show to the people through this food, which had previously been altogether unknown to them, that man does not live by bread alone, that the power to sustain life does not rest upon bread only (Isa 38:16; Gen 27:40), or belong simply to it, but to all that goeth forth out of the mouth of Jehovah. That which “proceedeth out of the mouth of Jehovah” is not the word of the law, as the Rabbins suppose, but, as the word כּל (all, every) shows, “the word” generally, the revealed will of God to preserve the life of man in whatever way (Schultz): hence all means designed and appointed by the Lord for the sustenance of life. In this sense Christ quotes these words in reply to the tempter (Mat 4:4), not to say to him, The Messiah lives not by (material) bread only, but by the fulfilment of the will of God (Usteri, Ullmann), or by trusting in the sustaining word of God (Olshausen); but that He left it to God to care for the sustenance of His life, as God could sustain His life in extraordinary ways, even without the common supplies of food, by the power of His almighty word and will.
Verse 4
As the Lord provided for their nourishment, so did He also in a marvellous way for the clothing of His people during these forty years. “Thy garment did not fall of thee through age, and thy foot did not swell.” בּלה with מן, to fall off from age. בּצק only occurs again in Neh 9:21, where this passage is repeated. The meaning is doubtful. The word is certainly connected with בּצק (dough), and probably signifies to become soft or to swell, although בּצק is also used for unleavened dough. The Septuagint rendering here is ו̓פץכש́טחףבם, to get hard skin; on the other hand, in Neh 9:21, we find the rendering ὑποδήματα αὐτῶν ου' διεῤῥάγησαν, “their sandals were not worn out,” from the parallel passage in Deu 29:5. These words affirm something more than “clothes and shoes never failed you,” inasmuch as ye always had wool, hides, leather, and other kinds of material in sufficient quantities for clothes and shoes, as not only J. D. Michaelis and others suppose, but Calmet, and even Kurtz. Knobel is quite correct in observing, that “this would be altogether too trivial a matter by the side of the miraculous supply of manna, and moreover that it is not involved in the expression itself, which rather affirms that their clothes did not wear out upon them, or fall in tatters from their backs, because God gave them a miraculous durability” (Luther, Calvin, Baumgarten, Schultz, etc.). At the same time, there is no necessity to follow some of the Rabbins and Justin Martyr (dial. c. Tryph. c. 131), who so magnify the miracle of divine providence,
