Exodus 12 notes

¹sn Chapter 12 details the culmination of the ten plagues on Egypt and the beginning of the actual deliverance from bondage. Moreover, the celebration of this festival of Passover was to become a central part of the holy calendar of Israel. The contents of this chapter have significance for NT studies as well, since the Passover was a type of the death of Jesus. The structure of this section before the crossing of the sea is as follows: the institution of the Passover (12:1-28), the night of farewell and departure (12:29-42), slaves and strangers (12:43-51), and the laws of the firstborn (13:1-16). In this immediate section there is the institution of the Passover itself (12:1-13), then the Unleavened Bread (12:14-20), and then the report of the response of the people (12:21-28).
²tn Heb “and Yahweh said.”
³tn Heb rm)al@ (le’mor), “saying.”
⁴sn B. Jacob shows that the intent of the passage was not to make this month in the springtime the New Year—that was in the autumn. Rather, when counting the months of the years this was supposed to be remembered first, for it was the great festival of freedom from Egypt. He observes how some scholars have unnecessarily tried to date one New Year earlier than the other (B. Jacob, Exodus, 294-95).
⁵tn Heb “and they will take for them a man a lamb.” This is clearly the distributive sense of “man.”
⁶tn The hC# (seh) is a single head from the flock, or smaller cattle, which would include both sheep and goats.
⁷sn The expression “fathers’ house” is a common expression for a family. The Passover is to be a domestic institution. Each lamb was to be shared by family members.
⁸tn Heb “the house.”
⁹sn Later Judaism ruled that “too little” meant fewer than ten, in accordance with the interpretation based on Num 14:27 that ten was the smallest number that would constitute a congregation (S. R. Driver, Exodus, 88).
¹⁰tn The clause uses the comparative min construction: hC#m! ty)h=m! ty]B^h^ fu^m=y] (yim’at habbayit mihyot misseh, “the house is small from being from a lamb,” or “too small for a lamb”). It clearly means that if there are not enough people in the household to have a lamb by themselves, they should join with another family. For the use of the comparative, see GKC §133.c.
¹¹tn Heb “he and his neighbor”; the referent (the man) has been specified in the translation for clarity.
¹²tn Heb “who is near to his house.”
¹³tn The construction uses a perfect tense with a vav consecutive after a conditional clause: “if the household is too small…then he and his neighbor will take.”
¹⁴tn Heb “[every] man according to his eating.”
sn The reference is normally taken to mean whatever each person could eat. B. Jacob suggests, however, that the reference may not be to each individual person’s appetite, but to each family. Each man who is the head of a household was to determine how much his family could eat, and this in turn would determine how many families shared the lamb (see B. Jacob, Exodus, 299).
¹⁵tn The construction has: “[The] lamb…will be to you.” This may be interpreted as a possessive use of the lamed, meaning, “[the] lamb…you have” (your lamb) for the Passover. In the context instructing the people to take an animal for this festival, the idea here is that the one they select, their animal, must meet these qualifications.
¹⁶tn The Hebrew word <ym!T* (tamim) means “perfect” or “whole” or “complete” in the sense of not having blemishes and diseases—no physical defects. The rules for sacrificial animals applied here (see Lev 22:19, 21; Deut 17:1).
¹⁷tn The idiom says “a son of a year” (hn*v*-/B# [ben sana]), meaning a “yearling” or “one year old” (see GKC §128.v).
¹⁸tn Because a choice is being given here in this last clause, the imperfect tense nuance of permission should be used. They must have a perfect animal, but it may be a sheep or a goat. The verb’s object “it” is supplied from the context.
¹⁹tn The text has tr#m#v=m!l= <k#l hy`h*w+ (w^ehaya lakem mismeret), “and it will be for you for a keeping.” This noun stresses the activity of watching over or caring for something, probably to keep it in its proper condition for its designated use (see 16:23, 32-34).
²⁰tn The expression “all the congregation of the assembly” is a pleonasm. The verse means that the whole congregation will kill the lamb, i.e., each family unit within the congregation will kill its animal.
²¹tn The expression “between the evenings” (<y]Br+u^h /yB@ [ben ha‘arbayim]) has had a good deal of discussion. There are several predominant views. (1) Targum Onqelos says “between the two suns,” which the Talmud explains as the time between the sunset and the time the stars become visible. More technically, the first “evening” would be the time between sunset and the appearance of the crescent moon, and the second “evening” the next hour, or from the appearance of the crescent moon to full darkness (see Deut 16:6—“at the going down of the sun”). (2) Saadia, Rashi, and Kimchi say the first evening is when the sun begins to decline in the west and cast its shadows, and the second evening is the beginning of night. (3) The view adopted by the Pharisees and the Talmudists (b. Pesahim 61a) is that the first evening is when the heat of the sun begins to decrease, and the second evening begins at sunset, or, roughly from 3-5 p.m. The Mishnah (m. Pesahim 5:1) indicates it was killed about 2:30 p.m.—anything before noon was not valid. Driver concludes from this survey that the first view is probably the best, although the last view was the traditionally accepted one (S. R. Driver, Exodus, 89-90).
²²tn Heb “this night.”
²³sn Unleavened bread could be baked quickly, not requiring time for the use of leaven. In Deut 16:3 the unleavened cakes are called “the bread of affliction,” which alluded to the alarm and haste of the Israelites. In later Judaism and in the writings of Paul, leaven came to be a type of evil or corruption, and so “unleavened bread” was interpreted to be a picture of purity or freedom from corruption or defilement (S. R. Driver, Exodus, 90-91).
²⁴sn This ruling was to prevent their eating it just softened by the fire or partially roasted as differing customs might prescribe or allow.
²⁵tn In this section of divine instructions (using imperfect of instruction) this clause inserts an obligatory imperfect—they must burn anything left over with fire.
²⁶tn Heb “your loins girded.”
²⁷tn Driver argues that “haste” is not fully accurate. He suggests “trepidation,” that mixture of hurry and alarm. In Deut 20:3 it is connected to “tremble.”
²⁸tn The meaning of js^P# (pesah) is debated. (1) Some have tried to connect it to the Hebrew verb with the same radicals that means “to halt, leap, limp, stumble.” See 1 Kgs 18:21 where the word describes the priests of Baal cavorting around the altar; also the crippled child in 2 Sam 4:4. (2) Others connect it to the Akkadian passahu, which means “to appease, make soft, placate”; or (3) an Egyptian word to commemorate the harvest (see Segal, The Passover, 95-100). The verb occurs in Isa 31:5 with the connotation of “to protect”; Childs suggests that this was already influenced by the exodus tradition (B. S. Childs, Exodus, 183, n. 11). Whatever links there may or may not have been that show an etymology, in this passage it is describing Yahweh’s passing over or through.
²⁹sn The entire section of instructions for the Passover is important to Christian expositors, for Paul announced that “Christ our Passover has been sacrificed,” and therefore believers must keep the Feast of Unleavened Bread—a life of holiness (1 Cor 5:7-8). Christian expositors down through the years have seen clear connections between Exod 12 and the Gospel—deliverance from bondage by the blood of the lamb, the lamb without blemish, salvation from judgment by the angel of death, and the details of the time of the sacrifice of Christ as the Passover Lamb at 3 p.m. Here, the large picture as well as the details fit the typology of the death of Christ. And, the fact that the last Supper was a Passover meal in which Jesus explained the full meaning of it all adds to the completion. A related area of correspondence between the testaments is the image of “son.” Christ is the “only begotten Son” but also the Passover Lamb. So in the fulfillment of the Lamb that brings redemption there is also the Son, the Seed of Abraham. When OT images overlap like this, the expositor is confronted with the richness of the eternal plan of God revealed in Scripture. In Exodus the firstborn die as part of the judgment of God on the world; in the NT the Son dies as a substitute, so that sinners might live. For additional material on these themes, see P. R. Davies, “The Sacrifice of Isaac and Passover,” StudBib (1979): 127-32; and “Passover and the Dating of the Aqedah,” JJS 30 (1979): 59-67.
³⁰tn The verb yT!r+b^u*w+ (w^e‘abarti) is a Qal perfect with vav consecutive, announcing the future action of God in bringing judgment on the land. The word means “pass over, across, through.” This verb provides a contextual motive for the name “Passover.”
³¹tn Heb “this night.”
³²tn The verb hkn (naka) means “to strike, smite, attack”; it does not always mean “to kill,” but that is obviously the meaning in this context. It was also the meaning of the usage where Moses killed the Egyptian and buried him in the sand .
³³tn Heb “man and beast.”
³⁴tn The phrase <yf!pv= hc#u$a# (’e‘eseh s^epatim) is “I will do judgments.” The statement clearly includes what had begun in Exod 6:1. But the statement that God would judge the gods of Egypt is appropriately introduced here (see also Num 33:4) because with the judgment on Pharaoh and the deliverance from bondage, Yahweh would truly show himself to be the one true God. Thus, “I am Yahweh” is fitting here (see B. Jacob, Exodus, 312).
³⁵tn Both of the verbs for seeing and passing over are perfect tenses with vav consecutives: yT!j=s^p*W…yt!ya!rw+ (w^era’iti…upasahti); the first of these parallel verb forms is subordinated to the second as a temporal clause. See Gesenius’ description of perfect consecutives in the protasis and apodosis (GKC §159.g).
³⁶tn The meaning of the verb is supplied in part from the near context of seeing the sign and omitting to destroy, as well as the verb at the start of verse 12 “pass through, by, over.” Isa 31:5 says, “As birds flying, so will Yahweh protect Jerusalem: he will protect and deliver, he will pass over and rescue.” The word does not occur enough times to enable one to develop a clear meaning. It is probably not the same word as “to limp” found in 1 Kgs 18:21, 26, unless there is a highly developed category of meaning there.
³⁷tn The word “plague” ([g#n# [negep]) is literally “a blow” or “a striking.” It usually describes a calamity or affliction given to those who have aroused God’s anger, such as Exod 30:12; Num 8:19; 16:46, 47; Josh 22:17 (S. R. Driver, Exodus, 92-93).
³⁸tn Heb “for destruction.” The form tyj!v=m^^ (mashkhit) is the Hiphil participle of tjv (shakhat). The word itself is a harsh term; it was used to describe Yahweh’s destruction of Sodom and Gomorrah (Gen 13:10).
³⁹tn yt!K)h^B= (b^ehakkoti) is the Hiphil infinitive construct from hkn (naka), with a preposition prefixed and a pronominal suffix added to serve as the subjective genitive—the subject of this temporal clause.
⁴⁰sn For additional discussions, see W. H. Elder, “The Passover,” RevExp 74 (1977): 511-22; E. Nutz, “The Passover,” BV 12 (1978): 23-28; H. M. Kamsler, “The Blood Covenant in the Bible,” Dor l^e Dor 6 (1977): 94-98; A. Rodriguez, Substitution in the Hebrew Cultus and in Cultic-Related Texts (Berrien Springs: Andrews University Press, 1979); B. Ramm, “The Theology of the Book of Exodus: a Reflection on Exodus 12:12,” SwJT 20 (1977): 59-68; and M. Gilula, “The Smiting of the First-Born: An Egyptian Myth?” TA 4 (1977): 94-85.
⁴¹tn Heb “and this day will be.”
⁴²tn The expression “will be for a memorial” means “will become a memorial.”
sn The instruction for the Unleavened Bread (vv. 14-20) begins with the introduction of the memorial (/orK*z! [zikkaron], from rkz [zakar]). The reference is to the fifteenth day of the month, the beginning of the Feast of Unleavened Bread. B. Jacob notes that it refers to the death blow on Egypt, but as a remembrance had to be held on the next day, not during the night. He also notes that this was the origin of “the Day of the Lord” (“the Day of Yahweh”) which the prophets predicted as the day of the divine battle. On it the enemy would be wiped out (B. Jacob, 315). For further information, see B. S. Childs, Memory and Tradition in Israel (SBT). The point of the word “remember” in Hebrew is not simply a recollection of an event, but a reliving of it, a reactivating of its significance. In covenant rituals “remembrance” or “memorial” is designed to prompt God and worshiper alike to act in accordance with the covenant. Jesus brought the motif forward to the new covenant with “this do in remembrance of me.”
⁴³tn The verb <t#G)j^w+ (w^ehaggotem), a perfect tense with the vav consecutive to continue the instruction, is followed by the cognate accusative gj^ (hag), for emphasis. As the wording implies and the later legislation required, this would involve a pilgrimage to the sanctuary of the Yahweh.
⁴⁴tn The two expressions show that this celebration was to be kept perpetually: the line has “according to your generations, [as] a statute forever.” “Generations” means successive generations (Driver, 94). <l*ou (‘olam) means “ever, forever, perpetual”—no end in sight.
⁴⁵tn This expression is an adverbial accusative of time. The feast was to last from the 15th to the 21st of the month.
⁴⁶tn The imperfect tense could be translated as a future, expressing the instruction for Israel. This verse seems, rather, to stress their obligation—they must not eat leaven.
⁴⁷tn The etymology of toXm^ (massot), “unleavened bread,” is uncertain. Suggested connections to known verbs include “to squeeze, press,” “to depart, go out,” “to ransom,” or to an Egyptian word “food, cake, evening meal.” For a more detailed study of “unleavened bread” and related matters such as “yeast” or “leaven,” see A. P. Ross, “Bread, Cake,” in NIDOTTE 4:448-53.
⁴⁸tn The particle serves to emphasize, not restrict here (Childs, 183, n. 15).
⁴⁹tn Heb “every eater of leavened bread,” this participle stands at the beginning of the clause as a casus pendens, to indicate a condition, the contingent occurrences of which involve a further consequence (GKC §116.w).
⁵⁰tn The verb ht*r+k=n]w+ (w^enikr^eta) is the Niphal perfect with the vav consecutive; it is a common formula in the Law for divine punishment. Here, in sequence to the idea that someone might eat leavened bread, the result would be that “that soul [the verb is feminine] will be cut off.” The verb is the equivalent of the imperfect tense due to the consecutive; a translation with a nuance of the imperfect of possibility fits better than a specific future. There is the real danger of being cut off, for while the punishment might include excommunication from the community, the real danger was in the possibility of divine intervention to root out the evildoer (Driver, 94). Gesenius lists this as the use of a perfect with a vav consecutive after a participle (a casus pendens) to introduce the apodosis (GKC §112.mm).
sn Concerning the use of leaven, B. Jacob writes, “This prohibition against leaven, with its slight intoxicating effect, and the command to eat bitter herbs, displayed an extraordinary sensitivity to any stimulation (compare with Exod 20:25f.). The ancient Israelite experience considered all luxury and opulence as vulgar and barbaric; enjoyment led to vulgarity, while restraint to nobility and priestly holiness” (p. 319).
⁵¹sn This refers to an assembly of the people at the sanctuary for religious purposes. The word “convocation” implies that the people were called together; and Num 10:2 indicates they were called together by trumpets.
⁵²tn Heb “all/every work will not be done.” The word refers primarily to the work of one’s occupation. B. Jacob explains that since this comes prior to the fuller description of laws for Sabbaths and festivals, the passage simply restricts all work except for the preparation of food. Once the laws are added, this qualification is no longer needed (p. 322). Gesenius translates this as “no manner of work shall be done” (GKC §152.b).
⁵³tn The word means “bone”; the expression then means “the substance of the day,” the day itself, the very day (Driver, 95).
⁵⁴tn The word is “armies” or “divisions.” The narrative will continue to portray Israel as a mighty army, marching forth in its divisions.
⁵⁵tn See Exod 12:14.
⁵⁶tn “month” has been supplied.
⁵⁷tn “Seven days” is an adverbial accusative of time (see R. J. Williams, Hebrew Syntax, §56).
⁵⁸tn The term is vp#n# (nefesh), often translated “soul.” The term refers to the whole person, the soul within the body. The noun is feminine, agreeing with the feminine verb “be cut off.”
⁵⁹tn Or “alien”; or “stranger.”
⁶⁰tn The term refers to the one who is native born in the land. B. Jacob argues that since the “stranger” also was born in the land, the distinction has to be greater. The natural citizen is the one who has ancestors who came out of Egypt by the exodus (p. 324).
⁶¹tn The verb has in view the need “to draw out” a lamb or goat from among the rest of the flock.
⁶²tn The noun is singular and can refer to a lamb or a goat; but the context is addressing the people who each would be taking a small animal.
⁶³tn The word “animals” is added to avoid giving the impression in English that the Passover festival itself is the object of “kill.”
⁶⁴sn The hyssop is a small bush that grows throughout the Sinai, probably the aromatic herb Origanum Maru L., or Origanum Aegyptiacum. The plant also grew out of the walls in Jerusalem (1 Kgs 4:33). See L. Baldensperger and G. M. Crowfoot, “Hyssop,” PEQ 63 (1931): 89-98. A piece of hyssop was useful to the priests because it worked well for sprinkling.
⁶⁵tn The Greek and the Vulgate translate [s^ (sap), “basin,” as “threshold.” Kaiser reports how early traditions grew up about the killing of the lamb on the threshold (W. C. Kaiser, Jr, “Exodus,” in EBC 376).
⁶⁶tn Heb “and you, you shall not go out, a man from the door of his house.” This construction puts stress on prohibiting absolutely everyone from going out.
⁶⁷tn The first of the two clauses begun with perfects and vav consecutives may be subordinated to form a temporal clause: “and he will see…and he will pass over,” becomes “when he sees…he will pass over.”
⁶⁸tn Here the form is the Hiphil participle with the definite article. Gesenius says this is now to be explained as “the destroyer” although some take it to mean “destruction” (GKC §126.m, note).
⁶⁹tn “you” has been supplied.
⁷⁰tn The verb used here and at the beginning of v. 24 is rmv (samar); this can be translated “watch, keep, protect” but in this context “observe” the religious customs and practices set forth in these instructions. Judaism, of course, has complied with this injunction by including these details in the Passover Haggadah (the “telling”).
⁷¹tn Heb “what is this service to you?”
⁷²sn This expression “the sacrifice of Yahweh’s Passover” occurs only here. The word jb^z# (zebah) means “slaughtering” and so a blood sacrifice. The fact that this word is used in Lev 3 for the peace offering has linked the Passover as a kind of peace offering, both of which were eaten as communal meals.
⁷³tn The verb means “to strike, smite, plague”; it is the same verb that has been used throughout this section ([gn [nagap]). Here the construction is the infinitive construct in a temporal clause.
⁷⁴tn The two verbs form a verbal hendiadys: “and the people bowed down and they worshiped.” Both words are synonyms, and so one is taken as the adverb for the other.
⁷⁵tn Heb “went away and did as the Lord had commanded Moses and Aaron, so they did.” The final phrase “so they did,” which is somewhat redundant in English, has been represented in the translation by the adverb “exactly.”
⁷⁶sn The next section records the deliverance of Israel from Egypt, and so becomes the turning point of the book. Verses 28 and 29 could be included in the exposition of the previous section as the culmination of that part: the message developed God’s requirement for deliverance from bondage through the application of the blood of the sacrifice, God’s instruction for the memorial of deliverance through the purging of corruption, and the compliance of those who believed the message. But these verses also form the beginning of this section (and so could be used transitionally). This unit includes the judgment on Egypt (29,20), the exodus from Egypt (31-39) and the historical summation and report (40-42).
⁷⁷tn The verse begins with the temporal indicator yh!y+w~ (wayhi), so often translated, “and it came to pass.” Here it could be left untranslated: “In the middle of the night Yahweh struck.” The word order of the next and main clause provides the emphasis: “and/that Yahweh struck”—the vav disjunctive on the divine name preceding the verb. The sentence clearly states that Yahweh struck the firstborn in the middle of the night; but the emphasis on Yahweh, and on the suddenness of the attack at mid-night, can be reflected in the translation.
⁷⁸sn The plague struck in total darkness, when they were at their deepest rest, contributing to the terror of it. Unlike previous verses that talk of a plague or a destroyer, here only the stark “attack (kill)” is used with no explanation. Sudden death, with no apparent cause or warning was a frightening divine secret (B. Jacob, 334). He adds that the Torah is not concerned with the explanations, only with the defeat of a tyrant and the deliverance of the covenant people. Contemporary scholars who propose natural phenomena for explanations of such things have suggested a couple of causes for this. Some who wish to see the Passover as a Hebrew development of an earlier harvest festival are troubled by the death of the humans, for only firstborn animals were offered in those rites. Others like Driver suggest a commonly occurring epidemic struck in the middle of the night. He even suggests that people report these breaking out in the spring time (p. 98). This is surely carrying the natural explanation too far. At least Driver quotes Dillmann as saying, “the plague here, by its momentary suddenness, as also by its carrying off as its victims exclusively the first-born of the Egyptians, bears a wholly supernatural character…” (p. 99)—but then the quote goes on to say how this tradition might have grown up. Jacob rightly says that all this is theoretical and without basis, and reverses matters completely (p. 335).
⁷⁹tn Heb “arose,” the verb <Wq (qum) in this context certainly must describe a less ceremonial act. The entire country woke up in terror because of the deaths.
⁸⁰tn The noun is an adverbial accusative of time—“in the night” or “at night.”
⁸¹sn Or so it seemed. One should not push this description to complete literalness. The reference would be limited to houses that actually had firstborn people or animals.
⁸²tn The urgency in Pharaoh’s words is caught by the abrupt use of the imperatives—“get up, go” (WaX= WmWq [qumu ss^e’u]), and “go, and serve” (Wdb=u! Wkl=W [u-l^eku ‘ibdu]) and “take” and “leave/go” (Wkl@w*…Wjq+ [q^ehu…waleku]).
⁸³sn It appears from this clause that Pharaoh was expecting the Israelites to go for three days to sacrifice—except that with the severe judgment on him for his refusal he would have known that this people were no longer his subjects, and he was no longer sovereign.
⁸⁴tn The form is the Piel perfect with a vav consecutive (<T#k=r^b@W [u-beraktem]); coming in the sequence of imperatives this perfect tense would be volitional—probably a request rather than a command.
sn Pharaoh probably meant that they should bless him also when they were sacrificing to Yahweh in their religious festival—after all, he might reason, he did let them go (after divine judgment). To bless him would mean to invoke divine blessing or good gifts on him.
⁸⁵tn The verb used here (qzj [hazaq]) is the same verb used for Pharaoh’s heart being hardened. It then conveys the idea of their being resolved or insistent in this—they were not going to change.
⁸⁶tn The construction uses two infinitives construct here in a hendiadys, the first infinitive becoming the modifier.
⁸⁷tn The imperfect tense after the adverb <r#f# (terem) is to be treated as a preterite, “before it was leavened,” or “before the yeast was added.” See GKC §107.c.
⁸⁸tn These verbs “had done” and then “had asked” were accomplished prior to the present narrative (Driver, 99).
⁸⁹tn Heb “of Egypt.” Here the Hebrew text uses the name of the country to represent the inhabitants (a figure known as metonymy).
⁹⁰tn The holy name (“Yahweh,” represented as “the Lord” in the translation) has the vav disjunctive with it. It may have the force: “Now it was Yahweh who gave the people favor….”
⁹¹sn God was destroying the tyrant and his nobles on the throne, and the land’s economy because of their stubborn refusal. But God established friendly, peaceful relations between his people and the Egyptians. The phrase is only used elsewhere in Gen 39:21.
⁹²tn Here the verb is the Hiphil form of the earlier Qal—<Wla!v=Y^w~ (wayyas’ilum). It is frequently translated “and they lent them”; but lending does not really fit the point here. What they gave the Israelites were farewell gifts sought by demanding or asking for them. Driver translates it “let them have.” He adds that the people may have lent the Israelites things to use in the wilderness, assuming they were coming back; but as it turned out, Israeli had plundered them.
⁹³sn See B. Jacob, “The Gifts of the Egyptians; A Critical Commentary,” Journal of Reformed Judaism 27 (1980): 59-69.
⁹⁴tn Heb “and the Israelites journeyed.”
⁹⁵sn The wilderness itinerary begins here. Kaiser records the identification of these two places as follows: The name Rameses probably refers to Qantir rather than Tanis, which is more remote, because Qantir was by the water. And Sukkoth is identified as Tell el Maskhuta in the Wadi Tumilat near modern Ismailia—or the region around the city (W. C. Kaiser, Jr, “Exodus,” in EBC 379). Of the extensive bibliography, see G. W. Coats, “The Wilderness Itinerary,” CBQ 34 (1972): 135-52; G. I. Davies, “The Wilderness Itineraries: A Comparative Study,” TynBul 25 (1974): 46-81; and J. T. Walsh, “From Egypt to Moab. A Source Critical Analysis of the Wilderness Itinerary,” CBQ 39 (1977): 20-33.
⁹⁶tn The text has it “who were men”; this word for men (<yr!bG+h^ [hagg^ebarim]) stresses the hardiness and capability of them—strong.
sn There have been many attempts to calculate the population of the exodus group, but nothing in the text gives the exact number other than the 600,000 people on foot who were men. Estimates of two million people are very large, especially since the Bible says there were seven nations in the land of Canaan mightier than Israel. It is probably not two million people (note, the Bible never said it was—this is calculated by scholars). But attempts to reduce the number by redefining the word “thousand” to mean clan or tribe or family unit have not been convincing, primarily because of all the tabulations of the tribes in the different books of the Bible that have to be likewise reduced. B. Jacob rejects the many arguments and calculations as the work of eighteenth century deists and rationalists, arguing that the numbers were taken seriously in the text (p. 347). Some writers interpret the numbers as inflated due to a rhetorical use of numbers, arriving at a number of 60,000 or so for the men here listed (reducing it by a factor of ten), and insisting this is a literal interpretation of the text as opposed to a spiritual or allegorical approach (see R. Allen, “Numbers,” in EBC, 686-96; see also G. Mendenhall, “The Census Lists of Numbers 1 and 26,” JBL 77 [1958]: 52-66). This proposal removes the “embarrassingly” large number for the exodus, but like other suggestions, lacks the completely compelling evidence. For a more extensive discussion of the large numbers used to describe the Israelites in their wilderness experience, see the note on “46,500” in Num 1:21.
⁹⁷tn For “women and children” the text has “little ones.”
⁹⁸tn The “mixed multitude” (br~ br#u@ [‘ereb rab]) refers to a great “swarm” (see a possible cognate in 8:21[17]) of folk who joined the Israelites, people who were impressed by the defeat of Egypt, who came to faith, or who just wanted to escape Egypt (maybe slaves or descendants of the Hyksos). The expression prepares for later references to half-breeds and riffraff who came along.
⁹⁹tn Heb “and very much cattle.”
¹⁰⁰sn For the use of this word in developing the motif, see Exod 2:17, 22; 6:1; and 11:1.
¹⁰¹tn Heb “and also.”
¹⁰²tn The verb is WCu (‘asu), “they made”; here, with a potential nuance for the tense, it is rendered “they could [not] prepare.”
¹⁰³sn Here as well some scholars work with the number 430 to try to reduce the stay in Egypt for the bondage. Some argue that if the number included the time in Canaan, that would reduce the bondage by half. Driver notes that P thought Moses was the fourth generation from Jacob (6:16-27), if those genealogies are not selective (p. 102). Exodus 6 has Levi—Kohath—Amram—Moses. This would require a period of about 100 years, and that is unusual. There is evidence, however, that the list is selective. In 1 Chr 2:3-20 the text has Bezalel (see Exod 31:2-5) a contemporary of Moses and yet the seventh from Judah. Elishama, a leader of the Ephraimites (Num 10:22), was in the ninth generation from Jacob (1 Chr 7:22-26). Joshua, Moses’ assistant, was the eleventh from Jacob (1 Chr 7:27). So the “four generations” leading up to Moses are not necessarily complete. With regard to Exod 6, Kitchen has suggested a whole new scheme: He argues that the four names do not indicate successive generations, but tribe (Levi), clan (Kohath), family (Amram) and individual (Moses) (see K. A. Kitchen, Ancient Orient and Old Testament, 54-55). For a detailed discussion of the length of the sojourn, see E. H. Merrill, A Kingdom of Priests, 74-79.
¹⁰⁴tn There is some ambiguity in hw`hyl^ aWh <yr!M%v! lyl@ (lel simmurim hu’ la’adonay/l^eYahweh). It is likely that this first clause means that Yahweh was on watch for Israel to bring them out, as the next clause says. He was protecting his people (Driver, 102). Then, the night of vigil will be transferred to Israel, who now must keep it “to” him.
¹⁰⁵tn “and so” has been supplied.
¹⁰⁶tn Heb “this night is to Yahweh a vigil for all Israelites for their generations.”
¹⁰⁷sn The section that concludes the chapter is a section of regulations pertaining to the Passover. The section begins at v. 43, but vv. 40-42 forms a good setting for it. In this unit vv. 43-45 belong together because they stress that a stranger and foreigner cannot eat. Verse 46 stands by itself, ruling that the meal must be eaten at home. Verses 47-49 instruct that the whole nation was to eat it. And vv. 50, 51 record the obedience of Israel. The passage does not have a great deal of difficult material in it that is new that needs to be commented on, grammatically or theologically.
¹⁰⁸tn This taken in the modal nuance of permission, reading that no foreigner is permitted to share in it.
¹⁰⁹tn This is the partitive use of the bet preposition, expressing that the action extends to something and includes the idea of participation in it (GKC §119.m).
¹¹⁰tn Both the participle “the stranger” and the verb “will live” are from the verb rWG (gur), which means “to sojourn, to dwell as an alien.” This reference then is to a foreigner who settles temporarily in the land. He is the protected foreigner; when he comes to another area where he does not have his clan to protect, he must come under the protection of the Law, or the people. If the “resident alien” is circumcised, he may have the Passover (Driver, 104).
¹¹¹tn The infinitive absolute functions as the finite verb here; and “every male” could be either the object or the subject (see GKC §§113.gg and 121.a).
¹¹²tn jr*z+a# (‘ezrah) refers to the native-born individual, the native Israelite as opposed to the “stranger, alien” (Driver, 104); see also W. F. Albright, Archaeology and the Religion of Israel, 127, 210.
¹¹³tn Heb “one law will be to.”
¹¹⁴tn Heb “did as the Lord had commanded Moses and Aaron, so they did.” The final phrase “so they did,” which is somewhat redundant in English, has been represented in the translation by the adverb “exactly.”