A Cloud The Size of a Hand (I Kings 18:44)

Who saw “a cloud no larger than a man’s hand” and knew the three-year drought was over? Elijah’s servant (I Kings 18:44)

One of the most famous incidents in the life of Elijah is his defeat of 450 prophets of Ba’al in a contest to determine whose god would send fire on Mount Carmel (I Kings 18:20-40). Immediately after this great triumph, while in the midst of a drought and with nary a cloud in the sky, Elijah dismisses King Ahab in anticipation of a torrential downpour (I Kings 18:41). The prophet then assumes the fetal position (I Kings 18:42) and instructs his unnamed servant to inspect the horizon seven times (I Kings 18:43). After the first six trips prove fruitless, the servant returns a seventh time having witnessed the smallest of signs (I Kings 18:44).

It came about at the seventh time, that he [the servant] said, “Behold, a cloud as small as a man’s hand is coming up from the sea.” And he [Elijah] said, “Go up, say to Ahab, ‘Prepare your chariot and go down, so that the heavy shower does not stop you.’” (I Kings 18:44 NASB)

Marvin A. Sweeney (b. 1953) summarizes:

Elijah goes to the top of Carmel and prostrates himself, with his head between his knees, in a position of prayer. The purpose of this action becomes evident as he bids his servant seven times to look out to the sea. When the boy observes at his seventh attempt a small rain cloud forming over the Mediterranean it is evident that the drought is about to come to an end. (Sweeney, First and Second Kings: A Commentary (Old Testament Library), 229-30)

The only evidence the servant produces is a seemingly inconsequential cloud (I Kings 18:44) yet this is enough confirmation to satisfy Elijah.

When James recounts the event, he attributes the downpour to the prophet’s prayers (James 5:17-18). August H. Konkel (b. 1948) interprets:

A sevenfold repetition indicates the fullness of prayer (I Kings 18:43-44); each time the servant ascends one of the peaks of Carmel for the best view. At the first sign of a small cloud the company begins its descent from the mountain lest the rain bog them in the valley below. As Ahab rides furiously towards Jezreel, Elijah runs on ahead [I Kings 18:46]. Running before the king indicates service to the king, now with the intent that the king will fulfill his proper mission in service to God. (Konkel, 1 & 2 Kings (The NIV Application Commentary), 301)

Warren W. Wiersbe (b. 1929) applies:

Unlike the answer to the prayer at the altar, the answer to this prayer didn’t come at once. Seven times Elijah sent his servant to look toward the Mediterranean Sea and report any indications of a storm gathering, and six of those times the servant reported nothing. The prophet didn’t give up but prayed a seventh time, and the servant saw a tiny cloud coming from the sea. This is a good example for us to follow as we “watch and pray” and continue to intercede until the Lord sends the answer...The little cloud wasn’t a storm, but it was the harbinger of the rains that were to come. (Wiersbe, Be Responsible (I Kings): Being Good Stewards of God’s Gifts, 169)

The precursor to rain is a natural one, namely a cloud. Richard D. Patterson and Hermann J. Austel (1927-2011) define:

The Hebrew word for “cloud” (’āb) refers to a thick, dark, rainy cloud mass (cf. Judges 5:4; II Samuel 23:4). Ahab’s need for haste in the face of the oncoming cloudburst can be appreciated when one realizes that his chariot must travel seventeen miles through the accumulating mud and across the quickly swelling dry wadis. (Tremper Longman III [b. 1952] and David E. Garland [b. 1947], 1 Samuel-2 Kings (The Expositor’s Bible Commentary), 779)

The cloud is “as small as a man’s hand” (I Kings 18:44 NASB). In her classic devotional Streams in the Desert, L.B. Cowman (1870-1960) remarks:

“A cloud as small as a man’s hand is rising from the sea” (1 Kings 18:44). What a fitting description, for a man's hand had been raised in prayer to God before the rains came. (Cowman, Streams in the Desert: 366 Daily Devotional Readings, 176)

Other authors writing to a popular audience have also found symbolism in the cloud’s comparison to a hand. Clark Strand (b. 1957) sees:

The cloud witnessed by Elijah’s servant is very small—the tiniest cloud you could see, just like a little hand coming up over the horizon. So small is it, in fact, that it might almost seem insignificant, if it weren’t for the fact that it is shaped like a hand. That makes it intimate, and that intimacy gives Elijah an intimation of things to come. When it pops up from the blank horizon of the sea, immediately he leaps up. (Strand, How to Believe in God: Whether You Believe in Religion or Not, 109)

Craig B. Polenz (b. 1948) concurs:

There is a small cloud like a man’s hand on yonder horizon that is rising out of the sea, which is a type of our humanity (I Kings 18:44a). By injecting the human element of a hand, I believe the divine suggestion is that the things such as prolonged draughts, hopelessness, and bitter disappointment must acquiesce to the divinely empowered, small hand of a man. (Polenz, The Chronicles of Elijah: To Jericho and Beyond God’s Path of Enlightenment, 28)

The text’s emphasis, however, is on the cloud’s size, or lack thereof, not its shape. It uses a double description. First, it is described as “small” (ASV, CEV, HCSB, NASB, NIV, NKJV) or “little” (ESV, KJV, MSG, NLT, NRSV, RSV).

Then the servant adds the simile “as a man’s hand” (ASV, ESV, HCSB, KJV, NASB, NIV, NKJV, NLT, RSV). More modern translations use the equally accurate but more inclusive language of a “person’s hand” (NRSV) or “someone’s hand” (MSG).

A similar comparison occurred around Chattanooga, Tennessee, in 1917. Coal miners had begun dipping their graham crackers in marshmallow fluff. Noticing that he was selling an excessive number of graham crackers to the miners, Earl Mitchell Sr. (1884-1945), an industrious salesman for Chattanooga Bakery, investigated and decided to combine the two ingredients into a single product. Legend has it that during a moonlit night, Mitchell asked how the product should be packaged. Noting that it would fit into the average lunch pail, a coal miner held up circled fingers and framed the moon to indicate its size. With that, the Moon Pie was born. Despite taking its name from the moon, much like Elijah’s servant, the miner was indicating size, not shape.

The palm sized cloud is minuscule particularly against the backdrop of the vast sky. But it is enough for the prophet. Choon-Leong Seow (b. 1952) relates:

The servant sees a little cloud “no bigger than a person’s hand” arising from the horizon. The approaching cloud, though appearing small in the distance, is reminiscent of the cloud of glory that represented the Lord’s presence at the mountain of God in the time of Moses. (Seow, 1 & 2 Kings, 1 & 2 Chronicles, Ezra, Nehemiah, Esther, Tobit, Judith (The New Interpreter’s Bible), 137)

Interpreting natural phenomena as divine omens is common among religious people. Piotr Sadowski (b.1957) philosophizes:

Sometimes...some reactions produced by non-human systems can be interpreted as “signs” by persons who regard certain natural phenomena, such as the strike of a thunderbolt, a flood, an earthquake, or a pestilence as resulting not just from physical causes but from the actions of some purposeful, supernatural intelligence, variously identified as “god,” “providence,” or “fate.” Interpreted in this light natural phenomena begin to assume human-like characteristics, as when the prophet Elijah’s prayer for rain is answered with “Behold, there ariseth a little cloud out of the sea, like a man’s hand” (I Kings 18:44). Because having a purposeful design about things presupposes an autonomous system equipped with metainformational cognitive faculties, for religious persons the entire universe, created by such a superior being, can indeed be filled with “signs” rather than simply with physical states. (Sadowski, From Interaction to Symbol: A systems view of the evolution of signs and communication (Iconicity in Language and Literature), 69)

The belief in a personal God creates the hope that the deity is attempting to communicate. Joyce Meyer (b. 1943) encourages:

If you and I could just look at our situation really hard, I am sure we could always find a cloud of hope at least the size of a man’s hand. No matter how things may look right now, I am sure that there must be at least that much hope we can hang onto. (Meyer, The Battle Belongs to the Lord: Overcoming Life’s Struggles Through Worship, 175)

Why does the servant describe the cloud? What does the analogy “as small as a man’s hand” add to the story? How would you have described the cloud had you been Elijah’s servant? Do you believe that God speaks through natural occurrences? When have you gained confidence from a seemingly negligible sign? Why do you think that both the king and the servant followed Elijah’s instructions to vacate the vicinity?

Elijah believes in his prayer so much that he employs a lookout. He puts his money where his mouth is, placing his reputation (invaluable to a prophet) on the line. And his faith is rewarded.

Iain W. Provan (b. 1957) elucidates:

It is a long wait but at last a cloud as small as a man’s hand is seen rising from the sea. Though small, it is enough to assure Elijah that the drought is over (cf. Luke 12:54), and after warning Ahab to leave or get wet, he races him to Jezreel in the power of the LORD. As we might expect, in view of the story so far, he wins. It is a fitting conclusion to the chapter. (Provan, 1 and 2 Kings (New International Biblical Commentary), 139)

Elijah’s forecast is correct marking a rare instance in which a cloud serves as a good omen. The small hand-sized cloud represents the first fruits of the heavy rains that follow (I Kings 18:45).

Jesse C. Long, Jr. (b. 1953) praises:

For Elijah, an unsurpassed stalwart of faith, even a small cloud is enough to know that Yahweh is about to send rain. Ahab is told to hurry back before the rains mire his travel. The sky grows black, the winds pick up, and a heavy rain begins. Ahab sets out in his chariot, and the power of the Lord seizes Elijah, enabling him to run ahead of Ahab to Jezreel (the location of Ahab’s winter palace, not far from Carmel). (Long, 1 & 2 Kings (College Press NIV Commentary), 218)

Richard Nelson (b. 1945) reveals:

The climax comes in I Kings 18:45 with a colorful description of the storm’s sudden onset. The dramatic tension drains away in the denouement of Elijah’s spirit-driven twenty-five kilometer run to Jezreel (I Kings 18:46). Once more, Ahab, who has been either passive or absent during much of the chapter, simply reacts to events. (Nelson, First and Second Kings (Interpretation: A Bible Commentary for Teaching & Preaching), 120)

The large faith generated from such a small sign has inspired many. James Joyce (1882-1941) titled the eighth story in his Dubliners collection “A Little Cloud” and the expression “Cloud Like a Man’s Hand” developed from this narrative (I Kings 18:41-45).

David L. Jeffrey (b. 1941) traces:

The expression is often used simply to portend the imminence of greater things. It is of little moment in medieval and Renaissance literature, but emerges to prominence in Protestant preaching of the Puritan tradition in connection with meditations on prayer “in faith believing” (see Matthew Poole [1624-1679]’s commentary in his Annotations upon the Holy Bible; also on James 5:7), and in Sunday sermons on Elijah and Elisha such as Cytherea reflects sorrowfully as she ponders being forced into marriage in Thomas Hardy [1840-1928]’s Desperate Remedies. (Jeffrey, A Dictionary of Biblical Tradition in English Literature, 148)

Elijah is able to see the great potential in such a small sign as he views the world with the eyes of faith ( Matthew 5:8; Ephesians 1:18). He takes action before the sign comes to fulfillment, instructing the king to get while the getting’s good (I Kings 18:44).

John W. Olley (b. 1938) describes:

Elijah is confident as he hears with the ears of faith: there is the sound of a heavy rain – but as yet no cloud (I Kings 18:41, 43). He expectantly commands the king to go up, eat and drink...that is, participate in the meal associated with the sacrifice, here signifying for Ahab a reaffirming of the covenant with Yahweh. (Olley, The Message of Kings (Bible Speaks Today), 177)

Gary Inrig (b. 1943) adds:

Elijah’s confidence that God would answer this prayer was so great that this was all the evidence he needed. He sent the servant to advise Ahab to head for home as quickly as possible, before the storm overtook him. Torrential rain after a drought presented the likelihood of swollen streams, mudslides, and flash floods that would make charioteering dangerous. (Inrig, I & II Kings (Holman Old Testament Commentary), 150)

Elijah’s faith does not merely lead to belief. It transforms into action.

When have you taken an action based upon your faith in an as yet unrealized occurrence? What action do you need to be taking in faith now? How do you know that a sign is from God? How much evidence do you need before acting upon a sign from God?

“Signs must be read with caution. The history of Christendom is replete with instances of people who misread the signs.” - Sheldon Vanauken (1914-1996), A Severe Mercy, p. 190

It’s All in the Hands (Exodus 17:9-13)

What did Moses do during the battle of Rephidim? Stayed on top of a hill holding up his hands with the rod of God in them (Exodus 17:9-12)

While wandering in the wilderness, Israel not only faces challenges from nature (Exodus 16:1-8, 9-36, 17:1-7) but also from new military rivals. The nascent nation’s first battle comes when the Amalekites ambush them at Rephidim (Exodus 17:8).

Presumably between gradual attacks, Moses instructs Joshua to piece together a makeshift army with the assurance that he would remain perched atop a hill holding the staff of God (Exodus 17:9). The Bible records that Moses’ posture was the deciding factor in a seesaw daylong battle (Exodus 17:11).

So it came about when Moses held his hand up, that Israel prevailed, and when he let his hand down, Amalek prevailed. (Exodus 17:11 NASB)

To ensure that Moses’ hands remain raised, he is propped up on a stone and realizing that six hands are better than two, Aaron and Hur hold his hands prostrate (Exodus 17:12). Israel wins the battle (Exodus 17:13).

The narrator leaves much to the imagination. Though both will play prominent roles later in the Exodus story, Joshua and Hur enter the biblical text for the first time with no introduction. The Amalekites also appear as a people for the first time (Genesis 14:7, 36:12). Not only is no introduction given them but no reason is given for their assault.

John Goldingay (b. 1942) speculates:

Exodus gives no reason for the attack. Perhaps they thought they could appropriate the Israelites’ flocks and herds. Living in the wilderness south of Canaan, perhaps they felt threatened by the Israelites’ advancing their way. Greed, resentment, and fear have often fueled anti-Semitism. But Exodus gives no reason and this underlines the link between the mystery of hostility to Israel and the Jewish people that has been a recurrent aspect of Israelite and Jewish experience. (Goldingay, Exodus and Leviticus for Everyone, 73)

The Amalekites, presumed to be a hostile nomadic tribe, are traditional enemies of Israel and they simply enter the story donned in their customary black hats (Judges 6:3-4; I Samuel 15:1-9, 27:8). They serve almost as stock characters in the Bible and are not referenced outside of it. The Israelites would later remember the attack as a cowardly affront to a vulnerable people (Deuteronomy 25:17-18). In appearing from seemingly out of nowhere, the text captures the unexpectedness of the attack felt by the original victims.

Perhaps the passage’s most glaring omission is that no explanation is given as to how Moses’ flagging equates to victory. The reader is left to speculate as to what he is doing or saying while raising his arms and why he is positioned high above the battlefield.

John I. Durham (b. 1933) notes that Moses’ position is conducive to his activity:

The reason for Moses’ position on the brow of the hill can be seen in what he does during the battle. Moses lifted his hands, in symbol of the power of Yahweh upon the fighting men of Israel, surely, but in some miraculous way Moses’ upraised hands became also conductors of that power. (Durham, Exodus (Word Biblical Commentary, Vol. 3), 236)

Military historian Richard A. Gabriel (b. 1942) does not find Moses’ isolation irregular for a military commander:

Here we see the ancient dictum that commanders must be seen by their soldiers to be effective. Egyptian pharaohs were always portrayed as leading their troops in battle, as was Alexander. Caesar, it was said, wore a red cloak so his men could easily identify him during battle, and both George S. Patton (who seriously contemplated wearing a red cloak!) and Irwin Rommel were both known for their presence on the battlefield in plain sight of their soldiers. (Gabriel, The Military History of Ancient Israel, 82)

The real question is not Moses’ placement but what his actions symbolize -what is he doing with his hands? Many explanations have been posited.

Brevard S. Childs (1923-2007) explicates:

Both Jewish and Christian commentators have been quick to assume that Moses’s stance was that of prayer. What else would he be doing? However, there is no indication whatever in the text which would confirm this. No words are spoken, but the battle is decided simply by the raising and lowering of his hands. The same effect results from Moses’ stance even when his weary arms are physically supported by others. Hugo Gressmann [1877-1927] and Georg Beer [1865-1946] have described the scene as magical, with Moses playing the role of cult magician. Additional parallels from the Ancient Near East have been suggested...Without discussing at length the validity of these extra-biblical parallels, certainly the Old Testament offers the closest parallel in the figure of Balaam (Numbers 22:1ff). He is hired to curse Israel, and the point of the narrative turns on the automatic effect of a curse (or a blessing) which, once it has been unleashed, continues relentlessly on its course. In Exodus 17 the hands are the instruments of mediating power, as is common throughout the Ancient Near East...This amoral element of the unleashing of power through an activity or a stance is still reflected in the story. Nor can it be rationalized away, as already in the Mekilta, by assuming that Moses’ role was essentially psychological. His uplifted hands encouraged the Israelites to exert themselves fully, whereas without the encouragement they slackened in battle. (Childs, The Book of Exodus: A Critical, Theological Commentary (The Old Testament Library), 314-15)

Nahum M. Sarna (1923-2005) admits:

The significance of this gesture is unclear. The hand, often the symbol of action and power, is also the instrument of mediation. The expression “the laying on of the hands” exemplifies this idea. Moses’ action might therefore be interpreted as a sort of mysterious focusing of super natural power on Israel. If so, it is noteworthy that Moses is here presented as being subject to ordinary human frailties, in possession of no superhuman or innate magical powers. Another interpretation, highly plausible, is that of Rashbam, according to which Moses held up a standard bearing some conspicuous symbol that signified the presence of God in the Israelite camp. (Sarna, The JPS Torah Commentary: Exodus, 95)

Peter Enns (b. 1961) summarizes:

Some commentaries suggest this is some sort of “magical” feat” performed by Moses, perhaps some power emanating from the staff. Others assign to Moses’ gesture a psychological explanation, that his raised hands are a sign of encouragement to the troops. Neither explanation seems satisfying...But can a better explanation be found?... No proposed explanation is problem-free. This problem is a classic example of what interpreters run into when attempting to explain a cryptic text. (Enns, Exodus (The NIV Application Commentary), 348)

Moses has raised his hands previously to produce miraculous results but not for an extended period (Exodus 9:22, 10:12, 14:16). Many have looked to the staff for answers as it is now called the “staff of God”, a term that has not been used since the item’s introduction in Exodus 4:20.

J. Gerald Janzen (b. 1932) describes:

Up to this point Moses’ use of the staff has been a simple matter of raising it and accomplishing the result, whether sign, plague, parting of the waters, or water from the rock. But this time the struggle is drawn out, to the point where Moses becomes so tired that from time to time he has to lower his arms...Interestingly...when Moses gets tired, the help does not come directly from God, but through Aaron and Hur, as each one supports one of Moses’s arms after seating him on a stone. What is this symbolism, of Moses seated on a stone, holding up his and God’s staff, and supported on both sides by Aaron and Hur? (Janzen, Exodus (Westminster Bible Companion), 122)

As Moses intervenes for the people and Aaron and Hur raise Moses’ hands, not their own, it is not surprising that many interpreters have seen this passage as an image of intercessory prayer.

Maxie D. Dunnam (b. 1934) comments:

The soldiers on the field of battle were not determining the issue of victory by themselves, but the intercessors on the mountain were playing an integral role. See that beautiful picture of those intercessors on the mountain in your imagination?...It’s a stirring picture—a picture of the Lord’s intercessor. (Dunnam, Exodus (Mastering the Old Testament), 214)

Many popular books on prayer prominently feature this story. In Too Busy Not To Pray, Bill Hybels (b. 1951) writes:

More than any other biblical passage, one story in the Old Testament has persuaded me that prayer yields significant results. It is found in Exodus 17:8-13...Moses stretches his arms toward heaven again and brings the matter to the Lord...Moses discovered that day that God’s prevailing power is released through prayer. (Hybels, Too Busy Not To Pray, 18-19)

In his book on intercessory prayer, Dutch Sheets (b. 1954) analyzes:

The victory was not decided by the strength or power of Israel’s army. If this had been the case, they would not have faltered when the staff was lowered. Nor was it a morale thing – they weren’t watching Moses for inspiration while in hand-to-hand conflict! An unseen battle in the heavenlies actually decided the outcome on the battlefield. And when the rod, representing the rule or authority of God, was lifted by the authorized leader of Israel, Joshua and the army prevailed. In other words, it was not power on the battlefield – though it was necessary – that was the deciding factor, but authority on the mountain. Authority is the key issue; power never had been. (Sheets, Intercessory Prayer: How God Can Use Your Prayers to Move Heaven and Earth, 190)

While the mechanics of how Moses’ arms correlated to victory are speculative, the text is clear that they did. In Israel’s first battle as a nation, the focus is on the hill, not the battlefield. The direction off stage upstages the actors on the stage. In modern sports terms, the camera is focused on the fans changing their posture or switching to their rally caps as it is the deciding factor in the contest. No exploits on the battlefield are remembered; only the result is recorded: victory.

How long can you hold up your arms? What would a national leader in Moses’ era have been expected to do during battle? Who is most responsible for the Israelites’ victory at Rephidim? Whose part in the story do you most relate to: the warriors, Aaron/Hur, Moses, Joshua? Who can you prop up spiritually when they are weakened? Who is praying for you? Where is God in this story?

God is not explicitly involved in this text. William H.C. Propp (b. 1957) acknowledges:

Unlike the previous wilderness episodes, Moses responds to the crisis without seeking divine instructions, at least so far as we are told. But he gives God proper credit in the end. (Propp, Exodus 1-18: A New Translation with Notes and Comments (Anchor Bible), 617)

Terence E. Fretheim (b. 1936) adds:

After Amalek starts the battle, the initiative for the defense of Israel is taken entirely by Moses, demonstrating the leadership role he has assumed. God does not become the subject of a sentence until Exodus 17:14 but is not uninvolved in the prior verses. (Fretheim, Exodus (Interpretation: A Bible Commentary for Teaching and Preaching), 192)

Despite not being referenced categorically, in Moses’ actions, there is little doubt that the battle is God’s. Douglas K. Stuart (b. 1943) comments:

Exodus 17:11 does not teach the efficacy of “prayer without ceasing” but rather the fact that Israelite holy war was God’s war. God reinforced this in the consciousness of Moses, Aaron, and Hur as well as the Israelite army by correlating the position of the staff with the fortunes of the army. It was important that the Israelites understand unmistakably that the only reason they could win against the Amalekites was that God was fighting for them, giving them the victory. The staff functioned in the case of this battle just as it had in the case of the plagues. As long as the staff of God was raised high, just as in the miraculous plagues and the miracle of the water from the rock immediately preceding, God’s decisive role was properly acknowledged symbolically and the army prevailed. When the staff was lowered (because Moses grew tired, as Exodus 17:12 makes explicit), “the Amalekites were winning.” Thus the staff portrayed God’s sovereignty in the consequences of battle. (Stuart, Exodus (The New American Commentary, Vol. 2), 398)

Thomas B. Dozeman (b. 1952) concludes:

The circumstances indicate that the power to wage holy war resides in the magical staff of God, not in Moses, and certainly not in Joshua or the Israelite warriors. The staff of God, is like a lightning rod at the summit of the hill channeling power down to the Israelites in the battle. When the antenna is down, the power ceases. The eventual weakness of Moses even to raise his arms underscores further that the power in the battle does not reside with him but with God. (Dozeman, Exodus (Eerdmans Critical Commentary), 395)

Victory did not rest in Moses’ hands, but rather in the hands that they represented.

If Moses is a conduit of God’s power, why is he himself weakened in channeling it (Exodus 17:12; Mark 5:30)? Does God still decide wars today? What do you need to relinquish and place into God’s hands?

“I have held many things in my hands, and I have lost them all; but whatever I have placed in God's hands, that I still possess.” - Martin Luther (1483-1546)