Exodus 8

Introduction

Exodus 8 continues the escalating confrontation between the LORD and Pharaoh by narrating three plagues in succession: frogs, gnats, and swarms. Each plague reveals something new about the nature of this conflict. The frog plague demonstrates that Pharaoh can be driven to bargain but not to genuine repentance — the moment relief comes, his promises evaporate. The gnats plague marks the first time Egypt's magicians fail to replicate a sign, prompting their remarkable confession: "This is the finger of God." And the plague of swarms introduces for the first time the theological principle of distinction — God separates his people in Goshen from the Egyptians, demonstrating that the plagues are not random natural disasters but targeted acts of divine judgment.

The chapter reveals a pattern that will repeat throughout the plague narrative: divine warning, Pharaoh's refusal, the plague's execution, Pharaoh's apparent relenting, and then Pharaoh's heart hardening once the pressure is removed. Two different Hebrew verbs describe the hardening in this chapter — הִכְבִּיד ("made heavy," vv. 15, 32) and חָזַק ("was strong/firm," v. 19) — and in every instance here, it is Pharaoh himself who hardens his own heart, not God hardening it for him. That shift will come later. Moses also shows increasing boldness in his dealings with Pharaoh, offering him the honor of choosing when the frogs will cease (v. 9) and directly accusing him of deception (v. 29). The chapter sets the stage for the escalating severity that will culminate in the death of the firstborn.

The Second Plague: Frogs (vv. 1-15)

Notes

• צְפַרְדְּעִים ("frogs") — This word appears almost exclusively in connection with this plague (here and in Psalm 78:45, Psalm 105:30). Its etymology is uncertain; some scholars relate it to a word meaning "marsh-leaper." The frog held religious significance in Egypt: the goddess Heqet, who was associated with fertility and childbirth, was depicted with the head of a frog. Egyptian women wore frog-shaped amulets as charms for fertility. The plague thus strikes at the heart of Egyptian religious symbolism — the sacred creature becomes a revolting infestation. What Egypt venerated, God turns into a curse.

• וַ/תַּעַל הַ/צְּפַרְדֵּעַ ("the frog came up," v. 6) — Remarkably, the Hebrew uses the singular הַ/צְּפַרְדֵּעַ ("the frog") rather than the expected plural. Some grammarians explain this as a collective singular — one mass of frogs acting as a single entity. Others see it as a deliberate literary choice: the singular emphasizes the overwhelming, undifferentiated swarm, as though one giant frog-entity rose from the Nile and smothered the land. The Septuagint also uses the singular. The effect is vivid and almost surreal.

• הַעְתִּירוּ אֶל יְהוָה ("Plead with the LORD," v. 8) — The verb עָתַר in the Hiphil means "to pray, entreat, plead earnestly." This is the first time Pharaoh asks Moses to intercede with the LORD on his behalf. It is a significant concession: Pharaoh, who had declared "Who is the LORD, that I should obey his voice?" (Exodus 5:2), now implicitly acknowledges that the LORD has power his own gods and magicians cannot match. Note that Pharaoh does not pray himself — he asks Moses to pray for him. He wants the benefit of the LORD's power without submitting to the LORD's authority.

• הִתְפָּאֵר עָלַי ("Have the honor over me," v. 9) — This unusual expression from Moses is translated variously: "Glory over me" (KJV), "You may have the honor over me" (BSB), "Be pleased to command me" (ESV). The Hitpael of פָּאַר means "to glorify oneself, to boast." Moses is inviting Pharaoh to name the time — to "have the boasting rights" of choosing when the frogs will cease. This is an extraordinary display of confidence in God's power: Moses offers Pharaoh the choice of timing to demonstrate that God can act on any schedule, not just his own.

• Pharaoh's answer — לְמָחָר ("tomorrow") — is puzzling. Why not ask for immediate relief? Some interpreters suggest Pharaoh suspected a natural event and wanted to test whether Moses truly controlled the timing. Others think Pharaoh, still proud, wanted to show he could endure one more night. The Midrash wryly observes that Pharaoh preferred to spend another night with the frogs rather than admit total dependence on Moses' God. Whatever the reason, Moses uses it to make a theological point: "so that you may know that there is no one like the LORD our God" (כִּי אֵין כַּיהוָה אֱלֹהֵינוּ).

• חֳמָרִם חֳמָרִם ("heaps upon heaps," v. 14) — The repetition of the word חֹמֶר ("heap, pile") is an emphatic doubling expressing vast quantity. The image is deliberately grotesque: the dead frogs are piled into enormous mounds, and the land stinks. The word וַ/תִּבְאַשׁ ("it reeked/stank") comes from בָּאַשׁ, which means "to stink, become odious." The same verb is used in Exodus 5:21 when the Israelite foremen say Moses has made them "stink" in Pharaoh's sight. Now it is Egypt itself that reeks.

• וְ/הַכְבֵּד אֶת לִבּוֹ ("he made his heart heavy," v. 15) — The Hiphil of כָּבֵד ("to be heavy") is used here. This is the same root that gives us כָּבוֹד ("glory, weight, honor"). Pharaoh's heart becomes "glorious" in the wrong sense — weighted down with pride and stubbornness. The verb is causative: Pharaoh actively makes his own heart heavy. The narrator notes that this happened "when Pharaoh saw that there was הָרְוָחָה ("relief, respite")" — the moment the pressure was removed, the promise was forgotten. This pattern — repentance under pressure, relapse upon relief — is one of the chapter's central themes.

• The magicians' replication of the frog plague (v. 7) is noteworthy for its absurdity. Egypt is already overrun with frogs, and the magicians respond by... producing more frogs. They can imitate the plague but they cannot remove it. Their power is purely destructive, adding to the problem rather than solving it. This is the last plague the magicians will successfully replicate.

The Third Plague: Gnats (vv. 16-19)

Notes

• כִּנִּם ("gnats") — The identification of this creature is debated. The Hebrew word כֵּן (plural כִּנִּים) has been variously identified as lice (KJV, many older translations), gnats (BSB, ESV, NIV), or mosquitoes. The Septuagint translates it as skniphes (gnats or mosquitoes). The Talmud (Sanhedrin 67b) identifies them as lice. The key detail is that they arise from the עֲפַר הָאָרֶץ ("dust of the ground"), which connects this plague to the creation narrative: humanity was formed from the dust of the ground (Genesis 2:7), and now that same dust is turned into a tormenting swarm. The very ground of Egypt becomes a source of misery.

• This plague comes without warning. Unlike the first plague (blood) and the second (frogs), there is no prior announcement to Pharaoh, no demand to "let my people go," and no opportunity for repentance. The plagues follow a pattern of three cycles of three, with the third plague in each cycle arriving unannounced (gnats here; boils in Exodus 9:8-12; darkness in Exodus 10:21-29). This structure suggests deliberate escalation: Pharaoh has been warned twice and refused; the third plague in each cycle comes as judgment without further negotiation.

• וְלֹא יָכֹלוּ ("but they could not," v. 18) — This is the turning point in the magicians' role in the narrative. Through the first two plagues, the חַרְטֻמִּים ("magicians") had matched Moses and Aaron's signs with their לָטִים ("secret arts" or "enchantments"). Now they fail. The word חַרְטֻמִּים is likely borrowed from Egyptian and refers to priestly scholars skilled in ritual magic. Their inability to replicate this plague demonstrates a limit to their power — they cannot create life from dust, because only God does that.

• אֶצְבַּע אֱלֹהִים הִוא ("This is the finger of God," v. 19) — This is one of the most theologically charged statements in the plague narrative, and it comes from the mouths of pagan magicians. The word אֶצְבַּע ("finger") is an anthropomorphism suggesting the smallest exertion of divine power. If this is merely God's finger, what would his hand or arm accomplish? The phrase "finger of God" appears elsewhere in Scripture: the tablets of the law were written by "the finger of God" (Exodus 31:18, Deuteronomy 9:10). Jesus alludes to this passage when he says, "If I cast out demons by the finger of God, then the kingdom of God has come upon you" (Luke 11:20). The magicians use אֱלֹהִים ("God") rather than the covenant name YHWH — they recognize a divine power at work but do not yet identify it with the specific God of Israel.

• וַ/יֶּחֱזַק לֵב פַּרְעֹה ("the heart of Pharaoh was firm/strong," v. 19) — Here a different verb is used for the hardening: חָזַק ("to be strong, firm, resolute"). Unlike the Hiphil הִכְבִּיד in v. 15 (where Pharaoh actively made his heart heavy), here the Qal form describes a state — Pharaoh's heart was firm. Even the testimony of his own magicians cannot move him. The irony is sharp: the men who had validated Pharaoh's resistance by replicating the signs now tell him to yield, and he ignores them too.

Interpretations

The magicians' declaration "This is the finger of God" has been understood differently across traditions. Some interpreters take it as a genuine theological recognition — the magicians perceive that a power beyond their own magic is at work and honestly report this to Pharaoh. Others see it as a self-serving excuse: rather than admitting their own incompetence, they blame a divine force they cannot control. Still others note that the magicians say אֱלֹהִים ("God" in a general sense) rather than YHWH, suggesting they recognize a supernatural power but have not yet identified it as the specific God of Israel who demands Pharaoh's submission. The Talmud (Sanhedrin 67b) uses this passage to argue that demonic or magical power cannot operate on creatures smaller than a barleycorn — the gnats were too small for the magicians' sorcery to affect.

The Fourth Plague: Swarms (vv. 20-32)

Notes

• הֶעָרֹב ("the swarm," vv. 21-31) — The identity of this plague creature is one of the most debated translation questions in Exodus. The Hebrew word עָרֹב comes from the root עָרַב, which means "to mix, to mingle." The word thus literally means "the mixture" or "the mixed swarm." The BSB, KJV, and most English translations render it "flies" or "swarms of flies," but the Hebrew text never specifies flies. The Septuagint translates it as kunomuia ("dog-fly"), a biting insect. The Midrash (Exodus Rabbah 11:2) interprets it as a mixture of various wild animals and beasts. Josephus describes it as a swarm of diverse creatures. My translation retains "the swarm" to preserve the Hebrew's ambiguity — the text emphasizes the devastating mixture rather than identifying a single species.

• וְהִפְלֵיתִי בַיּוֹם הַהוּא אֶת אֶרֶץ גֹּשֶׁן ("I will set apart the land of Goshen on that day," v. 22) — The Hiphil of פָּלָה means "to distinguish, to make wonderful, to set apart." This is the first explicit statement that God will protect Israel in Goshen while judging Egypt. The distinction between Israel and Egypt will become a defining feature of the remaining plagues (Exodus 9:4, Exodus 9:26, Exodus 10:23, Exodus 11:7). The theological point is critical: the plagues are not indiscriminate natural disasters but targeted divine acts that distinguish between those who belong to God and those who oppose him.

• וְשַׂמְתִּי פְדֻת בֵּין עַמִּי וּבֵין עַמֶּךָ ("I will set a redemption between my people and your people," v. 23) — The Hebrew word פְּדוּת means "redemption, ransom, distinction." The BSB follows the LXX and Vulgate in reading "distinction" (as if from a different root), but the Masoretic Text reads פְּדֻת — "redemption." If the MT is correct, God is saying he will place a "redemption" — a protective ransom — between his people and Pharaoh's people. The choice of this word is theologically suggestive: what separates Israel from Egypt is not ethnicity or geography but redemption. God's act of sparing his people is itself an act of פְּדוּת, foreshadowing the ultimate redemption at the sea and the Passover lamb.

• תּוֹעֲבַת מִצְרַיִם ("an abomination to the Egyptians," v. 26) — Moses objects to Pharaoh's first compromise (sacrifice within the land) on practical grounds. The word תּוֹעֵבָה ("abomination, detestable thing") is strong — it denotes something that provokes horror and revulsion. What would be abominable to the Egyptians about Israelite sacrifices? Several possibilities have been proposed: (1) the Israelites sacrificed cattle, sheep, and goats, animals that the Egyptians held sacred or associated with their gods (cf. Genesis 46:34, where shepherds are called "an abomination to the Egyptians"); (2) the manner of slaughter — the Egyptians had specific ritual requirements that differed from Israelite practice; (3) the religious offense of sacrificing to a foreign deity within Egyptian territory. Moses' argument is shrewd: he frames the request not as religious disobedience but as a matter of Egyptian sensibility.

• הַשְׁכֵּם בַּבֹּקֶר וְהִתְיַצֵּב לִפְנֵי פַרְעֹה הִנֵּה יוֹצֵא הַמָּיְמָה ("Rise early in the morning and station yourself before Pharaoh — behold, he goes out to the water," v. 20) — This is the same instruction given for the first plague (Exodus 7:15). Pharaoh's morning visit to the Nile was likely a ritual act — the Nile was deified in Egypt as the god Hapi, and the pharaoh may have performed morning ablutions or devotions at the river. God sends Moses to confront Pharaoh at the very site of his pagan worship, interrupting his devotion to a false god with the demand of the true God.

• Pharaoh's three compromises in this passage reveal his negotiating strategy. First: "sacrifice within the land" (v. 25) — worship your God, but stay in Egypt under my authority. Moses refuses. Second: "go, but not far" (v. 28) — you may leave, but remain within my reach. Pharaoh also adds הַעְתִּירוּ בַּעֲדִי ("plead for me"), revealing that his bargaining is driven by suffering, not conviction. Each of these compromises attempts to maintain some measure of control over Israel. The pattern is familiar in the plague narrative: Pharaoh yields just enough to seek relief but never enough to genuinely release his grip.

• אַל יֹסֵף פַּרְעֹה הָתֵל ("let Pharaoh not continue to deceive," v. 29) — The verb הָתַל means "to mock, deceive, deal deceitfully." Moses directly accuses Pharaoh of deception — not merely of changing his mind but of deliberately playing false. The word carries connotations of mockery and trickery. Moses has learned from the frog episode that Pharaoh's word under pressure is worthless. This accusation is remarkably bold for a man standing before the most powerful ruler in the ancient world, and it shows how Moses' confidence has grown since his initial reluctance at the burning bush (Exodus 3:11, Exodus 4:10).

• עָרֹב כָּבֵד ("a heavy swarm," v. 24) — The adjective כָּבֵד ("heavy, severe") is from the same root as the verb used for Pharaoh hardening his heart (הִכְבִּיד). The wordplay is deliberate: God sends a "heavy" swarm, and Pharaoh responds by making his heart "heavy." The plague's weight is matched by the weight of Pharaoh's obstinacy.

• לֹא נִשְׁאַר אֶחָד ("not one remained," v. 31) — The completeness of the removal is emphasized: not a single creature from the swarm was left. This detail heightens the miracle and deepens Pharaoh's guilt. The relief was total, the evidence of God's power undeniable — and still Pharaoh hardened his heart.

• וַ/יַּכְבֵּד פַּרְעֹה אֶת לִבּוֹ גַּם בַּפַּעַם הַזֹּאת ("Pharaoh made his heart heavy this time also," v. 32) — The narrator notes גַּם בַּפַּעַם הַזֹּאת ("also this time"), marking the pattern as established and deliberate. Pharaoh's hardening is not a single decision but a habit, a pattern that grows more entrenched with each repetition. The moral trajectory is clear: each act of hardening makes the next one easier, until eventually God confirms the direction Pharaoh has chosen for himself.

Interpretations

The hardening of Pharaoh's heart in this chapter raises the long-debated question of divine sovereignty and human responsibility. In Exodus 8, every instance of hardening is attributed to Pharaoh himself: he "made his heart heavy" (vv. 15, 32) or his heart "was firm" (v. 19). It is not until Exodus 9:12 that the text says "the LORD hardened Pharaoh's heart." Reformed interpreters (following Augustine and Calvin) argue that even Pharaoh's self-hardening is ultimately under God's sovereign control, since God had predicted it in advance (Exodus 3:19, Exodus 4:21) and the text says everything happened "just as the LORD had said." Arminian and Wesleyan interpreters emphasize the sequence: Pharaoh freely hardened his own heart first, and only after repeated self-hardening did God confirm the trajectory by hardening Pharaoh's heart himself. On this reading, God's hardening is a judicial act that ratifies a choice Pharaoh had already made. Both traditions agree that Pharaoh was morally responsible for his refusal; the debate concerns the ultimate cause behind that responsibility.