Sailhamer on Jethro and Melchizedek

Jethro, Moses' Father-in-law (18:1-27)

The father-in-law of Moses goes by several names: Reuel in 2:16-22; Jether in 4:18; Jethro in 3:1; and Hobab in Nu 10:29. Moses had lived with his father-in-law as a shepherd (3:1). In Ex 3 he is called by God to return to Egypt. Although 4:19-20 makes it appear that Moses took his wife and two sons with him when he returned to Egypt, we learn from this passage that Moses had returned them to his father-in-law before going back to Egypt. Perhaps the purpose of the mysterious narrative in 4:24-26 is intended to give some motivation for the return of Moses' wife and family to Jethro.

The present narrative has many parallels with the account of Abraham's meeting with Melchizedek in Ge 14. Just as Melchizedek, the priest of Salem, met Abraham bearing gifts as he returned from battle (Ge 14:18ff.), so Jethro, the Midianite priest, came out with Moses's wife and sons to offer peace as Moses returned from the battle with the Amalekites. Melchizedek praised God for his rescue of Abraham from his enemies saying, “Blessed be Abram by God Most High . . . who delivered your enemies into your hand” (Ge 14:19), just as Jethro praised God saying “Blessed be the LORD, who rescued you from the hand of the Egyptians. . . . The LORD is greater than all other gods” (Ex 18:10). Melchizedek brought out bread and wine as a priest of God Most High and Abraham tithed to him (Ge 14:18ff.), and Jethro brought out a burnt offering and other sacrifices and ate bread with Moses and Aaron.

The purpose of such parallels appears to be to cast Jethro as another Melchizedek, the paradigm of the righteous Gentile. It is important that Jethro have such credentials because he plays a major role in this chapter, instructing Moses, the lawgiver himself, how to carry out the administration of God's law with Israel. Thus, just as Abraham was met by Melchizedek the priest (Ge 14), before God made a covenant with him in Ge 15, so Moses was met by Jethro, the priest (Ex 18), before God made a covenant with him at Sinai (Ex 19ff.).

Sailhamer, John (1994) NIV Compact Commentary (pp. 85-86) Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan.

Comments

John Stott on the "old man" and the "body ruled by sin" in Rom 6 v 6

There are, in fact, two quite distinct ways in which the New Testament speaks of crucifixion in relation to holiness. The first is our death to sin through identification with Christ; the second is our death to self through imitation of Christ. On the one hand, we have been crucified with Christ. But on the other we have crucified (decisively repudiated) our sinful nature with all its desires, so that every day we renew this attitude by taking up our cross and following Christ to crucifixion. The first is a legal death, a death to the penalty of sin; the second is a moral death, a death to the power of sin. The first belongs to the past, and is unique and unrepeatable; the second belongs to the present, and is repeatable, even continuous. I died to sin (in Christ) once; I die to self (like Christ) daily. It is with the first of these two deaths that Romans 6 is chiefly concerned, although the first is with a view to the second, and the second cannot take place w...

Berkoff: "The law was not substituted for the promise; neither was faith supplanted by works. "

The giving of the law did not effect a fundamental change in the religion of Israel, but merely introduced a change in its external form. The law was not substituted for the promise; neither was faith supplanted by works. Many of the Israelites, indeed, looked upon the law in a purely legalistic spirit and sought to base their claim to salvation on a scrupulous fulfillment of it as a body of external precepts. But in the case of those who understood its real nature, who felt the inwardness and spirituality of the law, it served to deepen the sense of sin and to sharpen the conviction that salvation could be expected only from the grace of God . L. Berkhof, Systematic Theology (Grand Rapids, MI: Wm. B. Eerdmans publishing co., 1938), 498–499.

F.F. Bruce: ...know their father's will...

The NT does not contain a detailed code of rules for the Christian. Codes of rules, as Paul explains elsewhere, are suited to the period of immaturity when the children of God are still under guardians; but children who have come to years of responsibility know their father’s will without having to be provided with a long list of “Do’s” and “Don’t’s.” What the NT does provide is those basic principles of Christian living which may be applied to varying situations of life as they arise. So, after answering the Corinthian Christians’ question about the eating of food that has been offered to idols, Paul sums up his advice in the words: “whether you eat or drink, or whatever you do, do all to the glory of God” (1 Cor. 10:31). Phrases current in worship, like “to the glory of God” or (as here) “in the name of the Lord Jesus,” were given a practical relevance by being applied to the concerns of ordinary life. Bruce, F. F. (1984). The Epistles to the Colossians, to Philemon, and to the...

Search This Blog