Psalms 78:20 Commentary: Doubting God After the Rock

Psalm 78 is a historical psalm, a teaching song that traces Israel’s rebellion in the wilderness. The events behind verse 20 combine two separate moments: the striking of the rock at Rephidim (Exodus 17:6) and the craving for meat at Taberah or Kibroth-hattaavah (Numbers 11). Cambridge Bible notes that the psalmist fuses these narratives to make a theological point rather than a strict chronology. In the Israelites’ mind, the miracle of water was impressive, but it did not prove God could solve the more complex problem of feeding a huge population with bread and meat in a land without grain or herds.

The term ‘bread’ (lehem) is the common word for food; ‘meat’ (she’er) means flesh, the kind of protein the people had enjoyed in Egypt. The desert offered none. Gill comments that the doubters may have argued that ‘light bread,’ the manna, was inadequate, they wanted substantial food. The word ‘behold’ (hen) introduces a contrast: yes, God struck the rock and water flowed (that much they conceded), but can He also (gam) give bread? The Hebrew particle gam emphasizes a climax: even if He did that, can He go further? The people limited God to what they had already seen, refusing to trust His unlimited power. This is the same spirit that tested God at Massah and Meribah (Exodus 17:7).

The consulted sources note no significant textual variants for Psalm 78:20. The Hebrew text is stable, with only minor differences in particle usage across manuscripts (e.g., the presence or absence of the conjunction ‘and’ before ‘torrents’). None of these affect the meaning of the verse.

In early Christian interpretation, the rock struck for water was seen as a type of Christ (1 Corinthians 10:4), and Israel’s doubt became a warning against hardening the heart (Hebrews 3:7-19). The verse was also used in monastic traditions to teach the danger of grumbling against God’s provision. During the Reformation, commentators like Calvin and the Geneva Bible emphasized Israel’s ingratitude as a mirror for the church’s own tendency to forget grace. In modern preaching, Psalm 78:20 is often paired with Exodus 17 and Numbers 11 to illustrate the cycle of complaint and provision, serving as a call to trust God for daily needs rather than testing Him.

Three-point outline

1. What God has already done, The rock was struck; water gushed out in torrents. This was a clear, visible miracle. Barnes remarks that it proved God’s power comprehensively, yet the people treated it as an isolated event.
2. What the people demanded, “Can he give bread also? Will he provide meat?” The questions are not innocent inquiries; they are challenges. The people essentially said: “That miracle does not count because we need this.”
3. What God did next, As verses 23-29 show, He did provide bread and meat, manna and quail. But the request came from a heart of unbelief, and judgment followed (vv. 30-31). The provision itself was a mercy, but the attitude revealed a deeper spiritual problem.

Five-point outline

1. The memory of mercy: God struck the rock, water flowed (v.20a).
2. The logic of unbelief: “Can he give bread? Can he provide meat?” (v.20b).
3. The selective focus: They admitted the water miracle but denied its implications.
4. The root sin: They believed not in God, nor trusted in His salvation (v.22).
5. The divine response: God gave them what they demanded, and then dealt with their rebellion.

Illustration hooks

• The one-time provision: A friend pays for a meal you need, but then you worry about tomorrow’s lunch, forgetting that the same friend is still with you.
• The “yes, but” logic: We acknowledge God helped us through a past crisis, but when a new and bigger problem appears, we think, “That was then, this is different.”
• Demanding a different kind of miracle: The Israelites had water, but they wanted bread and meat. Sometimes we dismiss what God provides because it doesn’t match our preferred deliverance.

Questions your congregation is asking

• Is it wrong to ask God for specific needs, like the Israelites asked for meat? (Scripture shows that the request itself wasn’t the sin, the demanding, doubting attitude was.)
• How can I trust God for a need He has never met before, when I’ve only seen Him meet smaller needs? (The answer lies in the character of God, not the size of the previous miracle.)
• Does God get angry when we express our doubts honestly? (Psalm 78 suggests that the anger was not at honest questioning but at the refusal to trust after repeated proof.)

This verse shows the human tendency to limit God based on past experience. The Israelites saw water flow from a rock, yet they questioned God’s ability to feed them. The sin was not asking for food, it was forgetting that the God who broke the rock could also break the bread. Discuss how this pattern shows up in your own life and how we can build trust on what God has already done. Use the questions below to guide your conversation.

Discussion questions

1. Read the verse aloud. What stands out to you about the way the people phrase their doubt? (“Can he give bread also?”)
2. Why do you think the miracle of water from the rock did not convince the people that God could also provide food? (See Barnes’ comment about unreasonable doubt.)
3. How does the surrounding context (Psalm 78:17-22) describe the root of Israel’s sin? What connection do you see between unbelief and complaining?
4. Have there been times when you acknowledged God’s past help but still doubted He would help with a new situation? What did that feel like?
5. Compare Exodus 17:6 (water from rock) with Numbers 11:18-23 (meat promised). What does each story teach about God’s character and our need to trust?
6. How can we remind ourselves of God’s faithfulness in concrete ways, so that past mercies strengthen present faith?
7. What is one area of your life right now where you need to move from “Can He?” to “He can and He will, in His way and time”?