebellions. Because he is their Savior and their Provider, he will demand loyalty from them. In the Manna Narrative there is murmuring over the lack of bread (1-3), the disputation with Moses (4-8), the appearance of the glory and the promise of bread (9-12), the provision (13-22), the instructions for the Sabbath (23-30), and the memorial manna (31-36).
[16:1] 2 tn The sentence begins with a preterite and vav (ו) consecutive, which can be subordinated to the next clause with the preterite and vav consecutive. Here it has been treated as a temporal clause.
[16:1] 3 tn The word is often rendered “congregation” (so KJV, ASV, NASB, NRSV), but the modern perception of a congregation is not exactly what is in mind in the desert. Another possible rendering is “community” (NAB, NIV, NCV, TEV) or “assembly.” The Hebrew word is used of both good and bad groups (Judg 14:8; Ps 1:5; 106:17-18).
[16:1] 4 tn The form in the text is לְצֵאתָם (lÿtse’tam, “after their going out”). It clearly refers to their deliverance from Egypt, and so it may be vividly translated.
[16:2] 5 tn Or “community” or “assembly.”
[16:3] 6 tn The text reads: מִי־יִתֵּן מוּתֵנוּ (mi-yitten mutenu, “who will give our dying”) meaning “If only we had died.” מוּתֵנוּ is the Qal infinitive construct with the suffix. This is one way that Hebrew expresses the optative with an infinitive construct. See R. J. Williams, Hebrew Syntax, 91-92, §547.
[16:3] 7 tn The form is a Qal infinitive construct used in a temporal clause, and the verb “when we ate” has the same structure.
[16:3] 8 sn That the complaint leading up to the manna is unjustified can be seen from the record itself. They left Egypt with flocks and herds and very much cattle, and about 45 days later they are complaining that they are without food. Moses reminded them later that they lacked nothing (Deut 3:7; for the whole sermon on this passage, see 8:1-20). Moreover, the complaint is absurd because the food of work gangs was far more meager than they recall. The complaint was really against Moses. They crave the eating of meat and of bread and so God will meet that need; he will send bread from heaven and quail as well.
[16:3] 9 tn לְהָמִית (lÿhamit) is the Hiphil infinitive construct showing purpose. The people do not trust the intentions or the plan of their leaders and charge Moses with bringing everyone out to kill them.
[16:4] 10 tn The particle הִנְנִי (hinni) before the active participle indicates the imminent future action: “I am about to rain.”
[16:4] 11 tn This verb and the next are the Qal perfect tenses with vav (ו) consecutives; they follow the sequence of the participle, and so are future in orientation. The force here is instruction – “they will go out” or “they are to go out.”
[16:4] 12 tn The verb in the purpose/result clause is the Piel imperfect of נָסָה (nasah), אֲנַסֶּנוּ (’anassenu) – “in order that I may prove them [him].” The giving of the manna will be a test of their obedience to the detailed instructions of God as well as being a test of their faith in him (if they believe him they will not gather too much). In chap. 17 the people will test God, showing that they do not trust him.
[16:4] 13 sn The word “law” here properly means “direction” at this point (S. R. Driver, Exodus, 146), but their obedience here would indicate also whether or not they would be willing to obey when the Law was given at Sinai.
[16:5] 14 tn Heb “and it will be on the sixth day.”
[16:5] 15 sn There is a question here concerning the legislation – the people were not told why to gather twice as much on the sixth day. In other words, this instruction seems to presume that they knew about the Sabbath law. That law will be included in this chapter in a number of ways, suggesting to some scholars that this chapter is out of chronological order, placed here for a purpose. Some argue that the manna episode comes after the revelation at Sinai. But it is not necessary to take such a view. God had established the Sabbath in the creation, and if Moses has been expounding the Genesis traditions in his teachings then they would have known about that.
[16:6] 16 tn The text simply has “evening, and you will know.” Gesenius notes that the perfect tense with the vav consecutive occurs as the apodosis to temporal clauses or their equivalents. Here the first word implies the idea “[when it becomes] evening” or simply “[in the] evening” (GKC 337-38 §112.oo).
[16:6] sn Moses is very careful to make sure that they know it is Yahweh who has brought them out, and it will be Yahweh who will feed them. They are going to be convinced of this now.
[16:7] 17 tn Heb “morning, and you will see.”
[16:7] 18 tn The form is a Qal infinitive construct with a preposition and a suffix. It forms an adverbial clause, usually of time, but here a causal clause.
[16:7] 19 tn The words “as for us” attempt to convey the force of the Hebrew word order, which puts emphasis on the pronoun: “and we – what?” The implied answer to the question is that Moses and Aaron are nothing, merely the messengers. The next verse repeats the question to further press the seriousness of what the Israelites are doing.
[16:8] 20 tn “You will know this” has been added to make the line smooth. Because of the abruptness of the lines in the verse, and the repetition with v. 7, B. S. Childs (Exodus [OTL], 273) thinks that v. 8 is merely a repetition by scribal error – even though the versions render it as the MT has it. But B. Jacob (Exodus, 447) suggests that the contrast with vv. 6 and 7 is important for another reason – there Moses and Aaron speak, and it is smooth and effective, but here only Moses speaks, and it is labored and clumsy. “We should realize that Moses had properly claimed to be no public speaker.”
[16:8] 21 tn Here again is an infinitive construct with the preposition forming a temporal clause.
[16:8] 22 tn The words “as for us” attempt to convey the force of the Hebrew word order, which puts emphasis on the pronoun: “and we – what?” The implied answer to the question is that Moses and Aaron are nothing, merely the messengers.
[16:8] 23 tn The word order is “not against us [are] your murmurings.”
[16:9] 24 tn Or “congregation” (KJV, ASV, NASB, NRSV); the same word occurs in v. 10.
[16:9] 25 tn The verb means “approach, draw near.” It is used in the Torah of drawing near for religious purposes. It is possible that some sacrifice was involved here, but no mention is made of that.
[16:10] 26 tn Heb “and it was as Aaron spoke.” The construction uses the temporal indicator and then the Piel infinitive construct followed by the subjective genitive “Aaron.”
[16:10] 27 sn S. R. Driver says, “A brilliant glow of fire…symbolizing Jehovah’s presence, gleamed through the cloud, resting…on the Tent of Meeting. The cloud shrouds the full brilliancy of the glory, which human eye could not behold” (Exodus, 147-48; see also Ezek 1:28; 3:12, 23; 8:4; 9:3, et al.). A Hebrew word often translated “behold” or “lo” introduces the surprising sight.
[16:10] 28 tn The verb is the Niphal perfect of the verb “to see” – “it was seen.” But the standard way of translating this form is from the perspective of Yahweh as subject – “he appeared.”
[16:12] 29 tn Heb “during the evenings”; see Exod 12:6.
[16:12] 30 sn One of the major interpretive difficulties is the comparison between Exod 16 and Num 11. In Numbers we find that the giving of the manna was about 24 months after the Exod 16 time (assuming there was a distinct time for this chapter), that it was after the erection of the tabernacle, that Taberah (the Burning) preceded it (not in Exod 16), that the people were tired of the manna (not that there was no bread to eat) and so God would send the quail, and that there was a severe tragedy over it. In Exod 16 both the manna and the quail are given on the same day, with no mention of quail on the following days. Contemporary scholarship generally assigns the accounts to two different sources because complete reconciliation seems impossible. Even if we argue that Exodus has a thematic arrangement and “telescopes” some things to make a point, there will still be difficulties in harmonization. Two considerations must be kept in mind: 1) First, they could be separate events entirely. If this is true, then they should be treated separately as valid accounts of things that appeared or occurred during the period of the wanderings. Similar things need not be the same thing. 2) Secondly, strict chronological order is not always maintained in the Bible narratives, especially if it is a didactic section. Perhaps Exod 16 describes the initiation of the giving of manna as God’s provision of bread, and therefore placed in the prologue of the covenant, and Num 11 is an account of a mood which developed over a period of time in response to the manna. Num 11 would then be looking back from a different perspective.
[16:12] 31 tn The verb means “to be sated, satisfied”; in this context it indicates that they would have sufficient bread to eat – they would be full.
[16:12] 32 tn The form is a Qal perfect with the vav (ו) consecutive; it is in sequence with the imperfect tenses before it, and so this is equal to an imperfect nuance. But, from the meanings of the words, it is clear that this will be the outcome of their eating the food, a divinely intended outcome.
[16:12] 33 sn This verse supports the view taken in chap. 6 concerning the verb “to know.” Surely the Israelites by now knew that Yahweh was their God. Yes, they did. But they had not experienced what that meant; they had not received the fulfillment of the promises.
[16:13] 34 sn These are migratory birds, said to come up in the spring from Arabia flying north and west, and in the fall returning. They fly with the wind, and so generally alight in the evening, covering the ground. If this is part of the explanation, the divine provision would have had to alter their flight paths to bring them to the Israelites, and bring them in vast numbers.
[16:14] 35 tn Heb “and [the dew…] went up.”
[16:14] 36 tn The preterite with vav (ו) consecutive is here subordinated as a temporal clause to the main clause; since that clause calls special attention to what was there after the dew evaporated.
[16:14] 37 sn Translations usually refer to the manna as “bread.” In fact it appears to be more like grain, because it could be ground in hand-mills and made into cakes. The word involved says it is thin, flakelike (if an Arabic etymological connection is correct). What is known about it from the Bible in Exodus is that it was a very small flakelike substance, it would melt when the sun got hot, if left over it bred worms and became foul, it could be ground, baked, and boiled, it was abundant enough for the Israelites to gather an omer a day per person, and they gathered it day by day throughout the wilderness sojourn. Num 11 says it was like coriander seed with the appearance of bdellium, it tasted like fresh oil, and it fell with the dew. Deut 8:3 says it was unknown to Israel or her ancestors; Psalm 78:24 parallels it with grain. Some scholars compare ancient references to honeydew that came from the heavens. F. S. Bodenheimer (“The Manna of Sinai,” BA 10 [1947]: 2) says that it was a sudden surprise for the nomadic Israelites because it provided what they desired – sweetness. He says that it was a product that came from two insects, making the manna a honeydew excretion from plant lice and scale insects. The excretion hardens and drops to the ground as a sticky solid. He notes that some cicadas are called man in Arabic. This view accounts for some of the things in these passages: the right place, the right time, the right description, and a similar taste. But there are major difficulties: Exodus requires a far greater amount, it could breed worms, it could melt away, it could be baked into bread, it could decay and stink. The suggestion is in no way convincing. Bodenheimer argues that “worms” could mean “ants” that carried them away, but that is contrived – the text could have said ants. The fact that the Bible calls it “bread” creates no problem. לֶחֶם (lekhem) is used in a wide range of meanings from bread to all kinds of food including goats (Judg 13:15-16) and honey (1 Sam 14:24-28). Scripture does not say that manna was the only thing that they ate for the duration. But they did eat it throughout the forty years. It simply must refer to some supernatural provision for them in their diet. Modern suggestions may invite comparison and analysis, but they do not satisfy or explain the text.
[16:15] 38 tn The preterite with vav consecutive is here subordinated to the next verb as a temporal clause. The main point of the verse is what they said.
[16:15] 39 tn Heb “a man to his brother.”
[16:15] 40 tn The text has: מָן הוּא כִּי לאֹ יָדְעוּ מַה־הוּא (man hu’ ki lo’ yadÿ’u mah hu’). From this statement the name “manna” was given to the substance. מָן for “what” is not found in Hebrew, but appears in Syriac as a contraction of ma den, “what then?” In Aramaic and Arabic man is “what?” The word is used here apparently for the sake of etymology. B. S. Childs (Exodus [OTL], 274) follows the approach that any connections to words that actually meant “what?” are unnecessary, for it is a play on the name (whatever it may have been) and therefore related only by sound to the term being explained. This, however, presumes that a substance was known prior to this account – a point that Deuteronomy does not seem to allow. S. R. Driver says that it is not known how early the contraction came into use, but that this verse seems to reflect it (Exodus, 149). Probably one must simply accept that in the early Israelite period man meant “what?” There seems to be sufficient evidence to support this. See EA 286,5; UT 435; DNWSI 1:157.
[16:15] 41 sn B. Jacob (Exodus, 454-55) suggests that Moses was saying to them, “It is not manna. It is the food Yahweh has given you.” He comes to this conclusion based on the strange popular etymology from the interrogative word, noting that people do not call things “what?”
[16:15] 42 sn For other views see G. Vermès, “‘He Is the Bread’ Targum Neofiti Ex. 16:15,” SJLA 8 (1975): 139-46; and G. J. Cowling, “Targum Neofiti Ex. 16:15,” AJBA (1974-75): 93-105.
[16:16] 43 tn Heb “the thing that.”
[16:16] 44 tn The perfect tense could be taken as a definite past with Moses now reporting it. In this case a very recent past. But in declaring the word from Yahweh it could be instantaneous, and receive a present tense translation – “here and now he commands you.”
[16:16] 45 tn The form is the plural imperative: “Gather [you] each man according to his eating.”
[16:16] 46 sn The omer is an amount mentioned only in this chapter, and its size is unknown, except by comparison with the ephah (v. 36). A number of recent English versions approximate the omer as “two quarts” (cf. NCV, CEV, NLT); TEV “two litres.”
[16:16] 47 tn Heb “for a head.”
[16:16] 48 tn The word “number” is an accusative that defines more precisely how much was to be gathered (see GKC 374 §118.h).
[16:16] 49 tn Traditionally “souls.”
[16:16] 50 tn Heb “will take.”
[16:16] 51 tn “lives” has been supplied.
[16:18] 52 tn The preterite with the vav (ו) consecutive is subordinated here as a temporal clause.
[16:19] 53 tn The address now is for “man” (אִישׁ, ’ish), “each one”; here the instruction seems to be focused on the individual heads of the households.
[16:19] 54 tn Or “some of it,” “from it.”
[16:20] 55 tn Heb “men”; this usage is designed to mean “some” (see GKC 447 §138.h, n. 1).
[16:20] 56 tn The verb וַיָּרֻם (vayyarum) is equivalent to a passive – “it was changed” – to which “worms” is added as an accusative of result (GKC 388-89 §121.d, n. 2).
[16:21] 57 tn Heb “morning by morning.” This is an example of the repetition of words to express the distributive sense; here the meaning is “every morning” (see GKC 388 §121.c).
[16:21] 58 tn The perfect tenses here with vav (ו) consecutives have the frequentative sense; they function in a protasis-apodosis relationship (GKC 494 §159.g).
[16:22] 59 tn Heb “and it happened/was.”
[16:22] 60 tn This construction is an exception to the normal rule for the numbers 2 through 10 taking the object numbered in the plural. Here it is “two of the omer” or “the double of the omer” (see GKC 433 §134.e).
[16:22] 62 tn The word suggests “the ones lifted up” above others, and therefore the rulers or the chiefs of the people.
[16:22] 63 tn Or “congregation” (KJV, ASV, NASB, NRSV).
[16:22] 64 sn The meaning here is probably that these leaders, the natural heads of the families in the clans, saw that people were gathering twice as much and they reported this to Moses, perhaps afraid it would stink again (U. Cassuto, Exodus, 197).
[16:23] 65 tn The noun שַׁבָּתוֹן (shabbaton) has the abstract ending on it: “resting, ceasing.” The root word means “cease” from something, more than “to rest.” The Law would make it clear that they were to cease from their normal occupations and do no common work.
[16:23] 66 tn The technical expression is now used: שַׁבַּת־קֹדֶשׁ (shabbat-qodesh, “a holy Sabbath”) meaning a “cessation of/for holiness” for Yahweh. The rest was to be characterized by holiness.
[16:23] 67 tn The two verbs in these objective noun clauses are desiderative imperfects – “bake whatever you want to bake.”
[16:23] 68 tn The word “today” is implied from the context.
[16:25] 69 tn Heb “in the field” (so KJV, ASV, NASB, NCV, NRSV); NAB, NIV, NLT “on the ground.”
[16:28] 70 tn The verb is plural, and so it is addressed to the nation and not to Moses. The perfect tense in this sentence is the characteristic perfect, denoting action characteristic, or typical, of the past and the present.
[16:29] 71 sn Noting the rabbinic teaching that the giving of the Sabbath was a sign of God’s love – it was accomplished through the double portion on the sixth day – B. Jacob says, “God made no request unless He provided the means for its execution” (Exodus, 461).
[16:29] 72 tn Heb “remain, a man where he is.”
[16:29] 73 tn Or “Let not anyone go” (see GKC 445 §138.d).
[16:31] 74 sn The name “house of Israel” is unusual in this context.
[16:31] 75 tn Hebrew מָן (man).
[16:31] 76 tn Heb “like seed of coriander, white, its taste was.”
[16:32] 77 tn Heb “This is the thing that.”
[16:32] 78 tn Heb “for keeping.”
[16:32] 79 tn Heb “according to your generations” (see Exod 12:14).
[16:32] 80 tn In this construction after the particle expressing purpose or result, the imperfect tense has the nuance of final imperfect, equal to a subjunctive in the classical languages.
[16:34] 81 sn The “Testimony” is a reference to the Ark of the Covenant; so the pot of manna would be placed before Yahweh in the tabernacle. W. C. Kaiser says that this later instruction came from a time after the tabernacle had been built (see Exod 25:10-22; W. C. Kaiser, Jr., “Exodus,” EBC 2:405). This is not a problem since the final part of this chapter had to have been included at the end of the forty years in the desert.
[16:36] 83 tn The words “omer” and “ephah” are transliterated Hebrew words. The omer is mentioned only in this passage. (It is different from a “homer” [cf. Ezek 45:11-14].) An ephah was a dry measure whose capacity is uncertain: “Quotations given for the ephah vary from ca. 45 to 20 liters” (C. Houtman, Exodus, 2:340-41).
[16:36] sn The point of this chapter, with all its instructions and reports included, is God’s miraculous provision of food for his people. This is a display of sovereign power that differs from the display of military power. Once again the story calls for faith, but here it is faith in Yahweh to provide for his people. The provision is also a test to see if they will obey the instructions of God. Deut 8 explains this. The point, then, is that God provides for the needs of his people that they may demonstrate their dependence on him by obeying him. The exposition of this passage must also correlate to John 6. God’s providing manna from heaven to meet the needs of his people takes on new significance in the application that Jesus makes of the subject to himself. There the requirement is the same – will they believe and obey? But at the end of the event John explains that they murmured about Jesus.
[17:1] 84 sn This is the famous story telling how the people rebelled against Yahweh when they thirsted, saying that Moses had brought them out into the wilderness to kill them by thirst, and how Moses with the staff brought water from the rock. As a result of this the name was called Massa and Meribah because of the testing and the striving. It was a challenge to Moses’ leadership as well as a test of Yahweh’s presence. The narrative in its present form serves an important point in the argument of the book. The story turns on the gracious provision of God who can give his people water when there is none available. The narrative is structured to show how the people strove. Thus, the story intertwines God’s free flowing grace with the sad memory of Israel’s sins. The passage can be divided into three parts: the situation and the complaint (1-3), the cry and the miracle (4-6), and the commemoration by naming (7).
[17:1] 85 tn Or “congregation” (KJV, ASV, NASB, NRSV).
[17:1] 86 tn The text says that they journeyed “according to their journeyings.” Since the verb form (and therefore the derived noun) essentially means to pull up the tent pegs and move along, this verse would be saying that they traveled by stages, or, from place to place.
[17:1] 87 sn The location is a bit of a problem. Exod 19:1-2 suggests that it is near Sinai, whereas it is normally located near Kadesh in the north. Without any details provided, M. Noth concludes that two versions came together (Exodus [OTL], 138). S. R. Driver says that the writer wrote not knowing that they were 24 miles apart (Exodus, 157). Critics have long been bothered by this passage because of the two names given at the same place. If two sources had been brought together, it is not possible now to identify them. But Noth insisted that if there were two names there were two different locations. The names Massah and Meribah occur alone in Scripture (Deut 9:22, and Num 20:1 for examples), but together in Ps 95 and in Deut 33:8. But none of these passages is a clarification of the difficulty. Most critics would argue that Massah was a secondary element that was introduced into this account, because Exod 17 focuses on Meribah. From that starting point they can diverge greatly on the interpretation, usually having something to do with a water test. But although Num 20 is parallel in several ways, there are major differences: 1) it takes place 40 years later than this, 2) the name Kadesh is joined to the name Meribah there, and 3) Moses is punished there. One must conclude that if an event could occur twice in similar ways (complaint about water would be a good candidate for such), then there is no reason a similar name could not be given.
[17:1] 88 tn The disjunctive vav introduces a parenthetical clause that is essential for this passage – there was no water.
[17:1] 89 tn Here the construction uses a genitive after the infinitive construct for the subject: “there was no water for the drinking of the people” (GKC 353-54 §115.c).
[17:2] 90 tn The verb וַיָּרֶב (vayyarev) is from the root רִיב (riv); it forms the basis of the name “Meribah.” The word means “strive, quarrel, be in contention” and even “litigation.” A translation “quarrel” does not appear to capture the magnitude of what is being done here. The people have a legal dispute – they are contending with Moses as if bringing a lawsuit.
[17:2] 91 tn The imperfect tense with the vav (ו) follows the imperative, and so it carries the nuance of the logical sequence, showing purpose or result. This may be expressed in English as “give us water so that we may drink,” but more simply with the English infinitive, “give us water to drink.”
[17:2] sn One wonders if the people thought that Moses and Aaron had water and were withholding it from the people, or whether Moses was able to get it on demand. The people should have come to Moses to ask him to pray to God for water, but their action led Moses to say that they had challenged God (B. Jacob, Exodus, 476).
[17:2] 92 tn In this case and in the next clause the imperfect tenses are to be taken as progressive imperfects – the action is in progress.
[17:2] 93 tn The verb נָסָה (nasah) means “to test, tempt, try, prove.” It can be used of people simply trying to do something that they are not sure of (such as David trying on Saul’s armor), or of God testing people to see if they will obey (as in testing Abraham, Gen 22:1), or of people challenging others (as in the Queen of Sheba coming to test Solomon), and of the people in the desert in rebellion putting God to the test. By doubting that God was truly in their midst, and demanding that he demonstrate his presence, they tested him to see if he would act. There are times when “proving” God is correct and required, but that is done by faith (as with Gideon); when it is done out of unbelief, then it is an act of disloyalty.
[17:3] 94 tn The verbs and the pronouns in this verse are in the singular because “the people” is singular in form.
[17:3] 95 tn The demonstrative pronoun is used as the enclitic form for special emphasis in the question; it literally says, “why is this you have brought us up?” (R. J. Williams, Hebrew Syntax, 24, §118).
[17:3] 96 sn Their words deny God the credit for bringing them out of Egypt, impugn the integrity of Moses and God by accusing them of bringing the people out here to die, and show a lack of faith in God’s ability to provide for them.
[17:4] 97 tn The preposition lamed (ל) is here specification, meaning “with respect to” (see R. J. Williams, Hebrew Syntax, 49, §273).
[17:4] 98 tn Or “they are almost ready to stone me.”
[17:4] 99 tn The perfect tense with the vav (ו) consecutive almost develops an independent force; this is true in sentences where it follows an expression of time, as here (see GKC 334 §112.x).
[17:5] 100 tn “Pass over before” indicates that Moses is the leader who goes first, and the people follow him. In other words, לִפְנֵי (lifney) indicates time and not place here (B. Jacob, Exodus, 477-78).
[17:6] 101 tn The construction uses הִנְנִי עֹמֵד (hinni ’omed) to express the futur instans or imminent future of the verb: “I am going to be standing.”
[17:6] sn The reader has many questions when studying this passage – why water from a rock, why Horeb, why strike the rock when later only speak to it, why recall the Nile miracles, etc. B. Jacob (Exodus, 479-80) says that all these are answered when it is recalled that they were putting God to the test. So water from the rock, the most impossible thing, cleared up the question of his power. Doing it at Horeb was significant because there Moses was called and told he would bring them to this place. Since they had doubted God was in their midst, he would not do this miracle in the camp, but would have Moses lead the elders out to Horeb. If people doubt God is in their midst, then he will choose not to be in their midst. And striking the rock recalled striking the Nile; there it brought death to Egypt, but here it brought life to Israel. There could be little further doubting that God was with them and able to provide for them.
[17:6] 102 tn Or “by” (NIV, NLT).
[17:6] 103 tn The form is a Hiphil perfect with the vav (ו) consecutive; it follows the future nuance of the participle and so is equivalent to an imperfect tense nuance of instruction.
[17:6] 104 tn These two verbs are also perfect tenses with vav (ו) consecutive: “and [water] will go out…and [the people] will drink.” But the second verb is clearly the intent or the result of the water gushing from the rock, and so it may be subordinated.
[17:6] sn The presence of Yahweh at this rock enabled Paul to develop a midrashic lesson, an analogical application: Christ was present with Israel to provide water for them in the wilderness. So this was a Christophany. But Paul takes it a step further to equate the rock with Christ, for just as it was struck to produce water, so Christ would be struck to produce rivers of living water. The provision of bread to eat and water to drink provided for Paul a ready analogy to the provisions of Christ in the gospel (1 Cor 10:4).
[17:6] 105 tn Heb “in the eyes of.”
[17:7] 106 sn The name Massah (מַסָּה, massah) means “Proving”; it is derived from the verb “test, prove, try.” And the name Meribah (מְרִיבָה, mÿrivah) means “Strife”; it is related to the verb “to strive, quarrel, contend.” The choice of these names for the place would serve to remind Israel for all time of this failure with God. God wanted this and all subsequent generations to know how unbelief challenges God. And yet, he gave them water. So in spite of their failure, he remained faithful to his promises. The incident became proverbial, for it is the warning in Ps 95:7-8, which is quoted in Heb 3:15: “Oh, that today you would listen as he speaks! Do not harden your hearts as in the rebellion, in the day of testing in the wilderness. There your fathers tested me and tried me, and they saw my works for forty years.” The lesson is clear enough: to persist in this kind of unbelief could only result in the loss of divine blessing. Or, to put it another way, if they refused to believe in the power of God, they would wander powerless in the wilderness. They had every reason to believe, but they did not. (Note that this does not mean they are unbelievers, only that they would not take God at his word.)
[17:8] 107 sn This short passage gives the first account of Israel’s holy wars. The war effort and Moses’ holding up his hands go side by side until the victory is won and commemorated. Many have used this as an example of intercessory prayer – but the passage makes no such mention. In Exodus so far the staff of God is the token of the power of God; when Moses used it, God demonstrated his power. To use the staff of God was to say that God did it; to fight without the staff was to face defeat. Using the staff of God was a way of submitting to and depending on the power of God in all areas of life. The first part of the story reports the attack and the preparation for the battle (8,9). The second part describes the battle and its outcome (10-13). The final section is the preservation of this event in the memory of Israel (14-16).
[17:8] 108 tn Heb “and Amalek came”; NIV, NCV, TEV, CEV “the Amalekites.”
[17:8] 109 tn Or “fought with.”
[17:9] 110 tn This could be rendered literally “choose men for us.” But the lamed (ל) preposition probably indicates possession, “our men,” and the fact that Joshua was to choose from Israel, as well as the fact that there is no article on “men,” indicates he was to select some to fight.
[17:10] 111 tn The line in Hebrew reads literally: And Joshua did as Moses had said to him, to fight with Amalek. The infinitive construct is epexegetical, explaining what Joshua did that was in compliance with Moses’ words.
[17:11] 112 tn The two verbs in the temporal clauses are by וְהָיָה כַּאֲשֶׁר (vÿhaya ka’asher, “as long as” or, “and it was that whenever”). This indicates that the two imperfect tenses should be given a frequentative translation, probably a customary imperfect.
[17:12] 114 tn Literally “now the hands of Moses,” the disjunctive vav (ו) introduces a circumstantial clause here – of time.
[17:12] 115 tn The term used here is the adjective כְּבֵדִים (kÿvedim). It means “heavy,” but in this context the idea is more that of being tired. This is the important word that was used in the plague stories: when the heart of Pharaoh was hard, then the Israelites did not gain their freedom or victory. Likewise here, when the staff was lowered because Moses’ hands were “heavy,” Israel started to lose.
[17:12] 116 tn Heb “from this, one, and from this, one.”
[17:12] 117 tn The word “steady” is אֱמוּנָה (’emuna) from the root אָמַן (’aman). The word usually means “faithfulness.” Here is a good illustration of the basic idea of the word – firm, steady, reliable, dependable. There may be a double entendre here; on the one hand it simply says that his hands were stayed so that Israel might win, but on the other hand it is portraying Moses as steady, firm, reliable, faithful. The point is that whatever God commissioned as the means or agency of power – to Moses a staff, to the Christians the Spirit – the people of God had to know that the victory came from God alone.
[17:13] 118 tn The verb means “disabled, weakened, prostrated.” It is used a couple of times in the Bible to describe how man dies and is powerless (see Job 14:10; Isa 14:12).
[17:13] 120 tn Heb “mouth of the sword.” It means as the sword devours – without quarter (S. R. Driver, Exodus, 159).
[17:14] 121 tn The presence of the article does not mean that he was to write this in a book that was existing now, but in one dedicated to this purpose (book, meaning scroll). See GKC 408 §126.s.
[17:14] 122 tn The Hebrew word is “place,” meaning that the events were to be impressed on Joshua.
[17:14] 123 tn Heb “in the ears of Joshua.” The account should be read to Joshua.
[17:14] 124 tn The construction uses the infinitive absolute and the imperfect tense to stress the resolution of Yahweh to destroy Amalek. The verb מָחָה (makhah) is often translated “blot out” – but that is not a very satisfactory image, since it would not remove completely what is the object. “Efface, erase, scrape off” (as in a palimpsest, a manuscript that is scraped clean so it can be reused) is a more accurate image.
[17:14] 125 sn This would seem to be defeated by the preceding statement that the events would be written in a book for a memorial. If this war is recorded, then the Amalekites would be remembered. But here God was going to wipe out the memory of them. But the idea of removing the memory of a people is an idiom for destroying them – they will have no posterity and no lasting heritage.
[17:15] 126 sn Heb “Yahweh-nissi” (so NAB), which means “Yahweh is my banner.” Note that when Israel murmured and failed God, the name commemorated the incident or the outcome of their failure. When they were blessed with success, the naming praised God. Here the holding up of the staff of God was preserved in the name for the altar – God gave them the victory.
[17:16] 127 tn The line here is very difficult. The Hebrew text has כִּי־יָד עַל־כֵּס יָהּ (ki yad ’al kes yah, “for a hand on the throne of Yah”). If the word is “throne” (and it is not usually spelled like this), then it would mean Moses’ hand was extended to the throne of God, showing either intercession or source of power. It could not be turned to mean that the hand of Yah was taking an oath to destroy the Amalekites. The LXX took the same letters, but apparently saw the last four (כסיה) as a verbal form; it reads “with a secret hand.” Most scholars have simply assumed that the text is wrong, and כֵּס should be emended to נֵס (nes) to fit the name, for this is the pattern of naming in the OT with popular etymologies – some motif of the name must be found in the sentiment. This would then read, “My hand on the banner of Yah.” It would be an expression signifying that the banner, the staff of God, should ever be ready at hand when the Israelites fight the Amalekites again.
[17:16] 128 sn The message of this short narrative, then, concerns the power of God to protect his people. The account includes the difficulty, the victory, and the commemoration. The victory must be retained in memory by the commemoration. So the expositional idea could focus on that: The people of God must recognize (both for engaging in warfare and for praise afterward) that victory comes only with the power of God. In the NT the issue is even more urgent, because the warfare is spiritual – believers do not wrestle against flesh and blood. So only God’s power will bring victory.
[20:17] 129 map For location see Map5 B1; Map6 F3; Map7 E2; Map8 F2; Map10 B3; JP1 F4; JP2 F4; JP3 F4; JP4 F4.
[20:17] 130 tc ‡ A number of significant witnesses (e.g., B C W 085 33 lat) have μαθητάς (maqhtas, “disciples”) after δώδεκα (dwdeka, “twelve”), perhaps by way of clarification, while other important witnesses lack the word (e.g., א D L Θ Ë1,13). The longer reading looks to be a scribal clarification, and hence is considered to be secondary. NA27 puts the word in brackets to show doubts about its authenticity.
[20:18] 131 tn Or “and the scribes.” See the note on the phrase “experts in the law” in 2:4.
[20:19] 132 tn Traditionally, “scourged” (the term means to beat severely with a whip, L&N 19.9). BDAG 620 s.v. μαστιγόω 1.a states, “The ‘verberatio’ is denoted in the passion predictions and explicitly as action by non-Israelites Mt 20:19; Mk 10:34; Lk 18:33”; the verberatio was the beating given to those condemned to death in the Roman judicial system. Here the term μαστιγόω (mastigow) has been translated “flog…severely” to distinguish it from the term φραγελλόω (fragellow) used in Matt 27:26; Mark 15:15.
[20:19] 133 sn Crucifixion was the cruelest form of punishment practiced by the Romans. Roman citizens could not normally undergo it. It was reserved for the worst crimes, like treason and evasion of due process in a capital case. The Roman historian Cicero called it “a cruel and disgusting penalty” (Against Verres 2.5.63-66 §§163-70); Josephus (J. W. 7.6.4 [7.203]) called it the worst of deaths.
[20:19] 134 tn Here καί (kai) has been translated as “yet” to indicate the contrast present in this context.
[20:20] 135 tn Grk “asked something from him.”
[20:21] 136 tn Grk “said to him.”
[20:21] 137 tn Grk “Say that.”
[20:21] 138 tc A majority of witnesses read σου (sou, “your”) here, perhaps for clarification. At the same time, it is possible that the pronoun dropped out through haplography or was excised because of perceived redundancy (there are two other such pronouns in the verse) by א B. Either way, the translation adds it due to the requirements of English style. NA27 includes σου here.
[20:22] 139 tn Grk “And answering, Jesus said.” This is somewhat redundant in English and has been simplified in the translation. Here δέ (de) has not been translated.
[20:22] 140 tn The verbs in Greek are plural here, indicating that Jesus is not answering the mother but has turned his attention directly to the two disciples.
[20:22] 141 tc Most
[20:22] 142 sn No more naïve words have ever been spoken as those found here coming from James and John, “We are able.” They said it with such confidence and ease, yet they had little clue as to what they were affirming. In the next sentence Jesus confirms that they will indeed suffer for his name.
[20:23] 143 tc See the tc note on “about to drink” in v. 22.
[20:24] 144 tn Here καί (kai) has been translated as “now” to indicate the transition to a new topic.
[20:24] 146 tn The word “this” is not in the Greek text, but is supplied. Direct objects were often omitted in Greek when clear from the context.
[20:27] 147 tn See the note on the word “slave” in 8:9.
[20:28] 148 sn The Greek word for ransom (λύτρον, lutron) is found here and in Mark 10:45 and refers to the payment of a price in order to purchase the freedom of a slave. The idea of Jesus as the “ransom” is that he paid the price with his own life by standing in our place as a substitute, enduring the judgment that we deserved for sin.
[20:29] 149 map For location see Map5 B2; Map6 E1; Map7 E1; Map8 E3; Map10 A2; Map11 A1.
[20:30] 150 tn Grk “And behold.” The Greek word ἰδού (idou) has not been translated because it has no exact English equivalent here, but adds interest and emphasis (BDAG 468 s.v. 1).
[20:30] 151 tn Grk “shouted, saying.” The participle λέγοντες (legontes) is redundant here in contemporary English and has not been translated.
[20:30] 152 sn Have mercy on us is a request for healing. It is not owed to the men. They simply ask for God’s kind grace.
[20:30] 153 sn There was a tradition in Judaism that the Son of David (Solomon) had great powers of healing (Josephus, Ant. 8.2.5 [8.42-49]).
[20:31] 154 tn Here δέ (de) has not been translated.
[20:31] 155 tn Or “rebuked.” The crowd’s view was that surely Jesus would not be bothered with someone as unimportant as a blind beggar.
[20:31] 156 tc ‡ The majority of
pada popup untuk memperkecil ukuran huruf, ikon 
pada popup untuk memperbesar ukuran huruf. [