The moral of the narrative is perhaps most clearly brought out in God's rejoinder to Moses, "Who maketh a man dumb or deaf, or seeing or blind? is it not I, the Lord?" Exodus 4.11. [7] Essays in Pentateuchal Criticism pages 47-53. =Aim.= The aim of this lesson should be to inculcate in the child faith in God's power and providence as revealed in Jewish history. The teacher should endeavor to make the child, through admiration of the heroism of Moses in attempting the apparently impossible in the service of God, feel with deep conviction that in His service, there can be no failure. He should try to get not only the child's intellectual assent to the idea that God can accomplish anything that He purposes, but he should arouse an emotional appreciation of that heroism begotten of faith which leads great men to undertake what would, to others, seem impossible. =Suggestions to the teacher.= Inasmuch as we wish to inspire in the child by means of this lesson, a faith in divine providence, we must guard against any attempt at rationalizing the miracles recorded in this and subsequent chapters. It is faith in God's power over nature and His use of this power in the interests of justice and righteousness that this lesson should teach, and no philosophic explanation can bring home this truth to the child so well as the simple, impressive narration of the miracle. A belief in the supernatural and transcendent power of God is essential in Judaism, and the miracle tale is the best means for emphasizing this doctrine. To be sure, it may be necessary at an older age, to modify and deepen one's conception of the miraculous, but the only means by which the child can conceive of God's transcendent power, providentially exercised, is through the simple, straight-forward narrative of miracles He performed. No attempt, for instance, should be made to identify the voice that addressed Moses from the burning bush with the voice of conscience. It must remain an objective voice. God's reply to Moses' inquiry as to His name, "I am that I am," is sometimes made the occasion for the teacher to indulge in an attempt at a philosophical discussion of the nature of God. We have already suggested in our interpretation of the passage that these words were probably never intended to convey such meaning. They are not an answer to the question, "What is Thy name?" but a refusal to answer it, and, therefore, it is not in place to interpret their significance as revealing anything of the nature of God. Apart from this consideration, however, such abstract theological discussion is above the mental power of the child and should always be avoided. It is, therefore, best to teach the verse without any comment, as this by itself tends to preserve the atmosphere of mystery and awe which envelopes the whole episode.