s for a sign on the hand and a frontlet between the eyes.

We have already observed the connection between the thirteenth verse and
the events of the previous night. But there is an interesting touch of
nature in the words "the firstling of an ass thou shalt redeem with a
lamb." It was afterwards rightly perceived that all unclean animals
should follow the same rule; but why was only the ass mentioned? Plainly
because those humble journeyers had no other beast of burden. Horses
pursued them presently, but even the Egyptians of that period used them
only in war. The trampled Hebrews would not possess camels. And thus
again, in the tenth commandment, when the stateliest of their cattle is
specified, no beast of burden is named with it but the ass: "Thou shalt
not covet ... his ox nor his ass." It is an undesigned coincidence of
real value; a phrase which would never have been devised by legislators
of a later date; a frank and unconscious evidence of the genuineness of
the story.

Some time before this, a new and fierce race, whose name declared them
to be "emigrants," had thrust itself in among the tribes of Canaan--a
race which was long to wage equal war with Israel, and not seldom to see
his back turned in battle. They now held all the south of Palestine,
from the brook of Egypt to Ekron (Josh. xv. 4, 47). And if Moses in the
flush of his success had pushed on by the straight and easy route into
the promised land, the first shock of combat with them would have been
felt in a few weeks. But "God led them not by the way of the
Philistines, though that was near, for God said, Lest peradventure the
people repent them when they see war, and they return to Egypt" (ver.
17).

From this we learn two lessons. Why did not He, Who presently made
strong the hearts of the Egyptians to plunge into the bed of the sea,
make the hearts of His own people strong to defy the Philistines? The
answer is a striking and solemn one. Neither God in the Old Testament,
nor God manifested in the flesh, is ever recorded to have wrought any
miracle of spiritual advancement or overthrow. Thus the Egyptians were
but confirmed in their own choice: their decision was carried further.
And even Saul of Tarsus was illuminated, not coerced: he might have
disobeyed the heavenly vision. He was not an insincere man suddenly
coerced into earnestness, nor a coward suddenly made brave. In the moral
world, adequate means are always employed for the securing of d