Hebrews 11:23–31

11:23 Although Moses is the grammatical subject of the passive verb “was hidden,” it was his parents’ courageous faith that set him apart in infancy. Recounting the narrative of Exodus 2:1–2, our author states that Moses’ parents hid him for three months because they saw that he was “beautiful” (Gk. asteios). Our author follows the LXX, in which asteios represents the Hebrew adjective tov (often glossed as “good,” but having a broad semantic range). In Acts 7:20 Stephen’s comment on Moses’ infancy likewise reflects the influence of the LXX, but he describes Moses as “beautiful [asteios] in God’s sight.”

In view of our author’s description of faith as focused on “things not seen” (Heb. 11:1), which reappears explicitly in the Moses section (v. 27), the reference to the infant Moses’ “beauty” refers to more than physical appearance. His parents “saw” that there was something special about this child. The king’s edict mandated that male infants of Hebrew mothers be killed at birth (Ex. 1:15–22). Presumably those who defied Pharaoh’s semi-genocidal policy would themselves be punished, probably by death. Yet Moses’ parents did not fear to protect this special child whom God had entrusted to them. Their fearlessness foreshadowed their son’s fearlessness when facing the king’s anger (Heb. 11:27) and illustrated how a living faith in God can set people free from the fear of death (2:15; cf. 13:6).

11:24–26 Our preacher is most interested in the life-changing decision that Moses reached when he had become an adult (Ex. 2:11–15; Acts 7:23). He had gone out to his brothers in order to see their burdensome toil. Suddenly he saw an Egyptian taskmaster cruelly beating a Hebrew slave—“one of his brothers” (ESV mg.; Moses’ recognition of Hebrew slaves as his “brothers” is mentioned twice in Exodus 2:11, an emphasis that seems relevant to our author’s interest in this incident.) In Exodus Moses himself records his action of killing the Egyptian abuser, thereby defending his Hebrew brother, without revealing his motivation.

Our author, however, insists that we contemplate the alternatives Moses confronted at that moment. Moses had been adopted by a daughter of Pharaoh, Egypt’s quasi-divine monarch (Ex. 2:10). As a member of the royal court, Moses had access to the “treasures of Egypt” and could “enjoy the fleeting pleasures [apolausis] of sin.” The term apolausis is not intrinsically negative (cf. 1 Tim. 6:17), but here it refers to pleasures that are both sinful and short-lived. Such ephemeral enjoyment would have included not only violations of God’s moral law but also, especially relevant here, a culpable refusal to be identified with his suffering Hebrew kinfolk. On the other hand, although the children of Israel had been welcomed to Egypt with honor in Joseph’s day, they had long been an enslaved, despised, and abused minority. To identify with them would be to suffer mistreatment with them (cf. Heb. 11:37; 13:3).

The alternatives are described first in terms of physical and social experience: either mistreatment or enjoyment. They are then restated in financial metaphors: either Egypt’s “treasures,” or the “greater wealth” and “reward” on which Moses’ sights were set. In a doubly arresting move, our author identifies the “greater wealth” that Moses chose as “the reproach of Christ.” It is a shocking paradox to equate reproach to wealth—and wealth exceeding that of Pharaoh’s court. Moreover, the author seamlessly links afflictions endured by ancient Hebrew slaves to the suffering of “reproach” endured by the Messiah himself. The psalmists lamented the reproaches suffered by the Lord’s Anointed (Pss. 69:7–9, 19–20; 89:50–51), and Hebrews will speak of the shame endured by Jesus on the cross (Heb. 12:2). His execution “outside the gate” and “outside the camp,” in territory reserved for death and defilement, symbolized the reproach he endured, which his followers must share (13:11–13).

The sermon-letter’s original Jewish-Christian hearers had already suffered reproach for their faith and had identified with others who had likewise suffered (10:32–34). They will be called to do so again (13:3). For them, the choice was not between the luxuries of Egypt’s royal court and the helplessness and exhausting toil of a nation of slaves. Rather, it was between status and welcome in the Jewish community, synagogue, and near and extended family circles, on the one hand, and shunning by synagogue and family, with related social and economic ramifications, on the other. For every generation, bearing the reproach of Christ in solidarity with his faithful followers has its price, and the cost of enduring faith is not negligible. But Moses’ reckoning was right: Christ’s reproach is wealth that sin’s pleasures and society’s acceptance cannot rival. The reward is nothing less than drawing near and dwelling with God in the heavenly country and city to come (10:34–35; 11:6, 10, 16; 12:22–24, 28; 13:14).

11:27 A third display of faith in Moses’ life was his departure from Egypt, “not being afraid of the anger of the king.” Since this precedes the mention of the Passover (v. 28), it probably refers to Moses’ flight from Egypt to Midian soon after he killed an abusive Egyptian taskmaster and his act became public knowledge and reached the king’s ears (Ex. 2:14–15; cf. comment on 11:24–26). The OT text, however, states that, when the news got out, “Moses was afraid” and fled (Ex. 2:14).¹ How can our author so flatly contradict the OT? To attribute Moses’ flight from Egypt to his faith instead of to his fear of the king conveniently parallels our author’s treatment of Moses’ parents’ protection of him in infancy as being motivated by their faith in God, not their fear of the king. But surely a desire to highlight this parallel cannot justify our author’s deliberately suppressing the truth about his fear that Moses frankly confessed when he wrote Exodus. Our preacher’s point seems to be that, although Moses was afraid of the king’s wrath (as anyone familiar with the OT knows), his faith, not his fear, was the dominant motive driving him out of Egypt.

Our author assumes that his hearers have seen Moses’ struggle with fear in Exodus, just as we observed Abraham’s and Sarah’s fluctuating faith in Genesis. Over against that fear, however, was his faith, by which he “endured as seeing him who is invisible.” The invisible one is God the creator (Rom. 1:20; Col. 1:15; 1 Tim. 1:17; 6:15–16). Forty years after Moses fled Egypt, he saw the angel of the Lord in the burning bush (Exodus 3–4) and the “form of the LORD” on Mount Sinai (Num. 12:8). But long before those visible displays of divine glory, Moses had already glimpsed God’s glory, by faith (not physical sight) perceiving “things not seen.” Our preacher assures us that Moses’ faith overshadowed his (very obvious) fear. By that same faith, all believers now “behold” the Lord’s glory and are being transformed into his image (2 Cor. 3:18).

11:28 Like Noah previously, Moses and Israel believed God’s announcement about a traumatic judgment to come in an unseen but fast approaching future: a final plague would inflict death on the firstborn throughout Egypt (Ex. 11:4–7). Like Noah, in their faith they obeyed God’s instruction for their protection, smearing the blood of a lamb “without blemish” on their doorframes and eating the Passover meal in their homes (Ex. 12:3–13). Acting in faith preserved their lives (Heb. 10:39), as God had promised: “The blood shall be a sign for you, on the houses where you are. And when I see the blood, I will pass over you, and no plague will befall you to destroy you” (Ex. 12:13). As the blood of bulls and goats on the Day of Atonement foreshadowed Christ’s conscience-cleansing sacrifice, so the Passover lamb’s blood symbolized Jesus’ death as the means of rescue from the enslaving fear of death (Heb. 2:14–15; 9:13–14; cf. John 1:29; 1 Cor. 5:7).

11:29 Another rescue immediately followed the first Passover. The final plague forced Egypt’s Pharaoh to release his Hebrew slaves, but immediately he regretted that decision and sent forces to recapture the Israelites, who had reached the Red Sea and were trapped between impassable waters and implacable foes (Exodus 14). Fear, not faith, fueled their words of complaint against Moses (Ex. 14:11–12), ominously foreshadowing the next forty years. Nevertheless, “by faith” they crossed the sea as on dry ground (Ex. 14:21–22, 29), and, when the waters returned, their oppressors were drowned (Ex. 14:26–28). This visible display of power evoked from the Israelites a confession of faith, short-lived though it would be: “Israel saw the great power that the LORD used against the Egyptians, so the people feared the LORD, and they believed in the LORD and in his servant Moses” (Ex. 14:31).

11:30–31 Our author bypasses major events he discusses elsewhere: the inauguration of the Sinai covenant (Heb. 9:15–22; 12:18–21) and the Israelites’ four decades of doubt in the desert (chs. 3–4). He concludes this section with two simultaneous displays of God’s power and mercy when a new generation of Israelites finally entered the Promised Land. The sudden fall of Jericho’s walls illustrates our preacher’s point that the faith that pleases God takes action in response to God’s word, even when visible circumstances make his commands seem foolish and his promises impossible. The Lord directed Israel’s priests—sounding trumpets and bearing the ark of the covenant—and its armed forces to march around Jericho once a day for six days, and seven times on the seventh day, before shouting and again blasting trumpets (Josh. 6:1–21). But Jericho was a formidable fortress, securely sealed against siege (Josh. 6:1). Such a bizarre military strategy—no battering ram to shatter gates, no ladders to scale walls—must have seemed unlikely to breach Jericho’s stout battlements. But Joshua had just led Israel through the Jordan River on dry land in flood season (Joshua 3–4), so Israel again proceeded in obedience, trusting God’s word about things not yet seen, and they watched their divine champion throw down Jericho’s walls.

While Jericho was overthrown, Rahab the prostitute (with her family; Josh. 6:22–25) was spared “by faith.” Despite her background in Canaan’s pagan religions, this Gentile woman’s faith in the living God of Israel was robust in content, informed by reports of the Lord’s prior victories (Josh. 2:8–13). Her trust was both active and risky. Jeopardizing her own and her family’s safety from harm by human powers, she secured their deliverance from destruction by the Lord, expecting that he would fulfill his promise to give his land to his people. If she had been caught giving “a friendly welcome” (lit., “welcome with peace”) to the Israelite spies, no doubt Jericho’s authorities would have executed her (Josh. 2:2–7). Her hope lay not in her own virtue but in the trustworthy word of God. Thus the Bible identifies Rahab as “the prostitute” while nevertheless commending her exemplary faith (Josh. 2:1; 6:17, 22, 25; James 2:25). She is one of four women with Gentile associations enfolded into the genealogy of Jesus the Messiah, along with Tamar, Ruth, and Uriah’s wife (Matt. 1:1–16).