Exodus 8:2

And if thou refuse to let them go,.... Will not obey the orders: I will smite all thy borders with frogs; he gives him warning of the blow before he strikes, which shows his clemency and goodness,

And if thou refuse to let them go, behold, I will smite all thy borders with frogs: I will smite ... [ nogeep (H5062)] - smite by the infliction of a divine judgment; I will plague [ batsªpardª`iym

All thy land which is within thy borders; a synecdoche; so that word is used also ,19 . So the gate and the wall are put for the city to which they belong, ,10,14.

Exodus 8:2 And if thou refuse to let [them] go, behold, I will smite all thy borders with frogs:Ver. 2. Behold, I will smite.] God usually, not always, warns before he wounds. Ideoque minatur, ut non puniat; and therefore threateneth, that he may not punish his creature.

VIII.THE SECOND PLAGUE.(1-4) It is generally allowed that the second plague was one of frogs. All the ancient versions agree in the interpretation; and the only rival rendering—“crocodiles”—is too absurd to be argued against. We may take it, therefore, as certain that the second infliction upon Egypt was an innumerable multitude of frogs, which came up out of the river, and infested the cities, the houses, the sleeping apartments, the beds, the ovens, and the kneading troughs. There was no escaping them. They entered the royal palace no less than the peasant’s cottage; they penetrated to the inner chambers; they leaped upon the couches and beds; they polluted the baking utensils, and defiled the water and the food. Here, again, the infliction was double. (1) Frogs were sacred animals to the Egyptians, who regarded them as symbols of procreative power, and associated them especially with the goddess Heka (a wife of Kneph, or up), whom they represented as frog-headed. Sacred animals might not be intentionally killed; and even their involuntary slaughter was not unfrequently punished with death. To be plagued with a multitude of reptiles which might not be put to death, yet on which it was scarcely possible not to tread, and which, whenever a door was opened were crushed, was a severe trial to the religious feelings of the people, and tended to bring the religion itself into contempt. (2) The visitation was horrible to the senses—nauseous, disgusting. The frogs were hideous to the eye, grating to the ear, repulsive to the touch. Their constant presence everywhere rendered them a continual torment. If other later plagues were more injurious, the plague of frogs was perhaps of all the most loathsome. We read without surprise in Eustathius (Comment. in Hom. II., p. 35) that the people of Pseonia and Dardania on one occasion, were so plagued by a multitude of frogs, which filled the houses and the streets, infected the water, invaded the cooking utensils, and made all the food uneatable, that after a time, being unable to bear the pest any longer, they “fled from that region altogether.” (1) Let my people go.—The usual demand, which it was determined to reiterate until Pharaoh yielded. (See Exodus 5:1; Exodus 7:16; Exodus 8:20; Exodus 9:1-13; Exodus 10:3.) (2) With frogs.—The particular species intended is thought to be the modern dofka (Rana Mosaica), which i is a large kind, resembling our toad, which crawls more; than it leaps, and croaks perpetually. (3) The river shall bring forth frogs.—The frogs do not now come up directly out of the river, but rather out of the ponds and marshes which are left by the inundation. (See Exodus 8:5.) These, however, may be viewed as detached portions of the river. Frogs in Egypt are, even at the present day, an occasional annoyance and inconvenience. Thy bedchamber . . . thy bed.—No nation of antiquity set such a value on cleanliness as the Egyptians.

Verse 2. If thou refuse] Nothing can be plainer than that Pharaoh had it still in his power to have dismissed the people, and that his refusal was the mere effect of his own wilful obstinacy. With frogs] צפרדעים tsepardeim. This word is of doubtful etymology: almost all interpreters, both ancient and modern, agree to render it as we do, though some mentioned by Aben Ezra think the crocodile is meant; but these can never weigh against the conjoint testimony of the ancient versions. Parkhurst derives the word from צפר tsaphar, denoting the brisk action, or motion of the light, and ידע yada, to feel, as they seem to feel or rejoice in the light, croaking all the summer months, yet hiding themselves in the winter. The Arabic name for this animal is very nearly the same with the Hebrew [Arabic] zafda, where the letters are the same, the ר resch being omitted. It is used as a quadriliteral root in the Arabic language, to signify froggy, or containing frogs: see Golius. But the true etymology seems to be given by Bochart, who says the word is compounded of [Arabic] zifa, a bank, and [Arabic] rada, mud, because the frog delights in muddy or marshy places; and that from these two words the noun [Arabic] zafda is formed, the [Arabic] re being dropped. In the Batrocho myomachia of Homer, the frog has many of its epithets from this very circumstance. Hence Λιμνοχαρις, delighting in the lake; Βορβοροκοιτης, lying or engendering in the mud; Πηλευς, and Πηλβατης, belonging to the mud, walking in the mud, c., c. A frog is in itself a very harmless animal but to most people who use it not as an article of food, exceedingly loathsome. God, with equal ease, could have brought crocodiles, bears, lions, or tigers to have punished these people and their impious king, instead of frogs, lice, flies, c. But had he used any of those formidable animals, the effect would have appeared so commensurate to the cause, that the hand of God might have been forgotten in the punishment and the people would have been exasperated without being humbled. In the present instance he shows the greatness of his power by making an animal, devoid of every evil quality, the means of a terrible affliction to his enemies. How easy is it, both to the justice and mercy of God, to destroy or save by means of the most despicable and insignificant of instruments! Though he is the Lord of hosts he has no need of powerful armies, the ministry of angels, or the thunderbolts of justice, to punish a sinner or a sinful nation the frog or the fly in his hands is a sufficient instrument of vengeance.

2. And if thou refuse, &c.] The announcement to Pharaoh of what will follow, in case he refuses, as elsewhere in J (Exodus 8:21, Exodus 9:2, Exodus 10:4; cf. Exodus 9:17, Exodus 4:23). borders] i.e. territory, as often: in J, here, Exodus 10:4; Exodus 10:14; Exodus 10:19, Exodus 13:7.

With frogs - Some months appear to have elapsed between this and the former plague, if the frogs made their appearance at the usual time, that is in September. The special species mentioned here is of Egyptian origin.

2. I will smite all thy borders with frogs — Several species of frogs are found in Egypt, and they are specially abundant in September, filling the lakes and ponds left by the retiring inundation.