Bible Commentaries
Exodus 3

Introduction

The Birth And Growth of Moses As Yahweh’s Future Deliverer (Exodus 2:1 to Exodus 4:26 ).

This section takes us from the birth of Moses to the commencement of his return from Egypt. This again takes on a clear pattern.

a The birth and deliverance of Moses and his establishment in Pharaoh’s ‘house’ (Exodus 2:1-10).

b Moses has to flee from Egypt and falls among friends in Midian and makes his home with the Midianites (Exodus 2:15-22).

c Conditions in Egypt worsen - God remembers His covenant with their fathers (Exodus 2:23-25)

d God appears to Moses in the sign of a flaming bush at the mountain of God (Exodus 3:1-5).

e Yahweh reveals Himself as Yahweh, the God of their Fathers, the ‘I am’, with the promise of Deliverance (Exodus 3:6-15).

e Moses is therefore to go to the Elders of Israel and promise a glorious deliverance (Exodus 3:16-22).

d God gives to a reluctant Moses a further three signs (Exodus 4:1-9).

c The response of Moses worsens and Yahweh becomes angry and offers him Aaron as ‘his mouth’ (Exodus 4:10-17).

b Moses leaves Midian for Egypt (Exodus 4:18-20).

a The renewal of Moses by deliverance from death and call to go to Pharaoh. Three sons are compared, Yahweh’s firstborn (Israel), Pharaoh’s firstborn, and Moses’ Midianite son. Moses must choose whom he will serve (Exodus 4:21-26).

Note again the parallels. In ‘a’ Moses is born, delivered and brought up in Pharaoh’s household, in the parallel Moses’ loyalty to Yahweh is renewed, he is delivered from death and he is to go to Pharaoh as his adversary. In ‘b’ Moses flees Egypt and makes his home with the Midianites, in the parallel he leaves Midian and goes to Egypt. In ‘c’ the situation in Egypt is worsening, but Yahweh remembers His covenant, and in the parallel Moses’ relationship with Yahweh is worsening and Moses is forgetting the covenant. In ‘d’ God gives Moses a sign in the flaming bush and the sign of the mountain of God, and in the parallel He give Moses three signs. And in ‘e’ Yahweh reveals Himself as Israel’s Deliverer, and in the parallel Moses is to take that deliverance to Israel.

Note for Christians.

The New Testament takes these historical accounts and applies their principles to the modern situation. For history is seen as a continual repetition of itself. Apart from Christ the world does not change. God offered man in the Garden the possibility of living for ever under the Kingly Rule of God. But man rebelled and chose his own way (Genesis 2-3). And from then on history consisted of the few who responded to God and pleased God, and the many who lived without concern for Him.

He then called out one, Abraham, who would found his own ‘kingdom of God’ which would be brought into covenant with God (Genesis 12:0 onwards), and which would travel from place to place. But again it led to failure by man, and the kingdom eventually finished up in Egypt and became absorbed within it.

It is then offered here, in Exodus to Deuteronomy, through Moses, when the divinely perfect ‘seventy’ are introduced (Exodus 1:5), with the final aim of establishing from their descendants God’s Kingly Rule in Canaan, but from the beginning it is made clear that the people to whom He made this offer were unworthy. For having gone into Egypt which represented ‘the world’ they had remained there and sought to become one with them. But ‘Egypt’ is never a place with which men can be truly satisfied, and thus in this chapter we have seen them stirred from their lives of sin and unbelief by the sufferings that came on them, outwardly caused by their enemies, but underneath the surface caused by God, and as the book proceeds, there will be an offering to them of coming under the Kingly Rule of God in Canaan with all that could hinder removed. But Exodus to Judges is the tale of how they will fail to seize what God has offered them, so that it will only accepted by the few, and in the end they will go so far from God in compromise and sin that the prophets, despairing of them, predict the coming of the Kingly Rule of God in the future. But that it will come they are sure, for God has promised it. There will come an everlasting kingdom (Isaiah 9:6-7; Isaiah 11:0; Ezekiel 37:24-28).

And the New Testament reveals a similar picture. The Jews were waiting for the coming of the Kingly Rule of God promised by the prophets, but when it came in Jesus they rejected it and only the comparatively few responded. They failed to see that the Kingly Rule of God essentially consisted in responding to and obeying the King. Thus they rejected the King sent by God. And the result was that Kingly Rule of God was in the end offered through Jesus’ Apostles to all in the world who would believe in Him and come to Him.

But did this mean that God had forsaken Israel? The answer lies in how God saw Israel. For God makes clear that the true Israel is composed of those who submit to His covenant and obey Him. In the words of Paul ‘He did not cast away His people whom He foreknew’ (Romans 11:2), those who were faithful to Him. And all who would could come within the covenant as long as they were circumcised and became subject to His covenant requirements (Exodus 12:48). As to those who did not obey His covenant they had to be cut off from it and not be seen as His people (Exodus 32:33). Thus Abraham’s foreign servants came within the covenant. There is no reason to doubt that the mixed multitude (Exodus 12:38) came within the covenant. In the days before Christ the Jews welcomed all proselytes into the covenant theoretically at least on equal terms with natural born Jews. And thus after the resurrection of Jesus those who rejected Him were cut off from the true Israel, and the Apostles went out to form the new congregation (ekklesia) of Israel as a result of Jesus’ command (Matthew 16:18). That is why when the Gentiles began to respond the question arose as to whether it was necessary for them to be circumcised in order to become members of the Israel of God. The question was, how else could they be true proselytes in accordance with 12:48? And Paul’s reply was not that they were not becoming Israel. Indeed he made clear that they were (Ephesians 2:11-22). It was that they were circumcised already, in the circumcision of Christ (Colossians 2:11; Colossians 2:13). In Christ all had been done in order for them to become the Israel of God, God’s new creation (Galatians 6:12-16), without earthly ritual. Like the offerings and sacrifices, circumcision was done away with in Christ. Thus were Christians seen as entering under the Kingly Rule of God and as the true Israel of God. For if we are Christ’s then are we Abraham’s seed and heirs according to the promise (Galatians 3:21).

In the New Testament this has a present and future aspect, as it also had with Jesus. In the present His Kingly Rule is enjoyed by God’s true people in this world (Acts 8:12; Acts 19:8; Acts 20:25; Acts 28:23; Acts 28:31; Romans 14:17; 1 Corinthians 4:20; Colossians 1:13; Hebrews 1:8; Hebrews 12:28; ), and in the future it will be a heavenly kingdom for all who are called by God in Jesus Christ ( Act 14:22 ; 1 Corinthians 6:9-10; 1 Corinthians 15:24; 1 Corinthians 15:50; Galatians 5:21; Ephesians 5:5; 1Th 2:12 ; 2 Thessalonians 1:5; 2 Timothy 4:1; James 2:5; Revelation 11:15; Revelation 12:10). Yet the distinctions are not absolute and many verses in the second category include the thought of the present inheriting of the Kingly Rule of God (the Kingdom of heaven) for all who truly believe and respond to Him.

Thus can we apply these historical lessons to our own situation. We too live at a time when the Kingly Rule of God is subject to rejection by the many. We too know that in history God’s offer was made and rejected because man would not receive it on God’s terms, until it was distorted beyond all recognition. And why? Because men clung to ‘Egypt’. They wanted both God and Egypt and that was not possible, and so they chose ‘Egypt’ and tried to call it the kingdom of God. But all through history, in spite of the pretence, for the outward church was no different from failing Israel and foolish Judaism, and it too rejected the Kingly Rule of God, replacing it with its own rule, God’s work has gone on. Within the great churches that became monoliths and Egypts of their own, were always found the true believers who formed the true church, the living, invisible church, yet not really invisible, for it was visible by its life and faith expressed through the individuals who made up the whole. And in the end many broke out and formed churches of their own, only to fall into the danger of doing exactly as had been done before. Thus do all true believers constantly have to ‘come forth from Egypt’, whether representing a failing church or a sordid world, and turn from love of them to the service of the living God, thus revealing themselves as members of the true Israel of God. In the words of John we are called to ‘love not the world, nor the things that are in the world. If any man love the world the love of the Father is not in him. For all that is in the world, the longings of the flesh, the longings for what is seen (of the eyes, that is, covetousness), and the arrogance and desire of position and status that bespeaks the vanity of life (the pride of life), are not of the Father but are of the world’ (1 John 2:15-16). And the world consists not only of heady pleasures that destroy the soul, or the pride of self-seeking, but also of man’s attempts at religion which avoid true faith in Christ and make him very satisfied with himself.

And this is not only true of the whole it is true of the part. Each individual has his own ‘Egypt’ from which he must be rescued, for it is the tendency of man’s heart to seek the pleasures of sin (Hebrews 11:25) and the vanity of the mind (Ephesians 2:3). When they are converted many still crave for Egypt. Thus when we see Israel suffering because of its folly in clinging to Egypt we can apply it to our own tendency to do the same. And when God brings persecution and suffering on His erring people we can see in it the picture of what happens to many of us, firstly in order to release us from ‘Egypt’, and then in order to remove ‘Egypt’ from us. We should be grateful for His correction. It is because He loves us and wants our love in return (Hebrews 12:5-7).

Most of Israel would in fact never really come out of Egypt, for while their bodies moved from it their hearts would always be there. That is why they subsequently failed again and again, ever longing for Egypt. And subsequently, and ironically, Canaan the chosen land itself became an Egypt for their children, because they had failed to cleanse it of its inhabitants and its follies. It became the continual source of its temptations. It was only the few who, like the prophets, ‘came out’ and freed themselves, like the ‘seven thousand who had not bowed the knee to Baal’ (1 Kings 19:18). And so it is for us today.

Thus as we read these records we may rightly ask, what have they to say to us. What examples can we take from them? And apply these lessons to ourselves. Something which we will seek to do at the end of each chapter. For these things were written for our learning.

Here then we learn in chapter 1 that those who are different from others because of their faith in God will always suffer persecution in one way or another, even though it be only in the home or the workplace. They may find themselves welcome in ‘Egypt’ for a time, but they will find that one day ‘Egypt’ will not like the standards that they set, the demands that they make and the way that they behave, and persecution will follow. And like the midwives they must see in it the opportunity to stand firm for God and thus enjoy His blessing. And they must rejoice in it and recognise that it is helping to free them from love of ‘Egypt’ which deadens the soul. For ‘tribulation works patient endurance, and patient endurance results in experience, and experience produces hope, and hope does not make us ashamed, because the love of God is shed abroad in our hears by the Holy Spirit Who is given to us’ (Romans 5:3-5). Thus through the suffering do we experience the love of God, and through it His love possesses us too.

End of note.

The Call of Moses (Exodus 3:1 to Exodus 4:17 ).

What has gone before was preparatory to what follows. It is now that the main story of the book begins, which will take us from God’s call to Moses, to the establishment of the covenant at Sinai and the erecting of God’s earthly Dwellingplace, over a period of about two years.

But note the care that has been taken over the training of this man we see before us. He does not know it but he has been fully prepared by God. In Egypt he has been trained in statecraft and law, he has been involved with those who ran a great and powerful nation, and has no doubt had his share in the running of it. He has learned the discipline of power. But what is equally important in Midian he has been trained in desert lore. He now knew where water was to be found in the desert, he knew the secrets of the wilderness of Sinai, he knew the ways that led through that mountainous wilderness and which ways could take a multitude of people and which could not, and apart from his brother-in-law Hobab who was clearly famous for his desertcraft, whom he was able to call on for help (Numbers 10:29, Hobab would have done it for no one else), none was better aware of how to survive in that sometimes dreadful place. No one had been better trained and equipped to be a trek leader than he.

Verses 1-5

The Call of Moses (Exodus 3:1 to Exodus 4:17 ).

What has gone before was preparatory to what follows. It is now that the main story of the book begins, which will take us from God’s call to Moses, to the establishment of the covenant at Sinai and the erecting of God’s earthly Dwellingplace, over a period of about two years.

But note the care that has been taken over the training of this man we see before us. He does not know it but he has been fully prepared by God. In Egypt he has been trained in statecraft and law, he has been involved with those who ran a great and powerful nation, and has no doubt had his share in the running of it. He has learned the discipline of power. But what is equally important in Midian he has been trained in desert lore. He now knew where water was to be found in the desert, he knew the secrets of the wilderness of Sinai, he knew the ways that led through that mountainous wilderness and which ways could take a multitude of people and which could not, and apart from his brother-in-law Hobab who was clearly famous for his desertcraft, whom he was able to call on for help (Numbers 10:29, Hobab would have done it for no one else), none was better aware of how to survive in that sometimes dreadful place. No one had been better trained and equipped to be a trek leader than he.

God Appears To Moses In A Flaming Bush (Exodus 3:1-5 ).

a Moses is feeding the flock and comes to the mountain of God (Exodus 3:1).

b The Angel of Yahweh appears to him in a flaming fire in the midst of a bush (Exodus 3:2 a).

c Moses sees the bush burning and that it is not being consumed (Exodus 3:2 b).

c Moses says that he will turn aside and see why this wonder of a burning bush not being consumed (Exodus 3:3).

b Yahweh sees that he has turned aside and calls to him from the midst of the bush (Exodus 3:4)

a He is not to approach but to take of his shoes because he is on holy ground (Exodus 3:5).

Note the parallels. In ‘a’ Moses comes to the holy ‘mountain of God’, in the parallel he is not to approach but take of his shoes because he is on holy ground. In ‘b’ the Angel of Yahweh appears in flaming fire in a bush, in the parallel Yahweh speaks to Moses from the bush. In ‘c’ Moses sees that the bush is not consumed, in the parallel he turns aside to see why the bush is not consumed.

Exodus 3:1

‘Now Moses was keeping the flock of Jethro, his father-in-law, the priest of Midian, and he led the flock to the back of the wilderness and came to the mountain of God, to Horeb.’

Moses was now well settled into the family tribe of Reuel and here is seen fulfilling responsibilities for the flocks. There may well have been others with him keeping the flock, possibly even some of the daughters We have to recognise that we can only speculate as to the make up of the group to which he belonged for we are told nothing. No mention is made of what had happened to the seven daughters, or why Moses should be the shepherd here rather than be involved in other activities of the group. It may be that he was filling in between these other activities, and was accompanied by some of the daughters.

“Led the flock to the back of the wilderness.” He seems to have wandered some distance from the normal pasturage, possibly because of shortage of good pasture. This need to travel some distance may explain why he had been put in charge of them at this time. He had to drive the sheep from the Midianite encampment as far as Horeb, so that after first passing through a wilderness he reached the pasture land there. In this, the most elevated ground of the peninsula, fertile valleys could be found in which fruit-trees grew, and water abounded even in the bad times. It is still the resort of the Bedouin when the lower areas dry up. And he had been involved in this and similar wilderness activity for forty years.

“To the mountain of God.” This is probably the writer’s description in the light of what he knew was to come, both in this chapter and later. In the analysis above the parallel is that it is holy ground. It may suggest that it was already looked on as a sacred mountain, but this is not evidenced elsewhere. That God would choose it for a revelation of Himself is sufficient to justify the description. The mountain of God was Mount Sinai (Exodus 24:13) which is in the wilderness of Sinai.

“To Horeb.” It may be that Horeb was the area around the mount but including the mount, for ‘Sinai’ is always qualified by either ‘the wilderness of’ or ‘Mount’ to distinguish the two (except for Exodus 16:1 where it is used loosely, and in poetry in Deuteronomy 33:2; Judges 5:5; Psalms 68:8; Psalms 68:17), whereas Horeb was usually geographically referred to as a place. There is only once a mention of ‘Mount Horeb’, and that may even be a different local peak (Exodus 33:6 but see also 1 Kings 19:8, although the latter may arise from the same problem as we have, interpretation). This suggests that Mount Sinai and Horeb, while closely identified, are not to be seen as synonymous expressions, with Horeb having a wider meaning and including the plain beneath the Mount. Indeed the area of Horeb clearly stretched even further afield (Exodus 17:6). There may also be some truth in the idea that Sinai was the Canaanite name for the mountain and Horeb the Midianite name, but that would not fully account for the differing usage. But it may be that the Canaanites tended to think only of the particular impressive mountain while the Midianites thought in terms of the whole place where they wandered.

Exodus 3:2

‘And the angel of Yahweh appeared to him in a flame of fire out of the middle of a bush, and he looked, and behold the bush burned with fire and the bush was not consumed.’

God appears as ‘the angel of Yahweh’. This is another connection of the book with Genesis. It parallels the use of the term in Genesis 16:7-13; Genesis 22:11-18; Numbers 22:22-35 compare Genesis 21:17). Ishmael would go on from such an appearance to found a nation. In the Pentateuch the phrase always refers to God directly as openly revealing Himself at a time of crisis in covenant matters. So now in this time of crisis Yahweh is revealing Himself in a direct way to Moses. He too is going forward to found a nation. This mention of the Angel of Yahweh stresses the direct relationship of His action with the covenant, and relates back to 2:24. The Angel of Yahweh was the manifestation of the God of the covenant of their fathers.

Here we have the first use of Yahweh in Exodus. This is because as their covenant God He is now stepping into their situation to act in accordance with His covenant.

“Appeared in a flame of fire.” Many attempts have been made to explain this naturally. Bushes do sometimes burst into flame in hot countries, and Moses may well at first have thought that that was what was happening here. But the point that is made, and presumably impressed Moses, was that it went on burning without consuming the bush and did not die out. It was not the natural phenomenon that he was used to. The undying flame was a fit picture of the ‘I am What I am’, the ever existing and present One, by which Yahweh revealed Himself and His nature..

God appearing in fire is common in both Old and New Testaments (see Genesis 15:17; Exodus 13:21; Exodus 19:16; Exodus 19:18; Exodus 20:18; Exodus 24:17; Exodus 40:38; Deuteronomy 4:11; Ezekiel 1:27; Ezekiel 8:2: Act 2:3 ; 1 Timothy 6:16; Revelation 21:23; Revelation 22:5). To the ancients such a manifestation was a combination of the inexplicable and beneficial, dangerous and yet vital. It had no form and yet could be seen even in the darkness. It benefited man and yet could consume him. It was glorious and awe-inspiring and then in a moment it could be gone. In manifestation it brought home something of the significance of the divine.

“Out of the middle of a bush.” It may well have been God’s intention that Moses was to see in the sparse desert bush a picture of afflicted Israel. The idea would then be that God was among His people in an undying flame, just as the lampstand in the Tabernacle would later represent the same. It may be of some significance in regard to this that the lampstand later represented a tree, with the burning flames at the tips. By then the thorn bush had potentially become a fruit tree (Exodus 25:31-40).

Exodus 3:3

‘And Moses said, “I will turn aside now and see this great sight, why the bush is not burnt.”

Moses had seen many bushes burn briefly but not one that went on and on burning incessantly. So he decided that he must take a closer look. The words may simply have been passing through his thoughts, or they may have been spoken to those who were with him. But either way he somehow knew that he must approach the bush alone.

Exodus 3:4

‘And when Yahweh saw that he turned aside to see, God called to him out of the midst of the bush, and said, “Moses, Moses.” And he said, “I’m here.” And he said, “Do not draw near here. Take your sandals off from your feet for the place on which you stand is sanctified ground.’

Note that it was ‘Yahweh’ Who saw that he turned aside to see, but ‘God’ Who called to him from the bush. It was important to link this visit of the Angel of Yahweh (Exodus 3:2) with the God Who was so concerned about Israel. This use of ‘God’ very much emphasises His oneness. The introduction of the name Yahweh signalled the commencement of new covenant activity. We can compare how in Genesis, when Ishmael was to be restored to the covenant community it was ‘the Angel of Yahweh’ Who met him (Genesis 16:0), but when he was leaving the covenant community for ever he was helped by ‘the Angel of God’ (Genesis 21:17). This is a reversal of that situation. Now it was Moses, who had been so long away from the covenant community and covenant matters, and had lived among strangers under the hand of ‘God’, who was being reintroduced into the covenant community. Thus the reintroduction of the name of ‘Yahweh’ Who was thus making His name known once again.

God called Moses twice by name. Thus did Moses know that this was personal, something for him and for him alone. Compare Genesis 22:11; 1 Samuel 3:10. The repetition of the name always stresses urgency.

It is difficult for us to appreciate the trauma of this moment. Moses had often wandered in the wilderness. He had possibly often approached this mountain. He had fairly regularly seen bushes burning spontaneously, although never one that continued to do so like this without apparently being affected by it. But a voice was something different, especially a voice that revealed its divine source in what it commanded. We can only imagine the stunned shock. The incredulity. The fear. Moses was but a man like we are, although later he would become more familiar with the voice (compare Numbers 7:89).

“Do not draw near.” God was there, and it would have been dangerous to come too close, for God was revealed as a consuming fire.

“Take off your sandals.” Compare Joshua 5:15; 2 Samuel 15:30. Later the priests performed their duties barefoot (note that there is no mention of shoes or sandals in Leviticus 8:0 and the toe at least is accessible (Leviticus 8:23)). Indeed in many religions men took of their shoes when entering the Sanctuary. The point was that the dirt on men’s sandals must not defile the place where God is. It is a symbol of the otherness of God. The washing with water at the laver would have a similar purpose. It did not ‘cleanse’ (‘shall not be clean’ is a constant refrain after washing with water) but prepared the way for cleansing by removing earthiness as man approached God in solitariness.

“Sanctified ground.” That is, ground that was set apart at that time as uniquely untouchable and holy except by God’s grace, because God was there. His presence made all He came in contact with holy and exclusive (compare Exodus 19:12-13). No man could be allowed to approach such things lightly.

In his youth he had possibly known what it was to come into the presence of Pharaoh, the necessary preparation, the washing, the grooming, and then the solemn approach into the inner throne room. That preparation had been awesome. But he recognised that this was something even more traumatic. For this was unearthly, terrifying, in a way that Pharaoh had never been. Here was an unearthly presence. And he would divest himself of his sandals, and sink to his knees and wonder what was to happen to him.

Verses 6-15

He Reveals Himself as Yahweh, the God of their Fathers With the Promise of Deliverance (Exodus 3:6-15 ).

a Yahweh declares that He is the God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob (Exodus 3:6 a).

b Moses hides his face because he is afraid to look on God (Exodus 3:6 b).

c Yahweh declares that He has seen the deep affliction of His people and because of it has come down to deliver them (Exodus 3:7).

d He will bring them into a good land, a land flowing with milk and honey (Exodus 3:8).

e He has heard their cry and has seen the oppression and will send Moses to Pharaoh to deliver them (Exodus 3:9-10).

e Moses defers and rejects the idea that he is capable of being a deliverer (Exodus 3:11).

d God says that He will be with him and gives as a token of his sure success that he will worship God on this mountain (Exodus 3:12).

c Moses explains that the people will want to know the nature of the God Who has made these promises (Exodus 3:13).

b Yahweh replies that His name reveals that He is the One Who acts (Exodus 3:14).

a Yahweh declares that it is the God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob Who is sending him to them (Exodus 3:15).

The parallels here are striking. In ‘a’ and in the parallel God is declared to be the God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob, In ‘b’ Moses hides his face because of his fear of God and in the parallel God reveals the amazing wonder of Who He really is. In ‘c’ He declares Himself the Deliverer and in the parallel Moses explains that they will want to know His credentials. In ‘d’ He declares that He will bring them into a good land (elsewhere His mountain - Exodus 15:17) and in the parallel the sign is that they will serve Him on His mountain here. In ‘e’ He appoints Moses as the deliverer and in the parallel Moses professes his inability and unworthiness.

Exodus 3:6

‘Moreover he said, “I am the God of your father, the God of Abraham, the God of Isaac and the God of Jacob.” And Moses hid his face for he was afraid to look on God.’

Up to this point Moses was very uncertain as to who it was who was speaking to him from the bush. But the voice now revealed Himself as the God of his fathers (‘father’ is a compound singular). And Moses hid his face in awe and fear. The sense of terror increased. He dared not look at God face to face for he knew that no man could see this God and live (Exodus 33:20 compare 1 Kings 19:13; Isaiah 6:2). Special men may have partial experiences of God in His hiddenness (Genesis 32:30; Exodus 33:22-23; Deuteronomy 5:24; Judges 6:22) but not in His revealed glory. And he was afraid.

Moses was clearly expected to know about the patriarchs and their special covenant relationship with God. His mother would have educated him in the history of his people, and especially in their sacred stories. Once he considered it this would explain to him Who this God was and why He was about to act. But at this point he was simply stunned.

Exodus 3:7-9

‘And Yahweh said, “I have surely seen the affliction of my people who are in Egypt, and have heard their cry because of their taskmasters, for I know their sorrows. And I am come down to deliver them out of the hand of the Egyptians, and to bring them up out of that land to a good land and a large land, a land flowing with milk and honey, to the place of the Canaanite and the Hittite and the Amorite and the Perizzite and the Hivite and the Jebusite. And now, behold, the cry of the children of Israel has reached me. Moreover I have seen the oppression with which the Egyptians oppress them.” ’

He learned that ‘Yahweh’ their God had taken knowledge of His people (Exodus 2:25). He ‘knows’ their sorrow, that is He has entered into their sorrows, and shares them with them. He has seen the affliction, He has heard the cries, He has entered their experience of misery, and now He has ‘come down’ as their covenant God for the express purpose of delivering them. That is why He is here. Not just to call Moses but to actively deliver His people.

“I am come down.” One from the heavens has come down to take an active interest in covenant activity on earth. The idea is that He has come down to spend some time there so as to bring about their deliverance because of that covenant. The time for inaction is past. The covenant is again coming to the fore.

There is a contrast here of God with Moses. Moses had seen the affliction of his people, his heart had entered into their sorrows, but he had lost control of himself and had had to flee from Egypt. But now it is God who has come down, their covenant God, Yahweh. And he has remained. Now they will be delivered. In this is also expressed His hatred of oppression.

There are times in history when God has ‘come down’, but not very often. It will happen here. It happened in the days of Elijah and Elisha. It happened supremely in the coming of Jesus and the outreach of the early church. Then amazing things happened for God was here in personal expression of His power. It has happened occasionally in amazing ‘revivals’. But it does not happen very often and when it does man has to draw back and God takes over.

“To a good land, and a large land, a land flowing with milk and honey.” A ‘large’ land, larger than Goshen with plenty of room, and more, for all His people. A good land for it flows with milk and honey (Numbers 13:27; Deuteronomy 6:3). Milk would flow because there was good pasturage and, apart from in times of famine, plentiful rain. The honey would be from wild bees, (and later domesticated bees, for it was tithed), along with possibly grape and date syrup, and would be plentiful and would later be exported to other countries (Ezekiel 27:17). Thus it provided both nourishment and sweetness. The same description was given of Goshen by the complaining Israelites (Numbers 16:13), but that was partly sarcastic referring the future promise back into the past. Then they had been promised this wonderful land which they had failed to obtain. Well, it seemed to them then in their despair that perhaps Goshen had been like that after all.

The Canaanites and Amorites were terms for the general population of the country and the terms were often interchangeable. Each could be used for the inhabitants of the whole country. However there was sometimes some distinction in that often the Canaanites was the term for those occupying the coastlands and the Jordan valley while the Amorites could be seen as dwelling in the hill country east and west of Jordan. The Hittites may have been settlers who had come from the Hittite Empire further north and had settled in Canaan. Or they may have been longstanding inhabitants of the land (see Genesis 23:0). The Perizzites were hill dwellers (Joshua 11:3; Judges 1:4 on) and possibly country peasantry, their name being taken from ‘peraza’, meaning ‘hamlet’. This is supported by the fact that they were not named as Canaan’s sons in Genesis 10:15 on. They are also omitted in a parallel passage to this in Exodus 13:5. The Hivites may have been the equivalent of the Horites (see on Genesis 36:0). Their principal location was in the Lebanese hills (Judges 3:3) and the Hermon range (Joshua 11:3; 2 Samuel 24:7), but there were some in Edom in the time of Esau (Genesis 36:0) and in Shechem (Genesis 34:0). The Jebusites were the inhabitants of Jerusalem and the hills round about (Numbers 13:29; Joshua 11:3; Joshua 15:8; Joshua 18:16). Thus the population was very mixed and open to invasion and infiltration. The wide range of peoples mentioned, and their spread, emphasises the largeness of the land, and its availability due to its many divisions.

“The cry of the children of Israel has reached me.” That is, will now receive an effective response, because Yahweh was very much aware of the oppression they faced. As He has said earlier He ‘knows’ it within Himself. This repetitiveness is typical of ancient literature of the time, a device used among other things in order to bring home the facts to the listener. But now comes the telling blow.

Exodus 3:10

“Come now, therefore, and I will send you to Pharaoh that you may bring forth my people the children of Israel out of Egypt.”

By now Moses’ fear had been lessening as He had learned that this visitation was to inform him of a covenant deliverance of his people, but these words that he was to be the one who was to bring it about must have come as a jolt to Moses. He had been listening and content that Yahweh had come down to do the delivering. But he had not thought that he was to be involved in it. Now he discovered that he was to be right in the forefront of the deliverance and would have to face up to Pharaoh himself.

“I will send you to Pharaoh.” Moses knew all about Pharaoh and his power and his despotism. He did not like the thought of the task at all. Once it might have been vaguely possible when he had been a prince in Egypt and had seemed invulnerable. But now he was simply the son-in-law of a Midianite priest, a desert tribesman, one who would be despised by the Egyptians. And no one was more aware of the high opinion that the Pharaohs had of themselves than Moses.

Exodus 3:11

‘And Moses said to God, “Who am I that I should go to Pharaoh and that I should bring forth the children of Israel out of Egypt?”

We find here no more the brash young man. He felt rather his inadequacy for the task in hand. After all what was he? A desert nobody in comparison with Pharaoh. And had God forgotten that he was a fugitive? He knew only too well the power of Pharaoh, and his arrogance, and how a Midianite priest’s son dressed for the desert would appear to him. He spoke of what he knew. And would the children of Israel think any better of him? A man from the desert? It was hardly likely.

He was yet to recognise that while God could not use a proud son of Pharaoh at the height of his powers who could not control himself, he could use someone who was obedient to him, and had been prepared by Him in His own way, even though in his appearance and standing he was not promising material.

Exodus 3:12

‘And he said, “Certainly I will be with you, and this shall be the sign to you that I have sent you. When you have brought forth the people out of Egypt you will serve God on this mountain.” ’

So God thrust aside his excuses. He would Himself go with him. ‘Certainly I will be with you,’ He declared. That was why He had ‘come down’. There was One Who would go with Moses, Yahweh their covenant God, Who was more powerful than Pharaoh and all his armies. He was to see that as a guaranteed certainty. He need not therefore be afraid. And this mountain itself was a guarantee, for it was at this very place that there would be blessing.

“This shall be the sign.” The ‘sign’ was the pledge of God of what was to be. It was a pledge and promise, a sign to be fulfilled after the event. It called for faith. But, if he would, Moses could look around him even now and visualise the hordes of the children of Israel with him while he worshipped God here. Then would he know that he was being sent by God. So what he had to do was to take a step of faith and accept God’s word, believing that the promise of God was as good as a certainty, and see it as though it were already happening. He had to trust God ‘in the dark’. The mountain was even now there as evidence before him. It was a tangible place to which he would bring the children of Israel. God had made a promise, God could not break His word, therefore the event was sure. And here they would all worship Him. So the sign consisted of God’s pledge of what was to happen, and the mountain on which it was to happen. It was an indication that He who comes to God must believe that He is and that He is a rewarder of those who diligently seek Him (Hebrews 11:6). This was Moses’ first major test.

“You will serve God on this mountain.” To ‘serve God’ was a phrase which meant among other things to lead men in worship and sacrifice. And the need to serve Him would be the basis for the request to leave Egypt (Exodus 10:8; Exodus 10:11; Exodus 10:24; Exodus 10:26; Exodus 12:31). Whenever he later began to doubt whether Pharaoh would ever release the people he could remember this promise. ‘You SHALL serve God on this mountain.’

But the next question that occurred to Moses was, would the children of Israel be willing to follow a stranger from Midian? He should of course have gone forward unquestioningly, but God was graciously willing to lead His servant step by step, as He always is.

Exodus 3:13

‘And Moses said to God, “Look, when I come to the children of Israel and will say to them, ‘The God of your fathers has sent me to you’ and they say to me, “What is his name?’ What shall I say to them?’

The question seems naive. Surely the statement ‘the God of your fathers’ will be quite clear. Will they not immediately think of Whoever their fathers had worshipped, the God Whom their fathers had served. So we can be sure of one thing and that is that when Moses says “they will ask ‘What is his name?’ ” he is not thinking that they will mean that as a question spoken by them as indicating that they do not know His name. Rather the question is designed to bring His name to the fore. Does this stranger from Midian even know His name, but even more, does he know Who He is? Does he know Whose people they are? So Moses is saying, ‘make Yourself known to me in greater depth so that I will know what to say to them’.

For to the ancient mind the name indicated the person and personality, it indicated the attributes and abilities, it spoke of what someone was. Thus their real question included the thought, ‘Do you know what power and attributes the God of our fathers has that we should believe that He will be able to act through you on our behalf? How can we know that He will, and that He can do what He promises through you? He has not acted for us in the past. He has allowed us to be oppressed and caused to suffer. What new revelation has He given that we should believe Him through you?’ And Moses will then have an answer for them.

This is confirmed by the way the question is put. Had it meant, ‘what is his name?’ literally the question would begin with ‘mi’. But it does in fact begin with ‘mah’ asking about the meaning of the name.

So God took the name that they knew so well, but had probably half forgotten the meaning of, (consider how easily men today can speak of ‘the Almighty’ without even thinking what it means) so that some had even turned to the gods of Egypt (Joshua 24:14), and He expounded to Moses its significance, so that he could take it to them, and so that they would recognise Him again for what He was. It was the Yahweh Who had brought Joseph to Egypt (Genesis 39:2-3) Who would lead them out again. So they were to fix their thoughts again on the true God.

Exodus 3:14

‘And God said to Moses, “I am what I am.” And he said to Moses, “Thus shall you say to the children of Israel, ‘I am has sent me to you.’ ”

To suggest that the children of Israel would have accepted a new name in the place of the old name is frankly incredible. It was rather the old name expanded and fully revealed through this stranger that would speak to their hearts and give them the confidence He was seeking to impart to them. That was why God put His name Yahweh into the first person ‘Ehyeh’. It was to Yahweh the God of their fathers He wanted them to look, but as a Yahweh Who had become personal and present. He wanted them to know the full significance of His name. (In Hebrew Yahweh is ‘He is’ in the third person, Ehyeh is ‘I am’ in the first person. Both come from the same verbal stem, although the ‘w’ in Yahweh is an ancient form). He was saying, ‘tell them to recall My name. Then they will recognise what I can do!’

“I am what I am.” There are a number of ways of translating this, each of which is significant. ‘I am what I am.’ ‘I am who I am.’ ‘I will be what I will be.’ ‘I cause to be what I cause to be.’ ‘I am the one who is.’ It partly depends on what vowels are used (that is, how it was pronounced, for there were minimal vowel signs in ancient Hebrew) and what interpretation is put on it. But as the Hebrews were a people of action rather than abstract thought, we must surely interpret it as meaning ‘God does what He wants to do and no one can stop Him’, and this is true whichever we favour. It also indicated that there is no other like Him. He is the supreme and only God, the Creator. Before Him the gods of the nations are nothings. That is why they are mentioned so briefly in the whole Exodus narrative (only in Exodus 12:12)

In his letters to his subjects Pharaoh would often begin by saying, ‘I am there’ signifying that in his status as a god nothing could be hidden from him, for he was there with them and could see what they were about. So when Yahweh spoke of Himself as ‘I am’ He was setting Himself up in contrast to Pharaoh and telling His people that He was the One Who really was there. This fits neatly in with what He has earlier said, ‘I have come down.’ Thus He was supremely the One Who was there in a new way, and the people could thus be sure that Yahweh was there to act in that new way. They have cried to Him and He was now there to answer their cry. Thus the old name, given new life and meaning, will inspire them to new visions and new expectancy. They will know it in experience and in action. Yahweh will come to the fore.

For us that name comes with even greater significance. He is the God of the present (I am), the God of the past, the Creator (I cause to be), and the God of the future (I will be), the One Who is, the One Who was and the One Who is to come (Revelation 1:4), the Almighty (Revelation 1:8), the One Who has been revealed in Jesus Christ. The all present and all powerful.

Exodus 3:15

‘And God said moreover to Moses, “Thus shall you say to the children of Israel, ‘Yahweh the God of your fathers, the God of Abraham, and the God of Isaac and the God of Jacob, has sent me to you. This is my name for ever, and my memorial to all generations.’ ”

So the name of the One on Whom they must set all their trust was to be declared to them. Here the name Yahweh is specifically linked to the ‘I am.’ It is represented as the covenant name. He is the One Who guarantees and brings about the covenant promises. YHWH is from a very early form of the verb. Its meaning may be (depending on pronunciation) ‘the One Who is’ referring to His presence and continual activity, ‘the One who will be’ which really says the same but with more emphasis on continuing to be into the future, or ‘the One Who causes to be’ referring to His creative activity and power in the world. He thus wanted them to know that as Yahweh He was now there ready to act for them.

“The God of your fathers” (see verse Exodus 3:13). The link with the past is emphasised. Here is the One Who acted for Abraham and Isaac and Jacob, the One Who made His covenants with them, the One they now worshipped as a nation, even though He might be being sidelined, and to Whom in their despair they had cried, the One Who had previously brought Joseph to Egypt for the succour of His people (Genesis 39:2-3), and could equally well take them out again.

“Has sent me.” Moses must reveal himself as one sent by Yahweh to bring about Yahweh’s will as He acts through him. He was to come to them as a messenger from God. We note that while Moses has been in Midian the name Yahweh has not been in use in the record. Now with him being connected with God’s people in the new deliverance the name is introduced. For Yahweh was the God of Israel, not the God of Midian.

“This is my name for ever.” In the light of this Yahweh declares Himself to be the unchanging One. He is the same yesterday, today and for ever. Let them therefore remember what He has done in the past in speaking to their fathers, and recognise that He can speak again today, and bring all that was then promised into fulfilment. Yahweh’s activity might have seemed to be in abeyance, but He has remained the same. He is the same Yahweh Who had spoken to their forefathers giving them promises of what would be. They had not then known His delivering power, for they had waited in hope of it in the future. They had had the promise in His name, but they had not seen that promise fulfilled. While experiencing Yahweh, they had not experienced all that that name meant. They had not ‘known His name’. His ‘name’ as representing all that He was and could do, was not yet fully known to them, for His doing was yet in the future. Indeed the revelation of all that that name meant would take for ever, and affect all generations.

“And my memorial to all generations.” His name was to remind men of what He has been, and of what He is and of what He can do through the ages, and of what He will be in the future so that He is remembered by it continually. And the great thing that He would now do through Moses would never be forgotten until the end of time.

Verses 16-22

Moses Is Therefore To Go To The Elders of Israel And Promise A Glorious Deliverance (Exodus 3:16-22 ).

a Moses is to gather the elders and explain that Yahweh the God of their fathers has visited them and has seen what is done to them in Egypt (Exodus 3:16).

b He will deliver them and bring them into a land flowing with milk and honey (Exodus 3:17).

c They must approach Pharaoh and request that they might go into the wilderness to serve their God (Exodus 3:18).

c But Yahweh knows that Pharaoh will not allow them to go into the wilderness to serve Him (Exodus 3:19).

b Yahweh will then reveal His wonders and smite Egypt and deliver His people so that they will let them go (Exodus 3:20).

a The children of Israel will then be favoured by the Egyptians and will despoil them (because of what had been done to them in Egypt (Exodus 3:21-22).

Note the parallels. In ‘a’ Yahweh has visited His oppressed people, in the parallel they will despoil their oppressors. In ‘b’ He will deliver them and bring them into a fruitful land, in the parallel He will reveal His wonders in Egypt and cause them to be let go. In ‘c’ the request for permission to go into the wilderness is paralleled by the fact that Yahweh knows that Pharaoh will not let them go.

Exodus 3:16-17

‘Go, and gather the elders of Israel together, and say to them, “Yahweh, the God of your fathers, the God of Abraham, of Isaac and of Jacob has appeared to me saying, ‘I have surely visited you and that which is done to you in Egypt. And I have said I will bring you up out of the affliction of Egypt to the land of the Canaanite, and the Hittite, and the Amorite, and the Perizzite, and the Hivite and the Jebusite, to a land flowing with milk and honey.” ’

So Moses must approach ‘the elders of Israel’ with a message from Yahweh, and bring them together to hear it. ‘Of Israel’ probably refers to the fact that they acted in the place of Jacob, but it is leading up to the eventual solidifying of ‘Israel’ as the name of the future nation. And he must tell them what he had heard.

“The elders of Israel.” The children of Israel were now run by ‘elders’. This was a general term for the lay leaders of a town or city or encampment or other grouping based on the fact that they were usually the older and wiser heads of the group. But not always necessarily so. A prominent or capable younger man could also qualify as ‘an elder’. Among the children of Israel these would be the heads of the different branches of the family, the lay aristocracy, although at this stage they probably acted as priests as well, leading the worship of the people, just as Abraham, Isaac and Jacob had done. Indeed the elders would continue to be a power even when there was a king with his ministers and priests.

But note that the phrase ‘the children of--’ has been dropped here. There is the beginning of a general movement towards calling them Israel, partly caused here by the genitival use. (But Pharaoh will also call them ‘Israel’).

“I have surely visited you and what is done to you.” Yahweh, the one to Whom they had cried as their God, now informs them that He has not in fact forgotten them. Indeed He wants them to know that He has already visited them and entered into the experience of what had been done to them. And during that visitation He has declared to Himself that He will bring them out from their affliction to a land flowing with milk and honey, the land of their forefathers, just as He long ago promised to their forefathers. For the time has now come for the fulfilling of those promises. The verb ‘visit’ as used here means more than just paying a visit, it signifies a visit which means He is there with a view to action (as we might speak of ‘a visitation from God’). His visit will ensure their deliverance. Their God will come truly revealing Himself as Yahweh.

For the land flowing with milk and honey compare Exodus 3:8.

Exodus 3:18

‘And they will listen to your voice, and you will come, you and the elders of Israel, to the king of Egypt, and you will say to him, “Yahweh, the God of the Hebrews, has met with us, and now let us go, we pray you, three days journey into the wilderness that we may sacrifice to Yahweh our God.”

Moses was assured that the elders would listen to him. They were then to go together to Pharaoh with a request. The first request was to be a reasonable one. That because of a theophany from their God Yahweh they be allowed to make a short journey to the place where He had appeared (the wilderness, not necessarily the exact site) in order to offer sacrifices to Him.

“Yahweh the God of the Hebrews.” Pharaoh would take this to mean the Habiru god, a strange, wild God of no fixed abode apart from the desert. To Pharaoh the children of Israel were Habiru, a former stateless and landless people. Thus he would see their God in the same way. But to Moses and the elders ‘Hebrews’ was possibly more specific, it probably signified in their minds the God of those who claimed descent from Eber. (See the article, " ") . The God Who was the God of their history.

“Has met with us.” They were to acknowledge the revelation to Moses as being a revelation to His people. They were to declare that He had met with their representative Moses, this Midianite stranger from God who was related to them, calling them to meet with Him in His mountain.

“Three days journey.” A standard phrase signifying a relatively short journey of a few days, well within range of Egypt and in land under Egypt’s ‘protection’.

“The wilderness.” As the God of a stateless and landless people this would be seen by the Egyptians as a suitable venue for such worship, a venue off the soil of Egypt where, in the view of the Egyptians, the gods of Egypt held sway. And there they could offer sacrifices without offending the Egyptians. Furthermore it was where the theophany with Moses had taken place and therefore a suitable place for response in worship. As their God was clearly a God of the wilderness, and had appeared there, that was clearly where He should be worshipped. (This is again looking from Pharaoh’s point of view)

This was not an unreasonable request. Religion was recognised to be central to the lives of all people. Even slaves were thus seen as entitled to worship their gods in accordance with that god’s requirements, and would expect to be given time off for the purpose. It was recognised that their gods had to be respected. Who knew otherwise what might happen? In view of the outstanding nature of the theophany many a king would happily have agreed to this request. But the people were many and this Pharaoh felt superior to their God, and he did not want to lose them. The request, while therefore not totally unreasonable, was yet unlikely to be agreed to.

In the British Museum there is an Egyptian record which shows the entries of an overseer of the labourers and he lists the number of absent workmen. Reasons are given for absence such as illness, or the illness of a man's wife or one of his children, and there are various explanations given. Others were that some workmen were idle, or that they were pious and remained away from work because they wanted to sacrifice to their gods. The latter would not be frowned on as long as it was not overdone. A man’s gods were seen as very important to his wellbeing and would contribute to the wellbeing of the land.

Exodus 3:19

“And I know that the king of Egypt will not give you leave to go, no, not by a mighty hand.”

But Yahweh was aware that Pharaoh would refuse. He knew Pharaoh’s heart only too well. Pharaoh would thus himself be made to recognise that he was setting himself up against Yahweh, but would foolishly feel that he could do so with impunity. If the consequences were detrimental therefore he would have only himself to blame.

“No, not by a mighty hand.” Even though the One Who seeks their worship is strong and mighty it would make no difference. Pharaoh will see himself as mightier. He will consider that his hand is mightier than the hand of Yahweh. LXX translates ‘even though compelled by a mighty hand’ (see Exodus 6:1; Exodus 13:3; Exodus 13:9; Exodus 13:14; Exodus 13:16).

Exodus 3:20

“And I will put forth my hand and smite Egypt with all my wonders which I will do in the midst of it, and after that he will let you go.”

But though Pharaoh may have begun the battle it will be Yahweh Who will be victorious and finish it. It will be a matter of the god Pharaoh, and all the gods of Egypt, against Yahweh but He will totally defeat them by His wonders (Exodus 12:12). And defeated and humbled, Pharaoh, representative of all those gods, will therefore eventually submit and let them go. At this stage Moses could not even begin to conceive of those wonders, nor of how long it would be before Pharaoh was persuaded. But he had to accept by faith that God would do as He had said, and persevere. We should note, however, in saying this that the gods of Egypt are rarely mentioned in the narrative and are kept continually in the background. God will not give them recognition even for a moment, until His final judgment (Exodus 12:12) when their total inability to prevent Yahweh’s activity will be revealed in the smiting of all the firstborn in Egypt, including the firstborn in the house of Pharaoh, with his false claim to godhood.

But in saying this let not Moses think that His people will leave Egypt as an impoverished rabble. Rather they will leave with pride and loaded with spoils.

Exodus 3:21-22

“And I will give this people favour in the sight of the Egyptians. And it will thus happen that when you go, you will not go empty. But every woman shall ask of her neighbour, and of her who lodges in her house, jewels of silver and jewels of gold, and clothing, and you will put them on your sons and on your daughters, and you will spoil the Egyptians.”

For their Egyptian neighbours will be so pleased and relieved to see them go to worship their God that they will give them anything that they ask for. They will pile jewels and clothing on them so as to satisfy their God. And thus will His people receive the spoils of what will be Yahweh’s great victory. It is after all the victor who receives the spoils. Note that they were to ‘ask’, possibly as a contribution to the worship of Yahweh. They had no power to demand. It would be up to the Egyptians what they gave. But the situation will be such that they will give gladly and bountifully. So will God be honoured in the eyes of the Egyptians.

It should be noted that the parallel verse in the analysis explains that this is in return for how they have been treated in Egypt.

There is no thought here that the Egyptians would receive their goods back. They would be fully aware that was given to a deity remained with that deity in His treasure house or equivalent (fitting in with whatever the customs of these Israelites might be). The description goes beyond just vessels used for worship.

So Yahweh depicted the forthcoming battle in terms of the coming day when they would finally receive permission to go and worship. For a while Pharaoh would challenge and insult Yahweh by refusing to let His people worship Him, but finally Yahweh will bring about their release by His power. And no one in that day will be able to dispute that this was reasonable, for Yahweh had a right to the worship of His people, and it was that that had quite wrongly been refused to them.

It should be noted that the request to worship is not to be seen as a subterfuge to enable their escape. It is a genuine request so as to put Pharaoh in the wrong. They were simply to ask to fulfil the demands of their God, and that was to be their intent. Then they must trust Him as to what would happen next. And in the end, although they did not know it or know how it would be, it would be Pharaoh’s belligerence that would finally justify their permanent flight. Once he had set out to attack them with his army and had failed he had himself guaranteed their non-return. The whole position was known to God from beginning to end.

Note how freely the Israelites were mingled among the Egyptians. The Egyptians lived next door to them, and they even lodged in their houses. Their slavery was not such that they did not have a certain amount of limited freedom. It was just that each day they were dragged off to hard labour for which they received little in return, so that they could not see to their flocks and herds, such as they were.

Note to Christians.

There is a sense in which Moses is a type of Jesus. As God met Moses at the burning bush, so does God meet with us through the One Whose face is like the sun shining in its strength (Revelation 1:16 compare Matthew 17:2). John could say, ‘we beheld His glory’ (John 1:14) and we by faith may be aware of that glory as He speaks to us through His word as the Light of the world (John 8:12) and calls us first to follow Him, and then to walk in the way that He shows us. Through Moses came God’s revelation of Himself to His people through His name, but even greater is the revelation that has come to us in Christ (2 Corinthians 4:4-6). Thus we are without excuse if we fail to follow Him fully.

And just as the elders and the people believed when Moses and Aaron came to them, so do we easily believe when times are good. But let the testing times come, an how is it with us then? For Israel would be greatly tested before they were finally delivered.

End of note.