The Miracle at the Sea

127 2.2.13.5 History and Indwelling in H

2.3.2 The םע Take Their Stand

2.3.2.2 The Miracle at the Sea

Anticipating YHWH’s intervention at the Sea of Reeds, Moses instructs the people, “do not fear, take your stand, and you will see the salvation of YHWH”

⁶⁸⁶

וארו ובציתה וארית־לא

הוהי תעושי־תא (Exod 14:13a); v. 14b then emphasizes the importance of their standing firm, implying that YHWH’s deliverance depends on their maintaining their position and

should be noted that whereas Ezekiel often mentions the elders, H never does; cf. Joosten, People and Land, 89 and n. 277. (The mentions of the elders in Leviticus are two: 4:15 and 9:1.) A preexilic conception of the elders’ city-gate function meets us in Deut 22:13ff. For a text-critical explanation of the changing office(s) of elders, including critical evaluation of the view of Volker Wagner (“Beobachtungen am Amt der ältesten im alttestamentlichen Israel. 2. Teil: Die Kompetenzen und Aufgaben der ältesten im Rechtsleben und im Kult,” ZAW 114, no. 4 [2002]: 560-76, 560 et passim) that the elders of the Hebrew Bible were connected to cities and their populations rather than tribes, and that the institution of the elders wanes, even disappears after the exile, see Schmitt, “Ältesten,” 63f. See additional comments and

bibliography regarding the elders above, n. 365.

685 Bunni (see Neh 10:14f); Chenani? We may also assume other lay persons who go unnamed. Otherwise, v. 5 would not begin by specifying that the following individuals are all Levites: “Then the Levites said …”

686 Writer’s translation.

142

composure ( ןושיר ֲחת םתאו ).

⁶⁸⁷

In the following verse, however, YHWH chides Moses for not leading the םע forward. This interpretive difficulty is not the only one disqualifying Exod 14 as a coherent, unified text. Ska enumerates four problems that are best solved by positing two parallel versions that have been woven together.

⁶⁸⁸

We restrict ourselves here primarily to treating the interchange between YHWH and Moses of which v. 15 assumes. The passage lacks context, however. It supposes previous conversation between Moses and YHWH regarding attitudes and logistical issues that have compromised the Israelite’s mission. Yet in the present arrangement, the parlay of Moses that irritates the deity is missing. The passage is perplexing. YHWH’s rejoinder “why did you cry to me”

in v. 15 contradicts the data of vv. 13f., which describe Moses dutifully exhorting the people. Here we find no hint of Moses either complaining to YHWH or unnecessarily inhibiting the field unit’s

⁶⁸⁹

forward movement. What is one to make of the deity’s reproach?

Scholars have posited two accounts or versions of the same story in Exod 13:17–

14:30 (e.g., J and P versions, with some E

⁶⁹⁰

). The text before us is clearly polyphonic.

⁶⁹¹

The interchange between the deity, the people, and Moses casts a shadow on the latter’s leadership of the people and competence in implementing the deity’s commands. Exodus 14:15 plausibly comprises the tail end, or in any event belongs to a larger body, of

traditions that paint the Mosaic personage in less than glowing colors (e.g., Exod 14:11f.;

Exod 16; Num 16:3; 28-35; 20:10-12). In the present arrangement, v. 15 has been allowed to stand because it connects tangentially to the criticism in vv. 11f. and logistically to the verses that follow (vv. 16ff.); it also functions rhetorically, by

687 Cf. 2 Chr 20:17, which adds ודמע, “stand still” in its reuse of Exod 14:13: “Take your stand, don’t move and you will see the salvation of YHWH” (writers translation; cf. Gerhard von Rad, “The Levitical Sermon in I and II Chronicles,” in The Problem of the Hexateuch and Other Essays [London: SCM Press Ltd, 1984], 267-80, 273).

688 The inconcinnities are as follows: Moses’ words and action in vv. 13f. do not merit YHWH’s reproach in v. 15; the Egyptian’s location prior to the “miracle”; the nature of the “miracle”; the death of the Egyptians (Ska, Introduction, 69).

689 Cf. Hans M. Barstad, A Brief Guide to the Hebrew Bible (Louisville: Westminster/John Knox Press, 2010), 60-1: “A striking characteristic of the whole narration of the desert wanderings is that the people are portrayed as a field unit on the move, with a strict military organization of the Israelite tribes, led by YHWH himself …”

690 See the elucidatory division of sources in Campbell and O’Brien, Sources, 238f.

691 In his ingenious reconstruction Ska does not press for a particular authorial attribution for the two accounts (Introduction, 68-75). In contrast, Campbell and O’Brien’s treatment (Sources, 238-54) upholds Noth’s division of Exod 13:17–14:30 into J, E, and P.

143

heightening the leadership problem that figures prominently in the miracle narrative (and indeed within the larger, hexateuchal Geschichte of Israel following YHWH from Egypt to the Land of Canaan). Verse 31b claims that tension has been resolved: “So the people feared the Lord and believed in the Lord and in his servant Moses.” The claim is made by Zadokite-Levite Pentateuch redactors affirming their ideal of Mosaic leadership. With v.

31b they project back into the exodus experience the harmony they believe it will soon bring between YHWH and Israel—under their “Mosaic” leadership, in the early postexilic period.

Although the people’s fear in v. 31b leads to their subordination to Mosaic leadership and therefore serves the idealogical ends of PentRed, there is more to the story. This fear is not debilitating but rather productive (along the lines of “the fear of the Lord” in the wisdom tradition, e.g., Prov 1:7, 29; 2:5; 3:7; 8:13; 9:10; 10:27; 14:27; Ps 19:9; 34:12 [Eng 11]; 111:10; Isa 11:2, 3; 33:6; cf. Acts 9:31

⁶⁹²

). It ostensibly produces a outcome amenable to all three principle parties, YHWH, Moses, and people. Verse 31b can therefore support the notion of a holy and competent people not adverse to following their liberating God and designated emancipator. The passage is capable of double duty, functioning just as well as support for HexRed and the later School of HexRed (cf. Exod 19:8), with some connections to the wisdom tradition and probably also to “holiness”

circles responsible for texts in the Holiness Code such as Lev 22: 31-33.

⁶⁹³

Verses 11f. constitute a secondary portion of Exod 14. We should count the

possibility that this negative depiction of the Israelites as unbelieving and fearful in this redactional insertion owes to PentRed. It was subsequently challenged by either

theocratic revisors or the School of HexRed, both of whom would have benefitted from the perpective of local religious functionaries supportive of a positive depiction of the people (cf. Exod 19:8; Josh 24:16-18, 22b, 24) such as the Levites. It is to such a circle or school of thought that we attribute the insertion of the startling rebuke of Moses in v. 15.

692 πορευομένη (walking/living/going on) τῷ φόβῳ τοῦ κυρίου. Richard D. Nelson, Deuteronomy: A Commentary (Louisville: Westminster/John Knox Press, 2002), 80, contrasts debilitating fear with “a reasoned and proper caution” in mountain of God revelations.

693 See Chapter Six for further comments on these verses.

144

They were familiar with the pericope or tradition thread that they chose not to include in Exod 13:17–14:31, that is, the fuller story of which v. 15 forms a small part.

⁶⁹⁴

Against the objection to our interpretation that the narratival plot of the miracle story concerns itself only with the forward, topographical movement of the people that sets up and intensifies the grandeur of the event, we submit the following: on the rhetorical level, vv. 11f. tie well to the larger theme of both the need for (vv. 13f.) and problems with (vv.

11f., 15) Mosaic leadership, which the final and therefore proto-canonical form of chapter fourteen raises as a central concern. Moreover, the dizzying array and shifting of subjects in Exod 13:17–14:31 (YHWH, Pharaoh, Pharaoh and his servants, the Egyptians, Moses, Israel, the angel of God, army of Egypt, army of Israel, the pillar of cloud ( דומע ןנעה), the waters, etc.) forms a discursive framework in which the linear disruptiveness of the insertion of v. 15 (as we have described it) becomes less self-conscious. During a public reading/recital of this narrative, the audience probably quibbled little over the abruptness of v. 15. The orator, and likely teacher of the tradition, knew his audience’s familiarity with and probable participation in the larger, evaluation of religious

leadership to which it connects.

⁶⁹⁵

As in other truncated texts in the Hebrew Bible (e.g., Gen 6:1-4) the fuller version of which may appear in later texts (1 Enoch 1–37, which expands Gen 6:1-4; cf. also the tradition-historical and literary variations in Josephus’recounting biblical “history”) the presenter of the story/text enjoins the audience to actively participate in a cooperative, rhetorical venture, persuasion being its goal. J. Joosten speaks of the “game of

persuasion.”

⁶⁹⁶

In view of the numerous players, literary layers, topographic movement, and Tendenzen within the miracle narrative of Exod 13:17–14:31, “le jeu” in the miracle narrative is indeed multifaceted. Again, though, here we are dealing with the problems appertaining to v. 15’s curious role and placement in Exod 14.

2.3.2.3 The Role of Fear in Exod 14

694 Note that Levites and community leaders bring the criticism of Moses in Num 16.

695 See previous note.

696 Cf. Joosten, “Persuasion coopérative”; idem, “Moïse, l’assemblée et les fils d’Israël: La structuration du pouvoir dans le Code de Sainteté,” untitled as of 30 March 2011 (ed. A.Wénin; Forthcoming); the present writer wishes to thank Professor Joosten for providing a prepublication copy of the latter study; see

§§6.4.5-6; 6.4.8 for an application of Joosten’s rhetorical model to the Holiness Code.

145

Verses 13f., which lionize Mosaic leadership and echo the familiar refrain that ties the need for it to the people’s incapacitating fear (PentRed; cf. in contrast v. 31b, in which the fear is salubrious and productive, HexRed), most likely owe to PentRed. In this text, along with vv. 11f. (and perhaps v. 10a), PentRed sets up a scene similar to passages in Exod 19f. in which the people seem capable of little without either Moses’ mediation or exhortation to be courageous.

The arrangement of vv. 11-14 may predate the addition of v. 15 (see below). Whereas removing vv. 10b-14 from the present formulation does not make for the smoothest text, there exists terminological and thematic linkage between v. 10b and v. 15. The verb קעצ (“cry out”) appears in both texts; both instances share a problem that connects the verses together thematically. In v. 10b, the people fear greatly and cry out ( וקעציו דאמ וארייו הוהי־לא לארשי־ינב); in v. 15 YHWH accuses of Moses of having cried out (2 sg.) to him in a way that kept the people from obeying YHWH, namely, in moving forward ( רבד ועסיו לארשׂי־ינב־לא v. 15b). Whereas v. 10b sings the familiar refrain of the people’s debilitating fear, which leads to murmuring in vv. 11f., v. 15b implies Moses’ complicity in the people’s retarded movement. As to the question of the degree or mode of

complicity, were the audience aware of Aaron’s complicity in the incident of the golden calf in Exod 32, my reconstruction suggests they would be just as aware of a tradition of another serious incident in which the recalcitrant people are implicated in the failure of their leader as in Num 20:11 (cf. Ps 78:20). In the case of Exod 14, however, the writers apparently de-emphasized Moses’ infraction because the law had not yet been given.

My hypothesis cannot be proven, but it does help explain two things: the rather odd way in which Moses encourages the people to be strong, and the peculiar event of v. 15.

A final comment concerns the function of fear in the text of Exod 14. Whereas in the scene of revelation at the holy mountain the people’s fear is of YHWH’s presence, here their fear has more to do with trusting in God’s faithfulness and his servant Moses.

⁶⁹⁷

“The account describes, by and large, Israel’s transition of fear of the Egyptians to the fear of YHWH and to faith.”

⁶⁹⁸

697 Ska, Introduction, 74.

698 Ibid.

146