2019- 2020 Boyd's Commentary: 2019-2020

By R.H. Boyd Publishing Corporation

The 2019-2020 Boyd's Commentary is a resource for planning and preparation for pastors, directors, teachers, students, or anyone searching for a deeper relationship with Christ. It follows the International Uniform Sunday School Lesson Outline from the National Council of Churches, and it is filled with scholarly, yet practical descriptions and exposition for modern Christians. Readers will find Boyd’s Commentary useful in their search for increased wisdom and theological insight (Proverbs 4:7) for walking in the way of Christ.

• Language: English
• Publisher: R.H. Boyd Publishing Corporation
• Release date: Aug 1, 2019
• ISBN: 9781681675619

Book preview

FIRST QUARTER

September

October

November

Lesson material is based on International Sunday School Lessons and International Bible Lessons for Christian Teaching. Copyrighted by the International Council of Religious Education and is used by its permission.

GENESIS 19:1, 15–26, 29

MAIN THOUGHT: And it came to pass, when God destroyed the cities of the plain, that God remembered Abraham, and sent Lot out of the midst of the overthrow, when he overthrew the cities in the which Lot dwelt. (Genesis 19:29, KJV)

LESSON SETTING

Time: 1868 B.C.

Place: Sodom (Jordan Valley)

LESSON OUTLINE

I. Lot Meets the Angels

(Genesis 19:1)

II. Impending Danger

(Genesis 19:15–17)

III. The Rescue

(Genesis 19:18–23)

IV. The Danger of Looking Back

(Genesis 19:24–26, 29)

UNIFYING PRINCIPLE

People’s lives often are affected by what others have done or are doing on their behalf. How do the actions of others affect our lives? Genesis says God preserved Lot when Sodom was destroyed because of the righteousness of his uncle Abraham.

INTRODUCTION

Born in Ur of the Chaldeans, Lot was brought by his uncle Abraham to Canaan, where they became chieftains of two large shepherd enterprises. When their two competing herds became too large, God blessed both Lot and Abraham to such an extent they were able to separate and continue to remain individually prosperous and wealthy. When the split occurred, Abraham elected to relocate in the highlands of the land of milk and honey while Lot chose the fertile Jordan Valley and subsequently the cities of Sodom and Gomorrah. God is preparing to destroy these cities and has plans to save Lot and his family. Often the focus is centered on the weakness of Lot’s wife, who infamously became a pillar of salt. Lot’s stubbornness usually is overlooked.

EXPOSITION

I. LOT MEETS THE ANGELS

(GENESIS 19:1)

One evening, we find Lot sitting in the gate of the city of Sodom, which indicates the city was a walled fortress, not unlike most of the citadels of the period. The Hebrew term used is shar-ar, which actually describes a gateway that could indicate it was the entrance to the town or a guard’s station used to keep watch over the city. Several scholars believe Lot’s presence in the gatehouse suggested he was an official or judge of Sodom; however, the aggressive men, whom Lot would later battle, noted he came into the city as an alien and to them, a pompous one acting like a judge (see Gen. 19:9). Whatever the reason, during the evening, two men appeared before Lot.

The Hebrew uses the term mal-ak, meaning angels but also messengers of the Lord. Interestingly, the two men who visited Lot were a part of the triumvirate of angels who had previously visited Abraham at Mamre (Gen. 18:2). As with Abraham, when Lot saw the men, he rose to meet them and then bowed down, a customary sign of respect of this period.

II. IMPENDING DANGER

(GENESIS 19:15–17)

After a trying night, the dangers of the previous evening had not subsided; therefore, the angels devised a plan that would save Lot and his family from the horrors of the wicked city. The description of the scene reveals a mob mentality that suggests Lot’s adversaries acted as a pack of wild animals that were determined to hunt their intended prey. The passage describes the pack as both young and old (Gen. 19:3–15).

As morning ( sha-har) finally arrived, the angels urged or pressed Lot to leave the wicked city. They implored Lot to gather his family, which consisted of his wife and two daughters, who Lot had actually offered to the mob as a substitute for the men whom they wished harm. Recall that Lot had been warned God was going to destroy the city and had pleaded with his future sons-in-law to leave the area; however, Lot’s efforts were ignored because the young men thought Lot was joking. Now as the angels push Lot to leave, he becomes reluctant to find the momentum needed to grasp the seriousness of the moment. The angels plead with Lot, literally begging him to escape or else he will be caught in the conflagration that was soon to occur. The Hebrew term used is sa-fa, meaning to take or carry away, be swept away, or ultimately, destroyed. Lot has to be pressed to get up or to spring into action, for doom is approaching.

What is Lot thinking and why is he exhibiting this sense of lethargy? Was he tired from the previous night of despair? While we are not provided with a description of Lot’s energy conundrum, we are given an idea he was hesitant because he did not have time to plan for an escape that would allow him to save his wealth and personal belongings.

III. THE RESCUE

(GENESIS 19:18–23)

Continuing in his obstinance, Lot rejects the advice of the angels. It would appear Lot attempts to shift the angels’ instructions by cajoling their sensibilities. Notice the adulation: your servant has found favor in your sight and you have magnified your lovingkindness or concern by saving my life. Lot somehow believes if he escapes to the mountains, the impending disaster will overtake him, and he will surely die. It seems as if he has at least finally understood the seriousness of the situation and realized the importance of the angels’ concern and God’s intervention. The cities of Sodom and Gomorrah will be destroyed, and the surrounding regions will suffer collateral damage.

The Scriptures do not reveal exactly when Lot realizes his circumstances, but when he does, we have an idea of it; however, Lot continues to challenge God’s plan. Lot intones he now senses a problem with fleeing to the mountains because they are too far away, and the disaster of God’s wrath would overtake him in his flight.

Incredibly, Lot does not consider he is in God’s care and he and his family are protected wherever they are. The Hebrew term ra-kah-ha is translated disaster but strongly means evil or misfortune. Lot senses the presence of evil; however, it also was possible to consider the harm to have been of God, or otherwise, he is not being forthright in his argument with the angels. Recall the aforementioned accolades that would have been enough blustery rhetoric to convince a conceited man; but God sent to Lot angels or messengers (not men) who should not have been easily persuaded. Nonetheless, in an act that resembles God’s trust in Abraham’s judgment and heart, Lot was able to convince the angels to consider his perspective.

Notice that Lot begs to be allowed to go to a small town (the size of which he emphasized) to seek shelter from the forthcoming destruction. Continuing his conniving dialogue, Lot believes that in also this village, his life could be saved the same as if he goes to the mountains. The town Lot chose was called Zoar, which means little town. Why Lot would have chosen to go to Zoar is incredulous because he was taken prisoner during a war that also saw Sodom and Gomorrah taken by Chedorlaomer and his allies. Lot was spared by the intervention of the Lord and Abraham, who rescued his nephew from certain death. As Lot reached Zoar, the signal for God to explode the cities in utter annihilation had begun.

IV. THE DANGER OF LOOKING BACK

(GENESIS 19:24–26, 29)

The account paints a picture of the method used by God to enact His destruction on the cities in the region, with Sodom and Gomorrah being prominently mentioned. God rained ( men-ther) on them a lethal mixture of brimstone ( go-freet), or sulfur, and fire. Sulfur was a well-known mineral of the region and in biblical imagery served as a sign of divine destruction. Because of its combustible tendencies, sulfur was unstable and ignited rapidly; and due to its poisonous fumes, it became toxic when inhaled. Sulfur, or brimstone, also was used as a fumigant or cleansing agent.

The walled fortifications of these cities were designed to stop men from invading their grounds but were no match for the poured out elements that rained down from heaven. Everything (buildings, livestock, crops, and more) were consumed in the conflagration of God’s wrath, including those wicked humans that could not be salvaged. Recall, sulfur or brimstone was used as a fumigant; here, we witness God fumigating the scourge of the immoral and unrighteous.

Again, notice the path of destruction was not limited to Sodom and Gomorrah, but included all of the cities and villages of the Jordan Valley except for one, the hamlet of Zoar. In contemporary society, we are acquainted with sanctuary cities in which people of different persuasions are protected from prejudicial mistreatment. In this situation, God allowed Zoar to become a sanctuary city for Lot and his family. However, God’s provisions could not save a prominent member of the family because of her disregard for God’s instructions and a mistimed lack of faith.

Ironically, we have witnessed the image of Lot, who vacillated and wavered in his desire to leave Sodom. The angels had an exasperating few days convincing Lot to escape and then wrestling with him as to the destination of his refuge. All eyes are focused on Lot as the rogue of this account in which he, although portrayed as righteous and worthy of being saved, is rebelling against God (if not with his actions, in his attitude and spirit). Previously, the other members of the family seem to be resigned to their fate and in compliance with the directions of the angels; however, a breakdown in discipline occurs. Lot’s wife ( e-shah) decided to take one last glimpse of her home, her belongings, and her city. If she could not let go of her thoughts of her present possessions, she surely could not have related to the knowledge God would provide new possessions, just as He was providing an opportunity for a new life. Whatever her weakness, Lot’s family had been warned during their escape not to look back (verse 17). This may seem insignificant but becomes an important aspect in the set of instructions given by the angels. Nonetheless, in utter disregard to those instructions, Lot’s wife was turned into a pillar ( net-sieve) or column of salt ( me-lah)!

Although this account is centered on the persons of Lot and his family, in the background of this rescue, God is remembering His servant Abraham. Lot is portrayed as a righteous man, worthy of God’s salvation; however, the relationship between God and Abraham is furthermore extraordinary because Lot’s rescue by extension is collateral in the bond between Abraham and his God. As aforementioned, Abraham had previously rescued Lot from the kings of the valley, but God had been with Abraham. On this occasion, Lot is saved by God, as a gesture or show of favor toward Abraham, whose covenant with God is obviously magnificent. In a summary of the final scene of destruction and devastation, God overthrew these cities where Lot now formerly lived!

THE LESSON APPLIED

This account is a sad exposé of those people under God’s protection who create their own rules. While ignoring the simplest of commands, people of Sodom and Gomorrah created a way of life that displeased God. The displeasure included the disobedience of Lot’s wife, who looked back, and the end result is she is turned into the salt pillar. When humans drink too much salt water, their organs shut down. Due to the destructive nature and potential of salt, it also is used as a connotation of man turning away from God. Jesus spoke about our being the salt of the earth or a season to bring the lost to Him. He also presented salt as a preservative to condition the earth. Lot’s wife, however, as herself a pillar of salt, could do neither! Rather than an agent that brings spice or flavor, or an instrument that serves as one who believes in God’s promises, she forever will be a symbol of someone who perished because she failed to obey God.

LET’S TALK ABOUT IT

1. What lessons can we learn from the lives of Lot and his wife as we await the return of Jesus Christ?

Lot seems to have been lazy, wanting to take an easy way out of his situation. Although he was culturally agrarian, he had accumulated the customs and behaviors of the city. Because of this, Lot may have desired to move into another city rather than face life in the rugged mountains. As Christians we too occasionally become indifferent in our quest to please God and actually cling to the trappings and things of the world and our own little lives. As the people of God, we can trust God will place us along the paths of righteousness. It may sometimes seem boring, especially if we measure our life of discipleship as a believer and follower of Jesus Christ against those commonplace things the rest of the world is doing or thinking each and every day. When we behave in such a manner, the question becomes: Are we putting ourselves in a position to miss God’s blessings simply because we are spiritually lazy? Do not miss the blessings God has especially for you. Do not turn back and take your eyes off of God. He is leading you to a more beautiful and blessed life of righteousness in His sight. That is the way you should want to go. That is the way Christ would have you to go.

The other lesson we learn from Lot is that it doesn’t pay to ignore God’s will or to disobey Him. Lot’s wife took God’s word for granted and refused to consider the magnitude of God’s command. Her glance backward was more than a reaction to the calamity behind her; it was outright disobedience and defiance to God’s command. Rebellion against God has consequences for all of us. Her becoming a pillar of salt was the direct result of failing to appreciate and honor the salvation she had been given. Let us not throw the Lord’s grace back in His face through flagrant acts of disobedience and disregard for God’s wise advice.

HOME DAILY DEVOTIONAL READINGS

SEPTEMBER 2–8, 2019

1 SAMUEL 1:9–20

MAIN THOUGHT: Then Eli answered and said, Go in peace: and the God of Israel grant thee thy petition that thou hast asked of him. (1 Samuel 1:17, KJV)

LESSON SETTING

Time: 1127 B.C.

Place: Ramah and Shiloh

LESSON OUTLINE

I. Hannah’s Depression

(1 Samuel 1:9–11)

II. Hannah’s Prayer

(1 Samuel 1:12–18)

III. Hannah’s Prayer is Answered

(1 Samuel 1:19–20)

UNIFYING PRINCIPLE

People often feel no one hears them when they express their deepest desires. Is anyone really listening? Hannah, who had no children, asked God for a son, promising to dedicate him to God’s service; and soon she conceived and gave birth.

INTRODUCTION

Elkanah has two wives, which is not uncommon in this agrarian society; their names are Hannah and Peninnah. The problem is Peninnah is quite fertile and has produced several children, whereas Hannah is infertile and childless. The anguish of not being able to produce children, especially a son, is almost destructive to Hannah. Living in a land filled with pagan influences and attractions, Hannah turns to Yahweh, whom she firmly believes will hear her plight. This account is not simply about God blessing Hannah with a son, but about the strength of her faith, even in a state of depression.

EXPOSITION

I. HANNAH’S DEPRESSION

(1 SAMUEL 1:9–11)

Elkanah had brightened Hannah’s mood by expressing his love and devotion for her, which he indicates is of far greater value than ten sons (verse 8). After arriving in Shiloh, Hannah, who had been encouraged not to be sad, is convinced she should eat her meal, which was probably dinner. In Hebrew, the term qu-fav-mem is used, which means to rise, or to get up. The verb in the sentence structure indicates Hannah rose after she ate. Samuel’s insertion of Hannah’s eating and drinking reveals a change in her demeanor, her confidence, and subsequently, her faith. The author does not indicate what she ate or drank; however, her food probably consisted of bread, a staple of their diet, and meat from the double portion that was available from Elkanah’s sacrifice. The drink, although not identified, was probably wine because Hannah would later be accused of being drunk.

After Hannah rose in the morning, she went to the tabernacle, which by this time, resembled a permanent building more than the previous tent. Several items suggest this: One is that Hannah finds Eli, the priest, sitting in the doorframe ( mea-zu-zah) or between the door posts, on a chair ( ke-sea), seat, or seat of honor. The term used here is temple; however, the words tabernacle and temple are used interchangeably. There would be only one temple, which would be located in Jerusalem. The house of the Lord (see the same phrase in 3:15) is called the temple of the Lord in verse 9. The Ark of the Covenant was no longer kept in a tent as it had been during the years the Israelites wandered in the wilderness. It was now kept in a building with a doorpost (verse 9) and at least two doors (3:15). The large temple in Jerusalem, however, was not yet in existence. It was not built until the reign of Solomon (1 Kings 6).

The author places such importance on Hannah’s meal due to her state of depression, which resulted from taunting by Peninnah, and her usual custom of going on partial hunger strikes during their yearly sojourn to Shiloh. As with other situations whereby men had children with a second wife or concubine, tension existed in the relationship. Recall the hostility between Sarai (later Sarah) and Hagar and Leah and Rachel, which created serious issues for the families. Because children, especially males, were so valued, jealously invaded these arrangements, as the women often resorted to hateful taunting about the other’s barrenness.

Hannah wept bitterly but prayed to the Lord. Again, depending on how one views the sentence structure, we could translate this verse as Hannah being bitter in her soul or inner sanctum, the word (Heb., mar), means bitter. As she considered her situation, she found that for yet another year she was barren and could not produce a child. Succumbing to the emotional pressure, Hannah began to weep bitterly in her prayer to Yahweh. Interestingly, the word is derived from the account of the children of Israel who during the Exodus arrived at the waters of Marah but could not drink because the water was bitter; therefore, it was named Marah (Exod. 15:23).

II. HANNAH’S PRAYER

(1 SAMUEL 1:12–18)

Hannah was at the tabernacle praying to the Lord. Eli was sitting in the doorway and happened to observe Hannah’s fervent appeal. Hannah may have been praying in the proximity of the Ark of the Lord; however, Eli seemed to be drawn to the actions of her mouth ( peh). Many people pray silently with their eyes closed; in this scene, Hannah was moving her lips but was not speaking. However, she had an emotional conversation with the Lord, speaking ( de-bear) from her heart. The Hebrew term used is (lev), which is initially translated as heart but is better understood as one’s inner self, capturing the anguish of her pain. Therefore, a more accurate rendering would be that as Hannah prayed to the Lord, she was speaking in and from her inner self. Eli, who could be accused of eavesdropping, could not hear her prayer. He assumed Hannah was drunk ( she-kor) from too much wine. Apparently, drunkenness was not uncommon, even at the tabernacle and by women. Incredibly enough, Eli’s belief that Hannah was intoxicated may have stemmed from the idea she was a victim of too much participation in the festival.

Mistaking Hannah’s condition, Eli was not amused and retorted by asking her, How long will you behave like someone who is drunk and exhibit this detrimental behavior? Eli demanded Hannah put away her wine ( ya-in), or literally stop drinking. While the original Hebrew of making yourself drunk and putting away your wine from you is too wooden and clumsy, the image is clear: Eli is disappointed with Hannah, especially being a woman, in this seemingly derogatory state.

A rather mild-mannered Hannah responded to Eli saying, No, my lord, assigning the proper respect and title to his office. She confessed she was suffering from an oppressed ( ka-shay) spirit that had severely strained her countenance. Hannah explained she was not drunk from wine, but her demeanor was as such because she was pouring out ( sha-phak) herself before the Lord. Notice the wordplay of the pouring out of her soul as compared to the pouring out of wine! Hannah, overcome by years of torment, let it go in the presence ( pa-neh), in the face, of Yahweh. Hannah was not ashamed of her actions before Eli nor before the Lord. Her prayer emanated from the well-spring of her soul or inner being.

III. HANNAH’S PRAYER IS ANSWERED

(1 SAMUEL 1:19–20)

Do not assume that when Elkanah and Hannah returned home and had sexual relations, it was unusual for this to occur. Their sex life was more than likely routine, yet they were not able to become pregnant. It is probable Hannah and Peninnah were around the same age, which made it all the more painful when Peninnah taunted Hannah about her inability to conceive. This couple was not beyond child-producing years; notice they had tried, and Peninnah was successful but Hannah was not. Therefore, there is no reason to think she was like Sarah or Elizabeth, who were beyond childbearing years.

Elkanah and Hannah had worshiped the Lord in Bethel before they left, which means they had participated in the remainder of the festival. Notice that Peninnah is not mentioned again. Obviously, Hannah is the focus of the account; and it is probable that for the first time, Elkanah and Hannah were able to spend quality time together at the feast, which had never occurred. Hannah’s mood had changed, and her depression had disappeared, which created a situation through which her presence was pleasurable. Hannah’s previous moods could have created a situation in which no one wanted to be in her presence, spoiling the overall atmosphere of the occasion; but God had heard her prayer. The important point that cannot be overlooked is that Hannah’s faith allowed her to become blessed, even in her seemingly simple but important request. Hannah was sincere in her belief God was with her, and therefore, her demeanor was drastically changed!

The couple’s previous attempts had been futile; but in what must be seen as the grace or favor of God, the Lord heard the prayers of Hannah and graciously delivered on her request. The situation was special in that the Lord did not forget Hannah but remembered more than just her prayers—He counted her humility and sincerity. Since God remembered Hannah, it will seem fitting that Hannah would remember her promise to the Lord.

Interestingly, the NASB states Elkanah had relations with Hannah, his wife. The Hebrew term used is ya-da, which means to know, notice, or to learn. This does not make literal sense as to the understanding of what is being stated. Why would the account say Elkanah knew Hannah, when it is obvious, in contemporary understanding, he already had been acquainted with Hannah, who was his wife? Hebrew frequently uses the euphemism to know to refer to sexual intercourse. The words Elkanah knew Hannah are biblical English, not contemporary English. Translators of other languages need to be sure the meaning is clear and should also avoid using an expression that could be considered too explicit or vulgar for use in the Bible. Some readers of English find the expression had intercourse (Today’s English Version, Revised English Bible) too explicit and offensive. Something such as had relations with (New American Bible) may be more acceptable. Most languages have euphemistic expressions to describe sexual relations without being too explicit—some use slept with or a more unusual idiom that can be understood clearly by all readers.

In the proper time ( te-qu-phah), cycle or course of her time, Hannah conceived and gave birth. The original Hebrew reads at the turn of the day, meaning at the end of her pregnancy. Remember, the Lord heard or accepted the prayers of Hannah; and when the family returned to their home in Ramah, God continued to remember ( za-kar), name her prayer, and bless her (and her family) with a son, who is named Samuel ( Shem-uel). Although Samuel’s name means name of God, it also is closely associated with Hannah’s asking the Lord for this child.

When the family returned to Shiloh for the festival the next year, Hannah would return with a son who was promised in the tabernacle. God’s blessing for Hannah will have greater implications and blessings for the nation, as Hannah’s request and God’s gift will extend beyond this immediate family.

THE LESSON APPLIED

God intervenes in the lives of infertile couples, allowing them to conceive children who would become heroes of the faith. Several examples are Sarah and Isaac, the childless wife of Manoah, and Elizabeth and Zechariah. The plague of Baalism haunted God’s people, and ideas of female fertility were based in the worship of these false gods of fertility. Pagan belief systems were predictable; if a woman was infertile, she was not favored by whichever pagan fertility god was in vogue. Living in this cultural context, those loyal to Yahweh had to believe He would not overlook their needs. Infertility in these believing women would be conquered, and God would raise the children of these blessings to be His servants.

LET’S TALK ABOUT IT

1. This text posits the power of prayer as a viable resource when all other measures have failed. Why does Hannah turn to the vehicle of prayer?

Hannah realized the God’s power to evoke change in her circumstances through prayer. She prayed for divine intervention to alter her course in life. She understood barrenness and the implications that came with it. However, she also believed God was not hampered by human impediments and decided to appeal to Him. Her request for a child was granted. Because of her plea to God, Hannah’s song of joy became the model for Mary’s song of divine selection, the Magnificat (see and compare 1 Samuel 2:1-11 with Luke 1:46-55).

The Scriptures are replete with instances where the suffering cast their hope and faith upon God to overturn their obstacles. Hezekiah and others, found themselves in similar circumstances and turned to God in light of their situation and, likewise, found divine favor and experienced holy intervention. For example, Hezekiah was told that his life was about to end, but he appealed to God and was granted fifteen more years to live (2 Kings 20:1-7).

Also, the prophet Elisha came face-to-face with the vast army of Syria, but God revealed to him legions of angels that enveloped the Syrian military and gave the prophet protection (2 Kings 6:8-18).

In the New Testament parables of the Persistent Widow and the Pharisee and Publican, Jesus insisted that people should always pray and not faint (Luke 18:1-9 and 10-14). Jesus confirmed that persistence in prayer pays off. The persistent widow received favor from the unjust judge because she refused to walk away unfulfilled. Also, Jesus affirmed the tax collector’s recognition of God’s ability to forgive sin despite the fact that the Hebrew people regarded him as a despicable traitor.

The importance of prayer is further confirmed in John 17, in the only prolonged prayer uttered by Jesus. Additionally, prayer is shown to be the primary in seeking His guidance, as Jesus admonished His disciples to seek first the Kingdom of God and His righteousness with the promise that God will also supply one’s other needs (Matthew 6:33).

HOME DAILY DEVOTIONAL READINGS

SEPTEMBER 9–15, 2019

EXODUS 16:1–8, 13–15

MAIN THOUGHT: And when the children of Israel saw it, they said one to another, It is manna: for they wist not what it was. And Moses said unto them, This is the bread which the LORD hath given you to eat. (Exodus 16:15, KJV)

LESSON SETTING

Time: 1462 B.C.

Place: The Wilderness of Sin (between Elim and Sinai)

LESSON OUTLINE

I. The Lord Provides Manna

(Exodus 16:1–7)

II. The Lord Provides Meat

(Exodus 16:8–15)

UNIFYING PRINCIPLE

People often are unhappy with what they have in life. How can people truly be satisfied? Despite the complaining of the Israelites as they wandered in the wilderness, God provided meat and bread for them.

INTRODUCTION

Israel has been led out of Egypt and into the oasis of Elim. It seems as if rejoicing and good times are in place for the nation. God, however, instructs them to move again, for Elim is not their final destination. Their journey takes them to an area called the Wilderness of Sin, which is a desert, the opposite of Elim. Here, they lack food; but rather than relying on the God who had freed them, they bitterly complain and grumble in rebellion against Him. This is an account of God’s love and mercy, despite the actions of the Israelites.

EXPOSITION

I. THE LORD PROVIDES MANNA

(EXODUS 16:1–7)

The recently delivered Israelites have broken camp at Elim and are setting out to their new destination. Before they left Egypt, the Lord had commanded Moses and Aaron to change their calendar. While they suffered under Egyptian captivity, Israel also was subject to Egyptian chronology. At their release, God provided a new beginning. One of the items that accompanied this new beginning was the initiation of a new calendar. God commanded Moses to consider the month of their release the beginning of months for you; it was the first month of the year for you (Exod. 12:2). The new month would be known as Abib (later Nisan), which corresponded to the present months of March through April. This was the spring of the year and was compatible for travel from Egypt and thus, Elim.

Moses had led the entire ( kol, meaning all or whole) congregation ( e-dah, community) of Israel and arrived in the wilderness ( mid-bar), or desert of Sin, which is approximately 120 miles from Goshen, where most of Israel lived during the captivity. Elim, which was considered an oasis consisting of seventy palm trees and twelve springs, was thought to be located a few miles from the wilderness. Since their arrival was on the fifteenth day of the second month, they came to the desert during the second new month of Ziv, which corresponds to our months of April through May.

The wilderness of Sin was another large area probably along the west coast of the Sinai Peninsula. In this case, Sin has no relation to the English word sin. It is simply the name of a place and possibly has some connection with the word Sinai. The title Wilderness of Sin also may be expressed as the wilderness named Sin or the Sin Wilderness.

In a reference to the creation sequence, the people are to work for six days, and on the sixth day, they will be given further instructions. On this day, they will gather twice as much as they gathered and prepared on each of the first five days. Enough was supplied each day for only that one day, except on Friday, when twice as much was to be gathered to provide enough for that day and the Sabbath. They were told they must follow these instructions and gather during these six days because on the seventh day, the Sabbath, there will be none (Exod. 16:26). At this juncture, it seems as if the vocal minority has disappeared because there are not any other complaints; however, Moses will face them again, which reveals the Lord already knows of their dissatisfaction.

II. THE LORD PROVIDES MEAT (EXODUS 16:8–15)

Continuing in his exaltation of the Lord, Moses exclaims the promise of God is guaranteed, stating this will happen, which was added to the phrase by translators for emphasis and is not part of the original Hebrew. The idea is the glory and splendor of the Lord will reach its zenith when the people are furnished food from heaven. Notice God has planned their sequence of meals: meat in the evenings (twilight) and bread in the mornings.

Again, Moses further stresses the Lord has heard their grumblings, as if to state that if they were trying to keep their complaints secret, they had not been successful—the Lord knows the heart and mind of His people. Additionally, Moses restates the incessant gripes were directed against the Lord and the poison piled upon Moses and Aaron would not have any effect on the mission of God and His quest to direct Israel into what would later be the land of promise.

Grumblings seems to be a resounding theme that is re-stated again and again, as if the repetition is needed to underscore the people’s disbelief, their rebellion, and sadly, their ungratefulness toward the Lord who had brought them out of Egyptian captivity. Moses changes his approach by having Aaron encourage the congregation that was assembled before them to come near ( qa-rab), or to step up to, or to get or come closer to the Lord. The image is they would hear from the Lord Himself rather than from Moses and Aaron, since their messages seemed to be viewed as second-handed appeals to convince them their position in this wilderness was an improvement over their existence in Egypt. Moreover, by repeating that the Lord is painfully aware of their misgivings, it appears Moses is virtually taunting