Moses
Water from the Rock and War with Amalek
The Lord provides for His testing people and gives victory over their enemies, teaching Israel that their survival and triumph depend on His presence, power, and banner.
Reading a chapter
What this page is: Each chapter page shows the big idea, the argument flow, key original-language terms, doctrine connections, and passage units, all in one place.
How to use it: Start with the Overview tab to get the chapter's main point. Then move to Passages to study individual units, or Language to trace key terms.
Going deeper: The Doctrines and Motifs tabs show how this chapter connects to the broader biblical story.
The Lord provides for His testing people and gives victory over their enemies, teaching Israel that their survival and triumph depend on His presence, power, and banner.
Exodus 17 argues that the redeemed people must learn dependence on the Lord in both need and conflict. Israel’s thirst exposes their recurring distrust and their temptation to interpret hardship as abandonment. The Lord responds by providing water from the rock, proving that He is among them despite their testing question. Then Amalek’s attack reveals that the wilderness journey includes hostile opposition.
Israel must fight, but victory is not grounded in military strength alone; it depends on the Lord, symbolized by Moses’ raised hands and the staff of God. The chapter ends by preserving the event in writing and altar, teaching that the Lord Himself is Israel’s banner and that He will judge those who oppose His redeemed people.
Israel, the covenant people redeemed from Egypt and trained in wilderness dependence, obedience, prayer, and trust in the Lord’s presence.
The wilderness journey after the manna provision in the Desert of Sin, as Israel travels by stages according to the Lord’s command and camps at Rephidim.
The Lord provides for His testing people and gives victory over their enemies, teaching Israel that their survival and triumph depend on His presence, power, and banner.
Moses
Israel, the covenant people redeemed from Egypt and trained in wilderness dependence, obedience, prayer, and trust in the Lord’s presence.
The wilderness journey after the manna provision in the Desert of Sin, as Israel travels by stages according to the Lord’s command and camps at Rephidim.
- Israel faces another survival crisis, this time lack of water. Their thirst turns into quarreling with Moses and testing the Lord. After the water crisis, Amalek attacks Israel, forcing the newly redeemed people into their first recorded military conflict.
Water scarcity in the wilderness created immediate danger for people and livestock. Staff-bearing leadership, elders as witnesses, and naming places after key events were common ways to preserve communal memory. Warfare with Amalek introduces a hostile wilderness people who attack Israel during their vulnerable journey.
Exodus 17 continues the wilderness formation of Israel before Sinai. The chapter shows that the Lord provides water from the rock, exposes Israel’s testing unbelief, and fights for His people against Amalek through Moses’ intercession and Joshua’s battle leadership.
Israel quarrels with Moses because there is no water, tests the Lord’s presence, receives water from the rock at Horeb, faces Amalek in battle, and learns that victory comes through the Lord’s upheld servant and the Lord’s banner over His people.
Theological exposition and fulfillment
Exodus 17 prepares gospel clarity by showing that the redeemed people need life-giving provision and defending grace after deliverance. Israel is thirsty, quarrelsome, and undeserving, yet the Lord gives water from the rock. Israel is attacked, weak, and vulnerable, yet the Lord gives victory under His banner. In Christ, the true Rock and greater Mediator, God gives living water to sinners and secures victory over every enemy.
Christ’s intercession does not grow weary, and His people stand under the banner of His completed triumph.
Israel’s thirst becomes a crisis of unbelief as the people quarrel with Moses and test the Lord’s presence.
Moses cries out, and the Lord provides water from the rock through Moses’ staff in the presence of the elders.
Massah and Meribah preserve the memory of Israel’s quarreling and testing question: whether the Lord was among them.
Israel faces hostile opposition in the wilderness after the water crisis.
Joshua fights below while Moses’ upheld hands with the staff above signify dependence on the Lord’s power.
The victory is written, Joshua is instructed, and Moses builds an altar naming the Lord as Israel’s banner.
- 1: Israel camps at Rephidim according to the Lord’s leading, but there is no water.
- 2-3: The people quarrel with Moses, grumble in thirst, and accuse Him of bringing them out to die.
- 4-6: The Lord instructs Moses to strike the rock at Horeb with the staff, and water comes out for the people.
- The place is named for Israel’s quarreling and testing question about the Lord’s presence.
- Amalek attacks Israel at Rephidim.
- 9-13: Joshua fights Amalek while Moses’ raised hands are supported by Aaron and Hur, and Israel prevails.
- 14-16: The Lord commands the event to be remembered, promises judgment against Amalek, and Moses builds an altar.
Theological Argument
Exodus 17 argues that the redeemed people must learn dependence on the Lord in both need and conflict. Israel’s thirst exposes their recurring distrust and their temptation to interpret hardship as abandonment. The Lord responds by providing water from the rock, proving that He is among them despite their testing question. Then Amalek’s attack reveals that the wilderness journey includes hostile opposition.
Israel must fight, but victory is not grounded in military strength alone; it depends on the Lord, symbolized by Moses’ raised hands and the staff of God. The chapter ends by preserving the event in writing and altar, teaching that the Lord Himself is Israel’s banner and that He will judge those who oppose His redeemed people.
From thirst, to quarreling, to water from the rock, to memorial warning, to Amalek’s attack, to victory through upheld intercession, to written remembrance and altar worship.
- 1.The LORD may lead His people to places where need exposes whether they trust His presence.
- 2.Israel’s grumbling against Moses is a form of testing the LORD by questioning whether He is among them.
- 3.The LORD graciously provides water from the rock despite Israel’s unbelieving complaint.
- 4.The redeemed people will face enemies after deliverance, not only scarcity.
- 5.Victory involves obedient human action and visible dependence on the LORD’s power.
- 6.The LORD remembers opposition to His people and will wage war against Amalek across generations.
Theological Focus
- Testing the Lord
- Water from the rock
- The Lord’s presence among His people
- Moses as mediator
- The staff of God
- Wilderness provision
- Amalek’s opposition
- Joshua’s first battle role
- Intercession and upheld weakness
- The Lord as banner
- Memorial writing
- Divine war against Amalek
- Need exposes the heart
- Grace despite grumbling
- The staff as sign of divine power
- The Lord stands before Moses
- Opposition after deliverance
- Dependent victory
- Shared burden in leadership
- Judgment on hostile opposition
- Divine Presence
- Providence
- Human Sinfulness
- Grace
- Mediation
- Spiritual Warfare
- Prayer and Dependence
- Divine Judgment
- Christological Fulfillment
Theological Themes
Israel’s lack of water reveals distrust, accusation, and a willingness to question the Lord’s presence.
Israel tests the Lord by demanding proof of His presence after He has already redeemed, guided, and fed them.
The Lord provides water from the rock, giving mercy to a people who have quarreled and tested Him.
The staff that struck the Nile now strikes the rock, showing the Lord’s authority in both judgment and provision.
The Lord’s presence at the rock answers Israel’s question about whether He is among them.
Amalek’s attack shows that redemption does not remove all conflict from the journey.
Joshua fights, but Israel prevails in connection with Moses’ raised hands and the staff of God.
Aaron and Hur support Moses’ weary hands, showing that God’s servants need help in the battle.
Moses’ altar declares that Israel gathers, fights, and survives under the Lord’s banner.
The Lord promises to blot out Amalek, showing His commitment to judge opposition against His redeemed people.
Covenant Significance
Exodus 17 shows the covenant people being formed through provision, testing, and conflict before Sinai. The Lord gives water at Horeb, the region where covenant instruction will soon be given. The question 'Is the Lord among us or not?' strikes at the heart of covenant relationship, and the Lord answers with presence and provision. The battle with Amalek shows that the Lord defends His people and records hostile opposition for judgment.
Israel must learn that covenant life includes dependence, obedience, remembrance, and warfare under the Lord’s banner.
- Covenant presence - The Lord stands before Moses at the rock, answering Israel’s question about His presence.
- Covenant provision - The Lord provides water for the people and their livestock in the wilderness.
- Covenant testing - Massah and Meribah memorialize Israel’s testing of the Lord.
- Covenant leadership - Moses mediates provision and intercession · Joshua begins to appear as a battle leader.
- Covenant protection - The Lord gives victory against Amalek, the attacker of His redeemed people.
- Covenant remembrance - The Lord commands the Amalek event to be written on a scroll and rehearsed to Joshua.
- Exodus 15:22-27 - Marah introduced water testing, grumbling, provision, and the Lord’s covenant instruction.
- Exodus 16:4 - The manna was given as a test of whether Israel would follow the Lord’s instruction.
- Numbers 20:1-13 - A later water-from-the-rock crisis occurs at Meribah, where Moses fails to honor the Lord as holy.
- Deuteronomy 25:17-19 - Moses later commands Israel to remember Amalek’s attack and blot out Amalek’s name.
- 1 Samuel 15:1-3 - The Lord’s judgment against Amalek is later taken up in Saul’s commission.
Canonical Connections
Israel’s testing at Massah becomes a repeated biblical warning against hardening the heart and testing the Lord.
The rock provision becomes a major wilderness image of the Lord’s sustaining care and is later interpreted typologically in Christ.
The warning from Massah is later used to command Israel not to test the Lord and is quoted by Jesus in the wilderness.
The attack of Amalek becomes a lasting memory and grounds later commands concerning Amalek.
The altar name anticipates the broader biblical theme of rallying under the Lord’s name and victory.
Moses’ role anticipates the biblical pattern that God’s people need mediatorial representation and intercession.
Cross References
Yahweh of Armies says, ‘I remember what Amalek did to Israel, how he set himself against him on the way, when he came up out of Egypt. Now go and strike Amalek, and utterly destroy all that they have, and don’t spare them; but kill both...
Remember what Amalek did to you by the way as you came out of Egypt; how he met you by the way, and struck the rearmost of you, all who were feeble behind you, when you were faint and weary; and he didn’t fear God. Therefore it shall be,...
You shall not tempt Yahweh your God, as you tempted him in Massah.
I will bless those who bless you, and I will curse him who treats you with contempt. All the families of the earth will be blessed through you.”
He said to Abram, “Know for sure that your offspring will live as foreigners in a land that is not theirs, and will serve them. They will afflict them four hundred years. I will also judge that nation, whom they will serve. Afterward they...
Timna was concubine to Eliphaz, Esau’s son; and she bore to Eliphaz Amalek. These are the descendants of Adah, Esau’s wife.
There was no water for the congregation; and they assembled themselves together against Moses and against Aaron. The people quarreled with Moses, and spoke, saying, “We wish that we had died when our brothers died before Yahweh! Why have...
He looked at Amalek, and took up his parable, and said, “Amalek was the first of the nations, But his latter end shall come to destruction.”
Exodus 17 prepares gospel clarity by showing that the redeemed people need life-giving provision and defending grace after deliverance. Israel is thirsty, quarrelsome, and undeserving, yet the Lord gives water from the rock. Israel is attacked, weak, and vulnerable, yet the Lord gives victory under His banner. In Christ, the true Rock and greater Mediator, God gives living water to sinners and secures victory over every enemy.
Christ’s intercession does not grow weary, and His people stand under the banner of His completed triumph.
- Grace comes to the undeserving - The Lord gives water to a people who have grumbled and tested Him.
- The rock gives life in the wilderness - Water from the rock points toward the deeper provision God gives in Christ.
- The presence question is answered by provision - Israel asks whether the Lord is among them, and the Lord stands before Moses at the rock.
- The redeemed still face enemies - Amalek attacks after the Exodus, showing that salvation begins a journey that includes conflict.
- Victory depends on the mediator - Israel prevails as Moses’ hands are raised · believers prevail because Christ intercedes perfectly.
- The Lord is the banner - God’s people do not fight under self-confidence but under the Lord’s victory.
- Do not make the rock merely a moral illustration of resourcefulness.
- Do not overlook Israel’s sin in testing the Lord.
- Do not present the water as earned by faithfulness · it is mercy to the undeserving.
- Do not separate Joshua’s battle from Moses’ dependence · the chapter requires both action and intercession.
- Do not turn Moses’ raised hands into superstition or technique.
- Do not jump to Christ without preserving the Exodus categories of thirst, testing, rock, water, mediator, enemy, intercession, and banner.
Primary Emphasis
Exodus 17 contributes to the biblical pattern fulfilled in Christ by presenting water from the rock and victory through the Lord’s appointed mediator. The New Testament identifies the spiritual rock accompanying Israel with Christ, showing that the wilderness provision points beyond itself to God’s sustaining grace in Him. Moses’ intercessory posture also anticipates the need for a mediator whose work secures victory for God’s people.
Christ is the true source of living water, the greater Mediator, and the victorious Lord under whose banner His people stand.
Chapter Contribution
Exodus 17 argues that the redeemed people must learn dependence on the Lord in both need and conflict. Israel’s thirst exposes their recurring distrust and their temptation to interpret hardship as abandonment. The Lord responds by providing water from the rock, proving that He is among them despite their testing question. Then Amalek’s attack reveals that the wilderness journey includes hostile opposition.
Israel must fight, but victory is not grounded in military strength alone; it depends on the Lord, symbolized by Moses’ raised hands and the staff of God. The chapter ends by preserving the event in writing and altar, teaching that the Lord Himself is Israel’s banner and that He will judge those who oppose His redeemed people.
Israel's victory requires more than individual heroism; the people are preserved through coordinated dependence under God's appointed order.
The central issue is not merely water but whether Israel will trust that the Lord is among them when need is severe.
The battle is not mere tribal conflict but opposition against the Lord's redeemed people within the unfolding covenant story.
The Lord declares that Amalek's assault will not be forgotten and that judgment will reach Amalek across generations.
The Lord preserves His redeemed people against hostile opposition in the wilderness.
The Lord leads Israel by stages and governs even the wilderness places where lack exposes dependence.
The Lord gives water despite Israel's quarrel, showing mercy without denying the seriousness of their testing.
Israel's grumbling shows how redeemed people can accuse God and His servant when hardship contradicts their expectations.
Moses stands between the Lord and the people, crying out under their hostility and obeying the Lord's provision-command.
Moses' raised hands with the staff of God portray dependence mediated before God while Joshua fights below.
The Lord gives victory through real human means: Joshua's leadership, chosen men, Moses' staff, and Aaron and Hur's support.
The naming of Massah and Meribah preserves the event as a theological warning for later generations.
Moses builds an altar and names it 'The Lord is my Banner,' turning victory into worship and theological confession.
The Lord stands before Moses at the rock, answering the question of whether He is among His people.
The Lord provides water from the rock in a waterless place.
Israel quarrels, grumbles, accuses Moses, and tests the Lord’s presence.
The Lord gives water to a people who do not deserve provision.
Moses cries out to the Lord, strikes the rock, and later stands with raised hands during battle.
Amalek’s attack introduces hostile opposition against the redeemed people in the wilderness.
Israel’s victory is tied to Moses’ upheld hands and the staff of God.
The Lord declares that He will blot out Amalek and be at war against Amalek from generation to generation.
The water-giving rock and mediatorial victory prepare categories fulfilled in Christ.
Theological exposition and fulfillment
- Exodus 17 prepares gospel clarity by showing that the redeemed people need life-giving provision and defending grace after deliverance. Israel is thirsty, quarrelsome, and undeserving, yet the Lord gives water from the rock. Israel is attacked, weak, and vulnerable, yet the Lord gives victory under His banner. In Christ, the true Rock and greater Mediator, God gives living water to sinners and secures victory over every enemy. Christ’s intercession does not grow weary, and His people stand under the banner of His completed triumph.
Sense Rephidim
Definition A wilderness camping place where Israel lacked water and Amalek attacked.
References Exodus 17:1, 8
Lexicon Rephidim
Why it matters Rephidim becomes the setting for both the water-from-the-rock crisis and the battle with Amalek.
Sense water
Definition Water for drinking and life.
References Exodus 17:1-6
Lexicon water
Why it matters The lack of water exposes Israel’s distrust, and the Lord’s provision answers the crisis.
Sense to quarrel, contend, dispute
Definition To contend or bring a dispute.
References Exodus 17:2, 7
Lexicon to quarrel, contend, dispute
Why it matters The people’s response to thirst is not humble prayer but contentious accusation.
Sense to test, try, prove
Definition To test or put to the proof.
References Exodus 17:2, 7
Lexicon to test, try, prove
Why it matters Israel tests the Lord by demanding proof of His presence and care.
Sense to grumble, murmur, complain
Definition To complain or murmur in discontent.
References Exodus 17:3
Lexicon to grumble, murmur, complain
Why it matters Israel’s grumbling continues the wilderness pattern of distrust after deliverance.
Sense to cry out, call for help
Definition To cry out in distress or appeal.
References Exodus 17:4
Lexicon to cry out, call for help
Why it matters Moses responds to the crisis by crying out to the Lord rather than merely arguing with the people.
Sense to stone
Definition To kill or punish by throwing stones.
References Exodus 17:4
Lexicon to stone
Why it matters The threat that the people may stone Moses shows the severity of their distrust and anger.
Sense elders
Definition Older leaders or representatives of the community.
References Exodus 17:5-6
Lexicon elders
Why it matters The elders witness the Lord’s provision from the rock.
Sense staff, rod
Definition A staff or rod used as an instrument of divine signs.
References Exodus 17:5, 9
Lexicon staff, rod
Why it matters The staff that struck the Nile is used to strike the rock, linking judgment and provision under the Lord’s power.
Sense Nile, river
Definition The Nile River, Egypt’s central waterway.
References Exodus 17:5
Lexicon Nile, river
Why it matters The staff’s earlier use against the Nile recalls the Lord’s power in judgment before its use in wilderness provision.
Sense rock
Definition A rock or rocky formation.
References Exodus 17:6
Lexicon rock
Why it matters The Lord provides water from the rock, a key wilderness provision later connected to Christ typologically.
Sense Horeb
Definition The mountain region associated with Sinai and the LORD’s revelation.
References Exodus 17:6
Lexicon Horeb
Why it matters The water provision occurs at the rock in Horeb, near the place where the Lord will give covenant instruction.
Sense testing
Definition A place name meaning testing.
References Exodus 17:7
Lexicon testing
Why it matters Massah preserves the memory that Israel tested the Lord in the water crisis.
Sense quarreling, strife
Definition A place name meaning quarreling or contention.
References Exodus 17:7
Lexicon quarreling, strife
Why it matters Meribah preserves the memory of Israel’s quarrel with Moses and the Lord.
Sense in our midst, among us
Definition The inner part or midst of a group.
References Exodus 17:7
Lexicon in our midst, among us
Why it matters Israel’s question concerns whether the Lord is present in their midst.
Sense Amalek
Definition A hostile people who attack Israel in the wilderness.
References Exodus 17:8-16
Lexicon Amalek
Why it matters Amalek becomes a lasting enemy remembered for attacking Israel after the Exodus.
Sense Joshua
Definition Joshua, Moses’ assistant and later Israel’s leader.
References Exodus 17:9-14
Lexicon Joshua
Why it matters Joshua appears as Israel’s battle leader against Amalek.
Cross-language bridge 2 links · View in lexicon
Sense to fight, wage war
Definition To fight or engage in battle.
References Exodus 17:9-10
Lexicon to fight, wage war
Why it matters Israel must fight Amalek while depending on the Lord’s power.
Sense staff of God
Definition The staff associated with God’s power and Moses’ commissioned signs.
References Exodus 17:9
Lexicon staff of God
Why it matters Moses holds the staff of God during the battle, marking Israel’s dependence on the Lord.
Sense to prevail, be strong
Definition To prevail or be stronger.
References Exodus 17:11
Lexicon to prevail, be strong
Why it matters The battle’s outcome shifts according to Moses’ raised or lowered hands, showing dependence on the Lord.
Sense steadiness, firmness, faithfulness
Definition Firmness, steadiness, reliability, or faithfulness.
References Exodus 17:12
Lexicon steadiness, firmness, faithfulness
Why it matters Moses’ hands remain steady with Aaron and Hur’s support until sunset.
Sense to weaken, subdue, overcome
Definition To weaken or subdue.
References Exodus 17:13
Lexicon to weaken, subdue, overcome
Why it matters Joshua subdues Amalek with the sword, showing the Lord’s victory through Israel’s obedience.
Sense to write
Definition To write or record.
References Exodus 17:14
Lexicon to write
Why it matters The Lord commands the event to be written as a memorial, emphasizing covenant remembrance.
Sense memorial, remembrance
Definition A memorial or reminder preserved for future remembrance.
References Exodus 17:14
Lexicon memorial, remembrance
Why it matters The Lord requires Amalek’s attack and judgment to be remembered.
Sense to wipe out, blot out
Definition To wipe away or erase.
References Exodus 17:14
Lexicon to wipe out, blot out
Why it matters The Lord promises to blot out Amalek’s name from under heaven.
Sense altar
Definition A place of sacrifice, worship, and memorial before God.
References Exodus 17:15
Lexicon altar
Why it matters Moses builds an altar to memorialize the Lord’s victory.
Sense banner, standard, signal
Definition A banner, standard, or rallying signal.
References Exodus 17:15
Lexicon banner, standard, signal
Why it matters The altar name 'The Lord is my Banner' declares that Israel’s victory and identity are under the Lord.
Sense throne
Definition A throne or seat of rule.
References Exodus 17:16
Lexicon throne
Why it matters The statement about a hand against the Lord’s throne emphasizes Amalek’s opposition as rebellion against the Lord’s rule.
Sense generation to generation
Definition Across successive generations.
References Exodus 17:16
Lexicon generation to generation
Why it matters The Lord’s war against Amalek is not treated as a temporary skirmish but as an ongoing divine judgment.
Lexicon data: MorphGNT Strong's Dictionary XML (CC0) · Open Scriptures Hebrew Bible (CC BY 4.0) · Open Scriptures Hebrew Lexicon (CC BY 4.0) · STEPBible Data (CC BY 4.0) · Full details
C.F. Keil & F. Delitzsch, Commentary on the Old Testament (1861–91) — public domain
The Lord is present with His redeemed people, providing life from the rock and victory under His banner even when they are thirsty, afraid, opposed, and weak.
God’s people must stop testing His presence by hardship, learn to cry out instead of quarrel, receive His undeserved provision, and fight spiritual battles through obedient action and dependent prayer.
Trust, prayer, endurance, humility, dependence, courage, shared burden-bearing, and remembrance of the Lord’s victories.
- Name the Rephidim place where You are tempted to question whether the Lord is with You.
- Turn one complaint into a direct prayer for provision and trust.
- Remember a past instance where the Lord provided from an unexpected source.
- Ask where God is calling You to fight faithfully rather than retreat fearfully.
- Support someone whose hands are weary in ministry, family, or spiritual battle.
- Build a memorial habit that records the Lord’s deliverance and provision.
- Confess any tendency to test God by demanding comfort as proof of His presence.
- The chapter warns against testing the Lord by demanding proof of His presence, against interpreting hardship as abandonment, against turning need into accusation, and against opposing the people whom the Lord has redeemed.
- Treating Israel’s thirst as proof that God led them wrongly. - The chapter opens by saying Israel traveled according to the Lord’s command. The lack of water becomes a test, not evidence of divine mistake.
- Excusing Israel’s quarrel as only natural frustration. - The text interprets their response as quarreling and testing the Lord.
- Reducing the rock miracle to survival logistics. - The miracle answers the theological question of whether the Lord is among His people.
- Overlooking the elders’ presence. - The elders witness the provision, giving communal testimony to the Lord’s answer.
- Making Moses’ raised hands magical. - The raised hands with the staff signify dependence on the Lord’s power, not magical technique.
- Ignoring Joshua’s active role. - The chapter holds together fighting below and intercession above. Human obedience and divine dependence belong together.
- Treating Amalek as a minor episode. - The Lord commands the event to be written and declares ongoing judgment against Amalek.
- Where am I assuming that hardship means the Lord is not with me?
- When I lack what I need, do I pray or quarrel?
- How has thirst, pressure, or fear distorted my view of God’s past faithfulness?
- Do I judge the Lord’s presence by comfort, or by His covenant promise?
- Where is the Lord calling me to obey actively while still depending completely on Him?
- Whose weary hands am I helping to hold up in the battle?
- Do I remember victories as the Lord’s banner over me, or as my own achievement?
- Teach that obedience may still lead into testing.
- Address grumbling as a presence issue.
- Model intercessory leadership.
- Preach grace to undeserving people.
- Hold together action and dependence.
- Build support around weary leaders.
- Preserve testimony after victory.
The Lord’s leading brings Israel to Rephidim, where need exposes the heart.
The people’s physical thirst becomes spiritual accusation against Moses and the Lord.
The people ask whether the Lord is among them, and the Lord stands at the rock and gives water.
The staff used to strike the Nile now strikes the rock, showing the Lord’s power in judgment and grace.
Immediately after receiving provision, Israel faces Amalek’s attack.
Moses’ tired hands are upheld by Aaron and Hur until victory is complete.
The battle’s outcome becomes worship and remembrance under the name 'The Lord is my Banner.'
The Biblical World
Chapter At A Glance
Israel quarrels with Moses because there is no water, tests the Lord’s presence, receives water from the rock at Horeb, faces Amalek in battle, and learns that victory comes through the Lord’s upheld servant and the Lord’s banner over His people.
Exodus 17 shows the covenant people being formed through provision, testing, and conflict before Sinai. The Lord gives water at Horeb, the region where covenant instruction will soon be given. The question 'Is the Lord among us or not?' strikes at the heart of covenant relationship, and the Lord answers with presence and provision. The battle with Amalek shows that the Lord defends His people and records hostile opposition for judgment.
Israel must learn that covenant life includes dependence, obedience, remembrance, and warfare under the Lord’s banner.
Exodus 17 prepares gospel clarity by showing that the redeemed people need life-giving provision and defending grace after deliverance. Israel is thirsty, quarrelsome, and undeserving, yet the Lord gives water from the rock. Israel is attacked, weak, and vulnerable, yet the Lord gives victory under His banner. In Christ, the true Rock and greater Mediator, God gives living water to sinners and secures victory over every enemy.
Christ’s intercession does not grow weary, and His people stand under the banner of His completed triumph.
Trust, prayer, endurance, humility, dependence, courage, shared burden-bearing, and remembrance of the Lord’s victories.
Focus Points
- Testing the Lord
- Water from the rock
- The Lord’s presence among His people
- Moses as mediator
- The staff of God
- Wilderness provision
- Amalek’s opposition
- Joshua’s first battle role
- Intercession and upheld weakness
- The Lord as banner
- Memorial writing
- Divine war against Amalek
- Need exposes the heart
- Grace despite grumbling
- The staff as sign of divine power
- The Lord stands before Moses
- Opposition after deliverance
- Dependent victory
- Shared burden in leadership
- Judgment on hostile opposition
- Divine Presence
- Providence
- Human Sinfulness
- Grace
- Mediation
- Spiritual Warfare
- Prayer and Dependence
- Divine Judgment
- Christological Fulfillment
Cross References
Passages
Chapter opening: Exodus 17:1-7
v 1 Want of Water at Rephidim. - Exo 17:1. On leaving the desert of Sin, the Israelites came למסעיהם, “according to their journeys,” i. e. , in several marches performed with encampings and departures, to Rephidim , at Horeb, where they found no water. According to Num 33:12-14, they encamped twice between the desert of Sin and Rephidim, viz. , at Dofkah and Alush .
The situation of Rephidim may be determined with tolerable certainty, partly from Exo 17:6 as compared with Exo 18:5, which shows that it is to be sought for at Horeb, and partly from the fact, that the Israelites reached the desert of Sinai, after leaving Rephidim, in a single day’s march (Exo 19:2). As the only way from Debbet er Ramleh to Horeb or Sinai, through which a whole nation could pass, lies through the large valley of es-Sheikh , Rephidim must be sought for at the point where this valley opens into the broad plain of er Rahah; and not in the defile with Moses’ seat ( Jokad Seidna Musa ) in it, which is a day’s journey from the foot of Sinai, or five hours from the point at which the Sheikh valley opens into the plain or er Rahah, or the plain of Szueir or Suweiri , because this plain is so far from Sinai, that the Israelites could not possibly have travelled thence to the desert of Sinai in a single day; nor yet at the fountain of Abu Suweirah , which is three hours to the north of Sinai ( Strauss , p.
131), for the Sheikh valley, which is only a quarter of a mile broad at this spot, and enclosed on both sides by tall cliffs (Robinson, i. 215), would not afford the requisite space for a whole nation; and the well found here, which though small is never dry (Robinson, i. 216), neither tallies with the want of water at Rephidim, nor stands “upon the rock at (in) Horeb,” so that it could be taken to be the spring opened by Moses.
The distance from Wady Nasb (in the desert of Sin) to the point at which the upper Sinai road reaches the Wady es Sheikh is about 15 hours (Robinson, vol. iii. app.) , and the distance thence to the plain of er Rahah through the Sheikh valley, which runs in a large semicircle to Horeb, 10 hours more ( Burckhardt , pp. 797ff.) , whereas the straight road across el Oerf, Wady Solaf, and Nukb Hawy to the convent of Sinai is only seven hours and a half (Robinson, vol.
iii. appendix). The whole distance from Wady Nasb to the opening of the Sheikh valley into the plain of er Rahah, viz. , 25 hours in all, the Israelites might have accomplished in three days, answering to the three stations, Dofkah, Alush, and Rephidim. A trace of Dofkah seems to have been retained in el Tabbacha , which Seetzen found in the narrow rocky valley of Wady Gné , i.
e. , Kineh , after his visit to Wady Mukatteb, on proceeding an hour and a half farther in a north-westerly(?) direction, and where he saw some Egyptian antiquities. Knobel supposes the station Alush to have been in the Wady Oesch or Osh (Robinson, i. 125; Burckhardt , p. 792), where sweet water may be met with at a little distance off. But apart from the improbability of Alush being identical with Osh, even if al were the Arabic article, the distance is against it, as it is at least twelve camel-hours from Horeb through the Sheikh valley.
Alush is rather to be sought for at the entrance to the Sheikh valley; for in no other case could the Israelites have reached Rephidim in one day.
Exo 17:2-6 As there was no water to drink in Rephidim, the people murmured against Moses, for having brought them out of Egypt to perish with thirst in the wilderness. This murmuring Moses called “tempting God,” i. e. , unbelieving doubt in the gracious presence of the Lord to help them (Exo 17:7). In this the people manifested not only their ingratitude to Jehovah, who had hitherto interposed so gloriously and miraculously in every time of distress or need, but their distrust in the guidance of Jehovah and the divine mission of Moses, and such impatience of unbelief as threatened to break out into open rebellion against Moses.
“ Yet a little, ” he said to God (i. e. , a very little more), “ and they stone me; ” and the divine long-suffering and grace interposed in this case also, and provided for the want without punishing their murmuring. Moses was to pass on before the people, and, taking some of the elders with him, and his staff with which he smote the Nile, to go to the rock at Horeb, and smite upon the rock with the staff, at the place where God should stand before him, and water would come out of the rock.
The elders were to be eye-witnesses of the miracle, that they might bear their testimony to it before the unbelieving people, “ ne dicere possint, jam ab antiquis temporibus fontes ibi fuisse ” ( Rashi ). Jehovah’s standing before Moses upon the rock, signified the gracious assistance of God. לפני עמד frequently denotes the attitude of a servant when standing before his master, to receive and execute his commands.
Thus Jehovah condescended to come to the help of Moses, and assist His people with His almighty power. His gracious presence caused water to flow out of the hard dry rock, though not till Moses struck it with his staff, that the people might acknowledge him afresh as the possessor of supernatural and miraculous powers. The precise spot at which the water was smitten out of the rock cannot be determined; for there is no reason whatever for fixing upon the summit of the present Horeb, Ras el Sufsafeh , from which you can take in the whole of the plain of er Rahah (Robinson, i.
p. 154).
Exo 17:2-6 As there was no water to drink in Rephidim, the people murmured against Moses, for having brought them out of Egypt to perish with thirst in the wilderness. This murmuring Moses called “tempting God,” i. e. , unbelieving doubt in the gracious presence of the Lord to help them (Exo 17:7). In this the people manifested not only their ingratitude to Jehovah, who had hitherto interposed so gloriously and miraculously in every time of distress or need, but their distrust in the guidance of Jehovah and the divine mission of Moses, and such impatience of unbelief as threatened to break out into open rebellion against Moses.
“ Yet a little, ” he said to God (i. e. , a very little more), “ and they stone me; ” and the divine long-suffering and grace interposed in this case also, and provided for the want without punishing their murmuring. Moses was to pass on before the people, and, taking some of the elders with him, and his staff with which he smote the Nile, to go to the rock at Horeb, and smite upon the rock with the staff, at the place where God should stand before him, and water would come out of the rock.
The elders were to be eye-witnesses of the miracle, that they might bear their testimony to it before the unbelieving people, “ ne dicere possint, jam ab antiquis temporibus fontes ibi fuisse ” ( Rashi ). Jehovah’s standing before Moses upon the rock, signified the gracious assistance of God. לפני עמד frequently denotes the attitude of a servant when standing before his master, to receive and execute his commands.
Thus Jehovah condescended to come to the help of Moses, and assist His people with His almighty power. His gracious presence caused water to flow out of the hard dry rock, though not till Moses struck it with his staff, that the people might acknowledge him afresh as the possessor of supernatural and miraculous powers. The precise spot at which the water was smitten out of the rock cannot be determined; for there is no reason whatever for fixing upon the summit of the present Horeb, Ras el Sufsafeh , from which you can take in the whole of the plain of er Rahah (Robinson, i.
p. 154).
Exo 17:2-6 As there was no water to drink in Rephidim, the people murmured against Moses, for having brought them out of Egypt to perish with thirst in the wilderness. This murmuring Moses called “tempting God,” i. e. , unbelieving doubt in the gracious presence of the Lord to help them (Exo 17:7). In this the people manifested not only their ingratitude to Jehovah, who had hitherto interposed so gloriously and miraculously in every time of distress or need, but their distrust in the guidance of Jehovah and the divine mission of Moses, and such impatience of unbelief as threatened to break out into open rebellion against Moses.
“ Yet a little, ” he said to God (i. e. , a very little more), “ and they stone me; ” and the divine long-suffering and grace interposed in this case also, and provided for the want without punishing their murmuring. Moses was to pass on before the people, and, taking some of the elders with him, and his staff with which he smote the Nile, to go to the rock at Horeb, and smite upon the rock with the staff, at the place where God should stand before him, and water would come out of the rock.
The elders were to be eye-witnesses of the miracle, that they might bear their testimony to it before the unbelieving people, “ ne dicere possint, jam ab antiquis temporibus fontes ibi fuisse ” ( Rashi ). Jehovah’s standing before Moses upon the rock, signified the gracious assistance of God. לפני עמד frequently denotes the attitude of a servant when standing before his master, to receive and execute his commands.
Thus Jehovah condescended to come to the help of Moses, and assist His people with His almighty power. His gracious presence caused water to flow out of the hard dry rock, though not till Moses struck it with his staff, that the people might acknowledge him afresh as the possessor of supernatural and miraculous powers. The precise spot at which the water was smitten out of the rock cannot be determined; for there is no reason whatever for fixing upon the summit of the present Horeb, Ras el Sufsafeh , from which you can take in the whole of the plain of er Rahah (Robinson, i.
p. 154).
Exo 17:2-6 As there was no water to drink in Rephidim, the people murmured against Moses, for having brought them out of Egypt to perish with thirst in the wilderness. This murmuring Moses called “tempting God,” i. e. , unbelieving doubt in the gracious presence of the Lord to help them (Exo 17:7). In this the people manifested not only their ingratitude to Jehovah, who had hitherto interposed so gloriously and miraculously in every time of distress or need, but their distrust in the guidance of Jehovah and the divine mission of Moses, and such impatience of unbelief as threatened to break out into open rebellion against Moses.
“ Yet a little, ” he said to God (i. e. , a very little more), “ and they stone me; ” and the divine long-suffering and grace interposed in this case also, and provided for the want without punishing their murmuring. Moses was to pass on before the people, and, taking some of the elders with him, and his staff with which he smote the Nile, to go to the rock at Horeb, and smite upon the rock with the staff, at the place where God should stand before him, and water would come out of the rock.
The elders were to be eye-witnesses of the miracle, that they might bear their testimony to it before the unbelieving people, “ ne dicere possint, jam ab antiquis temporibus fontes ibi fuisse ” ( Rashi ). Jehovah’s standing before Moses upon the rock, signified the gracious assistance of God. לפני עמד frequently denotes the attitude of a servant when standing before his master, to receive and execute his commands.
Thus Jehovah condescended to come to the help of Moses, and assist His people with His almighty power. His gracious presence caused water to flow out of the hard dry rock, though not till Moses struck it with his staff, that the people might acknowledge him afresh as the possessor of supernatural and miraculous powers. The precise spot at which the water was smitten out of the rock cannot be determined; for there is no reason whatever for fixing upon the summit of the present Horeb, Ras el Sufsafeh , from which you can take in the whole of the plain of er Rahah (Robinson, i.
p. 154).
Exo 17:2-6 As there was no water to drink in Rephidim, the people murmured against Moses, for having brought them out of Egypt to perish with thirst in the wilderness. This murmuring Moses called “tempting God,” i. e. , unbelieving doubt in the gracious presence of the Lord to help them (Exo 17:7). In this the people manifested not only their ingratitude to Jehovah, who had hitherto interposed so gloriously and miraculously in every time of distress or need, but their distrust in the guidance of Jehovah and the divine mission of Moses, and such impatience of unbelief as threatened to break out into open rebellion against Moses.
“ Yet a little, ” he said to God (i. e. , a very little more), “ and they stone me; ” and the divine long-suffering and grace interposed in this case also, and provided for the want without punishing their murmuring. Moses was to pass on before the people, and, taking some of the elders with him, and his staff with which he smote the Nile, to go to the rock at Horeb, and smite upon the rock with the staff, at the place where God should stand before him, and water would come out of the rock.
The elders were to be eye-witnesses of the miracle, that they might bear their testimony to it before the unbelieving people, “ ne dicere possint, jam ab antiquis temporibus fontes ibi fuisse ” ( Rashi ). Jehovah’s standing before Moses upon the rock, signified the gracious assistance of God. לפני עמד frequently denotes the attitude of a servant when standing before his master, to receive and execute his commands.
Thus Jehovah condescended to come to the help of Moses, and assist His people with His almighty power. His gracious presence caused water to flow out of the hard dry rock, though not till Moses struck it with his staff, that the people might acknowledge him afresh as the possessor of supernatural and miraculous powers. The precise spot at which the water was smitten out of the rock cannot be determined; for there is no reason whatever for fixing upon the summit of the present Horeb, Ras el Sufsafeh , from which you can take in the whole of the plain of er Rahah (Robinson, i.
p. 154).
Exo 17:7 From this behaviour of the unbelieving nation the place received the names Massah and Meribah , “temptation and murmuring,” that this sin of the people might never be forgotten (cf. Deu 6:16; Psa 78:20; Psa 95:8; Psa 105:41).
Exo 17:8-13 The want of water had only just been provided for, when Israel had to engage in a conflict with the Amalekites, who had fallen upon their rear and smitten it (Deu 25:18). The expansion of this tribe, that was descended from a grandson of Esau (see Gen 36:12), into so great a power even in the Mosaic times, is perfectly conceivable, if we imagine the process to have been analogous to that which we have already described in the case of the leading branches of the Edomites, who had grown into a powerful nation through the subjugation and incorporation of the earlier population of Mount Seir.
The Amalekites had no doubt come to the neighbourhood of Sinai for the same reason for which, even in the present day, the Bedouin Arabs leave the lower districts at the beginning of summer, and congregate in the mountain regions of the Arabian peninsula, viz. , because the grass is dried up in the former, whereas in the latter the pasturage remains green much longer, on account of the climate being comparatively cooler ( Burckhardt , Syr.
p. 789). There they fell upon the Israelites, probably in the Sheikh valley, where the rear had remained behind the main body, not merely for the purpose of plundering or of disputing the possession of this district and its pasture ground with the Israelites, but to assail Israel as the nation of God, and if possible to destroy it. The divine command to exterminate Amalek (Exo 17:14) points to this; and still more the description given of the Amalekites in Balaam’s utterances, as גּוים ראשׁית, “the beginning,” i.
e. , the first and foremost of the heathen nations (Num 24:20). In Amalek the heathen world commenced that conflict with the people of God, which, while it aims at their destruction, can only be terminated by the complete annihilation of the ungodly powers of the world. Earlier theologians pointed out quite correctly the deepest ground for the hostility of the Amalekites, when they traced the causa belli to this fact, “ quod timebat Amalec, qui erat de semine Esau, jam implendam benedictionem, quam Jacob obtinuit et praeripuit ipsi Esau, praesertim cum in magna potentia venirent Israelitae, ut promissam occuparent terram ” Münster, C.
a Lapide, etc.) This peculiar significance in the conflict is apparent, not only from the divine command to exterminate the Amalekites, and to carry on the war of Jehovah with Amalek from generation to generation (Exo 17:14 and Exo 17:16), but also from the manner in which Moses led the Israelites to battle and to victory. Whereas he had performed all the miracles in Egypt and on the journey by stretching out his staff, on this occasion he directed his servant Joshua to choose men for the war, and to fight the battle with the sword.
He himself went with Aaron and Hur to the summit of a hill to hold up the staff of God in his hands, that he might procure success to the warriors through the spiritual weapons of prayer. The proper name of Joshua , who appears here for the first time in the service of Moses, as Hosea (הושׁע); he was a prince of the tribe of Ephraim (Num 13:8, Num 13:16; Deu 32:44).
The name יהושׁע, “Jehovah is help” (or, God-help), he probably received at the time when he entered Moses’ service, either before or after the battle with the Amalekites (see Num 13:16, and Hengstenberg, Dissertations , vol. ii.) Hur , who also held a prominent position in the nation, according to Exo 24:14, in connection with Aaron, was the son of Caleb, the son of Hezron, the grandson of Judah (1Ch 2:18-20), and the grandfather of Bezaleel, the architect of the tabernacle (Exo 31:2; Exo 35:30; Exo 38:22, cf.
1Ch 2:19-20). According to Jewish tradition, he was the husband of Miriam. The battle was fought on the day after the first attack (Exo 17:9). The hill (גּבעה, not Mount Horeb), upon the summit of which Moses took up his position during the battle, along with Aaron and Hur, cannot be fixed upon with exact precision, but it was probably situated in the table-land of Fureia, to the north of er Rahah and the Sheikh valley, which is a fertile piece of pasture ground ( Burckhardt , p.
801; Robinson, i. pp. 139, 215), or else in the plateau which runs to the north-east of the Horeb mountains and to the east of the Sheikh valley, with the two peaks Umlanz and Um Alawy; supposing, that is, that the Amalekites attacked the Israelites from Wady Muklifeh or es Suweiriyeh. Moses went to the top of the hill that he might see the battle from thence.
He took Aaron and Hur with him, not as adjutants to convey his orders to Joshua and the army engaged, but to support him in his own part in connection with the conflict. This was to hold up his hand with the staff of God in it. To understand the meaning of this sign, it must be borne in mind that, although Exo 17:11 merely speaks of the raising and dropping of the hand (in the singular), yet, according to Exo 17:12, both hands were supported by Aaron and Hur, who stood one on either side, so that Moses did not hold up his hands alternately, but grasped the staff with both his hands, and held it up with the two.
The lifting up of the hands has been regarded almost with unvarying unanimity by Targumists, Rabbins, Fathers, Reformers, and nearly all the more modern commentators, as the sign or attitude of prayer. Kurtz , on the contrary, maintains, in direct opposition to the custom observed throughout the whole of the Old Testament by all pious and earnest worshipers, of lifting up their hands to God in heaven, that this view attributes an importance to the outward form of prayer which has no analogy even in the Old Testament; he therefore agrees with Lakemacher , in Rosenmüller's Scholien, in regarding the attitude of Moses with his hand lifted up as “the attitude of a commander superintending and directing the battle,” and the elevation of the hand as only the means adopted for raising the staff, which was elevated in the sight of the warriors of Israel as the banner of victory.
But this meaning cannot be established from Exo 17:15 and Exo 17:16. For the altar with the name “ Jehovah my banner, ” and the watchword “ the hand on the banner of Jehovah, war of the Lord against Amalek, ” can neither be proved to be connected with the staff which Moses held in his hand, nor be adduced as a proof that Moses held the staff in front of the Israelites as the banner of victory.
The lifting up of the staff of God was, no doubt, a banner to the Israelites of victory over their foes, but not in this sense, that Moses directed the battle as commander-in-chief, for he had transferred the command to Joshua; nor yet in this sense, that he imparted divine powers to the warriors by means of the staff, and so secured the victory. To effect this, he would not have lifted it up, but have stretched it out, either over the combatants, or at all events towards them, as in the case of all the other miracles that were performed with the staff.
The lifting up of the staff secured to the warriors the strength needed to obtain the victory, from the fact that by means of the staff Moses brought down this strength from above, i. e. , from the Almighty God in heaven; not indeed by a merely spiritless and unthinking elevation of the staff, but by the power of his prayer, which was embodied in the lifting up of his hands with the staff, and was so far strengthened thereby, that God had chosen and already employed this staff as a medium of the saving manifestation of His almighty power.
There is no other way in which we can explain the effect produced upon the battle by the raising and dropping (הניח) of the staff in his hands. As long as Moses held up the staff, he drew down from God victorious powers for the Israelites by means of his prayer; but when he let it fall through the exhaustion of the strength of his hands, he ceased to draw down the power of God, and Amalek gained the upper hand.
The staff, therefore, as it was stretched out on high, was not a sign to the Israelites that were fighting, for it is by no means certain that they could see it in the heat of the battle; but it was a sign to Jehovah, carrying up, as it were, to God the wishes and prayers of Moses, and bringing down from God victorious powers for Israel. If the intention had been the hold it up before the Israelites as a banner of victory.
Moses would not have withdrawn to a hill apart from the field of battle, but would either have carried it himself in front of the army, or have given it to Joshua as commander, to be borne by him in front of the combatants, or else have entrusted it to Aaron, who had performed the miracles in Egypt, that he might carry it at their head. The pure reason why Moses did not do this, but withdrew from the field of battle to lift up the staff of God upon the summit of a hill, and to secure the victory by so doing, is to be found in the important character of the battle itself.
As the heathen world was now commencing its conflict with the people of God in the persons of the Amalekites, and the prototype of the heathen world, with its hostility to God, was opposing the nation of the Lord, that had been redeemed from the bondage of Egypt and was on its way to Canaan, to contest its entrance into the promised inheritance; so the battle which Israel fought with this foe possessed a typical significance in relation to all the future history of Israel. It could not conquer by the sword alone, but could only gain the victory by the power of God, coming down from on high, and obtained through prayer and those means of grace with which it had been entrusted.
The means now possessed by Moses were the staff, which was, as it were, a channel through which the powers of omnipotence were conducted to him. In most cases he used it under the direction of God; but God had not promised him miraculous help for the conflict with the Amalekites, and for this reason he lifted up his hands with the staff in prayer to God, that he might thereby secure the assistance of Jehovah for His struggling people.
At length he became exhausted, and with the falling of his hands and the staff he held, the flow of divine power ceased, so that it was necessary to support his arms, that they might be kept firmly directed upwards (אמוּנה, lit. , firmness) until the enemy was entirely subdued. And from this Israel was to learn the lesson, that in all its conflicts with the ungodly powers of the world, strength for victory could only be procured through the incessant lifting up of its hands in prayer.
“ And Joshua discomfited Amalek and his people (the Amalekites and their people) with the edge of the sword ” (i. e. , without quarter. See Gen 34:26).
Exo 17:8-13 The want of water had only just been provided for, when Israel had to engage in a conflict with the Amalekites, who had fallen upon their rear and smitten it (Deu 25:18). The expansion of this tribe, that was descended from a grandson of Esau (see Gen 36:12), into so great a power even in the Mosaic times, is perfectly conceivable, if we imagine the process to have been analogous to that which we have already described in the case of the leading branches of the Edomites, who had grown into a powerful nation through the subjugation and incorporation of the earlier population of Mount Seir.
The Amalekites had no doubt come to the neighbourhood of Sinai for the same reason for which, even in the present day, the Bedouin Arabs leave the lower districts at the beginning of summer, and congregate in the mountain regions of the Arabian peninsula, viz. , because the grass is dried up in the former, whereas in the latter the pasturage remains green much longer, on account of the climate being comparatively cooler ( Burckhardt , Syr.
p. 789). There they fell upon the Israelites, probably in the Sheikh valley, where the rear had remained behind the main body, not merely for the purpose of plundering or of disputing the possession of this district and its pasture ground with the Israelites, but to assail Israel as the nation of God, and if possible to destroy it. The divine command to exterminate Amalek (Exo 17:14) points to this; and still more the description given of the Amalekites in Balaam’s utterances, as גּוים ראשׁית, “the beginning,” i.
e. , the first and foremost of the heathen nations (Num 24:20). In Amalek the heathen world commenced that conflict with the people of God, which, while it aims at their destruction, can only be terminated by the complete annihilation of the ungodly powers of the world. Earlier theologians pointed out quite correctly the deepest ground for the hostility of the Amalekites, when they traced the causa belli to this fact, “ quod timebat Amalec, qui erat de semine Esau, jam implendam benedictionem, quam Jacob obtinuit et praeripuit ipsi Esau, praesertim cum in magna potentia venirent Israelitae, ut promissam occuparent terram ” Münster, C.
a Lapide, etc.) This peculiar significance in the conflict is apparent, not only from the divine command to exterminate the Amalekites, and to carry on the war of Jehovah with Amalek from generation to generation (Exo 17:14 and Exo 17:16), but also from the manner in which Moses led the Israelites to battle and to victory. Whereas he had performed all the miracles in Egypt and on the journey by stretching out his staff, on this occasion he directed his servant Joshua to choose men for the war, and to fight the battle with the sword.
He himself went with Aaron and Hur to the summit of a hill to hold up the staff of God in his hands, that he might procure success to the warriors through the spiritual weapons of prayer. The proper name of Joshua , who appears here for the first time in the service of Moses, as Hosea (הושׁע); he was a prince of the tribe of Ephraim (Num 13:8, Num 13:16; Deu 32:44).
The name יהושׁע, “Jehovah is help” (or, God-help), he probably received at the time when he entered Moses’ service, either before or after the battle with the Amalekites (see Num 13:16, and Hengstenberg, Dissertations , vol. ii.) Hur , who also held a prominent position in the nation, according to Exo 24:14, in connection with Aaron, was the son of Caleb, the son of Hezron, the grandson of Judah (1Ch 2:18-20), and the grandfather of Bezaleel, the architect of the tabernacle (Exo 31:2; Exo 35:30; Exo 38:22, cf.
1Ch 2:19-20). According to Jewish tradition, he was the husband of Miriam. The battle was fought on the day after the first attack (Exo 17:9). The hill (גּבעה, not Mount Horeb), upon the summit of which Moses took up his position during the battle, along with Aaron and Hur, cannot be fixed upon with exact precision, but it was probably situated in the table-land of Fureia, to the north of er Rahah and the Sheikh valley, which is a fertile piece of pasture ground ( Burckhardt , p.
801; Robinson, i. pp. 139, 215), or else in the plateau which runs to the north-east of the Horeb mountains and to the east of the Sheikh valley, with the two peaks Umlanz and Um Alawy; supposing, that is, that the Amalekites attacked the Israelites from Wady Muklifeh or es Suweiriyeh. Moses went to the top of the hill that he might see the battle from thence.
He took Aaron and Hur with him, not as adjutants to convey his orders to Joshua and the army engaged, but to support him in his own part in connection with the conflict. This was to hold up his hand with the staff of God in it. To understand the meaning of this sign, it must be borne in mind that, although Exo 17:11 merely speaks of the raising and dropping of the hand (in the singular), yet, according to Exo 17:12, both hands were supported by Aaron and Hur, who stood one on either side, so that Moses did not hold up his hands alternately, but grasped the staff with both his hands, and held it up with the two.
The lifting up of the hands has been regarded almost with unvarying unanimity by Targumists, Rabbins, Fathers, Reformers, and nearly all the more modern commentators, as the sign or attitude of prayer. Kurtz , on the contrary, maintains, in direct opposition to the custom observed throughout the whole of the Old Testament by all pious and earnest worshipers, of lifting up their hands to God in heaven, that this view attributes an importance to the outward form of prayer which has no analogy even in the Old Testament; he therefore agrees with Lakemacher , in Rosenmüller's Scholien, in regarding the attitude of Moses with his hand lifted up as “the attitude of a commander superintending and directing the battle,” and the elevation of the hand as only the means adopted for raising the staff, which was elevated in the sight of the warriors of Israel as the banner of victory.
But this meaning cannot be established from Exo 17:15 and Exo 17:16. For the altar with the name “ Jehovah my banner, ” and the watchword “ the hand on the banner of Jehovah, war of the Lord against Amalek, ” can neither be proved to be connected with the staff which Moses held in his hand, nor be adduced as a proof that Moses held the staff in front of the Israelites as the banner of victory.
The lifting up of the staff of God was, no doubt, a banner to the Israelites of victory over their foes, but not in this sense, that Moses directed the battle as commander-in-chief, for he had transferred the command to Joshua; nor yet in this sense, that he imparted divine powers to the warriors by means of the staff, and so secured the victory. To effect this, he would not have lifted it up, but have stretched it out, either over the combatants, or at all events towards them, as in the case of all the other miracles that were performed with the staff.
The lifting up of the staff secured to the warriors the strength needed to obtain the victory, from the fact that by means of the staff Moses brought down this strength from above, i. e. , from the Almighty God in heaven; not indeed by a merely spiritless and unthinking elevation of the staff, but by the power of his prayer, which was embodied in the lifting up of his hands with the staff, and was so far strengthened thereby, that God had chosen and already employed this staff as a medium of the saving manifestation of His almighty power.
There is no other way in which we can explain the effect produced upon the battle by the raising and dropping (הניח) of the staff in his hands. As long as Moses held up the staff, he drew down from God victorious powers for the Israelites by means of his prayer; but when he let it fall through the exhaustion of the strength of his hands, he ceased to draw down the power of God, and Amalek gained the upper hand.
The staff, therefore, as it was stretched out on high, was not a sign to the Israelites that were fighting, for it is by no means certain that they could see it in the heat of the battle; but it was a sign to Jehovah, carrying up, as it were, to God the wishes and prayers of Moses, and bringing down from God victorious powers for Israel. If the intention had been the hold it up before the Israelites as a banner of victory.
Moses would not have withdrawn to a hill apart from the field of battle, but would either have carried it himself in front of the army, or have given it to Joshua as commander, to be borne by him in front of the combatants, or else have entrusted it to Aaron, who had performed the miracles in Egypt, that he might carry it at their head. The pure reason why Moses did not do this, but withdrew from the field of battle to lift up the staff of God upon the summit of a hill, and to secure the victory by so doing, is to be found in the important character of the battle itself.
As the heathen world was now commencing its conflict with the people of God in the persons of the Amalekites, and the prototype of the heathen world, with its hostility to God, was opposing the nation of the Lord, that had been redeemed from the bondage of Egypt and was on its way to Canaan, to contest its entrance into the promised inheritance; so the battle which Israel fought with this foe possessed a typical significance in relation to all the future history of Israel. It could not conquer by the sword alone, but could only gain the victory by the power of God, coming down from on high, and obtained through prayer and those means of grace with which it had been entrusted.
The means now possessed by Moses were the staff, which was, as it were, a channel through which the powers of omnipotence were conducted to him. In most cases he used it under the direction of God; but God had not promised him miraculous help for the conflict with the Amalekites, and for this reason he lifted up his hands with the staff in prayer to God, that he might thereby secure the assistance of Jehovah for His struggling people.
At length he became exhausted, and with the falling of his hands and the staff he held, the flow of divine power ceased, so that it was necessary to support his arms, that they might be kept firmly directed upwards (אמוּנה, lit. , firmness) until the enemy was entirely subdued. And from this Israel was to learn the lesson, that in all its conflicts with the ungodly powers of the world, strength for victory could only be procured through the incessant lifting up of its hands in prayer.
“ And Joshua discomfited Amalek and his people (the Amalekites and their people) with the edge of the sword ” (i. e. , without quarter. See Gen 34:26).
Exo 17:8-13 The want of water had only just been provided for, when Israel had to engage in a conflict with the Amalekites, who had fallen upon their rear and smitten it (Deu 25:18). The expansion of this tribe, that was descended from a grandson of Esau (see Gen 36:12), into so great a power even in the Mosaic times, is perfectly conceivable, if we imagine the process to have been analogous to that which we have already described in the case of the leading branches of the Edomites, who had grown into a powerful nation through the subjugation and incorporation of the earlier population of Mount Seir.
The Amalekites had no doubt come to the neighbourhood of Sinai for the same reason for which, even in the present day, the Bedouin Arabs leave the lower districts at the beginning of summer, and congregate in the mountain regions of the Arabian peninsula, viz. , because the grass is dried up in the former, whereas in the latter the pasturage remains green much longer, on account of the climate being comparatively cooler ( Burckhardt , Syr.
p. 789). There they fell upon the Israelites, probably in the Sheikh valley, where the rear had remained behind the main body, not merely for the purpose of plundering or of disputing the possession of this district and its pasture ground with the Israelites, but to assail Israel as the nation of God, and if possible to destroy it. The divine command to exterminate Amalek (Exo 17:14) points to this; and still more the description given of the Amalekites in Balaam’s utterances, as גּוים ראשׁית, “the beginning,” i.
e. , the first and foremost of the heathen nations (Num 24:20). In Amalek the heathen world commenced that conflict with the people of God, which, while it aims at their destruction, can only be terminated by the complete annihilation of the ungodly powers of the world. Earlier theologians pointed out quite correctly the deepest ground for the hostility of the Amalekites, when they traced the causa belli to this fact, “ quod timebat Amalec, qui erat de semine Esau, jam implendam benedictionem, quam Jacob obtinuit et praeripuit ipsi Esau, praesertim cum in magna potentia venirent Israelitae, ut promissam occuparent terram ” Münster, C.
a Lapide, etc.) This peculiar significance in the conflict is apparent, not only from the divine command to exterminate the Amalekites, and to carry on the war of Jehovah with Amalek from generation to generation (Exo 17:14 and Exo 17:16), but also from the manner in which Moses led the Israelites to battle and to victory. Whereas he had performed all the miracles in Egypt and on the journey by stretching out his staff, on this occasion he directed his servant Joshua to choose men for the war, and to fight the battle with the sword.
He himself went with Aaron and Hur to the summit of a hill to hold up the staff of God in his hands, that he might procure success to the warriors through the spiritual weapons of prayer. The proper name of Joshua , who appears here for the first time in the service of Moses, as Hosea (הושׁע); he was a prince of the tribe of Ephraim (Num 13:8, Num 13:16; Deu 32:44).
The name יהושׁע, “Jehovah is help” (or, God-help), he probably received at the time when he entered Moses’ service, either before or after the battle with the Amalekites (see Num 13:16, and Hengstenberg, Dissertations , vol. ii.) Hur , who also held a prominent position in the nation, according to Exo 24:14, in connection with Aaron, was the son of Caleb, the son of Hezron, the grandson of Judah (1Ch 2:18-20), and the grandfather of Bezaleel, the architect of the tabernacle (Exo 31:2; Exo 35:30; Exo 38:22, cf.
1Ch 2:19-20). According to Jewish tradition, he was the husband of Miriam. The battle was fought on the day after the first attack (Exo 17:9). The hill (גּבעה, not Mount Horeb), upon the summit of which Moses took up his position during the battle, along with Aaron and Hur, cannot be fixed upon with exact precision, but it was probably situated in the table-land of Fureia, to the north of er Rahah and the Sheikh valley, which is a fertile piece of pasture ground ( Burckhardt , p.
801; Robinson, i. pp. 139, 215), or else in the plateau which runs to the north-east of the Horeb mountains and to the east of the Sheikh valley, with the two peaks Umlanz and Um Alawy; supposing, that is, that the Amalekites attacked the Israelites from Wady Muklifeh or es Suweiriyeh. Moses went to the top of the hill that he might see the battle from thence.
He took Aaron and Hur with him, not as adjutants to convey his orders to Joshua and the army engaged, but to support him in his own part in connection with the conflict. This was to hold up his hand with the staff of God in it. To understand the meaning of this sign, it must be borne in mind that, although Exo 17:11 merely speaks of the raising and dropping of the hand (in the singular), yet, according to Exo 17:12, both hands were supported by Aaron and Hur, who stood one on either side, so that Moses did not hold up his hands alternately, but grasped the staff with both his hands, and held it up with the two.
The lifting up of the hands has been regarded almost with unvarying unanimity by Targumists, Rabbins, Fathers, Reformers, and nearly all the more modern commentators, as the sign or attitude of prayer. Kurtz , on the contrary, maintains, in direct opposition to the custom observed throughout the whole of the Old Testament by all pious and earnest worshipers, of lifting up their hands to God in heaven, that this view attributes an importance to the outward form of prayer which has no analogy even in the Old Testament; he therefore agrees with Lakemacher , in Rosenmüller's Scholien, in regarding the attitude of Moses with his hand lifted up as “the attitude of a commander superintending and directing the battle,” and the elevation of the hand as only the means adopted for raising the staff, which was elevated in the sight of the warriors of Israel as the banner of victory.
But this meaning cannot be established from Exo 17:15 and Exo 17:16. For the altar with the name “ Jehovah my banner, ” and the watchword “ the hand on the banner of Jehovah, war of the Lord against Amalek, ” can neither be proved to be connected with the staff which Moses held in his hand, nor be adduced as a proof that Moses held the staff in front of the Israelites as the banner of victory.
The lifting up of the staff of God was, no doubt, a banner to the Israelites of victory over their foes, but not in this sense, that Moses directed the battle as commander-in-chief, for he had transferred the command to Joshua; nor yet in this sense, that he imparted divine powers to the warriors by means of the staff, and so secured the victory. To effect this, he would not have lifted it up, but have stretched it out, either over the combatants, or at all events towards them, as in the case of all the other miracles that were performed with the staff.
The lifting up of the staff secured to the warriors the strength needed to obtain the victory, from the fact that by means of the staff Moses brought down this strength from above, i. e. , from the Almighty God in heaven; not indeed by a merely spiritless and unthinking elevation of the staff, but by the power of his prayer, which was embodied in the lifting up of his hands with the staff, and was so far strengthened thereby, that God had chosen and already employed this staff as a medium of the saving manifestation of His almighty power.
There is no other way in which we can explain the effect produced upon the battle by the raising and dropping (הניח) of the staff in his hands. As long as Moses held up the staff, he drew down from God victorious powers for the Israelites by means of his prayer; but when he let it fall through the exhaustion of the strength of his hands, he ceased to draw down the power of God, and Amalek gained the upper hand.
The staff, therefore, as it was stretched out on high, was not a sign to the Israelites that were fighting, for it is by no means certain that they could see it in the heat of the battle; but it was a sign to Jehovah, carrying up, as it were, to God the wishes and prayers of Moses, and bringing down from God victorious powers for Israel. If the intention had been the hold it up before the Israelites as a banner of victory.
Moses would not have withdrawn to a hill apart from the field of battle, but would either have carried it himself in front of the army, or have given it to Joshua as commander, to be borne by him in front of the combatants, or else have entrusted it to Aaron, who had performed the miracles in Egypt, that he might carry it at their head. The pure reason why Moses did not do this, but withdrew from the field of battle to lift up the staff of God upon the summit of a hill, and to secure the victory by so doing, is to be found in the important character of the battle itself.
As the heathen world was now commencing its conflict with the people of God in the persons of the Amalekites, and the prototype of the heathen world, with its hostility to God, was opposing the nation of the Lord, that had been redeemed from the bondage of Egypt and was on its way to Canaan, to contest its entrance into the promised inheritance; so the battle which Israel fought with this foe possessed a typical significance in relation to all the future history of Israel. It could not conquer by the sword alone, but could only gain the victory by the power of God, coming down from on high, and obtained through prayer and those means of grace with which it had been entrusted.
The means now possessed by Moses were the staff, which was, as it were, a channel through which the powers of omnipotence were conducted to him. In most cases he used it under the direction of God; but God had not promised him miraculous help for the conflict with the Amalekites, and for this reason he lifted up his hands with the staff in prayer to God, that he might thereby secure the assistance of Jehovah for His struggling people.
At length he became exhausted, and with the falling of his hands and the staff he held, the flow of divine power ceased, so that it was necessary to support his arms, that they might be kept firmly directed upwards (אמוּנה, lit. , firmness) until the enemy was entirely subdued. And from this Israel was to learn the lesson, that in all its conflicts with the ungodly powers of the world, strength for victory could only be procured through the incessant lifting up of its hands in prayer.
“ And Joshua discomfited Amalek and his people (the Amalekites and their people) with the edge of the sword ” (i. e. , without quarter. See Gen 34:26).
Exo 17:8-13 The want of water had only just been provided for, when Israel had to engage in a conflict with the Amalekites, who had fallen upon their rear and smitten it (Deu 25:18). The expansion of this tribe, that was descended from a grandson of Esau (see Gen 36:12), into so great a power even in the Mosaic times, is perfectly conceivable, if we imagine the process to have been analogous to that which we have already described in the case of the leading branches of the Edomites, who had grown into a powerful nation through the subjugation and incorporation of the earlier population of Mount Seir.
The Amalekites had no doubt come to the neighbourhood of Sinai for the same reason for which, even in the present day, the Bedouin Arabs leave the lower districts at the beginning of summer, and congregate in the mountain regions of the Arabian peninsula, viz. , because the grass is dried up in the former, whereas in the latter the pasturage remains green much longer, on account of the climate being comparatively cooler ( Burckhardt , Syr.
p. 789). There they fell upon the Israelites, probably in the Sheikh valley, where the rear had remained behind the main body, not merely for the purpose of plundering or of disputing the possession of this district and its pasture ground with the Israelites, but to assail Israel as the nation of God, and if possible to destroy it. The divine command to exterminate Amalek (Exo 17:14) points to this; and still more the description given of the Amalekites in Balaam’s utterances, as גּוים ראשׁית, “the beginning,” i.
e. , the first and foremost of the heathen nations (Num 24:20). In Amalek the heathen world commenced that conflict with the people of God, which, while it aims at their destruction, can only be terminated by the complete annihilation of the ungodly powers of the world. Earlier theologians pointed out quite correctly the deepest ground for the hostility of the Amalekites, when they traced the causa belli to this fact, “ quod timebat Amalec, qui erat de semine Esau, jam implendam benedictionem, quam Jacob obtinuit et praeripuit ipsi Esau, praesertim cum in magna potentia venirent Israelitae, ut promissam occuparent terram ” Münster, C.
a Lapide, etc.) This peculiar significance in the conflict is apparent, not only from the divine command to exterminate the Amalekites, and to carry on the war of Jehovah with Amalek from generation to generation (Exo 17:14 and Exo 17:16), but also from the manner in which Moses led the Israelites to battle and to victory. Whereas he had performed all the miracles in Egypt and on the journey by stretching out his staff, on this occasion he directed his servant Joshua to choose men for the war, and to fight the battle with the sword.
He himself went with Aaron and Hur to the summit of a hill to hold up the staff of God in his hands, that he might procure success to the warriors through the spiritual weapons of prayer. The proper name of Joshua , who appears here for the first time in the service of Moses, as Hosea (הושׁע); he was a prince of the tribe of Ephraim (Num 13:8, Num 13:16; Deu 32:44).
The name יהושׁע, “Jehovah is help” (or, God-help), he probably received at the time when he entered Moses’ service, either before or after the battle with the Amalekites (see Num 13:16, and Hengstenberg, Dissertations , vol. ii.) Hur , who also held a prominent position in the nation, according to Exo 24:14, in connection with Aaron, was the son of Caleb, the son of Hezron, the grandson of Judah (1Ch 2:18-20), and the grandfather of Bezaleel, the architect of the tabernacle (Exo 31:2; Exo 35:30; Exo 38:22, cf.
1Ch 2:19-20). According to Jewish tradition, he was the husband of Miriam. The battle was fought on the day after the first attack (Exo 17:9). The hill (גּבעה, not Mount Horeb), upon the summit of which Moses took up his position during the battle, along with Aaron and Hur, cannot be fixed upon with exact precision, but it was probably situated in the table-land of Fureia, to the north of er Rahah and the Sheikh valley, which is a fertile piece of pasture ground ( Burckhardt , p.
801; Robinson, i. pp. 139, 215), or else in the plateau which runs to the north-east of the Horeb mountains and to the east of the Sheikh valley, with the two peaks Umlanz and Um Alawy; supposing, that is, that the Amalekites attacked the Israelites from Wady Muklifeh or es Suweiriyeh. Moses went to the top of the hill that he might see the battle from thence.
He took Aaron and Hur with him, not as adjutants to convey his orders to Joshua and the army engaged, but to support him in his own part in connection with the conflict. This was to hold up his hand with the staff of God in it. To understand the meaning of this sign, it must be borne in mind that, although Exo 17:11 merely speaks of the raising and dropping of the hand (in the singular), yet, according to Exo 17:12, both hands were supported by Aaron and Hur, who stood one on either side, so that Moses did not hold up his hands alternately, but grasped the staff with both his hands, and held it up with the two.
The lifting up of the hands has been regarded almost with unvarying unanimity by Targumists, Rabbins, Fathers, Reformers, and nearly all the more modern commentators, as the sign or attitude of prayer. Kurtz , on the contrary, maintains, in direct opposition to the custom observed throughout the whole of the Old Testament by all pious and earnest worshipers, of lifting up their hands to God in heaven, that this view attributes an importance to the outward form of prayer which has no analogy even in the Old Testament; he therefore agrees with Lakemacher , in Rosenmüller's Scholien, in regarding the attitude of Moses with his hand lifted up as “the attitude of a commander superintending and directing the battle,” and the elevation of the hand as only the means adopted for raising the staff, which was elevated in the sight of the warriors of Israel as the banner of victory.
But this meaning cannot be established from Exo 17:15 and Exo 17:16. For the altar with the name “ Jehovah my banner, ” and the watchword “ the hand on the banner of Jehovah, war of the Lord against Amalek, ” can neither be proved to be connected with the staff which Moses held in his hand, nor be adduced as a proof that Moses held the staff in front of the Israelites as the banner of victory.
The lifting up of the staff of God was, no doubt, a banner to the Israelites of victory over their foes, but not in this sense, that Moses directed the battle as commander-in-chief, for he had transferred the command to Joshua; nor yet in this sense, that he imparted divine powers to the warriors by means of the staff, and so secured the victory. To effect this, he would not have lifted it up, but have stretched it out, either over the combatants, or at all events towards them, as in the case of all the other miracles that were performed with the staff.
The lifting up of the staff secured to the warriors the strength needed to obtain the victory, from the fact that by means of the staff Moses brought down this strength from above, i. e. , from the Almighty God in heaven; not indeed by a merely spiritless and unthinking elevation of the staff, but by the power of his prayer, which was embodied in the lifting up of his hands with the staff, and was so far strengthened thereby, that God had chosen and already employed this staff as a medium of the saving manifestation of His almighty power.
There is no other way in which we can explain the effect produced upon the battle by the raising and dropping (הניח) of the staff in his hands. As long as Moses held up the staff, he drew down from God victorious powers for the Israelites by means of his prayer; but when he let it fall through the exhaustion of the strength of his hands, he ceased to draw down the power of God, and Amalek gained the upper hand.
The staff, therefore, as it was stretched out on high, was not a sign to the Israelites that were fighting, for it is by no means certain that they could see it in the heat of the battle; but it was a sign to Jehovah, carrying up, as it were, to God the wishes and prayers of Moses, and bringing down from God victorious powers for Israel. If the intention had been the hold it up before the Israelites as a banner of victory.
Moses would not have withdrawn to a hill apart from the field of battle, but would either have carried it himself in front of the army, or have given it to Joshua as commander, to be borne by him in front of the combatants, or else have entrusted it to Aaron, who had performed the miracles in Egypt, that he might carry it at their head. The pure reason why Moses did not do this, but withdrew from the field of battle to lift up the staff of God upon the summit of a hill, and to secure the victory by so doing, is to be found in the important character of the battle itself.
As the heathen world was now commencing its conflict with the people of God in the persons of the Amalekites, and the prototype of the heathen world, with its hostility to God, was opposing the nation of the Lord, that had been redeemed from the bondage of Egypt and was on its way to Canaan, to contest its entrance into the promised inheritance; so the battle which Israel fought with this foe possessed a typical significance in relation to all the future history of Israel. It could not conquer by the sword alone, but could only gain the victory by the power of God, coming down from on high, and obtained through prayer and those means of grace with which it had been entrusted.
The means now possessed by Moses were the staff, which was, as it were, a channel through which the powers of omnipotence were conducted to him. In most cases he used it under the direction of God; but God had not promised him miraculous help for the conflict with the Amalekites, and for this reason he lifted up his hands with the staff in prayer to God, that he might thereby secure the assistance of Jehovah for His struggling people.
At length he became exhausted, and with the falling of his hands and the staff he held, the flow of divine power ceased, so that it was necessary to support his arms, that they might be kept firmly directed upwards (אמוּנה, lit. , firmness) until the enemy was entirely subdued. And from this Israel was to learn the lesson, that in all its conflicts with the ungodly powers of the world, strength for victory could only be procured through the incessant lifting up of its hands in prayer.
“ And Joshua discomfited Amalek and his people (the Amalekites and their people) with the edge of the sword ” (i. e. , without quarter. See Gen 34:26).
Exo 17:8-13 The want of water had only just been provided for, when Israel had to engage in a conflict with the Amalekites, who had fallen upon their rear and smitten it (Deu 25:18). The expansion of this tribe, that was descended from a grandson of Esau (see Gen 36:12), into so great a power even in the Mosaic times, is perfectly conceivable, if we imagine the process to have been analogous to that which we have already described in the case of the leading branches of the Edomites, who had grown into a powerful nation through the subjugation and incorporation of the earlier population of Mount Seir.
The Amalekites had no doubt come to the neighbourhood of Sinai for the same reason for which, even in the present day, the Bedouin Arabs leave the lower districts at the beginning of summer, and congregate in the mountain regions of the Arabian peninsula, viz. , because the grass is dried up in the former, whereas in the latter the pasturage remains green much longer, on account of the climate being comparatively cooler ( Burckhardt , Syr.
p. 789). There they fell upon the Israelites, probably in the Sheikh valley, where the rear had remained behind the main body, not merely for the purpose of plundering or of disputing the possession of this district and its pasture ground with the Israelites, but to assail Israel as the nation of God, and if possible to destroy it. The divine command to exterminate Amalek (Exo 17:14) points to this; and still more the description given of the Amalekites in Balaam’s utterances, as גּוים ראשׁית, “the beginning,” i.
e. , the first and foremost of the heathen nations (Num 24:20). In Amalek the heathen world commenced that conflict with the people of God, which, while it aims at their destruction, can only be terminated by the complete annihilation of the ungodly powers of the world. Earlier theologians pointed out quite correctly the deepest ground for the hostility of the Amalekites, when they traced the causa belli to this fact, “ quod timebat Amalec, qui erat de semine Esau, jam implendam benedictionem, quam Jacob obtinuit et praeripuit ipsi Esau, praesertim cum in magna potentia venirent Israelitae, ut promissam occuparent terram ” Münster, C.
a Lapide, etc.) This peculiar significance in the conflict is apparent, not only from the divine command to exterminate the Amalekites, and to carry on the war of Jehovah with Amalek from generation to generation (Exo 17:14 and Exo 17:16), but also from the manner in which Moses led the Israelites to battle and to victory. Whereas he had performed all the miracles in Egypt and on the journey by stretching out his staff, on this occasion he directed his servant Joshua to choose men for the war, and to fight the battle with the sword.
He himself went with Aaron and Hur to the summit of a hill to hold up the staff of God in his hands, that he might procure success to the warriors through the spiritual weapons of prayer. The proper name of Joshua , who appears here for the first time in the service of Moses, as Hosea (הושׁע); he was a prince of the tribe of Ephraim (Num 13:8, Num 13:16; Deu 32:44).
The name יהושׁע, “Jehovah is help” (or, God-help), he probably received at the time when he entered Moses’ service, either before or after the battle with the Amalekites (see Num 13:16, and Hengstenberg, Dissertations , vol. ii.) Hur , who also held a prominent position in the nation, according to Exo 24:14, in connection with Aaron, was the son of Caleb, the son of Hezron, the grandson of Judah (1Ch 2:18-20), and the grandfather of Bezaleel, the architect of the tabernacle (Exo 31:2; Exo 35:30; Exo 38:22, cf.
1Ch 2:19-20). According to Jewish tradition, he was the husband of Miriam. The battle was fought on the day after the first attack (Exo 17:9). The hill (גּבעה, not Mount Horeb), upon the summit of which Moses took up his position during the battle, along with Aaron and Hur, cannot be fixed upon with exact precision, but it was probably situated in the table-land of Fureia, to the north of er Rahah and the Sheikh valley, which is a fertile piece of pasture ground ( Burckhardt , p.
801; Robinson, i. pp. 139, 215), or else in the plateau which runs to the north-east of the Horeb mountains and to the east of the Sheikh valley, with the two peaks Umlanz and Um Alawy; supposing, that is, that the Amalekites attacked the Israelites from Wady Muklifeh or es Suweiriyeh. Moses went to the top of the hill that he might see the battle from thence.
He took Aaron and Hur with him, not as adjutants to convey his orders to Joshua and the army engaged, but to support him in his own part in connection with the conflict. This was to hold up his hand with the staff of God in it. To understand the meaning of this sign, it must be borne in mind that, although Exo 17:11 merely speaks of the raising and dropping of the hand (in the singular), yet, according to Exo 17:12, both hands were supported by Aaron and Hur, who stood one on either side, so that Moses did not hold up his hands alternately, but grasped the staff with both his hands, and held it up with the two.
The lifting up of the hands has been regarded almost with unvarying unanimity by Targumists, Rabbins, Fathers, Reformers, and nearly all the more modern commentators, as the sign or attitude of prayer. Kurtz , on the contrary, maintains, in direct opposition to the custom observed throughout the whole of the Old Testament by all pious and earnest worshipers, of lifting up their hands to God in heaven, that this view attributes an importance to the outward form of prayer which has no analogy even in the Old Testament; he therefore agrees with Lakemacher , in Rosenmüller's Scholien, in regarding the attitude of Moses with his hand lifted up as “the attitude of a commander superintending and directing the battle,” and the elevation of the hand as only the means adopted for raising the staff, which was elevated in the sight of the warriors of Israel as the banner of victory.
But this meaning cannot be established from Exo 17:15 and Exo 17:16. For the altar with the name “ Jehovah my banner, ” and the watchword “ the hand on the banner of Jehovah, war of the Lord against Amalek, ” can neither be proved to be connected with the staff which Moses held in his hand, nor be adduced as a proof that Moses held the staff in front of the Israelites as the banner of victory.
The lifting up of the staff of God was, no doubt, a banner to the Israelites of victory over their foes, but not in this sense, that Moses directed the battle as commander-in-chief, for he had transferred the command to Joshua; nor yet in this sense, that he imparted divine powers to the warriors by means of the staff, and so secured the victory. To effect this, he would not have lifted it up, but have stretched it out, either over the combatants, or at all events towards them, as in the case of all the other miracles that were performed with the staff.
The lifting up of the staff secured to the warriors the strength needed to obtain the victory, from the fact that by means of the staff Moses brought down this strength from above, i. e. , from the Almighty God in heaven; not indeed by a merely spiritless and unthinking elevation of the staff, but by the power of his prayer, which was embodied in the lifting up of his hands with the staff, and was so far strengthened thereby, that God had chosen and already employed this staff as a medium of the saving manifestation of His almighty power.
There is no other way in which we can explain the effect produced upon the battle by the raising and dropping (הניח) of the staff in his hands. As long as Moses held up the staff, he drew down from God victorious powers for the Israelites by means of his prayer; but when he let it fall through the exhaustion of the strength of his hands, he ceased to draw down the power of God, and Amalek gained the upper hand.
The staff, therefore, as it was stretched out on high, was not a sign to the Israelites that were fighting, for it is by no means certain that they could see it in the heat of the battle; but it was a sign to Jehovah, carrying up, as it were, to God the wishes and prayers of Moses, and bringing down from God victorious powers for Israel. If the intention had been the hold it up before the Israelites as a banner of victory.
Moses would not have withdrawn to a hill apart from the field of battle, but would either have carried it himself in front of the army, or have given it to Joshua as commander, to be borne by him in front of the combatants, or else have entrusted it to Aaron, who had performed the miracles in Egypt, that he might carry it at their head. The pure reason why Moses did not do this, but withdrew from the field of battle to lift up the staff of God upon the summit of a hill, and to secure the victory by so doing, is to be found in the important character of the battle itself.
As the heathen world was now commencing its conflict with the people of God in the persons of the Amalekites, and the prototype of the heathen world, with its hostility to God, was opposing the nation of the Lord, that had been redeemed from the bondage of Egypt and was on its way to Canaan, to contest its entrance into the promised inheritance; so the battle which Israel fought with this foe possessed a typical significance in relation to all the future history of Israel. It could not conquer by the sword alone, but could only gain the victory by the power of God, coming down from on high, and obtained through prayer and those means of grace with which it had been entrusted.
The means now possessed by Moses were the staff, which was, as it were, a channel through which the powers of omnipotence were conducted to him. In most cases he used it under the direction of God; but God had not promised him miraculous help for the conflict with the Amalekites, and for this reason he lifted up his hands with the staff in prayer to God, that he might thereby secure the assistance of Jehovah for His struggling people.
At length he became exhausted, and with the falling of his hands and the staff he held, the flow of divine power ceased, so that it was necessary to support his arms, that they might be kept firmly directed upwards (אמוּנה, lit. , firmness) until the enemy was entirely subdued. And from this Israel was to learn the lesson, that in all its conflicts with the ungodly powers of the world, strength for victory could only be procured through the incessant lifting up of its hands in prayer.
“ And Joshua discomfited Amalek and his people (the Amalekites and their people) with the edge of the sword ” (i. e. , without quarter. See Gen 34:26).
Exo 17:8-13 The want of water had only just been provided for, when Israel had to engage in a conflict with the Amalekites, who had fallen upon their rear and smitten it (Deu 25:18). The expansion of this tribe, that was descended from a grandson of Esau (see Gen 36:12), into so great a power even in the Mosaic times, is perfectly conceivable, if we imagine the process to have been analogous to that which we have already described in the case of the leading branches of the Edomites, who had grown into a powerful nation through the subjugation and incorporation of the earlier population of Mount Seir.
The Amalekites had no doubt come to the neighbourhood of Sinai for the same reason for which, even in the present day, the Bedouin Arabs leave the lower districts at the beginning of summer, and congregate in the mountain regions of the Arabian peninsula, viz. , because the grass is dried up in the former, whereas in the latter the pasturage remains green much longer, on account of the climate being comparatively cooler ( Burckhardt , Syr.
p. 789). There they fell upon the Israelites, probably in the Sheikh valley, where the rear had remained behind the main body, not merely for the purpose of plundering or of disputing the possession of this district and its pasture ground with the Israelites, but to assail Israel as the nation of God, and if possible to destroy it. The divine command to exterminate Amalek (Exo 17:14) points to this; and still more the description given of the Amalekites in Balaam’s utterances, as גּוים ראשׁית, “the beginning,” i.
e. , the first and foremost of the heathen nations (Num 24:20). In Amalek the heathen world commenced that conflict with the people of God, which, while it aims at their destruction, can only be terminated by the complete annihilation of the ungodly powers of the world. Earlier theologians pointed out quite correctly the deepest ground for the hostility of the Amalekites, when they traced the causa belli to this fact, “ quod timebat Amalec, qui erat de semine Esau, jam implendam benedictionem, quam Jacob obtinuit et praeripuit ipsi Esau, praesertim cum in magna potentia venirent Israelitae, ut promissam occuparent terram ” Münster, C.
a Lapide, etc.) This peculiar significance in the conflict is apparent, not only from the divine command to exterminate the Amalekites, and to carry on the war of Jehovah with Amalek from generation to generation (Exo 17:14 and Exo 17:16), but also from the manner in which Moses led the Israelites to battle and to victory. Whereas he had performed all the miracles in Egypt and on the journey by stretching out his staff, on this occasion he directed his servant Joshua to choose men for the war, and to fight the battle with the sword.
He himself went with Aaron and Hur to the summit of a hill to hold up the staff of God in his hands, that he might procure success to the warriors through the spiritual weapons of prayer. The proper name of Joshua , who appears here for the first time in the service of Moses, as Hosea (הושׁע); he was a prince of the tribe of Ephraim (Num 13:8, Num 13:16; Deu 32:44).
The name יהושׁע, “Jehovah is help” (or, God-help), he probably received at the time when he entered Moses’ service, either before or after the battle with the Amalekites (see Num 13:16, and Hengstenberg, Dissertations , vol. ii.) Hur , who also held a prominent position in the nation, according to Exo 24:14, in connection with Aaron, was the son of Caleb, the son of Hezron, the grandson of Judah (1Ch 2:18-20), and the grandfather of Bezaleel, the architect of the tabernacle (Exo 31:2; Exo 35:30; Exo 38:22, cf.
1Ch 2:19-20). According to Jewish tradition, he was the husband of Miriam. The battle was fought on the day after the first attack (Exo 17:9). The hill (גּבעה, not Mount Horeb), upon the summit of which Moses took up his position during the battle, along with Aaron and Hur, cannot be fixed upon with exact precision, but it was probably situated in the table-land of Fureia, to the north of er Rahah and the Sheikh valley, which is a fertile piece of pasture ground ( Burckhardt , p.
801; Robinson, i. pp. 139, 215), or else in the plateau which runs to the north-east of the Horeb mountains and to the east of the Sheikh valley, with the two peaks Umlanz and Um Alawy; supposing, that is, that the Amalekites attacked the Israelites from Wady Muklifeh or es Suweiriyeh. Moses went to the top of the hill that he might see the battle from thence.
He took Aaron and Hur with him, not as adjutants to convey his orders to Joshua and the army engaged, but to support him in his own part in connection with the conflict. This was to hold up his hand with the staff of God in it. To understand the meaning of this sign, it must be borne in mind that, although Exo 17:11 merely speaks of the raising and dropping of the hand (in the singular), yet, according to Exo 17:12, both hands were supported by Aaron and Hur, who stood one on either side, so that Moses did not hold up his hands alternately, but grasped the staff with both his hands, and held it up with the two.
The lifting up of the hands has been regarded almost with unvarying unanimity by Targumists, Rabbins, Fathers, Reformers, and nearly all the more modern commentators, as the sign or attitude of prayer. Kurtz , on the contrary, maintains, in direct opposition to the custom observed throughout the whole of the Old Testament by all pious and earnest worshipers, of lifting up their hands to God in heaven, that this view attributes an importance to the outward form of prayer which has no analogy even in the Old Testament; he therefore agrees with Lakemacher , in Rosenmüller's Scholien, in regarding the attitude of Moses with his hand lifted up as “the attitude of a commander superintending and directing the battle,” and the elevation of the hand as only the means adopted for raising the staff, which was elevated in the sight of the warriors of Israel as the banner of victory.
But this meaning cannot be established from Exo 17:15 and Exo 17:16. For the altar with the name “ Jehovah my banner, ” and the watchword “ the hand on the banner of Jehovah, war of the Lord against Amalek, ” can neither be proved to be connected with the staff which Moses held in his hand, nor be adduced as a proof that Moses held the staff in front of the Israelites as the banner of victory.
The lifting up of the staff of God was, no doubt, a banner to the Israelites of victory over their foes, but not in this sense, that Moses directed the battle as commander-in-chief, for he had transferred the command to Joshua; nor yet in this sense, that he imparted divine powers to the warriors by means of the staff, and so secured the victory. To effect this, he would not have lifted it up, but have stretched it out, either over the combatants, or at all events towards them, as in the case of all the other miracles that were performed with the staff.
The lifting up of the staff secured to the warriors the strength needed to obtain the victory, from the fact that by means of the staff Moses brought down this strength from above, i. e. , from the Almighty God in heaven; not indeed by a merely spiritless and unthinking elevation of the staff, but by the power of his prayer, which was embodied in the lifting up of his hands with the staff, and was so far strengthened thereby, that God had chosen and already employed this staff as a medium of the saving manifestation of His almighty power.
There is no other way in which we can explain the effect produced upon the battle by the raising and dropping (הניח) of the staff in his hands. As long as Moses held up the staff, he drew down from God victorious powers for the Israelites by means of his prayer; but when he let it fall through the exhaustion of the strength of his hands, he ceased to draw down the power of God, and Amalek gained the upper hand.
The staff, therefore, as it was stretched out on high, was not a sign to the Israelites that were fighting, for it is by no means certain that they could see it in the heat of the battle; but it was a sign to Jehovah, carrying up, as it were, to God the wishes and prayers of Moses, and bringing down from God victorious powers for Israel. If the intention had been the hold it up before the Israelites as a banner of victory.
Moses would not have withdrawn to a hill apart from the field of battle, but would either have carried it himself in front of the army, or have given it to Joshua as commander, to be borne by him in front of the combatants, or else have entrusted it to Aaron, who had performed the miracles in Egypt, that he might carry it at their head. The pure reason why Moses did not do this, but withdrew from the field of battle to lift up the staff of God upon the summit of a hill, and to secure the victory by so doing, is to be found in the important character of the battle itself.
As the heathen world was now commencing its conflict with the people of God in the persons of the Amalekites, and the prototype of the heathen world, with its hostility to God, was opposing the nation of the Lord, that had been redeemed from the bondage of Egypt and was on its way to Canaan, to contest its entrance into the promised inheritance; so the battle which Israel fought with this foe possessed a typical significance in relation to all the future history of Israel. It could not conquer by the sword alone, but could only gain the victory by the power of God, coming down from on high, and obtained through prayer and those means of grace with which it had been entrusted.
The means now possessed by Moses were the staff, which was, as it were, a channel through which the powers of omnipotence were conducted to him. In most cases he used it under the direction of God; but God had not promised him miraculous help for the conflict with the Amalekites, and for this reason he lifted up his hands with the staff in prayer to God, that he might thereby secure the assistance of Jehovah for His struggling people.
At length he became exhausted, and with the falling of his hands and the staff he held, the flow of divine power ceased, so that it was necessary to support his arms, that they might be kept firmly directed upwards (אמוּנה, lit. , firmness) until the enemy was entirely subdued. And from this Israel was to learn the lesson, that in all its conflicts with the ungodly powers of the world, strength for victory could only be procured through the incessant lifting up of its hands in prayer.
“ And Joshua discomfited Amalek and his people (the Amalekites and their people) with the edge of the sword ” (i. e. , without quarter. See Gen 34:26).
Exo 17:14 As this battle and victory were of such significance, Moses was to write it for a memorial בּסּפר, in “ the book ” appointed for a record of the wonderful works of God, and “ to put it into the ears of Joshua, ” i. e. , to make known to him, and impress upon him, that Jehovah would utterly put out the remembrance of Amalek from under heaven; not “in order that he might carry out this decree of God on the conquest of Canaan, as Knobel supposes, but to strengthen his confidence in the help of the Lord against all the enemies of Israel.
In Deu 25:19 the Israelites are commanded to exterminate Amalek, when God should have given them rest in the land of Canaan from all their enemies round about.
Exo 17:15-16 To praise God for His help, Moses built an altar, which he called “ Jehovah my banner, ” and said, when he did so, “ The hand on the throne (or banner) of Jah! War to the Lord from generation to generation! ” There is nothing said about sacrifices being offered upon this altar. It has been conjectured, therefore, that as a place of worship and thank-offering, the altar with its expressive name was merely to serve as a memorial to posterity of the gracious help of the Lord, and that the words which were spoken by Moses were to serve as a watchword for Israel, keeping this act of God in lively remembrance among the people in all succeeding generations.
כּי (Exo 17:16) merely introduces the words as in Gen 4:23, etc. The expression יהּ על־כּס יד is obscure, chiefly on account of the ἁπ λεγ. כּס. In the ancient versions (with the exception of the Septuagint, in which יה כץ is treated as one word, and rendered κρυφαία) כּס is taken to be equivalent to כּסּה (1Ki 10:19; Job 26:9) for כּסּא, and the clause is rendered “the hand upon the throne of the Lord.
” But whilst some understand the laying of the hand (sc. , of God) upon the throne to be expressive of the attitude of swearing, others regard the hand as symbolical of power. There are others again, like Clericus , who suppose the hand to denote the hand laid by the Amalekites upon the throne of the Lord, i. e. , on Israel. But if כּס signifies throng or adytum arcanum , the words can hardly be understood in any other sense than “the hand lifted up to the throne of Jehovah in heaven, war to the Lord,” etc.
; and thus understood, they can only contain an admonition to Israel to follow the example of Moses, and wage war against Amalek with the hands lifted up to the throne of Jehovah. Modern expositors, however, for the most part regard כּס as a corruption of נס, “the hand on the banner of the Lord. ” But even admitting this, though many objections may be offered to its correctness, we must not understand by “the banner of Jehovah” the staff of Moses, but only the altar with the name Jehovah-nissi, as the symbol or memorial of the victorious help afforded by God in the battle with the Amalekites.