And when he went out the second day, behold, two men of the Hebrews strove together: and he said to him that did the wrong, Wherefore smitest thou thy fellow?

And he went out the second day, and, behold, two men of the Hebrews were striving together: and he said to him that did the wrong, Wherefore smitest thou thy fellow?

And going out the next day, he saw two Hebrews quarreling: and he said to him that did the wrong: Why strikest thou thy neighbour?

And he went out on the second day, and behold, two Hebrew men were quarrelling; and he said to him that was in the wrong, Why art thou smiting thy neighbour?

And he goeth out on the second day, and lo, two men, Hebrews, striving! and he saith to the wrong-doer, 'Why dost thou smite thy neighbour?'

And when he went out the second day, behold, two men of the Hebrews strove together: and he said to him that did the wrong, Why smite you your fellow?

And he went out the day after and saw two of the Hebrews fighting: and he said to him who was in the wrong, Why are you fighting your brother?

And going out the next day, he spotted two Hebrews quarrelling violently. And he said to him who was causing the injury, "Why do you strike your neighbor?"

Et quum egressus esset postridie, ecce, duo viri Hebraei rixabantur: tunc dixit malefico, Quare percutis propinquum tuum?

Behold, two men of the Hebrews. This perseverance shews that Moses was firm and determined in his design of returning to his brethren, and abandoning the Court; and that he had advisedly renounced its splendor, its wealth, and comforts, although he was by no means ignorant of the miseries to which he exposed himself, and how painful and disagreeable, nay, how ignominious a condition awaited him. Wherefore we need not wonder if the Apostle says, that he chose "rather to endure the reproach of Christ," "and to suffer affliction with the people of God, than to enjoy the pleasures of sin for a season." (Hebrews 11:25, 26.) Besides, the sad sight of the tyrant's violence and of the burdens by which his brethren were oppressed, was anything but an obstacle to his proceeding, because, being prepared by the hope of future recompense to bear the cross, he was superior to present fear. But he does not assume, as before, the character of a judge; but performs a duty, which the law of charity demands of every one, addressing the men who strove together as a peace-maker, and exhorting them both to be reconciled, though he especially blames the wrongdoer. This was not peculiar to Moses, but the common duty of all believers, when the innocent are harshly treated, to take their part, and as far as possible to interpose, lest the stronger should prevail. It can scarcely be done without exasperating those who are disposed to evil; but nothing ought to allow us to be silent, while justice is violated by their forwardness. For in this ease, silence is a kind of consent. Yet Moses reproves moderately, and in kind terms, the man who had assaulted his brother; because he does not so much wish to reproach him with the greatness of his fault, as to find the means of calming his ferocity.

Thy fellow - "Thy neighbor." the reproof was that of a legislator who established moral obligations on a recognized principle. Hence, in the following verse, the offender is represented as feeling that the position claimed by Moses was that of a Judge. The act could only have been made known by the Hebrew on whose behalf Moses had committed it.

Two men of the Hebrews strove together - How strange that in the very place where they were suffering a heavy persecution because they were Hebrews, the very persons themselves who suffered it should be found persecuting each other! It has been often seen that in those times in which the ungodly oppressed the Church of Christ, its own members have been separated from each other by disputes concerning comparatively unessential points of doctrine and discipline, in consequence of which both they and the truth have become an easy prey to those whose desire was to waste the heritage of the Lord. The Targum of Jonathan says that the two persons who strove were Dathan and Abiram.

And when he went out the second day,.... The day following:
behold, two men of the Hebrews strove together; which the Jewish writers (h) take to be Dathan and Abiram:
and he said to him that did the wrong; who was the aggressor, and acted the wicked part in abusing his brother:
wherefore smitest thou thy fellow? friend and companion; signifying, that it was very unbecoming, unkind, and unnatural, and that brethren and friends ought to live together in love, and not strive with, and smite one another, and especially at such a time as this, when they were so oppressed by, and suffered so much from their enemies; See Gill on Acts 7:26.
(h) Targum Jonah. & Jarchi in loc. Shemoth Rabba, sect. 1. fol. 91. 4. Shalshalet Hakabala, fol. 5. 2. Pirke Eliezer, c. 48.

two men of the Hebrews strove together--His benevolent mediation in this strife, though made in the kindest and mildest manner, was resented, and the taunt of the aggressor showing that Moses' conduct on the preceding day had become generally known, he determined to consult his safety by immediate flight (Hebrews 11:27). These two incidents prove that neither were the Israelites yet ready to go out of Egypt, nor Moses prepared to be their leader (James 1:20). It was by the staff and not the sword--by the meekness, and not the wrath of Moses that God was to accomplish that great work of deliverance. Both he and the people of Israel were for forty years more to be cast into the furnace of affliction, yet it was therein that He had chosen them (Isaiah 48:10).