Commentary on Psalms Volume 3 John Calvin (continued)
JOHN CALVIN
of Egypt is well irrigated, yet the Egyptians were parched with drought amidst abundance of water. It is afterwards said, that frogs were brought forth, 225 and entered even into the chambers of the kings; by which God manifestly evinced that he was the author of the miracle; for although all Egypt swarmed with frogs, the courts of the kings ought to have been exempt from this nuisance. By the term kings, is denoted either the nobles of the realm, or the king's sons, who were brought up in the expectation of the royal power; for at that time, as is well known, one king alone reigned over all Egypt. From this we learn how easily, and as it were by a kind of mockery, God humbles those who pride themselves in the flesh. He did not gather together an army to fight against the Egyptians, nor did he forthwith arm his angels, or thunder out of heaven, but brought forth frogs, which contemptuously trampled upon the pride of that haughty nation, who held in contempt the whole world beside. It would have been no disgrace for them to have been conquered by powerful enemies; but how dishonorable was it to be vanquished by frogs? God thus intended to show that he has no need of powerful hosts to destroy the wicked; for he can do this, as it were in sport, whenever he pleases.
Psalm 105:31-38
31. He spake, and there came a swarm of flies, 226 and lice 227 in all their borders. 32. He gave them hail for rain, and flaming fire upon their land. 33. And he smote their vines and their fig trees; and
They executed the command of God, with respect to the plagues brought on the Egyptians, although they knew that in thus acting they would incur the heavy displeasure of Pharaoh, and expose their lives to considerable danger. "The import of,לא מרוthey resisted not," says Hammond, "seems no more than what is affirmed in the story, Exodus 10:21, 22, 'The Lord said unto Moses, Stretch out thy hand. — And Moses stretched forth his hand,' — i.e., readily obeyed, and did what God directed, and that at a time when Pharaoh was likely to be incensed, and vehemently offended with him and Aaron. For which consideration the story there gives us this farther ground: for as, verse 10, he had before expressed some anger and threats, — 'Look to it, for evil is before you,' and 'they were driven from his presence,' verse 11; so now, upon the hardening his heart, which follows this plague of darkness, he said to Moses, 'Get thee from me, take heed to thyself, see my face no more, for in that day thou seest my face thou shalt die the death,' verse 28. This rage of Pharaoh, Moses in reason might well foresee, but he dreaded it not; but boldly did as God directed, and that is the meaning of "they resisted not God's word.'"
The Hebrew verb for brought forth is,שרףsharats, which signifies to multiply exceedingly; and "the noun is used for creeping things, because they procreate in great abundance. It cannot therefore be more fitly translated, as is observed by Hammond, than by swarming." — Phillips.
The original word for a swarm of flies is,ערבarob. For some account of the noxious insects here meant, see volume 3, page 258, note 2.
COMMENTARY ON PSALMS - VOLUME 3 destroyed the trees throughout their borders. 34. He spake, and the grasshopper came, and the caterpillar 228 without number, 35. And they devoured all the herbage in their land, and consumed the fruit of their ground. 36. And he smote all the first-born in their country, even the beginning of all their strength. 229 37. And he brought
The Hebrew word for lice is,כניםkannim. The reading in the Septuagint is σκνιφες, and in the Vulgate sciniphes, which signifies a species of little gnats that sting painfully in the marshy country of Egypt; the culex reptans of Linnaeus, or the culex molestus of Forskal. In support of the accuracy of this interpretation it has been said, that as the translators of the Septuagint dwelt in Egypt, it can hardly be supposed that they were ignorant of what was intended by the Hebrew name. Philo, an Alexandrian Jew, and Origen, a Christian father, who likewise lived at Alexandria, have also been produced as confirming this interpretation. Both Philo and Origen represent these insects as being very small, but very troublesome. The latter describes them as winged insects, but so small as to escape any but the acutest sight; and says, that when settled on the body, they wound it with a most sharp and painful piercer. Jerome also supports this view, while Gesenius, Boothroyd, and others, concur in it. The Jewish interpreters, however, and Josephus, understand the original word as denoting lice; which has been adopted by the translators of our English Bible, and which Bochart likewise follows, with most of the modern commentators. Bochart argues that gnats could not be intended: — 1. Because the creatures here mentioned sprang from the dust of the earth, and not from the waters. 2. Because they were both on men and cattle, which cannot be spoken of gnats. 3. Because their name comes from a root which signifies to make firm, fix, establish, which could not apply to gnats, flies, etc., as they are almost constantly on the wing. 4. Because,כנהkinah, is the term given by the Talmudists for louse. The translation given by Calvin, and in our English Bible, appears the most correct, but whichever we adopt, it is necessary to conclude (which the history expressly states) that the creatures were brought in swarms, most extraordinary even for Egypt, and thus a miraculous interposition was made manifest. This judgment was the more noisome and disgraceful to the Egyptians, from the great external purity which they affected, and from their being very nice both in their persons and clothing; bathing and making ablutions continually. They were particularly solicitous not to harbour any vermin, thinking it would be a great profanation of the temple which they entered, if any animalculae of this sort were concealed in their garments.
The Hebrew word translated caterpillar is,ילקyelek. This word is in our English Bible rendered caterpillar here, and in Jeremiah 51:27; but in Joel 1:4, 2:25, and Nahum 3:15, it is rendered cankerworm. In the passage in Nahum the creature is spoken of as winged and bristled, whence some commentators suppose that a kind of locust is intended. "It certainly means some insect remarkable for destroying vegetables, probably the 'chafer' or 'maybug,' βρουχος, as the LXX. render it in five passages out of eight wherein it occurs. The Vulgate throughout renders it bruchus, the 'chafer.' Michaelis thinks it means the 'chafer,' particularly in its vermicular state, when it is much more destructive to plants, namely, by gnawing, eating, and cankering their roots, than after it has taken wing." — Parkhurst's Lexicon on,ילקunder,לק2.
The beginning, or the first-fruit of all their strength, is understood by Lowth to mean the first-born of the mother. His note on the verse in Merrick's Annotations is as follows: — "Απαρχὴν πόνου, Primitias laboris vel partus LXX. Vulg. Hieron. Compare Genesis
35:18. This, I think, is the right translation. The first-born, that were slain on this occasion, were those that opened the womb; the first-born of the mother, not of the father, as it appears from the circumstances of the history." The first-born of cattle is no doubt also intended. — See Genesis 49:3; and Psalm 78:51