translation_id: net-engnet

book_id: EXO

label: NET translator note

text: Heb “and Moses answered and said.”


text: Or “What if.” The use of הֵן ( hen ) is unusual here, introducing a conditional idea in the question without a following consequence clause (see Exod 8:22 HT [ 8:26 ET]; Jer 2:10 ; 2 Chr 7:13 ). The Greek has “if not” but adds the clause “what shall I say to them?”


text: Heb “listen to my voice,” so as to respond positively.


text: Or “rod” (KJV, ASV); NCV, CEV “walking stick”; NLT “shepherd’s staff.” sn The staff appears here to be the shepherd’s staff that he was holding. It now will become the instrument with which Moses will do the mighty works, for it is the medium of the display of the divine power (S. R. Driver, Exodus , 27; also, L. Shalit, “How Moses Turned a Staff into a Snake and Back Again,” BAR 9 [1983]: 72-73).


text: Heb “he”; the referent (the Lord ) has been specified in the translation for clarity.


text: The word חֵיק ( kheq ), often rendered “bosom,” refers to the front of the chest and a fold in the garment there where an item could be placed for carrying (see Prov 6:27; 16:33; 21:14 ). So “into your robe” should be understood loosely here and in v. 7 as referring to the inside of the top front of Moses’ garment. The inside chest pocket of a jacket is a rough modern equivalent.


text: The particle הִנֵּה ( hinneh ) points out the startling or amazing sight as if the reader were catching first glimpse of it with Moses.


text: Heb “it returned.”


text: Heb “like his flesh.”


text: Heb “and it will be if.”


text: Heb “listen to the voice of,” meaning listen so as to respond appropriately.


text: The nuance of this perfect tense with a vav ( ו ) consecutive will be equal to the imperfect of possibility – “they may believe.”


text: Heb “believe the voice of the latter sign,” so as to understand and accept the meaning of the event.


text: Heb “listen to your voice.”


text: The verb form is the perfect tense with the vav ( ו ) consecutive; it functions then as the equivalent of the imperfect tense – here as an imperfect of instruction.


text: The word בִּי ( bi ) is a particle of entreaty; it seeks permission to speak and is always followed by “my lord” or “my Lord.” Often rendered “please,” it is “employed in petitions, complaints and excuses” (W. H. C. Propp, –18 [AB], 213).


text: The designation in Moses’ address is אֲדֹנָי (’ adonay ), a term of respect and deference such as “lord, master, sir” but pointed as it would be when it represents the tetragrammaton. B. Jacob says since this is the first time Moses spoke directly to Yahweh, he did so hesitatingly ( Exodus , 87).


text: When a noun clause is negated with לֹא ( lo ’), rather than אֵין (’ en ), there is a special emphasis, since the force of the negative falls on a specific word (GKC 479 §152. d ). The expression “eloquent man” is אִישׁ דְּבָרִים (’ ish dÿvarim , “a man of words”). The genitive may indicate a man characterized by words or a man who is able to command or control words. Moses apparently is resigned to the fact that he can do the signs, but he knows the signs have to be explained.


text: Heb “also from yesterday also from three days ago” or “neither since yesterday nor since before that” is idiomatic for “previously” or “in the past.”


text: The two expressions are כְבַד־פֶּה ( khÿvad peh , “heavy of mouth”), and then כְבַד לָשׁוֹן ( khÿvad lashon , “heavy of tongue”). Both use genitives of specification, the mouth and the tongue being what are heavy – slow. “Mouth” and “tongue” are metonymies of cause. Moses is saying that he has a problem speaking well. Perhaps he had been too long at the other side of the desert, or perhaps he was being a little dishonest. At any rate, he has still not captured the meaning of God’s presence. See among other works, J. H. Tigay, “‘Heavy of Mouth’ and ‘Heavy of Tongue’: On Moses’ Speech Difficulty,” BASOR 231 (1978): 57-67.


text: The verb שִׂים ( sim ) means “to place, put, set”; the sentence here more precisely says, “Who put a mouth into a man?” sn The argumentation by Moses is here met by Yahweh’s rhetorical questions. They are intended to be sharp – it is reproof for Moses. The message is twofold. First, Yahweh is fully able to overcome all of Moses’ deficiencies. Second, Moses is exactly the way that God intended him to be. So the rhetorical questions are meant to prod Moses’ faith.


text: The form is the imperfect tense. While it could be taken as a future (“what you will say”), an obligatory imperfect captures the significance better (“what you must say” or “what you are to say”). Not even the content of the message will be left up to Moses.


text: Heb “And he said”; the referent (Moses) has been specified in the translation for clarity.


text: The word בִּי ( bi ) is a particle of entreaty; it seeks permission to speak and is always followed by “Lord” or “my Lord.”


text: The text has simply שְׁלַח־נָא בְּיַד־תִּשְׁלָח ( shÿlakh-na ’ bÿyad tishlakh , “send by the hand you will send”). This is not Moses’ resignation to doing God’s will – it is his final attempt to avoid the call. It carries the force of asking God to send someone else. This is an example of an independent relative clause governed by the genitive: “by the hand of – whomever you will send” (see GKC 488-89 §155. n ).


text: Heb “and the anger of Yahweh burned against.” sn Moses had not dared openly to say “except me” when he asked God to send whomever he wanted to send. But God knew that is what he meant. Moses should not have resisted the call or pleaded such excuses or hesitated with such weak faith. Now God abandoned the gentle answer and in anger brought in a form of retribution. Because Moses did not want to do this, he was punished by not having the honor of doing it alone. His reluctance and the result are like the refusal of Israel to enter the land and the result they experienced (see U. Cassuto, Exodus , 49-50).


text: Heb “Is not” or perhaps “Is [there] not.”


text: The construction uses the Piel infinitive absolute and the Piel imperfect to express the idea that he spoke very well: דַבֵּר יְדַבֵּר ( dabber yÿdabber ). sn Now Yahweh, in condescending to Moses, selects something that Moses (and God) did not really need for the work. It is as if he were saying: “If Moses feels speaking ability is so necessary (rather than the divine presence), then that is what he will have.” Of course, this golden-tongued Aaron had some smooth words about how the golden calf was forged!


text: The particle הִנֵּה ( hinneh ) with the participle points to the imminent future; it means “he is about to come” or “here he is coming.”


text: Or “I will help you speak.” The independent pronoun puts emphasis (“as for me”) on the subject (“I”).


text: Or “and will help him speak.”


text: The word “both” is supplied to convey that this object (“you”) and the subject of the next verb (“you must do”) are plural in the Hebrew text, referring to Moses and Aaron. In 4:16 “you” returns to being singular in reference to Moses.


text: The imperfect tense carries the obligatory nuance here as well. The relative pronoun with this verb forms a noun clause functioning as the direct object of “I will teach.”


text: The word “he” represents the Hebrew independent pronoun, which makes the subject emphatic.


text: The phrase “as if” is supplied for clarity.


text: Heb “and it will be [that] he , he will be to you for a mouth,” or more simply, “ he will be your mouth.”


text: Heb “he will be to you for a mouth.”


text: The phrase “as if” is supplied for clarity. The word “you” represents the Hebrew independent pronoun, which makes the subject emphatic. sn Moses will be like God to Aaron, giving him the words to say, inspiring him as God would inspire a prophet. The whole process had now been removed one step. Instead of God speaking to Moses and Moses telling the people, Aaron would be the speaker for a while. But God was still going to work through Moses.


text: The two verbs form a verbal hendiadys, the second verb becoming adverbial in the translation: “and he went and he returned” becomes “and he went back.”


text: There is a sequence here with the two cohortative forms: אֵלְכָה נָּא וְאָשׁוּבָה (’ elÿkhah nna ’ vÿ ’ ashuva ) – “let me go in order that I may return.”


text: Heb “brothers.”


text: This verb is parallel to the preceding cohortative and so also expresses purpose: “let me go that I may return…and that I may see.”


text: The text has two imperatives, “Go, return”; if these are interpreted as a hendiadys (as in the translation), then the second is adverbial.


text: Heb “And Moses took.”


text: The verb would literally be rendered “and returned”; however, the narrative will record other happenings before he arrived in Egypt, so an ingressive nuance fits here – he began to return, or started back.


text: Heb “And Yahweh said.”


text: The construction may involve a verbal hendiadys using the two infinitive forms: “when you go to return” ( בְּלֶכְתְּךָ לָשׁוּב , bÿlekhtÿkha lashuv ). The clause is temporal, subordinated to the instruction to do the signs. Therefore, its focus cannot be on going to return, i.e., preparing or beginning to return.


text: The two verb forms in this section are the imperative ( רְאֵה , rÿ ’ eh ) followed by the perfect with the vav ( וַעֲשִׂיתָם , va ’ asitam ). The second could be coordinated and function as a second command: “see…and [then] do”; or it could be subordinated logically: “see…so that you do.” Some commentators who take the first option suggest that Moses was supposed to contemplate these wonders before doing them before Pharaoh. That does not seem as likely as the second interpretation reflected in the translation.


text: Or “in your power”; Heb “in your hand.”


text: Heb “strengthen” (in the sense of making stubborn or obstinate). The text has the expression וַאֲנִי אֲחַזֵּק אֶת־לִבּוֹ ( va ’ ani ’ akhazzeq ’ et-libbo ), “I will make strong his will,” or “I will strengthen his resolve,” recognizing the “heart” as the location of decision making (see Prov 16:1, 9 ).


text: The sequence of the instruction from God uses the perfect tense with vav ( ו ), following the preceding imperfects.


text: The text uses the imperative, “send out” ( שַׁלַּח , shallakh ) followed by the imperfect or jussive with the vav ( ו ) to express purpose.


text: The Piel infinitive serves as the direct object of the verb, answering the question of what Pharaoh would refuse to do. The command and refusal to obey are the grounds for the announcement of death for Pharaoh’s son.


text: The construction is very emphatic. The particle הִנֵּה ( hinneh ) gives it an immediacy and a vividness, as if God is already beginning to act. The participle with this particle has the nuance of an imminent future act, as if God is saying, “I am about to kill.” These words are not repeated until the last plague.


text: Or “at a lodging place” or “at an inn.”


text: Heb “to his feet.” The referent (Moses) has been specified in the translation for clarity. The LXX has “and she fell at his feet” and then “the blood of the circumcision of my son stood.” But it is clear that she caused the foreskin to touch Moses’ feet, as if the one were a substitution for the other, taking the place of the other (see U. Cassuto, Exodus , 60).


text: Heb “he”; the referent (the Lord ) has been specified in the translation for clarity.


text: Or “Therefore.” The particle אָז (’ az ) here is not introducing the next item in a series of events. It points back to the past (“at that time,” see Gen 4:26 ) or to a logical connection (“therefore, consequently”).


text: The Hebrew simply has לַמּוּלֹת ( lammulot , “to the circumcision[s]”). The phrase explains that the saying was in reference to the act of circumcision. Some scholars speculate that there was a ritual prior to marriage from which this event and its meaning derived. But it appears rather that if there was some ancient ritual, it would have had to come from this event. The difficulty is that the son is circumcised, not Moses, making the comparative mythological view untenable. Moses had apparently not circumcised Eliezer. Since Moses was taking his family with him, God had to make sure the sign of the covenant was kept. It may be that here Moses sent them all back to Jethro ( 18:2 ) because of the difficulties that lay ahead.


text: S. R. Driver considers that this verse is a continuation of vv. 17 and 18 and that Aaron met Moses before Moses started back to Egypt ( Exodus , 33). The first verb, then, might have the nuance of a past perfect: Yahweh had said.


text: Heb “and kissed him.”


text: This verb and the last one in the verse are rendered with the past perfect nuance because they refer to what the Lord had done prior to Moses’ telling Aaron.


text: Heb “And Aaron spoke.”


label: NET textual note

text: The LXX (Greek OT) has “and they rejoiced,” probably reading וַיִּשְׂמְחוּ ( vayyismÿkhu ) instead of what the MT reading, וַיִּשְׂמְעוּ ( vayyismÿ ’ u , “and they heard”). To rejoice would have seemed a natural response of the people at the news, and the words sound similar in Hebrew. tn The form is the preterite with the vav consecutive, “and they heard.” It clearly is a temporal clause subordinate to the following verbs that report how they bowed and worshiped. But it is also in sequence to the preceding: they believed, and then they bowed when they heard.


text: Or “intervened for.” The word פָּקַד ( paqad ) has traditionally been translated “visited,” which is open to many interpretations. It means that God intervened in the life of the Israelites to bless them with the fulfillment of the promises. It says more than that he took notice of them, took pity on them, or remembered them. He had not yet fulfilled the promises, but he had begun to act by calling Moses and Aaron. The translation “attended to” attempts to capture that much.


text: The verb וַיִּשְׁתַּחֲוּוּ ( vayyishtakhavu ) is usually rendered “worshiped.” More specifically, the verbal root חָוָה ( khava ) in the hishtaphel stem means “to cause oneself to be low to the ground.” While there is nothing wrong with giving it a general translation of “worship,” it may be better in a passage like this to take it in conjunction with the other verb (“bow”) as a verbal hendiadys, using it as an adverb to that verb. The implication is certainly that they prayed, or praised, and performed some other aspect of worship, but the text may just be describing it from their posture of worship. With this response, all the fears of Moses are swept aside – they believed and they were thankful to God.