Exodus/Shemoth: 3 – Promises, Promises

[Translation:  Everett Fox, The Five Books of Moses.  Commentary from P&H/Pentateuch& Haftorahs and AST/ArtScroll Tanach.—Admin1.]

• From Pharaoh’s court to the wanderer in the wilderness;
• from bachelor to husband to Zipporah;
• and father to firstborn Gershom (“a stranger there”)
• from prince of Egypt to shepherd for the flocks of father-in-law Jethro who’s a priest of Midian;

—–thus far, this is the movement in the life and roles taken on by the key figure in this book of Exodus/Shemoth during the years he was being prepared for his calling as God’s hand-picked, set-apart, anointed leader-to-be, of a nation already prophesied but yet to be formed.

At this stage, Mosheh had not yet realized he was being primed for the next stage of a life-path he had not chosen for himself; he could have easily settled into the uncomplicated and unstressful life of a shepherd. The desert seems to be ideal for contemplation except the text does not tell us if Mosheh was at all a man who sought God.  Raised in pharaoh’s court, how much of Egypt’s religion impacted his thinking?  Conscious of his Hebrew roots, how much did he know about the God of his ancestors? Was anything handed down those generations of Hebrews born and raised in Egypt?

We’ve studied the call of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob; to these patriarchs, the God of Abraham spoke of specific promises and a distant future affecting their progeny.  They died seeing partial promises and prophecies fulfilled in relation to them and the next generation, but the promise of the Land where they moved to, lived in, left, returned to, were buried in—were yet to happen.  Did the generations after them know, remember, forgot? What would Moses himself have known of those promises?

The call of Moses is by far the most unusual, with vivid images, dramatic in fact, for an initial human-divine encounter, and as we will see through this whole book of Shemoth, the Divine Presence becomes not only Mosheh’s personal God but his life Companion to see him through the most significant divine assignment that is uniquely his. 

Exodus/Shemoth 3

Any encounter with an “other” unfamiliar being is unsettling to say the least; surely instant fear is the first impulsive reaction. But Mosheh seems to be given a gradual introduction first through a malak (angelic appearance) within an unnatural phenomenon of an unconsumed burning bush followed by the Divine call.  So . . . is the burning bush a manifestation of God or an attention-caller?  Perhaps both, for later in Scripture, God refers to Himself as a Consuming Fire and appears as a pillar of fire by night among the encamped Israelites.  Fire and Light become familiar theophanies for this God of Israel.  Remember He also manifested as a smoky furnace/smoking fire pot and a torch of fire in the ratification of the covenant with Abraham (Genesis 15:17).

AST comment:  Moses first prophetic vision.  The Torah describes Moses’ vision in three different ways:  a fire, an angel, and finally, as God.  Like someone in a dark room whose eyes cannot tolerate an immediate exposure to blinding sunlight, Moses ha to be exposed to prophecy gradually.  First, he was shown a fire that was strange because it did not consumer the bush.  Then it was revealed to him that an angel was in the fire, and once he had become accustomed to this new phenomenon, he was given the vision of God Himself (R’Bachya).

The preponderant Name of God in this chapter is Elohim, the Name that connotes strict justice, because God was about to judge Egypt for its excessive cruelty.  In the three places where He reveals Himself to Moses (vv. 2, 4, and 7), however, He is called HaSHEM, the Name of mercy, to show that His primary intention is to save Israel in a historic demonstration of Divine mercy.

Q:  If Mosheh was already looking at the curiosity of an unconsumed burning bush, then what else was he afraid to look at?  “upon the ‘Elohiym” — was God manifesting in more than just the burning bush?  He was listening to a voice speaking to him, with nobody else around, one would presume it must be  ‘Elohiym because of what is being communicated. As Mosheh’s first encounter with this so far unfamiliar God,  he begins to learn about the Character of the Speaker —- surely, his faith begins to develop:

Who am I?  Isn’t this a basic question for every individual to determine for himself, what is one doing here at this time in this situation for what and whose purpose? In Mosheh’s case, he is said to be meek and humble (Numbers 12:3).  Skeptics challenge this by saying how can anyone write about himself as being humble; pastors teach that when you think you’re humble, most likely you are not! In the context of the Numbers 12:3 verse, Miriam and Aaron are challenging Moses’ being the only one spoken to by Elohiym, so that warrants putting them in their place.  In this context, it is only right that Mosheh questions his capability to execute a tall order—to begin with, he fled Egypt to save his life, now he’s going back to tell Pharaoh he’s going to take the Hebrew slaves out of Egypt? The question is right, who is Mosheh at this point but a fugitive and a lowly shepherd.

AST Comment:  Obviously the Jews knew the various Names of God, so that the question cannot be understood literally.  Each of God’s Names represents the way in which He reveals Himself through His behavior toward the world.  When He is merciful, He is called HaSHEM [Yud-Kei-Vav-Kei].  When He exercises strict judgment, He is called Elohim, God.  When He exercises His mastery over nature and performs hidden miracles—as He did for the Patriarchs—He is called Shaddai, and so on. Thus Moses was saying that once the Jews accepted him as God’s emissary, they would want to know which of God’s attributes He would manifest in the course of redeeming them from Egypt (Ramban).

P&H Comment:  “I AM THAT I AM” Heb. Ehyeh asher ehyeh — the self-existent and eternal God; a declaration of the unity and spirituality of the  Divine Nature, the exact opposite of all the forms of idolatry, human, animal, and celestial, that prevailed everywhere else.  I am that I am is, however, not merely a philosophical phrase; the emphasis is on the active manifestation of the Divine existence . . . .To the Israelites in bondage, the meaning would be, ‘Although He has not yet displayed His power towards you, He will do so; He is eternal and will certainly redeem you.’
 
Most moderns follow Rashi in rendering ‘I will be what I will be’; i.e. no words can sum up all that He will be to His people, but His everlasting faithfulness and unchanging mercy will more and more manifest themselves in the guidance of Israel.  The answer which Moses receives in these words is thus equivalent to, ‘I shall save in the way that I shall save.’  It is to assure the Israelites of the fact of deliverance, but does not disclose the manner.  It must suffice the Israelites to learn that, “Ehyeh, I WILL BE (with you), hath sent me unto you.’

What more could Mosheh or the children of Israel ask?  YHWH their Deliverer has given specific details of what they can expect from  beginning to end! What group of people, what nation, what religion or church, has ever had this much privilege? Yet, promises are one thing, fulfillment another. 

Here are further notes on this portion of Scripture, from one of our recommended RESOURCES, Introduction to the Hebrew Bible by John J. Collins:

The most celebrated part of this passage is the exchange between Moses and God in 3:13-14.  When Moses asks for God’s name he is told “I am who I am” (Hebrew ehyeh aser ehyeh).  The Greek translators of the Bible rendered this passage as eimi ho on, “I am the one who is.”  Beginning with Philo of Alexandria, around the time of Christ, countless generations of theologians argued that the God revealed to Moses was identical with absolute Being, in the sense in which that term was understood in Greek philosophy.  The Greek translation became the foundation for a theological edifice that assumed that Greek philosophy and biblical revelation could be correlated, and were two ways of getting at the same thing.  Historically, however, it is impossible to find this meaning in the Hebrew text.  Hebrew simply did not have a concept of Being, in the manner of Greek philosophy.  This fact does not invalidate the theological correlation of the Bible with Greek philosophy, but neither does it give it any real support.  No such correlation is envisioned in the Hebrew text.
 
The actual meaning of the Hebrew phrase is enigmatic.  The proper Hebrew name for the God of Israel, Yahweh, can be understood as a form of the verb “to be” —specifically the causative (Hiphil) third person singular imperfect.  It can be translated “he causes to be.”  It has been suggested that this name is a way of referring to a creator God.  The Deity is often called “the LORD of hosts” (YHWH Sabaoth), and it has been suggested that this means “he causes the hosts (of heaven) to be” or “creator of the hosts.”  Whether the name was originally understood as a verbal form, however, is uncertain.  It often appears in Hebrew names in the form yahu or yaho, which would not be so easily parsed.  In Exodus 3, in any case, the association with the verb “to be” is assumed.  The phrase “I am who I am” in effect changes the verbal form to the first person.  The phrase may be taken as a refusal to divulge the divine name, in effect brushing off Moses’ question.  In favor of this suggestion is the fact that Jewish tradition is reluctant to pronounce the divine name.  Rather, it substitutes Adonai, “the Lord.”  But elsewhere in Exodus the name YHWH is used freely, and it is explicitly revealed in the Priestly passage in Exodus 6.  It may be that the passage is only an attempt to put the divine name YHWH, understood as a form of the verb “to be” in the first person.

In any case, Exodus 3 goes on to give a fuller explanation of the identity of the Deity.  He is the God of the ancestors, the God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob.  The key element, however, is what he promises to do in the future . . . in effect fulfilling the promise to Abraham in Genesis 15.  The Deity is motivated by the suffering of Israel . . . YHWH may already have been worshipped in Midian as a god who appeared in fire on the mountain, but henceforth, he would be worshipped as the God who delivered the Israelites from Egypt.