Part 3 of the commentary on the Book of Numbers contains details of the preparation for the advance on Canaan. This part of Numbers includes details of a second numbering of Israel towards then end of their journey. Numbers here also deals with the rebellion of Korah and the claims of the daughters of Zelophehad. Included in this part of the Book of Numbers are the adventures and oracles of Balaam. For the third part of the Commentary on the Book of Numbers see below.
IS THERE SOMETHING IN THE BIBLE THAT PUZZLES YOU?
If so please EMail us with your question and we will do our best to give you a satisfactory answer.EMailus. (But preferably not from aol.com, for some reason they do not deliver our messages).
FREE Scholarly verse by verse commentaries on the Bible.
THE PENTATEUCH --- GENESIS ---EXODUS--- LEVITICUS --- NUMBERS --- DEUTERONOMY --- THE BOOK OF JOSHUA --- THE BOOK OF JUDGES --- THE BOOK OF RUTH --- SAMUEL --- KINGS --- I & II CHRONICLES --- EZRA---NEHEMIAH---ESTHER---PSALMS 1-73--- PROVERBS---ECCLESIASTES--- SONG OF SOLOMON --- ISAIAH --- JEREMIAH --- LAMENTATIONS --- EZEKIEL --- DANIEL --- --- HOSEA --- --- JOEL ------ AMOS --- --- OBADIAH --- --- JONAH --- --- MICAH --- --- NAHUM --- --- HABAKKUK--- --- ZEPHANIAH --- --- HAGGAI --- ZECHARIAH --- --- MALACHI --- THE GOSPEL OF MATTHEW ---THE GOSPEL OF MARK--- THE GOSPEL OF LUKE --- THE GOSPEL OF JOHN --- THE ACTS OF THE APOSTLES --- READINGS IN ROMANS --- 1 CORINTHIANS --- 2 CORINTHIANS ---GALATIANS --- EPHESIANS--- PHILIPPIANS --- COLOSSIANS --- 1 THESSALONIANS --- 2 THESSALONIANS --- 1 TIMOTHY --- 2 TIMOTHY --- TITUS --- PHILEMON --- HEBREWS --- JAMES --- 1 & 2 PETER --- JOHN'S LETTERS --- JUDE --- REVELATION --- THE GOSPELS & ACTS
E. FROM KADESH TO THE PLAINS OF MOAB (20-25).
The New Beginning.
After the gap for the wilderness wanderings and the return to Kadesh, there now follows a series of historical events which bring Israel to the plains of Moab, and point to a new beginning. History has become important again because Yahweh’s purposes were now going forward. The first section (20.1-21.20) deals with the view that was to be taken of the future. It was to be a move from dearth to abundance, from death to life. The old was being put to one side, so that the new could take over, although only under Yahweh.
The second section (21.21-25.18) will go on to deal with victory in the Wars of Yahweh including the defeat of the Amorites who had once defeated them (21.21-22.1 compare Deuteronomy 1.44), the ‘battle’ with Balaam (22.1-24.25), and their establishment in the plains of Moab having received their first instalment of Yahweh’s inheritance (25.1a) which results in the sin of Peor and deliverance by the hand of Phinehas, son of Eleazar (25.1b-25.18).
(I). The Turning Point of the Death of Miriam and Aaron and the Change in the High Priesthood, The Warning of the Demise of Moses, and The New Approach to Be Taken As They Enter The Land (20.1-21.20).
This section commences with shortage of water and terrible thirst, and the death of Miriam, with abundance of water then provided by Yahweh (20.1-13), but at the cost of the lives of Moses and Aaron. It then continues, with the death of Aaron and appointment of Eleazar coming between (20.22-29), and ends with even greater abundance of water (21.11-20). The new beginning produces new life. This is not just a coincidence. In a similar way in referring to the death of Aaron, and appointment of Eleazar in his place in Deuteronomy 10.6-7, Moses preceded the incident with being at the springs of the sons of Yaakan, leading on to Moserah (chastisement), and followed it with arrival at Yotbathah, a land of brooks of water. In both cases his aim was to bring out that through this change of High Priesthood, which no doubt filled the people with foreboding, God was going to bring even greater blessing. To a nation of farmers water was the essence of all that was good in life. It represented life itself (24.5-7).
In the same way Paul likened God’s continual provision of water to His people in the wilderness as like the availability to us today of the lifegiving, thirst quenching presence of Jesus Christ, He is our rock, once smitten (as at Massah and Meribah in Exodus 17.6), that we may drink of Him (see 1 Corinthians 10.4), and Jesus Himself continually pictured the provision of life by the Holy Spirit in terms of abundance of water (John 3.5; 4.6-15; 6.35; 7.37-39).
Analysis Of The Section.
The section is divided into sub-divisions which all follow the same pattern. The first deals with the death of Miriam (mrym) and the provision of the waters of Meribah (myrbh).
1). The Waters of Meribah (20.1-13).
This first incident occurred through lack of water (20.1-13). Shortage of water in the hot and dry desert and semi-desert areas had been a continuing problem throughout the wilderness experience and it raised its head here seemingly for the last time. Note the play on words. The passage begins with the death of Miriam (mrym) and the dearth of water at Kadesh (qdsh = holy place) and ends with the life-giving waters of Meribah (mrybh) and the ‘making holy’ (yqdsh) of Yahweh.
This can be analysed as follows:
We must now consider this in detail.
Miriam (mrym) Dies and The People Strive With Moses and Aaron For Lack of Water (20.1-3).
20.1 ‘And the children of Israel, even the whole congregation, came to the wilderness of Zin in the first month. And the people abode in Kadesh, and Miriam died there, and was buried there.’
In the first month the people arrived at the wilderness of Zin in the Negeb. (This was probably the first month of the fortieth year after leaving Egypt (33.38). But the emphasis here is on which month it occurred in). ‘The first month’ would spring out at those early readers. It was the anniversary of the Passover. It should have reinvigorated the people and encouraged their hopes of deliverance, but instead of the joyous celebration and hope that there should have been we find sorrow. As the people settled down in the area of Kadesh (qdsh) Miriam died there.
There was a threefold reason for the mention of this sad event. The first was because her death linked with the shortage of water. There was both physical drought and spiritual drought. This suggests what a blow this was to the people. In spite of her failings Miriam had been a provider of spiritual sustenance to the people, and they recognised that her death would bring them a spiritual drought along with the physical drought caused by lack of water.
The second was that Miriam’s death brought home God’s warning that the generation of which she was a member were doomed to die in the wilderness. It was even true of Miriam.
The third was because the death of Miriam (Mrym) would lead on both to the production of abundance of water at Meribah (Mrybh), and the ‘contention’ (mrybh) of God both with the people and with Moses and Aaron. When the people of God are at their lowest God always meets them with greater blessing, but in this case it would be a mixed blessing, for at Meribah Aaron and Moses would disqualify themselves from entry into the land. This would lead on to the death of Aaron, and more gloom. But it would then result in the appointment of a new High Priest and the even greater abundance of water at Beer (21.16). Man proposes, but God disposes, and then comes in with even greater blessing for His people. He is ever ready to begin with us again.
Life is like that. God takes our disappointments and uses them to make us look to Christ. There we find in Him sustenance and life. But how easily we can then spoil it all by allowing sin to take over, so hindering our growth.
The arrival at Kadesh (qdsh) would also result in the ‘sanctifying’ (yqdsh) of Yahweh ‘in (by) them’ (verse 13), that is either by the provision of the waters of Meribah or in the people. His holiness was revealed either by the demonstrating of His compassion in miraculously providing water or through His being made holy in the sight of His people.
As previously mentioned above this can be compared with Deuteronomy 10.6-7, where Moses preceded the death of Aaron with being at ‘the springs of the sons of Yaakan’, leading on to Moserah (chastisement), and followed it with arrival at ‘Yotbathah, a land of brooks of water’. The final emphasis of the whole section is therefore on blessing beyond Aaron.
The shortage of water at Kadesh (qdsh) is at first sight surprising. The site we identify with it included a group of oases in the Negeb. If that was the Kadesh mentioned here then this shortage of water may thus have been due to exceptionally dry conditions, to drought, which might explain why the people were so disappointed as a result of finding Kadesh short of water when they had been expecting an abundance. Coming to such a place with such expectation and finding insufficient water would have been a huge shock, which might well have precipitated their despair. Or it may be that it was another Kadesh (it was likely to be a common name), on the borders of Edom, where there was no water.
It will be noted that the name Kadesh (qdsh - holy place) relates to yqdsh in verse 13. It was to be the place where Yahweh was sanctified. God’s holiness and mercy is often revealed when an unexpected period of darkness is followed by a period of blessing.
20.2 ‘And there was no water for the congregation, and they assembled themselves together against Moses and against Aaron.’
At the same time as Miriam died there was a real shortage of water. The dry wilderness and the hot sun were beginning to tell. So instead of a feast of rejoicing all was gloom. Miriam had died and Kadesh had failed them. They had no song and they had no water. They were at a low ebb.
20.3 ‘And the people strove with Moses, and spoke, saying, “Would that we had died when our brethren died before Yahweh” ’
The result was that once more the people began to rebel. They sent their leaders to make their feelings known to Moses. They ‘strove’ (ryb) with Moses, and their cry expressed the wish that they had never survived to have to face up to such thirst. They rather wished that they had died when their fellow-tribesmen had died ‘before Yahweh’. Judgment would have been better than this. Their thoughts were seemingly still on the ground that had swallowed up Dathan and Abiram, and the fire that had destroyed the rebellious Levites (chapter 17). Better had it been for them, they said, if they had been included. Although it is equally possible that they were referring to those who had died throughout the period in the wilderness as having died ‘before Yahweh’, because it was seen as His specific judgment on them.
The People Complain Because They Have Been Dragged Away From the Pleasures of Egypt and Moses and Aaron intercede before Yahweh (20.4-6).
20.4 “And why have you (ye) brought the assembly of Yahweh into this wilderness, that we should die there, we and our beasts?”
Why, the only result of their still being alive was that they had now been brought to this wilderness to die along with all their herds and flocks. All was despair. Note their accusation. They claimed to be ‘the assembly of Yahweh’. And yet they had no trust in Yahweh to provide. They were simply using the idea in order to put Moses and Aaron in the wrong. They were trying to force home on Moses and Aaron the greatness of their failure. How could they bring ‘the assembly of Yahweh’ to such a pass. Did Moses and Aaron not realise that they were to be seen as completely to blame for their predicament and for letting down Yahweh’s holy people? It was they who had brought the assembly of Yahweh into the wilderness to die, when they could have been worshipping Yahweh in Egypt. They were responsible before Yahweh.
Such was their hypocrisy. Yet it was not only an accusation against Moses, it was an unspoken, backhanded accusation against Yahweh Himself. Moses had told them that they were His people, that they were ‘the assembly of Yahweh’, but now even He had brought them to die miserably here in the wilderness.
But they should have recognised that if they were the ‘assembly of Yahweh’ their disappointment would only be for a moment. If they would but look to Him in confident trust they would be doubly blessed, first by the joy of trusting in the darkness, and then by the equal joy of receiving blessing and experiencing God’s power when the water came.
20.5 “And why have you made us to come up out of Egypt, to bring us in to this evil place? It is no place of seed, or of figs, or of vines, or of pomegranates, nor is there any water to drink.”
Instead they were angry at the thought that they had been so well off in Egypt, and yet Moses had dragged them away from it! There they had had seed, and figs, and vines, and pomegranates, and above all plenty of water. To listen to them you would have thought that life in Egypt had been a bed of roses. But their main point was that Moses had promised a land of ‘milk and honey’, of seed, and figs, and vines and pomegranates, and that this evil place in which they found themselves was the very opposite. At least in Egypt they had had something. This was a place of total dearth and barrenness. And even Miriam was dead so that the song had gone from their hearts.
And it should be noted that this was the new generation in which Moses had pinned such hopes, and for whom God had such great plans. But they had had thirty eight years in the wilderness and hope had grown dim. They were beginning to despair of any prospects for the future. Hope deferred was making the heart sick (Proverbs 13.12).
20.6 ‘And Moses and Aaron went from the presence of the assembly to the door of the tent of meeting, and fell on their faces, and the glory of Yahweh appeared to them.’
The reaction of Moses and Aaron was to leave the assembly and approach the door of the Tent of meeting. That is always a good move to make in a crisis. And there they fell on their faces, ‘and the glory of Yahweh appeared to them’. He had not deserted them. He was still the same as ever. He does not change. It is we who change.
There comes a time in most of our lives when we have to face the dearth in the wilderness. It is then that the test of our faith comes. Will we grumble and look back and wish we had never been converted? Or will we approach the door of the Tent of meeting that we might see the glory of God? For if we do this latter we can be sure that soon we will again begin to see His wondrous working on our behalf.
Yahweh Promises Water From A Rock At The Voice of Moses’ Command (20.7-8).
Yahweh’s response was gracious and generous. He recognised the strain under which His people were, and He responded accordingly. There was no hint of criticism in that response. He was ready to meet His people’s needs. He recognised the disappointment that they had received on arriving at Kadesh. And he knew that, unlike their fathers, they had not recently received good reports of the land. They had grounds for discouragement. So He was eager to encourage them, and at a word of command from Moses, to provide them with abundance of water. He was all compassion.
It should therefore have become a time of abundant blessing for all, a time when all experienced God in a way that would never be forgotten. But it would not be so for Moses and Aaron. There is no indication at this stage of the devastating event that would soon follow, an event that would blight Moses’ final days. But those who would serve God and be used by Him have to follow in the way of obedience, and must recognise that to fail to do so can only result in loss. While God was patient and understanding, Moses and Aaron were sadly less so. It was in fact in its own way an indication that they needed to be replaced. Yet as the future would reveal, this event probably raised Moses from the depths to which he had sunk to a new spiritual level. Without it his career might well have been over. He learned again that he was the servant of Yahweh, not the lord of Israel, a lesson all God’s leaders have to keep in mind.
20.7 ‘And Yahweh spoke to Moses, saying,’
Once again we have confirmed that we are dealing with words spoken to Moses by God.
20.8 “Take the rod, and assemble the congregation, you, and Aaron your brother, and speak you (ye) to the rock before their eyes, that it give forth its water. And you shall bring forth to them water out of the rock. So you shall give the congregation and their cattle drink.”
Patiently God prepared to give His people an indication of the power of His word. They would see what Yahweh could do using but the voice of His servants, and He would from it receive great glory. He would be ‘sanctified’, set apart as the Holy One, the unique and peerless One, in their eyes. And the people would gain great assurance in readiness to face the future. And they would see that all it would require was a word. They would go forward confident in the One Who spoke and it was done. They would be reminded of how when God had spoken through His word the world came into being (Genesis 1).
‘Take the rod.’ This was possibly the one Moses had used in Egypt through which such wonders had been done. Or it may have been the one which had budded revealing Aaron’s authority as High Priest. Or it may have been a specific one which revealed Moses’ status. Certainly it was the one that was the sign of Moses’ authority from Yahweh. This in itself was a significant action. To take the rod, the symbol of Moses’ authority received from God, was to declare to the people that they were about to act on the authority of Yahweh. It was a symbol not a weapon.
Then they were to assemble all the congregation in order that they might see the great thing that their God was going to do. He was going to give them abundant water in the wilderness at the spoken word of His servant acting in Yahweh’s name.
‘Speak you (ye) to the rock before their eyes, that it give forth its water. And you shall bring forth to them water out of the rock. So you shall give the congregation and their cattle drink.’ The instructions were quite clear. In the eyes of the whole congregation Moses and Aaron were to speak to the rock which would produce water. They were to bring forth water from the rock with a word. In this they would reveal that they were the favoured servants of Yahweh. And there would be sufficient for all to drink, both men and cattle. So would God be magnified and the faith of the people strengthened. The future would suddenly become bright again. By the word of Yahweh the water would gush forth, and they would recognise that He and He alone was the One to Whom they could always look with full confidence, even when there appeared to be no water.
Before the Reed Sea he had lifted up his rod and the sea had parted. Here he would lift up his rod and speak and water would gush forth. In its own way it would be a repeat of the Reed Sea miracle.
Moses Strikes The Rock In Anger and Water Gushes Out (20.9-11).
But Moses and Aaron were seething with anger. They had had enough of these treacherous people. First it had been their fathers, and now it was them. They were almost reluctant to act to provide the water. They considered that the people did not deserve it. But what they failed to consider was their own attitude. What they did not realise was that by their behaviour they were forfeiting their own right to lead the people of God, and that God could see it. Not only Aaron, but Moses also, had come to a low ebb. They were no longer fit to lead.
20.9 ‘And Moses took the rod from before Yahweh, as he commanded him.’
Outwardly all seemed well. Moses obeyed Yahweh’s commandment and took the rod ‘from before Yahweh’. That it was essentially Yahweh’s rod that he used was well recognised by the people. But in taking it from before Yahweh he ought to have recognised how obediently he should have used it. It was not given to him for the glory of Moses. He was within the sphere of God’s commands, and it was intended to be for the glory of God. Even the rock would recognise the authority symbolised by that rod. The Creation would gladly respond to its Creator. But it was to be through the word of power, not through ill-will and violence.
20.10-11 ‘And Moses and Aaron gathered the assembly together before the rock, and he said to them, “Listen now, you rebels. Shall we bring you forth water out of this rock?” And Moses lifted up his hand, and smote the rock with his rod twice, and water came forth abundantly, and the congregation drank, and their cattle.’
But in the eyes of all the people, the whole assembly, the two leaders, instead of revealing the gracious power and provision of Yahweh, castigated the people, calling them rebels, and then pointed to themselves as the providers of what was to come. ‘Shall we bring you forth water?’ And then reluctantly and peevishly Moses, such was his lack of control, struck the rock twice with ‘his’ rod. What should have been a glorious revelation of Yahweh’s power and goodness and authority, and have enhanced Moses reputation as the servant of Yahweh, became a petty display of temper and highhandedness against God’s express command. Moses and Aaron had taken over from, and misrepresented, Yahweh.
Apart from Moses’ anger the people might not have known that anything was wrong. They were not party to God’s commands. What they heard was their leaders’ accusation of rebellion. What they saw was Moses striking the rock twice with the rod of God, and the water pouring out. And they rejoiced and hastened to drink.
But God saw something very different. He saw two men who were taking God’s very symbol of authority and wildly misusing it, appropriating Yahweh’s authority to themselves and in the process wholly misrepresenting Him. He heard anger that should have been compassion. He saw resentment that should have been love. He witnessed the unbelievably arrogant behaviour of these two who claimed to be leaders and to represent Him. He heard the claim that the water was being brought forth by Moses and Aaron. And He saw Moses take His rod and with it disobediently smite the rock, not once but twice. We might almost suggest that He could not believe His eyes. It was as though all the disobedience of the people was being lived out by these two men. They had got above themselves.
The water did come. The people were satisfied. But God was very ‘angry’ indeed. His servants had totally failed Him. They had proved themselves unfit for His service. They were no longer suited to the task ahead.
Yahweh Complains at Moses and Aaron Because They Have Not Sanctified Him in the Eyes of Israel and Punishes Them by Exclusion from The Land (20.12).
20.12 ‘And Yahweh said to Moses and Aaron, “Because you did not believe in me, to sanctify me in the eyes of the children of Israel, therefore you shall not bring this assembly into the land which I have given them.” ’
God then made clear to them how desperately wrong their behaviour had been. It was not so much the people who were in the wrong, and who were rebels, it was Moses and Aaron. They, His trusted leaders, had flouted His will and disobeyed Him. They had demonstrated that they no longer willingly did His will. They had shown total lack of control and a totally wrong attitude towards the people. They had dared to misuse the sacred rod which had come from ‘before Yahweh’, the instrument of His authority and of His Name, which to take in the hand indicated that they were the especial chosen of Yahweh. And they had shown that they themselves were no longer fitted to lead the people of God into the land, that they could misuse the holy. It was a wonder that they were not struck down on the spot as others had been before them (16.35; Leviticus 10.1-2).
Sadly what had been apparent about the fathers of these people at the beginning of the thirty eight years was now equally apparent of Moses and Aaron at the end. It had become apparent that they would not be able to cope with the entry into the land. They had excluded themselves. They were no longer fitted for it, and it would have to be made the responsibility of someone else.
For instead of performing the wonder with a word as they were commanded they had done it by twice smiting the rock. They had forgotten themselves. They had overlooked who and what they were, servants of God from whom obedience was required. They had misused the rod of God and the authority that had been given to them. Instead of demonstrating His gracious power, they had revealed reluctance of spirit. Instead of showing His lovingkindness they had revealed anger. The people had gained the impression that Yahweh resented giving them water, and that the gift was in the end due to the rod in Moses’ hand, which he could use as he pleased, and not to Yahweh Himself. Why the claim had even been made that it was ‘they’ who had produced the water. It was almost unbelievable.
Perhaps also He knew that Moses was in such a state that he had not fully believed that the water would come out with only a word. That he had struck the rock in a kind of unbelief, remembering the previous incident at another Meribah (Exodus 17.1-12). It demonstrated that Moses’ faith was no longer up to the task ahead. He was no longer obedient. He was not listening carefully. He was doing his own thing. Whatever it was these two men had marred the image that God was seeking to represent. And it had been because of their lack of faith. So God would now need to seek a new leader for the entry into the land, one who would be obedient to His will, and would trust Him and obey Him fully.
It is the great danger for all Christian leaders that they can begin to think that God’s work is in their own hands. They can begin almost to think that they can choose to do whatever they want, that God is subject to their whim. And even the greatest can wane in their behaviour and faith, and begin to magnify themselves. It is one of the greatest dangers facing Christian leaders. It is then that they have to be set aside to be replaced by those more trusting and obedient. God will not give His glory to another. While Moses was meek, God glorified him. Now he had become overbearing, God would replace him.
Note the accusation. ‘Because you did not believe in me, to sanctify me in the eyes of the children of Israel.’ It was their attitude towards Yahweh that was at fault, an attitude that was far worse than the people’s. They may have been justified in their view of the people, but they were not justified in their attitude towards God’s orders. And that attitude had resulted in their totally misrepresenting God, and reducing the presentation of His glory, and violating the rod of Yahweh. Moses and Aaron had an attitude problem, and they had suggested that Yahweh had one as well.
‘Therefore you shall not bring this assembly into the land which I have given them.’ The land was only available for those who would trust and obey God. That had been the theme right from the beginning. Thus the lesson had to come over strongly that those who would not trust and obey could not enter the land, whoever they were. That this gave Moses a huge jolt is unquestionable (Deuteronomy 1.37; 4.21-22). But his exclusion from the land was certain from that moment on. And yet he undoubtedly became a humbler and a better man for it, and learned the humility that would enable him to better prepare the people for that entry, as Deuteronomy reveals. In his diminished dedication God had had mercy on him. Without this lesson he may well have had to be replaced earlier. And as a result, while he could not enter the land, he was able to possess it with his eyes. But in the end even Moses was only a man.
Another at another time would endure a ‘contradiction of sinners against Himself’ (Hebrews 12.3). He too would be faced with the question of obedience to the will of God in the light of an ungrateful people. He too would be tested to the very edge of man’s ability to cope. But in His case He would reply, ‘not my will but yours’ (Mark 14.36). And through full obedience to God’s will in the face of all provocation He would be proved fit to be a sacrifice for the sins of the whole world, thus demonstrating that He was not only a man but God’s Instrument in the fulfilling of His will (see especially Hebrews 10.5-10).
The Place is Called the Waters of Meribah (mrybh) Because ‘the Children of Israel’ Strove (ryb) There with Yahweh and He Was Sanctified (yqdsh) In Them (20.13).
20.13 ‘These are the waters of Meribah, because the children of Israel strove with Yahweh, and he was sanctified in them.’
And the waters were given the name Meribah, which means ‘contention’ (rib = quarrel, complaint). The same name had been given at an earlier incident at the beginning, soon after the departure from Egypt, when the people had also there contended with Moses because of lack of water. Thus the children had repeated what their fathers had done before them. The repetition of the name was probably deliberately in order to bring out that very fact. Moses wanted the people to recognise that they were following in their fathers’ footsteps, and that they were behaving little differently from their fathers. There had been a previous Rephidim (contention with God, resulting in blessing), and the people had gone on to disaster. Now they had their own Rephidim. They too had been contentious, and yet had received blessing. Let them take warning from it not to go on as their fathers had done. The repetition indicated a new beginning for God’s people. Now they could go forward if they had learned their lesson.
But the two incidents were clearly quite different. In Exodus 17.1-7 only Moses was involved, and the ‘miracle’ was performed before the elders of Israel only. There it was out of sight of the people. Here it was deliberately in front of all the people. Furthermore there Moses was told to strike the rock, which he did obediently, not in anger. Indeed the smiting was deliberately drawn attention to, and specifically stated to be similar to the smiting of the Nile (Exodus 7.20), and thus as bringing glory to God. The striking revealed Yahweh’s power. Here the striking of the rock is portrayed as nearly destroying all that God was attempting to reveal. At that stage the people had needed to recognise that the God of the Exodus was working though Moses in the same way as He had before in Egypt. But here, after all that had gone before, the people had needed a new lesson, the lesson that God was with them and would graciously provide for them through His word. Here He had wanted His peoples’ eyes turned from Moses to Himself. And that was where Moses had failed. Considering what had happened to Nadab and Abihu (Leviticus 10.1-2) for the misuse of holy things Moses might well have been smitten down. To hold the rod of God is an awesome thing. It puts someone under a huge responsibility. It was only because he was so favoured in God’s sight, and because it had been more unwitting than highhanded, that his punishment was less.
‘And he was sanctified in them.’ Moses and Aaron had failed Him, but they had not prevented His final aim. As a result of receiving the ‘waters of contention’ (called such because the people ‘contended’ with Him there) He was sanctified in the eyes of the people. They did recognise in it a wonderful provision from Yahweh. And in view of their contentiousness He was even more sanctified as a result of His graciousness being revealed in the face of their contention.
Perhaps we may conclude this section by again drawing attention to the word play on Miriam (mrym) and Meribah (mrybh). The section commences with the death of mrym and ends with the waters of mrybh. This is surely deliberate. It indicates the passing away of the old order. First in the death of Miriam, and then in embryo in the coming death of Aaron and Moses. For at the waters of mrybh not only did the people quarrel (ryb) with God, but God quarrelled with Moses and Aaron. But it also indicates that after death came life through the waters. The advance had begun. But they had to learn stage by stage that it would not always be straightforward.
EXCURSUS Note on Kadesh.
In the time of Abraham a place called En Mishpat was seen as later called Kadesh (Genesis 14.7), which was ‘in the country of the Amalekites’, a wilderness tribe. In Numbers 20.16 a Kadesh is declared to be a city on the border of the Edom (compare Kedesh in Joshua 15.23). One problem that we have here is that we do not know how far the borders of Edom extended, but it is very doubtful if they reached to Kadesh-barnea. Secondly it may well be that this Kadesh was called Kadesh (qdsh - holy place) by Israel, simply because that was where Yahweh was sanctified in the eyes of Israel (verse 13). The names are given so that the people of Israel can identify the places. Most places around that area would have different names to different peoples, each identifying them in their own terms. It is doubtful how many places, if at all, would have standard names. However, a Kadesh is mentioned in Genesis 16.14; 20.1, thus the name for at least one site appears to come from earlier times.
Kadesh-barnea is not referred to as such until 32.8; 34.4; Deuteronomy 1.2, 19; 2 14; 9.23; Joshua 10.41; 15.3 and was the Kadesh from which the scouts went out and to which they returned. ‘Barnea’ may well have been added simply to distinguish it because it was well known that there was another Kadesh. Kadesh-barnea may, in fact, be identifiable with ‘Ain Qudeirat, where a small fortress would later be built in 10th century BC, and it is possible that it was originally called Barnea. It is noteworthy that it is not mentioned in the itinerary in Chapter 33 until the second visit in verse 36, whereas an earlier visit must have been made around verses 17-18, as mentioned in 13.26 and in the above references. Perhaps then it was called Rithmah. Or Rithmah may have been a more important landmark, only being superseded because of the events chapter 20. There were a number of oases around Kadesh-barnea. In view of the meaning of the name, ‘holy place’, it is not inconceivable that there were a number of Kadeshes. End of Excursus.
2). The Appeal to Edom (20.14-21).
The incident at Meribah was followed by an appeal to Edom to be allowed to use the King’s Highway through their territory. Compare here Deuteronomy 2.4-8. The march on Yahweh’s land had begun in earnest. But in the event they were required to skirt the territory and were not allowed through. God’s presence with His people was not a guarantee that they would face no problems, only that He would help them to overcome them in one way or the other. The reference to Kadesh being on the borders of Edom would support the idea that this was a different Kadesh (‘holy place’) from Kadesh-barnea as the latter was in the heart of the Negeb.
This incident was firstly a reminder to Israel of the obstacles that lay ahead. They had to recognise that they were not going to be welcomed in their project. Even a brother tribe refused them assistance. It would be tougher later. But secondly it stressed to Israel that they were not there as aggressors and seekers of spoil. The Canaanites (including the Amorites) were there for the taking for Yahweh’s judgment was coming on them. But with neighbouring tribes they were to seek peace not aggression. This was stressed in Deuteronomy 2 in respect of Edom, Moab and Ammon.
All Christians have to face constant attack. Sometimes, as here, the way to fight it is to avoid the place of testing, and go around it. ‘Abstain from every form of evil’ (1 Thessalonians 5.22). ‘Flee youthful desires’ (1 Timothy 2.22). In the battle of the flesh avoidance is often a primary weapon. At other times when the battle is in the mind flight is of little use, then we have to stand and fight, ‘take to you the whole armour of God that you may be able to withstand in the evil day, and having done all, to stand’ (Ephesians 6.13), just as Israel would be required to stand against the enemies of God, against Arad and the Canaanites (Numbers 21.1-3). In the battle of the mind we cannot flee, but must stand firm on the promises of God, as Jesus did during His temptations.
Analysis.
The Request To Be Allowed Through Peaceably (20.14-17).
20.14-15 ‘And Moses sent messengers from Kadesh to the king of Edom, Thus says your brother Israel, You know all the trouble that has befallen us, how our fathers went down into Egypt, and we dwelt in Egypt a long time, and the Egyptians dealt ill with us, and our fathers.’
It was to Moses’ credit that having learned that he himself would not be allowed to enter the land there was no hint of his refusing to go forward so as to bring God’s people there. We are probably to see from this that he recognised how grievously he had been at fault. He had learned the lesson of obedience. It would mean that his usefulness could continue. Indeed that lesson came in useful in this next incident. Without it he might well have smitten Edom with the rod of God. But he had learned obedience.
Here (at God’s command - Deuteronomy 2.2-7) he sent messengers to Edom with just that advance in mind. Note the contrast of the description here with 20.5. This description was the truer picture of what life in Egypt had been like.
The words in which Moses expressed his request were typical of a diplomatic letter of the time as witnessed at El Amarna, Alalakh and Mari. It was addressed to the king of Edom, contained the formula ‘thus says’ (compare 22.16), provided the identity of the sender, claimed kinship, outlined their problem, and made a plea for response.
He pointed out that Israel were brothers to Edom (Jacob was Esau’s brother, and Esau had established himself in Edom), and reminded them that Canaan was their real home. They were not coming to make trouble. They were going home. They had a right to be on the way there. He also sought to draw on Edom’s sympathy by reminding them how Israel had, as they well knew, suffered in Egypt, and how they had been treated. This knowledge of what Edom was aware of may well suggest that he knew that the two tribal groups had maintained contact with each other through the years.
His words are also an almost incidental confirmation of what we know of Israel’s history, and are in conformity with the Exodus account. They ring true.
20.16 ‘And when we cried to Yahweh, he heard our voice, and sent an angel, and brought us forth out of Egypt. And, behold, we are in Kadesh, a city in the furthest extent of your border.’
Moses’ aim was to indicate why they, with such a large force, were almost on Edom’s borders, and explained precisely where they were camped. He knew that Edomite scouts would already have reported back their presence. He wanted it known that they had no ill intent. They were there because Yahweh had heard their pleas, and had sent His angel (ml‘k - a messenger) to bring them out of Egypt. They were thus there on Yahweh’s instructions. His message also contained the gentle hint that not to assist them would be to go against Yahweh. And all knew what that entailed for news of His activities would have gone before them (Exodus 15.14-16; Numbers 14.14; Joshua 2.9).
20.17 ‘Let us pass, I pray you, through your land. We will not pass through field or through vineyard, neither will we drink of the water of the wells. We will go along the king’s highway. We will not turn aside to the right hand nor to the left, until we have passed your border.’
So he made the reasonable plea that they be allowed to pass along the King’s Highway. That was a recognised trade route that led through Edom towards the land on the east of the Jordan and up towards Damascus. Its length was marked by early bronze age settlements and fortresses, some of which are know to have been occupied at this time. It was called the King’s Highway, partly because it was the way used by travelling kings and was suitable for the travel of larger bodies of people.
He promised that while passing along it Israel would be totally circumspect. They would use their own provisions and would not trespass on Edomite property or springs. They would pass right through Edom without straying right or left.
Edom’s Refusal and Threat (20.18).
20.18 ‘And Edom said to him, You shall not pass through me, lest I come out with the sword against you.’
Edom’s reply was a firm ‘no’. If they did seek to pass through they would be met with the sword. Edom’s armies would positively resist them. Edom were taking no chances with such a large body of people.
Patiently Israel Tried Again and Laid Out The Terms of Peaceable Passage (20.19).
20.19 ‘And the children of Israel said to him, We will go up by the highway; and if we drink of your water, I and my cattle, then will I give its price. Let me only, without doing anything else, pass through on my feet.’
The messengers were again sent to the king of Edom, on behalf of the whole of Israel. But the change to the first person indicates the hand of Moses. The promise was repeated that they would go through peaceably, and it was added that they would pay for anything that they required. All they wanted was passage through.
Edom Still Refuse and Make Clear Their Threat (20.20)
20.20 ‘And he said, You shall not pass through. And Edom came out against him with much people, and with a strong hand.’
The king of Edom again refused permission, but recognising that his refusal might result in warlike action from the advancing host, moved to his borders with a display of strength, at the points where he knew they might make the attempt. If they wanted to come through, they would have to fight every step of the way. With its mountain passes Edom was fairly easy to defend in that area.
The Request Being Refused, Israel Turned Away Peaceably (20.21)
20.21 ‘Thus Edom refused to give Israel passage through his border, for which reason Israel turned away from him.’
Moses was clearly determined not to antagonise a related tribe. He possibly recognised how sensible it would be to maintain good relations with those who lived on the borders of Canaan. They would not want them interfering during the invasion. Furthermore he was under Yahweh’s strict instructions (Deuteronomy 2.4-6). And he had learned at Meribah that he must not misuse the rod of Yahweh. War would be a waste of time as Israel were forbidden to occupy the land of a brother tribe, a tribe who themselves had received the land from Yahweh. By this the point was got over to the people that the land that Yahweh did wish them to occupy was specific and fixed. They were there on Yahweh’s business. They should therefore receive a certain amount of assurance from the fact that Yahweh had previously given land in the area, whose inhabitants were still in safe occupation of it, and were protected by Him.
Thus Moses was recognising (and being made to recognise) that they were not there as aggressors to take into possession any land they liked, but were there under the command of God to take only the land that He had given them.
However, the blunt statement in verse 21 contains a double entendre. Had Edom been more helpful it might have made a great difference to relations in the future. As it was Israel ‘turned away from Edom’. The opportunity of a lasting friendship had been lost so that later Israel would have no hesitation in invading Edom (24.18). But in the context the main point was that they did not seek to force their way through. They took another route. Note how the historicity of this whole incident is confirmed in Judges 11.16-18.
3). The Death of Aaron (20.22-29).
This advance forward was evidence of a new beginning. This was confirmed by the fact that as a result of his sins over the Cushite wife of Moses (12.11) and at Meribah (20.12) Aaron was to die and be replaced by his son who would introduce the new era (35.25, 28). Note that apart from the final verse the incident is not described in terms of being a sad occasion, although it was for Aaron for he had failed to achieve the final goal, but simply as a solemn moving forward of God’s purposes. However, God would still achieve His final goal, but He would do it without Aaron. We must beware of ever thinking that we are indispensable, with the result that we grow careless. For God can soon strip us down.
Analysis.
Aaron Was to Die and Not Enter The Land (20.22-29).
20.22 ‘And they journeyed from Kadesh: and the children of Israel, even the whole congregation, came to mount Hor.’
They journeyed from the place where Yahweh had been revealed as holy in their eyes, and skirting round Edom came to Mount Hor, whose whereabouts is unknown. Edom was in mountainous country. Mount Hor was ‘on the way of Atharim’ (21.1). We do not have enough information to know which route round Edom Israel took, but this may suggest the western border in view of the forthcoming clash with the Canaanites (assuming the order to be chronological, which it may not be. It may be more in theological order. But see 33.40 which also supports the chronological order).
20.23 ‘And Yahweh spoke to Moses and Aaron in mount Hor, by the border of the land of Edom, saying,’
This would be the last time that Yahweh spoke to ‘Moses and Aaron’. Soon Aaron would be no more. We are simply told that Mount Hor was by the border of the land of Edom. Elsewhere we learn that it was near Moserah (Deuteronomy 10.6), but that is also unidentifiable. This is not surprising. Different names would be given to places by different peoples, and this was not settled land. But both were clearly identifiable at the time of writing. Moserah (chastisement) was not necessarily the same place as Moseroth (plural of Moserah - strong chastisement) (33.30-31). See commentary on Deuteronomy 10.6. Indeed it would seem that Moses (or the people) liked to give duplicate names (as with Meribah) in order to back up Yahweh’s repeated lessons. The giving of the name would bring to mind what had happened preciously. It was a wise teaching technique.
20.24 “Aaron shall be gathered to his people; for he shall not enter into the land which I have given to the children of Israel, because you (ye) rebelled against my word at the waters of Meribah.’
The time had come for the death of Aaron as chastisement (moserah) for his failures. After the failure of Moses and Aaron at ‘the waters of Meribah’ there had to be a new beginning, although even now it was not yet time for Moses to be replaced. But it was now time for Aaron’s replacement to take over. It was the next step in the new beginning.
However, it should be noted that neither Moses nor Aaron were ‘struck down’. Both died with dignity. God did not overlook their years of faithful service. Being ‘gathered to his fathers’ indicated proper burial, and that he was not dying under God’s judgment. He was joining the faithful who had gone before (Genesis 25.8, 17; 35.29; 49.33).
Yet in all this it was made clear that what was happening was within the will of Yahweh. It was not to be seen as a disaster but as Yahweh’s next step forward.
Aaron Was To Be Stripped of His Garments on Mount Hor and Eliezer, His Son, Appointed (20.25-26).
It is apparent from what is described that Aaron had ascended the mountain in his High Priestly regalia. For this was a solemn ceremonial in which one High Priest was replaced by another.
20.25-26 “Take Aaron and Eleazar his son, and bring them up to mount Hor, and strip Aaron of his garments, and put them on Eleazar his son. And Aaron shall be gathered to his people, and shall die there.”
Moses was therefore commanded to take Aaron and Eleazar up into Mount Hor, where Aaron was to be stripped of his High Priestly garments which were then to put on his son Eleazar who was to be the new High Priest. Such a lofty place was seen as bringing men nearer to God, but had the advantage of not being too public. Aaron was to be allowed to be replaced in quiet and private dignity. And it was to be the place where he would die and be buried. It was a reminder that the High Priesthood did not pass at the will of man but at the will of Yahweh.
20.27 ‘And Moses did as Yahweh commanded: and they went up to mount Hor in the sight of all the congregation.’
So in accordance with Yahweh’s commandment (a constant stress throughout the Pentateuch) Moses took Aaron and Eleazar into the mountain.
Yet to some extent the people were being made aware that some change was taking place for they were aware of their entry into the mountain. It was not something done in secret. However, they were used to the fact that when Moses took men into a mountain they would have a special revelation of God (Exodus 24.1-2, 9-11) and that it was not a place for them to be, and they waited patiently for their return.
20.28 ‘And Moses stripped Aaron of his garments, and put them on Eleazar his son; and Aaron died there on the top of the mount, and Moses and Eleazar came down from the mount.’
And there in the mountain Moses took off from Aaron his High Priestly garments and put them on his son. Provision would undoubtedly have been made for this to happen with all decency. Indeed the likelihood is that both were wearing a similar priestly undergarment and that it was only the top garments that were exchanged. But the change signified to both that Eleazar was now taking Aaron’s place as High Priest of the whole of Israel. A new epoch was beginning (35.25, 28). And there Aaron died after a long and useful life and there he joined his fathers.
Verses 35.25, 28, 32 make clear that the death of the High Priest in some way counters the defilement of the land by the innocent shedding of blood. The High Priest represented the whole people. Thus his death may have been seen as having an atoning significance for innocent failure. Through it the land may have been seen as being cleansed from the shedding of innocent blood through the necessary death of a representative. It may suggest that in the High Priest Israel as it were died and was reborn. But this idea is not specifically stated, is never suggested and does not appear elsewhere. So it may rather be that it was seen as a carrying out of the principle of a life for a life. That was why until a death of his representative had take place the slayer had to remain in the city of refuge. Until there had been a balancing death the man in the city of refuge could not be free. This seems to be the main principle in mind (see 35; Exodus 21.12-14; Deuteronomy 19.2-13). Compare how when a slaying was discovered where the killer was unknown, an animal’s slaughter had to take place (Deuteronomy 21.4). And then there was no suggestion of sacrifice, it was not offered sacrificially, although legal forgiveness did ensue (Deuteronomy 21.8-9). What was, however, certain was that the High Priest’s death was seen as the end of an epoch.
In the same way the death of our Great High Priest, our Lord Jesus Christ, brings legal forgiveness for the sin of all who are His (compare Galatians 3.10-13). As our representative He died where we should have died. He was both dying priest and dying sacrifice (see Hebrews 1.3; 2.17-18; 4.14-16; 5.5-10; 6.20; 7.26-28; 8.6; 9.11-12, 15, 24; 10.12-14, 21; 12.24, where the High Priesthood is again and again seen as finding perfect fulfilment in Him).
20.29 ‘And when all the congregation saw that Aaron was dead, they wept for Aaron thirty days, even all the house of Israel.’
When Moses and Eleazar descended from the mountain the people would recognise from the way that Eleazar was dressed that Aaron was dead. And their hearts were moved and they wept. And for Israel there was thirty days of weeping, which would seem to have been standard on the passing of a great chieftain (Deuteronomy 34.8). In Israelite terms thirty days was a complete period (3 x 10). In Egypt it was seventy days (Genesis 50.3) but that may simply have been because of the exalted position of Joseph, and therefore of his father.
While mourning was a requirement at all such occasions we can be sure that in this case much of it was genuine. At such a time they would remember the great debt that they owed him, and old enmities would be forgotten.
But the most important thing of all was that the High Priesthood continued on unbroken. God’s purposes did not come to a halt. It was simply that there was a different Aaronide in the clothing. Yahweh went on for ever.
Chapter 21 From Victory Through Chastening To Further Victory.
The death of Aaron did indicate a new era. In this chapter we cover the first defeat of ‘the Canaanites’, the dire warning and chastisement of the fiery serpents, the provision of abundant water, and the defeat of the Amorites under Sihon.
4). The Canaanites Under the King of Arad Defeated (21.1-3).
Another attempt to interfere with Israel right of passage now followed, but this time it resulted in a glorious victory. Those who made the attempt were Canaanites. With them there could be no compromise. Here were the firstfruits of what Yahweh intended for the whole of Canaan. All Canaanites must be destroyed. It was His judgment on their sins for which He had waited for hundreds of years (Genesis 15.16). The new beginning was continuing. And it would give Israel their first taste of victory over Canaanites and a new certainty that Yahweh was with them for the future.
So while on the one side of Aaron’s death there was a kind of failure in their being turned aside by Edom, even though it taught them an important lesson, on the other side of his death was glorious victory. His death had not weakened Israel, it had rather made them strong. Whether this lesson is in chronological order or simply in theological order is disputed, for it is apparent throughout that the book is constructed to teach its lessons within a given pattern rather than to be a chronological history. It is what happened rather than when it happened that is considered important. The answer to the whole question partly depends on what route we see Israel as having taken. For we may probably assume that the king of Arad, which was seemingly in the northern Negeb, attacked before they rounded the bottom end of the Dead Sea. The message is, however, quite clear.
It is a reminder that at times of sorrow our Adversary will seek to attack our hearts and minds. We too must then take our stand and do battle using the weapons of our warfare, the word of God and the Holy Spirit (Ephesians 6.10-18). Then victory will be ours, but he may take captives first.
Analysis.
21.1 ‘And the Canaanite, the king of Arad, who dwelt in the South, heard tell that Israel came by the way of Atharim, and he fought against Israel, and took some of them captive.’
The news of Israel’s approach naturally spread. The movement of such a large body of people could hardly be kept secret. And it reached the ears of the king of Arad, a city and region in the northern Negeb (see 33.40). Later Pharaoh Shishak would mention two Arad’s captured during his invasion of Israel. This was probably Arad the Great. Learning that they were using ‘the way of Atharim’ he attacked their column and took prisoners. The way of Atharim may have led past Edom on the western side. As with Edom this massing of his troops may have been intended as a warning, warning them off his territory, but the taking of prisoners was a mistake. It demanded response and retaliation in order to obtain their fellow-countrymen back.
21.2 ‘And Israel vowed a vow to Yahweh, and said, “If you will indeed deliver this people into my hand, then I will utterly destroy their cities.” ’
The people of Israel were angry and called on Yahweh. But they knew that these people were Canaanites and thus under Yahweh’s ban. So they promised Him that if He would deliver them into their hand they would utterly destroy their cities.
21.3 ‘And Yahweh listened to the voice of Israel, and delivered up the Canaanites; and they utterly destroyed them and their cities, and the name of the place was called Hormah.’
And Yahweh heard their cry. He delivered up the Canaanites to them and they utterly destroyed them with their cities devoting them to destruction. The name Hormah means ‘devoted to destruction’. Either that was a coincidence accompanied by the fact that thirty eight years earlier the Israelites had been driven back to this very place (14.45), or more likely the name was given to the smouldering mound left after the destruction, a mound left as a testimony to what the future held for Canaanites, as it had been given to other mounds.
The lesson we can learn from this incident is that when there are major changes which affect our lives (like the death of Aaron) God is quite able to follow it with important victories which reveal that He is still in control.
5). The Brazen Serpent (21.4-10).
Having defeated the king of Arad Israel continued its journey from Mount Hor by ‘the way to the Reed Sea’, skirting the land of Edom. As they had been hoping to take the much easier King’s Highway they were greatly discouraged at the hardship of the way, for it led through difficult territory where there was no water and no means of obtaining bread, and they only had the despised manna (compare 11.5-6). It was like being back in the wilderness again. This again caused them to hanker after Egypt (compare 20.3-5). Forgetting the glory of their recent victory they fell back into their old ways.
So Yahweh gave them a reminder of their time in the wilderness, by sending ‘fiery serpents’ among them. Compare Deuteronomy 8.15 where fiery serpents were symbolic of the hardships of the wilderness. It was a reminder that if they wanted to go back to the trials of the wilderness period they could do so.
They were possibly called fiery serpents because their bite caused men’s bodies to be ‘set on fire’, or it may have been because they basked in the sun which shone on them and was seen as reflected in them.
In the Christian life victories are often followed by meeting up with ‘biting serpents’. The secret then is to look to Jesus as the crucified One. It is a continual lesson to us of how we must be continually dependent on Him.
Analysis.
21.4 ‘And they journeyed from mount Hor by the way to the Reed Sea, to compass the land of Edom, and the soul of the people was much discouraged because of the way.’
Their journey now took them through a parched region where they again had to depend totally on the manna, and this caused great discouragement. They themselves were parched and they were sick of the manna, ‘this light bread’. If only they could have used the King’s Highway instead of this harsh and dreary route round the border of Edom. Did Yahweh not care?
21.5 ‘And the people spoke against God, and against Moses, “Why have you brought us up out of Egypt to die in the wilderness? For there is no bread, and there is no water, and our soul loathes this light bread.” ’
So in their usual vein they turned against God and against Moses. Why had Moses dragged them away from Egypt to die in the wilderness? Why did they have to put up with this pretended bread? Why had they no proper bread and water to satisfy them?
21.6 ‘And Yahweh sent fiery serpents among the people, and they bit the people; and many people of Israel died.’
And the result was that they found themselves in a place seemingly filled with snakes. Many of the people were bitten, and many died. Yahweh was reminding them of what it had been like to travel through the wilderness (compare Deuteronomy 8.15). But they had never come across snakes as bad and as numerous as this before. It quickly brought them to their senses. Did it also remind them of the time when the rod of God had turned into a serpent before their eyes? (Exodus 4.3, 30;7.7). That also had happened at a new beginning. But here were many rods of God come to chastise His people.
Or it may well be that this incident would take their minds back to Genesis 3.15. The serpent was bruising their heels. Yahweh had warned of what the serpent might do in the future, and here it was. It was a clear judgment from God.
21.7 ‘And the people came to Moses, and said, “We have sinned, because we have spoken against Yahweh, and against you. Pray to Yahweh, that he take away the serpents from us.” And Moses prayed for the people.’
Either way this faced them up with what they were doing. They recognised their folly and admitted that they had sinned both against Yahweh and against Moses. Then they begged Moses to intercede on their behalf, and ask Yahweh to take the serpents away. And Moses did pray as they requested.
21.8 ‘And Yahweh said to Moses, “Make you a fiery serpent, and set it on a standard, and it shall come about, that every one who is bitten, when he sees it, shall live.” ’
Yahweh responded mercifully. Not only would He remove the snakes but He would cause many of those bitten to be healed. So He commanded Moses to set up an image of a fiery serpent and set it up on a pole. Then He promised that whoever then looked to that image would live.
Remarkable examples of bronze and copper serpents have been discovered in Canaan. At Timna, south of Hebron, where copper was mined, a gilded copper snake has been found. At Hazor a serpent standard has been discovered. And a bronze serpent was found at Gezer. Thus there are parallels to the fiery serpent of bronze (or copper). The thought here was that they were to look away from the serpents who crawled in the dust to the serpent provided by Yahweh, lifted up high before them. The serpents slithering in the dust spelled death. Yahweh offered life. But they had to look. Unless they looked to Yahweh’s provision they would die. Some have seen the redness of the copper as symbolising the blood of sacrifice. But the lesson may more have been that in order to find life they must lift their eyes from the dust wherein death lies (compare Leviticus 11.20, 23, 31) and look to Yahweh the living God.
If the serpent into which Moses’ rod had turned in the time in Egypt was in mind, and it was not something easily forgotten, indeed may well have been proverbial among the Israelites, then this copper serpent ‘frozen’ on a pole might well have indicated how Yahweh could ‘freeze’ serpents whenever He would (Exodus 4.4). It would indicate to the people without words that their deliverance could only come through the rod of God and His power over serpents. They would possibly remember how Yahweh’s serpent had eaten up all the other serpents (Exodus 7.12). Thus it would enhance their faith and they would know from Whom their deliverance came.
21.9 ‘And Moses made a serpent of bronze (or copper), and set it on the standard, and it came about, that if a serpent had bitten any man, when he looked to the serpent of bronze (copper), he lived.’
And Moses did as he was commanded. He made the serpent of bronze/copper, set it on a pole, and lifted it up. Then whoever of those who had been bitten, who looked to the serpent, lived. They had taken their minds from earthly things to seek the heavenly. They had looked to the rod and mighty authority of Yahweh.
Jesus used this example as a picture of His being lifted up on the cross, so that whoever looked to Him and believed on Him would live and have eternal life (John 3.14-15). Men had been bitten by sin and were doomed, but He had come to give them new life.
21.10 ‘And the children of Israel journeyed, and encamped in Oboth.’
Then the people continued their journey and encamped in Oboth. The name Oboth means ‘waterskins’. Perhaps there is a hint here of readiness for the plentiful water soon to come.
So we have here again the reminder that because God loves His people He chastens them. He will not allow us to permanently continue in known sins. If we murmur and complain against Him then we must expect ‘serpents’, troubles of some kind, to come among us. But in the final analysis His aim is to make us turn to Him so that we may have and enjoy eternal life.
6). Journey from Oboth to the Pisgah Looking Towards Jeshimon (21.11-20).
From this point on there is no shortage of water, as they move via the Wadi Zered to the River Arnon. And the abundance of water seemed to them like a dream fulfilled which they celebrated in song. The battle against the wilderness was won. But then they would have to move on to a different kind of battle. One difficulty after another would arise. In a sinful world life is ever such. But with Yahweh with them it would all turn out for the good.
Analysis.
Journey to the Arnon (21.11-13).
21.11 ‘And they journeyed from Oboth, and encamped at Iye-abarim, in the wilderness which is before Moab, toward the sunrising.’
Compare here 33.44. Iye-abarim means ‘the ruins of Abarim’. It was by Moab, on the east (the sunrising).
21.12 ‘From there they journeyed, and encamped in the valley of Zered. From there they journeyed, and encamped on the other side of the Arnon, which is in the wilderness, which comes out of the border of the Amorites.’
And from Iye-abarim they journeyed to the valley of Zered through which ran the Wadi Zered. The crossing of the Zered was seen as a major event in Deuteronomy 2.13-14. There we learn that at this point the old generation was seen as having all passed away. Yahweh’s work of pruning was completed.
21.13 ‘From there they journeyed, and encamped on the other side of the Arnon, which is in the wilderness, which comes out of the border of the Amorites. For the Arnon is the border of Moab, between Moab and the Amorites.’
They then moved along the eastern border of Moab in semi-desert and came to the River Arnon, Moab’s northern border. Note the continual stress on their being ‘in the wilderness’. They avoided the ‘built up areas’. They were seeking not to cause offence and to avoid aggression. But progress was now satisfactory.
A Song of Victory And Taking Of Water Sources and Land (21.14-15).
After the preliminary victory over Arad there now began a period of constant victory. The instatement of Eleazar had introduced a new era indeed.
21.14-15 ‘For this reason it is said in the book of the Wars of Yahweh:
The book of the Wars of Yahweh is mentioned only here. It probably contained the details of the battle at Rephidim (Exodus 17.8-16) and subsequent wars and skirmishes, including the battles fought here, written by Moses as God had instructed (Exodus 17.14).
The quotation was a reminder that their journey had been catalogued with this being an extract depicting this moment of the beginnings of their first major war, and it vividly pictured the victories which were to come. Vaheb was no doubt an Amorite fortress city, seemingly rapidly taken by Israel ‘in a whirlwind’, followed by the regions of the tributaries of the Arnon and the plains looking down on the Moabite border and the city of Ar, sources of water and land. Chronologically this would come in verse 24. But it is mentioned here as a reminder of their first permanent capture of water sources and fertile land which took place after reaching the Arnon, a firstfruit of what was to come. Together with what followed it stressed the abundance of water now made available to Israel. It was the commencement of the period of ‘milk and honey’, and with what follows it was the climax of the new beginning. Plentiful water was ever the picture of blessing, from Eden on to Revelation 22.
Yahweh Provides An Abundant Water Source (21.16-20).
21.16 ‘And from there they journeyed to Beer, that is the well of which Yahweh said to Moses, “Gather the people together, and I will give them water.”
Their next movement was to Beer (well). We are told that this was specifically a well revealed by Yahweh and made available to them, for He had said to Moses, “Gather the people together, and I will give them water.” This well was so abundant that it resulted in a song of triumph. Note the song sandwich (see analysis above), a song before and a song afterwards. The water sources and well were the ultimate answer to all Israel’s periods of shortage of water as epitomised by the contention at Meribah. Only those who have known extreme water shortage can appreciate quite what this meant to Israel. The water sources were a symbol of life.
21.17-18a Then sang Israel this song,
Yahweh having revealed the whereabouts of the spring the well ‘sprang up’. The princes and nobles took the lead, digging it with their sceptre and staves. This would be the ceremonial element. Others would move in and do the hard work. But the song reveals the general rejoicing. They knew that their troubles with regard to water were behind them.
The wonder of the Christian life is that this overflowing water is always available in Christ. We can come to Him and drink, and the water we receive will then be in us a spring of water springing up to eternal life (John 4.14), and flowing out from us to a thirsty world round about (John 7.37-38).
21.18b-20 ‘And from the wilderness they journeyed to Mattanah, and from Mattanah to Nahaliel; and from Nahaliel to Bamoth; and from Bamoth to the valley that is in the field of Moab, to the top of Pisgah, which looks towards Jeshimon (or ‘down on the desert’).’
Now that they had abundant water advance was rapid. They moved quickly from one place to another until they came to the border of the promised land, and were able to look over at it from the Pisgah.
Bamoth (heights, high places) is probably identical with the Bamoth Baal, ‘the heights of Baal’ of Numbers 22.4. The purpose in these names here is to indicate the speed of travel until they came to the Pisgah (precipice) from which they could view the promised land across the Jordan valley. Thus the movement is seen as going from place to place almost without stopping until they reached the valley in the field of Moab and the top of the Pisgah which looks over the bleak desert over the Jordan at that point (compare for the description 23.28). This last area would be synonymous with ‘Abarim which is before Nebo’. These were not encampments, they were landmarks.
Compare here 33.45-47. But there it is the encampments which were recorded, where they set up the Dwellingplace, identified by the names of cities by which they encamped, while here those were deliberately ignored in order to give the impression of haste. Dibon-gad (Dibon of Gad), Almon-diblathaim and Abarim which is before Nebo (33.45-47) would be camp sites near cities, where the Dwellingplace was set up.
(II). Victory In The Wars of Yahweh (21.21-25.18).
Having tasted victory against the king of Arad, and come to the land of plenty, Yahweh now provided them with a series of victories forced on them by belligerent enemies. These would give them possession of the land of plenty on that side of Jordan, continuing the theme of the new beginning. These victories were important. Through their being forced on Israel they had to face them without thinking too hard, so that by the time that they had triumphed they were adequately prepared for ventures ahead. Had they had time to think they might well have decided that Sihon and Og were too powerful for them, but they had no time to think, and Yahweh reversed the defeat of their fathers by the Canaanites/Amorites (14.45 compare Deuteronomy 1.44) by giving glorious victories.
Analysis.
The territory that Israel were now operating in was in the land of the Moabites, although it was a section under the control of the Amorites who had seized it from Moab. Moses in fact wished to pass amicably by the land of Sihon, king of the Amorites but Sihon sought to prevent it. That was why he felt able to invade it and take possession of it. These were Amorites, akin to the Canaanites, and thus fair game. Nor had their land been given to them by Yahweh. They were trespassers. Yet they would have been left alone had they been cooperative, for they were not strictly people of ‘the land’. But Deuteronomy 2.30 confirms that it was Yahweh’s intention that the attack and defeat took place.
This would then be followed by a campaign against Og, king of Bashan and a ‘battle’ of another kind between Yahweh and the prophet Balaam who was recruited by Moab to curse Israel. They were moving on from victory to victory. It would only be their own lustful desires that would drag them down and bring God’s chastening on them (25). This was a reminder of the fact that the enemy we must most beware of is our own selves.
The term Amorite has various meanings in the Old Testament. It can refer to all the people of Canaan, (e.g. Genesis 15.16), to tribes living in the hill country of Canaan (Joshua 5.1; 10.5; Judges 1.34), to inhabitants of the Negeb and the region to the southeast of the Dead Sea (Genesis 14.7), and very often, as here, to the inhabitants east of the Jordan under the rule of Sihon and Og.
Battles with the Amorites (21.21-35).
Now commenced the epoch-making battles with the two kings of the Amorites on the east side of the Jordan which would provide Israel with its first conquered land.
1). The Defeat of Sihon, King of the Amorites (21.21-31).
While what is now described passes in a few verses we must not overlook what was involved. The taking of the land of the Amorites and of their fortified cities would not have been easy and would have taken considerable time and effort. But as the poem above made clear, Yahweh was with Israel and thus progress was rapid. It was Israel’s first period of sustained warfare.
Analysis.
A Plea to Sihon to Be Allowed to Pass Unscathed Through The Land of the Amorites (21.21-22).
21.21 ‘And Israel sent messengers to Sihon king of the Amorites, saying,’
In accordance with practise messengers were sent requesting safe passage without interference. They brought Moses’ words to the king.
21.22 “Let me pass through your land. We will not turn aside into field, or into vineyard. We will not drink of the water of the wells. We will go by the king’s highway, until we have passed your border.”
The request was from ‘king’ to king. ‘Let me pass through your land.’ It was then promised that if he did so they would use only the highway and not trespass on their fields or drink their water. This was referring to the continuation of ‘the Kings Highway’, the trade route to Damascus, which would make travel easier.
Sihon Refuses and Faces Up to Israel (21.23).
21.23 ‘And Sihon would not allow Israel to pass through his border, but Sihon gathered all his people together, and went out against Israel into the wilderness, and came to Jahaz, and he fought against Israel.’
But Sihon was determined to prevent their passage. It may have been that he recognised that they were proceeding to an invasion on fellow-Amorites, or it may have been because he did not trust Israel and what they might do once they were in the midst of the land, or it may simply have been because he enjoyed fighting and saw the possibility of much booty. But whichever way it was he went out with his army to where Israel were ‘in the wilderness’, outside the fertile land, and coming to Jahaz, he fought against Israel.
Jahaz would shortly become a Reubenite city, and a levitical city (Joshua 13.18; 21.34, 36), but it would later be in conflict with Mesha, king of Moab, who, according to the Moabite stone, would eventually seize it. It would still be in Moabite hands in the days of Isaiah 15.4 and Jeremiah 48.21, 34.
Sihon Is Defeated and His Land Possessed Up to The Borders of Ammon (21.24).
21.24 ‘And Israel smote him with the edge of the sword, and possessed his land from the Arnon to the Jabbok, even to the children of Ammon. For the border of the children of Ammon was strong.’
Israel defeated Sihon, and possessed his land. There would first be the initial battle and then the progressive taking of cities and seizure of the land which is described in summary. This is then followed by the history of Heshbon in poetic form.
‘From the Arnon to the Jabbok.’ The Arnon was the southern border of Sihon’s land and formed the border with Moab. The River Jabbok was to the north and then curved round southward to form a border with Ammon.
Once Sihon determined to resist Israelite progress battle was inevitable. The border of Ammon, the only other possible route, was strong, guarded by a ring of fortresses to which archaeology bears witness. Thus it was defeat Sihon or retreat. And once the victory had been won the rest followed. Deuteronomy tells us that in fact all this was because Yahweh intended this land for Israel and therefore hardened Sihon’s spirit in order to make him behave in the way in which he did (Deuteronomy 2.30). There the credit for the victory goes to Yahweh. And as the Amorites were basically ‘Canaanites’ (related to inhabitants of Canaan) they were all to be put to the sword.
The Possession of the Cities of Sihon (21.25-26).
21.25 ‘And Israel took all these cities. And Israel dwelt in all the cities of the Amorites, in Heshbon, and in all its towns.’
Having defeated Sihon Israel took his cities, including Heshbon the capital city, one by one until all were in their possession. And subsequently they set up residence there, and throughout the whole country.
21.26 ‘For Heshbon was the city of Sihon the king of the Amorites, who had fought against the former king of Moab, and taken all his land out of his hand, even to the Arnon.’
Then it is explained that in fact Heshbon was the royal city where Sihon dwelt, and that he and the Amorites had captured it from Moab, a description of these events then being provided in a celebration ode.
The Triumph Song of the Amorites (21.27-29).
21.27-29 ‘That is the reason that they who speak in proverbs say,
In vivid language the defeat of Moab by Sihon is described. First he captured Heshbon, which would become his royal city, and fortified it (established it’). Then he moved down like a flame and a fire as far as ‘Ar, a city of Moab and defeated the border lords, seizing a number of captive slaves. And although Chemosh was the god of Moab he was able to do nothing about it. Indeed he surrendered them to the opposing forces.
The point behind the song was not only to display Sihon’s belligerency, but also to expose Chemosh’s helplessness. But now Israel had defeated Sihon. That proved that Yahweh was Lord over all. And as Chemosh had surrendered the land, Moab no longer had a claim on it.
‘Ar was to the south of the Arnon but may simply be named as the nearest city to the border, being wasted but not retained. However, in early Hebrew ‘r could probably also signify ‘are (‘cities’) and that may be the rendering here.
Israel’s Taunt Song Against the Amorites (21.30).
In an addition to the poem, which does not compare as literature with the original, Israel then taunt Sihon and the Amorites with their loss. Israel had in turn shot at them and captured all their cities and territory. Apart from Nophah the cites are all well testified to. It may be significant that Sihon’s gods are not mentioned. The Pentateuch appears to deliberately avoid any mention of Baal apart from Baalpeor (22.41; 25.3, 5; Deuteronomy 4.3) and in place names (32.38; 33.7; Exodus 14.2, 9), possibly because of the danger at this early stage of ‘baal’ (lord) being linked with Yahweh. In the early days in the land ‘baal’ was even included in Israelite names (e.g Ish-baal, Meri-baal, which were changed into Ish-bosheth, Mephi-bosheth where bosheth means ‘shame’). We too must beware of false terminology. By astute use of language what is displeasing to God can easily be presented as being the real thing. The only way to prevent ourselves from being ensnared is to avoid sin and test everything by the word of God.
Israel Settle In The Land of the Amorites (21.31).
21.31 ‘Thus Israel dwelt in the land of the Amorites.’
The passage ends triumphantly with the fact that Israel now dwelt in the land of the Amorites. The Amorite bogey (Deuteronomy 1.27, 44) had been laid once for all.
One lesson for us from this incident is that sometimes what appears to be a disappointment can be turned by God into a triumph. In this case He was working in His sovereignty with the blessing of His people in mind. Israel were no doubt disappointed that the Amorites refused them passage, but the final result was possession of lands which would be theirs permanently.
2). The Defeat of Og, King of Bashan (21.32-35).
The defeat of Sihon did not pass unnoticed and when Israel advanced even further northwards Og, king of Bashan decided that enough was enough. Gathering his forces he came down from the north, from northern Gilead and Bashan, and faced up to Israel. Og was probably a giant of a man, and connected with a race similar to the Anakim (Deuteronomy 3.11). But that made no difference to Yahweh. Og was defeated and Gilead and Bashan were both taken and occupied and their cities subdued. The description is brief but the actual carrying out of it would again take some time.
Analysis.
21.32 ‘ And Moses sent to spy out Jazer; and they took its towns, and drove out the Amorites who were there.’
After the defeat of Sihon Moses sent scouts to spy out Jazer, an Amorite city in Sihon’s kingdom. It was taken with its towns and the Amorites were ‘driven out’, possibly fleeing across the Jordan. Or they may have gone as refugees to Bashan thus prompting Og’s subsequent action.
21.33 ‘And they turned and went up by the way of Bashan, and Og the king of Bashan went out against them, he and all his people, to battle at Edrei.’
The advance of the Israelite army then continued on ‘the way of Bashan’. It may be that they were pursuing the Amorites who had fled from Jazer. This prompted Og to bring his army to Edrei, possibly in response to pleas for help, and there they met in battle. Edrei is modern Dura.
21.34 ‘And Yahweh said to Moses, “Fear him not, for I have delivered him into your hand, and all his people, and his land, and you shall do to him as you did to Sihon king of the Amorites, who dwelt at Heshbon.’
We are told that Yahweh had given Moses especial assurance of victory. This may have been because of the imposing stature of Og, who would be enough to frighten the Israelites, or it may simply have been an added encouragement on the way. In their enthusiasm over their victories it was important that they recognised that their victories came from Yahweh. Either way the promise was that Og and his people would be delivered into their hands, and would have done to them what had been done to Sihon and his Amorites.
21.35 ‘So they smote him, and his sons and all his people, until none were left remaining to him, and they possessed his land.’
The end result was total defeat for Og. He and his sons were slain, and all the people exterminated, according to God’s requirement for all ‘Canaanites’ and ‘Amorites’. And finally they possessed his land. Although described so briefly it would in fact be an extended campaign.
More details of this conquest are given in Deuteronomy 3.1-11. While the details are here only given in summary form we must not underestimate the significance of the victories. They comforted Israel with the fact that they were well able to meet formidable foes and capture fortified cities, and they confirmed the power of Yahweh. And once they were completed and the land settled they were able to rejoice in the fact that Yahweh had given them the firstfruits of the land of milk and honey.
So quite unexpectedly as far as Israel were concerned they found themselves potential possessors of a huge area of fertile land which had plenty of water. It would still have to be settled, and parts would have to be reconquered in the future as the defeated former residents moved back while Israel were busy elsewhere, but it was a glorious firstfruits of what the future held for them. The taking over of this land by Reuben, Gad and the half tribe of Manasseh is described in chapter 32.
The clear lesson we learn from this is that it matters not how superior our antagonists may appear to be. If God is on our side we have nothing to fear. Nothing is too hard for Him.
22.1 ‘And the children of Israel journeyed, and encamped in the plains of Moab beyond the Jordan at Jericho.’
Their warfare being in successful process of completion, the people of Israel encamped in the plains of Moab opposite Jericho in Beyond Jordan. The plains of Moab were a large relatively uninhabited region north of the Arnon, in former Amorite territory. Israel would remain there for some time and there Moses delivered his final exhortation and encouragement as revealed in Deuteronomy, prior to his death. Here they were on the verge of the territory known as ‘Beyond Jordan’ which extended on both sides of the Jordan. The Moabites in their land south of the Arnon could hardly be anything but worried. They did not like their seeming inactivity. The inevitable question on their minds was, who were these people going to attack next? So they decided to take the initiative in order to protect themselves.
Battles Against Evil Influence (22.2-25.18).
Having defeated the Amorites and being in process of possessing their land Israel are now faced with a more subtle threat. This commences with the approach of the Aramean prophet Balaam, and continues with the results of his later evil plan.
3). The Defeat of the Evil Influence of Balaam (22.2-24.25).
The follow-up war against the Amorites in Bashan may still have been in progress under different generals while what follows was going on. (‘They possessed his land’ - 21.35, and that would take time. See 32.39-42). But meanwhile Moab, watching Israel from behind their frontiers, wondered what they were going to do next, and decided to take their own initiative.
In those days warfare was conducted on a number of levels. The most obvious was the clash of armies. But behind the clash of armies could be a variety of other activities. These could include interchange of correspondence enforcing their case by citing the power of their gods (see Judges 11.12-28), both encouraging their own troops and dismaying the enemy. Preliminary ‘battles’ taking place between champions in order to determine whose god was the most powerful (see 1 Samuel 17). And so on. But nothing was more important than ensuring that the gods were on your side. And that was where certain men seen as possessing awesome powers came in. Such men, ‘prophets’, ‘soothsayers’ and ‘diviners’ were seen as having special influence with the gods, and operated through dreams, visions, trances, omens, enchantments and the occult. We can compare the execration texts from Egypt, written on pottery against Egypt’s enemies, pottery which was then broken in order to apply the curse. (Amalek probably saw Moses with his hands held up in the same light - Exodus 17.11). One such ‘diviner’ in those days was the mighty Bala‘-‘am (‘the nation swallower’), held in awe throughout the Ancient Near East. It was to him that Moab were to turn.
Thus in these chapters we have revealed in the tactics of Balak, king of Moab, a different approach to the challenging of Israel from those before him. For while Israel had made no attempt to interfere with Moab, Balak was afraid. Here was a large and seemingly belligerent army on his frontiers and he wanted to get rid of them. But he seemingly did not feel up to taking them on in battle. Having probably heard of what Yahweh had done previously, and having seen them destroy the enemy that he himself had been unable to defeat, he decided that he needed ‘similar’ powers on his side, and he needed somehow to influence Yahweh.
So he sent for Bala‘am (the ‘nation-swallower’), the famous prophet-diviner, requesting that he come to him so that he might curse Israel. Balaam, the prophet-diviner, was a man of great reputation who apparently lived in northern Syria. Such people professed to be able to influence events by use of various occult methods. They would often enter into drug induced trances in which they could see and hear almost anything. They hired themselves out for gold, and their fees were high. The subsequent story in fact reveals what an enigmatic figure he was. For while he was certainly wanting to oblige Balak by bringing divine powers to his rescue, at the same time he openly acknowledged that they were not fully under his control. He acknowledged that unless the ‘gods’ were cooperative he could not achieve his ends. Indeed in seeking to exercise his gifts with Yahweh he was revealed as being limited in what he could achieve right from the beginning, by the response that came when he commenced his sorceries.
However, while not approving of his methods, the account does suggest a certain genuineness in what he sought to do, so much so that God was willing to have dealings with him and reveal things to him on behalf of His own people. Yet it is quite obvious that Balaam involved himself in the occult. He clearly considered that he did get in touch with other world beings, and did expect to receive messages from them. He was thus seen as engaging in spiritism and divination. Using Moses’ terms, he contacted devils (Deuteronomy 32.17). But as with the medium of Endor later (1 Samuel 28.6-25), where confronted with such, God was willing to use them in order to bring home His own message.
Bala‘am was not a worshipper of Yahweh, but that he was willing to listen to Him and respond to Him the account makes clear. It would seem that at first he mistakenly thought that he could treat Yahweh like any of his other other-world ‘contacts’. But he soon learned that he was dealing with something outside his previous experience. What harm he could actually have done to Israel we do not know, but certainly at the time everyone thought that he could do great harm.
The account is clearly a unity for it is based on a number of sections which follow a basically chiastic pattern in four instalments, 22.2-14; 22.15-38; 22.39-24.13; 24.14-25. But they also inter-relate. Balaam is the man whose eyes are open in 24.3 and 15. In 24.4, 16 he is the one who has ‘heard the words of God and saw the vision of the Almighty, falling into a trance (or ‘falling down’) but having his eyes open’. (This certainly sounds like drug use). He ‘took up his parable (incantation)’ five times in 24.3, 15, 20, 21, 23. His extra prophecies are fourfold (24.15-19, 20, 21-22, 23-24) which with his threefold prophecies/blessings in 23.7-10, 18-24; 24.3-9 make up a sevenfold series of prophecies.
The whole account is also notable for the emphasis put on threefold action. The ass avoided the angel of Yahweh three times (22.28, 32; see verses 23, 25, 27). Balaam had three major encounters with Yahweh (22.9-12, 20, 32-35). Balaam offered three sets of sacrifices (22.39-24.13). Yahweh gives His word to Balaam three times (23.5, 16; 24.2 compare 22.38). Three times things happen ‘in the morning’ (22.13, 21, 41). We can note also that to Yahweh the messengers are but ‘men’ (’anoshim) three times (22.9, 20, 35).
But we may ask, ‘why is so much space given in Scripture to this rather strange history when seemingly larger affairs are dealt with in a few sentences?’ The answer lies mainly in the words which God put in Balaam’s mouth. Three times he spoke, followed by further prophecy, and in doing so he confirmed the promises of God to His people. That they were spoken by a non-Israelite prophet of the status of Balaam made them even more significant. The words of such a man as Balaam would be a major encouragement as Israel prepared to enter the land in order to take possession, for they would be seen as coming from an external prophetic source. It was only human nature among the weaker of them that while they might have some doubts about what Yahweh promised, the promises seemed much more certain when spoken by such a man as Balaam. And God graciously allowed it to be so for their sakes.
In his first prophecy Balaam would speak of Israel as being like the dust of the earth (compare Genesis 13.16), and as being innumerable (23.10 compare Genesis 12.2; 13.16), both recognised signs of blessing as promised by Yahweh. He would also describe them as a nation dwelling alone, different from all other nations (23.9), a holy nation (compare Exodus 19.5-6), thus further confirming the promises and revealing that they were blessed by their God.
In the second he would speak of their deliverance from Egypt and their being firmly established, with God among them as their King with, metaphorically speaking, the strength and horns of the wild ox (23.21), a fearsome Opponent indeed, who could dispense lions with the toss of his head. While Israel themselves were depicted as being, along with their God, dangerous and victorious like a pride of lions (23.24). In other words Israel had become a powerful people, with the even more powerful Yahweh living among them as their King and God.
In the third he saw them as being in a land of fruitfulness, with plenteous waters available to them (see 21.14-18), and spreading that fruitfulness around the world, with their God still being powerful and they still being like a victorious pride of lions.
And finally he saw the coming to them of a future ruler who would be victorious over all around him (compare Genesis 17.6). This remarkable series of prophecies, revealing the rise and triumph of Israel from early beginnings to its final triumph, will be considered in more detail in the commentary. But it explains the importance laid on these prophecies.
Then, secondly, God’s control of Balaam was probably seen as an example of the greatness of Yahweh. The mighty Balaam was feared throughout the Ancient Near East, but he was nothing before Yahweh. He was seen as subject to Yahweh’s will. The thought would be that if Yahweh could defeat Balaam, He could defeat anyone. For that Balaam was an awesome figure comes out in that his name has been found in an Aramaic text written on wall plaster at Tell Deir ‘Alla in the Jordan valley dating from around 700 BC in which he is seen as involved with a number of gods and goddesses whose will he conveys to a disobedient people. His reputation as a powerful contact person between men and the gods had passed into history, it had been immortalised.
Balak’s Entreaty to Balaam (22.2-14).
The story began with Balak sending important messengers to Balaam. These were ‘chieftains’ (sarim - ‘nobles’, ‘chieftains’, ‘princes’) who would seek to persuade him to come to Moab and curse Israel. This was to be the subject of the first fourteen verses.
Analysis.
The first fourteen verses relate to Balak’s first appeal to Balaam. These can be analysed chiastically.
Balak Is Afraid of the Children of Israel and Fears That They Will Spoil Moab (22.2-4)
22.2 ‘And Balak the son of Zippor saw all that Israel had done to the Amorites.’
Balak, king of Moab (verse 4), had received notice of all that Israel had done to the Amorites. This would especially relate to what he knew had happened in the adjacent kingdom. Whether Og had also been defeated at this time we do not know. We can, however, understand Balak’s fear when he saw all the Amorites slain and their cities taken, for he himself had not been able to withstand the Amorites who had possessed half his land. He was not aware of Yahweh’s word to Moses that Moab was not to be disturbed, or if he had received messages to that end he probably thought that he had cause not to believe them. He clearly did not lay as much stress on the family relationship as God did (Deuteronomy 2.9).
22.3 ‘And Moab was sore afraid of the people, because they were many, and Moab was distressed because of the children of Israel.’
So Moab were dreadfully afraid of Israel, because of the size of their army. And as they saw them encamped seemingly permanently almost on their borders and heard what they were accomplishing elsewhere they were ‘distressed because of the children of Israel’. They waited pensively and apprehensively, wondering when the attack would be turned on them.
22.4a ‘And Moab said to the elders of Midian, “Now will this multitude lick up all that is round about us, as the ox licks up the grass of the field.’
In their dilemma they also consulted with their allies, a group of Midianites (probably including Amalekites and Kenites, both of whom were inter-related to the Midianites through Abraham - see 24.20-21; Genesis 25.2; 36.12; Exodus 18.1 with Judges 1.16; 4.11) who had been settled in the kingdom of Sihon (Joshua 13.21) and who had quite possibly escaped to Moab territory. They described to the ‘elders’ (chief men and advisers) of these Midianites how Israel were denuding their neighbours like a hungry ox denudes a field, as they had good cause to know. It would surely be their turn next. They suggested that they needed to act together to rid themselves of this menace.
Balak Sends Messengers to Balaam Describing ‘The People Who Have Come From Egypt’ Who Are In Large Numbers (22.5).
Having consulted with the Midianite elders, Balak, king of Moab, sent messengers to Balaam pleading with him to come and help them against Israel, emphasising the huge numbers that they were opposing.
22.4b ‘And Balak the son of Zippor was king of Moab at that time.’
This note is put in so as to explain why it was he who acted and responded to the people’s fears. It was because at that time he was the king of Moab. (His pre-eminence in the matter suggests that the Midianites in mind here were in Moabite territory and in treaty relations with him - compare Abraham with the king of Salem in Genesis 14)
22.5 ‘And he sent messengers to Balaam the son of Beor, to Pethor, which is by the River, to the land of the children of his people, to call him, saying, “Behold, there is a people come out from Egypt. Behold, they cover the face of the earth, and they abide over against me.’
Balak was aware that Moab could not defeat Israel unless somehow they were weakened and the power of their God neutralised. So he formulated a plan. He sent messengers to Balaam, the son of Beor, the great prophet of Pethor by the Euphrates, (probably the Pitru of Assyrian inscriptions), which was ‘the land of the children of his people’. This may mean simply his native land, or may indicate that it was a place where many such diviners and sorcerers had taken up residence. In Joshua 13.22 Balaam is called a ‘diviner’ (qasam). This clearly also involved him being in contact with the spirit world. Some see ‘his people’ (‘ammo) as referring rather to ‘the land of the ‘Amavites’ mentioned in a 13th century BC inscription from Alalakh.
For Balak to send to a stranger in so far off a place for assistance must have meant that the reputation of Balaam was awesome. Balaam had obviously built up an extensive reputation as being effective in cursing people, for the Midianites later called on him again in spite of his failure in this case, and it was then that Balaam was slain along with the Midianite leaders (31.8). This was because he who had advised the method of destroying the Israelites by causing them to offend Yahweh (31.16). This last incident warns us against seeing him as deserving of Yahweh’s approval.
22.6 ‘Come now therefore, I pray you, curse me this people, for they are too mighty for me. Perhaps I shall prevail, that we may smite them, and that I may drive them out of the land, for I know that he whom you bless is blessed, and he whom you curse is cursed.’
Balak’s intention was that Balaam might weaken Israel by putting a curse on them so that Moab could then smite them. And he called for him to come and curse Israel, so weakening them that he and his armies could deal with them. For he knew that when Balaam cursed men, they were cursed, and conversely that when he blessed men they were blessed. If he could be blessed and Israel could be cursed, in his view this would give him a real advantage. This confirms the kind of reputation that Balaam had in this direction. Many an army would be unwilling to fight and would fight less well if they heard that they had been cursed by a man like Balaam. It would be enough to put them off fighting altogether. And many would fight better because he had blessed them.
The Elders Leave With Rewards In Their Hand To Persuade Balaam to Curse Israel (22.7).
22.7 ‘And the elders of Moab and the elders of Midian departed with the rewards of divination in their hand, and they came to Balaam, and spoke to him the words of Balak.’
Certain Midianite princes, along with their tribes, who were now probably refugees in Moabite territory as a result of the defeat of Sihon in whose kingdom they had been settled (Joshua 13.21), were united with Moab in their evil intention against Israel (see also verse 4; 25.6, 17-18; 31.1-12). Their elders, chief men of the tribes, thus combined with the elders of Moab to seek out Balaam. And they took in their hands ‘the rewards of divination’. It may be that there was a recognised fee for such an action as Balaam was to be called on to perform. Or it may simply have been a large bribe. Then, when they arrived where Balaam was, they told him the words of Balak, which presumably included the fact that he wanted him to neutralise Yahweh’s power.
Balaam Tells Them to Wait While He Obtains Words From Yahweh. (22.8).
22.8 ‘And he said to them, “Lodge here this night, and I will bring you word again, as Yahweh shall speak to me,” and the chieftains of Moab abode with Balaam.’
Balaam clearly had a fairly large establishment as he was able to put up all the elders who had arrived with their servants. And he invited them to lodge with him that night while he received a word from Yahweh and found out what he would say. It seems from what follows that the purpose in bringing in Balaam lay in the belief that he could persuade a nation’s own god/gods to turn against their people and remove their protection from them. Thus in this case, having been informed that Yahweh was Israel’s God, he recognised that he would have to deal with Yahweh on the matter. Meanwhile the ‘chieftains of Moab’, representatives from Moab and their allies, remained with Balaam.
Yahweh Comes with Words For Balaam (22.9).
Balaam wasted no time. That night he sought to make contact with Yahweh. We are not informed of what methods he used, but they were seemingly successful, for ‘God came to Balaam’. (Not just another god, but the only God).
22.9 ‘And God came to Balaam, and said, “What men are these who are with you?”
Starting by using his own methods of divination in order to ‘contact’ Yahweh, Balaam became aware that Someone was there and ready to speak to him. Then God came up with a question. ‘Who are these men who are with you and what is their status and purpose?’ (Balaam was used to ‘hearing voices’).
Note that Yahweh was now described in terms of ‘God’. It was important that it was recognised that He alone was God, not just one among a number of ‘gods’ contacted by Balaam. And that to Him, Yahweh, those who came to Balaam were but ‘men’ (see also verse 20, 35. Note the threefoldness). It was a conflict between ‘God’ and ‘man’. (See 23.19). So the writer makes clear that Balaam was not here just contacting his usual spiritual ‘contacts’. It was God Himself Who came to him.
Balaam Explains That Balak Has Sent Them, Wanting Israel To Be Cursed (22.10-11)
22.10-11 ‘And Balaam said to God, “Balak the son of Zippor, king of Moab, has sent to me, saying, “Behold, the people which is come out of Egypt, it covers the face of the earth. Now, come curse me them, perhaps I shall be able to fight against them, and shall drive them out.”’
Balaam explained the situation. Balak, an important king, had sent to him telling him of a people who had come out of Egypt in great numbers and he wanted them to be cursed so that he would be able to drive them away from his country.
God Tells Him Not to Go and Not to Curse Israel (22.12)
22.12 ‘And God said to Balaam, “You shall not go with them. You shall not curse the people, for they are blessed.” ’
Note again that the One Who spoke to him was called ‘God’ and not ‘Yahweh’. He was not to be seen as one of many gods whom Balaam contacted (which was how Balaam would have seen Yahweh). He was the living God, the only God. He sternly informed Balaam that he must not go, and that he was not to seek to curse this people, for they were blessed. In other words they had special protection over them and were strengthened and watched over by Him. So no one must touch them (compare Psalm 105.15).
Balaam Tells The Messengers To Return Home, And They Return (22.13-14)
22.13 ‘And Balaam rose up in the morning, and said to the nobles/chieftains of Balak, “Get you into your land, for Yahweh refuses to give me leave to go with you.” ’
Next morning therefore Balaam told ‘the nobles/chieftains of Balak’ to return to their land because he had been consulting Yahweh, (he recognised the One Who had come as Yahweh) and Yahweh had refused to permit him to go. The chieftains would be suitably impressed. Once they had told Balak this he would know that he was dealing with the right man for the job. Here was someone in touch with Yahweh, Israel’s God. They may well have thought inwardly that Balaam was simply delaying in order to seek a better price.
Note that ‘the elders’ who were sent were ‘nobles’ or ‘chieftains’ (the word sar can indicate princes, rulers, nobles, chieftains, or captains depending on context). A good impression had to be made on Balaam. He was not just anyone.
‘In the morning.’ This phrase is another feature of the narrative. It occurs here and in verses 21, 41. We can compare a similar idea (but not the same phrase) in the story in chapters 16-17. See 16.5, 7, 41; 17.8.
22.14 ‘And the chieftains of Moab rose up, and they went to Balak, and said, “Balaam refuses to come with us.”
So the chieftains rose and returned to Balak, and informed him that Balaam refused to come with them.
Balak’s Second Entreaty to Balaam Followed By The Threefold Activity of Balaam’s Ass (22.15-40).
No doubt feeling that the reason why Balaam had not come was because he was not satisfied with the price offered, ‘the rewards of divination’ (verse 7) that he had previously sent, Balak sent even more important messengers to Balaam, offering him even greater rewards. He could not see why Balaam, the manipulator of gods, could not manipulate this one for him.
While what follows might seem strange to most of us, it would not seem so strange to those who are involved in spiritism and the occult. Evil spirits are still open to being contacted by humans, and although more modern ‘diviners’ might talk with their cat rather than their ass, they would in many cases tell you that their cat spoke back to them. They are used to hearing what they consider to be voices from ‘the other side’. (How it is to be interpreted is another matter. Scripture indicates that such activities are connected with devilry - Deuteronomy 32.17; 1 Corinthians 10.20).
But the description of Balaam’s dealings with his ass are not just a matter of that, nor are they as trivial as they might appear. They are intended to bring out the extremely important point that while Balaam was mighty in dreams and visions of the night, in the broad light of day he was blinder than his ass. For in what next occurred it was not Balaam who took the central stage, but his ass. This put Balaam right into perspective. His powers were limited. At times even his ass saw more than he did.
Analysis of the passage.
Note the threefold consecutive pattern in the middle which is also repeated in the next series. There could have been no more emphatic way than this to indicate that Balaam was behaving like his noble ass when he three times sought to use his powers against Israel. To retain the perfect chiastic pattern the threefold activity g h, g h, g h could be treated as one, (as one large g). The threefoldness is deliberately inserted for the purposes of emphasis and in order to indicate completeness.
Balak Sends Even More Important Messengers To Persuade Balaam To Come (22.15).
22.15 ‘And Balak sent yet again chieftains, more, and more honourable than they.’
Balak now set out to impress. In his next deputation he sent a more numerous delegation made up of even more powerful chieftains. The large party would have been an impressive sight, and that was Balak’s intention.
Balak Offers Balaam Great Reward For His Assistance (22.16-19).
22.16-17 ‘And they came to Balaam, and said to him, “Thus says Balak the son of Zippor, Let nothing, I pray you, hinder you from coming to me, for I will promote you to very great honour, and whatever you say to me I will do. Come therefore, I pray you, curse me this people.” ’
Balak was now desperate. Note the formal style of the diplomatic message. ‘Thus says’ (compare 20.14). Then the title of honour and identification, ‘Balak the son of Zippor’. Then the plea and offer of great reward. Then the statement of what was required.
Thus he courteously, but firmly, strongly expressed his desire for Balaam to come, with promises that he would promote him to very great honour. He assured him that he would fall in line with all his requirements. Nothing more could have been offered. He was at his wit’s end. He made it clear that all he wanted was that Balaam would come and curse ‘this people’, and that he was willing to pay any price to achieve it.
22.18 ‘And Balaam answered and said to the servants of Balak, “If Balak would give me his house full of silver and gold, I cannot go beyond the word of Yahweh my God, to do less or more.” ’
Note the change of description, ‘the servants of Balak’. To Balaam this impressive deputation were but lackeys to a petty king. He had dealt with higher than these, and he was Balaam. He assured them loftily that wealth mattered nothing if the gods were not responsive. Balak could offer him all his treasure house, but it could not alter the situation. In this particular case where Yahweh was involved he could only act if Yahweh was responsive. He was not at the behest of kings, he was a servant of the gods.
‘Yahweh my God.’ This cannot mean that he was a worshipper of Yahweh for he was later found meddling again along with the Midianites (31.8) seeking to subvert the children of Israel. What he was doing was pointing out to Balak that while he was on reasonable terms with Yahweh he was not Yahweh’s master, but that Yahweh was his master. (To Babylonians he would have said, ‘Marduk my god’.) By ‘my elohim’ he also possibly had in mind one of the particular ‘contacts’ he would use through whom he expected Yahweh would speak to him. But either way he was stressing by it that he responded to gods, not simply made them do what he wanted. Like men gods had to be persuaded, and until they were persuaded he was powerless.
22.19 “Now therefore, I pray you, tarry you also here this night, that I may know what Yahweh will speak to me more.”
So he informed the delegation that they must once again stay overnight in order that he might consult Yahweh and learn more from Him.
The Words of God (22.20).
22.20 ‘And God came to Balaam at night, and said to him, “If the men are come to call you, rise up, go with them; but only the word which I speak to you, that shall you do.” ’
Once the deputation were settled down Balaam began his rites for contacting Yahweh through his spirit contacts. But the One Who came to Balaam that night was no spirit contact, it was ‘God’ Himself. And this time He informed him that he could go with the men, but that he must only speak whatever word God gave to him. Note again the derogatory reference to ‘men’ in contrast with ‘God’. God was not impressed with the size and importance of the deputation.
Balaam Therefore Goes with the Chieftains of Moab (22.21).
22.21 ‘And Balaam rose up in the morning, and saddled his ass, and went with the chieftains of Moab.’
As God had bidden him Balaam rose, saddled his ass, and went with the chieftains of Moab. Note that he was now supposed to be under God’s orders. But it is clear that his thoughts were seemingly otherwise. He was all mixed up. For God knew that while he was obeying Him, he was still thinking in terms of helping the Moabites. He was measuring up how he could ‘persuade’ God to conform to what he wanted. Thus he needed to be taught a lesson.
The Angel of Yahweh Bars The Way Three Times (22.22-35).
22.22 ‘And God’s anger was kindled because he went, and the angel of Yahweh placed himself in the way for an adversary against him. Now he was riding on his ass, and his two servants were with him.’
This verse puzzles many people. Why, they ask, was God angry if Balaam was only doing what he had been told? The reply is that while God had sent Him, He was angry at the very fact that he was going, or even needed to go. He was angry at the whole situation. The whole affair had aroused His wrath. And now that Balaam was actually going His anger at the overall situation was even more aroused, especially as He recognised that Balaam’s submission was not complete.
For this affair was not something of which He approved. He had recognised that if Balaam did not go, someone else would be called and that Balaam’s refusal to go would not have ended the matter. That indeed was the only reason that He had allowed him to go. But He did not believe that Balaam was approaching the matter with the right attitude. So in order to demonstrate His anger in the situation, and so that Balaam might be fully aware of it, He now sent His Angel to act as an adversary and oppose him. It was important that Balaam did not get carried away. He must learn of the precariousness of his situation.
For He recognised that Balaam was not just going as a meek and willing instrument of Yahweh. He was going as his own man. He had his own agenda, and he still probably thought that in the end he could bring Yahweh round to his way of thinking. While God did not mind him going, as long as he was going for the right reason, He knew that that had to be ensured, and that Balaam must be tamed. Thus God was determined to press home on Balaam that he was not as great and influential a man as he thought he was. He was to be made to recognise that, in the end, when it came to spirit contact, his ass was to be seen as more discerning than he was!
Therefore in order to demonstrate Who was in control He sent His angel, the Angel of Yahweh, Who stood in the way before Balaam, (who was riding astride his ass), in order to oppose him. But He did not make Himself visible to Balaam. Incidentally we learn here also that Balaam had two faithful servants with him, who rode in close formation with him. These would probably be the witnesses from whom the whole story was subsequently learned when they were captured among the Midianites later and questioned.
The Angel of Yahweh appears a number of times in the Old Testament when God wanted to reveal Himself visibly while hiding His glory. Compare Genesis 16.7-13; 21.17-20; Judges 6.11-24; 13.3-23. Often the purpose was so that those visited might at first see Him as a man. But in each case it was finally made clear that it was God Himself. Yet the Angel is also partly differentiated from God, and even has communication with Him (Zechariah 1.12). The figure of the Angel therefore reveals the fact of interpersonal communion within God Himself. This would later come more into recognition in Jesus Christ. A good example of a similar figure of judgment to the One revealed here is found in 2 Samuel 24.15-17.
22.23 ‘And the ass saw the angel of Yahweh standing in the way, with his sword drawn in his hand, and the ass turned aside out of the way, and went into the field: and Balaam smote the ass, to turn her into the way.’
It is an undeniable fact that in all kinds of ways animals are very often able to discern strange phenomena, disturbances in their surroundings, when men are oblivious of them. It is not so surprising therefore that an ass should discern an invisible supernatural presence when men were unable to do so (although it would be surprising to people of that day that Balaam could not discern it). Nor do we know what animals actually ‘see’ in such circumstances.
It is, however’ possible that ‘saw’ should be translated as ‘discerned’. What the ass actually saw we cannot know, nor did the ass inform Balaam (we only know the facts and what Balaam saw later - verse 31). So the thought may be that the ass ‘discerned’ this ‘spirit presence’ (the detail of which was later revealed to Balaam in verse 31) and turned aside so as not to have to go past it, with the detailed description being added by the writer who knew what the presence was because of Balaam’s later vision. On the other hand the Angel may have actually made Himself visible to the ass. But if so the ass does not later describe Him.
Whatever is the case the ass discerned what Balaam, the supposed ‘spirit’ discerner, did not. It discerned the presence of the Angel and sought to avoid Him. Balaam the ignorant therefore beat his ass for his waywardness, trying to force him back into the blocked pathway. He was thus depicted as less discerning in the spirit world than his ass, and not quite as great as he liked to appear.
22.24 ‘Then the angel of Yahweh stood in a narrow path between the vineyards, a wall being on this side, and a wall on that side.’
The ass, having left the road to avoid the presence that it had discerned, took the only way open to it and went along a narrow path between two vineyards, which had walls on either side. So the Angel then moved and stood in that path.
22.25 ‘And the ass saw the angel of Yahweh, and she thrust herself to the wall, and crushed Balaam’s foot against the wall, and he smote her again.’
The ass, discerning the Angel again, pressed against one of the walls in order to avoid Him. It was clearly terrified at this strange presence. The result was that Balaam’s foot was trapped against the wall. So he beat his ass again. This repeated emphasis is in order to stress Balaam’s spiritual blindness. He himself was still totally unaware of the ‘presence’.
22.26 ‘And the angel of Yahweh went further, and stood in a narrow place, where there was no way to turn either to the right hand or to the left.’
The angel then allowed the ass through by moving away, and the ass continued along the pathway to a place where it was so narrow that there was no way of turning any way at all. And there the ass discerned the mysterious presence standing in his way again.
22.27 ‘And the ass saw the angel of Yahweh, and she lay down under Balaam. And Balaam’s anger was kindled, and he smote the ass with his staff.’
This was just too much and with no alternative direction to take the ass now collapsed to the ground in fear. Meanwhile Balaam could not understand his ass’s strange behaviour and beat it again. Here was the great prophet and diviner, but he had no clue about what was happening, even though to his ass the spirit presence was obvious.
So Balaam is here depicted as very much limited. The ancients recognised that strange animal behaviour might well indicate activity of the gods, and therefore this behaviour of his ass should have warned Balaam that something unusual was happening. But he was shown to be so undiscerning that he not only failed to be aware of the presence of the Angel, but also failed to pick up the messages from his ass.
22.28 ‘And Yahweh opened the mouth of the ass, and she said to Balaam, “What have I done to you, that you have smitten me these three times?’
Then Yahweh intervened in order to ram home His message. He spoke through the ass. Moses was used to hearing the voice of Yahweh from between the cherubim (7.89). Balaam received it from between the ass’s ears. It would be quite clear to all who was the greater prophet. But there is no reason why Yahweh should not speak in one way or the other. So to Balaam the voice seemed to be coming from his ass.
The question we may ask is, ‘Was there a genuine voice from the ass, or was it just within Balaam’s cognition?’ A man like Balaam would certainly have experiences of which ordinary men knew nothing. He would be used to ‘hearing voices’. So it is a question that we cannot answer. But what mattered was that Balaam got the message.
To him then the voice spoke as though from the ass. It asked why the ass should be blamed to such an extent that it had been beaten three times, that is, given a thorough beating.
22.29 ‘And Balaam said to the ass, “Because you have mocked me. I would there were a sword in my hand, for now I would have killed you.” ’
We must not read too much into a story expressed in simple terms, but Balaam’s lack of surprise may indicate that in fact Balaam was used to hearing spirit voices from his ass, and indeed sometimes used it as a kind of spirit medium. (Asses were not figures of fun in those days. Kings rode on them to their coronations. Some modern spiritists claim to have used their cats in the same way). Either way Balaam spoke back boldly to his ass. This was what this great man had come to! And he declared that quite frankly he felt like killing him. Indeed had he had a sword he would have done so. The comment would bring a wry smile to the reader’s face, for he would be aware that there was a drawn sword around, but it was not in the hand of Balaam but in the hand of the Angel of Yahweh.
22.30 ‘And the ass said to Balaam, “Am I not your ass, on which you have ridden all your life long to this day? Was I ever wont to do so to you?”. And he said, “No.” ’
The voice from the ass then pointed out that the ass had been his faithful companion for a long time. Could Balaam ever remember him behaving in this way before? The inference was that Balaam should therefore have known that something unusual was happening and should have discerned the apparition. He was supposed to be a discerner of spirits. Again the emphasis was on how lacking in discernment he was.
22.31 ‘Then Yahweh opened the eyes of Balaam, and he saw the angel of Yahweh standing in the way, with his sword drawn in his hand. And he bowed his head, and fell on his face.’
And then Yahweh opened the eyes of Balaam. Note the stress. It required the power of Yahweh to give this prophet true discernment, and it was His power that enabled Balaam to see the unseeable (compare 24.3-4). And the result was that Balaam saw the angel of Yahweh, with His sword drawn in His hand, standing in the way to prevent them from moving forward. And then all he could do was bow his head and fall on his face just as his ass had done. Balaam could now do nothing before Yahweh except submit. It is being made apparent that his position did not give him a sense of superiority to the gods, especially to Yahweh.
22.32-33 ‘And the angel of Yahweh said to him, “Why have you smitten your ass these three times? Behold, I am come forth as an adversary, because your way is perverse before me. And the ass saw me, and turned aside before me these three times. Unless she had turned aside from me, surely now I would have even slain you, and saved her alive.” ’
Then the Angel spoke to him directly. All pretence was thrown aside. He made the position absolutely clear. He should recognise that the faithful ass had saved his life. Why then had he beaten it when all it had done was seek to save its master’s life? For He, ‘the Angel of Yahweh’, had come as his adversary to prevent his going forward, if necessary by slaying him, so as to emphasise even more that what he was aiming to do was displeasing to Yahweh. It was only the behaviour of his ass which had saved him. (So much for the ‘swallower of nations’).
22.34 ‘And Balaam said to the angel of Yahweh, “I have sinned, for I did not know that you stood in the way against me. Now therefore, if it displease you, I will get me back again.” ’
This brought home to Balaam the recognition that he was dealing with something such as he had never faced before. This situation was unusual and he recognised that Yahweh was angry at his behaviour. He admitted that his whole attitude was wrong. He should never have considered going with the men even though Yahweh had told him to. It was putting him into conflict with the spirit world, and that was not what he wanted. But he pointed out in mitigation that he had not realised what the true position was. It was not that he was trying to oppose God. He had not realised that the Angel was standing in the way against him (even though his ass did!). So if the Angel was displeased he would return home.
22.35 ‘And the angel of Yahweh said to Balaam, “Go with the men, but only the word that I shall speak to you, that you shall speak.” So Balaam went with the princes of Balak.’
The Angel of Yahweh was now satisfied that he had learned his lesson and informed him that he could again go forward, but that when he did so he must ensure that he only spoke what Yahweh told him to speak. Balaam had had his warning.
Balaam’s Arrival in Moab (22.36-38).
22.36 ‘And when Balak heard that Balaam was come, he went out to meet him to the City of Moab (or ‘a city of Moab’), which is on the border of the Arnon, which is in the utmost part of the border.’
Meanwhile Balak learned that he was coming, and Balaam’s importance was such that Balak went with an official welcoming party to the very borders of Moab. ’Ir of Moab may have been the name of the city. Or the idea may simply be to indicate ‘a border city’. It was on the banks of the Arnon, the extreme border of Moab.
22.37 ‘And Balak said to Balaam, “Did I not earnestly send to you to call you? Why did you not come to me? Am I not able indeed to promote you to honour?” ’
When the two parties met up Balak, while remembering whom he was speaking to, expressed his displeasure. He could not understand why Balaam had prevaricated and had delayed coming. Had he not been made aware of the urgency of his request? Why then had he not come immediately the first time? Did he not recognise the honour that Balak could bestow on him? The stress that Balak felt himself under with the Israelite threat just across the border comes out in his aggravation at the slight delay. (Kings are used to saying what they want, but some of Balak’s followers may have been apprehensive about him speaking to the mighty Balaam in this way. They did not know about the incident of the ass).
22.38 ‘And Balaam said to Balak, “Lo, I am come to you. Have I now any power at all to speak anything? The word that God puts in my mouth, that shall I speak.” ’
Balaam haughtily pointed out that he should be satisfied with the fact that he was here. But with his recent experience in mind he emphasised that he was not in a position to speak anything he wanted. He could only speak what God put in his mouth. And that is all that he would speak. Balak was satisfied with that. After all, that was Balaam’s speciality, making gods do what he wanted.
22.39-40 ‘ And Balaam went with Balak, and they came to Kiriath-huzoth. And Balak sacrificed (or ‘slaughtered’) oxen and sheep, and sent to Balaam, and to the chieftains who were with him.’
Balak then took Balaam and the chieftains to a city named Kiriath-huzoth, and there Balak offered sacrifices and from the sacrifices provided food for them. ‘Sacrificed (slaughtered).’ This may simply have indicated the slaughtering of animals for a feast, or may have included a ritual ceremony of sacrifices to Chemosh, the god of Moab, and possibly to the god of the Midianites. Note how the whole account began with the chieftains and ends with them.
The Threefold Activity of Balaam In Moab (22.41-24.13).
In what follows we now have a triad of attempts by Balak to curse Israel which all follow the same pattern. These are sandwiched between Balaam going with Balak (22.41) and Balaam being bidden to return home (24.12-13). This parallels the triad of encounters with the Angel of Yahweh in the first passage. The reader is intended to see Balaam’s activity in terms of the noble ass, just as Israel were to be seen metaphorically as like a lion or a lioness (23.24; 24.9) and Yahweh as a large horned wild-ox (23.22; 24.8).
This comes out in that there are significant parallels and contrasts with the first account. Here Balak is seen as driving on a reluctant Balaam in the same way as Balaam drove on his reluctant ass. As the noble ass was really controlled, not by his rider but by the angel of Yahweh, so was Balaam to be seen as really controlled, not by Balak, but by Yahweh. Furthermore this happened because Balaam could see what Balak could not see, just as the noble ass could see what Balaam could not see. So Balaam has now replaced the ass as the ‘instrument’ of Yahweh. And as Balaam was angry with his ass three times, so Balak was angry with Balaam three times. As God finally spoke through the ass, so finally did the Spirit of Yahweh come on Balaam (24.2) who was now ‘the man whose eyes are open’ (24.3, 15), and speak through him. This does not represent Balaam as ‘an ass’ in any derogatory sense, it depicts him as an unwilling instrument of Yahweh, as the noble ass was, but whose eyes were now open as they had not been previously. Thus the incident of the ass illuminates all that follows. Balaam was seen to be as much in subjection to Yahweh as his ass had been to him.
Analysis.
Balaam Accompanies Balak To Have A Look At The Target (22.41).
Balaam having arrived Balak’s first action was to take him to see the people he was being called on to target.
Note the gradual increasing of the degree in which Balaam could ‘look on’ Israel. First the ‘utmost part’ (compare 23.13), then from Peor all Israel, ‘Israel dwelling according to their tribes’ (24.2)
Also note once again the phrase ‘in the morning’ (compare verses 13, 21).
Chapter 23 Two Attempts To Influence Yahweh That Fail.
The First Attempt To Influence Yahweh (23.1-12).
23.1 ‘And Balaam said to Balak, “Build me here seven altars, and prepare me here seven ox bulls and seven rams.” ’
Balaam set about the task he had been given willingly enough. He called on Balak to build seven altars and prepare for sacrifice on them seven ox bulls and seven rams. The sevenfoldness was intended to appeal to the gods. All nations saw ‘seven’ as a divine number. The offerings were intended to please Balaam’s ‘contacts’, including, from his point of view, Yahweh, Who could possibly be persuaded by them to change His mind. This was seemingly Balaam’s usual method, and it usually ‘worked’.
Up to this point Balaam had only ever dealt with the lower spirit world. In those circumstances he was usually able to work it so that he got back a message whereby those whom he sought to contact fell in line with his desires. But he had never had to deal with the true God before.
This pattern of sacrifices is paralleled elsewhere. A Babylonian tablet declares, ‘At dawn in the presence of Ea, Shamash and Marduk (Babylonian deities) you must set up seven altars --- and pour out the blood of seven sheep’. In that case too the diviner would then proceed to contact his ‘gods’, having persuaded them to help him.
23.2 ‘And Balak did as Balaam had said, and Balak and Balaam offered on every altar an ox bull and a ram.’
Balak did what Balaam requested and between them they offered an ox bull and a ram on each altar. These were whole burnt offerings (verse 3), ‘that which goes up’. The whole went up to the heavens.
23.3 ‘And Balaam said to Balak, “Stand by your whole burnt offering, and I will go. Perhaps Yahweh will come to meet me. And whatever he shows me I will tell you.” And he went to a bare height.’
Balaam then told Balak to stand by his whole burnt offering, as an indication that he was identifying himself with it, and letting the spirit world know that these magnificent offerings came from Balak who now sought their assistance. Then possibly he might get a favourable response. At this stage it would seem that Balaam still thought that he might get a changed response from Yahweh. He had never met Yahweh’s like before.
23.4 ‘And God met Balaam, and he said to him, “I have prepared the seven altars, and I have offered up an ox bull and a ram on every altar.”
Note the change again to ‘God’. It was important that Balaam was faced up with the fact that he was not here dealing with a local deity, but with the only true God. ‘And God met with him.’ Balaam was seeking some sort of ‘contact. He obtained more than he had expected, for God Himself came to him. So to God he explained that he had followed out his usual procedure. He had prepared seven altars and offered seven twofold offerings. Normally this would result in his ‘control’ coming back to him with a positive response. But this time he was dealing with something outside his experience. He was dealing with Yahweh, the true God. His enchantments were not working to pattern (see 24.1).
23.5 ‘And Yahweh put a word in Balaam’s mouth, and said, “Return to Balak, and thus you shall say.”
The result was that he received from Yahweh the message that he was to pass on. Note that it was Yahweh who ‘put the word in his mouth’. The message was reliable.
23.6 ‘And he returned to him, and, lo, he was standing by his whole burnt offering, he, and all the chieftains of Moab.’
So Balaam returned to where Balak and his chieftains were expectantly waiting, the latter confident that this would solve the problem of Israel once and for all. For who could stand against the enchantments of Balaam, the son of Beor? He was not aware of the experiences that Balaam had been through.
So Balaam then delivered his message, probably in a trance-like state (24.3-4, 15-17), for we note from 24.1 that Balaam was said to be ‘using enchantments’. Note the word used of Balaam’s prophetic words (‘parable, saying’), a word never used of the prophets’ full scale prophecies (although used of illustrations used by them). A ‘parable’ (mashal) was a proverb, saying, parable, similitude, and in this case an oracle or incantation expressed metaphorically.
23.7a-10 ‘And he took up his incantation (parable),
Note again the chiastic arrangement, expressing parallel thoughts.
23.7b-10 Still under the final ‘control’ of Yahweh Balaam uttered his incantation, and tried to work his enchantments, but the words he spoke were not what anyone expected..
‘From Aram has Balak brought me, the king of Moab from the mountains of the East. Come, curse me Jacob, and come, defy Israel. How shall I curse, whom God has not cursed? And how shall I defy, whom Yahweh has not defied?’
Note the parallels. Balak had brought him from Aram (from Syria), the king of Moab had brought him from the mountains of the East. His reference to ‘the mountains of the east’ was probably supposed to impress. He had contact with the gods of the east! Thus was he declaring in his trance-like state the source of the request to these higher powers. Balak was speaking through one with powerful contacts among the gods. Then he added what the request was. That Jacob be cursed, that Israel be defied. He wanted Yahweh to turn against His own people. Up to this point Balak would have been delighted with what he heard. He was soon to be disillusioned.
For, still caught up in his trance, Balaam then cried, ‘How shall I curse, whom God has not cursed? And how shall I defy, whom Yahweh has not defied?’ This may have been the response of his own spirit control. In spite of his willingness to please Balak he found himself unable to curse or defy them. God had expressed His unwillingness, Yahweh had refused. And He alone could have ensured the curse on them. Thus Balaam recognised that it was impossible for him or his ‘control’ to alter the situation.
He then pointed out in his trance three things about Israel as given in the word of Yahweh. Looking down from the high point on which they were, from ‘the heights of Baal’, the place where ‘gods’ were met with, he first declared that Israel were set apart, a people who dwelt apart, a people not numbered among the nations. They were different and unique. This situation was similar to that described in Exodus 19.5-6 where Israel were declared to be a ‘holy’ people, God’s own treasured possession, a kingdom of priests. They were thus to be seen as unique compared with all other nations. Compare Genesis 15.13-16. They were a chosen nation destined for a chosen land. See Deuteronomy 7.6.
Secondly he pointed out that their numbers were as ‘the dust’, and that even one fourth of them would not be countable. They were thus innumerable. (This may have had in mind the part of the Israelite camp that he could see clearly, those on the south side who would be one fourth of the whole). This expressed the fulfilment of the promises made to the Patriarch that their descendants would be as the dust of the earth, and innumerable like the sands (Genesis 13.16; 22.17; 28.14). Such multiplication of numbers would be seen by all as an indication of their being greatly blessed.
And finally he pointed out that they were ‘righteous’, a nation in covenant with Yahweh who were being obedient to Him (see Deuteronomy 6.25). Indeed they were so greatly blessed that he wished his end could be like theirs, following a long and prosperous life, and that he could die with the privileges that they enjoyed. For they were chosen and unique. (There is a twist to this wish. The reader is aware that he will soon be dead at the hands of these very people (31.8)).
23.11 ‘And Balak said to Balaam, “What have you done to me? I took you to curse my enemies, and, behold, you have blessed them altogether.” ’
This was not at all what Balak had wanted to hear. He could not believe his ears, and turning to Balaam he asked him if he realised what he had done to him. He had wanted his enemies cursed, and instead Balaam had counted them as blessed. This was not what he was being paid for.
23.12 ‘And he answered and said, “Must I not take heed to speak what Yahweh puts in my mouth?” ’
Balaam’s reply was simple. He did not control the words that came through his mouth. He could only speak the words that he was ‘given’ and which Yahweh put in his mouth through his control (or possibly in this unusual case directly). He had done his best by the arrangement of the offerings in his usual manner, but these had seemingly not swayed Yahweh.
The Second Attempt To Influence Yahweh (23.13-26).
23.13 ‘And Balak said to him, “Come, I pray you, with me to another place, from where you may see them. You shall see but the utmost part of them, and shall not see them all. And curse me them from there.” ’
It is interesting to note that Balak reluctantly accepted the explanation and decided that this particular height clearly brought them in contact with ‘gods’ not favourable to their cause. These were ‘the heights of Baal’. Clearly Baal was in league with Yahweh. The solution must therefore be to try another place. Perhaps on a new mountain the gods there could be persuaded to call on Yahweh to act in his favour. We see from this something of the beliefs of people outside Israel, and the uniqueness of Israel’s religion.
‘You shall see but the utmost part of them, and shall not see them all.’ The impression being given is that their numbers were so large that wherever they stood they could not all be seen at once.
23.14 ‘And he took him to the field of Zophim (the watchers), to the top of the Pisgah, and built seven altars, and offered up an ox bull and a ram on every altar.’
This time Balak took Balaam to the field of Zophim, to the top of the Pisgah. There again they went through the motions of Balaam’s usual approach to his control. Zophim means ‘the watchers’. The previous site was the ‘heights of Baal’. The names may therefore link with particular deities seen as connected with particular Moabite holy places.
23.15 ‘And he said to Balak, “Stand here by your whole burnt offering, while I meet yonder.” ’
Once again Balaam told Balak to stand by his offering. This was important so that the ‘gods’ would know to whom they owed this offering that they had received, and might be persuaded by it. It was a considerable offering. Then he went to ‘meet’ whoever would appear.
23.16 ‘And Yahweh met Balaam, and put a word in his mouth, and said, “Return to Balak, and thus shall you speak.” ’
Once again Balaam sought his ‘control’, and once again Yahweh met with him and put His word in Balaam’s mouth (either through Balaam’s control, or more probably directly). He was to go back with it to Balak.
23.17 ‘And he came to him, and, lo, he was standing by his whole burnt offering, and the princes of Moab with him. And Balak said to him, “What has Yahweh spoken?” ’
Then Balaam returned to where Balak was, obediently standing by his offering with his chieftains. They were agog to know what, message he had received, what Yahweh had spoken. They were hopeful that this time it would be satisfactory, and that Yahweh had been turned against His people. After all he had offered fourteen ox bulls.
23.18a-24 ‘And he took up his incantation (parable),’
Once again Balaam gave out his incantation. Note even here the chiastic construction.
23.18b-24 They were soon to be disillusioned. The second trance statement began more directly than the first. It asked Balak if he really thought that Yahweh would change His mind.
‘Rise up, Balak, and hear. Listen to me, you son of Zippor. God is not a man, that he should lie, nor the son of man, that he should repent. Has he said, and will he not do it? Or has he spoken, and will he not make it good?’ He learned that Yahweh was not ‘a man’, who might be liable to lie. He was not ‘a son of man’ (the equivalent of ‘man’) that He should change His mind. What He had said, He would do. What He had spoken He would make happen. Thus the word already given was sure of fulfilment. But now in the light of this second approach more was to be added in favour of Israel.
So Balaam then went on to declare that, ‘Behold, I have received the word to bless, and he has blessed, and I cannot reverse it.’ In other words, as Yahweh had chosen to bless Israel, Balaam had no alternative but to declare that blessing. It was something that he was unable to reject or reverse. It was not in his hands to decide.
‘He has not beheld iniquity in Jacob, Nor has he seen perverseness in Israel.’ The hope had always been that in some way ‘Yahweh’ could be made to find fault with Israel or could be persuaded to ‘foresee’ some trouble or misfortune ahead for them. After all the ‘gods’ of other nations were very often seen as taking it out on their people because of some reason or other, or for no reason at all, and could therefore be bribed to cooperate. (Balaam was not used to dealing with the Sovereign God). But he had learned that Yahweh would find no fault with Israel, and that He could see no trouble or misfortune ahead for them, or at least not the kind that could make Him curse them.
Then he declared what Balak did not want to hear (and what Israel did want to hear). ‘Yahweh his God is with him, and the shout of a king is among them.’
Far from being displeased with His people, he declared, Yahweh was ‘with them’ as their God. He was enthroned among them as their king to Whom they shouted their allegiance. All was well between them and their God. The parallelism confirms that the king in mind here is Yahweh. So this people whom Balak wanted Yahweh to curse actually acknowledged Him as their king and shouted their allegiance to Him, because He was with them and among them. There was therefore no likelihood that He would curse them.
What was more, he pointed out, ‘God brings them forth out of Egypt, He has as it were the towering horns or strength of the wild-ox.’ Not only was Yahweh their King, but as their God Who was among them He had brought them out of Egypt with His mighty power, power and strength which was like that of the towering horns of a mighty wild-ox, totally irresistible. He was thus not a God to be messed around with. And He was the Deliverer of this people.
Nothing was known that had greater strength than the wild ox with its mighty horns. It was untameable. And thus had Israel’s God shown Himself to be of invincible power,
‘Surely there is no enchantment with Jacob, nor is there any divination with Israel.’ This parallels the statement that He found no iniquity in them (verse 21). He now added that it was really no good trying to fight Israel with enchantments. For enchantments could only counter other enchantments. But Jacob/Israel did not use enchantments. He had been able to discern none among them.
We find here a remarkable confirmation of the fact that at this stage Israel were free from those who worked enchantments, as God’s Instruction had demanded that they should be (Exodus 22.18; Leviticus 19.26, 31; 20.6, 27; Deuteronomy 18.10-12). Israel were not involved in any way in the occult.
‘Now shall it be said of Jacob, and of Israel, What has God wrought!’. Here the parallel is with the fact that God had blessed them (verse 20). They had rather trusted in their God, and He had wrought on their behalf. Thus he, Balaam the enchanter, had no power against them. They were outside his sphere.
‘Behold, the people rise up as a lioness, and as a lion does he lift himself up. He shall not lie down until he eat of the prey, and drink the blood of the slain.’ Balaam then finished his prophecy by declaring that Israel were, in fact, like a lioness rising up to commence the hunt, and that Yahweh Himself was like a lion, not lying down again until He has seized the prey. To ‘drink the blood of the slain’ metaphorically referred simply to partaking in their death. All knew that a pack of lions, once they had been roused to the hunt, did not lie down again until they had been successful. This parallels ‘Has He said, and will He not do it? Or has He spoken, and will He not make it good?’
So all were to take note that Israel were to be feared because Yahweh was with them. And that like a lioness they should not be disturbed, lest they rise and seize the prey. It was best to let sleeping lions lie.
‘To drink the blood of the slain’. Later Jesus would charge the Pharisees with ‘drinking His blood’ in slaying Him. Their fathers had partaken of the blood of the prophets (Matthew 23.30) and now they were seeking His. Yet it was well they did so, for only through the shedding of that blood could men receive life and forgiveness from Him by partaking in the benefit of His death (John 6.48-63).
23.25 ‘And Balak said to Balaam, “Neither curse them at all, nor bless them at all.” ’
Balak had heard enough. He begged Balaam neither to curse or bless them, for it would be better if he did nothing than that he should bless them again as he had done previously. This was strengthening them, not weakening them.
23.26 ‘But Balaam answered and said to Balak, “Did I not tell you, saying, All that Yahweh says, that I must do?” ’
But Balaam replied that there was nothing that he could do about it. As he had already told him, if he contacted Yahweh he had to do what Yahweh said. In matters like this he was not his own master.
The Third Attempt To Influence Yahweh (23.27-24.13).
The previous two attempts at enchantment having failed Balak decided that he must try again, this time with Baal-peor. Some may wondered at Balak’s persistence, but both he and Balaam probably thought that the next seven offerings would do the trick. For seven times three would be divine completeness and perfection indeed.
23.27-28 ‘And Balak said to Balaam, “Come now, I will take you to another place. Perhaps it will please God that you may curse me them from there.” And Balak took Balaam to the top of Peor, which looks down on the desert.’
The stark mountain of Peor was his last hope. Here surely Baal-peor would come to his help against these people. So he took Balaam there and called on him to make another attempt to curse Israel for him.
23.29 ‘And Balaam said to Balak, “Build me here seven altars, and prepare me here seven ox bulls and seven rams.” ’
Balaam again called on him to follow his usual pattern. It had always ‘worked’ in the past. Another munificent offering to the gods might be successful, and might change Yahweh’s mind. Three times seven was complete divine perfection.
There is in all this a deliberate intent in the writer’s mind to bring out the futility of Balaam’s methods and Balak’s hopes. Yahweh the God of Israel just could not be influenced by these methods. He was over and above them. They were useless. Balaam might be powerful in his own sphere but against God he was powerless. All he could do was prophecy in His favour.
23.30 ‘And Balak did as Balaam had said, and offered up an ox bull and a ram on every altar.’
So Balak again did all that was required of him. An ox bull and a ram were offered up on each of seven altars.
Chapter 24 Balaam’s Final Failed Attempt Is Followed By Various Prophecies.
24.1 ‘And when Balaam saw that it pleased Yahweh to bless Israel, he did not go not, as at the other times, to meet with enchantments, but he set his face toward the wilderness.’
Balaam now recognised that it was Yahweh’s intention to bless Israel. So he realised that his enchantments, his ‘persuaders’, would not work and decided to try another tack. He would set his face towards the wilderness and seek to enter into a trance. Perhaps that would work.
24.2 ‘And Balaam lifted up his eyes, and he saw (or ‘looked on’) Israel dwelling according to their tribes, and the Spirit of God came on him.’
And there Balaam fixed his eyes on Israel dwelling in their usual formation, in their tribes. Now he saw the whole of Israel. And as he did so ‘the Spirit of God’ came on him, and he prophesied. What resulted was not his intention but he is seen as having no choice in the matter. Yahweh intervened again to make him bless Israel.
24.3a ‘And he took up his incantation (parable), and said,’
Here he begins with what was clearly his normal way of going into deep trance and follows it with a series of contrasts presented chiastically.
24.3b-9 Note how different is the opening here. Balaam is deliberately going into a visionary state.
‘Balaam the son of Beor says; And the man whose eye was closed says; He says, who hears the words of God, who sees the vision of the Almighty, falling down (or ‘falling into a trance’), and having his eyes open.’ These first phrases would instantly refer back in the reader’s mind to the incident with his ass. There Balaam’s eyes had been closed. That may also have been Balaam’s intention if rumours had begun to spread around about what had happened, (and it was not the kind of thing that servants kept to themselves). But then he had heard the words of God, and had seen the vision of the Almighty, and had fallen down and had his eyes opened (see 22.31, ‘then Yahweh opened the eyes of Balaam and he saw the Angel of Yahweh -- and he bowed his head and fell on his face -- and the Angel of Yahweh said to him’).
But these phrases may also be words that Balaam regularly used when working himself into a trance, with the name of the right god inserted in each case. He was revealing himself as one who can move from having his eyes closed to having his eyes opened by meeting with, in this case, ‘the Almighty’ (Shaddai). Note the change of title. Calling on Yahweh by His other title ‘the Almighty’ (Shaddai) might succeed.
So the process is outlined. His ‘eyes’ are first closed, then he hears the words of God, then he sees the vision of Shaddai, then he falls into a trance, then his eyes are opened. In his trance-like state all is now ready for him to affect issues by his words.
Once again his incantation could hardly please the frustrated Balak. ‘How goodly are your tents, O Jacob, Your tabernacles, O Israel! As valleys are they spread forth, As gardens by the riverside, As fragrant aloes (aromatic trees) which Yahweh has planted, As cedar trees beside the waters.’ Israel’s tents were to be ‘goodly’, prosperous and flourishing and fruitful. They were to be like valleys fed by water which are thus luxuriant, like gardens by the riverside which therefore flourish, like aromatic trees which Yahweh has planted giving pleasure to all around, the kind of trees found in king’s gardens (they were Yahweh’s planting - compare Psalm 1.3; Isaiah 27.2-6), and as cedar trees beside the waters, which grow very strong. Cedar trees were not noted for being by water, but the thought was that a cedar in such a place would be even stronger and more luxuriant than normal. Note the emphasis again on water. Nothing mattered to ancient peoples more than water. It was their life source. So Israel’s dwellingplaces would be like fruitful valleys, like flowering gardens, like scented trees and like strong cedars made even stronger by being by the riverside. All these were pictures of what was most desirable to mankind.
‘Water shall flow from his buckets, and his seed shall be in many waters.’ This probably indicates fruitfulness in childbearing, and the spreading of His people like refreshing and reviving water among the nations so as to bless them and bring justice to the world. In them will all the families of the earth be blessed (Genesis 12.3; 18.18; 22.18; 28.14). They will flow out to the nations like water and dwell among them abundantly, as the waters of Eden went out to all the world (Genesis 2.10-14).
The thought of water as an agent of life and blessing and bringer in of justice is found everywhere in Scripture. Compare here Isaiah 33.20-22, where Jerusalem would be like an immovable tent where Yahweh would be with His people in majesty, and it would be a place of broad rivers and streams, because Yahweh was their judge, lawgiver and king. Consider also Ezekiel 47.1-12 (compare 26.25-28) where the flowing forth of water brought life, as expanded in John 7.38, ‘out of your innermost being will flow rivers of living water’; and the going forth of God’s Instruction, and the word of Yahweh from Jerusalem (Isaiah 2.3). Consider also the constant picture throughout Isaiah of spiritual blessedness in terms of water, Isaiah 32.15-17; 33.20-22; 35.1, 7; 44.3-5; 45.8; 55.1, 10-13; 58.11.
‘And his king shall be higher than Agag, and his kingdom shall be exalted.’ Agag was probably a royal name of the Amalekite kings like Pharaoh was of Egypt and Abimelech of the Philistines. The Amalekites were doughty fighters, and their Agag was seen as wielding widespread power because of the widespread nature of the Amalekites as they spread over the wilderness descending to take their pickings where they would (compare 13.45; Exodus 17.8-16; Judges 6.3, 33; 7.12). Agag was feared, but Israel’s future king (whether heavenly or earthly, for the king in mind here may be God) would be more feared. He would enjoy more power and more widespread influence than Agag. Note how Balaam also prophesies against the Amalekites in 24.20 demonstrating that Amalek were very much in his mind. An Amalekite king under the name was defeated by Saul and slain by Samuel in 1 Samuel 15.8, 9, 32, 33. Haman the Agag-ite in Esther 3.1 etc. possibly traced his descent back to the dynasty (Josephus links him with the Amalekites).
‘His king.’ The King here is probably Yahweh (compare verse 21). But it would not be surprising if Balaam spoke of Israel’s ‘king’. He probably knew little of the way in which Israel was run, and would assume a supreme ruler. To him that would be expressed in terms of ‘king’, for all nations in one way or another had a king. His point was simply that whoever ruled Israel would be exalted, and that the sphere of their rule would be exalted. It is not prophesying a particular king.
‘God brings him forth out of Egypt. He has as it were the towering horns/strength of the wild-ox. He shall eat up the nations his adversaries, and shall break their bones in pieces, and smite them through with his arrows.’ Again he compares God as the Deliverer from Egypt to a mighty wild ox, eating up the nations as a wild ox devours the vegetation; breaking their bones in pieces as a wild ox treads down those who stand in its way; and smiting them through with his arrows, because He is more than just a wild ox, but a wild ox typifying a mighty warrior. Who can withstand such a God? And He is on Israel’s side.
The eating up of the nations is in contrast with Israel’s seed in many waters. In the one case blessing, in the other judgment. It is the former who are to be blessed and the latter who are to be cursed.
‘He couches, he lay down as a lion, and as a lioness; who shall rouse him up?’ As 23.24 suggests this description is of Yahweh and his consort Israel. Yahweh is identified with His people. They are like an established pride of lions at rest, best avoided and left undisturbed, lest they rend those who disturb them. It is a brave and foolish people who dare to stir them up. This picture of the sleeping pride of contented lions parallels the earlier pictures of Israel like watered gardens and valleys, and aromatic and towering trees.
‘Blessed be every one who blesses you, And cursed be every one who curses you.’ This parallels the ‘goodly tents’ of Jacob (verse 5). They are a people blessed by Yahweh. Thus all who bless them will be blessed, and all who curse then will be cursed, a real smack in the face to Balak.
So with this all round picture of Yahweh’s blessings on Israel we can understand why Balak might feel that somehow he was not being fairly treated.
24.10 ‘And Balak’s anger was kindled against Balaam, and he smote his hands together, and Balak said to Balaam, “I called you to curse my enemies, and, behold, you have altogether blessed them these three times.” ’
By this time Balak was very angry. He smote his hands together in his fury and cried, ‘I called you to curse my enemies and --- you have blessed them three times.’ A threefold blessing was completeness of blessing. Thus instead of a curse they had received multiplied blessing. The very opposite of what Balak had wanted had been accomplished.
24.11 “Therefore now flee you to your place. I thought to promote you to great honour, but, lo, Yahweh has kept you back from honour.”
Then he warned him to flee before vengeance overtook him. He had been given hospitality and could therefore not be harmed, but let him not assume that he would be safe if he stayed around. And he reminded him that he had intended to give him great honour and that Yahweh had kept him back from it. So he would do well to offer less of these eulogies about Yahweh Who had robbed him of so much.
24.12-13 ‘And Balaam said to Balak, “Did I not speak also to your messengers whom you sent to me, saying, “If Balak would give me his house full of silver and gold, I cannot go beyond the word of Yahweh, to do either good or bad of my own mind. What Yahweh says, that will I speak?”
But Balaam replied equally strongly and reminded him that he had done nothing other than he had said he would do. He had said from the beginning that even if Balak gave him his treasure house stocked to the brim, he would not go beyond the word of Yahweh. He would not, nay could not, do good or bad in his own mind. It was not within his ability to do so. He was not the master of the gods, he was their interpreter. He could only say what Yahweh had said to him. (He would have made the same reply to a Babylonian king about Marduk. His view was that he dealt with ‘gods’ and even though he did try to influence their decisions, and had ways of doing so, in the end simply brought the message that they gave, and was in no position to force them if they did not respond as he wanted. All he could do was keep trying).
The Prophecies of Balaam (24.14-25).
Balaam then told Balak that he would be returning to his people. This may signify his fellow soothsayers, living together as a people. Or it may simply mean he was returning to the Amavites. However, before doing so, being in prophetic mode, he offered him a prophecy for free. In view of Balak’s attitude it no doubt gave him great satisfaction, for in it he foresees the defeat of Moab.
Analysis.
24.14 “And now, behold, I go to my people. Come, and I will advertise you what this people shall do to your people in the latter days.”
Balaam then declared that he was returning to his people, but was meanwhile in such constraint in spirit that he had to give another prophetic declaration concerning the distant future of ‘this people’, the Israelites.
Balaam Prophesies Concerning Israel (24.15-19)
24.15 ‘And he took up his oracle (parable), and said,
(Note how the introduction follows the usual pattern, taken up again in what follows).
As before he goes into a trance. ‘Whose eye was closed’ may be a wry reference to his experience on the road with his ass, rumours of which may have been spreading around. Compare verse 3. But as previously the whole first phrases were his way of ‘entering’ the sphere of the gods.
‘I see him, but not now, I behold him, but not nigh,’ He firstly declares that what he speaks of is not to happen in the near future. It refers to the distant future (compare 24.14). It is ‘not now, -- not near’. Indeed in all his proclamations the ‘far future’ is in mind. Thus he had desired that his last end should be like that of Israel, one that resulted in length of days because of righteousness (23.10), he had stressed that the lioness of Israel would not lie down until with Yahweh they had eaten of the prey and drunk the blood of the slain (23.14), he had looked ahead to Israel’s seed being in many waters, his king higher than Agag, and his kingdom exalted (24.7). Now he was to speak further of that king.
‘There shall come forth a star out of Jacob, And a sceptre shall rise out of Israel.’ As already mentioned the question as to what ‘king’ is meant is not to be particularised. It is not even a prophecy that Israel would have ‘a king’. He simply speaks of their supreme ruler, something which he would assume for them as for all nations. His expression for such would be ‘melek’. He would almost certainly have used that title of Moses. And because Israel were to be exalted, so would be their supreme ruler. Indeed their heaven-supported ‘king’ would be part of the cause of their rise. And here he sees one such in terms of a ‘rising star’, and a ‘sceptre’, one who would be special and would one day smite Moab, and Edom, and Mount Seir, and all who caused trouble to Israel.
‘And shall smite through the corners of Moab, And break down all the sons of tumult. And Edom shall be a possession, Seir also, His enemies, shall be a possession.’ So Moab would be smitten from corner to corner, Edom would be possessed, Seir (His enemies) would be a possession. Thus He would possess both land and people. Those who would cause trouble to Israel are depicted as ‘the sons of tumult’. This might especially have in mind the desert peoples like the Midianites, whom Balaam had already met as being antagonistic towards Israel, the Amalekites, whose fierce king he had already mentioned, and the Kenites (see below).
‘While Israel does valiantly. And out of Jacob shall one have dominion, And shall destroy the remnant from the city.’ He would with his people ‘do valiantly’ and would have wide dominion, and would ‘destroy the remnant from the city’, that is, would have widespread success and come across no city that could resist him and prevent his total victory. This parallels the rising star and sceptre, declaring his success.
The picture of a rising star, combined with a sceptre, who would have dominion, depicted an especially great king. It was a declaration of the fact that the royal house of Israel would eventually produce a ‘super-star’, a ‘king’ who would rule over many nations. And these nations he depicted in terms of the ones whom he knew to be at odds with Israel at that time. This last fact firmly dates this prophecy to this particular time. Seen in terms of an ‘anointed king’ of Israel this was a ‘messianic’ prophecy. His picture is really one of final triumph, brought about by a supreme king. It is essentially applicable to David, and to strong kings who followed after him, but its final fulfilment required a king who would finally triumph and gain everlasting dominion, and that could only be the Messiah.
For a star as representing the king of Babylon see Isaiah 14.12; and as representing the Messiah see Revelation 22.16. See also Daniel 8.10. The use of stars of rulers in this way was also known in non-Biblical literature. In the future the ‘star of David’ would come to represent the Davidic house. Compare also how Bar Kochba’s Messianic claims were supported by naming him ‘son of the star’ when he led the Jewish rebellion against the emperor Hadrian in c.135 AD.
Balaam Looks On and Prophesies Concerning Wandering Amalek (24.20).
As we come to this final prophecy we should note that it is specifically stated that Balaam ‘looked on’ Amalek and the Kenite. Exactly the same expression is used in verse 2 of him ‘looking on Israel’ (translated ‘saw’). The verb is also used three times in 23.13 where again ‘looking on’ Israel was preparatory to an oracle concerning them. And in fact this ‘looking on’ Israel was clearly considered an important part of the process. This would therefore seem to suggest that the Amalekites and Kenites were near enough to be ‘looked on’ for the same purpose (why else introduce the verb which is otherwise redundant). In view of the presence of the Midianites who were often linked with the Amalekites (see Judges 6.3, 33 in the light of the whole of chapter 6 where ‘Midian’ regularly signifies the threefold combination of Midian, Amalek and the children of the East) we may probably see that they were present with the Midianites in their association with Moab. The same is probably therefore also true of the Kenites.
24.20a ‘And he looked on Amalek, and took up his oracle, and said,’
This may signify elders of Amalek who were standing by, or an encampment of them in Moab.
24.20b This probably refers to the fact that Amalek was the first of all the nations to attack Israel when they had left Egypt seeking safety (Exodus 17.8-16; Deuteronomy 25.17-18, compare also Numbers 14.43-45; Judges 6.3, 33). It was seen by God as a particularly heinous offence for as a result of it we are told, ‘Yahweh has sworn, Yahweh will have war with Amalek from generation to generation’ (Exodus 17.16; compare Deuteronomy 25.19; 1 Samuel 15.2-3). Thus Amalek of all nations would finally be destroyed.
Some, however, see it as signifying their ancient background. They are possibly the Meluhha mentioned in 3rd millennium BC inscriptions. But the Biblical view was that they were descended from Esau (Genesis 36.12). This latter fact would explain why their offence was seen as so heinous. Like Edom they were a brother tribe to Israel. (However, as with Edom and Moab and many nations their descent would be a complicated affair, some being descended from Esau, and others being from sub-tribes who had united with these descendants).
Balaam Looks On and Prophesies Concerning the Wandering Kenites (24.21-22).
24.21a ‘And he looked on the Kenite, and took up his oracle, and said,’
In the same way as with the Amalekites we may see that a group of Kenites were present, connected with the Midianites to whom they were related (see Numbers 10.29 with Judges 1.16; 4.11) and with Moab. The Kenites were metal smiths and tended to move around in small groups. Compare the ones who accompanied Israel (Judges 1.16; 4.11), and those who had an agreement with Sisera (Judges 4.11). By uniting with Moab against Israel they were bringing judgment on themselves.
24.21b-22 This may refer to the safe situation that the Kenites had found for themselves in Moab. Or it may have in mind their wilderness dwelling-place in the Sinai area. Either way it stresses that their seeming security will not avail them in the day of trouble. They would find themselves beset by the tribe of Asshur, another brother tribe (see Genesis 25.3, 18; 2 Samuel 2.9; Psalm 83.8), and be wasted and finally taken as slaves.
So the combination of tribes related to Israel (of Moab, of the Midianites, of the Amalekites and of the Kenites), were all included in his prophecies as fated because of their behaviour towards Israel. The presence of a nucleus was sufficient to condemn even those not present, on the basis of tribal solidarity.
Balaam Prophesies Concerning Eber (Israel and their fellow Semites) (24.23-24).
24.23a ‘And he took up his oracle, and said,’
We note immediately that he did not ‘look on’ those of whom he now spoke.
24.23b-24 The Asshurim may waste the Kenites but they themselves would not escape judgment. They in their turn would be afflicted by ships from Kittim (Cyprus and the Aegean coastlands). It would seem that exploratory raids, if not worse, had already been taking place by the ‘Sea People’, the relatives of the Philistines, and he recognised that these would afflict the Asshurim, treating them as they had treated the Kenites. When brother fights brother judgment awaits.
The same also applied to Eber. This referred to Semites in the area (Genesis 10.25) and may well have been intended indirectly to signify Israel, who would be one of those to suffer at Philistine hands, for Abraham was descended from Peleg, Eber’s son, a descent which was emphasised by appearing on its own and not in the Table of Nations (Genesis 10.25 with 11.16-18).
24.25 ‘And Balaam rose up, and went and returned to his place; and Balak also went his way.’
The affair of Balaam was now concluded. Israel remained blessed and Balak went one way and Balaam another, with the latter ‘returning to his place’. However to his cost he would return to give assistance to the Midianites and would die for his pains (Numbers 31.8).
As we have sought to draw out in the narrative this Balaam cycle contains many lessons. It reveals that God is above the occult and that such cannot hurt His people. It reveals Him as uniquely unlike the so-called ‘gods’ of the nations. Through the mouth of Balaam it provides us with prophetic announcements about God’s purposes. It reveals that there is no limit to what God can do. And to the Israelites it would be a spur, giving a new incentive to enter the land knowing that they need fear neither god nor man. To us it is another reminder of the coming of the Messiah prophesied long before.
Chapter 25 Israel Are Lured Into Sin By The Moabites and Midianites.
4). The Defeat of the Evil Influence of Moab (25.1-18).
It is noteworthy that just as the glorious revelation on Mount Sinai was followed by the lapse into idolatry with the molten calf, so here the glorious repetition and expansion of the promises by Balaam is followed by gross idolatry. In each case the one contrasts with the other, the proclamation of the grace of God with the disobedience of man.
For having settled down in the Moabite plain Israel now demonstrated their propensity for sin at Shittim by enjoying close relations with the daughters of Moab, and ‘joining themselves’ to Baal-peor. In spite of all Yahweh’s warnings they engaged in idolatry. This would finally result in the death of a Simeonite chieftain and a plague on the people.
Analysis of the chapter.
Israel Sin at Shittim in Regard to Baal-peor (25.1-3a)
25.1-2 ‘And Israel abode in Shittim; and the people began to play the harlot with the daughters of Moab, for they called the people to the sacrifices of their gods, and the people did eat, and bowed down to their gods.’
Settling down at Shittim after a period of continual travel, Israelite males began to take a fancy to certain young women who lived in Moab, and who seemingly made themselves available. (Note that the Midianitish woman is seen as ‘a daughter of Moab’, that is a woman who lived in Moabite territory. There was clearly a very close relationship between these Midianites and Moab). Not being constantly on the move themselves their women were able to make themselves up more attractively, and the men of Israel clearly enjoyed the novelty. These were worshippers of Baal-peor, and we note that the sin is not said to have been sexual, although that no doubt occurred, but a turning to their idols, although in view of what follows sexual relations might well be seen as implied. And in view of the nature of the religion of Baal with its fertility rites there may well have been ritual sex acts between them. Outwardly, however, the sin is said to be that of being present at the sacrifices to their gods, eating sacred meals with them and bowing down to their gods. Among others they were disobeying the first two commandments.
Yahweh Was Angry with Israel and Demanded The Punishment Of Those Who Had Sinned (25.3-4).
25.3 ‘And Israel joined himself to Baal-peor: and the anger of Yahweh was kindled against Israel.’
Thus Israel joined themselves to Baal-peor (the lord of Peor). That is they became involved in idolatry and all the behaviour that went with it. The lord of Peor may have been Chemosh, the Moabite god, or a local Baal favoured by the Midianites. This resulted in Yahweh’s anger being aroused, His righteous aversion to such evil behaviour. They had deserted Him and what He stood for and had chosen to follow idols and what they stood for.
25.4 ‘And Yahweh said to Moses, “Take all the chiefs of the people, and hang them up to Yahweh before the sun, that the fierce anger of Yahweh may turn away from Israel.’
That the failure took in a large number of Israelites is made apparent by the fact that only the chieftains among them were to be executed. Yahweh told Moses to hang up before Yahweh, in the sun, all the chieftains of the people who had been misbehaving. This suggests that a good number of chieftains were involved, which made the position even worse. Only then would His anger be turned away. (‘Them’ cannot mean all the chiefs in Israel, for Moses now turned to some of them for assistance. It refers to those who were among those who had sinned - see Deuteronomy 24.16).
25.5 ‘And Moses said to the judges of Israel, “Slay you every one his men who have joined themselves to Baal-peor.” ’
So Moses went to the high chiefs of Israel with special responsibility as judges and bade them slay all in their tribes who had committed idolatry and participated in the worship of Baal-peor, thereby ‘joining themselves’ to him.
A Midianitish Woman Is Brought Into the Camp by a Simeonite Chieftain (25.6).
25.6 ‘And, behold, one of the children of Israel came and brought to his brethren a Midianitish woman in the sight of Moses, and in the sight of all the congregation of the children of Israel, while they were weeping at the door of the tent of meeting.’
But even while the judges were meeting, and there was weeping at the door of the Tent of meeting, because of the sin of Israel and presumably because of the plague which had now broken out, ‘one of the children of Israel’ (a Simeonite chieftain - see verse 14) boldly and blatantly brought into the camp a Midianitish woman in the sight of Moses and all who were gathered before Yahweh. He appears to have had no shame in the matter. He presented her to his brethren before taking her to his ‘pavilion’ or inner portion of the tent. His open and brash involvement with the Midianite women was made very clear. It was high handed sin.
Prior to this it would appear that all the ‘sinning’ occurred outside the camp. So this was an increase in offence by the introduction of idolatrous behaviour into the holy camp of Yahweh. That was what justified Phinehas’ instant action.
Phinehas, Son of Eleazar, Slays the Chieftain and The Woman (25.7-8a).
25.7-8a ‘And when Phinehas, the son of Eleazar, the son of Aaron the priest, saw it, he rose up from the midst of the congregation, and took a spear in his hand, and he went after the man of Israel into the inner portion of the tent, and thrust both of them through, the man of Israel, and the woman through her body.’
Phinehas, the son of the High Priest Eleazar, was appalled at this behaviour, and constrained at the plague which had broken out. He rightly saw the man’s behaviour as an insult against Yahweh and as bringing shame on Yahweh’s name, and as defiling the camp. And leaving the gathered throng he seized a spear, and followed them into their tent, and thrust the spear, first through the man and then the woman. Someone who saw it remembered that it was through her stomach. That was where her childbearing would become apparent, and he made the punishment fit the crime
In acting like this Phinehas would see himself as fulfilling his priestly duty, for the penalty for idolatry was instant death. He was acting as public executioner against an open sin (see Deuteronomy 13.9), but because the plague had broken out he had recognised the need for fast action. He was also in principle carrying out Yahweh’s command in verse 4, for those who were hung out in the sun would have to be slain before they were hung out.
His action was actually very similar to that commanded by Moses at the incident of the molten calf at Sinai when he had commanded the responding Levites to slay those who had sinned (Exodus 32.27). Indeed he may well have remembered that and been determined to demonstrate that he was on Yahweh’s side.
As A Result of His Action Judgment By Plague Is Stayed (25.8b).
25.8b ‘So the plague was stayed from the children of Israel.’
We are now told that in fact a plague, previously unmentioned, had broken out in the camp. But as a result of the decisive action of Phinehas the plague was now stayed, and its effect began to die down
25.9 ‘And those that died by the plague were twenty and four thousand.’
And the number who died in the plague were the equivalent of twenty four larger families. These deaths would probably occur over a period. Paul picks up on this and speaks of ‘twenty three thousand’ dying ‘in one day’ (1 Corinthians 10.8). As with the number here it is not to be taken arithmetically. He lessened the number to mean ‘the great majority of them’ died in one day because he recognised, or someone from whom he quoted recognised, that not all would have died on the same day, and that if he did not reduce the number this would quickly be pointed out by his opponents. But he wanted to utilise the idea of ‘in one day’ in order to make the greater impact. Numbers in fact does not say how long a period was in mind during which people died through the plague.
As A Result of His Action Phinehas Was Confirmed In The Priesthood (25.10-13).
25.10 ‘And Yahweh spoke to Moses, saying, “Phinehas, the son of Eleazar, the son of Aaron the priest, has turned my wrath away from the children of Israel, in that he was jealous with my jealousy among them, so that I consumed not the children of Israel in my jealousy.” ’
God then spoke to Moses and praised what Phinehas had done. Note now the emphasis on the fact that he was a grandson of Aaron the Priest. Like God Himself he had been jealous for the name and honour of Yahweh (Exodus 20.5). As a result he had turned away Yahweh’s wrath directed at the children of Israel. If we would deal with sin in our midst, Yahweh would not have to.
25.12-13 ‘For that reason say, “Behold, I give to him my covenant of peace, and it shall be to him, and to his seed after him, the covenant of an everlasting priesthood; because he was jealous for his God, and made atonement for the children of Israel.” ’
Because Phinehas had done what he had done out of concern for Yahweh’s name and honour God now gave him and his descendants His ‘covenant of wellbeing’. That is, the covenant of an everlasting priesthood. By his act he had shown himself a true priest by being jealous for his God and by making a covering for the sins of Israel, an atonement or reconciliation for the children of Israel. Thus he and his were confirmed in a permanent priesthood.
The Man and The Woman Are Identified. Both From Chieftain’s Houses (25.14-15)
25.14 ‘Now the name of the man of Israel who was slain, who was slain with the Midianitish woman, was Zimri, the son of Salu, a prince of a fathers’ house among the Simeonites.’
The man who had done this thing was now named and shamed (note how this parallels what he had done in the analysis above). He was Zimri, son of Salu, a chieftain of a father’s house in Simeon. As we noted earlier he had introduce the woman among his brethren and they had not protested. Thus it would appear that the tribe of Simeon had been heavily involved in the idolatry. This explains why, when a name had to be omitted in the list of tribes publicly blessed by Moses, Simeon’s name was missing (Deuteronomy 33). They had to do penance for their failure by being temporarily ‘blotted out of Israel’. Levi had proved faithful once again and Simeon had sinned grievously, so that they could not be coupled together as they had been by Jacob (Genesis 49.5).
25.15 ‘And the name of the Midianitish woman who was slain was Cozbi, the daughter of Zur. He was head of the people of a fathers’ house in Midian.’
The name of the Midianitish woman was also given. She was Cozbi, daughter of Zur, a Midianite high chieftain, a ‘head of a father’s house’ (see 31.8; Joshua 13.21). We note again how easily Moab and Midian are linked.
25.16 ‘And Yahweh spoke to Moses, saying,’
Then Yahweh added a further sentence to His judgment.
25.17-18 ‘Vex the Midianites, and smite them, for they vex you with their wiles, with which they have beguiled you in the matter of Peor, and in the matter of Cozbi, the daughter of the prince of Midian, their sister, who was slain on the day of the plague in the matter of Peor.’
What had happened had been a result of a deliberate policy by the Midianites. They had hoped that by wooing Israel from Yahweh they would turn Him against them. Thus they had approved of their young women and the young women of Moab leading Israelite males astray for this purpose. It was seen to be Midianite policy (31.16) that had brought the plague on Israel and had led so many into idolatry and death. They were thus murderers. Therefore, like the Canaanites, they had to be slain. There had to be death for death.
It is noteworthy that this section of Numbers, which has contained so much of victory should end with Israel’s failure. It was Yahweh’s constant reminder that pride comes before a fall. It was an early warning of how careful they must be when they entered the land.
F. FUTURE PROSPECTS IN THE LAND (26-36).
We now come to the final main section of the book. It will commence with the numbering of Israel, a sign that they were making ready for the final push, and is divided up into rededication and preparations for entering the land (26-32), and warning and encouragement with respect to it (33-36). The first section concentrates on the mobilisation and dedication of the people of Yahweh, and the punishment of those who by their behaviour hinder that mobilisation and dedication.
In terms of the overall pattern of the book the first section covers the mobilisation of Israel, the appointment of Joshua on whom was the Spirit and the death of Moses For Sin (26-27), which compares with the earlier murmuring of Israel, the appointment of elders on whom came the Spirit, and the plague on Miriam because of sin (11-12). This then followed by the dedication of Israel through Feasts, Offerings and Vows and the purifying of Transjordan through vengeance on the Midianites and settlement of the two and a half Tribes (28-32) which compares with the purification and dedication of Israel in 5-10.
Analysis of the section.
(I). Preparation for Entering the Land (26-32).
This can be divided up into:
II) Warning and Encouragement of The Younger Generation ( 33-36).
In this section stress is laid on preparation for entering the land.
(I). Overall Preparation for Entering the Land (26-32).
The preparations include the mobilisation of Israel, instructions as to what to do on entering the land, appointment of a new commander-in-chief in whom is the Spirit, instructions concerning the worship to be offered to Yahweh, a description of the ‘atonement’ for the sin of Baal-peor and purification of the land by the slaughter of the Midianites, and the settling in of the tribes in their land on the east of Jordan, preparatory to their soldiers joining the offensive on Canaan.
Chapters 26-27.
1). Initial Preparations for Entering the Promised Land From The Numbering of The Army To The Appointment of Joshua As Their New Commander-in-Chief (26-27.23).
Analysis.
The first step in all this would be the numbering of Israel.
Chapter 26 The Numbering of Israel.
This chapter contains the numbering of the new Israel who had replaced the previous generation, followed by provisions in respect of the allocation of the land, and the numbering of the Levites. Its lesson to us today is that God numbers us for service, some to fight in the world, and some to minister in His Dwellingplace, with the promise of the allocation of our reward in His heavenly kingdom. Let us therefore beware that we are not of those who die in the wilderness with their service unfulfilled.
This chapter does not easily lend itself to chiastic construction in view of the statistics involved, nevertheless we can analyse it as follows;
Yahweh Commands the Numbering of Israel for Service (26.1-2).
With the land almost in sight the armies of Israel were to be ‘numbered’, that is, organised for warfare, while the Levites would be organised for service.
26.1 ‘And it came about after the plague, that Yahweh spoke to Moses and to Eleazar the son of Aaron the priest, saying,’
The plague having ceased, and Yahweh having become reconciled to Israel through the action of Phinehas, Yahweh spoke to Moses and Eleazar the Priest. Eleazar has adequately stepped into his father’s shoes. With Joshua he will provide Israel with effective leadership throughout the conquest.
26.2 “Take the sum of all the congregation of the children of Israel, from twenty years old and upward, by their fathers’ houses, all that are able to go forth to war in Israel.”
The command was to ‘number’ Israel, that is assess the forces available for warfare. These were to consist of all who were twenty years old and upwards.
Moses and Eleazar Pass On The Command (26.3-4).
26.3 ‘And Moses and Eleazar the priest spoke with them in the plains of Moab by the Jordan at Jericho, saying,’
In strict obedience Moses and Eleazar passed on the command in the plains of Moab by the Jordan opposite Jericho. The invasion would soon begin.
26.4 “Take the sum of the people, from twenty years old and upward, as Yahweh commanded Moses and the children of Israel, that came forth out of the land of Egypt.”
There is no opening verb. ‘Take the sum of’ is read in from the previous verses. So the command was given to current Israel to ‘number’ the army in the same way as Yahweh had commanded Moses and the children of Israel who came out of the land of Egypt. This last phrase was a reminder that the previous generation, having been numbered, failed.
The Numbering of the Army in Their Tribes and Clans (26.5- 51).
The numbering was far more than a head count. It was a listing of the contingents to which the men belonged.
26.5-7 ‘Reuben, the first-born of Israel; the sons of Reuben: of Hanoch, the family of the Hanochites; of Pallu, the family of the Palluites; of Hezron, the family of the Hezronites; of Carmi, the family of the Carmites. These are the families of the Reubenites; and they that were numbered of them were forty and three ’eleph and seven hundred and thirty.’
The tribe of Reuben was listed by its four sub-tribes, the Hanochites, the Palluites, the Hezronites, and the Carmites. As we have seen earlier this ‘numbering’ could signify forty three leaders/champions, seven ‘hundreds’ and a thirty. The number thirty signifies completeness. (Or forty three wider families).
26.8-11 ‘And the sons of Pallu: Eliab. And the sons of Eliab: Nemuel, and Dathan, and Abiram. These are that Dathan and Abiram, who were called of the congregation, who strove against Moses and against Aaron in the company of Korah, when they strove against Yahweh, and the earth opened its mouth, and swallowed them up, together with Korah when that company died, at the time when the fire devoured two hundred and fifty men, and they became a sign. Notwithstanding, the sons of Korah died not.’
This informative second section does not occur with all the tribes. It provides additional information looking back to earlier in the record. Here the reminder is given of the Reubenites Dathan and Abiram who had gained the support of many in Israel (or it could signify ‘who were described as members of the congregation’) who strove against Moses and Aaron as adherents of ‘the company of Korah’. But they also thereby strove against Yahweh and were swallowed up when the earth ‘opened its mouth’.
‘Together with Korah’ is ambiguous. It may refer to him as striving with them against Yahweh, or it may refer to him being swallowed up with them. Either he was swallowed up with them or he died with ‘the two hundred and fifty’. Thus it could rather be saying that they ‘strove against Yahweh --- together with Korah when ‘the company of Korah’ (which also included the two hundred and fifty - 16.6) died.’ We are never in fact specifically told how Korah died, only (here) that he did so.
‘They became a sign.’ They were ever a warning against rebellion, and against seeking to usurp the priesthood. Note that it is stressed that the actual sons of Korah were not included in the rebellion.
26.12-14 ‘The sons of Simeon after their families: of Nemuel, the family of the Nemuelites; of Jamin, the family of the Jaminites; of Jachin, the family of the Jachinites; of Zerah, the family of the Zerahites; of Shaul, the family of the Shaulites. These are the families of the Simeonites, twenty and two thousand and two hundred.’
The tribe of Simeon was listed by its five sub-tribes, the Nemuelites, the Jaminites, the Jachinites, the Zerahites and the Shaulites. Again this ‘numbering’ could signify twenty two leaders/champions, and two ‘hundreds’. (Or twenty two wider families). The huge drop in numbers of the Simeonites partly reflects their part in the sin of Peor when seemingly a larger portion of their leaders were executed, and a large number died in the plague. This emphasises how much they were involved and confirms why Moses excluded their name from the list of tribes in his blessing.
Compare Genesis 46.10. It would seem that Ohad left no family. Nemuel is called Jemuel there, as yod and nun are often interchanged. Zerah is a name with the same meaning as Zohar (Zerah signifies the rising of the sun; Zohar signifies splendour, and the transposition of consonants is often deliberate).
26.15-18 ‘The sons of Gad after their families: of Zephon, the family of the Zephonites; of Haggi, the family of the Haggites; of Shuni, the family of the Shunites; of Ozni, the family of the Oznites; of Eri, the family of the Erites; of Arod, the family of the Arodites; of Areli, the family of the Arelites. These are the families of the sons of Gad according to those that were numbered of them, forty thousand and five hundred.’
The sons of Gad are the same as in Genesis 46.16, except that Ozni (’zn) is there called Ezbon (’zbn). Word play with names was common practise.
The tribe of Gad was listed by its seven sub-tribes, the Zephonites, the Haggites, the Shunites, the Oznites, the Erites, the Arodites and the Arelites. As we have seen earlier this ‘numbering’ could signify forty leaders/champions, and five ‘hundreds’. (Or forty wider families).
26.19-22 ‘The sons of Judah: Er and Onan; and Er and Onan died in the land of Canaan. And the sons of Judah after their families were; of Shelah, the family of the Shelanites; of Perez, the family of the Perezites; of Zerah, the family of the Zerahites. And the sons of Perez were: of Hezron, the family of the Hezronites; of Hamul, the family of the Hamulites. These are the families of Judah according to those that were numbered of them, threescore and sixteen thousand and five hundred.’
The tribe of Judah was listed by its three sub-tribes, including two prominent clans; the Shelanites, the Perezites, split into the Hezronites and the Hamulites, and the Zerahites. As we have seen this ‘numbering’ could signify seventy six leaders/champions, and five ‘hundreds’. (Or seventy six wider families).
The mention of Er and Onan again calls to mind an incident which was to the detriment of Israel (as with the previous mention of Dathan and Abiram for Reuben).
26.23-25 ‘The sons of Issachar after their families: of Tola, the family of the Tolaites; of Puvah, the family of the Punites; of Jashub, the family of the Jashubites; of Shimron, the family of the Shimronites. These are the families of Issachar according to those that were numbered of them, threescore and four thousand and three hundred.’
The tribe of Issachar was listed by its four sub-tribes, the Tolaites, the Punites, the Jashubites, and the Shimronites. As we have seen this ‘numbering’ could signify sixty four leaders/champions, and three ‘hundreds’. (Or sixty four wider families).
The families of Issachar correspond in name with the sons mentioned in Genesis 46.13 with the exception that the name Job occurs there instead of Jashub. The two names have the same significance, as Job is derived from an Arabic word which signifies ‘to return’ while Jashub means ‘to return’.
26.26-27 The sons of Zebulun after their families: of Sered, the family of the Seredites; of Elon, the family of the Elonites; of Jahleel, the family of the Jahleelites. These are the families of the Zebulunites according to those that were numbered of them, threescore thousand and five hundred.’
The tribe of Zebulun was listed by its three sub-tribes, the Seredites, the Elonites, and the Jahleelites. As we have seen this ‘numbering’ could signify sixty leaders/champions, and five ‘hundreds’. (Or sixty wider families).
26.28-34 ‘The sons of Joseph after their families; Manasseh and Ephraim. The sons of Manasseh: of Machir, the family of the Machirites; and Machir begat Gilead; of Gilead, the family of the Gileadites. These are the sons of Gilead: of Iezer, the family of the Iezerites; of Helek, the family of the Helekites; and of Asriel, the family of the Asrielites; and of Shechem, the family of the Shechemites; and of Shemida, the family of the Shemidaites; and of Hepher, the family of the Hepherites. And Zelophehad the son of Hepher had no sons, but daughters: and the names of the daughters of Zelophehad were Mahlah, and Noah, Hoglah, Milcah, and Tirzah. These are the families of Manasseh; and they that were numbered of them were fifty and two thousand and seven hundred.’
The tribe of Joseph was split into two tribes, those of Manasseh and Ephraim. We are here given details of the tribe of Manasseh. They were listed by their sub-tribe, the Machirites who then seemingly subdivided into the sub-tribes of the Machirites and the Gileadites, the latter dividing into the clans of the Iezerites, the Helekites, the Asrielites, the Shechemites, the Shemidaites, and the Hepherites. As we know from what follows later the tribe of Manasseh was complicated and split into two sections, one in Transjordan inheriting Gilead and Bashan, and one in Canaan itself. Jair who is referred to later in connection with Gilead was the grandson of Machir’s daughter through her marriage to Hezron of Judah and is called a son of Machir (1 Chronicles 2.21-24).
So eight clans were descended from Manasseh; one from his son Machir, the second from Machir's son (Manasseh's grandson) Gilead, and the other six from six descendants of Gilead. The genealogical information in 27.1; 36.1 and Joshua 17.1 is in harmony with this, except that Iezer is called Ab-iezer (Iezer is father) in Joshua 17.2. Only a part of the names mentioned here occur in the genealogical fragments in 1 Chronicles 7.14-29, which also actually demonstrate how complicated these relationships were. In 26.33 a son of Hepher, named Zelophehad, is also mentioned. He had no sons, but only daughters, whose names are given here in order to prepare the way for the legal regulations mentioned in Numbers 27 and 39, to which this fact gave rise.
26.35-37 ‘These are the sons of Ephraim after their families; of Shuthelah, the family of the Shuthelahites; of Becher, the family of the Becherites; of Tahan, the family of the Tahanites. And these are the sons of Shuthelah: of Eran, the family of the Eranites. These are the families of the sons of Ephraim according to those that were numbered of them, thirty and two thousand and five hundred. These are the sons of Joseph after their families.’
The tribe of Ephraim was listed by its three sub-tribes, the Shuthelahites, the Becherites, and the Tahanites, together with the clan of the Eranites, descended from Shuthelah. As we have seen this ‘numbering’ could signify thirty two leaders/champions, and five ‘hundreds’. (Or thirty two wider families).
26.38-41 ‘The sons of Benjamin after their families; of Bela, the family of the Belaites; of Ashbel, the family of the Ashbelites; of Ahiram, the family of the Ahiramites; of Shephupham, the family of the Shuphamites; of Hupham, the family of the Huphamites. And the sons of Bela were Ard and Naaman: of Ard, the family of the Ardites; of Naaman, the family of the Naamites. These are the sons of Benjamin after their families; and they that were numbered of them were forty and five thousand and six hundred.’
The tribe of Benjamin was listed by its five sub-tribes, the Belaites, the Ashbelites, the Ahiramites, the Shuphamites, and the Huphamites, together with its clans of the Ardites and the Naamites.. As we have seen this ‘numbering’ could signify forty five leaders/champions, and six ‘hundreds’. (Or forty five wider families).
In Genesis 46.21 we find mentioned Bela and Ashbel, Naaman and Ard (‘sons’ has a wide meaning and includes descendants). Ahiram (’hrm) is probably there as Ehi (’h -dropping the ‘ram’, the name of a god). Hupham is probably there as Huppim and Shephupham probably Muppim (Shuppim in 1 Chronicles 7.12). That Shephupham is minimised to Shuphamites demonstrates the fluidity of the name. Some of Benjamin’s offspring clearly died childless. In ancient times names were fluid and even pet names would be used.
26.42-43 ‘These are the sons of Dan after their families: of Shuham, the family of the Shuhamites. These are the families of Dan after their families. All the families of the Shuhamites, according to those that were numbered of them, were threescore and four thousand and four hundred.’
Dan was not split into sub-tribes, the only tribe being named from a son of Dan, who is called Shuham here, but Hushim in Genesis 46.23. This reversing of consonants in names occurs so often that it must be deliberate. There would, of course, be smaller sub-clans. In this tribe there were sixty four leaders/champions and four hundreds of men.
26.44-47 ‘The sons of Asher after their families: of Imnah, the family of the Imnites; of Ishvi, the family of the Ishvites; of Beriah, the family of the Berites. Of the sons of Beriah: of Heber, the family of the Heberites; of Malchiel, the family of the Malchielites. And the name of the daughter of Asher was Serah. These are the families of the sons of Asher according to those that were numbered of them, fifty and three thousand and four hundred.’
The tribe of Asher was listed by its five sub-tribes, the Imnites, the Ishvites, the Berites, the Heberites, and the Malchielites. Asher had a daughter named Serah who must have been of some importance to be mentioned. Possibly she was in line to inherit because she had no brothers (see 27.1-11). As we have seen this ‘numbering’ could signify fifty three leaders/champions, and four ‘hundreds’. (Or fifty three wider families).
26.48-50 ‘The sons of Naphtali after their families; of Jahzeel, the family of the Jahzeelites; of Guni, the family of the Gunites; of Jezer, the family of the Jezerites; of Shillem, the family of the Shillemites. These are the families of Naphtali according to their families; and they that were numbered of them were forty and five thousand and four hundred.’
The tribe of Naphtali was listed by its four sub-tribes, the Jahzeelites, the Gunites, the Jezerites, and the Shillemites. As we have seen this ‘numbering’ could signify forty five leaders/champions, and four ‘hundreds’. (Or forty five wider families).
26.51 ‘These are they that were numbered of the children of Israel, six hundred thousand and a thousand seven hundred and thirty.’
So the total ‘numbered’ for war amounted to 596 leaders/champions and five large units, seven smaller units and a thirty, a reduction in leaders but a slight increase in total establishment. (See introduction).
The Land To Be Divided Up Between Them Tribes As An Inheritance According To Their Number Depending On Whether More or Fewer (26.52-54).
Having numbered the men for war, the encouragement was now given by describing the future division of what they were fighting for, and in such a way as to establish it as a certainty.
26.52 ‘And Yahweh spoke to Moses, saying,’
Again we are reminded that what we read are the words of Yahweh as given to Moses. While Eleazar was involved in the preparing of men for war, the division of the land was in the hands of the supreme leader.
26.53 ‘To these the land shall be divided for an inheritance according to the number of names.’
To those tribes and clans now numbered the land was to be divided up for an inheritance in accordance with the number of names. This may signify the names of the clans as given above.
26.54 ‘To the more you shall give the more inheritance, and to the fewer you shall give the less inheritance: to every one according to those that were numbered of him shall his inheritance be given.
The more numerous tribes would receive the larger inheritance, the less numerous the lesser inheritance. The inheritance would depend on the size of each tribe, sub-tribe and clan. Thus the numbering was not only so as to prepare the men for war, but also in order later to assist in the dividing of the land.
The Land Was To Be Divided By Lot As An Inheritance (26.55-56).
Dividing land by lots was an ancient practise in use in many civilisations. It was especially important in this case so that the people might know that they were receiving the land allocated to them by Yahweh, and that there was no favouritism.
26.55 ‘Notwithstanding, the land shall be divided by lot: according to the names of the tribes of their fathers they shall inherit.’
So the land was to be divided by lot, which would be decided by Yahweh (Proverbs 16.33; 18.18), according to the number of their clans and their size. That is what the inheritance would be based on. The lot in mind was probably the Urim and Thummim.
26.56 ‘According to the lot shall their inheritance be divided between the more and the fewer.’
For during the use of the lot the number of families in each tribe and clan would be kept in mind. The larger clans would receive the more, the smaller clans the less. But the actual siting would be by lot.
The Numbering Of The Levites For Their Service (26.57-62).
Once again it is significant that the Levites are numbered in ‘round thousands’. They operated through their three sub-tribes, and their clans, and were not split into ‘hundreds’ (smaller units). They would not be going into battle.
26.57-59a ‘And these are they that were numbered of the Levites after their families: of Gershon, the family of the Gershonites; of Kohath, the family of the Kohathites; of Merari, the family of the Merarites. These are the families of Levi: the family of the Libnites, the family of the Hebronites, the family of the Mahlites, the family of the Mushites, the family of the Korahites.
The sub-tribes of Levi were the Gershonites, the Kohathites and the Merarites. Further clans split of comprising the Libnites, the Hebronites, the Mahlites, the Mushites and the Korahites. We can see now why it was emphasised that the sons of Korah still lived.
26.59b ‘And Kohath begat Amram. And the name of Amram’s wife was Yochebed, the daughter of Levi, who was born to Levi in Egypt: and she bore to Amram Aaron and Moses, and Miriam their sister.
The birth of Aaron and Moses, together with Miriam their sister, was now categorised. They were descended from Kohath, through Amram, whose wife was Yo-chebed (a rare use of Yah in an early name). If Yo-chebed was strictly the daughter of Levi then she and Amram were ancestors of Aaron and Moses. An ancestress could be spoken of as ‘bearing’ her descendants for many generations. However, the alternative is that ‘the daughter of’ simply means that she was descended from him, she was a Levite. That usage too was common practise. What mattered was the bloodline.
26.60-61 ‘And to Aaron were born Nadab and Abihu, Eleazar and Ithamar. And Nadab and Abihu died, when they offered strange fire before Yahweh.’
Again attention is drawn to those who failed in Israel. Nadab and Abihu rebelled against Yahweh’s will and died. But also included are those who succeeded, and lived. Their future would speak for itself.
It is interesting to note that in the listing of the tribes there have been two references to circumstances where people had died (26.10, 19), compared with one here, making three such circumstances in all, a symbol of completeness. They summed up all who died in rebellion against Yahweh. And there have been two references to women in the listing of the tribes (26.33, 46), and one in verse 59. Again the same symbolism applies. They represented all the women of the tribes.
26.62 ‘And they that were numbered of them were twenty and three thousand, every male from a month old and upward; for they were not numbered among the children of Israel, because there was no inheritance given them among the children of Israel.’
And the number of Levites was twenty three larger units. An additional family grouping had been added during the wilderness period.
These Are Those Who Were Numbered By Moses and Eleazar But Among Them Was No One Previously Numbered At Sinai (i.e. of those who came forth from the land of Egypt) (26.62-5a).
26.63 ‘These are those who were numbered by Moses and Eleazar the priest, who numbered the children of Israel in the plains of Moab by the Jordan opposite Jericho.’
In verses 3-4 Moses and Eleazar commanded the numbering of all who were twenty years old and upwards ‘in the plains of Moab by the Jordan opposite Jericho’ (verse 3). Now we learn that their task was completed ‘in the plains of Moab by the Jordan opposite Jericho’, ready for crossing the Jordan when the command came from Yahweh.
26.64 ‘But among these there was not a man of those who were numbered by Moses and Aaron the priest, who numbered the children of Israel in the wilderness of Sinai.’
But while the original numbering had been commanded concerning ‘ the children of Israel who came forth from the land of Egypt’ (verse 4), among those who were numbered this time there was not a man present of those who had been previously numbered. Apart from Moses, Caleb and Joshua no one was left who had been in Egypt or who had been numbered at Sinai. Yahweh’s judgment had been complete.
26.65a ‘For Yahweh had said of them, “They shall surely die in the wilderness.’
For they had all died in the wilderness as Yahweh had threatened. Yahweh’s word of judgment had been fulfilled. For it is not only God’s promises which are fulfilled, but also His warnings.
No Male Of The Previous Generation Was Left Except Caleb and Joshua (26.65b).
26.65b ‘And there was not left a man of them, save Caleb the son of Jephunneh, and Joshua the son of Nun.”
The suggestion may well be that the plague mentioned in verse 1 had finally resulted in the death of all who had remained alive of those who had been previously numbered. Now none was left alive apart from Caleb and Joshua.
It is a sad thought that those who were at Sinai had been numbered with such hopes. But sin and unbelief had found them out, and they never attained the promised rest. That was not a question of their eternal destiny, but of what could have been theirs in this life. Instead of enjoying forty years in the land of milk and honey they had endured forty years in the barren wilderness. We too need to beware, lest having been numbered by the Lord, we fail to achieve what He desires for us or to enter His true rest (see Hebrews 3.7-4.11) by being unresponsive to Him. What fools we are if we forfeit both our present and future rewards for the passing pleasures of this life.
Chapter 27 Regulation In Respect Of Land To Be Inherited By Women and Relatives Where There Is No Full Blood Male Heir And The Provision Of a Shepherd For The People of Israel (27.12-23).
This chapter divides into three sections, the provision concerning land to be granted to a man’s family posthumously where he died before entering the land and had no male heir to receive his portion; the command to Moses to ascend a mountain in Abarim (Mount Nebo - Deuteronomy 32.48-52) to behold the land and possess it by sight before he died, and the appointment of a new Shepherd for the people, at Moses’ request, in the person of Joshua, a man in whom is the Spirit, in liaison with Eleazar the Priest. Joshua was one of the two men of the old generation who was not to die.
So these three incidents deal with three different types of men in their dealings with life and death. The first deals with one who was of the new generation, but who died in the wilderness (for he died for his own sins not because of the sin of the people). And yet in his daughters he would inherit the land. The second deals with the one who would die without entering the land, but not as those who died in the wilderness as a punishment had died. He (Moses) would be ‘gathered to his fathers’ as Aaron had been. But he would inherit the land by seeing it with his eyes. And the third deals with a member of the old generation who would enter the new land alive and would indeed inherit the land.
One question that was raised by the closing verses of the last chapter was, what about those who died in the wilderness who were not of the older generation, who did not die because of that sin? Were they to be equally punished by not receiving a portion of the new land if they had no male heirs? Of course if they had male heirs those would receive their portion. A portion of the new land would be allocated to their families. But what if they died without a male heir? Their family would receive no portion of the land that had been promised to the man prior to his dying. Their name would not be remembered in Israel, for they would possess no land, even though they had daughters. Could that be right in the eyes of Yahweh? The answer was to be ‘no, it is not right’.
It is not accidental that this comes immediately after the description of those who through their unbelief died in the wilderness. They had been faced with a challenge, had been unable to trust God, and had drawn back from obedience, and had been sentenced to die miserably in the wilderness. How great a contrast there was between them and these five brave young women of the tribe of Manasseh. They too were faced up with a challenge as the Manassites began to discuss the distribution of their new possessions. They saw themselves as being frozen out, as being thrust to one side, and their father’s name as dying out from Israel. But they believed in Yahweh. They believed that He would not allow them to be treated unfairly and allow their father’s name to perish unjustly. And with great boldness and trepidation they approached Moses and the congregation of Israel to seek to have this great wrong righted. We cannot imagine what huge courage it would have taken, for rarely did young women such as they come to the door of the tent of meeting. But they believed in Yahweh and refused to be daunted, and He saw and gave them what they asked.
They also stand in stark contrast to the women of Moab. It was not theirs to seek to lead men astray after other gods, and to drag men to destruction. Rather they would fight to ensure the preservation of their father’s name , and were deeply concerned for the inheritance that Yahweh had for them. This was the quality of the new generation, and Moses knew that the story would serve as an inspiration to Israel to take their courage in both hands and move forward to establish their names in the land which Yahweh had in store for them.
The Provisions For Inheritance When They Have Entered The Land Where There Was No Male Heir (27.1-11).
Analysis.
The Daughters of Zelophehad Draw Near For a Judgment by Moses (27.1-2).
What follows deals with an important question. Here was a man who had obeyed Yahweh and fought for Him, and yet whose name would die because he died without a male heir before land could be granted his family. Thus no land would be allocated to his name, and his name would die out in Israel. And his family would seemingly receive no lasting inheritance. Would this be right?
A further reason behind this passage was to enthuse Israel as they sought to enter the land by making them see that Yahweh would ensure that all were blessed. Even if they were slain in battle and had no male heir, their family would not be allowed to suffer. When the portions were allocated, none of the new generation would be omitted except those who had openly rebelled, even if they had died prior to the distribution without a male heir. Land would be allocated to them for their families.
27.1 ‘Then drew near the daughters of Zelophehad, the son of Hepher, the son of Gilead, the son of Machir, the son of Manasseh, of the families of Manasseh the son of Joseph; and these are the names of his daughters; Mahlah, Noah, and Hoglah, and Milcah, and Tirzah.’
In this passage five women of one family approached Moses concerning their rights of inheritance, and the continuing of the name of their father. As he had had no son the continuation of his name would depend on their receiving land in his name. So taking their courage in both hands they appealed to the tribunal of Israel. They were alone in the world. There was no male ready to come and stand with them. But they had each other, and they trusted in Yahweh.
The details are given of their tribal and clan connections in view of the matter in hand, that is, their share in the inheritance of the land. Manasseh was the tribe, Gilead the sub-tribe, Hepher the clan and Zelophehad the family head. All would be important in determining what they inherited. This information would thus be laid before the judges.
It should be noted that this was at this time a red hot issue. The lands of Gilead and Bashan from the Arnon northwards were being allocated to the Reubenites, the Gadites, and the descendants of Machir, one of whom had been the father of these five young, unmarried women. And they thought that they had reason to fear that they would be excluded from receiving a portion of that land. Discussion would undoubtedly already be taking place, and they may already have been informed that in view of their position they did not come into the reckoning. Their quality was shown in that they were not willing to accept this situation which would mean their father’s name being forgotten in Israel because no land was connected with it.
For it was in order to obtain land that Israel had journeyed all this way. It was the hope of land that had partially sustained them. Surely then just because he had died without a male heir, that did not mean that his family was excluded from owning land?
27.2 ‘And they stood before Moses, and before Eleazar the priest, and before the princes and all the congregation, at the door of the tent of meeting, saying,’
What courage they had. Following correct procedure they brought their request officially so that it could be considered by all Israel, although more strictly by Moses, Eleazar and the chieftains. That it was at the door of the tent of meeting demonstrated that they sought a decision before Yahweh. They came hesitantly and shyly, bolstering each other up, as the representatives of their family name. They clearly had a deep certainty that Yahweh would deal rightly with them. What could have been a better example to Israel at this time than this? In context it is full of meaning. Out of context it becomes just another dispute about land.
It should be noted here, as it will be noted later, that this very approach brings out that womenfolk were thus not of necessity excluded from having their part in such important matters. As with the widows and divorcees mentioned later in regard to oaths (30.9), where they were the ‘head’ of their particular family grouping they had equal rights to all other family heads. The reason that men usually took prominence was simply because it was they who were usually the heads of the family and responsible for their welfare and protection. But that did not totally exclude women in the right circumstances.
Yet it would not be easy for them. Standing in that holy place, facing the great men of the nation, they must have quailed. The courage that they mustered exceeded far that which was required to face up to the Anakim. These men of Israel whom they had to face were ‘giants’ indeed. But they believed that they were in the right. And they believed in Yahweh.
The Case is Put of a Their Father Who Has Died Having No Sons Before He Has received His Portion of the Promised Land (27.3).
Note their concern. It was that the name of their father might be taken away, because no portion of land would be allocated to him and his family when the distributions were made now that they had conquered the land of Gilead and Bashan. If only males could inherit there would be no portion of land for his name to be attached to, because he had no male heir. But we need not doubt that they were also interested in possession of the land. Then they could take it with them when they married.
27.3 “Our father died in the wilderness, and he was not among the company of those who gathered themselves together against Yahweh in the company of Korah, but he died in his own sin, and he had no sons.’
They sought to establish their father’s credentials. They pointed out that he was not one of those who had rebelled against Yahweh in the company of Korah. He was not barred as a rebel. Note their mention of that here. It confirms that that incident was long remembered and that all recognised that such people did not deserve a part in the land. By their behaviour they had excluded themselves. But that was not true of their father.
Nor had he died for the sin of unbelief at Kadesh. He was not one of those doomed to die in the wilderness because of gross disobedience. Rather he died for his own sin, as all sinners must die.
So they did admit that he was a sinner, but only, they stressed, like all who were around him. He died because of his own sin, like all men and women die because of their sins, yet they wanted it recognised that he was no more blameworthy than any other sinner. They did not consider that his death without a male heir demonstrated that Yahweh was angry with him and was cutting his name off from Israel. And they sought confirmation of that fact.
That being so did his family not deserve their portion in the land just like everyone else? Yet as he had died without a son there would be no male in the family for the portion to be allocated to. Thus unless their plea was heeded there would be no allocation to his close family. This seemed wrong to them. There would be no way to perpetuate his name.
The principle behind their statement is interesting. There was a clear recognition that he died for his own sin, not for the sins of the tribe or of others. They were acknowledging individual responsibility. They also refused to accept that his early death had been due to his being under judgment. It had happened, but it did not prove that he was worse than anyone else. We must beware of reading into these ancient people the prejudices of our modern day. Here were five young women who knew what they believed. And they recognised the distinction between those whose sin permanently barred them from God’s mercy, and those whose sin which, while having its own consequences, did not cut people off from His gracious provision. Here was the difference between ‘unwitting sin’ and ‘sin with a high hand’.
27.4 “Why should the name of our father be taken away from among his family, because he had no son? Give to us a possession among the brethren of our father.”
Now if he had had a son that son would have received his portion in Gilead and Bashan. No one would have argued. He would also have maintained the name of the family in the clan and in Israel. Furthermore he would have seen to the marriage settlements for the girls, so that they could make good marriages. They would not have had to be married empty handed. But by his death without a male heir it was being suggested that this would not now happen. Not only would no land be attached to his name, but his daughters would in fact lose out greatly. For the fact that he had had no son would result in no land being allocated to his immediate family as a result of their victories. His name would therefore be lost, having no land for it to be attached to, and his daughters would be bereft of the support that he had deserved. The head of a related family would, of course be expected to take them under his wing, but they would go there as dependants and suppliants with no property. What they wanted was to ensure that their deceased father would posthumously receive an allocation of land, which would then be passed on to them so that they could take it with them as dowry, with his name permanently attached to the land so that he was remembered for ever.
There are a number of examples elsewhere, where men who married women who owned land became members of the woman’s tribe, so vitally was the name of the tribe and the family connected with the land. See, for example, the case of Jarha, who belonged to pre-Mosaic times and is mentioned in 1 Chronicles 2.34-35. It would explain the introduction of Jair among the Manassites in Numbers 32.41; Deuteronomy 3.14. His father Segub was the son of Hezron of the tribe of Judah, but his mother was the daughter of Machir the Manassite (1 Chronicles 2.21-22). Another example is found in Ezra 2.61; Nehemiah 7.63, where the sons of a priest who had married one of the daughters of Barzillai the rich Gileadite, were called ‘sons of Barzillai’.
But as we shall see later the leaders of Manasseh were concerned that if these young women received land in their father’s name, they married within the clan so that the land might be preserved to Manasseh, and this they gladly agreed to do The story would have a happy ending. A good note on which to end the book (36.1-12).
This suggests that after the conquest when land was passed on it still retained its attachment to the family name of the original recipient throughout the generations. This was why the prophets were so angry at those who took advantage of bad times to add land to land, thus blotting out the memory of the land’s original owner for ever. It was a crime against the memory of Israel.
The Case Is Brought Before Yahweh (27.5).
27.5 ‘And Moses brought their cause before Yahweh.’
Moses clearly acknowledged that they had a case for he brought the matter before Yahweh, probably by entering the inner sanctuary and standing before the veil (compare 7.89).
Yahweh Acknowledges The Rightness of Their Case. The Daughters Are To Receive Their Inheritance Among Their Brothers (27.6-7).
27.6-7 ‘And Yahweh spoke to Moses, saying, “The daughters of Zelophehad speak right. You shall surely give them a possession of an inheritance among their father’s brethren; and you shall cause the inheritance of their father to pass to them.”
Yahweh confirmed to Moses that the land in Gilead and Bashan having been conquered they should be given the portion that would have fallen to their father, or to his male heir, if either had been alive. They would be able to inherit in their father’s name and take with them into their marriages land which would ever be seen as having been their father’s. So would his name be remembered in Israel. He would not have died without just reward for his service for Yahweh. (That is why later it will be stressed that they must marry within the family - 36.6).
For us this is a reminder that God is always faithful. No man or woman will ever serve God and then through unfortunate circumstance lose their reward. None will ever be forgotten. So we too must have courage and go forward, and never flinch whatever is demanded of us.
A General Case Is Then Made Of What Is To Happen When A Man Dies Having No Son (27.8-11a).
This solution would settle the concerns of many still living fathers who only had daughters. Some who had as yet no male heir would undoubtedly have been concerned about what would happen to their name, and what would happen to their families, if they were slain in the forthcoming warfare before having a male heir. (Compare how a newly married man was excluded from warfare for one year to give him time to breed an heir- Deuteronomy 24.5. It was put in terms of ‘cheering his wife’ but nothing would cheer her more than that). Now they could rest at peace. Their close family would still receive their portion posthumously after their death.
27.8-9 “And you shall speak to the children of Israel, saying, “If a man die, and has no son, then you shall cause his inheritance to pass to his daughter, and if he has no daughter, then you shall give his inheritance to his brothers.’
The point being established was twofold. Firstly that the family of every ‘head of family’ of the new generation would receive a portion in the land whatever happened to him, and whether he died or not, or whether he had a male heir or not. It was a guarantee that as long as he had children his name would thus be preserved and his family’s welfare ensured. If he had a daughter, she would receive his portion. And if he had no daughter his own brothers would receive it, with of course the responsibility to remember his name and look after his widow.
27.10 And if he has no brothers, then you shall give his inheritance to his father’s brothers.’
And if he had no brothers then the land would pass to his uncles who would bear the same responsibility.
27.11a ‘And if his father has no brothers, then you shall give his inheritance to his kinsman that is next to him of his family, and he shall possess it.’
And if he also had no uncles, his nearest male relative would inherit it, and would possess it. So would the inheritance remain in the family who would have a responsibility for the remembering of his name. At least in theory, no man of the new generation would ever die forgotten (unlike the old who died in the wilderness).
27.11b ‘And it shall be to the children of Israel a statute and ordinance, as Yahweh commanded Moses.’
And this was so important that it was to be a statute and ordinance in Israel, as Yahweh had commanded Moses.
Note on Inheritance Laws. We have in this passage an insight into the inheritance laws of those days. Land was to pass to the male heirs, with the firstborn receiving double because of his heavier responsibilities as head of the family (Deuteronomy 21.15-17). This did not necessarily mean that the land was divided. It would often be wiser to keep the land as one and work it together. But each would have his name attached to part of the land. The women would be given their dowry when they married, something of value, in the case of the better off a dowry of gold and jewels and gorgeous clothing, and in the case of rulers even of cities. But then they would come under the auspices of their new family. Meanwhile the males would have provided for their dowries and would continue to provide for the old families. We can see why these young women were concerned. If they did not receive their father’s portion they would be thrown on charity for their provision. But it was also true that if their father’s name had no land attached to it, it would soon be forgotten. Land was closely connected with family. That was why in the year of Yubile all land would revert to the original family which had owned it (Leviticus 25.13). That was one reason why names and lands were closely linked together.
End of note.
Moses Is Told To Prepare Himself For Death After First Seeing The Land. He Pleads For A New Shepherd For The People (27.12-17).
Having established that all of the new generation who had died (in contrast with the old. The old died as a punishment. The new did not) would have their names remembered in receiving a portion of land in the future from the conquered lands, the time came for the grand old man of both generations to die. But his death was not like that of the old, it was like that of the new. Even though he too ‘died for his sin’ with which he had sinned at Kadesh, it was not a punishment for the sin at Kadesh thirty eight years previously. It was not his destiny to die under that sentence. And before he died he would gaze with wonder on the land which Yahweh had brought them to, and had promised them.
Analysis.
Moses To Ascend A Mountain To See The Land After Which He Will Be Gathered To His People (27.12-13).
27.12 ‘And Yahweh said to Moses, “Get yourself up into this mountain of Abarim, and behold the land which I have given to the children of Israel.” ’
Yahweh was merciful to His old servant. While he had forfeited his right to enter the land because of his sin, he was to be allowed to possess it with his eyes. We can compare here Genesis 13.14-16. Abraham too possessed with his eyes what would one day belong to his descendants. And now Moses was having the promises confirmed. He was not as one who was excluded from the land to die in the wilderness because of the rebellion of unbelief. He would die in a place prepared by God, having seen the land with his own eyes, knowing that it would soon belong to his people, for that was why Yahweh had caused him to bring them there.
Zelophehad’s daughters were to possess the land by being allocated his portion. But Moses was to possess for a brief span the whole land. He would feast his eyes on it and see it as the land given to them by God. And Joshua would do even more. He would possess the whole land in reality. So does this chapter move on in progression.
Both this and the last passage therefore emphasise the difference between the deaths of the old generation who died in the wilderness because of their unbelief, and the deaths of those who had not been involved in that extreme unbelief, and who therefore in one way or another would possess the land.
So even Moses failed at the last. He was faithful in all his house, but he was a sinner. But when the greater Moses came, our Lord Jesus Christ, He would not fail or be discouraged (Isaiah 42.4). It would seem so at first when they hung Him, obedience intact, on a cross, but from that ‘failure’ would come forth the salvation of the world. He would say, ‘Lo, I come to do your will, O my God’ (Hebrews 10.7, 9), and die for us all and rise again, a resurrection which would bring new significance to the death of Moses.
27.13 “And when you have seen it, you also shall be gathered to your people, as Aaron your brother was gathered,”
Once Moses had seen the land with his own eyes he would then be ‘gathered to his people’ as Aaron had been. He would join them in the grave world. His death, while occurring earlier than it should have because of his sin, was not to be seen as punishment on the level of that meted out in the wilderness. It was a graded punishment (a reminder to us that God does grade punishment).
This Being Gathered To His People Was Because He Had Rebelled Against Yahweh’s Command Due To The Strife of the People (meribah) And Had Thus Failed To Sanctify Him (qdsh) In The Eyes of the People at The Waters (27.13a).
27.14 “Because you rebelled against my word in the wilderness of Zin, in the strife of the congregation, to sanctify me at the waters before their eyes.”
His punishment, though milder, was due to the fact that he too had been guilty of a form of rebellion. He had not ‘believed’ fully and had rebelled against Yahweh’s word, and had thus failed to ‘reveal Him as holy’ (qdsh) at the waters in the eyes of the people, because of the people’s strife (meribah). He had allowed his view of the people to cause him to disobey Yahweh.
27.14b (These are the waters of Meribah (strife) of Kadesh (sanctified place) in the wilderness of Zin.)’
For that was what the waters of ‘Meribah’, of strife, in ‘Kadesh’, in the place of sanctification, were all about. Note the play on words with the previous sentence. It should have been a place of sanctification, but it became a place of strife both for the people and for Moses and Aaron. What God had intended to be for everyone’s good had brought misery to everyone because of how they took it. If only all had looked only to Yahweh, how blessed they would have been!
Moses Pleads For a Man to Replace Him Lest The People Be As Sheep Without a Shepherd On His Departure (27.14-17).
But the heart of Moses is revealed in his reaction. The people had caused his downfall, but he still yearned that they might be watched over and cared for. And he pleaded with God to provide them with a suitable shepherd.
27.15-17 ‘And Moses spoke to Yahweh, saying, “Let Yahweh, the God of the spirits of all flesh, appoint a man over the congregation, who may go out before them, and who may come in before them, and who may lead them out, and who may bring them in, that the congregation of Yahweh be not as sheep which have no shepherd.”
Moses thought back over his long experience of these people and he pleaded with Yahweh to provide someone who would be as patient with them as he had been. It would have to be a man of patient spirit, of tender spirit, of compassionate spirit, of merciful spirit. But Who better to provide such a man than Yahweh, the God of ‘the spirits of all flesh?’ Man had been made of flesh, of the dust of the ground (Genesis 2.7), but God had breathed breath into him and he had lived (Genesis 2.7). And He Who had put that breath within man could surely therefore arrange for a man who had a spirit which could enable him to shepherd this people.
Compare here 16.22 where Yahweh being the God of the spirits of all flesh (because He had imparted that spirit) was expected to be compassionate for that reason. He had made man what he is.
What was needed was a man who, like a shepherd, would go out in front of them to protect them and watch for the dangers that lay ahead. He would also need to be one who came in among them to bring Yahweh’s message to them and to encourage them. He had to be one who could lead them out to face their destiny, and who could lead them in the right way, and he had to be one who could bring them in again safely to the shelter of the camp. So he prayed that God would appoint such a man.
The Appointment Of A New Shepherd (27.18-23).
And now we come to the one who can enter the land alive, the one chosen by Yahweh to replace Moses. Joshua had been Moses ‘servant. He had been with Moses in Mount Sinai (Exodus 24.13; 32.17). He had watched over the old tent of meeting where he had probably done scribal work for Moses (Exodus 33.11). He had led Israel to victory in its first battle (Exodus 17.9-10). He had believed and stood firm when ten of the scouts had discouraged the people (14.6-9). So he was well trained for his new position, for Yahweh had overseen his training. And he was a man in whom was the Spirit.
Analysis.
27.18 ‘And Yahweh said to Moses, “Take you Joshua the son of Nun, a man in whom is the Spirit, and lay your hand on him,” ’
In response to Moses’ plea Yahweh pointed to his man. He was to take Joshua, the son of Nun, a man full of the Spirit of God (compare 12.25). God would work through him as He had worked through Moses. And Moses was to lay his hand on him. The laying on of hands was the sign that a man had been set apart for God’s service. It was also a way of identifying with the person concerned. By this all would know that he was Moses’ chosen replacement.
27.19 “And set him before Eleazar the priest, and before all the congregation; and give him a charge in their sight.”
Then the whole congregation of Israel were to be gathered together, and there he would be set before ‘the Priest’, Eleazar, and given his charge to fulfil his responsibility faithfully.
27.20 “And you shall put of your honour on him, that all the congregation of the children of Israel may obey.”
Thus would the honour in which Moses was held be placed on Joshua. And he would be recognised as honoured by God. And thus the people would (hopefully) obey him as they had obeyed Moses.
27.21 “And he shall stand before Eleazar the priest, who shall enquire for him by the judgment of the Urim before Yahweh, at his word shall they go out, and at his word they shall come in, both he, and all the children of Israel with him, even all the congregation.”
To Joshua was given the right to enquire of Urim and Thummim, coming to the High Priest in whose breastpouch they were, and arranging for their use. He was thus to replace Moses as God’s mouthpiece to the people. And whatever he decreed they would do. At his word they would come in, and at his word they would go out. They would go in and out together.
But we note here that even Joshua would not enter the Dwellingplace and hear the voice of Yahweh speaking from the Mercy Seat between the cherubim (7.89). That was unique to Moses alone. Joshua would have to use the Urim and Thummim.
27.22 ‘And Moses did as Yahweh commanded him, and he took Joshua, and set him before Eleazar the priest, and before all the congregation,’
And Moses did exactly as Yahweh told him. He took Joshua and set him before Eleazar ‘the Priest’, and before all the congregation.
Note again that Moses did exactly what Yahweh commanded him. This refrain occurs again and again. It demonstrates why what happened at the rock at Meribah was such an appalling failure. It had been an aberration. There he had not done what Yahweh commanded him.
27.23 ‘And he laid his hands on him, and gave him a charge, as Yahweh spoke by Moses.’
And Moses laid his hands on him and charged him with his responsibility to lead the people as Yahweh’s shepherd, just as Yahweh had said to him. Even before Moses was dead God was ready to move forward.
2). Provision for Future Worship in the Land And The Continuing Dedication of All Israel (28-30).
There could have been no better place for these chapters on Israel’s response to Yahweh than here. It follows the sin at Baal Peor, the death of Zelophehad through sin, and the death of Moses through a failure in his dedication to Yahweh, and it follows them with a call to continually renew their dedication, and with a promise of continual forgiveness and purification.
This purifying and dedication of the new Israel parallels the call for the purification and dedication of the old Israel in 5-10. There it was necessary if they were to consider entering into Yahweh’s land, here it is seen to be gloriously fulfilled in the new Israel.
But above all this call for such offerings is a proclamation of the prosperous future that would be theirs on possession of the land. It follows the capture of huge amounts of cattle from Gilead and Bashan (Deuteronomy 2.35; 3.7), together with land which would be settled on, in which they would already have found vineyards, cereal crops and olive trees, so that firstfruits would be produced as never before. From now on these ceremonies were to be conducted in their full glory, because at least some tribes were already prospering. This would have begun to happen very rapidly. Having taken the land of Sihon and the Amorites Reuben and Gad had decided that they wanted it, an event which probably preceded the defeat of Bashan (note how Manasseh come in later). The process of at first temporary possession and settlement was no doubt initially quite complicated, but we can be sure that it happened quickly. Yahweh had indicated from the very beginning that this was land to be possessed (Deuteronomy 2.31). Then part of the overcoming of Bashan resulted from Machir’s recognition of the potential of the land (32.40-42).
But it also underlines the certainty of the prosperity that would be theirs once all were in the land, for it reveals the offerings that they were to continually make once they were settled there. It is only the prosperous who could bring their offerings in such abundance as this. It was thus very much a message of hope and encouragement.
Note that the primary emphasis is on the whole burnt offering, the offering that ‘goes up’, in these cases offered on behalf of the whole people (contrast Leviticus 1-2), the offering indicating wholehearted dedication, and thanksgiving and tribute, while also being underlaid by a recognition of the need for atonement. And it is continually accompanied by the necessary offering for the purification of sin. While therefore sin would trouble even the best of them, even a Moses, it was pointing out that it could be dealt with for the nation as a whole and put behind their backs because of the gracious provision God had made for them, as they continually rededicated themselves to Him at all their feasts. That is the message of what now follows. As in the stories of the numbering of Israel, of the daughters of Zelophehad and of the appointment of Joshua, these chapters are filled with hope and expectancy as they look to the future.
Thus what is mentioned here concentrates on Israel’s dedication, tribute, worship and atonement as a people. In its quantities it magnifies all of these in readiness for the grand assault.
To us these feasts of Israel may appear a little boring, but they were not so to Israel. If we think so let us consider our own feast as we gather at the Lord’s Table. Do we find that boring? If we do little more needs to be said. To the people of Israel, to whom every one of their feasts had a meaning and a significance, they spoke with a loud voice (and they blew their trumpets at them - 10.10). And the depth of offerings now required spoke even louder of a renewed and deeper dedication and a glorious future of prosperity and blessing.
We should note that these offerings described here were not the personal offerings described elsewhere (e.g. Leviticus 1-7). They were very much a part of the continual activity of the priests on behalf of the people. They were the backbone of the nations offerings. Apart from in chapter 30 dealing with oaths (where they are assumed rather than mentioned) there is no thought here of the myriad of personal offerings that would be offered to Yahweh. Those have been dealt with in detail in chapter 15 and in Leviticus 1-7. Here concentration is on the nation as a whole making their regular offerings through their representatives. This permanent determination to be dedicated to Yahweh as expressed in these chapters was equally as important to their moving forward as the numbering on the mobilisation of the army and the Levites in chapter 26. Without it the invasion could not take place.
These offerings are now dealt with as follows:
That the making of vows is a part of this overall pattern is confirmed by 29.39. The continual making of oaths was as much a sign of Israel’s ongoing dedication as the continual daily offering (compare the Nazirite vows in 6.1-21). It is probable overall that we are to see 28.1-2a and 29.39-40 as a kind of ‘envelope’ containing the individual chiasma or sequences that follow. Thus while the making of oaths is a part of this series of dedicatory activity, it lies outside the envelope as a distinctive feature.
We should note in this respect how Deuteronomy 12.10-11 closely links offerings with vows. They went closely together in the Israelite mind.
Chapter 28 The Continual Daily Offerings, The Sabbath Offerings, The New Moon Offerings, The Feast of Passover and Unleavened Bread, The Feast of Firstfruits (of Sevens).
There now follow information concerning the various feasts with emphasis on the regular priestly offerings.
The Continual Daily Offerings (28.1-8).
The first offerings described, the continual daily offerings, underpin all the others. It is emphasised that all the others will be offered as well as these. Every day, both morning and late-afternoon (‘between the evenings’), the continual whole burnt offerings were to be offered to Yahweh. These each consisted of the offering of a he-lamb of the first year, accompanied by grain and drink offerings. They were an offering by fire to Yahweh, and would rise to Him, when offered on behalf of an obedient people, as a pleasing odour.
And it will be emphasised throughout what follows, that the festal offerings were additional to this daily offering, which had precedence. They were also additional to the special offerings which related to each particular feast.
28.1 ‘And Yahweh spoke to Moses, saying,’
As ever we are reminded that these things were spoken by Yahweh to Moses.
28.2 “Command the children of Israel, and say to them, My oblation, my food for my offerings made by fire, of a pleasing odour to me, shall you observe to offer to me in their due season.”
This verse introduces the next two chapters which describe the pleasing offerings made to Yahweh, each in its due season, whether daily, weekly, monthly or at the particular feasts. The offerings made by fire were probably to be seen as ascending to Yahweh in the smoke of the offering which contained within it the essence of the offering. And it arose as something pleasing to Yahweh.
‘My oblation, my food for my offerings made by fire, of a pleasing odour to me.’ Compare Leviticus 3.11 ‘It is the food of the offering made by fire to Yahweh.’ Note there the change from ‘a pleasing odour to Yahweh’. Here the two are combined. The sacrifice offered in loving obedience is all that He needs to satisfy Him as He joins in fellowship with His own. But the offering is consumed in the flames. God is not seen as feeding on it directly. His ‘food’ is the pleasing odour, His spiritual satisfaction in the offering as He partakes of their obedience, love and gratitude. Parts of most of the other offerings apart from the whole burnt offerings were eaten, but they were eaten by the priests (and in some cases by the people). There was never any suggestion that God ate them.
28.3-4 “And you shall say to them, This is the offering made by fire which you shall offer to Yahweh, he-lambs a year old without blemish, two day by day, for a continual whole burnt offering. The one lamb shall you offer in the morning, and the other lamb shall you offer between the evenings,”
Each daily offering, morning and late afternoon/early evening, would be of a he-lamb, a year old and without blemish, together with its accompanying offerings. It was to be seen as a continual whole burnt offering, a constant renewal of Israel’s dedication and gratitude to Yahweh, and means of atonement. And it was to be a year old and without blemish. It was day by day a continual reminder both to God and His people of the Passover lamb (Exodus 12.5) which had revealed Yahweh as their Deliverer, and themselves as in need of mercy and protection. But the Passover lambs had also been a sign of faith as their blood was smeared on the doorposts and lintel. So every day these offerings, when offered in true faith on behalf of a believing people, said that in His judgments Yahweh would pass over them and they would be protected from all harm through the shed blood applied to the sides of the altar. But they were not to be partaken of, for their emphasis was on wholehearted response to God.
We too should look to Christ our Passover, offered for us once for all, and claim protection under His shed blood daily. Though He was offered once for all, we must come continually day by day to receive the continuing benefits of His death. If we walk in His light then the blood of Jesus Christ, His Son, will go on cleansing us from all sin (1 John 1.7).
28.5 “And the tenth part of an ephah of milled grain for a grain offering, mingled with the fourth part of a hin of beaten oil.”
With it would be offered a measure of milled grain mingled with olive oil, as described. This grain offering, offered with the whole burnt offering, was an offering to Yahweh of what they had produced in response to His goodness in sending rain. It was a dedication of their labours and a thanksgiving offering, and a reminder to Him of their continuing need for rain in its season. For this offering continued throughout the year, summer and winter alike,
28.6 “It is a continual whole burnt offering, which was ordained in mount Sinai for a pleasing odour, an offering made by fire to Yahweh.”
And here it is confirmed that this offering of he-lambs and grain was one that was ordained on Mount Sinai (compare Exodus 29.38-42), to represent a continual dedication of Israel before God.
28.7 “And its drink-offering shall be the fourth part of a hin for the one lamb. In the holy place you shall pour out a drink-offering of strong drink to Yahweh.”
It was also to be offered with a drink offering of strong drink (old matured wine?) which was to be poured out in the Holy Place. Thus within this offering were all the major benefits which they received from God. It represented their flocks and herds, their grain and fruit and the fruit of the vineyards that would be theirs once they were in the land.
28.8 “And the other lamb shall you offer in the evening, as the grain offering of the morning, and as its drink-offering, you shall offer it, an offering made by fire, of a pleasing odour to Yahweh.”
The ‘evening’ offering was to be offered in the same way as the morning offering. So each part of each day in the life of Israel was dedicated to Yahweh, and atoned for, as they offered their thanksgiving for all His provision.
This continual offering is a reminder to us that we too should come daily to God, morning and evening, yielding ourselves to Him as a living sacrifice (Romans 12.1-2) and offering our continual sacrifices of praise and thanksgiving (Hebrews 13.15; 1 Peter 2.5).
As a comparison to all the offerings which will be described here the daily offering regularly presented at either of the two Ramesside temples in western Thebes in the thirteenth century BC amounted to 5,500 loaves, 54 cakes, 204 vessels of beer, up to 50 geese, and an ox, as well as a variety of other items. So the multitude of offerings described in chapters 28-29 cannot be looked on as excessive.
A Total View Of The Special Offerings (28.9-29.40).
Apart from the continual daily offerings were the special offerings. As we go through these in detail it will be noted that all follow the same general repetitive pattern within their feasts, (following the repetitive patterns given in the threefold Balaam incantations in 23.1-24.12), although as regards the whole burnt offerings (when all of the offering is offered up and none eaten) the number of young ox bulls offered varies. These whole burnt offerings, together with a he-goat for a purification for sin offering, were to be offered on top of the continual daily offering at all feasts, although in the regular Sabbath offerings no young ox bulls were to be offered as whole burnt offerings (28.9-10) only two he-lambs, nor was there then a purification for sin offering. For the Sabbath offerings were also a reminder of the Passover.
But sin was not to be overlooked. A regular purification for sin offering was offered on the new moon day of each moon period, continuing throughout the year. On new moon days, each of the days of the Feast of unleavened bread, and the day of the firstfruits (the feast of sevens) the whole burnt offering was to consist of two young ox bulls, a ram and seven he-lambs, along with the he-goat for a purification for sin offering. Note that they were offered in proportion to the possessions of the whole of Israel.
Then on the day of the feasts of trumpets and the Day of Atonement in the seventh month it was to be of one young ox bull, a ram and seven he-lambs, along with the purification for sin offering. But in the case of the feast of trumpets, which was a new moon day, this would effectively mean three young ox bulls, two rams and fourteen he-lambs. In the case of the Day of Atonement the slight relaxation would serve to lay more emphasise on the purification for sin offerings and the scapegoat, while at the same time stressing that their rededication was also fully required. It was not primarily a rededication festival, even though rededication was still clearly important. And on the seven days of the Feast of Tabernacles the young ox bulls offered were to vary downwards from thirteen to seven (seventy in all), along each day with two rams and fourteen he-lambs, and the he-goat for the purification for sin offering. Then on the eighth day it was to be back to one young ox bull, one ram and seven he-lambs, along with the he-goat for the purification for sin offering.
But all these were to be offered additionally to the continual daily offerings, and to the special offerings related to specific feasts, such as the he-lamb offered on the first day of unleavened bread when the sheaf of firstfruits was waved before Yahweh (Leviticus 23.12), and the special goat offerings on the Day of Atonement (29.11; Leviticus 16.5).
Prior to this chapter in Numbers the descriptions of offerings at the feast have been limited. There was no idea of such munificence. Before this it was only at the feast of Sevens (a one day feast celebrating harvest) that mention had been made of a multiplicity of offerings, one young ox bull, two rams, seven lambs for a whole burnt offering, one goat as a purification for sin offering and two lambs as peace offerings (Leviticus 23.18). Thus it would seem probable that what was here mentioned in such abundance, mainly based on that one series offering in the year, may not have described previous practise, but have been a huge expansion, demonstrating that because through their conquests they were now to be blessed with so much more in the way of herds and flocks, more would be expected of their offerings. It was one more encouragement on the way to possessing the land and drew their attention to that blessing. Those who had freely received should now be able freely to give and note the even greater abundance that was in store for them in the land of milk and honey.
The Sabbath and New Moon Day Offerings (28.9-15).
After the continual daily offerings we have mention of the Sabbath offerings and the new moon offerings, which were additional to the daily offerings. Two further he-lambs, together with grain and drink offerings, were to be offered on the Sabbath, further reminder of their great deliverance and their protecting God, and on every new moon day were to be offered two young ox bulls, a ram and seven he-lambs together with a goat for a purification for sin offering. Thus each seven day Sabbath and each new moon day were marked by special offerings, for each was a mark of God’s goodness in bringing them safely through those periods, and in each they were to offer themselves in renewed dedication to Yahweh and His covenant.
No mention has previously been made of new moon days, and possibly this was a new celebration in view of the fact that wilderness journeying was now behind them, but it seems more probable that even prior to this new moon days were celebrated with offerings (see 10.10). The truth is that it was probably only the munificence of the offering that was new.
We may not today make offerings such as these, but we too on each seventh day, and at the beginning of each month (as well as daily), should recognise that all our time belongs to God, and that we should rededicate ourselves and make the best use of our time for His glory (Ephesians 5.16). For one day time will cease and then what will matter will be what we accomplished for Him with what we had.
Analysis of 28.9-15.
The Special Sabbath Day Offerings (28.9-10).
28.9 “And on the sabbath day two he-lambs a year old without blemish, and two tenth parts of an ephah of fine flour for a grain offering, mingled with oil, and its drink-offering,”
Every seventh day was a Sabbath. Each such seventh day was a holy day, for it had been appointed by Yahweh as a day of rest on which no work must be done, both as a reminder of His work in creation (Exodus 20.11) and in His work of deliverance from servitude in Egypt (Deuteronomy 5.15). It is doubtful if they thought in terms of ‘weeks’ as we do. That would be an idea which would gradually arise. But it was still very significant. For this seven day period was the only time period not fixed by the sun and the moon. It went on in its familiar pattern regardless of the activities of the heavens. It was ordained by Yahweh from heaven itself. And it represented to them the divine perfection of the passing of their time, and was a continual reminder that in contrast to the nations, they were subject to Yahweh in their daily lives, and not dependent on sun, moon and stars. It was a reminder also that in the end all were finally equal in His sight, for all rested equally on His day. It evidenced the fact that all time was in His hands.
So on this holy day two extra year old he-lambs without blemish were to be offered, together with their grain and drink offerings, an act of double dedication because of the holiness of the day. And on this day all who lived in the camp, and all who would later live in the land must abstain from all work on the Sabbath day, from the highest to the lowest, as they contemplated the wonder of His ways, and His constant provision, and rededicated themselves to Him (compare Isaiah 58.13-14). We may sometimes see the Sabbath restrictions as tiresome. To the weary slaves and servants it would be seen as heaven sent. In Israel none could compel them to work on that day.
28.10 “This is the whole burnt offering of every sabbath, besides the continual whole burnt offering, and its drink-offering.”
This was the whole burnt offering of the Sabbath, the offering that ‘went up’ to Yahweh every Sabbath, and was additional to the normal daily offering.
The lesson for us is that every seventh day (it does not finally matter which day we choose as long as we are consistent - Romans 14.5-6), it can be helpful for us too to make our renewed dedication to God and bring Him our sacrifices of praise and thanksgiving, although Paul stresses that some prefer to do this every day (Romans 14.5).
The Special New Moon Offerings (28.11-15).
And at the commencement of every moon cycle, on the day of the new moon, additional offerings would be made to Yahweh. These expressed gratitude to Yahweh for the continual maintenance of the times and the seasons (see Genesis 8.22), and the unchangeableness of creation. And they were a dedication to Yahweh on that day of their labour and service to Yahweh in the moon period ahead, and a making of atonement for their failures in the moon period that had passed. They had grown used to watching the moon and seeing it as being almost on the point of disappearing, and then as beginning to grow until it became full again, but they never forgot that it was due to Yahweh’s control and power (Genesis 1.16-18). And they were thankful. And in their offerings on the new moon day was the heart cry, ‘let the moon flourish again’.
The new moon day was a day for feasting (1 Samuel 20.5-6), a day for those who had special concerns to visit prophets (2 Kings 4.23) and became a day when all trading was to cease (Amos 8.5), even though it was not usually a seven day Sabbath. Its special importance comes out in that the trumpets were to be blown when its offerings were offered (10.10), similarly to at set feasts. It was one step below the Sabbath.
28.11-13 “And in the beginnings of your moon periods you shall offer a whole burnt offering to Yahweh, two young ox bulls, and one ram, seven he-lambs a year old without blemish, and three tenth parts of an ephah of milled grain for a grain offering, mingled with oil, for each ox bull, and two tenth parts of milled grain for a grain offering, mingled with oil, for the one ram, and a tenth part of milled grain mingled with oil for a grain offering to every lamb; for a whole burnt offering of a pleasing odour, an offering made by fire to Yahweh,”
The offering was to have a new munificence. Two young ox bulls, one ram and seven he-lambs were to be offered up as whole burnt offerings, offerings that ‘went up’, together with suitable grain offerings depending on the level of offering. (Three tenths for an ox bull, two tenths for a ram, and one tenth for each he-lamb). These male animals and grain offerings represented the source of their herds and flocks and the abundance of grain as provided to them by Yahweh. And they rose as a pleasing odour to Yahweh, an offering made to Him by fire. They would celebrate the possessions that would be theirs once Yahweh had given them the land (and the possessions that they had already received as a result of their present victories).
28.14 “And their drink-offerings shall be half a hin of wine for an ox bull, and the third part of a hin for the ram, and the fourth part of a hin for a lamb. This is the whole burnt offering of every moon period throughout the moon periods of the year.”
With them were offered their drink offerings, again graded according to the level of the offerings. All these offerings were made, new moon day by new moon day, throughout the year, as each introduced the moon cycle that was to follow. And they offered thanksgiving for the certainty that although the moon might wane, Yahweh would revive it again.
28.15 “And one he-goat for a purification for sin offering to Yahweh, it shall be offered besides the continual whole burnt offering, and its drink offering.”
And as well as these offerings of dedication, tribute, thanksgiving and atonement, a he-goat was to be offered as a purification for sin offering. For it was necessary that the people be purified, and the camp be purified, continually if Yahweh was to dwell among them (15.24-26). All this was offered over and above the continual daily whole burnt offering with its drink offering.
The Set Feasts of Israel (28.16-29.39).
Information is now given about the offerings at the set feasts of Israel. There were three major feasts to which all the men of Israel of over twenty (the congregation of Israel) were expected to come: the feast of Passover and unleavened bread, the feast of firstfruits or sevens or harvest, and the feast of tabernacles or ingathering (see Exodus 23.14-17; 34.23; Deuteronomy 16.16). Two of these, the first and the last, were seven day feasts, (to each of which was connected an extra day which was different from the seven). And then there were two extra one day feasts in the sacred seventh month. On every day of those feasts munificent offerings were to be made to Yahweh. These were over and above the continual daily whole burnt offerings, the Sabbath whole burnt offerings and the new moon whole burnt offerings. The day of the full moon (the fifteenth day, fourteen days after the new moon day) was also a solemn sabbath in the first and seventh months. The seven day feasts commenced and ended the cycle of feasts, occurring on the first and the seventh months, except that the day for sacrificing the Passover preceded the first seven day feast and the eighth day of Tabernacles came the day after the second seven day feast.
Note the divine pattern. Three one day feasts (the threeness signifying completeness) sandwiched between the two seven day feasts indication divine perfection.
Seven was especially significant. It was a number recognised as sacred by all surrounding nations. And the whole system of time in Israel was in fact mainly based on sevens, demonstrating that their time was in His hands. The Sabbath occurred every seventh day (Exodus 20.8-11), there was a sabbath year every seven years (Exodus 23.10-11; Leviticus 25.1-7), the year of Yubile occurred after seven sevens of years, and did not interrupt the cycle, for the Yubile year was made up of the last six moon periods of the forty ninth year and the first six moon periods of the first year of the new cycle (see Leviticus 25.9). And while it was the new moon that determined the beginning of each moon period, the main feasts were fixed by sevens dating from that beginning. Thus unleavened bread began twice seven days after the first day of the first moon period, and tabernacles began twice seven days after the first day of the seventh moon period, while the feast of firstfruits was seven times seven days after the first day of unleavened bread. There were seven special holy days, the first and seventh of Unleavened Bread, the Firstfruits, Trumpets, the Day of Atonement, and the first and eighth days of Tabernacles. Furthermore the seventh month was seen as especially holy and was crowded with feasts; Trumpets, Day of Atonement, seven days of Tabernacles, and the solemn sabbath following those seven days. So were the people made aware that the advance of time, both short and long, was under His hand, something which had to be recognised once each ‘seven’ arrived.
The main feasts in the first half of the cycle began on the tenth day of the first month with the setting aside of the Passover lamb (Exodus 12.3). The main feast in the second half of the cycle began with the Day of Atonement on the tenth day of the seventh month. Each was a day of preparation. So the whole was carefully balanced.
It will be noted from this point on that Unleavened Bread and Firstfruits (with their offerings of two young ox bulls, a ram and seven he-lambs per day of each), and Blowing of Trumpets and the Day of Atonement (although with only one young ox bull, a ram and seven he-lambs at each) all follow the same general pattern, while maintaining their distinctive features. While at the feast of Tabernacles seventy young bulls, fourteen (seven times two) rams and ninety eight (seven times seven times two) he-lambs were offered during the feast. These were all extra to the continual daily offerings, the Sabbath offerings and the new moon offerings.
From the eighth to the twelfth month there were no feasts, although some were added in later centuries, for in these months there were no significant harvests. But it will be noted that the two seven day feasts, and passover or atonement, occurred six ‘monthly’, and while the former were agricultural feasts, neither of the latter are ever said to be so. Yet even the former were given a new significance, along with the other feasts, in terms of Israel’s salvation history, with Passover and Unleavened Bread celebrating the deliverance from Egypt, and Tabernacles celebrating that deliverance in terms of their dwelling in tents in the wilderness period (Leviticus 23.42-43).
Passover and The Feast of Unleavened Bread (28.16-25).
Here the assumption is made that the details of the Passover sacrifices are known. But the Passover sacrifices were not whole burnt offerings. They could be partaken of. The concern is therefore with the priestly offerings on behalf of Israel for the whole nation throughout the feast of Unleavened Bread. Other offerings are dealt with elsewhere. In the future the term Passover would come to include the Feast of Unleavened Bread (e.g. Ezekiel 45.21) so that in the New Testament ‘the Feast of the Passover’ could mean the whole eight days of the feast, but at this stage the two, while conjoined, were seen separately.
28.16 “And in the first month, on the fourteenth day of the month, is Yahweh’s passover.”
The actual Passover was sacrificed on the fourteenth day of the first month. This was everywhere stated (9.5; Exodus 12.2, 6; Leviticus 23.5). It was the month of Abib (Exodus 13.4; Deuteronomy 16.1), which later became Nisan (around March/April). On that day the Passover lamb (or goat - Exodus 12.5 - although the lamb seems to have been preferred) was sacrificed ready for the feast that night after sunset which would be on the fifteenth day of the month.
This feast was a yearly reminder of their great deliverance from Egypt, and of how when Yahweh had exacted His vengeance on the firstborn sons of Egypt, their sons had been spared because of the protecting hand of Yahweh, and the shed blood of the Passover lambs sprinkled on their doorposts (see Exodus 12).
For us it is a reminder of Christ our Passover Who was sacrificed for us (1 Corinthians 5.7), the Lamb of God Who takes away the sin of the world (John 1.29).
28.17 “And on the fifteenth day of this month shall be a feast. Seven days shall unleavened bread be eaten.”
This was then followed by the feast of unleavened bread commencing on the morning of the fifteenth day, and lasting for seven days. During this period many offerings would be offered, including peace offerings of various kinds. But this passage deals only with the central offerings made by the priests on behalf of the people. During the feast only unleavened bread could be eaten.
At these great feasts all the men of Israel (at least) were to be present, and as daily they assembled around the Sanctuary they would see the smoke of the offerings rising to the heavens again and again, and their hearts were to respond and also go upwards in loving dedication to Yahweh and His covenant and recognition of His mercy.
The fact that only unleavened bread was to be found in all their tents in the camp, and, when they arrived and were settled in the land, in all their houses throughout the land, was to be a reminder of the haste with which they had fled from Egypt (Exodus 13.8; Deuteronomy 16.3), and a permanent reminder that nothing corrupt must be allowed in their lives. Not all would be at the feasts, but all must put away unleavened bread.
28.18 “In the first day shall be a holy convocation. You shall do no servile work,”
The first day of the feast (the fifteenth day) was a ‘holy convocation (calling together)’. It was a kind of sabbath although without the full restrictions of the seven day Sabbath. But on it no servile work must be performed. Work necessary for the feast would, however, be allowed (Exodus 12.16).
28.19 “But you shall offer an offering made by fire, a whole burnt offering to Yahweh, two young ox bulls, and one ram, and seven he-lambs a year old. They shall be to you without blemish,”
Each day of the seven day feast whole burnt offerings would be made of two young ox bulls, one ram and seven he-lambs. Thus during the seven days fourteen young ox bulls, seven rams, and seven times seven he-lambs. This gave thanks for the mighty ox, the productive rams and the he-lambs that were the result of that productivity. But with that thanksgiving was to be a wholehearted dedication to Yahweh as they recognised what they owed Him.
28.20 “And their grain offering, milled grain mingled with oil, three tenth parts shall you offer for an ox bull, and two tenth parts for the ram, a tenth part shall you offer for every lamb of the seven lambs.”
With each of those offerings came the offerings of grain mingled with oil, the two products which were the basic stuff of life, proportioned according to the level of the sacrifice. Yahweh had given it to them through their labours and they brought a portion back to Him.
28.22 “And one he-goat for a purification for sin offering, to make atonement for you.”
But it could never be forgotten that in all their enthusiasm expressed in other offerings they were also a sinful nation, and so there had to be offered moon period by moon period, and on every feast day, the goat of the purification for sin offering, a reminder of those goats offered yearly on the great Day of Atonement. Its blood would be applied to the horns of the altar, with the remainder thrown at its base. The whole aim was to draw Yahweh’s attention to it, and to call on Him to accept it for atonement and forgiveness (15.25-28), in order to purify them and to maintain the purity of that holy place (compare the original purification of the altar (7.84)).
28.23 “You shall offer these besides the whole burnt offering of the morning, which is for a continual whole burnt offering.”
And all these were to be offered as well as the continual daily offerings which were for a continual daily offering up to God in dedication and worship.
28.24 “After this manner you shall offer daily, for seven days, the food of the offering made by fire, of a pleasing odour to Yahweh. It shall be offered besides the continual whole burnt offering, and its drink offerings.”
So this was the way that for seven days throughout the feast of unleavened bread they should make their offerings as a pleasing odour to Yahweh, offering the food of their offering made by fire and consumed in the flames, as a pleasing odour to Yahweh. Yahweh was fed, not literally, but by the flames of their dedication. And again it is emphasised that they were additional to the continual daily offering, with its drink offerings.
28.25 “And on the seventh day you shall have a holy convocation. You shall do no servile work.”
And like the first day, the seventh also would be a holy convocation, and no servile work of any kind was to be done on it. Thus in this period of seven days there would regularly be three days of rest, the first, the seventh and the seven day Sabbath. Peace and rest and contemplation of Him was at the heart of all that Yahweh had come to bring. For the servants among them this would be a double blessing.
We note in all this that unleavened bread is not mentioned except in the name of the feast. The concentration here is not on the Feast, but on the dedication that it represents.
The Feast Of The Firstfruits (28.26-31).
Even here, where there were already munificent offerings, we note that there is an increase in the level of the offerings as compared with Leviticus 23.18. Previously, while they were still in the wilderness, the requirement was of one ox bull, two rams and seven he-lambs, and the munificence was particular to that feast. But now that they had accumulated all the bulls of Bashan, to say nothing of those of Gilead, ox bulls were in plentiful supply, and so the level of the offering was increased, a subtle change that reflected that even this day, with its already munificent offerings, had to see a token increase in offering. All Israel would notice this and recognise the significance of the change. Gilead and Bashan were themselves firstruits to Yahweh.
28.26 “Also in the day of the first-fruits, when you offer a new grain offering to Yahweh in your feast of sevens, you shall have a holy convocation. You shall do no servile work,”
The feast of firstfruits, or sevens, or harvest, was a day when a new grain offering was offered to Yahweh, the firstfruits of their labours (Exodus 23.16) and of the wheat harvest (Exodus 34.22), a contribution offering of two loaves of milled grain baked with leaven ( a rare case of leaven being allowed) and presented with the listed offerings (Leviticus 23.11). No leaven could be offered by fire to Yahweh, but leaven was permitted as a part of the offering from their labours in a contribution offering which could be partaken of by the priests. And this too was a day of holy convocation (calling together) in which no servile work could be done. This feast especially celebrated the gathering in of the wheat harvest.
28.27-30 “But you shall offer a whole burnt offering for a pleasing odour to Yahweh, two young ox bulls, one ram, seven he-lambs a year old; and their grain offering, milled grain mingled with oil, three tenth parts for each ox bull, two tenth parts for the one ram, a tenth part for every lamb of the seven lambs; one he-goat, to make atonement for you.”
And during that day the priests would offer their two young ox bulls, their ram and their seven he-lambs, representing the gratitude, dedication and worship of the whole of Israel. And again the men of Israel, gathered with any who had come with them round the Sanctuary, would see the smoke of the offerings rising again and again, and their hearts were to be full of praise and worship as they rededicated themselves to Yahweh and the covenant.
28.31 “Besides the continual whole burnt offering, and its grain offering, you shall offer them (they shall be to you without blemish), and their drink-offerings.”
And this was as well as the continual daily whole burnt offerings with their grain offerings and their drink offerings, offered without blemish.
Chapter 29 The Feasts of the Seventh Month.
The seventh moon period contained within itself parallel ceremonies to those which took place in the first three moon periods. Each began with a special day, Passover and Atonement, these were then followed by a seven day feast, Unleavened Bread and Tabernacles, and both concluded with a special one day feast, Firstfruits and the Eighth Day. This confirms how special the seventh month was. Once in the land (and already in Gilead and Bashan) it would be a time when the harvesting for the year was all completed and they awaited the hoped for coming rains. This last may well have been part of the reason for this concentration of feasts. If Israel was to be blessed with rain they must be fully right with Yahweh. Certainly Tabernacles later became a festival associated with the cry for rain.
The sacred seventh month would commence with the feast of the blowing of trumpets. This was the audible celebration of the introduction of this sacred month, the month in which on its tenth day yearly atonement would be made before the very Ark itself on the Day of Atonement, and on its fifteenth day the final celebration of the agricultural year, the celebration of the ingathering of summerfruits and grapes, and of all the harvests, at the Feast of Tabernacles, would be entered into and enjoyed (see Deuteronomy 16.13-15 which stresses the rejoicing). The day of trumpets announced the holiness of the month and called on Yahweh to recognise the wholehearted response of His people. It would then be followed by the annual atonement ceremony and the concluding ceremony over eight days of full rejoicing for the abundance of harvests received, both of flocks and herds, and grain and fruits.
When later, long after entry into the land, this became the first month of the year, the trumpets would celebrate the entry of the new year. But in these early days of recognition of the wonder of Yahweh’s coming provision the celebration was of the sacred seventh month of atonement and blessing.
Feast of the Blowing of Trumpets (29.1-6).
29.1 ‘And in the seventh month, on the first day of the month, you shall have a holy convocation. You shall do no servile work. It is a day of blowing of trumpets to you.’
So on the first day of the seventh month the trumpets would be blown by the sons of Aaron the Priest (10.8). Yet it was not the only time the trumpets were blown. They were to be blown on this ‘day of gladness’, but they were also to be blown over the offerings offered at their set feasts, and on new moon days and over their peace offerings as a memorial to Yahweh their God (10.10). The trumpets drew everyone’s attention, and especially Yahweh’s attention (looking from the people’s point of view) to the fact that this sacred month had now dawned at the end of another hopefully successful agricultural round, when atonement would be made for all Israel for another year.
29.2-5 ‘And you shall offer a whole burnt offering for a pleasing odour to Yahweh, one young ox bull, one ram, seven he-lambs a year old without blemish; and their grain offering, milled grain mingled with oil, three tenth parts for the ox bull, two tenth parts for the ram, and one tenth part for every lamb of the seven lambs; and one he-goat for a purification for sin offering, to make atonement for you,’
Again we have a munificent offering. And it was even more munificent because on it would also be offered the continual daily offerings and the new moon offerings. Thus were offered three young ox bulls, two rams, fourteen he-lambs, together with their accompanying offerings, and the two he-lambs of the daily offering. And if it was also a Sabbath, the Sabbath offerings would be offered as well.
29.6 ‘Besides the whole burnt offering of the new moon, and its grain offering, and the continual whole burnt offering and its grain offering, and their drink-offerings, according to their ordinance, for a pleasing odour, an offering made by fire to Yahweh.’
On this day offerings were multiplied. The special day offerings, the new moon offerings and the continual daily offerings. And all this was a pleasing odour to Yahweh and an offering made by fire to Him.
The Day of Atonement (29.7-11).
Sacred in the Israelite calendar was the Day of Atonement on the tenth day of the seventh month. It was a day of affliction of the person (compare Leviticus 16.29), although we are never told in what way. On this day they were to ‘afflict themselves’. This probably represented some form of indicating penitence, although we are not told what it was. It may have been the loosening of the hair, the ritual tearing of clothes, and the covering of the upper lip (13.45). (Compare 10.6; 21.10; Ezekiel 24.17, 22; Genesis 37.34; Numbers 14.6; 2 Samuel 1.11; 2 Kings 11.14; 19.1; 22.11, 19; Ezra 9.5; Micah 3.7). It would later be related to fasting, but there is no hint of that here. In Isaiah 58.3-5 it is related to fasting but rather as something done while fasting, possibly ‘bowing down his head as a rush, and spreading sackcloth and ashes under him’.
But it was not specifically spelled out, probably so that men could choose how they expressed themselves without it becoming just a formal response. This day yearly was the day when Israel specially remembered their sins. It was a sorrowful day for that reason, but behind it lay joy, for on that day the High Priest discreetly and reverently entered behind the veil in the Holy Place into the Holy of Holies itself, and there presented before Yahweh at the very Mercy Seat (the Ark), the blood, first of his own purification for sin offering (a bull ox), and then of their purification for sin offering (a he-goat). And on that day also a further he-goat, the ‘scapegoat’, was driven into the wilderness, having had the sins of the people confessed over it, never to return, in one way or another bearing on it as their representative the sins of Israel (see Leviticus 16 for details).
29.7 ‘And on the tenth day of this seventh month you shall have a holy convocation, and you shall afflict your souls. You shall do no manner of work,’
That day was a day of affliction of the person, and a holy convocation (gathering together) on which no work must be done. All must be allowed to fully participate in that day.
29.8-11 ‘But you shall offer a whole burnt offering to Yahweh, for a pleasing odour; one young ox bull, one ram, seven he-lambs a year old; they shall be to you without blemish; and their grain offering, milled grain mingled with oil, three tenth parts for the ox bull, two tenth parts for the one ram, a tenth part for every lamb of the seven lambs: one he-goat for a purification for sin offering of atonement, and the continual whole burnt offering, and its grain offering, and their drink-offerings.’
On that day special offerings would be offered as here described, but these would be additional to the whole burnt offerings of a ram for the priest (Leviticus 16.3) and a ram for the people (Leviticus 16.5), and the purification for sin offerings of an ox bull for the priest and a he-goat for the people (Leviticus 16.3, 5) and the scapegoat. Thus would atonement be made followed by the offerings of worship, dedication, praise and thanksgiving, which also included an element of atonement.
Each year this solemn day would be seen as allowing a new beginning. The past was behind them and the future before them. Whatever had been they could begin again, being fully reconciled to Yahweh. Although this did depend on the attitude of heart with which they had come (see Isaiah 1.11-20). Their offerings had to be genuine. They did not work automatically.
The Feast Of The Harvest Moon - Tabernacles (29.12-40).
The climax of the festival year was the Feast of Tabernacles. It was at that feast that every seven years the whole of Israel were to gather for the reading of the full covenant (Deuteronomy 31.10-13). It was to include men, women, children and resident aliens. But every year it was to be special. The multiplicity of offerings including seventy young ox bulls, fourteen rams and ninety eight (seven times seven times 2) he-lambs brings this out. It was to be the climax to the agricultural year. All the harvests would have been gathered in, and the next thing would be the ploughing and preparation of the ground once the rains came.
Thus it was a time for relaxation and rejoicing (Leviticus 23.40; Deuteronomy 16.13-15)). But again the emphasis here is on the depth of dedication and tribute.
The gradual decrease of ox bulls from thirteen to seven might have been seen as a diminution in importance had it not ended on the sacred number seven, but as it did that makes it appear as though the sequence leads up to it! On the last of the seven days was the divinely perfect ox bull offering. (Incidentally this completely destroys any belief that the number thirteen was unlucky! Thirteen began the divine sequence).
It was called ‘Tabernacles’ (dwellingplaces) because at that time every one had to live in booths made of boughs of trees and palm branches (Leviticus 23.42). This was to be a reminder of how Israel had had to live in booths once they left Egypt (Leviticus 23.43). Its recognition of rain as a gift from God is implied in Zechariah 14.16-17.
Each of the days of this Feast follow the same pattern as the other feasts, but with an increase in the offerings.
Day One.
Day Two.
Day Three.
Day Four.
Day Five.
Day Six.
Day Seven.
Day Eight.
The whole is then completed with a summary which may be paralleled with 28.1.
The First Day of the Feast of Tabernacles.
29.12 ‘And on the fifteenth day of the seventh month you shall have a holy convocation. You shall do no servile work, and you shall keep a feast to Yahweh seven days,’
On the first day, fourteen days after the new moon day, it was to be a solemn convocation, a day on which no servile work should be done, ready for keeping a feast to Yahweh for seven days (a divinely perfect time).
29.13-15 ‘And you shall offer a whole burnt offering, an offering made by fire, of a pleasing odour to Yahweh; thirteen young ox bulls, two rams, fourteen he-lambs a year old; they shall be without blemish; and their grain offering, milled grain mingled with oil, three tenth parts for every ox bull of the thirteen ox bulls, two tenth parts for each ram of the two rams, and a tenth part for every lamb of the fourteen lambs.’
And on that first day thirteen young ox bulls, two rams, and fourteen he-lambs a year old, all without blemish, were to be offered as whole burnt offerings with their smoke and pleasing odour going up to Yahweh together with their accompanying grain offerings.
29.16 ‘And one he-goat for a purification for sin offering, besides the continual whole burnt offering, its grain offering, and its drink offering.’
And as regularly on a feast day a he-goat for a purification for sin offering was also to be offered on behalf of the whole of Israel, as on the Day of Atonement. Each offering of such a he-goat looked off to that day and what was accomplished there, and brought up to date its effectiveness.
The same procedure would apply each day through the seven days, with the number of ox bulls offered falling by one until on the seventh day it had become ‘seven’. This sequence is now given.
The Following Six Days of the Feast (29.17-34).
29.17-19 ‘And on the second day you shall offer twelve young ox bulls, two rams, fourteen he-lambs a year old without blemish; and their grain offering and their drink-offerings for the ox bulls, for the rams, and for the lambs, according to their number, after the ordinance; and one he-goat for a purification for sin offering; besides the continual whole burnt offering, and its grain offering, and their drink-offerings.’
29.20-22 ‘And on the third day eleven ox bulls, two rams, fourteen he-lambs a year old without blemish; and their grain offering and their drink-offerings for the ox bulls, for the rams, and for the lambs, according to their number, after the ordinance; and one he-goat for a purification for sin offering; besides the continual whole burnt offering, and its grain offering, and its drink-offering.’
29.23-25 ‘And on the fourth day ten ox bulls, two rams, fourteen he-lambs a year old without blemish; their grain offering and their drink-offerings for the ox bulls, for the rams, and for the lambs, according to their number, after the ordinance; and one he-goat for a purification for sin offering; besides the continual whole burnt offering, its grain offering, and its drink-offering.’
29.26-28 ‘And on the fifth day nine ox bulls, two rams, fourteen he-lambs a year old without blemish; and their grain offering and their drink-offerings for the ox bulls, for the rams, and for the lambs, according to their number, after the ordinance; and one he-goat for a purification for sin offering, besides the continual whole burnt offering, and its grain offering, and its drink-offering.’
29.29-31 ‘And on the sixth day eight ox bulls, two rams, fourteen he-lambs a year old without blemish; and their grain offering and their drink-offerings for the ox bulls, for the rams, and for the lambs, according to their number, after the ordinance; and one he-goat for a purification for sin offering; besides the continual whole burnt offering, its grain offering, and the its drink-offerings.’
29.32-33 ‘And on the seventh day seven ox bulls, two rams, fourteen he-lambs a year old without blemish; and their grain offering and their drink-offerings for the ox bulls, for the rams, and for the lambs, according to their number, after the ordinance; and one he-goat for a purification for sin offering; besides the continual whole burnt offering, its grain offering, and its drink-offering.’
Thus on the seventh day the ox bull offerings have reached the divinely perfect seven. This was where such a count had to stop. It was not possible to go beyond ‘seven’. It indicated divine perfection. Quantity has been replaced by quality. Now the feast could end, followed by a special day which was not part of the sequence.
The Eighth Day of the Feast (29.35-40).
This was the end of the festal season. Ahead lay the coming of rain (possibly in October onwards for the early rains, softening up the ground, a sprinkling of rain through the winter, and around March/April for the later rains) and the hard work of preparing the ground for the following year’s harvests. It is not therefore surprising that the feast later became a part plea for rain, and that the eighth day especially had that in mind and was called ‘the great day of the feast’ (John 7.37).
29.35-37 ‘On the eighth day you shall have a solemn assembly: you shall do no servile work, but you shall offer a whole burnt offering, an offering made by fire, of a pleasing odour to Yahweh: one ox bull, one ram, seven he-lambs a year old without blemish; their grain offering and their drink-offerings for the ox bull, for the ram, and for the lambs, shall be according to their number, after the ordinance,’
Like the first day the eight day was to be a day of no servile work, the last of the seven special such days. It was to be a day of solemn assembly. The offerings on the eighth day parallel the offerings at the feast of trumpets and on the Day of Atonement. It was not therefore just a continuation on from the seventh day. The sudden fall in offerings (although still munificent) would remind them of the first ten days of the month when sin had been mourned for and atonement obtained. Now they could go forward ready for what lay ahead.
29.38 ‘And one he-goat for a purification for sin offering, besides the continual whole burnt offering, and its grain offering, and its drink-offering.’
As on all special days when the whole burnt offerings were offered there was a purification for sin offering of a he-goat. Sin was always present and required to be forgiven and purified. Also was offered the continual whole burnt offering, and its grain offering, and its drink-offering, which would go on throughout the year (as would the new moon and Sabbath offerings).
This description of the dedication and tribute offerings at the feasts, deliberately ignoring all other offerings and sacrifices apart from the accompanying purification for sin offerings and continual daily whole burnt offerings, is in order to stress the fullness of Israel’s dedication to Yahweh at this point in time. It is because they are so dedicated that they are ready to enter the land.
29.39 ‘These you shall offer to Yahweh in your set feasts, besides your vows, and your freewill-offerings, for your whole burnt offerings, and for your grain offerings, and for your drink-offerings, and for your peace-offerings.’
Summing up the writer now points out that personal dedication offerings have not been mentioned. This was ‘besides your vows and your freewill offerings’. Those two types of dedication would have been common throughout the feasts, and on those freewill offerings much of the feasting would depend, for the large part of the meat from those offerings could be eaten by all who were clean. Mention is also made of all peace/wellbeing offerings, of which votary offerings and freewill offerings would be a part (see Leviticus 7.11-21). All backed up these special dedication offerings of the whole of Israel.
This therefore now leads on to the question of vows in the next chapter, for those were a necessary part of Israel’s dedication. Such vows have already been touched on in terms of the Nazirite vows (6.1-21). But there were also lesser vows, both in respect to wealth and in respect to personal living, and they too had to be controlled.
29.40 ‘And Moses told the children of Israel according to all that Yahweh commanded Moses.’
So Moses passed on Yahweh’s words and informed them of all that He had commanded them.
The Continual Making and Confirmation of Vows (with their peace/wellbeing offerings). But While Dedication Was Good and Was Required, It Also Had To Be Controlled (30.1-16).
Vows were an essential part of ancient life. By them men demonstrated their dedication to their gods, and it was no different for Israel. So such vows were a further evidence of Israel’s dedication. That is one reason why the general question of vows was introduced here, when the total dedication of Israel into the future was in mind. Furthermore a large number of vows would be accompanied by votary peace offerings both at their commencement and at their end. A number of people would partake of that offering in recognition and celebration of the vow and its final accomplishment. Thus they were a sacred matter.
This chapter must not be read as though it was simply describing a way for women to get out of their vows. Its emphasis is positive. Both men and women could make vows in order to demonstrate that they were dedicated to Yahweh. The exceptions were introduced simply in order to prevent a group being bound by one member who was not the head without its consent.
The main principle was easily dealt with. Solemn vows made to Yahweh were to be seen as a serious matter. They were binding. Once made they had to be performed. Only in this way could Israel be pleasing to Yahweh and worthy to enter the land (30.1-2). (Where they turned out to be too onerous a way was provided of redemption from some vows which were connected with property, but it was costly - see Leviticus 27).
But a problem then arose because of the popularity of vows among Yahweh’s people which were made either in order to demonstrate their love for Him, or in a time of crisis when special help was needed. The result was that people such as young women made vows who were not really in a position to do so, concerning matters over which they did not really have control, especially under the stress of war. In that case the vows could either be confirmed or rescinded by the head of the household at the time when he first heard of them.
In this chapter this situation was especially dealt with as regards women. The point was, however, not that all such vows would be rescinded, but that the final decision must rest with the head of the household which was affected by the vow. For he was responsible for both the wealth and behaviour of the household.
But why here the emphasis on women? If our analysis of 26-32 given at the commencement of chapter 26 is correct then it contained the sequence
Comparison of the first with the last partly explains why women are specially in mind in this passage. We have here a contrast between on the one hand the loyalty and faith of the daughters of Zelophehad which were exalted and rewarded by Yahweh, with, and, on the other hand, the general situation of young women and married women who were not to usurp authority over their menfolk. Their vows therefore, which were also an expression of loyalty and faith, had to be subject to their menfolk. The decision with regard to the daughters of Zelophehad was not to be seen as a general declaration of independence. (Under the hard conditions under which they lived such a declaration would have been foolish in the extreme).
This passage may be seen as following the pattern earlier established whereby sequences can be introduced into an overall chiasmus (compare 22.15-38; 23.1-24.12; 28.1-29.40), although it can actually also be seen as a chiasmus.
It may be analysed as follows:
A Man’s Vows Are Unbreakable (30.1-2).
A man’s vows were an expression of dedication to Yahweh. To break them would therefore be to withdraw his dedication.
30.1 ‘And Moses spoke to the heads of the tribes of the children of Israel, saying, This is the thing which Yahweh has commanded.’
What is here spoken was to the heads of the tribes who would be responsible for the administration of the consequences of vows. It was necessary that they made clear to the people the seriousness of vows and the situation in which they could be rescinded. For in the end a vow was not just a personal matter. It reflected on the whole of the tribe. Note the emphasis on the fact that this was a command of Yahweh. Vows to God were not to be treated lightly.
30.2 ‘When a man vows a vow to Yahweh, or swears an oath to bind his soul with a bond, he shall not break his word. He shall do according to all that proceeds out of his mouth.’
The general principle is clear. When a responsible adult male vows a vow or swears an oath they are to be seen as absolutely binding. Such a person must not break his word. He must do in accordance with the words that he has spoken (compare Deuteronomy 23.21-23; Ecclesiastes 5.4-5; Psalm 15.4; 66.13-14). It is an act of dedication that is irreversible, although in the case of some vows to do with property redemption was possible (Leviticus 27).
A vow could either be (1) with a view to general performance in the light of God’s favour (e.g. Genesis 28.20-22), (2) with a view to abstaining from something (e.g. Psalm 132.2-5; 1 Samuel 14.24), (3) with a view to performing an act in return for God’s favour (21.2-3; Judges 11.30-31; 1 Samuel 1.11), or (4) as an expression of zeal and devotion towards God (Psalm 22.22-25).
Two different words are used in connection with vows, neder and ’issar, the former generally, but not always having a positive vow to do something in mind, (it was used of the Nazirite vow which is both positive and negative), while the latter seems more to denote a vow of abstinence.
Vows Are Unbreakable If Confirmed By The Head of the Household But Can Be Rescinded by Him Immediately On Hearing Of Them, Although If He Does This Iniquitously He Must Bear The Consequences.
These are not to be seen as simply special exceptions enabling the avoidance of vows, but as a positive declaration that a vow must be confirmed by the head of the household in order to be finally binding. Thus a vow could not be finalised which bound or affected others unless agreed to by the head of the particular group, but the emphasis is on the probable confirmation of the vows. It should be noted that the whole tenor of the passage is positive. The expectation is that the vows would be confirmed if they were reasonable and acceptable to the head of the group.
(i) A young unmarried woman living in her father’s house (30.3-5).
30.3-4 ‘Also when a woman vows a vow to Yahweh, and binds herself by a bond, being in her father’s house, in her youth, and her father hears her vow, and her bond with which she has bound herself, and her father holds his peace at her; then all her vows shall stand, and every bond with which she has bound herself shall stand.’
The first example was of a young woman still unmarried and living at home under her father’s jurisdiction. Note that she was ‘in her youth’. She was in expectancy of marriage. Normally such a young woman would be in her early teens, or younger. When she vowed a vow it was subject to the agreement of her father. If when he first heard of it he said nothing then he was seen as approving of the vow and the vow became firm and could not afterwards be rescinded. By his silence he was seen as having given his approval. The vow stood and any bond had to be fulfilled. Note that the positive aspect comes first. Making vows of dedication was still in mind as something positive and meaningful.
30.5 ‘But if her father disallow her in the day that he hears, none of her vows, or of her bonds with which she has bound herself, shall stand: and Yahweh will forgive her, because her father disallowed her.’
However, if her father immediately rescinded her vows on the day that he heard of them then none of her vows would officially stand. She would not be bound to them by God or man. And Yahweh would forgive her because it was her father’s decision. She could, of course, still act in accordance with them, but the point is that neither God nor man would hold her bound to them.
This must not be assumed to be an easy get out. The father would be seen as responsible to honour vows that were made which were positive and sensible. He would not be expected to hinder his daughter’s dedication to Yahweh. But the point is that the vows may have been the rash act of a young teenager, or may have affected things outside her own life. Thus the father was put in a position to decide whether they should have been made, and to confirm or deny them accordingly
(ii) A young unmarried woman who makes a vow and then marries a husband (30.6-8)
30.6-7 ‘And if she be betrothed/married to a husband, while her vows are on her, or the rash utterance of her lips, with which she has bound herself, and her husband hear it, and hold his peace at her in the day that he hears it; then her vows shall stand, and her bonds with which she has bound herself shall stand.’
The second example is of a young woman who made a vow or vows and then either became betrothed or married. She had now come under the authority of her husband. Thus he had the right to decide whether to confirm her vows. She could not bring binding vows into the marriage without his agreement. Note the mention of ‘the rash utterance of her lips’. It was a recognition that a young teenage girl could make rather foolish vows. But the overall point was that if her husband came to know of her vows and by silence gave his consent to them, then they became firm and binding. Once again the positive aspect is in mind.
30.8 ‘But if her husband disallow her in the day that he hears it, then he shall make void her vow which is on her, and the rash utterance of her lips, with which she has bound herself, and Yahweh will forgive her.’
However once again there was a means of withdrawal. If her husband disallowed her vows on the day that he learned of them then no one would be bound by them,, and Yahweh would forgive the woman because it was not a sign of her change in dedication. Once again the husband would be seen as having a responsibility before Yahweh.
(iii) A vow made by a widow or a divorced woman (30.9).
30.9 ‘But the vow of a widow, or of her who is divorced, even everything with which she has bound her soul, shall stand against her.’
The vow made by a widow or a divorced woman was seen as being as binding as an adult male’s. She was not under the authority of father or husband and her vow was thus seen as irrevocable. Even a divorced woman who returned to her father’s household was thus still seen as having her own measure of independence. Even here, however, she could presumably only vow in a binding way concerning her own position and wealth.
This example is especially of interest in regard to the question of women’s ‘equality’. It was not that women were not seen as equal with men. That fact is confirmed here. It was that there had always to be a head of a group, and that that head was to be seen as having overall responsibility.
(iv) A vow made by a married woman without her husband’s knowledge (30.10-12).
30.10-11 ‘And if she (a woman) vowed in her husband’s house, or bound her soul by a bond with an oath, and her husband heard it, and held his peace at her, and disallowed her not; then all her vows shall stand, and every bond with which she bound herself shall stand.’
This case was of a married woman who made a vow without consulting her husband as the head of the household. Such a vow was always to be seen as subject to the husband’s agreement, for her fulfilling of the vow would necessarily affect the whole household. If he heard of it and allowed it by his silence then the vow continued as binding on all. She was bound by her dedicatory vow.
30.12 ‘But if her husband made them null and void in the day that he heard them, then whatever proceeded out of her lips concerning her vows, or concerning the bond of her soul, shall not stand. Her husband has made them void, and Yahweh will forgive her.’
But if her husband disallowed the vow or vows on the day that he heard of it/them, then they ceased to be binding. Whatever she had spoken was cancelled. Her husband had made them void and Yahweh would forgive her.
A Summary (30.13-16).
30.13-14 ‘Every vow, and every binding oath to afflict the soul, her husband may establish it, or her husband may make it void. But if her husband altogether hold his peace at her from day to day, then he establishes all her vows, or all her bonds, which are on her: he has established them, because he held his peace at her in the day that he heard them.’
The whole position with regard to husband and wife was now summarised. On the day that he heard of his wife’s vow, whether it was to perform something positive, or abstain from doing something, or to afflict herself in some way, he could make it void. But if from day to day he said nothing once he had heard of it, then it became binding. All such vows would be established. All such bonds would be binding. By holding his peace and saying nothing on the day that he heard of them he has firmly established them.
30.15 ‘But if he shall make them null and void after that he has heard them, then he shall bear her iniquity.’
This principle has been seen in two ways. Some see this as representing a case where the husband having said nothing on the day that he heard of the vow, decided later to rescind it. Had he rescinded it immediately there would have been no iniquity. But because he has rescinded it late he must pay any penalty required for failure to fulfil the vow. This rested on him as the head of the household because he had originally confirmed the vow by his silence.
But it seems more probable that this is simply a reminder that the husband must not rescind any vows made by his wife lightly. While the woman would be forgiven because it was at her husband’s demand that the vow was rescinded, he himself was still to be held as accountable. He must bear the result of his decision. If his decision was wise and reasonable there would be no cost. If it was not then he was accountable to Yahweh. The responsibility had come on him.
30.16 ‘These are the statutes, which Yahweh commanded Moses, between a man and his wife, between a father and his daughter, being in her youth, in her father’s house.’
The chapter finishes with a summary of what the chapter was about. It may suggest that this chapter once stood alone as a written record with this as the colophon. But note that it does not mention vows (although it may have been filed under ‘vows’). The principle behind this chapter was of overall authority in a household and not just a matter of vows. It covers the situation between a man and his wife, and a father and his young unmarried daughters with regard to overall authority.
Chapter 31. Vengeance on The Midianites For Causing Israel To Sin.
3). Yahweh to be Avenged on Midian (31.1-54).
One blot still remained on the horizon. Balaam and the Midianites had plotted to bring down Israel’s dedication to Yahweh by leading them astray after false gods, and as a result a goodly number of Israelites had been executed or had died in the plague. It remained therefore for justice to be brought on the murderers responsible.
This was another side of the dedication of Israel. As Yahweh’s dedicated people they had to be concerned for His holiness and for the destruction of all that actively stood against Him. Defeating Midian would be evidence of their genuine dedication, and as a result of shedding blood for blood would purify the land. Together with what has gone before in 27-29 it is part of the process of rededication and purification resulting from possession of the land, and the whole parallels chapters 5-9 which also dealt with purifying and dedication. The new Israel must be dedicated and purified as the old had been.
The principle here follows a similar principle to that which demanded the destruction or driving out of the Canaanites. All who would lead Israel astray from Yahweh must be removed. But it carries it a stage further, for these Midianites, (not be it noted the whole of Midian. Midian were widely scattered in a number of sub-tribes), who are depicted as having deliberately plotted Israel’s downfall at the behest of Balaam would clearly never cease to be a thorn in the side of Israel. There was therefore no alternative but to exterminate them. Had they left Israel alone, they would have been left alone. And the parallel in the chiasmus below also suggests that this extirpation was to be seen as a cleansing for Israel. Blood had been spilled in the land and so the murderers had to be brought to justice.
The chapter splits into two main sections, the carrying out of the sentence on Midian (31.1-24), and the division of the spoils (31.25-54), which can be analysed as follows:
The Sentence Passed and Carried Out On Midian (31.1-24).
(ii) The Division of the Spoils (31.25-54).
This second section can then be analysed as follows:
The Sum of The Prey That Was Taken From The Midianites and The Levies For Yahweh and the Levites Commanded (31.25-31).
The Division Between the Men of War, Yahweh (the Priests), the People and the Levites (31.32-47).
The Sum of The Surviving Men of War and Their Freewill Gift to The Sanctuary Of Their Personal Spoil (31.48-54).
We shall now look at chapter 31 in detail in its three sections.
(i) The Sentence Passed and Carried Out on the Local Midianites (31.1-24).
Analysis.
31.1 ‘And Yahweh spoke to Moses, saying,’
Once again it is emphasised that we have here the words of Yahweh to Moses.
31.2 ‘Avenge the children of Israel of the Midianites: afterwards you shall be gathered unto your people.’
The avenging of the people of Israel on the Midianites was to be Moses’ final act. After that he was to be ‘gathered to his people’. He was to die, but it was the death of the righteous. He would join those who had been faithful to Yahweh. The avenging was on the basis of ‘a life for a life’, on the basis of ‘whoever sheds man’s blood, by man shall his blood be shed’ (Genesis 9.6). For while Midian had not done the actual killing, it was as a result of their deliberate manoeuvrings that so many had died
31.3 ‘And Moses spoke to the people, saying, “Arm you men from among you for the war, that they may go against Midian, to execute Yahweh’s vengeance on Midian.”
So Moses was called on to arrange for the arming of a sufficient task force to destroy Midian, that is, the Midianites who were still encamped either in a part of the former kingdom of Sihon (Joshua 13.21), or over the border in Moab, having escaped there from the slaughter of the Amorites. They were to ‘execute Yahweh’s vengeance’ on Midian. These Midianites had sought to woo His people from Him, and He was a jealous God, and was concerned for the purity of the worship of His people. So His concern was such that Midian must be blotted out because of what they had done. Indeed had they not been blotted they would probably have called in their roving Midianite and Amalekite allies for a major attack on Israel (such as would come later in Judges 6), taking them in the rear as they invaded the land. It was therefore essential that they be wiped out before they could stir up further trouble.
31.4 “Of every tribe an ’eleph, throughout all the tribes of Israel, shall you send to the war.”
That the Midianite numbers were fairly small comes out in that it was not the whole army that was to be involved. A military unit (and eleph) taken from each tribe was considered to be sufficient for the task
31.5 ‘So there were delivered, out of the thousands of Israel, a thousand of every tribe, twelve thousand armed for war.’
So out of the many fighting units of Israel, twelve units, one from each tribe, were armed for the purpose of taking out Midian.
31.6 ‘And Moses sent them, a thousand of every tribe, to the war, them and Phinehas the son of Eleazar the priest, to the war, with the vessels of the sanctuary and the trumpets for the alarm in his hand.’
With them went Phinehas, the son of Eleazar the Priest, who would have responsibility for the Ark of the covenant of Yahweh and the trumpets which would sound so as to convey the commander’s messages to his troops. His presence and possibly that of the Ark and some holy vessels would be the assurance that this was holy war and that Yahweh was with them. The High Priest himself would not want to become ‘unclean, by the contact with death, for that would interfere with his daily ministry.
‘With the vessels of the Sanctuary.’ This could actually indicate the priestly garments (the word means ‘garments’ in Deuteronomy 22.5), but the Ark does seem to have been intended to lead the way for Israel (10.33-36), and its presence along with some holy vessels used for some special purpose, would be a huge encouragement as it would be in Joshua 6.3-4 where it was assumed that the Ark would go with the army. Alternately we may read, ‘with the vessels of the Sanctuary, even the trumpets for the alarm’, seeing the trumpets as being the ‘accoutrements of the Sanctuary’.
31.7 ‘And they warred against Midian, as Yahweh commanded Moses; and they slew every male.’
So the twelve military units of Israel attacked the Midianites with overwhelming force. There may well have been only a few hundred Midianite soldiers. And they may well have caught the Midianites unprepared and in fact in battles with the kind of weapons that they had casualties were regularly light. It was when one side panicked and fled that the real killing took place. It would seem probable that that is what happened in this case, and that they pursued them until every Midianite man was dead. Being caught unprepared and fleeing in panic would explain why there was not a single fatal casualty among the Israelites (verse 49).
31.8 ‘And they slew the kings of Midian with the rest of their slain: Evi, and Rekem, and Zur, and Hur, and Reba, the five kings of Midian. Balaam also the son of Beor they slew with the sword.’
All were slain, including the ‘kings’ of Midian whose names are given, and Balaam the diviner who was found to be among them. The giving of names confirms the authenticity of the account. It was a daughter of Zur who was slain by Phinehas in 25.8, 14, and that he would have been seeking blood revenge was one reason why the destruction of the Midianites was so necessary, while the fact Balaam was there among them suggests that that vengeance was already being planned. This was not an attack on an innocent people, but on a very belligerent and determined enemy who would stop at nothing.
31.9 ‘And the children of Israel took captive the women of Midian and their little ones; and all their cattle, and all their flocks, and all their goods, they took for a prey.’
The children of Israel then took over the Midianite camps, taking captive all the Midianite women, with their children, together with their cattle, flocks and a host of spoils.
31.10 ‘And all their cities in the places in which they dwelt, and all their encampments, they burned with fire.’
We must not read too much into ‘cities’. An encampment could be called a ‘city’ (see 13.19), which was probably the fact in this case, and a ‘city’ could contain a mere fifty men with their families, or even less. These were burned to the ground. They were ‘devoted’ to Yahweh.
31.11-12 ‘And they took all the spoil, and all the prey, both of man and of beast. And they brought the captives, and the prey, and the spoil, to Moses, and to Eleazar the priest, and to the congregation of the children of Israel, to the camp at the plains of Moab, which are by the Jordan at Jericho.’
So everything that belonged to the Midianites was taken, both of man and of beast, their wives, their young men, their daughters, their herds and their flocks. And they brought them to Moses and Eleazar, to the camp of Israel in the plains of Moab.
31.13 ‘And Moses, and Eleazar the priest, and all the princes of the congregation, went forth to meet them outside the camp.’
And Moses and Eleazar and the chieftains went out from the camp to meet and welcome the victorious army.
31.14 ‘And Moses was angry with the officers of the host, the captains of thousands and the captains of hundreds, who came from the service of the war.’
But when Moses saw that they had allowed the wives of the Midianites to live he was angry with their officers and NCOs.
31.15 ‘And Moses said to them, “Have you saved all the women alive? Behold, these caused the children of Israel, through the counsel of Balaam, to commit trespass against Yahweh in the matter of Peor, and so the plague was among the congregation of Yahweh.” ’
He angrily pointed out that these women were the ones responsible for turning so many Israelites away from Yahweh and thus causing so many deaths in Israel. They were the most blood guilty of all. They should not have been allowed to live.
It is made quite clear that the women had engaged in an act of war. They were not innocent. Following the guidance of Balaam they had deliberately sought to separate between the men of Israel and Yahweh their God as a military strategy so that Yahweh would then curse Israel. Balaam had clearly still not given up his attempts to persuade Yahweh that His people were worthy of cursing. Once they had succeeded the plan was that Balaam would persuade Yahweh to curse His errant people and the Midianites would then attack, assisted by the Moabites. And it had so nearly succeeded.
31.17 ‘Now therefore kill every male among the little ones, and kill every woman who has known man by lying with him.’
So he commanded the soldiers to kill all the male children, and to kill every woman who had known a man by lying with him, the wives and seducers of the enemy.
We might be horrified at what was commanded, but there was really little alternative. There was no possibility of setting up prisoner-of-war camps. Even had they been a settled people it would not have been possible, but being on the march towards Canaan it was totally impractical. Furthermore, while they might have enslaved them, every Midianite boy would have grown up knowing that it was his bounden duty to obtain blood vengeance against Israel, and with Midianites scattered throughout the wilderness and desert regions east of the Jordan, who could be called on for assistance on the grounds of blood ties, they would have been a constant danger. Allowing them to live would have been like taking to bed a deadly poisonous snake on the grounds of being kind to animals. It might have been a different matter if they had already been settled in the land.
Furthermore the women had been guilty of seducing many Israelites to their death. They were even more guilty. Their blood was required as a recompense. Nor would they have made suitable wives, they would have been vipers in the nest, to say nothing of further attempts to turn Israel’s menfolk away from Yahweh.
31.18 ‘But all the women-children, who have not known man by lying with him, keep alive for yourselves.’
But the young women children were a different matter. They could be taken in marriage or as servants and would expect to accept the religion of their new husbands or masters. They would gradually be merged into Israel. Compare Deuteronomy 21.10-14. They would not feel the same responsibility for blood vengeance which was mainly incumbent on the males.
31.19 ‘And you encamp outside the camp seven days. Whoever has killed any person, and whoever has touched any slain, purify yourselves on the third day and on the seventh day, you and your captives.’
However, as a result of their contact with the dead enemy, any who had killed someone, or who had touched a dead body, were to purify themselves with the water of uncleanness as described in chapter 19. For that purpose they had to remain outside the camp with their captives. The taint of death must not enter the camp of Israel in such quantity. Death was ever to be seen as contrary to what Yahweh was. It was true that it was sometimes necessary in order to compensate for other deaths, in order to bring out the heinousness of murder, and it was even sometimes commanded by Yahweh for that reason, but it was still contrary to His original purpose in creation which had been that man should produce life (Genesis 1.28), not death. Death was the result of man’s fall in the Garden, and the sin that had permeated mankind ever since. It was an intruder in God’s creation.
31.20 ‘And as to every garment, and all that is made of skin, and all work of goats’ hair, and all things made of wood, you shall purify yourselves.’
And this was to be true of all their clothing, and all captured clothing, which would need to be purified by washing, including all that was made of skin, or goats’ hair, and the same applied to anything made of wood.
31.21 ‘And Eleazar the priest said to the men of war who went to the battle, This is the statute of the law which Yahweh has commanded Moses,’
Eleazar now informed the men who had been in the battle of the statute of the instruction which Yahweh had commanded Moses in these circumstances.
31.22-23 ‘Only the gold, and the silver, the bronze, the iron, the tin, and the lead, everything that may abide the fire, you shall make to go through the fire, and it shall be clean. Nevertheless it shall be purified with the water for uncleanness, and all that abides not the fire you shall make to go through the water.’
All that could survive fire had to be cleansed by being put through the fire. That included the gold, the silver, the bronze (or copper), the iron, the tin and the lead. Then it would be clean. And yet even then it had to go through the water of uncleanness (chapter 19). And anything that could not stand being put through the fire had to be cleansed with the water of uncleanness. It is clear from this that the taint of death was seen as connected with the spoils, whose masters were dead.
31.24 ‘And you shall wash your clothes on the seventh day, and you shall be clean; and afterwards you shall come into the camp.’
Then the men were to wash their clothes and be clean. After that they could come into the camp. Note here that the clothes, which might have been defiled by blood, were what needed to be washed. Bathing was not necessary. Indeed bathing was never said to cleanse. It was preparatory to the waiting before God that did cleanse.
This account brings out for us any number of lessons. It stresses God’s hatred of sin and especially of anything that turns His people away from Him. It brings out that while merciful (if Midian had kept out of Israel’s way they would have been left alone), His holiness demands justice on those who will not respond to His mercy. It reveals God’s might acting on behalf of His people, and that all of us need to be continually cleansed if we would come into His presence. It brings out that God is both light and love. Those who turn from His love come into His awesome light which can only result in their condemnation (John 3.18-21). In what follows it also reveals that in the end Yahweh always rewards His people with good things.
(ii) The Division of the Spoils (31.25-54).
This whole passage follows the following pattern.
These sections can then be analysed as follows:
The Sum of The Prey That Was Taken and The Levies which Were To Be Exacted (31.25-31).
31.25 ‘And Yahweh spoke to Moses, saying,’
Once more it is emphasised that these were the words of Yahweh to Moses.
31.26-27 ‘Take the sum of the prey that was taken, both of man and of beast, you, and Eleazar the priest, and the heads of the fathers’ houses of the congregation; and divide the prey into two parts: between the men skilled in war, that went out to battle, and all the congregation.’
The first step with regard to the booty was a division between the men who went to war and the rest of Israel. We learn later that this was an equal division, and the fact that the skilled men of war were specifically distinguished here confirms that they each received the larger portion as a reward for risking their lives in battle.
So Moses, Eleazar and the tribal chieftains were first to assess the amount of the booty, including the young women (‘of man’) and were then to divide it into two parts.
31.28-29 ‘And levy a tribute to Yahweh of the men of war who went out to battle: one soul of five hundred, both of the persons, and of the oxen, and of the asses, and of the flocks: take it of their half, and give it to Eleazar the priest, for Yahweh’s heave-offering.’
Then of the share that went to the men of war one individual woman or animal out of every ‘five hundred’ (a half flock or five small groups) was to be given to Eleazar the Priest as Yahweh’s contribution offering. This would include young women, probably to serve in the outer Sanctuary, although they may have become servants in the priests’ households, as well as oxen, asses and flocks.
‘Counting’ would simply be by setting aside physically and apportioning accordingly. Very few could count. They would assess with the eye in terms of ‘thousands’ (flocks), ‘hundreds’ (smaller groupings), fifties’ (even smaller groupings’), and so on. Number words in those ancient days would have a different significance than they would have later, and would be fluid. The number of flocks may indicate how many men there had been in the Midianite camps (675), each family having a ‘flock’ which would not have been large, the number of herds may indicate the number of more wealthy Midianites (72) and so on.
31.30 ‘And of the children of Israel’s half, you shall take one drawn out of every fifty, of the persons, of the oxen, of the asses, and of the flocks, even of all the cattle, and give them to the Levites, who keep the charge of the tabernacle of Yahweh.’
And of the share that went to the children of Israel, one out of every smaller group was to be given to the Levites who had the charge of the Sanctuary.
31.31 ‘And Moses and Eleazar the priest did as Yahweh commanded Moses.’
And Moses and Eleazar did as Yahweh commanded them. They divided up the spoils of war in the way that He had instructed.
The Division Between the Men of War, Yahweh (the Priests), the People and the Levites (31.32-47).
The assessing and dividing of the spoils follows a sequential pattern rather than the usual chiastic pattern.
31.32-35 ‘Now the prey, over and above the booty which the men of war took, was six hundred ’eleph and seventy ’eleph and five ’eleph sheep, and threescore and twelve ’eleph oxen, and threescore and one ’eleph asses, and thirty and two ’eleph persons in all, of the women who had not known man by lying with him.’
The prey was now assessed. There were six hundred and seventy five units (flocks?) of sheep, seventy two units (herds?) of oxen, sixty one units (herds) of asses, and of young women there were young women from thirty two families.
31.36 ‘And the half, which was the portion of those who went out to war, was in number three hundred thousand and thirty thousand and seven thousand and five hundred sheep.’
Thus for the men who went to war there were three hundred and thirty seven and a half flocks of sheep to be distributed.
31.37 ‘And Yahweh’s tribute of the sheep was six hundred and threescore and fifteen.’
And Yahweh’s tribute was one out of every five half flocks, namely six smaller groups, three small groupings and some odd ones over.
31.38 ‘And the oxen were thirty and six thousand, of which Yahweh’s tribute was threescore and twelve.’
Of the oxen there were thirty six herds for the fighting men, of which Yahweh’s tribute was three small groupings and odd ones over.
31.39 ‘And the asses were thirty thousand and five hundred, of which Yahweh’s tribute was threescore and one.’
Of the asses there thirty and a half herds. Yahweh received three small groupings and one over.
31.40 ‘And the persons were sixteen thousand; of whom Yahweh’s tribute was thirty and two persons.’
Of the young women there were women from sixteen families, and Yahweh’s tribute three small groups and two persons.
31.41 ‘And Moses gave the tribute, which was Yahweh’s heave-offering, to Eleazar the priest, as Yahweh commanded Moses.’
And Moses gave Yahweh’s contribution to Eleazar the Priest as Yahweh had commanded him.
31.42 ‘And of the children of Israel’s half, which Moses divided off from the men who warred,’
They then moved on to assessing the half set aside to be divided among the children of Israel as a whole.
31.43-46 ‘(Now the congregation’s half was three hundred thousand and thirty thousand, seven thousand and five hundred sheep, and thirty and six thousand oxen, and thirty thousand and five hundred asses, and sixteen thousand persons),’
Their share also was three hundred and thirty seven flocks, and a smaller group, of sheep, thirty six herds of oxen, thirty herds and a smaller group of asses, and young women from sixteen ‘families’.
31.47 ‘even of the children of Israel’s half, Moses took one drawn out of every fifty, both of man and of beast, and gave them to the Levites, who kept the charge of the tabernacle of Yahweh, as Yahweh commanded Moses.’
And out of their half one out of every smaller grouping was given to the Levites, because they kept the charge of the Dwellingplace of Yahweh, just as Yahweh had commanded Moses.
The Sum of The Surviving Men of War and Their Freewill Gift to The Sanctuary Of Their Personal Spoil (31.48-54).
31.48-49 ‘And the officers who were over the thousands of the host, the captains of thousands, and the captains of hundreds, came near to Moses, and they said to Moses, “Your servants have taken the sum of the men of war who are under our charge, and there lacks not one man of us.”
Then the officers and NCOs approached Moses and said that they had checked who were still alive and had discovered that not a single man had died. While gratifying this was not as remarkable as it might at first seem. If they had caught the enemy by surprise, attacking in larger numbers, panic would have set in early and the whole affair been a rout.
Examples from throughout history demonstrate how often even quite large battles could end with very few having died. Weaponry was limited and not as lethal as modern days. The high level of deaths took place after the battle when the losers were sought out and killed. Tacitus, a Roman historian, for example, mentions the Romans as having slaughtered all the foe without losing a single man on the capture of a Parthian castle, while Strabo tells of a battle in which 1000 Arabs were slain, while only 2 Romans died.
31.50 “And we have brought Yahweh’s oblation, what every man has obtained of jewels of gold, ankle-chains, and bracelets, signet-rings, earrings, and armlets, to make atonement for our souls before Yahweh.’
Because of their heartfelt gratitude the men had determined to give their personal booty to Yahweh. This was not only a dedicatory and worship gift, but also an act of atonement and reconciliation for any wrong that they might have done. It was to their credit that they did not find easy the slaughter in which they had had to participate, even though there had been little alternative. The jewels, ankle chains, bracelets, signet rings, earrings, and armlets were typical of what Midianites would wear.
31.51 ‘And Moses and Eleazar the priest took the gold from them, even all wrought jewels.’
On behalf of Yahweh Moses and Eleazar received the gold and the jewels for placing in Yahweh’s treasury.
31.52 ‘And all the gold of the contribution (heave-offering) which they offered up to Yahweh, from the captains of thousands, and of the captains of hundreds, was sixteen thousand seven hundred and fifty shekels.’
And the amount of gold was sixteen and three quarter weightings, a good quantity.
31.53 ‘(For the men of war had taken booty, every man for himself.)’
This was the private booty that the men had taken for themselves, stripping the bodies of their enemies, taking it from the womenfolk and looting the tents.
31.54 ‘And Moses and Eleazar the priest took the gold from the captains of thousands and of hundreds, and brought it into the tent of meeting, for a memorial for the children of Israel before Yahweh.’
So Moses and Eleazar took the gold and laid it up in the Tent of meeting as a memorial on Israel’s behalf before Yahweh.
What with the prey seized from the Amorites and the wealth seized here the Israelites would enter the land far more wealthy than when they first entered the plains of Moab. It is probable that much of what was seized was kept in Transjordan territory while the initial invasion was going on. Again we must note that the actual carrying out of the invasion would have to be carefully planned, and they would not want too much encumbrance.
Chapter 32. The First Settlement Of Tribes of Israel.
We do not know at what stage this approach took place, but it must have been at an early one for Manasseh/Machir are not mentioned. They would come in later, when they saw the land of Og that they had conquered. The land which Reuben and Gad took was mainly the land which had been controlled by Sihon and his Amorites. The taking of the whole of that area followed later by the seizure of Upper Gilead and Bashan would have taken considerable time and effort, and was probably still going on when the battle with the Midianites took place.
A quick defeat of Sihon and Og was one thing, taking possession of their countries was another (see 22.24-25, 35; Deuteronomy 2.34-36; 3.4-10). But it becomes clear that different generals had been sent with their men and had assailed different places (see below). And as Yahweh had given them the land and they had been told from the beginning that they were to possess it (Deuteronomy 3.31) we can be sure that this procedure was carried out with alacrity. The subjection of Upper Gilead and Bashan could only have had possession in mind for it was not on their route to Canaan.
4). The Settlement of the Transjordanian Tribes (32).
The defeat of Sihon having taken place (22.21-25) and the country having been possessed and given to Israel by Yahweh (Deuteronomy 3.31), it would need to be permanently occupied, and Reuben and Gad, recognising that it suited their way of life, approached Moses for permission to settle there.
This settlement of the land finalised its cleansing. Those who through idolatry had been sentenced to death had been dealt with and now possession was taken of it in the name of Yahweh.
Once the details had been sorted out this possession would be a huge encouragement to all Israel. Here were the actual firstfruits of the invasion. And what Yahweh had done here, He could continue to do. So it was described in some detail with this in view.
But this reminds us that the logistics behind the invasion were far more complicated than appears from the narrative. This is in fact true of all books on warfare. Only a tiny proportion of the complications can be revealed. Here we learn of how Reuben and Gad, over a period of time, took possession of and ‘rebuilt’ the land of the Amorites, while Machir did the same in Upper Gilead and Bashan.
Once the crossing of the Jordan had taken place it would mainly be left in the hands of the young men between thirteen and twenty, partially disabled men of fighting age, and the older men who were unable to fight, together with their feisty womenfolk. And what was also important was that it would secure their rear.
Analysis.
b They receive the desirable cities and build folds for their sheep (32.33-28).
Reuben and Gad Desire To Settle in Transjordan (32.1-5).
32.1-2 ‘Now the children of Reuben and the children of Gad had a very great multitude of cattle: and when they saw the land of Jazer, and the land of Gilead, that, behold, the place was a place for cattle; the children of Gad and the children of Reuben came and spoke to Moses, and to Eleazar the priest, and to the princes of the congregation, saying,’
While the Reubenites and Gadites were in process of possessing the land they recognised its huge potential for their large numbers of cattle, and approached the leading body of Israel, made up of Moses, Eleazar and the tribal chieftains.
Note that in the first instance Reuben is mentioned first out of deference to Reuben’s seniority as the firstborn, but that immediately the Gadites then take preference as the stronger tribe, something which will continue throughout the chapter (verses 6, 25,29, 31, 33, 34-37).
32.3-4 “Ataroth, and Dibon, and Jazer, and Nimrah, and Heshbon, and Elealeh, and Sebam, and Nebo, and Beon, the land which Yahweh smote before the congregation of Israel, is a land for cattle; and your servants have cattle.”
They began by outlining the area that they had in mind. It was probably gone into in some detail, but was here described in terms of the chief cities, most of which can be identified with some degree of probability. It was a fertile and well watered area very suitable for herds and flocks.
‘Ataroth (‘crowns’) is probably Khirbet ‘Attarus. It is later mentioned in the Moabite stone when it had been repossessed by the Moabites. Dibon was possibly sited where the modern village of Dhiban is found. The city is mentioned by Rameses II who claimed its capture. It became known as Dibon-gad but is mentioned in the Moabite stone as having been recaptured by them. Jazer was later given to the Merarite family of the Levites, and furnished valuable fighting men in the days of David (1 Chronicles 26.31). The site may be that of Khirbet Gazzir on the Wadi Szaib. Nimrah (Beth-nimrah below in verse 36) is possibly Tell Nimrin, or Tell Bileibil. Heshbon was Sihon’s royal city (21.26). Its site has not been definitely identified. But while there are no late bronze age remains on Tell Hesban, there are on nearby sites. Elealeh has been identified with El ‘Al, north east of Heshbon. Nebo is possibly Khirbet Ayn Musa or Khirbet el Mukkayet. It was later recaptured by Mesha of Moab. All these towns would be vulnerable once Moab became strong again centuries later and Israel were weaker because of disobedience.
32.5 ‘And they said, “If we have found favour in your sight, let this land be given to your servants for a possession. Do not bring us over the Jordan.” ’
So knowing that Yahweh had declared that He was giving this land to Israel they staked their claim to it. They asked that they might possess it rather than the promised land over the Jordan. But it was not part of the original ‘promised land’ and Israel would always look on it as not quite the same as being in the promised land (Joshua 22.19).
Moses Is Angry At Them For Discouraging The Other Tribes (32.6-9).
32.6 ‘And Moses said to the children of Gad, and to the children of Reuben, “Shall your brethren go to the war, and shall you sit here?” ’
Moses took their words as an indication that they were trying to find an easy way out and were unwilling to enter Canaan and confront the nations there. He had cause to remember how Yahweh had punished their fathers for backing down from a conquest of the land. He asked them whether it was really their intention to leave their fellow Israelites to invade Canaan on their own.
32.7 “And for what reason do you discourage the heart of the children of Israel from going over into the land which Yahweh has given them?”
Did they not recognise that this would discourage the others from going forward into the land which Yahweh had given them? Why then were they doing it?
32.8-9 “Thus did your fathers, when I sent them from Kadesh-barnea to see the land. For when they went up unto the valley of Eshcol, and saw the land, they discouraged the heart of the children of Israel, that they should not go into the land which Yahweh had given them.”
By discouraging the people in this way they were no different from the scouts who went to the valley of Eshcol and saw the land, and also discouraged the hearts of the people (13.21-33), thus preventing them from going into the land which Yahweh had given them, thus rejecting His gift.
Moses Reminds Them That Yahweh Will Cast Them From The Land If They Hesitate To Enter It, As He Did Before (32.10-15).
32.10 “And Yahweh’s anger was kindled in that day, and he swore, saying,”
And the result was that Yahweh’s anger was kindled against them, so that He swore what He would do to them.
32.11-12 “Surely none of the men that came up out of Egypt, from twenty years old and upward, shall see the land which I swore to Abraham, to Isaac, and to Jacob; because they have not wholly followed me, except Caleb the son of Jephunneh the Kenizzite, and Joshua the son of Nun; because they have wholly followed Yahweh.”
For He had declared that none of them would be allowed to see the land that they had rejected, the land that He had sworn to give to their forefathers. None of the males from twenty years old and upwards would be allowed to enter it, apart from Caleb and Joshua. They would be the exceptions because they had wholly followed Yahweh.
32.13 “And Yahweh’s anger was kindled against Israel, and he made them wander to and fro in the wilderness forty years, until all the generation, that had done evil in the sight of Yahweh, was consumed.”
Thus was Yahweh’s anger kindled against them, and He made them wander to and fro in the wilderness for forty years until the whole of that generation was consumed, because they had done evil in His sight.
32.14 “And, behold, you are risen up in your fathers’ stead, an increase of sinful men, to augment yet the fierce anger of Yahweh towards Israel.”
And now here they were doing exactly the same thing. They were rising up in their father’s place, adding to those who had been sinful men by being equally sinful, stoking up the fierce anger of Yahweh against Israel.
32.15 “For if you turn away from after him, he will yet again leave them in the wilderness, and you will destroy all this people.”
For did they not realise what the result would be? If they turned away from following Yahweh, and refused to enter the land which God had promised their forefathers to give them? He would again leave them in the wilderness, along with all their fellow-tribesmen, and all of them would be destroyed, and it would all be the fault of the Reubenites and the Gadites.
Reuben and Gad Covenant That Their Warriors Will Go Forward With Israel (32.16-19).
32.16-17 ‘And they came near to him, and said, “We will build sheepfolds here for our cattle, and cities for our little ones, but we ourselves will be ready armed to go before the children of Israel, until we have brought them to their place: and our little ones shall dwell in the fortified cities because of the inhabitants of the land.”
But the Reubenites and Gadites assured him that they were not trying to avoid entering the land which God had given them. They pointed out that they would establish their families where they were, erecting sheepfolds for their animals, and repairing the fortified cities for them to find protection in, because of the belligerence of the inhabitants of nearby lands, and then they would go forward with the children of Israel, ready armed for battle, until they had brought them into the place that God had for them.
32.18 “We will not return to our houses, until the children of Israel have inherited every man his inheritance.”
Indeed they promised that they would not return to their houses until every man of the children of Israel had inherited his inheritance.
32.19 “For we will not inherit with them on the other side of the Jordan, and forward, because our inheritance is fallen to us on this side of the Jordan eastward.”
But they themselves would not inherit in Canaan because they believed that God was showing them that their inheritance lay on this side of the Jordan.
Their Going Forward Is Confirmed and Agreed (32.20-23).
32.20-21 ‘And Moses said to them, “If you will do this thing, if you will arm yourselves to go before Yahweh to the war, and every armed man of you will pass over the Jordan before Yahweh, until he has driven out his enemies from before him,”
At these words Moses was satisfied that they were not avoiding entering the land. And he declared that if they would do what they had promised, and would arm themselves to go to war ‘before Yahweh’, and every one of them would pass over the Jordan ‘before Yahweh’, until He had driven out all His enemies from before Him, then all would be well.
Notice the phrase ‘before Yahweh’. They would be involved in holy war, in Yahweh’s war, and they would be accomplishing God’s will in driving out from the land those who had proved their unfitness to be there.
32.22 “And the land is subdued before Yahweh, then afterwards you shall return, and be guiltless towards Yahweh, and towards Israel, and this land shall be to you for a possession before Yahweh.”
And once the land was subdued in Yahweh’s sight, then they would be able to return to their families, and be guiltless towards Yahweh, and towards Israel. None would be able to lay any charge against them. And then this land in which they now were could be to them their own possession before Yahweh.
32.23 “But if you will not do so, behold, you have sinned against Yahweh, and be sure your sin will find you out.”
But if they did not do so, then let them be sure of this, that their sin would find them out, and they would find themselves enduring the same punishment as their fathers had done, dying in the wilderness.
Moses Permits Settlement On Their Accepting His Conditions (32.24-26).
32.24 “Build you cities for your little ones, and folds for your sheep; and do what has proceeded out of your mouth.”
So he gave them permission to make the necessary safeguards for the future of their families, to repair and reinforce the fenced cities that had been captured, and to erect folds for their animals, on the condition that they would then go forward with the children of Israel over the Jordan.
32.25 ‘And the children of Gad and the children of Reuben spoke to Moses, saying, “Your servants will do as my lord commands.” ’
So the Gaddites and Reubenites said that they would do all that Moss commanded. Note the terminology with which they address him, which speaks of a contemporary situation remembered, ‘my lord’. This was a rare use of the term, in the giving of an official commitment (compare 12.11).
32.26 “Our little ones, our wives, our flocks, and all our cattle, shall be there in the cities of Gilead, but your servants will pass over, every man who is armed for war, before Yahweh to battle, as my lord says.” ’
They covenanted that their little ones, and their wives, and their flocks and their cattle would remain in the cities of Gilead (lower Gilead), but they would cross the Jordan with Israel, every man armed for war. They would go forward ‘before Yahweh’ to battle, as Moses, their lord had said.
Moses Confirms To The Leadership Of The Tribes That The Soldiers of Reuben and Gad Will Go With The Other Tribes (32.28-32).
32.28 ‘ So Moses gave charge concerning them to Eleazar the priest, and to Joshua the son of Nun, and to the heads of the fathers’ houses of the tribes of the children of Israel.’
On the condition of their promises Moses now gave a charge to Eleazar the Priest and to Joshua, and to the chieftains of the tribes.
32.29-30 ‘And Moses said to them, “If the children of Gad and the children of Reuben will pass with you over the Jordan, every man who is armed for battle, before Yahweh, and the land shall be subdued before you; then you shall give them the land of Gilead for a possession, but if they will not pass over with you armed, they shall have possessions among you in the land of Canaan.”
And the charge was this. That if the fighting men of Gad and Reuben passed over Jordan with them and the land of Canaan was subdued before Israel, then they should be given the land of Gilead for a permanent possession rather than just a temporary one, But if they would not pass over armed then they would not be granted the land but would have their possessions in the land of Canaan (thus ensuring that they had to cross over).
32.31 ‘And the children of Gad and the children of Reuben answered, saying, “As Yahweh has said to your servants, so will we do. We will pass over armed before Yahweh into the land of Canaan, and the possession of our inheritance shall remain with us beyond the Jordan.” ’
The Gaddites and the Reubenites then publicly confirmed their position. They would do what Yahweh had said. Their fighting men would pass over the Jordan with the tribes of Israel armed ready for battle, and they would accept their inheritance as being in the land east of Jordan.
It will be noted that nowhere at this stage is there a hint of the Manassites being given land east of Jordan. Thus this agreement was clearly made prior to the full conquest of Bashan, which will in fact now be brought into account.
It would seem therefore that the information just recounted clearly came from a written account which ceased at this point, presumably a covenant treaty between the Gaddites and the Reubenites, and the rest of Israel. That does not mean that the information given below was given so very much later. The record of the Daughters of Zelophehad demonstrates that the settlement of Machir in Gilead was already being widely discussed. It was just not included in the treaty record made with Gad and Reuben.
The Land of the Amorites in Transjordan Is Given To The Two Tribes and the Half Tribe of Manasseh (32.33-42).
The fulfilment of the treaty was now confirmed with the additional information that Upper Gilead and Bashan were given to the half tribe of Manasseh. We are given no indication as to when this activity took place, but it was clearly before they crossed the Jordan for it is mentioned that ‘Moses gave’. The essential first moves were therefore made before his death. It is, however possible that some of it was completed at a later date, being recorded by Moses’ scribe.
32.33 ‘And Moses gave to them, even to the children of Gad, and to the children of Reuben, and to the half-tribe of Manasseh the son of Joseph, the kingdom of Sihon, king of the Amorites, and the kingdom of Og, king of Bashan, the land, according to the its cities with their borders, even the cities of the land round about.’
As a result of the above treaty, and no doubt as a result of one made with the half-tribe of Manasseh at a later date, the kingdoms of Sihon and Og, with the land and the cities, was given to the Gaddites, the Reubenites and the half tribe of Manasseh. This latter probably resulted from the fact that the successful generals in the northern campaign were Manassites. The gift, however was one thing, the possession of it another, especially in Upper Gilead and Bashan. For while the Amorites had been defeated and driven out, they would tend to seek to return, so that in fact some of the cities had to be retaken.
32.34-36 ‘And the children of Gad built (repaired and fortified) Dibon, and Ataroth, and Aroer, and Atrothshophan, and Jazer, and Jogbehah, and Beth-nimrah, and Beth-haran, as fortified cities, and folds for sheep.’
The Gaddites immediately set about making the cities that the Israelites had sacked ready for occupation again. They repaired and fortified a number of cities in their allotment. These included Dibon, Ataroth, Nimrah (Beth-nimrah) and Jazer of those mentioned in verse 3, together with Aroer, Atrothshophan, Jogbehah, and Beth-haran, cities north of the Reubenite territory. They also erected the essential folds for the sheep.
Aroer was presumably not the one in the Arnon Valley, which would be in Reubenite territory, unless in fact the two tribes intermingled, which is very possible. Heshbon would later pass to the Gadites, and the powerful Gadites may well have wanted, with Moab over the river south of Arnon, to guard the southern border. Otherwise it may be the Aroer mentioned in Joshua 13.25. Jogbehah was mentioned in the pursuit by Gideon of the later Midianite oppressors Judges 8.11 and is probably modern Jubeihat. Beth-haran was probably a border strongpoint, and may well be identified with modern Tell Iktanu.
32.37 ‘And the children of Reuben built (repaired and fortified) Heshbon, and Elealeh, and Kiriathaim, and Nebo, and Baal-meon, their names being changed, and Sibmah. And they gave other names to the cities which they built.’
The Reubenites also set about repairing and fortifying the cities in their area. These included Heshbon, Elealeh, and Nebo, and possibly Beon (as Baal-meon), all as mentioned in verse 3. And they no doubt built up other structures which would act as temporary fortresses. Meanwhile the conquest of the north was going on, and Israel as a whole were preparing for the invasion.
Note that it specifically mentions that some of their names were altered. Some because they contained names of gods. Thus we should not be surprised to find them under other names. However, Moab would still call them by their old names, and when centuries later they retook them the old names would once again become prominent. The initial repairing and fortification would make them habitable and reasonably strong so as to afford a safe haven for those left behind by the fighting men in case of trouble.
32.39 ‘And the children of Machir the son of Manasseh went to Gilead, and took it, and dispossessed the Amorites who were in it.’
Meanwhile in the war against Upper Gilead and Bashan in which Og was first defeated, the children of Machir (sub-tribe of Manasseh) took Upper Gilead and dispossessed the Amorites who were in it. It was what they found there that made them subsequently decide to follow in the steps of Gad and Reuben.
32.40 ‘And Moses gave Gilead to Machir, the son of Manasseh, and he dwelt in it.’
So on the same principles as had applied to the Gadites and the Reubenites Moses gave Upper Gilead to Machir, no doubt also with a similar treaty.
32.41 ‘And Jair the son of Manasseh went and took its towns, and called them Havvoth-jair.’
The Manassite general, Jair, captured many ‘towns’ (encampments?) in Upper Gilead and named them ‘the tent-villages of Jair’.
32.42 ‘And Nobah went and took Kenath, and its villages, and called it Nobah, after his own name.’
Another Manassite general called Nobah, took other towns and villages, including Kenath which he called Nobah after himself. A Kenath appears in several Egyptian texts of 2nd millennium BC. Many identify it with the ruins of Qanawat, but this is uncertain.
So the land of Sihon was extensively settled by the Gadites and Reubenites, while Upper Gilead and Bashan were settled by the Manassites. We must not, however, see the latter as being as simple as that. Some of the former inhabitants returned to their cities, and were no doubt a continuing problem until the serving soldiers had returned home.
In all the above it is important to recognise that the name Gilead was very fluid. We know from its mention elsewhere that it could refer to at least part of the kingdom of Sihon, it could also apply to the northern part conquered by the Manassites, and it could apply to the whole area at once.
This firm establishment of a part of Israel in land given to them by Yahweh must have come as a huge boost to the remainder of the tribes. Here they saw before their very eyes the new prosperity that was going to be theirs. Here was what they were crossing the Jordan to obtain. And having defeated Amorites here, including the fearsome Og, there was no reason why it should be any different across the river. So the recording of this in book form would serve as a huge encouragement in the days to come.
There are many lessons that we can learn from this passage. It reveals how God was able to deal with the enemies of His people and so expand their blessings. It stresses how all who serve God should be faithful to each other and fight each other’s cause. It stresses honour and integrity. It was a lesson against letting others down. It reminds us that we should not just be concerned about our own patch, but seek the blessing and expansion of others, as others once did the same in order to bring the Gospel to our patch. Its emphasis is on sharing both activity and benefits.
II). Warning and Encouragement of The Younger Generation ( 33-36).
This final section of the book is full of hope, the kind of hope that was in the hearts of Israel when they first mobilised at Sinai. It reiterates the successful journey from Egypt to the plains of Moab, lays out details of how they were to divide the land that they would soon inherit, as the Gadites, Reubenites and half tribe of Manasseh had already done, describes that land in realistic terms as a goal to aim at, appoints the very leaders who will have responsibility for that task, tells them of the necessity to provide cities for the Levites and cities of refuge for the maintenance of the holiness of the land, and brings the whole to a conclusion with the glorious example of the daughters of Zelophehad, demonstrating how their struggle for fair treatment ended in success because of their faithfulness and trust in Yahweh and their final obedience to His commands. This last human interest story, which also carried within it other valuable lessons concerning the guaranteeing of the land to those to whom it would be allotted, would act like a spur to all the people as they sought to copy the trustfulness and obedience of these courageous daughters of Zelophehad. The inspiration that it was comes out in the constant references to it. It had seized the imagination of Israel (26.33; 27.1, 7; 36.2-11), and was thus seen as a suitable ending for the book.
Analysis of the Section.
It is quite clear that the book itself sees each of these passages as an encouragement ready for the crossing over into the land. Each of them is a confirmation to them that the conquest will in essence be completed within their lifetime and the lifetime of their leaders. The setting of it in between the journeying to the plain of Moab, and their actually being there stresses the context of the whole. It promises that they will possess a land to divide up after removing those who defile it, describes that land and who will divide it up, guarantees that they will possess sufficient cities to be able to give forty eight to the Levites, and that they will be able to set up Cities of Refuge for the purpose of keeping the land free from defilement, and finally affirms the necessity for each part of the land to remain with the tribe to whom it was allotted, and encourages all by describing how the five women of faith and loyalty, the daughters of Zelophehad, of whom all had now heard, brought their story to a happy ending by fully obeying Yahweh.
This all confirms the purpose of the whole book, encouragement for the battles ahead. If the date of its writing is pushed into the future it loses its main purpose, and we have to ask why some theoretical future writer should have designed it in this way. He would have spent considerable time achieving something that had no significance. It only has significance if the invasion is about to begin.
1). A Review of The Journey From Egypt to the Plains of Moab (33:1-49).
By its nature this passage is a list of encampments made on the journey from Egypt to the plains of Moab. As a historical travel narrative it could not be patterned chiastically (an evidence for its genuineness), and we are told that it was written down by Moses at Yahweh’s command (compare Exodus 17.14).
The purpose of its placing here was as evidence of how Yahweh had brought them thus far and provided for them in the way, and as confirmation of the certainty that now Yahweh would successfully bring to completion what He had so successfully brought to this point.
The fact that Moses is said to have written it down should not surprise us. In the course of the journey from Egypt Moses had been told by Yahweh to write down historical events related to Yahweh (Exodus 17.14), and we are regularly informed that he had at various times written down God’s instructions (Exodus 24.4; 34.27; Numbers 33.1-2; Deuteronomy 31.9; 31.22). Now we also learn that he had written down details of their journeyings. It is clear that Moses was in the habit of writing things down. Thus we can be confident that his writings formed the basis for this book along with the others in the Pentateuch. And that is why we are constantly told that we are reading the words that Yahweh spoke to Moses. Who the collator and scribe was who finalised the books we are not told, but the probable suspicion must lie on Joshua, Moses’ servant, who certainly for a period was restricted to the early tent of meeting (Exodus 33.11) for some unstated purpose. But, however that may be, what follows is specifically said to have been recorded directly by Moses.
The vast majority of the places mentioned in the list are unidentifiable, and in the nature of the case will be for ever unidentifiable. We are not even sure where the Israelites crossed the Reed Sea and which exact direction the children of Israel took. It was known at the time and that was what mattered. What we do know is that they went through the wilderness (in order to throw off any danger of pursuit, and in order to avoid meeting enemies of any size), that the journey to Sinai took the slow moving Israelites two months (Exodus 19.1), and that they ended up in Kadesh in the Negeb Any site which cannot be reached within two months from Egypt at say two to three miles a day at the most (and thus roughly at the most one hundred and eighty miles) must be rejected, and that is without taking into consideration any stops that they made.
Furthermore we must recognise that over a period of three thousand years many changes will have taken place in that wilderness. Wind and weather would slowly change everything. And even the weather itself will have altered to quite some extent. It was probably rainier then. Thus what were once positive signs which could have identified the places would already probably already have begun to exist no longer even by the beginning of the first millennium BC, and we can be sure that by the time of the Exile the wilderness would have looked a very different place. So while Josephus and sources of tradition, coming at or after the end of that millennium, might seem to us to have existed a long time ago (and did), it was at least 1200 years after the death of Moses. That being so it is questionable if any information that they give us is any more reliable than ours, indeed probably less so.
Furthermore the encampments listed here were not close to sites of permanent residence. Thus they would not have fixed names. Most names given would have been transitory, either given by the Israelites themselves, or picked up from a desert tribesman who gave his own tribe’s local name for the venue. Any names attaching today can have no certain connection with those long ago days, for they may simply have arisen from the desire to satisfy the curiosity of pilgrims, both Jewish and Christian. We must then ever remain in ignorance of the direction of the wilderness journey (exciting though the attempt might be). In view of the nature of the area its detail cannot validly be used to favour any theory.
But when they were written the place names were pregnant with meaning, for there were those alive who could remember them vividly. Some of them had been connected with never to be forgotten experiences.
The fact that there are forty two place names may be significant. Forty two is seven (the number of divine perfection) times three (the number of completeness) times two (intensifying the numbers). It was a complete and divinely perfect journey.
One last point before we plunge into the wilderness. We must not see this as one vast desert. The land would vary from fairly good pasture land, to sparse stony land, to limestone plateau, to sandstone hills, to rocky semi-desert to real desert, and back again. There were springs in some places, and many oases, while the water table was often not far below the ground and could be reached by digging. Water was usually available for those who knew where to find it.
1). Summary Of The Journey From Egypt To The Plains of Moab.
33.1-2 ‘These are the journeys of the children of Israel, when they went forth out of the land of Egypt by their hosts under the hand of Moses and Aaron. And Moses wrote their goings out according to their journeys by the commandment of Yahweh, and these are their journeys according to their goings out.’
We are informed here what the list of place names is all about. They describe the journey of the children of Israel who left Egypt in their hosts, under the hand of Moses and Aaron (note the attempt to rehabilitate Aaron), travelling from Egypt to the plains of Moab, and they were written down by Moses. ‘Their goings out’ signifies where they broke camp. Each place was to be seen as a temporary stopping point where the Dwellingplace was set up and from which they then set out on their journey towards the land promised to their forefathers.
As Christians we must never settle down comfortably anywhere. This world is not our home. We are just passing through. Each stage in our lives, especially those of our spiritual blessings, is a place from which we are to set out for the next thing that God has for us. That does not mean that we should be restless, but rather simply ready to be obedient, fulfilling His will at each place, but always ready to move on when commanded to further and further blessings.
The Journey From Egypt To Sinai (33.3-15).
The first station from which Israel set out was Rameses, the twelfth was the wilderness of Sinai. This may be totally coincidental, or it may have been deliberate in order to tie in with the twelve tribes of Israel. During that time they moved from being a loose association of tribes to being the covenant people of Yahweh.
33.3 ‘And they journeyed from Rameses in the first month, on the fifteenth day of the first month, on the morrow after the passover, the children of Israel went out with a high hand in the sight of all the Egyptians,’
The commencement of the journey is precisely dated, tying in with Exodus 12. It started on the fifteenth day of the first month, the first day of Unleavened Bread after the Passover night, when the children of Israel went out in triumph in the sight of the Egyptians. It began in triumph. The Egyptians did nothing to stop them. It was a reminder that now as they approached Canaan they could also go ‘with a high hand’, that is, confidently and courageously.
33.4 ‘While the Egyptians were burying all their first-born, whom Yahweh had smitten among them. On their gods also Yahweh executed judgments.’
For it was while the Egyptians were burying their firstborn whom Yahweh had smitten. And He had not only smitten the firstborn, He had revealed His judgments against all the gods of Egypt. Here we have a direct reference to Exodus 12.12. In the Exodus little is actually said about the gods of Egypt, but here it is emphasised so that Israel might recognise that the Canaanite gods would also be able to do nothing against them and that Yahweh would smite them too. It was also to bring out that against Yahweh even the most powerful of gods, the gods of Egypt, could do little. They were as putty in His hands.
33.5 ‘And the children of Israel journeyed from Rameses, and encamped in Succoth.’
Then the children of Israel had journeyed from Rameses, where they had been toiling on the rebuilding of the city, to Succoth (Exodus 12.37), with all their herds and flocks. They had arrived in a hurry and not fully prepared for travel, for they had been thrust out (Exodus 12.39). They had rejoiced in that they were on their way to freedom. Succoth may well have been ‘tkw’ (near Pithom), which was on the regular way out of Egypt for those who were seeking to escape, and was where refugees from the wilderness were processed as they entered Egypt. It is mentioned in the Tale of Sinuhe, and in Papyri Anastasi V and VI.
The problem for us is that none of these places have been definitely identified. It is rare for a site to divulge its name (as in fact the site at Gibeon in Canaan did, but it is a rare exception), and identifications thus for a large part remain tenuous, something which must ever be remembered before too much is built on them.
33.6 ‘And they journeyed from Succoth, and encamped in Etham, which is on the edge of the wilderness.’
And from Succoth they had travelled to Etham on the edge of the wilderness (Exodus 13.20), where they encamped. This is an unidentified site on the way to the sea crossing. By this time the pillar of cloud led them by day and the pillar of fire watched over them by night.
33.7 ‘And they journeyed from Etham, and turned back unto Pi-hahiroth, which is before Baal-zephon: and they encamped before Migdol.’
From Etham they did a detour to Pi-hahiroth which was by Baalzephon and encamped before Migdol (tower). See Exodus 14.2. Note the name of Baalzephon which confirms the worship of Baal in that area. Migdol would be a border post and was ‘by the sea’ (Exodus 14.2), that is near to an inner waterway which helped to form the borders of Egypt. Both Baalzephon and Midgdol are mentioned in Egyptian texts as being near Wadi Tumilat.
But the sea appeared to have them entrapped. We do not know where this ‘sea’ was. It probably no longer exists. It would be a continuation of the Gulf of Suez, but may not have been directly connected with it. There were probably a number of such seas or lakes. And they were probably all called ‘the Reed Sea’.
33.8 ‘And they journeyed from before Hahiroth, and passed through the midst of the sea into the wilderness, and they went three days’ journey in the wilderness of Etham, and encamped in Marah.’
From there they went to Hahiroth (Pi-hahiroth - Exodus 14.9). It was there that Pharaoh thought that he had them cornered, and where they panicked as they realised that the Egyptians were hard on their tail. And that was where the miracle happened and they passed through the sea, into the wilderness where they could disappear from view, leaving a broken Egyptian army behind them.
From there they travelled on a ‘three days journey’ through the Wilderness of Shur to Marah where they found no water (Exodus 15.22-23). This caused their first ‘murmuring’ in the wilderness, until Moses was guided by Yahweh to a tree which could turn the bitter waters sweet. And there he formulated basic ‘statutes and ordinances’ which would guide their lives as they moved on. His law-giving had begun. With a mixed multitude among them from many nations (Exodus 12.38) it was necessary, with Egypt behind them, for some basic rules to be laid down.
And there, where they had seen the waters healed, Yahweh promised them freedom from diseases if only they would hear His voice and obey Him.
33.9 ‘And they journeyed from Marah, and came to Elim, and in Elim were twelve springs of water, and threescore and ten palm-trees; and they encamped there.’
From Marah they came to Elim (Exodus 15.27) where there were ‘twelve springs of water, and threescore and ten palm-trees’. And there too they encamped. It is clear that the traditions of Exodus were burned into Moses’ mind.
Note too that while we have been briefly remembering all that happened, all that Moses has brought out is their coming out of Egypt with a high hand, the smiting of the gods of Egypt, and this water with its palm trees. He wants one or two lessons to come home as an introduction to this section, but this is not the main point of the exercise. The point was that eventually they could always be sure that Yahweh would always be with them and bring them to a place of fruitfulness. ‘Twelve springs’ would indicate sufficiency of water for all the twelve tribes, and ‘seventy’ (seven intensified) palm trees indicated the divine perfection of the food supply.
33.10 ‘And they journeyed from Elim, and encamped by the Reed Sea.’
The seventh encampment was by the Reed Sea. This would be on the Gulf of Suez. Up to this point, then, we have a general idea of the route that they were taking. It was avoiding the routes where they might meet up with those who would betray them to the Egyptians, and moving towards the territory in which Moses had spent many years during his time among the Midianites.
33.11 ‘And they journeyed from the Reed Sea, and encamped in the wilderness of Sin.’
From there they made their way into the wilderness of Sin, ‘which is between Elim and Sinai’ (Exodus 16.1). This was on the fifteenth day of the second month. They had now been journeying exactly a moon period (roughly four weeks). It was around this time that the manna began.
33.12-14 ‘And they journeyed from the wilderness of Sin, and encamped in Dophkah. And they journeyed from Dophkah, and encamped in Alush. And they journeyed from Alush, and encamped in Rephidim, where was no water for the people to drink.’
Travelling through the wilderness of Sin they came to Dophkah. Dophkah may mean ‘smeltery’ and indicate the presence of copper mining, but there was much copper mining in the area. It cannot be identified with any confidence. From there they moved to Alush and then to Rephidim. Note that these are the names of where they encamped. The aim would always be to find water, but at Rephidim there was no water. Neither Dophkah or Alush are mentioned in Exodus, but Rephidim is mentioned in Exodus 17. It was there that water was brought from a rock when Moses smote it, and that they had their first encounter with the Amalekites. The Amalekites probably saw them as trespassing on their grazing lands and rallied in order to oppose them.
‘Where was no water for the people to drink.’ This is the last comment made until they reach Mount Hor in verse 37. Given what occurred over that period this is quite remarkable. It may suggest that Moses saw the whole period from this point on as a ‘dry period’. Yahweh had intended plenty for them (verse 9), but because of their faithlessness and unbelief it was to be a period of spiritual dryness. Even Sinai resulted in the worship of the molten calf.
Incidentally these small comments added to lists are typical of many ancient lists. We can compare for example the Sumerian king lists where similar small comments occur now and again. It is modern man who likes his lists to be stark and barren.
33.15 ‘And they journeyed from Rephidim, and encamped in the wilderness of Sinai.’
Their twelfth listed encampment was in the wilderness of Sinai. They arrived at this in the third month (Exodus 19.1). But we do not know where Sinai was. The earliest traditions are at least 1500 years after the event. This is no grounds for confidence. All we can probably safely say is that it was in the gulf of Suez, simply because of distance travelled. (Jebel Musa is the traditional site, but a number of others such as Jebel Sin Bisher, are variously supported).
Their time spent there is covered from Exodus 19 onwards. There they received the covenant, and made and erected God’s new Dwellingplace. They arrived as a conglomeration of people, they left it as a covenant nation. The mixed multitude had mainly now become one with Israel, by being absorbed into the tribes.
From that point on every place where they set up a proper encampment would also be the place where the Dwellingplace of Yahweh was set up. Thus it obtained a kind of sacredness. Possibly one reason for the list was so that they might be specifically remembered.
33.16 ‘And they journeyed from the wilderness of Sinai, and encamped in Kibroth-hattaavah.’
Kibroth-hattaavah was where they buried those whose desires for fresh meat got the better of them (12.34). The journey from Sinai to Kadesh was one of eleven days for the normal traveller (Deuteronomy 1.2). This and Hazeroth are the only two encampments mentioned on that journey.
33.17 ‘And they journeyed from Kibroth-hattaavah, and encamped in Hazeroth.’
Hazeroth was the last stop before Kadesh. At Hazeroth Miriam and Aaron confronted Moses on the question of status and were confounded (12.1-16). It will be noted that the first arrival at Kadesh (13.26) is passed over here. Because of the disobedience of Israel it was deliberately ‘blotted out’. Their journey, which should have been almost over, would continue for another thirty eight years ‘in the wilderness’.
Thus Hazeroth is made the fourteenth stop (twice seven) on the journey. This was the journey as Yahweh had meant it to be, the divinely perfect one. What followed was outside what God had purposed, although He did not desert His people (Deuteronomy 2.7).
33.18 ‘And they journeyed from Hazeroth, and encamped in Rithmah.’
Some seek to associate Rithmah with Kadesh in some way, but the only ground for doing so is that it follows Hazeroth, and we know that Kadesh followed Hazeroth (11.35; 12.16). It is, however, quite possible. The tribes would probably divide over a number of oases. But it could equally have been the next stage after leaving Kadesh for the wandering in the wilderness, for the whole point of not mentioning Kadesh was that the first visit to Kadesh was deliberately blotted out. We have seen how the writer did this with the forty years in the wilderness (chapters 15-19), and how he did it with Korah’s death (16.32-35 where Korah’s death is remarkably not mentioned). Now he does the same thing for Kadesh (he will do the same thing for Simeon in Deuteronomy 33 because of their sin at the plains of Moab). How long Israel remained at Kadesh after their failure to enter the land we do not know (some would see them as remaining there for a good part of the thirty eight years). In Deuteronomy we learn that they remained there ‘many days’ (1.46). However, that could be anything from a few months upwards. But eventually their journeys recommenced, and the itinerary that now follows is the record of that wandering in the wilderness, 33.19-36 covering the scantily covered period in 14.25-20.1. It is a reminder that it was a long and weary period of wandering.
33.19-30 ‘And they journeyed from Rithmah, and encamped in Rimmon-perez. And they journeyed from Rimmon-perez, and encamped in Libnah. And they journeyed from Libnah, and encamped in Rissah. And they journeyed from Rissah, and encamped in Kehelathah. And they journeyed from Kehelathah, and encamped in mount Shepher. And they journeyed from mount Shepher, and encamped in Haradah. And they journeyed from Haradah, and encamped in Makheloth. And they journeyed from Makheloth, and encamped in Tahath. And they journeyed from Tahath, and encamped in Terah. And they journeyed from Terah, and encamped in Mithkah. And they journeyed from Mithkah, and encamped in Hashmonah. And they journeyed from Hashmonah, and encamped in Moseroth.’
This list of unknown names speaks volumes to us. Most of the first part of the list of names from Rameses to Hazeroth were well recorded in the history in Exodus, and in 11.35. Some of the final names will be recorded in the history. But the middle section are totally unmentioned. This is confirmation that the middle period was deliberately blanked out as far as the history was concerned. Moses had a record of the names of the places visited, where the Dwellingplace had been set up. He knew what had happened at each of them. But all that was to be ignored. Indeed as far as the rest of Numbers was concerned, apart from the incidents of Korah and the rod that budded which illustrate the rebellion at Kadesh, the whole period between the first leaving of Hazeroth and the second arrival at Kadesh, is as though it had not been. It was a blot on the name of Israel.
It may, however, be that we have reference to Moseroth (plural of Moserah) in the reference to Moserah (‘chastisement’) in Deuteronomy 10.6. But it is equally possible that each name was allocated to a different place and a different incident, with Moseroth (the plural) stressing a deeper level of chastisement than Moserah.
33.31-33 ‘And they journeyed from Moseroth, and encamped in Bene-jaakan. And they journeyed from Bene-jaakan, and encamped in Hor-haggidgad. And they journeyed from Hor-haggidgad, and encamped in Jotbathah.’
This can be compared with Deuteronomy 10.6-7 where we read, ‘And the children of Israel journeyed from Beeroth (the wells of) Bene-jaakan to Moserah (chastisement). There Aaron died, and there he was buried; and Eleazar his son ministered in the priest’s office in his stead. From there they journeyed to Gudgodah (similar to ‘the caves (hor) of ha-gidgad’); and from Gudgodah to Jotbathah, a land of brooks of water.’ But this latter description is a passing of this way a second time, for it refers to the time when Aaron died (compare 33.38), while Numbers refers to a time prior to the second arrival at Kadesh (33.37), well before the death of Aaron. It is not an unlikely event that they at some stage covered the same ground twice in view of the circumstances, especially as they knew that there was water there, and they were avoiding Edom. Either they visited Moserah in a different order the second time, or Moserah is different from Moseroth.
From Deuteronomy we gather that both Bene-jaaken and Jotbathah were selected out the second time precisely because they were sources of abundant water, and that would no doubt be why they were chosen as camp sites the first time. Thus a visit, and possibly a long stay, on the way from Kadesh to Ezion-geber, and a further visit on the way from Kadesh to Edom, at a time of such shortage that even Kadesh was lacking in water (20.2), is not to be ruled out. During the wilderness wandering they would necessarily seek out abundant water supplies, and stay at such places as long as possible (they were not going anywhere).
33.34-35 ‘And they journeyed from Jotbathah, and encamped in Abronah. And they journeyed from Abronah, and encamped in Ezion-geber. And they journeyed from Ezion-geber, and encamped in the wilderness of Zin (the same is Kadesh).’
Note that the journey from Jotbathah to Eziongeber took place with only one encampment mentioned, and then from Ezion-geber to Kadesh in one long march. The intervening land was clearly very inhospitable so that they did not tarry anywhere but made their way as quickly as possible, simply bedding down for the night and not setting up an encampment.
For we do know that Ezion-geber was on the gulf of Aqabah (1 Kings 9.26; 22.48) and was thus a good long march from Kadesh, and presumably, in view of what the second visit there tells us about its placement, from Jotbathah.
33.37 ‘And they journeyed from Kadesh, and encamped in mount Hor, in the edge of the land of Edom.’
The forty years being over Moses brought Israel back to Kadesh. This, as it were, re-established the journey from Egypt and discounted all that had gone between this and the last visit to Kadesh. The journey now began towards the eastern border of Canaan. This would take them round the Dead Sea and up its eastern side. Thus they set off from Kadesh and reached Mount Hor, which was near Moserah, on the border of the land of Edom. See for this 20.22.
33.38-39 ‘And Aaron the priest went up into mount Hor at the commandment of Yahweh, and died there, in the fortieth year after the children of Israel were come out of the land of Egypt, in the fifth month, on the first day of the month. And Aaron was a hundred and twenty and three years old when he died in mount Hor.’
It was on Mount Hor that Aaron was to die ‘at the commandment of Yahweh’, the Lord of life and death. This was almost exactly forty years since they had left Egypt, and was on the first day of the fifth month (they had left Egypt on the fifteenth day of the first month). He died at the age of one hundred and twenty three. At first sight this appears to be an exact number, but it may simply be one hundred and twenty (three generations - a man of this age in fact often called himself ‘three’) plus three for completeness. Being older than Moses who would shortly die at ‘one hundred and twenty’ (Deuteronomy 34.7) the three indicated that he was the elder brother. Moses had had three periods of life, life in Egypt, life among the Midianites, and the period of deliverance, each of which could be seen as ‘a generation’ (idealistically forty years).
The mention of his long life here and not earlier was because earlier his sins were still in mind. Now that that has been dealt with Aaron could be given his final accolade. To the ancients his length of life would be seen as evidence of his righteousness. It was evidence that he had been pleasing to Yahweh.
33.40 ‘And the Canaanite, the king of Arad, who dwelt in the South in the land of Canaan, heard of the coming of the children of Israel.’
At this same time had come the Canaanite king of Arad who, living in ‘the South’ (the Canaanite part of the Negeb, compare Genesis 12.9), had ‘heard of the coming of the children of Israel’ and hoped to drive them away (21.1-3). There is, in the way that this is put, the indication that the arrival of Israel was news which put fear in the hearts of the Canaanites (compare 14.14; Deuteronomy 2.25; Exodus 15.14-16).
Thus the writer deliberately once more puts us in touch with the history described earlier, which he has deliberately neglected in the middle section. History has, as it were recommenced
33.41-43 ‘And they journeyed from mount Hor, and encamped in Zalmonah. And they journeyed from Zalmonah, and encamped in Punon. And they journeyed from Punon, and encamped in Oboth.’
The middle two encampments are ignored in the history which speaks simply of moving from Mount Hor to Oboth (21.4-11). But they were important as places where the Dwellingplace had been set up.
33.44 ‘And they journeyed from Oboth, and encamped in Iye-abarim, in the border of Moab.’
For this compare 21.11. It is apparent that the list has the histories in mind.
33.45-48 ‘And they journeyed from Iyim (a shortening of Iye-abarim), and encamped in Dibon-gad. And they journeyed from Dibon-gad, and encamped in Almon-diblathaim. And they journeyed from Almon-diblathaim, and encamped in the mountains of Abarim, before Nebo. And they journeyed from the mountains of Abarim, and encamped in the plains of Moab by the Jordan opposite Jericho.’
This contrasts with 21.12-13, 18-20 which says, ‘From there they journeyed, and encamped in the valley of Zered. From there they journeyed, and encamped on the other side of the Arnon, which is in the wilderness, which comes out of the border of the Amorites -- and from the wilderness they journeyed to Mattanah, and from Mattanah to Nahaliel; and from Nahaliel to Bamoth; and from Bamoth to the valley that is in the field of Moab, to the top of Pisgah, which looks towards Jeshimon (or ‘down on the desert’).’
The difference probably lies in the purpose of the descriptions. These in chapter 33 refer to the places where they encamped and set up the Dwellingplace (or in the early part the old Tent of Meeting - Exodus 33.7-11). Anywhere were the Dwellingplace was set up was special. That is possibly one reason for this list in chapter 33. It indicated the march of Yahweh and where He stayed. Those in chapter 21 refer to sites of well known interest, which were not necessarily campsites. Alternately the change of Dibon to Dibon-gad (Dibon of Gad) may suggest that these in chapter 33 were the new names given by the children of Israel as in 32.38. That would explain why unexpectedly there was not a single similar name.
(We must not make too much of these differences. The descriptions in chapter 21 only include two specific ‘place’ names, Mattanah and Nahaliel (and this latter simply means ‘the valley of God’). Bamoth is ‘the heights’, the river valley and mountain sites are general descriptions).
33.49 ‘And they encamped by the Jordan, from Beth-jeshimoth even to Abel-shittim in the plains of Moab.’
And finally they arrived in the plains of Moab and encamped between Beth-jeshimoth (House of the Deserts, near the north-east shore of the Dead Sea) and Abel-shittim (meadow or brook of Shittim). ‘Between the desert and the meadow/brook’ may be intended by the writer also to emphasise both from where they came (the wilderness), and where they now were (in a pleasant watered land). The journey was now over.
2). The Dividing Up Of The Land That Was Set Before Them (33.50-34.29).
Having arrived at the plains of Moab with the land visible over the Jordan, a preliminary indication of what would be expected of them, and what they might expect to receive, was now provided for them. This will be followed in chapter 34 by a brief description of the land and the names of those who will divide it out between them. The picture is being dangled in front of their eyes of the prize that lies before them.
Instruction Concerning Dividing Up The Land By Lot in the Future So That Each Man Has His Lot and For the Purifying of the Land (33.50-56).
There were two prongs to the requirements. One was that they were to receive the land by lot. It was theirs for the taking, and Yahweh Himself would dispose of it among them. And the second was that they must remember His word about driving out the Canaanites in their totality. The land must be purified from all the sin and idolatry that had been committed in it.
33.50 ‘And Yahweh spoke to Moses in the plains of Moab by the Jordan at Jericho, saying,’
These are triumphant words. This time when Yahweh spoke to Moses it was on the very borders of the promised land.
33.51-52 “Speak to the children of Israel, and say to them, When you pass over the Jordan into the land of Canaan, then you shall drive out all the inhabitants of the land from before you, and destroy all their figured stones, and destroy all their molten images, and demolish all their high places.”
Their solemn duty on possessing the land is again stressed. They must drive out all the inhabitants of the land, and must destroy all tokens of idolatry and places for their worship (compare 32.21; Exodus 23.24-33; 34.10-14; Deuteronomy 7.2, 5 and often). The land had to be cleansed by the driving out or destruction of all that offended Yahweh, for the iniquity of these nations had now reached overflowing (compare Genesis 15.16).
33.53 “And you shall take possession of the land, and dwell in it; for I have given to you the land that you might possess it.”
And on the positive side they themselves were to possess it and dwell in it, to live in its cities and farm its fields. For Yahweh was giving it to them for this purpose. This was the dream for which they would fight.
33.54 “And you shall inherit the land by lot according to your families; to the more you shall give the more inheritance, and to the fewer you shall give the less inheritance. Wherever the lot falls to any man, that shall be his; according to the tribes of your fathers shall you inherit.”
And when they did inherit the land it was to be by lot, which would indicate Yahweh’s will in its disposal, and they were to do it by and in accordance with their clans. The many would receive much, the fewer less. This was their inheritance from Yahweh. All was to be by lot and not by man’s devising. Each man would receive what the lot indicated. And all would receive within their tribes, and dependent on their size.
33.55 “But if you will not drive out the inhabitants of the land from before you, then will those whom you allow to remain of them be as pricks in your eyes, and as thorns in your sides, and they will vex you in the land in which you dwell.”
But if they failed to drive out the inhabitants of the land, those inhabitants would remain, ever to be to them a sore in their eyes, thorns in their sides, a vexation. (compare Joshua 23.12-13; Judges 2.3; Psalm 106.34, 36). It would permanently mar the enjoyment of their dwelling in the land.
Note the vivid picture. They would be well aware from their days of wandering of the prickly bushes that could tear at the eyes, and the thorns that could pierce their sides. This was not something that they would want to find in the new land.
33.56 “And it will come about, that, as I thought to do to them, so will I do to you.”
And even more, if they neglect to purify the land from idolatry Yahweh Himself will do to Israel what He had thought to do to those nations. They would come to be in such a state that He would drive them out, and destroy their places of worship. And they would have brought it all on themselves. This is the basis of all the warnings and prophecies elsewhere, see especially Leviticus 26.14-39; Deuteronomy 28.15-68.
There is a reminder here for us that as we too go forward with God we must remove from our lives all that could hinder our forward march, so that we might please Him Who has chosen us to be soldiers (2 Timothy 2.4-5). We too must set aside every weight and the sin which does so easily beset us (Hebrews 12.1). We too must avoid what attacks the eye (Matthew 5.29; 6.23; 18.9) and the thorns that seek to tear at us (1 Timothy 6.9)
3). Description of The Land To Be Inherited (34.1-15).
Having commanded the purifying of the land by the driving out of its inhabitants and their gods, the land in mind is now delineated. This was not just some vague notion, it was a grand plan.
Analysis.
Chapter 34 Delineation of the Land To Be Possessed and the Names of Those Who Will Divide It Up Once It Is Possessed.
The land of Canaan was in general a recognised entity in the ancient world. For long periods it came under the control of Egypt to the south who considered that they had rights over it. When they were strong those rights were exercised. Thus in the Amarna letters Egypt expected to be kept in touch with affairs and were regularly called on to give assistance, and their idea of Canaan corresponds with the description here. Interestingly a later 12th century BC text of Pharaoh Merenptah actually mentions the presence of Israel in the land, boasting that he had got rid of them, ‘Israel lies desolate, its seed are no more’. But they had simply retired to the hills awaiting his departure.
While its exact borders were nowhere mentioned it is made quite clear that it occupies pretty much of what is described here.
34.1 ‘And Yahweh spoke to Moses, saying,’
Again we are assured that we have Moses’ words given by Yahweh.
34.2 “Command the children of Israel, and say to them, When you come into the land of Canaan, this is the land which shall fall to you for an inheritance, even the land of Canaan according to its borders.”
When they came into the land of Canaan the land that they were to possess was clearly specified. The delineations are much larger than was actually achieved, but that was due to disobedience. Because they failed Yahweh the Canaanites survived as far as Byblos, well to the north, the area from which had previously come the Ugaritic texts.
Description Of The South Quarter (34.3-5).
34.3-5 “Then your south quarter shall be from the wilderness of Zin along by the border of Edom, and your south border shall be from the end of the Salt Sea eastward, and your border shall turn about southward of the ascent of Akrabbim (‘scorpions’), and pass along to Zin. And its goings out shall be southward of Kadesh-barnea; and it shall go forth to Hazar-addar, and pass along to Azmon; and the border shall turn about from Azmon to the Wadi of Egypt, and its goings out shall be at the sea.”
Compare Joshua 15.2-4. They were not to possess any of the land of Edom (‘along by the border of Edom’ - compare Deuteronomy 2.5). The boundary then goes from the bottom of the Salt Sea (the Dead Sea) across to the Great Sea, (the Mediterranean Sea), passing to the south of Kadesh Barnea (possibly Ain el Qudeirat) which was to be included in the land, and reaching ‘the Wadi of Egypt’ (Wadi el-Arish). The Negeb provided good pasture land, and by judicious use of groundwater could be, and regularly was at times, irrigated.
34.6 “And for the western border, you shall have the great sea and the border. This shall be your west border.”
The Western border was the Great Sea, the Mediterranean itself.
34.7-9 “And this shall be your north border: from the great sea you shall mark out for you mount Hor; from mount Hor you shall mark out to Lebo-Hamath; and the goings out of the border shall be at Zedad; and the border shall go forth to Ziphron, and its goings out shall be at Hazar-enan. This shall be your north border.”
This Mount Hor was probably by the sea north of Byblos. The boundary then went across to Lebo-Hamath in the Beqa Valley (probably modern Lebweh, and mentioned in both Egyptian and Assyrian sources), and Zedad (modern Sedad)
34.10-12 “And you shall mark out your east border from Hazar-enan to Shepham; and the border shall go down from Shepham to Riblah, on the east side of Ain; and the border shall go down, and shall reach to the side of the sea of Chinnereth eastward; and the border shall go down to the Jordan, and its goings out shall be at the Salt Sea. This shall be your land according to its borders round about.”
The first part of the eastern border cannot now be determined, but it soon became the Jordan valley, alongside the Sea of Chinnereth (Galilee) and down the Arabah to the Dead Sea. Transjordan was thus outside the delineated land, as Moses now explains.
34.13-15 ‘And Moses commanded the children of Israel, saying, “This is the land which you shall inherit by lot, which Yahweh has commanded to give to the nine tribes, and to the half-tribe; for the tribe of the children of Reuben according to their fathers’ houses, and the tribe of the children of Gad according to their fathers’ houses, have received, and the half-tribe of Manasseh have received, their inheritance: the two tribes and the half-tribe have received their inheritance beyond the Jordan at Jericho eastward, toward the sunrising.” ’
What he has described was to be seen as the land which was to be divided among them by lot. It was the land which Yahweh had commanded should be given to the nine and a half tribes. The other two and a half tribes have received theirs in Transjordan, east of Jordan. But note the tacit assumption that this had been given to them by Yahweh as well. It is ‘their inheritance’ (see Deuteronomy 2.30-31; 3.2, 18).
So the land that they were to possess was marked out before them. It remained for them to take possession in the name of Yahweh, and with His powerful assistance. He had brought them safely from Egypt (33.1-49), now He would take them safely into the promised land (33.51-53).
4). The Leaders Who Will Divide the Land For Them Are Appointed (34.16-29).
The picture is further enhanced by naming the leaders who will see to the dividing up of the land, which are now given. This was a guarantee that within their lifetime the land would be possessed. This was to be no future dream, it was a present hope. They could look to their leader’s tents and see where the one who would actually do this was dwelling. Here was certainty and encouragement sufficient for all. Those mainly responsible for the division would be Joshua and Eleazar, but they would be assisted by the chieftains of the nine and a half tribes.
Analysis.
34.16 ‘And Yahweh spoke to Moses, saying,’
Once again it is insisted that this was what was commanded to Moses by Yahweh.
34.17 “These are the names of the men who will divide the land to you for inheritance: Eleazar the priest, and Joshua the son of Nun.”
The two men mainly responsible for dividing the land would be Eleazar the Priest and Joshua. Eleazar was named first out of deference to his present position. Joshua was still simply the heir elect. But Eleazar is always mentioned first when the two are named together in direct contrast with Moses and Aaron suggesting that Joshua’s status was never quite seen as on a par with that of Moses (32.28; Joshua 14.1; 17.4; 19.51; 21.1).
34.18 “And you shall take one prince of every tribe, to divide the land for inheritance.”
And they were to act through the named chieftains of the tribe. The names of these chieftains is now given. The list is very pointed. The only chieftain remaining of the old chieftains was Caleb. All the others had passed way to be replaced by the new generation. Compare 1.4-16; 13.4-15. Joshua was the only other exception, but he was no longer available having been made commander-in-chief.
34.19-28 And these are the names of the men: Of the tribe of Judah, Caleb the son of Jephunneh. And of the tribe of the children of Simeon, Shemuel the son of Ammihud. Of the tribe of Benjamin, Elidad the son of Chislon. And of the tribe of the children of Dan a prince, Bukki the son of Jogli. Of the children of Joseph: of the tribe of the children of Manasseh a prince, Hanniel the son of Ephod. And of the tribe of the children of Ephraim a prince, Kemuel the son of Shiphtan. And of the tribe of the children of Zebulun a prince, Elizaphan the son of Parnach. And of the tribe of the children of Issachar a prince, Paltiel the son of Azzan. And of the tribe of the children of Asher a prince, Ahihud the son of Shelomi. And of the tribe of the children of Naphtali a prince, Pedahel the son of Ammihud.”
34.29 “These are they whom Yahweh commanded to divide the inheritance to the children of Israel in the land of Canaan.”
These chieftains are the ones whom Yahweh has commanded should divide up the inheritance of the children of Israel in the land of Canaan. This was Yahweh’s inheritance, given to the children of Israel. It was to be theirs and would be divided up by their chieftains alive at this day.
5). Provision of Cities To Dwell In For the Levites (35.1-8).
As is regular in Numbers the regulations for the Levites follow on after the regulations for the people (compare 1.1-46 with 1.47-54; chapter 2 with chapter 3; 6.1-21 with 8.5-22; 26.1-56 with 26.57-62).
A mark of the width and depth of the land which would be possessed was now revealed in the requirement to provide forty eight cities for the Levites to dwell in. For them to be able to do this large conquests would have to be made. Thus this confirmed the certainty of the success that would be theirs once they entered the land. Talking about something as though it was already possessed was a huge confidence booster, and expressed full belief in the certainty of the fulfilment of the promises of Yahweh.
It also confirmed Yahweh’s provision for their spiritual need. No Israelite would be living far from a Levitical city. There he could seek advice and guidance in respect of the Instruction of Yahweh. Information concerning these cities is found in Joshua 21.1-42.
Analysis.
Chapter 35
35.1 ‘And Yahweh spoke to Moses in the plains of Moab by the Jordan at Jericho, saying,’
Note the usual statement concerning Yahweh’s words to Moses, but reinforced by an identification of the place where the revelation was given. This reads very much like a genuine contemporary statement. Standing there on the verge of the Jordan ready for entry into the land final instructions were being given. Nothing was more important for their true survival as a covenant people than the presence among them of those whose lives were devoted to looking after the interests of Yahweh. This would enable the land to be kept pure, and was now to be provided for.
Cities To Be Given to the Levites, Along with the Suburbs of the Cities (the surrounding land) (35.1-8).
35.2 “Command the children of Israel, that they give to the Levites of the inheritance of their possession cities to dwell in; and suburbs for the cities round about them shall you give to the Levites.”
Out of their inheritance that they would soon possess the children of Israel were to give ‘cities to dwell in’ to the Levites. Surrounding land was also to be given to them. Note the change to the personal ‘you’ (ye). This may simply be in order to distinguish the ‘they’ now used of the Levites. Or it may be in order to bring home to the children of Israel the personal aspect of their gift to the Levites. All were involved, and all must give as unto Yahweh.
35.3 “And the cities they shall have to dwell in, and their suburbs, shall be for their cattle, and for their substance, and for all their beasts.”
The cities themselves were to be for the Levites to inhabit, and the surrounding land for their cattle and other animals.
“The cities they shall have to dwell in.” The Levites were not to be given the whole cities for their own possession but to have sufficient space allotted so that they would be able to build (or restore captured houses) for them to dwell in. They were to receive as many houses as were needed for their requirements, and these would become their hereditary possession, which, if sold, could be redeemed, and which reverted to them without compensation in the year of Yubile, if not redeemed before then (Leviticus 25.32-33). The remainder of each such city was then available for other Israelites to dwell in once they had restored or erected their own houses.
35.4-5 “And the suburbs of the cities, which you shall give to the Levites, shall be from the wall of the city and outward a thousand cubits round about. And you shall measure without the city for the east side two thousand cubits, and for the south side two thousand cubits, and for the west side two thousand cubits, and for the north side two thousand cubits, the city being in the midst. This shall be to them the suburbs of the cities.”
The size of the surrounding land which was to belong to the Levites was not to be left to chance but was clearly delineated. The land was to stretch 1000 cubits (450 metres, just over a quarter of a mile) in each direction, measuring from the boundaries of the cities, north, south, east and west, thus making an area of somewhat over 2000 square cubits, taking the area of the city into account. Each ‘side’ would have a 2000 cubit border, making a square around the city just over 2000 cubits in length and width. Some have related this to the 2000 cubits to be allowed around the Ark at the crossing of the Jordan (Joshua 3.4), but this is doubtful. The cities did not have the holiness of the Ark. On the other hand it is probably intended to signify that these Levitical cities were ‘special’. There was, however, no limit to access, except probably to the avenger of blood when it was a city of refuge (verse 19, 26-27). This land was to belong to the Levites in perpetuity. It could not be sold for it was Yahweh’s (Leviticus 25.23).
The figures were of course symbolic and approximate. They indicated the divine nature of the gift (the ‘thousand’ was the highest symbolical number). The size of the ‘city’ wall to wall would determine exactly how far they stretched.
The ‘cities’ would themselves not be overlarge. The forty eight cities would house the 22/23 Levite clans, although not being limited to them, and would indeed house a good number of ‘innocent manslayers’ for many years. The surrounding land was also not large. It would feed a minimum level of cattle and grow a minimal amount of food, possibly sufficient for survival in bad times. But while the Levites could personally own their houses (taken over or built by their own hands) they would not personally own land. The land was to be group land. Their possessions were communal. They had no individual personal inheritance in land. Yahweh was their inheritance.
We are not told how the manslayers were catered for. Perhaps their families would provision them, and their nearer family would presumably move with them into the city of refuge and rent nearby land. But once they became ‘needy’ they would have a right to receive from the common pool for the needy (Deuteronomy 14.28-29) and take advantage of similar provisions (Leviticus 19.9; 23.22; Deuteronomy 24.19-21).
35.6 “And the cities which you shall give to the Levites, will be the six cities of refuge, which you shall give for the manslayer to flee to: and besides them you shall give forty and two cities.”
Of the cities given to the Levites six were to be cities of refuge, a concept dealt with in what follows. The number six (3x2) indicated completeness of provision. These were for ‘innocent’ manslayers to flee to. There were to be three each side of the Jordan. The remaining forty two cities were simply for the housing of the Levite families so that by living among the people they could properly carry out their functions of teaching, guiding, and collecting and storing tithes. For any of the people who might desire clarification on a matter to do with the Instruction (Law), help was always available there.
The six cities of refuge actually appointed were Bezer, Ramoth-gilead and Golan in Transjordan and Hebron of Judah, Shechem of Ephraim and Kadesh of Galilee in Canaan proper (Deuteronomy 4.43; Joshua 20.7-8; 21.13, 21, 27 32, 36, 38). It will be noted that these were dispersed throughout both areas. Deuteronomy 19.1-6 describes it in terms of splitting Canaan into three parts and appointing a city in each. The cities had to be reachable from anywhere in Canaan, ‘lest the avenger of blood pursue the (innocent) manslayer while his heart is hot, and overtake him because the way is long, and smite him mortally, whereas he was not worthy of death, inasmuch as he did not hate him (his victim) in time past.’
35.7 “All the cities which you shall give to the Levites shall be forty and eight cities; them shall you give with their suburbs.”
So the total cities given to the Levites to dwell in, along with their surrounding land for 1000 cubits every way, were forty eight. This was twelve times four. The twelve indicated the twelve tribes whom they would serve. The four stressed the ‘universal’ nature of Yahweh’s provision, just as four rivers went out from Eden to the whole world, the four winds came from every part of heaven, and north, south, east and west stretch out to the four furthest parts (corners) of the earth. The basic idea was that the spiritual needs of Israel were being fully catered for.
35.8 “And concerning the cities which you shall give of the possession of the children of Israel, from the many you shall take many; and from the few you shall take few: every one according to his inheritance which he inherits shall give of his cities to the Levites.”
The cities were to be given in accordance with the size of tribal possession. Thus the larger tribes provided more, and the smaller tribes less. But all were to give something from their inheritance to the Levites, a kind of firstfruits of land. It was for Yahweh’s possession so that Yahweh’s servants might live among them and ensure the keeping of His Instruction (Torah), and, in the case of the cities of refuge, especially for the prevention of the defilement of the land as a result of the shedding of blood.
According to Joshua 21, the Levites received nine cities in the territory of Judah and Simeon, and four in the territory of each of the other tribes, with the exception of Naphtali, in which there were only three. Thus there were ten in Transjordan, and thirty-eight in Canaan proper. Of these the thirteen given up by Judah, Simeon, and Benjamin were available to the wider families of the priests, while the remaining thirty five were available to the three Levitical families. It will be quite apparent that the priests’ families would be scattered fairly thinly, at least to begin with, but provision was also being made for the future.
6). Provision of Cities of Refuge and Prevention of Defilement of the Land (35.9-34).
Central to maintaining the purity of the land was the need to prevent within it the shedding of innocent blood. If a man deliberately slew another his life was forfeit. Blood would have to be given for blood, however shed (Exodus 21.23; Deuteronomy 19.21). For to slay a man was to take what belonged to God, his very life, the breath of God (Genesis 2.7), and to despatch his lifeblood into the dust before the time determined by Yahweh (Ecclesiastes 12.7), and thus his own life would be forfeit (Genesis 9.5-6). In that way would the land be cleansed from blood guilt. If the murderer could not be discovered special provisions were made for an atonement ceremony so that the guilt could be purged (Deuteronomy 21.1-9).
But the question arose, what about the accidental shedding of blood? Provision was made for this in the cities of refuge. There the manslayer could be isolated until the death of the High Priest, whose blood would in some way then allow for the manslayer’s release, probably because the High Priest died and his blood was shed as the representative of the whole of Israel before Yahweh. Until then the ‘innocent’ manslayer could not be allowed to roam the land. His life was, as it were, held in suspense, until the death of the High Priest had finally expunged the consequences of shedding blood. By this the sacredness of human life was stressed. It was not a punishment. He was not imprisoned, his movements were not restricted, but he knew that if he moved away from the shelter of the city of refuge the avenger of blood was duty bound to seek him out in order to kill him.
For further stress on the cities of refuge see Exodus 21.13; Deuteronomy 19.1-13; compare Joshua 20.2, 8. They symbolise the place of safety in Christ for all who flee to Him from ‘unwitting sin’.
It is interesting that here, as in the case of the Balaam stories, we now have three threefold sequences placed within a chiastic framework. In both cases the divine is being directly affected by the activities of a human, in the former case by sorcery, in the latter by the extinguishing of the breath of Yahweh, of the image of God, in a man.
The Provision of Cities of Refuge for Unwitting Manslayers (to prevent the shedding of innocent blood) (35.9-11).
35.9 ‘And Yahweh spoke to Moses, saying,’
Once more we are reminded that we have here Yahweh’s word given to Moses.
35.10-11 “Speak to the children of Israel, and say to them, When you pass over the Jordan into the land of Canaan, then you shall appoint for yourselves cities to be cities of refuge for you, that the manslayer who kills any person unwittingly may flee there.”
The need for cities of refuge is declared by this requirement for their being ‘appointed’. They were needed in order to prevent the shedding of innocent blood, but also in order to isolate from the land anyone who had shed blood and slain another. The sacredness to God of human life was such that none who had taken such a life could be allowed to roam free in the land unless a parallel death had taken place. For thereby the land would be defiled.
35.12 “And the cities shall be to you for refuge from the avenger (goel), that the manslayer die not, until he stand before the congregation for judgment.”
These cities would act as a refuge from ‘the Avenger’ (the goel). The ‘goel’ often signified the ‘next-of-kin’, the kinsman-redeemer (5.8; 27.11; Leviticus 25.25, 49), and the term was used of those seen as responsible in the family for the protection of its name, its integrity, its wholeness and its inheritance from Yahweh. A man could sometimes be his own goel (Leviticus 25.26, compare Genesis 4.24; 27.45). Most would thus see ‘the avenger’ as a member of the family of a slain man who had the right to seek blood vengeance, the idea partly being that murder could be best controlled by allowing swift justice to be carried out by those most affected. Such an avenger could not then be accused of murder because he was judicially avenging the death of a member of his own family, and taking ‘life for life’. He was acting as official executioner. Such a concept was known from the earliest times. Cain feared that his family would kill him on sight (Genesis 4.14). This sense of a right to family revenge is still in vogue among some supposedly civilised people even today, and treated as acceptable, even though usually illegal, an indication that man with all his outward sophistication, is still a beast at heart. Some others see the Avenger as being an appointed official whose responsibility it was to seek out murderers and slay them.
Note that the refuge was only until the manslayer was brought to trial before the people’s representatives. But that would probably only happen if an accusation was brought against him. It then remained his refuge either if he was not accused or if he was found not guilty of deliberate murder. But stress is laid on the fact that for a guilty man there was no permanent refuge.
‘Stand before the congregation for judgment.’ ‘Before the congregation’ generally indicates the whole of Israel (16.9; 32.4). Thus this was probably before the Tent of Meeting, with the justices and elders conducting the trial, with all who would being able to gather to hear the verdict. For the fact that if not guilty he was to be returned to the city of refuge confirms that it took place away from there. Alternately it might have been in the locality where the manslaying had been committed (19.12), where witnesses could be found, but in that case we might have expected that to be explained. And that would not really be ‘before the congregation’, unless ‘before the congregation’ is seen as signifying being judged by one’s peers.
Something of the procedure is described in Joshua 20.4. The manslayer would flee from the avenger of blood to a city of refuge, and there he would stand before the gates of the city, and, having been brought within the gate area, would state his case before the elders. They were then to decide whether to receive him into the city, and give him a place in order that he might dwell among them, or whether to reject him because he admitted to deliberate murder. In cases of doubt they were not to deliver him up to the avenger of blood until he had stood ‘before the congregation’ for judgment.
The Number of Cities To Be Set Up And Their Widespread Coverage (35.13-15)
35.13-14 “And the cities which you shall give shall be for you six cities of refuge. You shall give three cities beyond the Jordan, and three cities shall you give in the land of Canaan. They shall be cities of refuge.”
The number of cities was to be six, three on each side of the Jordan. This was so that a city of refuge would be within easy reach from any point in Canaan or Transjordan. It was seen as complete provision (six = twice three) for this purpose.
35.15 “For the children of Israel, and for the foreigner and for the resident alien among them, shall these six cities be for refuge; that every one who kills any person unwittingly may flee there.”
And they were to be for the children of Israel, for foreigners and for resident aliens. Justice and compassion in Israel was to reach to all in the land, whether homeborn or strangers. Anyone who unwittingly slew a man could flee there. And once there he would be protected by the Levites and by Yahweh until his case could be examined, and then, if found to be not guilty, he could remain there until the death of the High Priest, at which point he was absolved and his life again became ‘sacred’. From then on his murder by an ‘avenger’ would be punishable by death as an act of sacrilege against Yahweh. Because for an avenger to slaughter him while he was under Yahweh’s protection would be sacrilege.
This is now followed by three threefold categorisations of possible incidents. The first two threesomes are seen as proving guilt. The third threesome as demonstrating probable innocence.
Three Examples of Those Who Would Find No Protection In A City of Refuge (35.16-18).
The deliberate murderer had no refuge. This would partly be determined by the nature of the instrument used. Thus an iron instrument, a large stone, or a wooden weapon would be evidence of intent. It would suggest that the slaying was intentional.
35.16 “But if he smote him with an instrument of iron, so that he died, he is a murderer: the murderer shall surely be put to death.”
To attack a man with an instrument of iron with sufficient force to kill clearly implied either a premeditated intention to kill or a total disregard for life. In such a case the slayer would have no valid excuse. The instrument used indicated a total disregard for a life given by Yahweh. To send a man’s lifeblood prematurely into the dust, before its time fixed by Yahweh, defiled the land and was a high-handed sin against Yahweh.
35.17 “And if he smote him with a stone in the hand, by which a man may die, and he died, he is a murderer: the murderer shall surely be put to death.”
To take a large stone in hand ‘by which a man may die’ would again show clear intent of murder or total disregard for God-given life. The intent to make unconscious or to injure would have been indicated by the use of a smaller stone.
35.18 “Or if he smote him with a weapon of wood in the hand (a piece of wood deliberately taken in hand, or ‘with a handle’), by which a man may die, and he died, he is a murderer: the murderer shall surely be put to death.”
Here the instrument is specifically described as a ‘weapon’, a man wrought instrument, a piece of wood with a handle, or deliberately taken in hand (either translation is possible). The purpose of carrying such a weapon would be in order to kill. Why else was he carrying the weapon? Thus again it revealed premeditated intent.
Further Examples.
35.20-21 “And if he thrust him of hatred, or hurled at him, lying in wait, so that he died, or in enmity smote him with his hand, so that he died; he that smote him shall surely be put to death; he is a murderer: the avenger of blood shall put the murderer to death, when he meets him.”
Here not only premeditated intent as indicated by the instrument used, but also knowledge of the persons involved and the circumstances of the death were taken into account. Was it done through hatred, or by something deliberately and cold-bloodedly hurled, or by someone lying in wait, or in enmity? Then clearly it was deliberate. The slayer was guilty, and the Avenger must slay him when he meets him.
Examples Of Innocent Slaying.
35.22-23 “But if he thrust him suddenly without enmity, or hurled on him anything without lying in wait, or with any stone, whereby a man may die, seeing him not, and cast it on him, so that he died, and he was not his enemy, neither sought his harm;”
Here we have the opposite cases, those where the thrust was accidental or instinctive and without a pre-history of enmity (compare Deuteronomy 19.4) or where the hurling of something was not by someone in hiding or lying in wait; or where the stone was not one of such a size that it would be seen as probably intended to produce a fatality; in all cases being where the slayer was known not to be an enemy of the slain man, or as someone who intended his victim harm. Then in those cases the assumption was to be that no such harm was intended. The example in Deuteronomy 19.5 of an insecure head of an axe flying off in an ‘industrial accident’ demonstrates how innocent the manslaying might be. But the death still required to be balanced with a parallel death, demonstrating the sacredness of life. All had to do all in their power to prevent death whether by murder or accident, and were responsible where the death was the result of their actions.
35.24 “Then the congregation shall judge between the smiter and the avenger of blood according to these ordinances.”
In that case it would be up to the congregation to judge whether the man was guilty or not. They would decide whether the man’s life should be spared, or whether the avenger of blood should be allowed his rights. Deliberate, premeditated murder was seen as an attack on God Himself.
While we would now probably take mitigating circumstances into account, it was considered very important in those days for there to be ‘life for life, blood for blood’. However, the point also being emphasised is that circumstance and motive must be taken into account. What was to be sought was not vengeance but justice. Thus provision was mad for accidental death.
35.25 “And the congregation shall deliver the manslayer out of the hand of the avenger of blood, and the congregation shall restore him to his city of refuge, where he was fled: and he shall dwell in it until the death of the high priest, who was anointed with the holy oil.”
If the congregation found the man not guilty of deliberate manslaying, then it was to deliver the man out of the hand of the avenger of blood and restore him to his city of refuge. He had still shed blood and a compensating death was required, but this death would take place when the High Priest who had been anointed with the holy anointing oil, died. His death would compensate as death for death. And the land would remain clean in the light of the inevitable death one day of the High Priest. (He atoned for sin done aforetime? - compare Romans 3.25).
This delay was thus seen as totally in the hands of Yahweh. It could be long or short, as He determined by His preservation or otherwise of the life of the High Priest.
The High Priest’s death is not actually said to be atoning, and we should not read into this a wider application than to this situation. But it would certainly seem to have reference to the fact that as ‘the anointed Priest’ he represented the whole of Israel. The whole of Israel was therefore seen as bearing the guilt of the accidental death so that the land was not seen as defiled before Yahweh. To this extent it could certainly be seen as atoning, and might therefore indeed have been seen as compensating for all unwitting sin. But if so it was additional to, and did not replace, the day of Atonement and all the other purification for sin offerings required in the cultus. It was a reminder both that all died, and that the need for atonement was never ending and never fully satisfactory. The purification for sin offerings had to be supplemented by the Day of Atonement, the Day of Atonement had to be supplemented by the death of the High Priest, and each High Priest in succession had to die. The process was never ending, an indication in fact of its insufficiency.
It was only in the death of our Lord Jesus Christ that such an atonement was provided once for all as to make unnecessary any other form of atonement. His death alone was sufficient for the sins of the whole world (1 John 2.2), and in Him we have an undying High Priest (Hebrews 7.24-25). It is the indication that in His death on the cross full atonement has been made.
35.26-28 “But if the manslayer shall at any time go beyond the border of his city of refuge to which he flees, and the avenger of blood finds him outside the border of his city of refuge, and the avenger of blood slay the manslayer; he shall not be guilty of blood, because he should have remained in his city of refuge until the death of the high priest: but after the death of the high priest the manslayer shall return into the land of his possession.”
However the manslayer must remain in the city of refuge until such a death of the High Priest took place. If he leaves it any consequence will be on his own head. The avenger of blood will then have the right to slay him. And if he does he will not be guilty of blood because he is simply obtaining a life for a life. The manslayer should have remained within the city of refuge where he knew he would be safe. However, once the High Priest had died he could then return to the land that he owned, and which belonged to him as an inheritance from Yahweh, and no one had any further right against him. His life was once again fully sacred.
This approach had much in its favour. Firstly all were made to recognise the sacredness of human life, and that if life was taken then someone had to bear the responsibility even if it was done innocently. It provided a warning against taking death, even accidental death, lightly. Secondly it allowed the slain man’s relatives the right of revenge, with provisos. It prevented running sores in men’s minds which might result in worse consequences. The ‘detaining’ of the man would help to assuage their feelings of frustration and anger. He would not be walking about openly in front of them. Thirdly it did provide a means by which the innocent could find protection, but only when they were open to being tried before their fellow-countrymen. Fourthly it made sure that all suspicious deaths were investigated. In fact family feelings ran so high that it is questionable whether someone who had slain another could ever feel absolutely safe from ‘avengers of blood’ outside a city of refuge (where all would protect him), such was the sense of family honour that often held sway, even if revenge had become illegal. But it was more likely that once time had passed, the feeling of vengeance would have died down, especially as the death had been declared to be accidental. But it would pass from one generation to another. Only the death of the High Priest could settle the matter.
35.29 “And these things shall be for a statute and ordinance to you throughout your generations in all your dwellings.”
It is confirmed that these principles laid down were the statute and ordinance in respect of manslaying which would apply among all the people through every generation.
Attitudes To Be Taken Towards The Crime of Murder.
Various precautions were now described concerning the crime of manslaying. No man must be found guilty on the testimony of only one person. No ransom could be paid which could redeem a deliberate manslayer. The sentence of death was absolute. Nor could a man be released from a city of refuge on the payment of a ransom. Whether deliberately or accidentally a violent death had taken place and it had to be strictly compensated for by another death. Nothing less would do. Human life was so valuable that there was no compensation which could be adequate.
35.30 “Whoever kills any person, the murderer shall be slain at the mouth of witnesses: but one witness shall not testify against any person that he die.”
One way in which innocence or guilt was established was at the hands of witnesses. They were seen as especially important in the case of a murder. But no one should ever be put to death on the testimony of only one witness. This was a safeguard against false accusation.
35.31 “Moreover you shall take no ransom for the life of a murderer, that is guilty of death; but he shall surely be put to death.”
But once a man was convicted there was no substitute punishment. No compensation payment or bribe should be allowed to prevent full capital punishment. Murder was so sacrilegious that only the death of the murderer was sufficient to counteract it. There must be blood for blood. Other nations allowed compensation, but in Yahweh’s eyes life was so sacred that its premature taking could only have one consequence, a death for a death. Israel could allow compensation in lesser cases (Exodus 21.29-30) but not in this.
35.32 “And you shall take no ransom for him who is fled to his city of refuge, that he may come again to dwell in the land, until the death of the priest.”
The same was even true of accidental death. There was no way by which a man who had sought refuge in a city of refuge could be allowed to ransom himself and be able to go about freely. Were he to walk abroad in the land it would cry out against him because the death had not been compensated for, ‘until the death of the High Priest’.
35.33 “So you shall not pollute the land in which you are. For blood, it pollutes the land, and no expiation can be made for the land for the blood that is shed in it, but by the blood of him who shed it.”
The whole idea behind all this was that man’s life was given to him by God and that the shedding of blood by violence polluted the land. The blood returning prematurely to the dust was evidence of the breaking of Yahweh’s commandment, it revealed that one who was in the image of God had been destroyed, thus Yahweh had a twofold reason for reaction against it. It was so serious that the only way by which its shedding could be atoned for was by the death of the perpetrator. By such an emphasis the sacredness of human life was established.
35.34 “And you shall not defile the land which you inhabit, in the midst of which I dwell, for I, Yahweh, dwell in the midst of the children of Israel.”
And this was especially important because Yahweh would be dwelling in the land. Thus the defiling of it with human, violently shed blood was inconceivable. It robbed God of what was His. It must not happen. For, He reminded them, He Yahweh would dwell among them as the Preserver of Life , and He would know.
Chapter 36 Problems Of Inheritance.
7). The Manassite Leaders’ Concern About Losing The Land If Women Inherit.
There are two emphases in this last chapter. The first is on the question of the certainty of the inheritance of each tribe being maintained. That was seen as an essential matter. That was what they would be fighting for. And the second was the glorious example that the daughters of Zelophehad were to the whole of Israel. They were a shining example of the fact that those who behaved rightly towards Yahweh would come out triumphantly as possessors of the land. They were an incentive to the whole of Israel.
It is not accidental that the book ends with the importance of ensuring that the divisions of the land as established by God for His people should remain inviolate. For the land was to be their permanent possession, given to them by Yahweh. It lay at the very heart of the covenant. This reveals both the deep concern of the people about possessing land, and the faithfulness of God in ensuring that they received it as a permanent possession. It was the fulfilment of all that they had come to Canaan to obtain. The absolute cast iron guarantee of such perpetuity would be a huge incentive to going forward.
In the same way it is for us the certainty that we will enter into and inherit an everlasting kingdom that will never diminish that gives us the courage to go constantly forward in the face of all difficulties. The principle is the same. All who believe and are faithful will inherit it.
But the situation that brought this matter to the forefront was the matter of families with no male heir, whose fathers had died on their journey while remaining faithful to Yahweh, with the result that their family, instead of joining in the fulfilment of the promises to the fathers, would lose everything that mattered through no fault of their own. They would no longer have their share in the land. This must not be. Such a situation would mean that all soldiers who only had daughters would fear at what their death might do to their families, and would therefore be hesitant about going into battle. Thus the solution proposed here removed that fear.
Yet there was the equal problem that if they did receive land and the women heiresses married outside the tribe, they would take the land that had been given to that tribe with them. The tribal inheritance would be diminished. What then was the solution? The final answer was that the women heiresses could inherit, but if they did they must marry within the tribe. And the book ends with the description of the obedience to Yahweh of the daughters of Zelophehad which results in satisfaction for all. The lesson being that thus will all be blessed who walk in obedience to Yahweh and seek land for their possession.
Analysis.
36.1 ‘And the heads of the fathers’ houses of the family of the children of Gilead, the son of Machir, the son of Manasseh, of the families of the sons of Joseph, came near, and spoke before Moses, and before the princes, the heads of the fathers’ houses of the children of Israel:’
The deputation that came to Moses and the princes of the twelve tribes was not an unimportant one. It included all the chieftains of the sub-tribe of Gilead, of the tribe of Machir, the son of Manasseh who was descended from Joseph.
36.2 ‘And they said, “Yahweh commanded my lord to give the land for inheritance by lot to the children of Israel: and my lord was commanded by Yahweh to give the inheritance of Zelophehad our brother to his daughters.” ’
Their concern was with the decision that had been made concerning the daughters of Zelophehad. Important inheritance rules were being established. On the one hand Yahweh had commanded that the land be given to the children of Israel by lot. Thus this would permanently attach the land that was given to it to each tribe by Yahweh’s decree. But on the other hand was the decision about the daughters of Zelophehad which if not regulated might have other consequences.
36.3 “And if they be married to any of the sons of the other tribes of the children of Israel, then will their inheritance be taken away from the inheritance of our fathers, and will be added to the inheritance of the tribe to which they shall belong, so will it be taken away from the lot of our inheritance.”
For if they married outside the tribe, they would take their land with them. That land would then be joined to that of another tribe, and Gilead, of Machir, of Manasseh would find themselves depleted of some of the land allocated to them by Yahweh by means of the lot. The sub-tribe would lose some of their guaranteed inheritance.
36.4 “And when the yubile of the children of Israel shall be, then will their inheritance be added to the inheritance of the tribe to which they shall belong: so will their inheritance be taken away from the inheritance of the tribe of our fathers.”
And the result would be that when the year of Yubile came, that land, returning to the family of the woman who had first possessed it on entering the land, would permanently become attached to the new tribe for ever, and would for ever be lost to the tribe who had received it by lot. That being so the permanency of their inheritance was in doubt. This would go against the whole principle of Yubile which was of restoration after forty nine years of all land to its original tribal inheritors.
It is difficult to stress sufficiently how important the question was. They saw the whole certainty of the future as hanging in balance, and nothing would have been more discouraging to the advance into Canaan. The fairness of Yahweh to His people needed to be guaranteed. The whole of the book had been concerned with possession of the land. And now it seemed that that possession could hang in balance.
But when the reply came it both satisfied their doubts concerning the loss of guaranteed land, and was a warm encouragement concerning the blessing that came on those who were obedient to Yahweh.
The Faithfulness of the Daughters of Zelophehad (36.5-12).
Analysis.
Moses Confirms The Essential Rightness of Their Position.
36.5 ‘And Moses commanded the children of Israel according to the word of Yahweh, saying, “The tribe of the sons of Joseph speak what is right.”
The first point was an immediate acknowledgement about the rightness of their position. Let all the tribes know that what these sons of Joseph say is right. Their land is secured to them by Yahweh, and He will not allow any of it to be taken away from them.
36.6 “This is the thing which Yahweh commands concerning the daughters of Zelophehad, saying, Let them be married to whom they think best; only into the family of the tribe of their father shall they be married.”
So while the decision concerning the daughters of Zelophehad stood firm, it was incumbent on them to respond to Yahweh’s goodness by marrying into their own clan. They had the right to choose whom they would, as long as it was within that clan.
36.7 “So shall no inheritance of the children of Israel remove from tribe to tribe; for the children of Israel shall cleave every one to the inheritance of the tribe of his fathers.”
The result would be that no inheritance would remove from tribe to tribe, and the children of Israel would each cleave to that land originally given to them by lot.
36.8 “And every daughter, who possesses an inheritance in any tribe of the children of Israel, shall be wife to one of the family of the tribe of her father, that the children of Israel may possess every man the inheritance of his fathers.”
So every daughter who possessed an inheritance in any tribe of the children of Israel would by this restriction to marrying within the family of the tribe of their fathers, ensure that the land remained in the clan. And this would ensure that every family in Israel would continually possess what Yahweh had originally given. Here was certainty indeed.
36.9 “So shall no inheritance remove from one tribe to another tribe; for the tribes of the children of Israel shall cleave every one to his own inheritance.”
And so verse 7 is repeated for emphasis. No inheritance will move from tribe to tribe, and each tribe would have all its allotted land as a permanent inheritance. What they were fighting for was guaranteed and unloseable.
36.10-11 ‘Even as Yahweh commanded Moses, so did the daughters of Zelophehad. For Mahlah, Tirzah, and Hoglah, and Milcah, and Noah, the daughters of Zelophehad, were married to their father’s brothers’ sons.’
And then comes the final accolade. These faithful daughters of Zelophehad, whom all now knew by name, did precisely as Yahweh commanded Moses. They married their father’s brothers’ sons. They had believed in the fairness of Yahweh, they had braved the ordeal of the leading assembly of Israel, they had courageously stood firm to plead their cause in the face of all opposition, and now through their faithfulness and courage they had achieved their aim. And they had done so by strict obedience to Yahweh’s commandment. Let them and their faithfulness be a final example to Israel in the light of the prospect of the battles ahead of what happens when men and women are faithful to Yahweh.
36.12 ‘They were married into the families of the sons of Manasseh the son of Joseph; and their inheritance remained in the tribe of the family of their father.’
For they were married into the families of the sons of Manasseh, the son of Joseph, their own tribe, and thus ensured that their inheritance would remain in the tribe of the clan of their father, a shining example of faith, courage and obedience and all it would achieve. They had believed and possessed their land, and all land allocated would ultimately be safe to those to whom it would be given.
There could have been no higher note on which the book could end, for it stressed the importance of faith and obedience as the means of possessing the land.
The Final Summary.
The final summary of the book is here given in what was probably the remnant of a colophon. The journey was over. They were safely in the plains of Moab opposite Jericho on the verge of crossing the Jordan (36.13).
36.13 ‘These are the commandments and the ordinances which Yahweh commanded by Moses to the children of Israel in the plains of Moab by the Jordan at Jericho.’
What this section of the book contained was the commandments and ordinances commanded by Yahweh to Moses in the plains of Moab, by the Jordan, opposite Jericho preparatory to the invasion.
So the book which began with the numbering of Israel prior to inglorious failure and expulsion from the land in unbelief and disobedience, finishes with the numbering of Israel (chapter 26) which leads up to this triumphant example of faith and obedience. It is not accidental that after the second mobilisation the final part of the book is framed within narratives describing the faith, perseverance, determination and obedience of the daughters of Zelophehad. With a spirit like this, and a faithful and compassionate God like Yahweh, how could Israel now possibly fail?
If so please EMail us with your question and we will do our
best to give you a satisfactory answer.EMailus.
(But preferably not from aol.com, for some reason they do not deliver our messages).
FREE Scholarly verse by verse commentaries on the Bible.
THE PENTATEUCH ---
GENESIS ---EXODUS--- LEVITICUS --- NUMBERS ---
DEUTERONOMY --- THE BOOK OF JOSHUA --- THE BOOK OF JUDGES --- THE BOOK OF RUTH --- SAMUEL --- KINGS --- I & II CHRONICLES ---
EZRA---NEHEMIAH---ESTHER---PSALMS 1-73--- PROVERBS---ECCLESIASTES--- SONG OF SOLOMON
--- ISAIAH --- JEREMIAH --- LAMENTATIONS ---
EZEKIEL --- DANIEL --- --- HOSEA --- --- JOEL ------ AMOS --- --- OBADIAH --- --- JONAH --- --- MICAH --- --- NAHUM --- --- HABAKKUK--- --- ZEPHANIAH --- --- HAGGAI --- ZECHARIAH --- --- MALACHI --- THE GOSPEL OF MATTHEW ---THE GOSPEL OF MARK--- THE GOSPEL OF LUKE --- THE GOSPEL OF JOHN --- THE ACTS OF THE APOSTLES --- READINGS IN ROMANS --- 1
CORINTHIANS --- 2 CORINTHIANS ---GALATIANS --- EPHESIANS--- PHILIPPIANS --- COLOSSIANS --- 1 THESSALONIANS --- 2 THESSALONIANS --- 1 TIMOTHY --- 2 TIMOTHY --- TITUS --- PHILEMON --- HEBREWS
--- JAMES --- 1 & 2 PETER --- JOHN'S
LETTERS --- JUDE --- REVELATION
--- THE GOSPELS & ACTS
Numbers,numbering,Balaam,Beor,ass,
.
IS THERE SOMETHING IN THE BIBLE THAT PUZZLES YOU?
daughters,Zelophehad,Meribah,rock,
Edom,Eleazar,Arad,serpents,brazen,
Serpent,Sihon,Amorites,king,Og,
Bashan,Gilead,Midianites,manslayer,
cities,refuge,Israel,silver,trumpet,
cloud,voice,Yahweh,water,uncleanness,
purification,ashes,Levi,Gershon,
Kohath,Merari,spirit,jealousy,
blessing,princes,Israel,voice,Yahweh,
candlestick,lampstand,gold,seven,
branched,firstborn,passover,cloud,
fire,silver,trumpet,Genesis,Canaan,
Egypt,Pharaoh,Aaron,Levite,Yahweh,
God,fathers,Sinai
