Augustine of Hippo

In his own words on Exodus

• Exodus 1:14

  We have been led out of Egypt where we were serving the devil as a pharaoh, where we were doing works of clay amid earthly desires, and we were laboring much in them. For Christ cried out to us, as if we were making bricks, "Come to me, all you who labor and are burdened." Led out of here, we were led over through baptism as through the Red Sea—red for this reason, because consecrated by the blood of Christ—when all our enemies who were assailing us were dead, that is, when our sins have been wiped out.

  TRACTATE ON THE GOSPEL OF JOHN 28.9

• Exodus 1:17-19

  On the midwives' lie, by which they deceived Pharaoh and kept him from killing the Israelite males when they were born: The midwives said that Hebrew women did not give birth as Egyptian women did. It is usual to ask whether such lies have been approved by divine authority. Scripture says that God favored the midwives. It is unclear whether God, in his mercy, pardoned the lie or judged that the lie itself deserved a reward. For the midwives did one thing by letting the infant boys live and another by lying to Pharaoh. In letting them live they performed a work of mercy; but they used that lie for their own ends, to keep Pharaoh from harming the infants. This act could be the occasion not for praise but for pardon. It does not seem to me that the authority to lie has been given to those of whom it is said, "And a lie has not been found in their mouths." For if the lives of certain people, being far below the level of the saints' lives, include these sins of lying, these people are living in accord with their natural abilities, especially if they do not yet know that they should expect heavenly gifts but busy themselves with earthly things. As for those who live in such a way that their conversation, as the apostle says, is in heaven, I do not think that they should regulate the style of their speech, insofar as it affects speaking the truth and avoiding falsehood, on the example of the midwives. But we should consider this question more carefully, on account of the other examples that are found in Scripture.

  QUESTIONS ON EXODUS 1

• Exodus 1:17-19

  Many lies indeed seem to be for someone's safety or advantage, spoken not in malice but in kindness: such was that of those midwives in Exodus, who gave a false report to Pharaoh, to the end that the infants of the children of Israel might not be slain. But even these are praised not for the fact but for the disposition shown; since those who only lie in this way will attain in time to a freedom from all lying.

  EXPLANATION OF THE PSALMS 5.7

• Exodus 1:21

  As for its being written that God dealt well with the Hebrew midwives and with Rahab the harlot of Jericho, he did not deal well with them because they lied but because they were merciful to the men of God. And so it was not their deception that was rewarded but their benevolence; the benignity of their intention, not the iniquity of their invention.

  On Lying 15.32

• Exodus 2:12

  Concerning Moses' deed, when he killed the Egyptian to defend his brethren, we have treated the point adequately in the book that we wrote against Faustus on the lives of the patriarchs. The question was whether his role in that deed was praiseworthy, insofar as he admitted his sin, just as the richness of the earth, even before useful seeds are planted, is often praised for a growth of plants, even if they are useless. Or perhaps the deed itself should be justified. But to do so does not seem right, for up to that point Moses had no legitimate authority—neither authority that he received from God nor authority ordained by human society. But still, as Stephen says in the Acts of the Apostles, Moses thought that his brethren understood that God would bring them salvation through him, so that by this testimony it appeared that Moses could dare to do this because he was already called by God to act. (But Scripture is silent on this point).

  QUESTIONS ON EXODUS 2

• Exodus 3:2

  And here he is first called the angel of the Lord and then God. Is the angel then the God of Abraham, the God of Isaac and the God of Jacob? Therefore he may be rightly understood to be the Savior himself of whom the apostle says, "Whose are the fathers, and from whom is Christ according to the flesh, who is over all things, God blessed forever." Hence even here he, who is the God blessed over all things forever, is not unreasonably understood to be himself the God of Abraham, the God of Isaac and the God of Jacob. But why was he previously called the angel of the Lord when he appeared in the flame of fire from the bush? Was it because he was one of many angels but by a dispensation represented the person of his Lord? Or was something belonging to a creature assumed which might appear visibly for the task at hand and from which words might be uttered in an audible way, whereby the presence of the Lord would also become known to the bodily senses of man, as circumstances required, by means of a creature made subject to him? For if he was one of the angels, who can readily affirm whether the person given him to announce was that of the Son, or of the Holy Spirit, or of God the Father or of the Trinity itself altogether, who is the one and only God, in order that he might say, "I am the God of Abraham, the God of Isaac and the God of Jacob"?For we cannot say that the God of Abraham, the God of Isaac and the God of Jacob is the Son of God and not the Father. Nor will anyone dare to deny that either the Holy Spirit or the Trinity itself, which we believe and understand to be the one God, is the God of Abraham, the God of Isaac and the God of Jacob. For he who is not God is not the God of those fathers. Moreover … not only the Father is God, as all, even the heretics, admit, but the Son also, which willingly or not they are forced to confess, for the apostle says, "who is, over all things, God blessed forever," and the Holy Spirit as well. The same apostle declares, "Therefore glorify God in your body," when he had previously stated, "Do you not know that your bodies are the temple of the Holy Spirit in you, whom you have from God?" And these three are one God, as the sound Catholic faith believes. It is not sufficiently clear which person in the Trinity that angel represented, assuming that he was one of the rest of the angels, and whether it was any person and not that of the Trinity itself.

  THE TRINITY 2.13.23

• Exodus 3:4

  Was the Lord speaking through an angel? Or was the Lord that angel who has been called the "angel of great counsel" and is understood to be Christ? For Scripture said above, "the angel of the Lord appeared to him."

  QUESTIONS ON EXODUS 3

• Exodus 3:5

  What are the shoes? Well, what are the shoes we wear? Leather from dead animals. The hides of dead animals are what we protect our feet with. So what are we being ordered to do? To give up dead works. This is symbolically what he instructs Moses to do in his honor, when the Lord says to him, "Take off your shoes. For the place you are standing in is holy ground." There's no holier ground than the church of God, is there? So as we stand in it let us take off our shoes, let us give up dead works.

  SERMON 101.7

• Exodus 3:6

  God gives witness and says, "I am the God of Abraham, the God of Isaac and the God of Jacob." Were there not other patriarchs? Was not Noah a holy man before these, who alone in the whole human race together with his whole house deserved to be delivered from the flood, in whom and in his sons the church is represented? They escape the flood, with wood carrying them. And then afterwards [come] the great men whom we know, whom Holy Scripture commends, Moses faithful in all his house. And those three are named, as if they alone were deserving of him: "I am the God of Abraham, the God of Isaac and the God of Jacob; this is my name forever."An enormous mystery! The Lord has the power to open both our mouths and your hearts that we may be able to speak as he has deigned to reveal and that you may be able to grasp as it is advantageous to you. Therefore those patriarchs are three: Abraham, Isaac and Jacob. You already know that the sons of Jacob were twelve and from them are the people of Israel because Jacob himself is Israel and the people of Israel are the twelve tribes belonging to the twelve sons of Israel. Abraham, Isaac and Jacob, three fathers and one people. Three fathers, as it were, in the beginning of the people; three fathers in whom the people was prefigured. And the earlier people itself [is] the present people. For in the people of the Jews the people of the Christians was prefigured. There a figure, here the truth; there a shadow, here the body, as the apostle says, "Now these things happened to them in figure." It is the apostle's voice, and he says, "They were written for us, upon whom the end of the world has come." Let your mind return to Abraham, Isaac and Jacob. In those three we find free women giving birth and bondwomen giving birth. We find there the progeny of free women; we find there also the progeny of bondwomen. The bondwoman signifies nothing good. "Cast out the bondwoman," [Scripture] says, "and her son; for the son of the bondwoman will not be heir with the son of the free woman." The apostle mentions this; and in these two sons of Abraham the apostle says was a figure of the two Testaments, Old and New. To the Old Testament belong the lovers of temporal things, the lovers of the world; to the New Testament belong the lovers of eternal life. Therefore that Jerusalem on earth was a shadow of the heavenly Jerusalem, the mother of us all, which is in heaven. And these are the apostle's words. And about that city from which we are sojourners you know many things, you have already heard many things. Now we find something remarkable in these births, that is, in these offspring, in these procreations of free women and bondwomen, namely, four types of men. And in these four types of men is comprised the figure of the Christian people, so that what was said in regard to these three is not astonishing: "I am the God of Abraham, the God of Isaac and the God of Jacob."

  TRACTATE ON THE GOSPEL OF JOHN 11.7.2-8.2

• Exodus 3:8

  I ask whether we should take the land flowing with milk and honey spiritually, since, according to the proper sense, this phrase does not describe the land that was being given to the people of Israel. Or is it a figure of speech that is used to praise the richness and sweetness of the land?

  QUESTIONS ON EXODUS 4

• Exodus 3:8

  Indeed, unless that land which was styled the land that flowed with milk and honey signified something great, through which, as by a visible token, he was leading those who understood his wondrous works to invisible grace and the kingdom of heaven, they could not be blamed for scorning that land, whose temporal kingdom we also ought to esteem as nothing, that we may love that Jerusalem which is free, the mother of us all, which is in heaven, and truly to be desired.

  EXPLANATION OF THE PSALMS 106.20

• Exodus 3:9

  Clamor: not like the clamor of the Sodomites, which signified iniquity without fear or shame.

  QUESTIONS ON EXODUS 5

• Exodus 3:14

  But now the Lord speaks to Moses—you know all this, and I won't keep you longer on it, for lack of time—"I am who I am; he who is sent me." When he asked God's name, you see, this is what was said: "I am who I am. And you shall say to the children of Israel, he who is sent me to you." What's this all about? O God, O Lord of ours, what are you called? "I am called He is," he said. What does it mean, I am called He is? "That I abide forever, that I cannot change." Things which change are not, because they do not last. What is, abides. But whatever changes was something and will be something; yet you cannot say it is, because it is changeable. So the unchangeableness of God was prepared to suggest itself by this phrase "I am who I am."

  SERMON 6.4

• Exodus 3:14

  Then too Plato's definition of a philosopher—one who loves God—contains an idea which shines forth everywhere in Scripture. But the most palpable proof to my mind that he was conversant with the sacred books is this, that when Moses, informed by an angel that God wished him to deliver the Hebrews from Egypt, questioned the angel concerning the name of the one who had sent him, the answer received was this: "I am who I am. Thus shall you say to the children of Israel: he who is has sent me to you," as though, in comparison with him who, being immutable, truly is, all mutable things are as if they were not. Now Plato had a passionate perception of this truth and was never tired of teaching it. Yet I doubt whether this idea can be found in any of the works of Plato's predecessors except in the text "I am who I am, and you shall say to them, he who is has sent me to you."

  City of God 8.11

• Exodus 3:14

  He is the first and greatest existence, who is utterly unchangeable and who could say most perfectly, "I am who I am, and you shall say to them, "He who is has sent me to you." As a result, the other things which exist could not exist except by him, and these things are good insofar as they have received the ability to be.

  ON CHRISTIAN TEACHING 1.32.35

• Exodus 3:14

  For although that immutable and ineffable nature does not admit of was and will be but only is (for it truly is, because it cannot be changed), and therefore it was proper for him to say, "I am who I am" and "You will say to the children of Israel, 'He who is has sent me to you,' " nevertheless, on account of the changeableness of the times in which our mortality and our changeableness are involved, we do not falsely say was and will be and is. Was, in past ages; is, in present ones; will be, in future ones. Was, because he was never lacking; will be, because he will never be lacking; is, because he always is.

  TRACTATE ON THE GOSPEL OF JOHN 99.5.2

• Exodus 3:14

  But God is without doubt a substance, or perhaps essence would be a better term, which the Greeks call ousia. For just as wisdom is so called from being wise and knowledge is so called from knowing, so essence is so called from being [esse]. And who possesses being in a higher degree than he, who said to his servant Moses, "I am who I am" and "He who is has sent me to you." But all other things that are called essences or substances are susceptible of accidents, by which a change, whether great or small, is brought about in them. But there can be no accidents of this kind in God. Therefore only the essence of God, or the essence which God is, is unchangeable.

  THE TRINITY 5.2.3

• Exodus 3:14

  Magnificently and divinely, therefore, our God said to his servant: "I am that I am," and "You shall say to the children of Israel, He who is sent me to you." For he truly is because he is unchangeable. For every change makes what was not, to be. Therefore he truly is, who is unchangeable; but all other things that were made by him have received being from him each in its own measure.

  ON THE NATURE OF THE GOOD 19

• Exodus 3:14

  Perhaps it was hard even for Moses himself, as it is much also for us, and much more for us, to understand what was said, "I am who I am" and "He who is has sent me to you." And if by chance Moses understood, when would they to whom he was being sent understand? Therefore the Lord put aside what man could not grasp and added what he could grasp. For he added and said, "I am the God of Abraham, and the God of Isaac and the God of Jacob." This you can grasp. But what mind can grasp, "I am who I am"?

  TRACTATE ON THE GOSPEL OF JOHN 38.8.3

• Exodus 3:15

  What does it mean then that later on he gave himself another name, where it says, "And the Lord said to Moses, I am the God of Abraham, the God of Isaac and the God of Jacob: this is my name forever"? How is it that there I am called this name that shows "I am," and lo and behold here is another name: "I am the God of Abraham, the God of Isaac and the God of Jacob"? It means that while God is indeed unchangeable, he has done everything out of mercy, and so the Son of God himself was prepared to take on changeable flesh and thereby to come to man's rescue while remaining what he is as the Word of God. Thus he who is clothed himself with mortal flesh, so that it could truly be said, "I am the God of Abraham, the God of Isaac and the God of Jacob."

  SERMON 6.5

• Exodus 3:22

  Whether then the reason was what I have said, or whether in the secret appointment of God there was some unknown reason for his telling the people by Moses to borrow things from the Egyptians and to take them away with them, this remains certain. This was said for some good reason and Moses could not lawfully have done otherwise than God told him, leaving to God the reason of the command, while the servant's duty is to obey.

  AGAINST FAUSTUS, A MANICHAEAN 22.71

• Exodus 3:22

  The Lord commanded the Hebrews through Moses to take gold and silver vessels and garments from the Egyptians, and he added, "And you will despoil them." The judgment implied in this command cannot be unjust. For it is a commandment of God. It was not to be judged but obeyed. For God knew how just his command was. It pertains to the servant obediently to do what was commanded.

  QUESTIONS ON EXODUS 6

• Exodus 3:22

  Accordingly on the one hand the Egyptians deserved being deceived, and on the other the people of Israel were then situated at such a level of morality, because of the age of the human race, that it would not be unworthy of them to deceive an enemy. It therefore came about that God commanded them (or, rather, permitted them because of their desire) to ask of the Egyptians gold and silver implements which these seekers of a kingdom as yet earthly were gazing upon longingly, even though they were not going to return them, and to take them as if they were going to return them. God did not want to be unjust in the matter of the reward for such lengthy hardship and labor—a reward adapted to the level of such souls; nor did he want to be unjust in the matter of the punishments of the Egyptians, whom appropriately enough he caused to lose what they were under obligation to pay. And so God is not a deceiver.

  ON EIGHTY-THREE VARIED QUESTIONS 53.2

• Exodus 4:2-3

  Let me try to explain, as far as the Lord enables me to, what these signs mean. The rod stands for the kingdom, the snake for mortality; it was by the snake that man was given death to drink. The Lord was prepared to take this death to himself. So when the rod came down to earth it had the form of a snake, because the kingdom of God, which is Jesus Christ, came down to earth. He put on mortality, which he also nailed to the cross. Your holinesses know that when that proud and stiff-necked people grumbled against God in the desert, they began to be bitten by serpents and to die of the bites. In his mercy God provided a remedy, a remedy that restored health at the time but also foretold the wisdom that was to come in the future.

  SERMON 6.7

• Exodus 4:10

  [Moses] believes that by God's will he can suddenly become eloquent when he says, "or since the time you began to speak to your servant." He shows that it could happen that one who was not eloquent the day before, or the day before that, could suddenly become eloquent, from the time when the Lord began to speak to him.

  QUESTIONS ON EXODUS 7

• Exodus 4:11

  There are some who bring false charges against God, or rather against the Scriptures of the Old Testament, because God said that he himself makes a man blind or mute. So what do they say about Christ the Lord, who says openly in the Gospel, "I have come so that those who are blind may see and those who see might be made blind"? Who besides a fool would believe that something can happen to a man in regard to corporeal defects that God did not will? No one doubts that God wills all things justly.

  QUESTIONS ON EXODUS 8

• Exodus 4:12

  It is clear that not only the instruction that comes from his mouth but also its being opened pertains to the will and grace of God. For God does not say, "You open your mouth, and I will instruct you," but promised both: "I shall open, and I shall instruct." Elsewhere he says in a psalm, "Open your mouth, and I shall fill it." There it signifies the will in man to receive what God gives to one who is willing, so that "open your mouth" pertains to the initiative of the will and "I shall fill it" to the grace of God. But here the sense is "I shall both open your mouth and instruct you."

  QUESTIONS ON EXODUS 9

• Exodus 4:14

  How can the anger of God be understood, since God is not gripped by any irrational disturbance, as man is? Where Scripture says something like this, we should have a consistent explanation to avoid repeating the same account too often. But one can rightly ask why God says here that he is angry with Moses about his brother Aaron, because he would speak to the people for Moses. For it means that God had not given Moses the fullest ability that he was going to give, because he was diffident. God wished the deed to be carried out by two men. He could also have done it through one, if that man had believed. But all these words, when they are considered more diligently, do not mean that the Lord in his anger had handed over Aaron for punishment. For he says this: "Behold, is your brother Aaron not a Levite? I know that when he speaks, he will speak eloquently." These words show that God rather reproached Moses, who feared to go because he was less suitable, since he had a brother through whom he could say to the people what he wanted, because Moses himself had a weak voice and a slow tongue. Still, he should have put all his hope in God. Then he says the same things that he had promised shortly before and afterward grown angry. For he had said, "I shall open your mouth and instruct you." But now he says, "I shall open your mouth and his mouth, and I shall teach you what to do." But since he added, "And he will speak for you to the people," the opening of the mouth seems to be provided, because Moses says he is slow of tongue. But the Lord did not will to supply [vocal strength] for the weakness of his voice but added the help of his brother Aaron. Moses could use Aaron's voice, which was sufficient to teach the people. So when he says, "and you will put my words in his mouth," he shows that he was going to provide him with words. For if he were only given things to hear for the people, God would have said, "into his ears." Then it says a little later, "and he will speak for you to the people," he shows clearly enough that the leading role was for Moses, the subordinate role for Aaron. What he says thereafter, "You will be to him as God," perhaps this great mystery is to be examined closely. The figure suggests that Moses was the mediator between God and Aaron, and Aaron the mediator between Moses and the people.

  QUESTIONS ON EXODUS 10

• Exodus 4:16

  One should notice that when Moses is sent to the people, God does not say to him, "Behold, I gave you as a god to the people, and your brother will be your prophet," but he says, "[Your brother] will speak to the people for you." For Scripture had said, "He will be your mouth, and you will be to him as God." It did not say, "You are god to him." But to Pharaoh Moses is said to be given as god, and according to analogy, Aaron is a prophet of Moses, but to Pharaoh. Here it is suggested to us that prophets of God say what they hear from him. A prophet of God is nothing but one who speaks the words of God to men—those who either cannot hear God or do not deserve to.

  QUESTIONS ON EXODUS 17

• Exodus 4:20

  What was said above, that Moses placed his wife and his children on carts so that he might go with them into Egypt, but afterwards his father-in-law Jethro met him with them [in his company], after Moses had led the people out of Egypt, one can ask how both assertions can be true. One should realize that after the killing of Moses or of the child that the angel was going to carry out, his wife returned with the children. For some interpreters thought that the angel threatened them to keep a woman from accompanying Moses and thus forming an obstacle to the ministry that God had imposed on him.

  QUESTIONS ON EXODUS 12

• Exodus 4:21

  And you must not deny free will to Pharaoh just because God says in a number of places, "I have hardened Pharaoh" or "I will harden the heart of Pharaoh," for it does not thereby follow that it was not Pharaoh himself that hardened his own heart. Furthermore, we read that this happened to Pharaoh after the plague of flies had been removed from the Egyptians, as the Scripture testifies: "And Pharaoh's heart was hardened so that neither this time would he let the people go." Thus it was that both God and Pharaoh caused this hardening of the heart: God, by his just judgments, Pharaoh, by his free will.

  ON GRACE AND FREE WILL 23

• Exodus 4:24

  We ask first, whom did the angel wish to kill? Was it Moses, because Scripture says, "The angel approached him and sought to kill him"? For whom will he be thought to have approached except him who was in charge of his entire people and by whom the others were led? Or did the angel seek to kill the boy, whom his mother aided by circumcising him? Then one would understand that the reason why God wished to kill the child was that he was not circumcised and thus sanctioned the precept of circumcision by the severity of the punishment. If this is the case, it is unclear of whom it was said previously, "he sought to kill him," because we do not know who it was until we discover it from what follows. It is a remarkable and unusual expression to say "he approached him and sought to kill him" about someone who had not been mentioned before. But there is such a usage in a psalm: "Its foundations are on the holy mountains; the Lord loves the gates of Zion." For the psalm begins at that point and had not said anything about the Lord or about that city whose foundations were meant to be understood when the psalm said, "Its foundations are on the holy mountains." But because of what follows, "the Lord loves the gates of Zion," the foundations, either those of the Lord or of Zion—"of Zion" yields the better sense—are understood as the foundation of a city. But the gender of this pronoun, "its," is ambiguous, for it can be masculine, feminine or neuter. In Greek, however, the feminine is autēs, whereas the masculine and neuter are autou, and the Greek text has autou, so we must understand that the foundations are those not of Zion but of the Lord. That is, [they are] the foundations that the Lord constitutes, of which Scripture has said, "the Lord building Jerusalem." But when the psalm said, "Its foundations are on the holy mountains," it had not previously mentioned either Zion or the Lord. Here too it is said, "He met him and sought to kill him," although the child had not yet been named, so that we do not know of whom he was speaking in the words that follow. But still, if someone wants to hold that Moses is meant, he should not be strongly opposed. We should rather understand what follows, if we can, what it means when the text says that the angel refrained from killing any of them because the woman said, "The blood of the infant's circumcision has stopped flowing." She does not say that "he drew back from him" because she circumcised the infant but that "the blood of circumcision stopped." Not that it flowed but that it stopped—in a great mystery, if I am not wrong.

  QUESTIONS ON EXODUS 11

• Exodus 4:25

  Now there was a forecast of His coming undoubtedly contained not only in other sacred institutions of the ancient Jews, but also in their circumcision of the foreskin. For the eighth day, in the recurrence of weeks, became the Lord's day, on which the Lord arose from the dead; and Christ was the rock whence was formed the stony blade for the circumcision; and the flesh of the foreskin was the body of sin.

  ON THE GRACE OF CHRIST AND ORIGINAL SIN 2.31.36

• Exodus 4:25

  Why, therefore, was it commanded him that he should circumcise every male child in order on the eighth day, though it could not yet believe with the heart, that it should be counted unto it for righteousness, because the sacrament in itself was of great avail? And this was made manifest by the message of an angel in the case of Moses' son; for when he was carried by his mother, being yet uncircumcised, it was required, by manifest present peril, that he should be circumcised, and when this was done, the danger of death was removed. As therefore in Abraham the justification of faith came first, and circumcision was added afterwards as the seal of faith; so in Cornelius the spiritual sanctification came first in the gift of the Holy Spirit, and the sacrament of regeneration was added afterwards in the laver of baptism.

  ON BAPTISM 4.24.32

• Exodus 4:25

  If I had been a Jew in the times of the ancient people, when there was nothing better to be, I would surely have accepted circumcision. That "seal of the justice of the faith" had so much power at that time, before it was rendered void by the coming of the Lord, that the angel would have strangled the infant son of Moses if his mother had not taken up a stone and circumcised the child and thus by this sacrament warded off his imminent destruction. This sacrament even tamed the river Jordan and reduced it to a brook. The Lord himself received this sacrament after birth, although on the cross he made it void.

  LETTER 23

• Exodus 5:1

  Some ask how the people can be told that God gave the order that he would lead them from Egypt into the land of Canaan, while Pharaoh was told that they wanted to make three days' journey into the desert to offer sacrifice to their god by his command. But the passage should be understood thus: although God knew what he was going to do and knew that Pharaoh would not agree to dismiss the people, that fact was to be stated first that would also happen first, if Pharaoh let the people go. The contumacy of Pharaoh and his courtiers merited everything that happened, to which the Scripture afterward attests. God is not lying when he commands what he knows is not going to be done by the one he commands; his purpose is to obtain a just judgment.

  QUESTIONS ON EXODUS 13

• Exodus 5:9

  When both the good and the bad do the same things and suffer the same things, they are to be distinguished by their intentions, not by their acts and penalties. Pharaoh oppressed the people of God with hard labors; Moses afflicted the same people, who had fallen into idolatry, with severe punishments. They did the same things, but they did not aim at the same result. The former was puffed up with pride of power, the latter was animated by love.

  LETTER 93

• Exodus 5:22

  The words that Moses speaks to the Lord are not words of contumacy or indignation but of inquiry and prayer. This fact is clear from the way the Lord answered him. For he did not accuse him of infidelity but revealed what he was about to do.

  QUESTIONS ON EXODUS 14

• Exodus 6:14

  There is no doubt that this is a mysterious passage. The Scripture wishes to demonstrate the origin of Moses, because his action now required it. His descent began from the firstborn of Jacob, that is, Reuben, and then to Simeon, and then to Levi. It went no further, because Moses was descended from Levi. These men who are mentioned here had already been mentioned among the seventy-five men in whom Israel entered Egypt. For God did not want the first or the second tribe, but the third—that is, the tribe of Levi—to be the priestly tribe.

  QUESTIONS ON EXODUS 15

• Exodus 6:30

  Moses says, "Behold, I have a weak voice, how will Pharaoh listen to me?" He appears to excuse himself for the weakness of his voice, not only due to the great number of the people but also due to the condition of one man. It would be remarkable if his voice were so weak that he could not be heard even by one man. Or perhaps the royal dignity did not allow them to speak at close range? For God says to Moses, "Behold, I gave you as a god to Pharaoh, and Aaron your brother will be your prophet."

  QUESTIONS ON EXODUS 16

• Exodus 7:3

  God constantly says, "I will harden Pharaoh's heart," and gives the reason why he does this. He says, "I will harden Pharaoh's heart and fulfill my signs and my portents in Egypt," as if the hardening of Pharaoh's heart were necessary so that God's signs might be multiplied and fulfilled in Egypt. God makes good use of bad hearts for what he wishes to show to those who are good or those he is going to make good. And the quality of evil in each heart (that is, what sort of heart is disposed to evil) came about through its own evildoing, which grew from the choice of the will. Still, those evils in quality, so that the heart is moved this way or that, when it is moved to evil this way or that way, comes to be by causes by which the soul is driven. And whether these causes either exist or do not exist is not within the power of man. They come from the providence of God that is hidden, most just and clearly most wise, who disposes and administers the universe that he created. So that Pharaoh had such a heart, which was not moved by God's patience to piety but rather to impiety, was the result of his own vice. But that those things happened by which his heart, so evil by its own vice, resisted God's command—it is called "hardened" because it did not bend and agree but resisted unbendingly—was of divine dispensation. It was not unjust to such a heart. It was clearly a just punishment [that] was being prepared, by which those who feared God would be corrected. For example: when money is offered for the commission of homicide, a greedy man is moved in one way, but one who disdains money is moved in another way. The former is moved to commit the crime, the latter to being cautious. Yet the offer of the money itself was not under the control of either of them. Thus motives come to evil men that indeed are not under their control, but they act from these motives as they find them already established from their own past willing. We should consider whether the phrase can be understood in this way: "I shall harden," as if he were saying, "I shall show how hard his heart is."

  QUESTIONS ON EXODUS 18

• Exodus 7:9

  Here indeed there was no need to use the service of the voice, for which Aaron was provided out of necessity, on account of the weakness of Moses' voice. But the staff was to be cast down so that it would become a serpent. Why did Moses himself not do this, except because that mediation of Aaron himself between Moses and Pharaoh was the symbol of some great matter?

  QUESTIONS ON EXODUS 19

• Exodus 7:10

  For by the serpent is to be understood death, which was brought about by the serpent in paradise, according to the manner of speech which attributes the effect to the cause. Therefore the rod was turned into a serpent, and the whole Christ, together with his body which is the church, into the resurrection, that will take place at the end of time. This is signified by the tail of the serpent which Moses held, in order that it might be turned again into a rod. But the serpents of the magicians are like those who are dead in the world, for, unless by believing in Christ they have been as it were swallowed up and entered into his body, they will not be able to rise in him.

  THE TRINITY 3.20

• Exodus 7:11

  Consequently it happens that the holy servants of God, when it is useful for them to have this gift, in accord, the power of the most high God, have command over the lowest powers in order to perform certain visible miracles. This power thus becomes publicly known, as if it were imperial law. For it is God himself who rules in them, whose temple they are, and whom they, having despised their own private power, love most fervently. However, in magical imprecation, in order to make the deception attractive so as to subjugate to themselves those [magicians] to whom they grant such things, [the lowest powers] give effect to their prayers and rituals, and they dispense through that private law what they are allowed to dispense to those who honor them and serve them and keep certain covenants with them in their mystery rites. And when the magicians appear to have command, they frighten their inferiors with the names of more elevated [powers] and exhibit to those looking on with wonder some visible effects. Due to the weakness of the flesh, these seem momentous to those unable to behold eternal things, which the true God offers through himself to those who love him. However, God permits these things through his righteous government of all things, in order that he may distribute to them the kinds of bondage or the kinds of freedom that are proportioned to their own desires and choices. And if they gain something for their own evil desires when they call upon the most high God, that is a punishment and not a kindness. Indeed not without reason does the apostle say, "God has given them over to the desires of their hearts." For the opportunity to commit certain sins is a punishment for other preceding sins.…But as for the Lord's claim that false prophets will perform many signs and wonders so as to deceive, if possible, even the elect, clearly he is urging us to understand that even wicked men do certain miracles of a kind which the saints cannot do. Still, they must not be thought to be in a better position with God on that account, for the magicians of the Egyptians were not more acceptable to God than were the Israelite people because the latter could not do what the magicians were doing, although Moses had been able to do greater things by the power of God. However, the reason for not granting these miracles to all the saints is this: to prevent the weak from being deceived by a most pernicious error of supposing that there are greater gifts in such feats than in the works of righteousness whereby one obtains eternal life. Accordingly the Lord prohibits his disciples from rejoicing on this account when he says, "Do not rejoice in this, that the spirits are subject to you; rather, rejoice in this, that your names are written in heaven."15 When therefore magicians do things of a kind which the saints sometimes do, remember that their deeds appear to the eye to be alike, but they are done both for a different purpose and under a different law. For the former act seeking their own glory; the latter, the glory of God. Again, the former act through certain things granted to the powers in their own sphere, as if through business arrangements and magic arts of a private nature; but the latter, by a public administration at the command of him to whom the entire creation is subject. For it is one thing for an owner to be compelled to give his horse to a soldier; it is another thing for him to hand it over to a buyer or to give or lend it to someone. And just as a great many evil soldiers, whom imperial discipline condemns, terrify some owners with the ensigns of their commander and extort from them something which is not in accord with public law, so evil Christians or schismatics or heretics sometimes exact through the name of Christ or Christian words or sacraments something from the powers who have been enjoined to defer to the honor of Christ. However, when the powers submit to the bidding of evil men, they do so willingly in order to seduce others, in whose error they rejoice. Consequently it is one thing for magicians to perform miracles, another for good Christians, and another for evil Christians. Magicians do so through private contracts, good Christians through a public righteousness, and evil Christians through the "ensigns" or symbols of this public righteousness.

  ON EIGHTY-THREE VARIED QUESTIONS 79.1, 3-4

• Exodus 7:11

  The magicians of Pharaoh, the king of Egypt who was tyrannizing over this people, were permitted to accomplish certain wonders merely that they might be outdone by more genuine miracles. These magicians worked by the kind of sorceries and incantations to which evil spirits or demons are addicted, while Moses was powerful by his holiness and helped by the angels, and so, in the name of God, creator of heaven and earth, he easily triumphed over them.

  City of God 10.8

• Exodus 7:11

  We read that the magicians of the Egyptians were very skilled in those arts, but they were outdone by Moses, the servant of God. Yet when they performed certain wonders by their forbidden arts, he overturned all their trickery by simply calling on God.

  LETTER 137

• Exodus 7:24

  You asked … how, when all the water of Egypt was turned into blood, the magicians of Pharaoh found any [water] with which they could transform in like manner. This difficulty is usually solved in two ways. They did it either because some sea water could be brought or, what is more likely, because in that part of the country where the children of Israel were those plagues did not take place. In certain passages of that Scripture this is very clearly expressed, and it warns us what is to be understood even when it is not expressed.

  LETTER 143

• Exodus 8:2

  For what reason do you puff yourself up with human pride? A man insulted you, and you swelled up and were angered. Rid yourself of the fleas that you may sleep. Find out who you are! For that you may know, brothers, that these things which would bother us were created to enable us to control our pride, [remember], God could have tamed the proud people of Pharaoh with bears, with lions or with snakes; he sent flies and frogs upon them that their pride might be tamed by the most ignoble of things.

  TRACTATE ON THE GOSPEL OF JOHN 1.15

• Exodus 8:19

  Isn't the finger of God to be understood as being the Holy Spirit? Read the Gospel, and see that where one Evangelist has the Lord saying, "If I with the Spirit of God cast out demons," another says, "If I with the finger of God cast out demons." So if that law too was written by the finger of God, that is, by the Spirit of God, the Spirit by which Pharaoh's magicians were defeated, so they said, "This is the finger of God, … why can it not be said of it, "For the law of the Spirit of life in Christ Jesus has delivered you from the law of sin and death"?

  SERMON 155.3

• Exodus 8:19

  Here I see a difficulty occurring to one of limited knowledge [of Scripture], that is, why miracles are also done by magical arts, for the magicians of Pharaoh also made serpents and other similar things. But what is a much greater cause of wonder is how the power of the magicians, who could make serpents, utterly failed when it came to very small gnats. For the sciniphs, by which the proud people of Egypt were afflicted, are very small flies. And there certainly the magicians who failed, exclaimed, "This is the finger of God." We are thereby given to understand that not even the angels and the spirits of the air, who transgressed and were cast from that home of sublime and ethereal beauty into this most profound darkness, as into a prison peculiar to them, could do anything that they could by means of their magical arts, if the power had not been given to them from above.

  THE TRINITY 3.7.12

• Exodus 9:16

  With God there is no injustice. Thus [Paul] immediately added, "For the Scripture says to Pharaoh, 'For this very purpose I raised you up, that I may show through you my power and that my name may be proclaimed in all the earth.' " Then, having said this, he draws a conclusion that looks both ways, that is, toward mercy and toward judgment: "Therefore," he says, "he has mercy on whom he wills, and whom he wills he hardens." He shows mercy out of his great goodness; he hardens out of no unfairness at all. In this way neither does he who is saved have a basis for glorying in any merit of his own; nor does the man who is damned have a basis for complaining of anything except what he has fully merited. For grace alone separates the redeemed from the lost, all having been mingled together in the one mass of perdition, arising from a common cause which leads back to their common origin.

  Enchiridion 25.99

• Exodus 12:3

  The bridegroom, who was to call good and bad to his marriage, was pleased to assimilate himself to his guests, in being born of good and bad. He thus confirms as typical of himself the symbol of the Passover, in which it was commanded that the lamb to be eaten should be taken from the sheep or from the goats—that is, from the righteous or the wicked. Preserving throughout the indication of both divinity and humanity, as man he consented to have both bad and good as his parents, while as God he chose the miraculous birth from a virgin.

  AGAINST FAUSTUS, A MANICHAEAN 22.64

• Exodus 12:6

  But now then, can there be anybody who is not curious to know what the meaning can be of the fact that the Jews answered from Scripture the inquiry of the magi about where the Christ would be born and yet did not go with them to worship him themselves? Don't we see the same thing even now, when by the very rites and sacraments to which they are subjected for their hardness of heart, nothing else is indicated but the very Christ in whom they refuse to believe? Even when they kill the sheep and eat the Passover, aren't they demonstrating to the Gentiles the very Christ whom they themselves don't worship along with them?And isn't it the same sort of thing, when people have their doubts about the prophetic testimonies in which Christ was foretold and wonder if they haven't perhaps been compiled by Christians after the event, not before? We appeal to the codices in the possession of the Jews to set the minds of doubters at rest. Don't the Jews on such occasions too show the Gentiles the Christ whom they decline to worship with the Gentiles?

  SERMON 202.3

• Exodus 12:7

  For why would the Lord instruct them to kill a sheep on this very feast day except that it was he about whom it was prophesied: "As a sheep is led to the slaughter." The doorposts of the Jews were marked with the blood of a slaughtered animal. Our foreheads are marked with the blood of Christ. And that sign, because it was a sign, was said to keep the destroyer away from the houses marked with the sign. The sign of Christ drives the destroyer away from us insofar as our heart receives the Savior.

  TRACTATE ON THE GOSPEL OF JOHN 50.3

• Exodus 12:11

  [The word] pascha is not, as some think, a Greek word, but a Hebrew one; yet most conveniently there occurs in this name a certain congruity between the two languages. Because in Greek [the word for] "to suffer" is paschein. For this reason "pascha" has been thought of as a passion, as though this name has been derived from [a Greek word for] "suffering." But in its own language, that is, in Hebrew, "pascha" means "a passing over." For this reason the people of God celebrated the pascha for the first time when, fleeing from Egypt, they "passed over" the Red Sea. So now that prophetic figure has been fulfilled in truth when Christ is led as a sheep to the slaughter. By his blood, after our doorposts have been smeared [with it], that is, by the sign of his cross, after our foreheads have been marked [with it], we are freed from the ruin of this world as though from the captivity or destruction in Egypt. And we effect a most salutary passing over when we pass over from the devil to Christ and from this tottering world to his most solidly established kingdom. And therefore we pass over to God who endures so that we may not pass over with the passing world.

  TRACTATE ON THE GOSPEL OF JOHN 55.1

• Exodus 12:22

  They are to bear in mind that those who celebrated the Passover at the time through figures and shadows, when they were commanded to mark their doorpost with the blood of the lamb, marked them with hyssop. This is a mild and humble plant, but it has very strong and penetrating roots. So, "being rooted and grounded in love," we may be able "to comprehend with all the saints what is the breadth and length and height and depth," that is, the cross of the Lord.

  ON CHRISTIAN TEACHING 2.41.62

• Exodus 12:36

  The Egyptians not only had idols and crushing burdens which the people of Israel detested and from which they fled. They also had vessels and ornaments of gold and silver, and clothing, which the Israelites leaving Egypt secretly claimed for themselves as if for a better use. Not on their own authority did they make this appropriation, but by the command of God. Meanwhile, the Egyptians themselves, without realizing it, were supplying the things which they were not using properly. In the same way, all the teachings of the pagans have counterfeit and superstitious notions and oppressive burdens of useless labor. Any one of us, leaving the association of pagans with Christ as our leader, ought to abominate and shun them.

  ON CHRISTIAN TEACHING 2.40.60

• Exodus 12:37

  From their single ancestor, in not much more than four hundred years, the Hebrew people became so numerous that at the time of the exodus from Egypt there were, we are told, six hundred thousand men of military age. This number does not include the Idumeans, who were not reckoned with the people of Israel, although they were descended from Israel's brother Esau, who was a grandson of Abraham. Nor does it include those other descendants of Abraham who were not of the line of his wife Sarah.

  City of God 15.8

• Exodus 12:46

  Now next, that the legs of those two were broken, while his [Christ's] were not. He was already dead. Why this happened was stated in the Gospel itself. It was fitting, you see, to demonstrate by this sign as well that the true point and purpose of the Jewish Passover, which contained this instruction, not to break the lamb's bones, was to be a prophetic preenactment of his death.

  SERMON 218.13

• Exodus 13:21

  Who can doubt that here too God appeared to the eyes of mortal men by a corporeal creature made subject to him and not by his own substance? But it is also not apparent whether it was the Father, or the Son, or the Holy Spirit, or the Trinity itself, the one God. Nor, as far as I can judge, has this distinction been made in that place where it is written: "And the glory of the Lord appeared in the cloud, and the Lord spoke to Moses saying, 'I have heard the grumbling of the children of Israel.' "

  THE TRINITY 2.14.24