In the first twenty verses of the twelfth chapter, we read of the original institution of the feast called in our version, "the Passover."* Like the Christian rite of the Last Supper, it was ordained previously to the actual occurrence of the momentous event, whose memory it was to keep alive, through coming ages. Designed to be the great national festival of the Israelites, to commemorate the deliverance now wrought for them by their Almighty Protector, and their introduction to an independent national existence, the solemnities, with which it was to be observed, were directed to be such as to call up vividly, in the mind, the remembrance of that event. As each house had had its own special deliverance, so in each there was to be a domestic celebration. As on the night of the emancipation, no Israelitish house, which, agreeably to the divine command, had been marked with the blood of the slain lamb, had been invaded by death, so the sprinkling of a lamb's blood on the door-posts of every Jewish dwelling was to make, through all time, a part of the commemoration. As the people had hurried forth from the land of their bondage, so they were to meet around

such things as they required; and they spoiled the Egyptians." The word here rendered lent, is merely the Hiphil form of the same word, and, literally translated, would be, made them ask; hence, they allowed them to ask, that is, listened to them favorably, when they asked, which I take to be the true meaning. ;, translated they spoiled, is, as pointed by the Masorites, the Piel form of the verb, and thus would be properly rendered, they freed Egypt, that is, of their presence. But I would rather point it as Niphal, or Pual, y, or, and render it; "they were freed as to Egypt," that is, emancipated from Egypt. — For this use of л, see 1 Kings xv. 23; 2 Kings xiii. 14.

*

from

"he passed over"; or, "he rescued," exempted, delivered. Perhaps, as Michaelis proposes, we should rather adopt the last-named meaning of the word, and render (instead of "passover,") "deliverance," or "deliverance day,” as we call our national anniversary festival "Independence day." See Isaiah xxxi. 5.-For language similar to that in Ex. xii. 12, see 1 Chron. xxi. 12.

the table of this festival in the attitude of haste, their sandals bound upon their feet, their girdles round their waists, and their staves in their hands, as if ready for the toils of travel. They were, for the same reason, to throw away the bones of the lamb, without breaking them, as usual, to taste the marrow; and they were to eat unleavened cakes, in remembrance of the urgent circumstances which, on that memorable night, had not permitted their fathers to use bread prepared in the usual manner. Different regulations appear to have been intended to guard against the danger, that idolatrous practices might creep in among the ceremonies of such an exciting time.* And to make the season in all respects august, it was ordained, that henceforward the month in which it occurred should be reckoned the first of the national religious year. From this time, accordingly, in ecclesiastical computation, the year began in the month Abib, or Nisan, (March-April,) while the civil year continued to be reckoned, as it had been, from Tisri (September-October).

Such were the directions prospectively given to Moses and Aaron respecting the commemoration of an event which had not yet befallen. Of course, they were not at present to be given to the people, who could not as yet understand them, and, at all events, were in a condition to do, at present, a part only of what was ultimately required.‡ Meantime, the arrangements for the memorable night proceed. The Israelites are directed to remain from evening to morning within their own doors, both to insure that families should be collected when the hour for departure should arrive, and perhaps also to prevent the Egyptians from attaching to the people any suspicion of personal agency in the desolation which was impending. To impress upon

xii. 9, 10.

† xii. 2.

† xii. 15.

their minds, with the utmost distinctness, the truth, that Jehovah could and would protect his obedient people, and to give to the ceremonies of the commemorative rite, which had been devised, the liveliest power over the imaginations of the coming generations which were to observe it, the people were directed to put a mark upon their dwellings, and assured that all of them, who should do that first act of allegiance, God would recognise for his own, and so that, while ruin was raging all around them, it should pass no portal distinguished by that sign.* The night came, and the consummating wonder was done. The cupidity of the Egyptian monarch and his people could hold out no longer against the experience and the terror of such judgments; the arm of the oppressor was broken, and the oppressed went out free.t

"Six hundred thousand on foot, that were men,"‡ constituted, at this time, the effective force of the nation. The men of full age are commonly computed to compose one fourth, or one fifth, part of a population. If we assume the latter proportion to be correct, the population of Israel, at this period, amounted to three millions of souls. This increase from seventy persons, who composed the family of Jacob, at the time of his migration, has sometimes been represented as incredibly great. An easy computation, however, will show, that, supposing the population to have doubled once in twenty-five years, (which is not so rapid an increase as has been witnessed, independently of emigration, in the United States,) four hundred and thirty years, the

* xii. 26, 27.

"Bless me also," says Pharaoh, (verse 32,) in our translation, when he bids them depart; ; that is, "Give me a parting blessing"; "Take your leave of me," "Begone." -D, (verse 34,) their platters, rather than "kneading-troughs."

xii. 37.

time declared* to have intervened between Jacob's emigration and the Exodus, would have raised it from seventy persons, not to three millions only, but to more than ten. There is no sufficient ground for questioning the correctness of the chronology, as thus represented; though the reading of the corresponding text in some copies of the Septuagint version, and the interpretation put on a passage in the New Testament, have created an impression that the period of the Israelitish sojourn in Egypt was actually no more than two hundred and fifteen years.

xii. 41. The statement is confirmed by Acts vii. 6, and by Gen. xv. 13, with only the difference that it is made in these last passages in round numbers. The question of reconciling the passage in Galatians (iii. 17), with these, belongs to the interpretation of the New Testament rather than of the Old. It may be proper, however, to remark, that Paul's argument, in his Epistle to the Galatians, did not at all require exactness in a computation of time. He was only concerned to show, that, as Moses was after Abraham, the law given by the ministry of the former, could not invalidate the promise made to the latter. This was equally true whether there was an interval of four hundred and thirty years between Abraham and Moses, or between Jacob and Moses; and if the copies of the Septuagint, which were in the hands of those to whom he was writing, presented the former view, there was no reason why he should not refer to it as it stood, instead of interrupting his discourse to enter into a chronological argument. Further, I would ask, whether we should not do well to render Paul's words, (though without the definite article in Greek,) "after the four hundred and thirty years"; that is, the famous four hundred and thirty years; the well-known four centuries of primeval servitude? This would relieve his statement of all apparent inconsistency with the representation in Exodus. If it be said, that Moses (Ex. vi. 16-20) was only the fourth in descent from Levi, a fact hardly consistent with the supposition that they lived four hundred and thirty years apart, the obvious reply is, that nothing is more common, in Scripture genealogies, than the omission of steps in the series; and that, in the present instance, Joshua, the contemporary of Moses, is actually related (1 Chron. vii. 23-27) to have been the tenth in descent from Joseph, brother of Levi.

LECTURE VII.

EXODUS XIII. 1.—XVIII. 27.

THE JEWISH CONSTITUTION CALLED A THEOCRACY. - MEANING AND OBJECT OF THE MOSAIC REPRESENTATION OF GOD, AS KING OF THE JEWS. PREPARATION FOR A NATIONAL WORSHIP. INCOMPLETE AND PROGRESSIVE CHARACTER OF SOME PROVISIONS OF THE LAW.-AGENCY OF MOSES IN THEIR ARRANGEMENT. - POSTOF THE INVASION OF CANAAN. NATURE OF THE PILLAR OF CLOUD AND FLAME. PASSAGE OF THE RED SEA.STATUTE GIVEN AT MARAH. MIRACULOUS SUPPLIES OF QUAILS, OF MANNA, AND OF WATER. BATTLE WITH THE AMALEKITES. -THE LAW GIVEN ON SINAI A CODE OF STATUTE Law.

PONEMENT

AT the period at which we have now arrived, the Jews, rescued from the servitude of Egypt, begin to constitute a distinct nation, regulated by a government of their own. To this government, the name Theocracy has been applied. The prevailing idea founded upon that name, has been, that, in a manner corresponding to that by which human monarchs superintend the concerns of their respective jurisdictions, the Supreme Being administered the affairs of the Jewish people; and it has even been commonly understood, that this immediate superintendence was continued to a late period of the Jewish history.

It will, however, I think, appear, on a more careful examination, that there was nothing in the relation which God sustained towards this people, to affect permanently their condition in respect to being governed, like other nations, by a political organization. The word Theocracy is of no older origin than the writings of Josephus,* and is not to be suffered to

* Contra Apionem. Lib. 2, § 16.