This message sharply contrasts Moses\u2019 position with that of a lesser prophet (compare 11:25) to whom the LORD might speak in visions and dreams. These two terms are synonymously paralleled, as in Joel 2:28. Far more than merely one prophet or leader among many, Moses had proven faithful as the chief steward in all the LORD\u2019s house, his chosen people, to carry out his purposes for them. Moses is thus rightly viewed as the towering human figure of Old Testament history, but, even so, he stands clearly subordinate to the Lord Christ, the Son over God\u2019s house (Heb 3:2, 5). In keeping with Moses\u2019 unique position and authority in Israel, the LORD\u2019s communication with him had been face to face, more direct and immediate than the revelatory dream-visions of prophets (cf. Exod 33:11; Deut 34:10). Riddles (\u05d7\u05b4\u05d9\u05d3\u05b9\u05ea, \u1e25\u00eed\u014dth) are utterances setting forth matters indirectly so as to require explanation (cf. Ezek 17:2). He sees the form of the LORD alludes to the superlative revelation of the LORD\u2019s glory that Moses had experienced in his intercession for the people at Sinai (Exod 33:18\u201323). Asking why then were you not afraid, the LORD indicted Miriam and Aaron for their jealous and groundless complaint against such an exalted servant of God.<\/p>\n
2. Moses Intercedes for Stricken Sister (12:9\u201316)<\/p>\n
12:9\u201316 Again the refrain the anger of the LORD burned underlines the divine displeasure at human rebellion (cf. 11:10, 33; 14:11\u201312). When the LORD left them as the cloud lifted (v. 5), there stood Miriam\u2014leprous, like snow in punishment for her sin. This was in fact a milder form of \u201cleprosy\u201d (Lev 13:2, 13 and notes). Now fully recognizing Moses\u2019 authority, Aaron pled with the one whose authority he had previously challenged do not hold against us the sin we have so foolishly committed. Aaron\u2019s love for his sister made him regard her affliction as punishment also for him. Like a stubborn infant is literally, \u201clike the dead one\u201d (\u05db\u05b7\u05bc\u05de\u05b5\u05bc\u05ea, kamm\u0113th), but the gruesome picture Aaron envisioned is that of a partially decomposed stillborn infant. Compassionately Moses cried out to the LORD, interceding in prayer for Miriam\u2019s healing. To spit in one\u2019s face was a contemptuous and humiliating rebuke for some offense, which would put the offender in disgrace (cf. Deut 25:9; Isa 50:6). The text suggests that the LORD healed Miriam in response to Moses\u2019 petition, since quarantine for seven days was frequently used in cases of doubtful skin eruptions (Lev 13:4\u20136) and exclusion from one\u2019s tent for seven days was prescribed for the cleansed leper (Lev 14:8). As an act of public shame for her misdeed Miriam was confined outside the camp for the seven-day period.<\/p>\n
D. THE GREAT REBELLION AT KADESH PUNISHED (13:1\u201314:45)<\/p>\n
1. Leaders Chosen for Reconnaissance in Canaan (13:1\u201316)<\/p>\n
13:1\u201316 Requested by the people (Deut 1:22), reconnaissance in Canaan was then authorized by the LORD. The qualifications that the scouts be chosen from each tribe and recognized as leaders should have assured fair representation and mature judgment. As a special tribe excluded from the military census (ch. 1) and from land inheritance (compare 35:1\u20138), Levi was exempted also in the selection of the spies. The action of sending out the explorers took place in the Desert of Paran (10:12), more specifically at Kadesh (Deut 1:19\u201325), to which place the scouts returned to the encamped Israelites (v. 26). The chosen leaders of the Israelites were not the tribal princes (1:4\u201316) but rather simply eminent persons of distinction within their tribes. Of the men whose names are listed in verses 4\u201315, only Joshua and Caleb are ever named again in the Law; all the others sinned grievously and died (v. 31; 14:36\u201337). Manasseh, as well as Ephraim, was a tribe of Joseph, being descended from one of Joseph\u2019s sons. Apparently much earlier Moses had changed the name of his aide from Hoshea to Joshua. The former name suggests \u201csalvation,\u201d the latter, \u201cthe LORD is salvation.\u201d This name change was likely a mark of special favor (compare Gen 41:45; Dan 1:7), but in the official register of the spies the original name was deemed proper.<\/p>\n
2. Moses Commissions Intelligence Team (13:17\u201320)<\/p>\n
13:17\u201320 Meaning \u201cdry,\u201d \u201cparched,\u201d the term Negev refers to the arid region in the south of Palestine which lay immediately north of the encamped Israelites. Inhabitants of Palestine could use the term to mean \u201csouth,\u201d but the older English translation \u201csouthward\u201d here is misleading. The hill country is the central highlands region of Palestine. Planning for both conquest and settlement, Moses was interested in Canaan\u2019s military capabilities and its natural resources. Accordingly, he sought pertinent data regarding geography, population, urban centers, and agriculture. Towns included open unwalled villages and fortified walled cities. Do your best is literally \u201cput forth strength\u201d in the sense of \u201cexert yourselves\u201d (cf. Gen 48:2). In Palestine the first ripe grapes usually appear toward the end of July.<\/p>\n
3. Spies Reconnoiter Canaan (13:21\u201325)<\/p>\n
13:21\u201325 Again, as often in Hebrew narrative, a general statement, they went up and explored, is followed by selected details. The Desert of Zin lay between the wilderness of Paran and the Negev, perhaps overlapping with the former (compare 13:26 with 20:1). The northernmost limit of the scouts\u2019 activity, Rehob, or Beth-Rehob (2 Sam 10:6, 8), was near Laish-Dan (Judg 18:27\u201329). As a place name Lebo Hamath is usually identified as a site on the Orontes known now as Lebweh, about fifty miles north of Damascus. The entire phrase, toward Lebo Hamath, might also be rendered \u201cnear the entrance to Hamath.\u201d As Hamath was an important ancient city on the Orontes in Syria, the \u201centrance to Hamath\u201d would be the southern opening of the Syrian Valley between the Lebanon and Antilebanon mountain ranges. Just north of the Negev lay Hebron. This city nineteen miles southwest of Jerusalem is the highest town in Palestine. It was known to the patriarchs as Kiriath Arba (see Gen 23:2). This older name means \u201ccity of Arba,\u201d who apparently was a progenitor of the Anakim (see Josh 15:13). \u201cArba\u201d as a common noun means \u201cfour\u201d from whence some derive the meaning \u201ctetrapolis.\u201d \u201cHebron\u201d means \u201cleague\u201d or \u201cconfederacy.\u201d The descendants of Anak are identified as Nephilim in verse 33; these pre-Israelite inhabitants of Palestine were noted for their stature and strength (Deut 2:10, 21; 9:2). The name \u201cAnak\u201d means \u201cneck\u201d (cf. S of S 4:9) or \u201cnecklace\u201d (cf. Judg 8:26; Prov 1:9), perhaps the former with the sense \u201clongneck,\u201d i.e., \u201ctall.\u201d Formerly thought to be Avaris, the northern capital of the Hyksos kings, and possibly also with Raamses (Exod 1:11), Zoan, or in Greek, Tanis, was an important Egyptian delta city. The interesting parenthetical note stresses the antiquity of Hebron (Kiriath Arba), near which Israel\u2019s great patriarchs were buried (Gen 23:19; 29:31; 50:13). The Israelite place-name Valley of Eshcol means literally, \u201cwadi of the cluster\u201d (\u05e0\u05b7\u05d7\u05b7\u05dc \u05d0\u05b6\u05e9\u05b0\u05c1\u05db\u05bc\u05d5\u05b9\u05dc, na\u1e25al \u02bee\u0161k\u00f4l). This rich, fertile streambed ravine near Hebron provided a clear testimony of fruitfulness in Canaan. The huge cluster \u2026 carried \u2026 on a pole between two has become a symbol of the land\u2019s agricultural abundance. During the forty days period the men ranged far (v. 21) and gathered extensive data (vv. 27\u201329), perhaps dispersing into smaller groups in order to do so.<\/p>\n
4. Pessimistic Report Returned (13:26\u201329)<\/p>\n
13:26\u201329 Elsewhere called Kadesh Barnea, Kadesh was an extensive oasis located in the northeast Sinai peninsula where the wilderness areas of Paran and Zin overlap (compare 20:1; 33:36). Kadesh, which means \u201csacred,\u201d is probably to be identified with Ain Qudeirat, the largest of three springs (the others being Ain Qudeis and Ain Qoseimeh) some 40\u201350 miles southwest of Beersheba. The vicinity of Kadesh became central in the wanderings of the rebellious wilderness generation. The fruit of the land included pomegranates and figs along with a massive cluster of grapes (v. 23). These products demonstrated that the land indeed does flow with milk and honey. The proverbial expression for a very fertile land is frequently applied to Canaan (cf. Exod 3:8). \u201cHoney\u201d usually includes, in addition to bee-honey, \u201cgrape-honey,\u201d a thick grape syrup. While praising the productivity of Canaan, the spies were intimidated by the fact that its people were powerful and dwelt in cities that were fortified and very large. As excavations attest, numerous walled towns, some more than ten acres in size, scattered over the countryside posed formidable obstacles to invasion. Further, they had seen the descendants of Anak whose physical size was itself fearful when one considered the possibility of hand-to-hand combat (see note to v. 22). Among the tribal groups mentioned, the Israelites had previously encountered and defeated some of the nomadic Amalekites (see Exod 17:8\u201316). Inhabiting the hill country, the central highlands region, were the Hittites, Jebusites and Amorites. The Hittites developed an advanced civilization in ancient Anatolia in Asia Minor; small groups of Hittites were settled in Palestine. The Jebusites lived near Jerusalem (cf. Josh 15:8; 18:16), and the Amorites were a major people of the ancient Near East who also inhabited Canaan. Often used as a general term for all the tribal groups west of the Jordan (Gen 12:6; 50:11), Canaanites may more precisely designate a major group, which had apparently spread southward along the Mediterranean coast from Phoenicia and also had settled in the fertile Jordan Valley (cf. Gen 10:15\u201319).<\/p>\n
5. Caleb\u2019s Faithful Counsel Repudiated (13:30\u201333)<\/p>\n
13:30\u201333 As the spies reported publicly (v. 26) to Moses (v. 27), the people grew ever more fearful and restless, but Caleb silenced the people to urge immediate action. Although Joshua fully agreed with Caleb (14:7\u20138), only Caleb spoke at first, perhaps considering Joshua too close to Moses to be regarded by the people as an independent voice. Caleb affirmed we can certainly do it, but the other scouts insisted we can\u2019t attack those people. Both assertions were made by competent and informed men, whose fundamental difference lay, not in their facts, but in their faith. As the ten spies progressed from their information (vv. 27\u201329) to their recommendations (vv. 31\u201333), their report became less realistic and more faithless, and they spread among the Israelites a bad report. Rather than identifying the land as barren and thus contradicting the spies\u2019 previous testimony (vv. 26\u201327), the words the land we explored devours those living in it probably allude to Canaan as the scene of continuous and consuming conflicts. The statement that all the people we saw there are of great size was a palpably false exaggeration because not all the inhabitants of Canaan were descendants of Anak (vv. 22, 28). The descendants of Anak are said to come from the Nephilim. A line of men called Nephilim, whose might became legendary, is mentioned in Genesis 6:4 as having existed before the flood. Before these huge men the Israelites seemed like grasshoppers, the spies lamented. Forgetting the LORD\u2019s promised aid (Exod 3:8, 17; 23:23\u201333; 34:11\u201316), these men felt small indeed before the formidable powers of Canaan. When a later generation put away this \u201cgrasshopper complex\u201d by trusting the LORD, even the Anakim \u201cgiants\u201d fell in defeat (Josh 11:21\u201322).<\/p>\n
6. Hysterical Congregation Threatens Revolt (14:1\u20134)<\/p>\n
14:1\u20134 Their determination destroyed by the pessimistic report, the people gave way to despair and spent the night in bitter crying (Deut 1:28; cf. Num 11:4, 10). Significant for later developments (vv. 28\u201329) was the people\u2019s anguished lament if only we had died in Egypt! Or in this desert! Although the people in their repeated murmuring had at different times expressed both death wish and desire to return to Egypt (1:4\u20135; Exod 16:3; 17:3), their intense despair on this occasion made them seriously propose insurrection. To choose a leader would constitute open revolt against God and Moses, the leader whose uniqueness had so recently been confirmed (12:1\u201316).<\/p>\n
7. Joshua, Caleb Plead with the People (14:5\u20139)<\/p>\n
14:5\u20139 Failing to embolden the people, as Deuteronomy 1:29\u201333 informs, Moses and Aaron, agonized by the unexpected turn of events, prostrated themselves in obeisance to pour out their distress to God. Faithful to their God, Joshua and Caleb, representatives of Judah and Ephraim among the spies (13:6, 8, 16, 30), tore their clothes as public expression of their grief and sought to influence their disheartened brethren. Agreeing the land \u2026 is exceedingly good and flowing with milk and honey (cf. 13:23, 27) while admitting that its inhabitants were physically imposing, they insisted that the key to success lay not in Israel\u2019s strength but in the LORD\u2019s purpose. Urging do not rebel and do not be afraid, Joshua and Caleb spoke strongly against the proposed action (v. 4), and the motive which prompted the proposal. We will swallow them up is more literally \u201cthey are bread for us\u201d with the sense \u201cwe will easily consume them\u201d (cf. 22:4, 24:8; Ps 14:4). Their protection is literally \u201ctheir shadow.\u201d No \u201crock\u201d would protect Canaan from the fierce heat of the LORD\u2019s wrath (cf. Isa 32:2). Canaan\u2019s gods were powerless (see Deut 32:31), and the LORD, the true \u201cRock,\u201d no longer would provide shield (cf. Gen 15:16).<\/p>\n
8. God Threatens to Annihilate Israel (14:10\u201312)<\/p>\n
14:10\u201312 The fact that the whole assembly talked about stoning them documents the extent of the people\u2019s panic. At the climactic moment when the people threatened stoning, the glory of the LORD appeared to intervene in the crisis. The manifestation of the LORD\u2019s glory was associated here, as elsewhere, with the cloud (cf. Exod 16:10; 40:34; cf. Num 12:5). Despite all the miraculous signs the LORD had performed in Egypt, at the Red Sea, in the wilderness, and at Sinai, Israel yet refused to trust his promises (Deut 9:7\u20138; Ps 78:11\u201316; 106:6\u201327). As at Sinai (Exod 32:10), the LORD threatened to strike them down \u2026 and destroy them and build a nation greater and stronger from Moses. Thus, again the LORD tested Moses\u2019 love for his people by threatening to annihilate sinful Israel; once again, as before, Moses \u201cstood in the breach\u201d (Ps 106:23) to intercede.<\/p>\n
9. Moses Again Intercedes for His People (14:13\u201319)<\/p>\n
14:13\u201316 Moses based his appeal for Israel, not on Israel\u2019s merit, but on the honor of the LORD\u2019s name among the surrounding nations (vv. 13\u201316) and especially on the powerful love God had revealed (vv. 17\u201319). While the thought is quite clear, the text of Moses\u2019 speech seems at times somewhat awkward, perhaps indicating his intense emotion. The Egyptians, whom the LORD had earlier forced to recognize the greatness of his name through the plagues (Exod 5:2; 7:5; 8:19; 9:27\u201328), would by Israel\u2019s destruction be given opportunity to discredit the divine name among the inhabitants of this land, the Canaanites (cf. Exod 32:12). Face to face is literally \u201ceye to eye,\u201d(Isa 52:8) i.e., \u201cplainly and clearly\u201d (cf. 12:8; Exod 33:11). The Canaanites had heard about the LORD\u2019s direct presence in Israel\u2019s midst, that his cloud stays over them and that he goes before them in a pillar of cloud by day and a pillar of fire by night (cf. 9:15\u201323; Exod 13:21\u201322). Literally \u201cas one man,\u201d the phrase idiomatically rendered all at one time means \u201ctotally\u201d (perhaps also \u201csuddenly\u201d), as in Judges 6:16. If the LORD thus destroyed Israel the nations might be given basis to claim the LORD was not able to grant Israel the land he promised them on oath, i.e., to the patriarchs (Gen 22:16; 26:3).
\n14:17\u201319 After his intercession at Sinai, Moses had experienced a marvelous revelation of the divine character as compassionate and merciful (Exod 34:6\u20137). In the power of divine love therein proclaimed, Moses grounded his plea for Israel\u2019s pardon. The LORD is slow to anger, allowing sinful men time to repent (cf. 2 Pet 3:9). The LORD is abounding in love. His love is totally trustworthy; he will keep his promises (Ps 136). The gracious LORD is willing to forgive sin and rebellion, all kinds of wrongdoing, if men sincerely repent and properly seek forgiveness. Yet he does not leave the guilty unpunished. The LORD will forgive sins, but he will not license them; the LORD is gracious but also just. The LORD punishes the children for the sin of their fathers, literally \u201cvisits the sins of the fathers upon the children.\u201d The effects of iniquity and its retribution may extend to several generations, and thus the \u201cchildren\u201d share in the retribution for their \u201cfathers\u2019 \u201d sins. When Israel later sought to misuse this truth to deny the basic responsibility of the individual and the justice of God, Ezekiel the prophet strongly affirmed individual responsibility (Ezek 18:2, 20; Deut 24:16). While punishment may extend to the third and fourth generation, God\u2019s steadfast love extends to thousands (Exod 20:6), even to a thousand generations (Deut 7:9). In accordance with your great love, forgive the sin of these people, Moses concluded.<\/p>\n
10. God Pardons, but Reveals Consequences (14:20\u201325)<\/p>\n
14:20\u201325 Moses\u2019 intercession was heard; the nation would be forgiven, not destroyed. Still, the iniquity of rebellion required punishment. As he had confirmed his promise to Abraham with an oath (Gen 22:16\u201318), so also here the LORD, swearing by his eternal reality (as I live) and by the sureness of his purpose for man (as the glory \u2026 fills the whole earth), confirmed his just sentence that the rebellious generation would not inherit Canaan. The terms glory and signs seem to be parallel to convey one idea (Ps 96:3 and see note to v. 11). Like our \u201ca dozen times\u201d the definite number ten times is used idiomatically to mean \u201crepeatedly,\u201d as in Genesis 31:7. Recognized for his fidelity to the LORD (vv. 6\u20139; 13:30), Caleb was permitted to enter Canaan and was granted Hebron, where the dreaded Anakim were seen, as a special inheritance (cf. Deut 1:36; Josh 14:6\u201315). For Joshua even greater things were planned (27:18\u201323; Deut 1:38). Truly Caleb had a different spirit from the majority, a spirit of courage and obedient trust. In light of Joshua 14:12, the land he went to probably alludes to Hebron (cf. 13:22). As noted earlier, the spies may have dispersed in order to cover the whole land. Because the Amalekites and Canaanites are living in the valleys, the Hebrews, prohibited from entering Canaan from the south, must now turn back and take a different route toward the desert, in the wilderness. The term Canaanites is used here in its broader sense; 13:29 informs that the Amalekites inhabited the Negev just north of the encamped Israelites. The term \u201cvalley\u201d (\u05e2\u05b5\u05de\u05b6\u05e7, \u02bf\u0113meq) means \u201cdeepening\u201d and is used here, as often, to denote a vale in hilly terrain (cf. v. 45). The Hebrew term is singular in the passage, so the text may speak of a definite vale just ahead of the encamped Israelites, perhaps the Wadi Murreh. The expression Red Sea renders Hebrew \u05d9\u05b7\u05dd \u05e1\u05d5\u05bc\u05e4 (yam s\u00fbph), which literally means \u201cSea of Reeds.\u201d The text here refers to the Gulf of Aqabah, an extension of the Red Sea (1 Kgs 9:26; Exod 13:18).<\/p>\n
11. Divine Decree Announced to Israel (14:26\u201335)<\/p>\n
14:26\u201335 How long will this wicked community grumble against me? This question previously addressed to Moses (v. 11) was now put to both Moses and Aaron. The public proclamation of the LORD\u2019s decree, naturally highly repetitive of the statement to Moses (vv. 20\u201325), focuses upon the fate of the rebellious generation. Again swearing by his own eternal nature (cf. v. 21), the LORD decreed that the people\u2019s prayer would be their punishment. Fearing for themselves and their families, they had wished for death in the wilderness (vv. 2\u20133); ironically, as punishment, their wish was granted, and in this desert their bodies, literally \u201ccarcasses,\u201d would fall. This punishment involved all the men twenty years old or more, i.e., of mature age, morally responsible and militarily fit (cf. 1:3; Lev 27:3; Deut 2:14). All who were counted in the census would be the military census total (ch. 1), which exempted the Levites. Only the faithful Caleb and Joshua among the scouts would be spared. The people\u2019s children whom they had feared would be taken as plunder would eventually enjoy the land the faithless generation had rejected. First, however, the children must live as shepherds, i.e., wandering nomads, for forty years, suffering for your unfaithfulness. The forty years allows one year for each day the spies had explored the land. Their entrance into Canaan delayed, the next generation would thus suffer the consequences of their fathers\u2019 apostasy.<\/p>\n
12. Faithless Spies Die by Plague (14:36\u201338)<\/p>\n
14:36\u201338 The instigators of the wholesale disaffection and rebellion, the ten men responsible for spreading the bad report about the land, deserved and received special punishment from the LORD, in that they were struck down and died of a plague. From a root meaning \u201cto strike,\u201d the noun for \u201cplague\u201d (\u05de\u05b7\u05d2\u05b5\u05bc\u05e4\u05b8\u05d4, magg\u0113ph\u0101h) is often used for a sudden death inflicted by the LORD (cf. 16:48\u201350.) Among the scouts only Joshua and Caleb survived the plague, and these two exemplary servants of the LORD were in fact amply rewarded later, as noted at verse 24.<\/p>\n
13. Abortive Southern Invasion Repelled (14:39\u201345)<\/p>\n
14:39\u201345 Additional details concerning the present episode are found in Moses\u2019 reflections on Israel\u2019s wilderness experience in Deuteronomy 1:41\u201345. Mourning and penitent, the people tragically sought to recapture their lost opportunity for obedience, saying we will go up to the place the LORD promised. Strangely and pathetically they now proposed to do alone what they had been afraid to do with the LORD\u2019s aid. Why are you disobeying the LORD\u2019s command? Moses asked and strongly warned the people this will not succeed. God had solemnly decreed they should remain in the wilderness (vv. 21\u201323, 28\u201335) and had specifically commanded them to change course (v. 25; Deut 1:42\u201343). Their fierce enemies, the Amalekites and Canaanites, remained before them (see notes to v. 25). Without the LORD\u2019s help the people would certainly fall by the sword. The phrase in their presumption renders a Hebrew verb (\u05e2\u05b8\u05e4\u05b7\u05dc, \u02bf\u0101phal) which is rather obscure and could perhaps mean \u201cthey acted rashly\u201d or \u201cthey were defiant.\u201d Significantly, neither Moses nor the ark of the LORD\u2019s covenant, which symbolized the LORD\u2019s presence (see 10:35 and notes), accompanied the rebels. As Moses predicted, the Israelites were routed by their foes who beat them down, i.e., pursued them all the way to Hormah. Deuteronomy 1:44 likens the pursuit to that of bees. The name \u201cHormah\u201d was assigned the site later (21:3); the exact location in the Negev is uncertain. Forced by this crushing defeat to submit to the LORD\u2019s decree, the rebellious generation which had left Sinai with such high hopes saw their future dissolve into a weary existence far removed from the promised inheritance. Their unbelief, their disobedience, and their punishment stand today as a signal warning to Christians promised a far greater, heavenly inheritance, as Hebrews 3:7\u20134:7 proclaims.<\/p>\n
II. From Kadesh to Moab (15:1\u201321:35)<\/p>\n
Combining legislative matters and historical episodes, these chapters briefly sketch the wilderness experience of the \u201clost generation\u201d and trace the eventful journey to the plains of Moab at the close of the period of wandering. Following treatment of miscellaneous laws (ch. 15) the text focuses upon the complex and serious rebellion of Korah (ch. 16) and its aftermath, including the divine demonstration of Aaron\u2019s priestly authority (ch. 17) and regulations governing sanctuary access and priestly dues (ch. 18). The constant presence of death in the wilderness experience, so vividly illustrated by the plague upon Korah\u2019s sympathizers is recalled by treatment of the special ritual provision for cleansing from the taint of contact with a corpse (cf. 19). Thus while the treatment of the career of the people of the rebellious generation is quite short, their dreary story is deftly portrayed by characteristic incidents. The closing chapters of this movement of Numbers document final events at Kadesh, such as Miriam\u2019s death and Moses\u2019 sin (ch. 20), relate the circuitous march from Kadesh to Moab, and tell of the signal victories over Sihon and Og which imbued Israel anew with confidence for eventual success in Canaan itself.<\/p>\n
A. ADDITIONAL LAWS GIVEN (15:1\u201341)<\/p>\n
Grouped in this chapter are five ceremonial and legal concerns: (1) accompaniments for offerings, (2) the coarse meal offering, (3) sin offerings, (4) the penalty for violation of the Sabbath, and (5) commemorative tassels. Envisioning Israel\u2019s eventual occupancy of Canaan (vv. 2, 18, 29), these supplementary laws addressed to the people (vv. 2, 18, 38) call attention away from the wilderness distress caused by their rebellion at Kadesh and focus instead upon the LORD\u2019s sure purpose and his revealed will.<\/p>\n
1. Amounts Given for Sacrificial Accompaniments (15:1\u201316)<\/p>\n
15:1\u201312 Like numerous others this law anticipates entrance into Canaan where grain, wine, and oil would abound (Deut 7:13; cf. Lev 23:10 and notes). Subtly but appropriately, the text renews emphasis upon Israel\u2019s eventual success. The sacrifices listed here are all detailed elsewhere as noted. Offerings made by fire involve any offerings of which part or all was consumed by the altar fire (cf. Lev 1:9; 2:2, 11, 16). Such offerings provided, anthropomorphically speaking, an aroma pleasing to the LORD in that the sincere sacrifices of his obedient people received the LORD\u2019s approval. In burnt offerings the entire animal was consumed by fire on the altar (see note to Lev 1:3). The sacrifices involved for special vows or freewill offerings were two types of \u201cfellowship offerings,\u201d a third being an offering for thanksgiving (cf. note to Lev 7:12). Festival offerings are those made at the great appointed feasts as described in Leviticus chapter 23. On the requisite sacrifices see also Numbers chapters 28\u201329. Procedures for a grain offering are discussed at length in Leviticus chapter 2. Here suitable amounts for grain offerings, olive oil and wine libations to accompany various sacrifices are regulated. The quantities vary in proportion to the differing sizes of a lamb (vv. 4\u20135), ram (vv. 6\u20137), or bullock (vv. 8\u201310). The term translated tenth of an ephah (\u05e2\u05b4\u05e9\u05b8\u05bc\u05c2\u05e8\u05d5\u05b9\u05df, \u02bfi\u015b\u015b\u0101r\u00f4n) is literally only \u201ctenth,\u201d but this is the measure intended (cf. 28:5; Exod 29:40). Use of the technical phrases \u201caroma pleasing\u201d (vv. 7, 10) and \u201coffering made by fire\u201d (v. 10) in connection with the drink offering ritual may suggest that such libations were poured out over the animal sacrifice upon the altar. Intertestamental sources, however, depict the libations as being poured out at the foot of the altar, and the above technical phrases may in each case be understood as referring to the whole sacrifice rather than to the libation specifically. The sacrifice for a special vow was itself a fellowship offering so that the mention of the fellowship offering in verse 8 alludes to the other types (see note to v. 3). The prescribed grain, oil, and wine were to accompany each animal offered (v. 12).
\n15:13\u201316 Treatment of the sacrificial accompaniments closes with emphasis upon the fact that this law was the same both for the native-born, Israelites by birth, and for the alien resident in Israel\u2019s midst who chose to serve the LORD as a proselyte (cf. Exod 12:19, 49). Using the terms rules \u2026 laws and regulations somewhat interchangeably, the text stresses the equality of the resident alien who through circumcision (Exod 12:48) became a member of the worshiping assembly, the congregation of Israel (cf. Lev 16:29; 17:8; 18:26; 20:2; 24:16\u201322). The law made provision for non-Israelites by birth to become part of the chosen covenant family through the same means as native Israelites, namely circumcision. Further, those who chose to do so were assured the same rights and privileges as native Israelites, and this position of equality was to be assured as a lasting ordinance for the generations to come.<\/p>\n
2. Ground Meal Offering Stipulated (15:17\u201321)<\/p>\n
15:17\u201321 Again, as in verse 2, anticipating Israel\u2019s possession of the land, the text calls for a special offering or contribution (\u05ea\u05b0\u05bc\u05e8\u05d5\u05bc\u05de\u05b8\u05d4, t\u0259r\u00fbm\u0101h). Because the Hebrew term for ground meal (\u05e2\u05b2\u05e8\u05b4\u05d9\u05e1\u05b8\u05d4, \u02bf\u0103r\u00ees\u0101h) is obscure, occurring only here and in Nehemiah 10:37 and Ezekiel 44:30, the translations differ, other versions proposing \u201cdough,\u201d (compare LXX) \u201ckneading of dough,\u201d \u201cyield of baking,\u201d etc. The term perhaps refers to the first batch of barley paste or dough from each new crop. On the other hand, later Jewish tradition, which devotes the Mishnah tractate Challah to this law, included all five grains of Palestine (wheat, barley, spelt, oats, and rye) and required a priestly portion be taken from each batch of dough used for baking. Seemingly from a root meaning \u201cpierce,\u201d the Hebrew word for cake (\u05d7\u05b7\u05dc\u05b8\u05bc\u05d4, \u1e25all\u0101h) occurs elsewhere for (perforated) cakes used in offerings (e.g., Exod 29:2; Lev 2:4). As an offering from the threshing floor is perhaps better rendered \u201clike the offering from the threshing floor,\u201d i.e., like first fruits of grain (Exod 22:9; 23:19; cf. Lev 2:14; 23:16; Num 18:12, 27). Throughout the generations Israel should continually recognize the LORD as the Giver of her bread, barley bread being probably the most common type (cf. Lev 23:9\u201314 and notes).<\/p>\n
3. Sin Offerings Considered Again (15:22\u201331)<\/p>\n
See the basic legislation in Leviticus 4:1\u20135:13 which the present passage supplements. The text depicts a situation calling for a congregational sin offering (vv. 22\u201326) and repeats the sin offering law for an individual (vv. 27\u201331).
\n15:22\u201326 This paragraph deals with inadvertent congregational sins of omission; Leviticus 4:13\u201321 requires only a bullock for a sin offering for similar congregational sins of commission. The category of unintentional wrongdoing involved not only sins of ignorance, but also more generally sins of carelessness, oversight, or other human weakness (cf. Lev 4:2). Such error is contrasted in verses 27\u201331 with sinning \u201cdefiantly,\u201d literally \u201cwith a high hand.\u201d Inadvertent congregational sins of omission required both a young bull for a burnt offering with its appropriate grain offering and drink offering (cf. v. 8\u201310) and a male goat for a sin offering. Doubtless the sin offering was offered before the burnt offering, as on the Day of Atonement (Lev 16:15, 24). The ritual for this offering would approximate that of Leviticus 4:14\u201321. Again, an offering made by fire designates any offering of which part or all was consumed on the altar, as in Leviticus 1:9.
\n15:27\u201331 Unlike the congregational offering just treated, this case is not limited to sins of omission. The text simply repeats the basic requirement for the most common type of sin offering. The ritual for offering the female goat in this circumstance is set forth in Leviticus 4:27\u201335 which also states that a female lamb could be used. Furthermore, lesser offerings were permitted the poor (Lev 5:7\u201313). Again the text stresses that the same law in this regard must apply equally to a native-born Israelite or a proselyte resident alien (cf. vv. 14\u201316).
\nIn contrast to inadvertent sins, willful defiant rebellion against God, literally, sinning \u201cwith a high hand\u201d (\u05d1\u05b0\u05bc\u05d9\u05b8\u05d3 \u05e8\u05b8\u05de\u05b8\u05d4, b\u0259y\u0101d r\u0101m\u0101h), blasphemes the LORD. For such the law makes no sacrificial provisions. Such an offender must be cut off from his people, i.e., likely, excommunicated (see note to Lev 7:21 and cf. Gen 17:14). The reason for this severe punishment is given in verse 31 which details that such a sinner has despised the LORD\u2019s word and broken his commands so that his guilt remains.<\/p>\n
4. A Sabbath Breaker Stoned (15:32\u201336)<\/p>\n
15:32\u201336 Gathering wood on the Sabbath day violated the Sabbath law of Exodus 20:8\u201311. The offender thus was openly defying one of the basic prohibitions of the LORD\u2019s covenant with Israel (cf. v. 30). Although the death penalty had been set for Sabbath violation (Exod 31:14; 35:2), the mode of execution had not been revealed, so that leaders kept him in custody to await clarification. Execution by stoning outside the camp was the decree and this was promptly carried out. A similar case is recorded in Leviticus 24:10\u201313.<\/p>\n
5. Commemorative Tassels Ordained (15:37\u201341)<\/p>\n
15:37\u201341 The Hebrew word rendered tassels (\u05e6\u05b4\u05d9\u05e6\u05b4\u05ea, \u1e63\u00ee\u1e63ith) may connote something twisted or plaited, in agreement with the parallel text, Deuteronomy 22:12, which uses a different term (\u05d2\u05b0\u05d3\u05b4\u05dc\u05b4\u05d9\u05dd, g\u0259dil\u00eem) which means \u201ctwisted threads.\u201d Accordingly, \u201ctassels\u201d seems better than \u201cfringes.\u201d Each tassel was attached to one of the four corners of a rectangular outer garment or cloak by a blue cord. On \u201cblue\u201d see notes to 4:7 and compare Exodus 25:4. Yarns and fabrics dyed purple-blue with dyes obtained from the secretions of certain mollusks were highly prized in antiquity. The tassel served as a commemorative ornament to help the people remember all the commands of the LORD. Seeking human recognition of their piety, some Pharisees in Jesus\u2019 day ostentatiously wore very long tassels (Matt 23:5). On occasion people sought to touch Jesus\u2019 tassel in order to be healed (Matt 9:20; 14:36). With this simple but constant reminder of one\u2019s covenant allegiance to God the people would be more likely to remember to obey all my commands and thus be consecrated to your God. Obedience is a mark of holiness. With the words I am the LORD \u2026 the passage closes with renewed emphasis upon the LORD as Israel\u2019s unique Deliverer (cf. Lev 11:44\u201345; see note to 10:10).<\/p>\n
B. REBELLION OF KORAH PUNISHED (16:1\u201317:13)<\/p>\n
1. Korah Revolts, Moses Responds (16:1\u201311)<\/p>\n
Korah Leads Rebellious Coalition (16:1\u20133).<\/p>\n
16:1\u20133 Espousing different causes, but united in their common opposition to Moses and Aaron, Korah \u2026 Dathan and Abiram (cf. Deut 11:6; Ps 106:17) put together a broadly based coalition of dissatisfied elements in Israel to challenge seriously the divinely appointed civil and religious establishment. The leading conspirator, the Kohathite Levite Korah, apparently aimed to replace Aaron as high priest, whereas the Reubenites Dathan and Abiram, evidently intended to displace Moses as leader of Israel, perhaps claiming firstborn status for their ancestral father (Gen 29:32; 49:3\u20134). Not mentioned elsewhere, On son of Peleth may have withdrawn early from the conspiracy. Some expositors assume a copying flaw here and read instead \u201cthe son of Pallu,\u201d in reference to Eliab and in agreement with 26:5, 8. The conspirators attracted a large following of well-known community leaders. Although wilderness conditions and the hopeless plight of the rebellious generation (14:28\u201335) would seem to have offered fertile soil for seditious intrigue, it is nevertheless impressive that the three conspirators amassed such a numerous and distinguished group of supporters. That these 250 Israelite men, while largely Levite (v. 7), included men from all the other tribes seems indirectly suggested by 27:3. This representative following ensured for Korah a sympathetic hearing before the whole congregation. Claiming the whole community is holy and the LORD is with them, Korah challenged Moses\u2019 leadership. To be sure, Israel was called to holiness (15:40; Exod 19:6; Lev 11:44), and the LORD had condescended to dwell in Israel\u2019s midst (Exod 29:45). Stressing these prerogatives and completely overlooking the call to obedience (Exod 19:5) and the LORD\u2019s authorization of Moses and Aaron, Korah sought to discredit them publicly as tyrants domineering over a holy people, the LORD\u2019s assembly. If successful, this indictment would have driven a wedge between the people and their appointed leaders.<\/p>\n
Moses Proposes Priesthood Test (16:4\u20137)<\/p>\n
16:4\u20137 Hearing Korah\u2019s effrontery the humble Moses (cf. 12:3) first fell facedown, i.e., prostrated himself before the LORD in prayer (cf. v. 22). Then, saying the LORD will show who belongs to him and who is holy, Moses quite decisively set forth a plan to identify the divinely consecrated priesthood while discrediting all counterfeit claimants. In this way the religious thrust of the coalition, Korah\u2019s Levitic challenge to Aaron\u2019s priesthood, would be blunted. Moses proposed that Korah and all his many followers take censers, the bronze pans in which the fire of live coals was carried and incense burned (Lev 10:1; 16:12), and attempt to offer incense before the LORD, i.e., before the sanctuary entrance. Echoing the very words of the rebels\u2019 charge, Moses then declared you Levites have gone too far. Not Moses but the rebels had overstepped themselves. Recalling the example of Nadab and Abihu (Lev 10:1\u20133), Korah and his company should have withdrawn their challenge.<\/p>\n
Moses Seeks to Reason with Korah (16:8\u201311)<\/p>\n
16:8\u201311 Reminding the rebels that the Levites were distinctively separated for special service for tabernacle and community, Moses asked, implicitly, why they should be trying to get the priesthood too. The role of important spiritual service assigned the Levites should have satisfied their aspirations for leadership. Korah\u2019s Levitic rebellion was not against Aaron but against the LORD who had consecrated Aaron (Exod 28:41).<\/p>\n
2. Dathan, Abiram Refuse Summons (16:12\u201314)<\/p>\n
16:12\u201314 The abrupt negative response of Dathan and Abiram to Moses\u2019 summons clearly reveals that they intended no less than the complete overthrow of Moses\u2019 leadership. The longer Israel remained in the wilderness, the better Egypt appeared, so that the rebels could apply to Egypt the epithet descriptive of Canaan\u2019s fertility, a land flowing with milk and honey (13:27; Exod 3:8). In actuality Egypt had been Israel\u2019s \u201chouse of bondage\u201d (Exod 20:1). Accusing Moses of seeking to kill us in the desert, Dathan and Abiram, like Korah (v. 3), depicted Moses as a self-appointed tyrant who wanted to lord it over the people of Israel. Ignoring the historical facts, the rebels further argued that Moses was an abject failure who had not given us an inheritance in the promised land. Disobedient runaway slaves were sometimes punished by the gouging out of their eyes (2 Kgs 25:7). Apparently, the rebels used this language as harsh imagery charging Moses with seeking to blind the people to his failure by holding before them illusory promises.<\/p>\n
3. Censer-Bearing Company Appears Before Tent (16:15\u201321)<\/p>\n
16:15\u201321 Before God an angry Moses defended himself against the charge of tyranny by denying he had ever abused his position by taking bribes (even so much as a donkey) or mistreating anyone for personal gain (cf. 1 Sam 12:3). Then Moses called upon Korah and his entire rebellious company to appear before the LORD tomorrow so that the test proposed in verses 6\u20137 could be carried out. The next day, at the Tent of Meeting, the tabernacle (1:1), the entire congregation, seemingly identifying with the rebels, assembled for the confrontation. At this critical point, as in 14:10, dramatically the glory of the LORD appeared. Once again Israel was opposing the divine will (cf. 14:12; Exod 32:10), and the LORD threatened her destruction, calling upon his faithful servants to separate yourselves.<\/p>\n
4. Moses, Aaron Intercede for Threatened People (16:22\u201324)<\/p>\n
16:22\u201324 Interceding, Moses and Aaron, the just-maligned leaders, fell face down in prayer (cf. v. 4; 14:5) to plead for the people by identifying only one man (Korah) as the instigator of the entire uprising. Addressing the LORD as creator and sustainer of life with the phrase God of the spirits of all mankind (literally, \u201call flesh\u201d), Moses and Aaron implicitly appealed to the LORD\u2019s nature as an argument for mercy and against unnecessary taking of life. Then the LORD instructed Moses to have the people move away from their tents (literally, singular, \u201cdwelling\u201d) of Korah, Dathan and Abiram. Although in Scripture the singular form of the word rendered \u201ctents\u201d (\u05de\u05b4\u05e9\u05b0\u05c1\u05db\u05b7\u05bc\u05df, mi\u0161kan) ordinarily refers to the tabernacle, the term can apply to any dwelling place, as usage of the plural shows (e.g., 24:5; Ps 78:28). The tents of the three conspirators were all in the southern area of the camp.<\/p>\n
5. Moses Predicts the Rebels\u2019 Fate (16:25\u201330)<\/p>\n
16:25\u201330 As Moses obediently warned the assembly to move away from the conspirators\u2019 tents, Dathan and Abiram \u2026 were standing, defiantly witnessing the dispersal of the people. Saying this is how you will know, Moses again proposed a test, this time of his own divine commission (cf. vv. 5\u20137, 16\u201317). Moses\u2019 authority would be vindicated by the rebels\u2019 dying, not a natural death, but one by catastrophic judgment. If the LORD brings about something totally new, is literally, \u201cif the LORD creates a creation.\u201d The phrase the earth opens its mouth and swallows pictures the ground as a devouring beast; this language suggests but does not necessarily denote an earthquake. The Hebrew word translated the grave (\u05e9\u05b0\u05c1\u05d0\u05d5\u05b9\u05dc, \u0161\u0259\u02be\u00f4l) signifies the place of the dead (cf. Gen 37:35).<\/p>\n
6. Predicted Earthquake and Fire Destroys Rebels (16:31\u201335)<\/p>\n
16:31\u201335 Immediately after Moses\u2019 proposal the ground under them split apart and \u2026 swallowed Korah\u2019s rebellious company. All Korah\u2019s men must have been Korah\u2019s slaves, since 26:11 specifies that Korah\u2019s sons did not die. That Korah himself perished in his revolt is certain; exactly how he died is not clear. He is naturally grouped with his coconspirators in the general conflagration (26:9\u201311). On the other hand, Dathan and Abiram are mentioned separately as dying by earthquake (Deut 11:6; Ps 106:16\u201318), and one would expect Korah to have accompanied his 250 followers who died by fire. Interestingly, Korah\u2019s descendants include numerous outstanding Israelites (1 Chr 6:33\u201338). The 250 men, the unauthorized ministers, seeking to offer incense, suffered the same fate as Nadab and Abihu (cf. Lev 10:1\u20133 and notes).<\/p>\n
7. Censers of Rebels Consecrated as Memorial (16:36\u201340)<\/p>\n
16:36\u201340 Responsible for the care of the sanctuary, Eleazar was instructed to take the rebels\u2019 censers out of the smoldering remains, to scatter the coals, and to treat the censers as holy. Offered to the LORD in sanctuary service, even though improperly, the censers had become holy and accordingly unfit for profane use (cf. Exod 29:37; 30:29). Hammered into sheets, the censers would provide an additional overlay (cf. Exod 38:17, 19; Isa 30:22) for the altar like the original bronze plating put upon it (Exod 27:2). Their additional plating would become a memorial sign to the Israelites. As verse 40 explains, the memorial plating was to serve future Israelite generations as a warning against usurping priestly prerogatives. The Hebrew word for bronze (\u05e0\u05b0\u05d7\u05b9\u05e9\u05b6\u05c1\u05ea, n\u0259\u1e25\u014d\u0161eth) may signify either copper or bronze, an alloy of copper and tin. The copper-zinc alloy now called \u201cbrass\u201d was unknown in ancient times. The bronze overlay served to remind the Israelites that any unauthorized person seeking to burn incense at the sanctuary would become like Korah (cf. 3:10; 2 Chr 26:16\u201321). In the New Testament Jude warns Christians that licentious heretics who arrogantly disregard apostolic authority will \u201cperish in Korah\u2019s rebellion\u201d (Jude 11).<\/p>\n
8. Plague on Recalcitrant People Halted Through Aaron\u2019s Intercession (16:41\u201350)<\/p>\n
16:41\u201345 The public reaction to the LORD\u2019s judgment on Korah and his followers was overwhelmingly negative, as the whole Israelite community grumbled against Moses and Aaron (cf. 11:1, 4; 14:2). Saying you have killed the LORD\u2019s people, the people charged Moses and Aaron with setting in force the events leading to the deaths of Korah\u2019s followers. In the Hebrew the pronoun \u201cyou\u201d is emphatic. Further, the phrase \u201cthe LORD\u2019s people\u201d recalls that the rebels had been persons of distinction in the congregation (v. 2). At this critical juncture, when the assembly gathered in opposition at the tabernacle, the Tent of Meeting, the glory of the LORD appeared. Whenever Israel was encamped, the cloud rested upon the tabernacle (9:16\u201318); on certain occasions, as here, a special manifestation of the LORD\u2019s glory appeared, perhaps involving a brilliant radiance and a more immediate \u201ccovering\u201d of the tabernacle by the cloud (cf. 11:25; 12:5; 14:10 and notes). The LORD warned Moses and Aaron to separate themselves from the congregation so I can put an end to them at once. Having demonstrated their extreme perversity by attacking God\u2019s servants and thus in effect defending the rebels so recently destroyed by divine fiat, the people fully deserved the wrath impending. Again, as in verse 22, Moses and Aaron, the very objects of the people\u2019s attack, fell face down, i.e., prostrated themselves in intercessory prayer (cf. v. 4; 14:5).
\n16:46\u201350 Quickly Moses instructed Aaron to offer incense and seek to make atonement (see note to Lev 1:4) for the people to avert the plague then beginning among the people. The censer which had been an instrument of death for the unauthorized (vv. 6, 18, 35) was to be a means of atonement in the hands of the LORD\u2019s anointed high priest (cf. Lev 16:12). The word translated plague (\u05e0\u05b6\u05d2\u05b6\u05e3, negeph) is akin linguistically to the one similarly rendered in 14:37 (see note and cf. 8:19). These terms may be applied to a pestilence but they do not necessarily denote such. Out of deep love for his people Aaron, as priestly mediator, stood virtually between the living and the dead for the community before the LORD and thus averted further destruction. Aaron\u2019s risking the prohibited defilement by dead bodies (Lev 21:11) and his taking incense out of the tabernacle suggest that Moses in his prayer (v. 45) received from the LORD his instruction to Aaron. Certainly Aaron\u2019s successful mediation confirmed his divine appointment which Korah had challenged, but the people required confirmation (17:5).<\/p>\n
9. Demonstration of Priestly Authority Planned (17:1\u201311)<\/p>\n
17:1\u20137 A staff, or walking stick, was a personal item commonly carried by Israelite men (e.g., Gen 38:18; 1 Sam 14:43). The staff of a leader signified his authority (Gen 49:10; cf. Exod 7:9; 8:5, 16). Moses was to take one staff from the head or leader of each ancestral tribe, literally \u201ceach father\u2019s house\u201d (see note to 1:2). The usage of \u201cfather\u2019s house\u201d (\u05d1\u05b5\u05bc\u05d9\u05ea \u05d0\u05b8\u05d1, b\u00eath \u02be\u0101b) to designate the larger patriarchal family, the tribe, is unusual. More commonly words meaning \u201crod\u201d are used by metonymy, like our \u201ccrown,\u201d to mean \u201ctribe,\u201d but such usage would have been confusing in the present context. The tribal leaders are listed in 1:5\u201316. Moses was to deposit the twelve staffs in front of the Testimony, i.e., the ten commandments contained in the ark of the covenant in the sanctuary. This Tent of Meeting, where the LORD met with his people (cf. Exod 25:22), can thus also be called \u201cthe Tent of the Testimony\u201d (v. 7; cf. 9:15; see note to 1:50). Likely the twelve tribes as listed in 1:20\u201343 were thus represented, Aaron\u2019s rod making thirteen. It is also possible the total was twelve, the Joseph tribes being considered as one, as in Deuteronomy 27:12. The LORD promised that the staff belonging to the man I choose will sprout. The miraculous sprouting of a dry rod was to identify positively the LORD\u2019s priestly tribe just as the previous day\u2019s events had confirmed Aaron\u2019s position negatively by the fiery repudiation of false claimants (16:6\u20138, 16\u201318, 35) and by the plague stayed only through Aaron\u2019s successful intercession. The reference to the Israelites\u2019 constant grumbling reveals that despite the evidence of the rebels\u2019 catastrophic end and the terrible plague, the people yet wickedly remained in the aftermath of the rebellion sullenly resistant to Moses and Aaron. Obediently, Moses placed the staffs before the LORD.
\n17:8\u201311 Entering the sanctuary the next day Moses saw that Aaron\u2019s staff had not only sprouted but had budded, blossomed and produced almonds. As predicted (v. 5), God by creative miracle had caused a dead stick to blossom into full mature growth. When Moses brought out all the staffs and each man took his own staff, the leaders clearly identified the chosen rod as Aaron\u2019s. The LORD then instructed Moses to return Aaron\u2019s staff in front of the Testimony for a memorial sign to the rebellious (cf. 16:38). Along with a memorial jar of manna (Exod 16:32\u201334), Aaron\u2019s rod was evidently first placed in front of the ark, and later put inside the ark with the stone tablets of the covenant (Heb 9:4). In Solomon\u2019s day, however, only the tablets remained in the ark (1 Kgs 8:9).<\/p>\n
10. People Frightened by Events (17:12\u201313)<\/p>\n
17:12\u201313 The verbs we will die and we are lost are Hebrew perfects, here expressing certainty. Though voiced in panic and probably with considerable self-pity, the statement anyone who even comes near the tabernacle of the LORD will die represents a confession, however reluctant, that sanctuary service was limited to the LORD\u2019s appointed ministers, the Levites, and especially the Aaronic priests (1:51). The alarmed question are we all going to die? forms an appropriate introduction to the following chapter which regulates sanctuary access by defining rights and duties of priests and Levites.<\/p>\n
C. DUTIES, DUES OF PRIESTS AND LEVITES REGULATED (18:1\u201332)<\/p>\n
1. Sanctuary Duties of Priests, Levites Reemphasized (18:1\u20137)<\/p>\n
18:1\u20134 On occasion specifically priestly concerns were revealed directly to Aaron (cf. vv. 8, 20; Lev 10:8\u201311). Aaron\u2019s father\u2019s family was the tribe of Levi (cf. 17:2). Aaron\u2019s family and his tribe were to bear the responsibility (literally, \u201cbear the iniquity\u201d) for the consequences of any Israelite\u2019s unlawfully approaching the sanctuary or improperly touching its holy objects; Aaron\u2019s family was also to be held responsible for the consequences of Israelite or Levite transgression through infringement upon priestly prerogatives (cf. Exod 28:38). Interestingly, the expression \u201cbear the iniquity\u201d elsewhere means \u201cto forgive iniquity.\u201d The Hebrew verb for join is \u05dc\u05b8\u05d5\u05b8\u05d4 (l\u0101w\u0101h), suggesting a possible wordplay on the name Levi, as in Genesis 29:34. As enjoined in 3:5\u201310, the Levites were to assist the priests in their ministry before the Tent of the Testimony (cf. 17:4, 7; see note to 1:50). The statement both they and you will die warns that not only the Levites (4:15) but also the priests themselves would be imperiled by the Levites\u2019 illegally performing service restricted to priests. Levite duties in regard to all the work at the Tent are listed in chapters 3\u20134. No one else, literally, \u201cstranger\u201d (\u05d6\u05b8\u05e8, z\u0101r), i.e., no non-Levite, was to come near (see note to 1:51).
\n18:5\u20137 Such judgments of divine wrath as the terrible plague following the destruction of Korah\u2019s company (16:41\u201350) would not occur if the priestly charge were faithfully kept. Thus the text answers the Israelites\u2019 fearful question recorded in 17:13. The Levites were the LORD\u2019s gift to Aaron to assist the priests (cf. 3:9; 8:16\u201319 and notes). The priests alone could render the holy service of the sacrificial altar, the Holy Place, and the Most Holy Place inside the curtain (Exod 26:33\u201335; Lev 16:12), into which only the High Priest entered. Thus priestly responsibilities in the sanctuary extended from the altar to the area within the veil. The priesthood as a vital and honorable service was itself a gracious gift freely bestowed on Aaron\u2019s family by the LORD. The text speaks literally of this as \u201ca service of gift\u201d (\u05e2\u05b2\u05d1\u05b9\u05d3\u05b7\u05ea \u05de\u05b7\u05ea\u05b8\u05bc\u05e0\u05b8\u05d4, \u02bf\u0103b\u014ddath matt\u0101n\u0101h). Again, anyone else, literally \u201cstranger,\u201d i.e., any nonpriest, who approached the tabernacle was to be executed (3:10).<\/p>\n
2. Priestly Revenues Listed (18:8\u201320)<\/p>\n
This paragraph treats five types of priestly revenues: (1) the portions of grain, sin, and guilt offerings not burned on the altar (vv. 9, 10); (2) the designated portions of the fellowship offerings (v. 11); (3) firstfruits (vv. 12\u201313); (4) devoted things (v. 14); and (5) firstlings, or, as required, their redemption fees (vv. 15\u201318). Introductory and concluding statements (vv. 8, 19\u201320) frame the list which, while not totally exhaustive, effectively summarizes priestly support.
\n18:8\u201310 The Hebrew term for offerings (\u05ea\u05b0\u05bc\u05e8\u05d5\u05bc\u05de\u05b9\u05ea, t\u0259r\u00fbm\u014dth) is used here in a general sense (cf. Lev 7:14 and note). Priestly portions of the most holy offerings could be consumed only by male Aaronites in a holy place, designated in Leviticus 6:16 as the tabernacle courtyard. In these offerings only a relatively small portion was burned on the altar (Lev 2:9; 4:31; 7:3\u20135). Grain \u2026 sin \u2026 and guilt offerings are discussed in Leviticus chapters 2, 4, and 5, and priestly dues from them are treated in Leviticus 6:16\u201318; 6:26\u201330, and 7:6\u20137 respectively. Not mentioned here is the fact that a priest officiating in a burnt offering received its skin (Lev 7:8). As something most holy was rendered in earlier translations as \u201cin a most holy place,\u201d which is also possible.
\n18:11\u201313 Although the phrase, gifts of all the wave offerings, is unusual, the text must refer to the priestly portions of each fellowship offering, namely the breast and the right thigh (Lev 7:30\u201334). Portions of the fellowship offerings were \u201cwaved\u201d before the LORD. A Nazirite\u2019s fellowship offering, for example, included several such items (see note to Lev 7:30). The rigid restrictions applying to most holy things (v. 10) did not apply to the fellowship offering portions. Thus everyone in your household who is ceremonially clean may eat it (cf. Lev 10:12\u201315). Laws of ritual cleanness are recorded in Leviticus chapters 11\u201315 (cf. also Lev 22:1\u201316). The priests also received the people\u2019s offerings of firstfruits. The Hebrew word rendered finest (\u05d7\u05b5\u05dc\u05b6\u05d1, \u1e25\u0113leb) is literally \u201cthe fat of,\u201d and the Hebrew terms used here for the staples, olive oil \u2026 new wine and grain, all refer to new produce before processing. The Hebrew text here uses interchangeably two words for firstfruits, \u05e8\u05b5\u05d0\u05e9\u05b4\u05c1\u05d9\u05ea (r\u0113\u02be\u0161\u00eeth) in verse 12 and \u05d1\u05b4\u05bc\u05db\u05bc\u05d5\u05bc\u05e8\u05b4\u05d9\u05dd (bikk\u00fbr\u00eem) in verse 13. The latter reference merely generalizes to include all produce. Specific amounts for the various firstfruits were not stipulated in the law.
\n18:14\u201319 The priests also received everything that individual Israelites voluntarily devoted to sanctuary service by vow (see Lev 27:28 and note). First offspring of every womb, i.e., firstlings, upon which the LORD had laid claim in Egypt (Exod 13:2), were also given to the priests. Aaron, as priest, was to accept the redemption fee of that which cannot be sacrificed (cf. Exod 13:11\u201316). The redemption price for firstborn sons was silver weighing five shekels by the sanctuary shekel weight which was twenty gerahs. On redemption of unclean animals see Exodus 13:13 and Leviticus 27:27. Animals suitable for sacrifice (ox \u2026 sheep \u2026 goat) were, when eight days old, to be offered, not redeemed. The ritual for their offering is like that for a fellowship offering (Leviticus 3 and notes). Sprinkle is literally \u201cthrow\u201d (\u05d6\u05b8\u05e8\u05b7\u05e7, z\u0101raq). In a firstling sacrifice, unlike a fellowship offering, the priest received all of the animal not consumed on the altar. Contrast, however, Deuteronomy 15:20, which, addressed to worshipers, apparently implies that the priests were to share the offerer\u2019s firstling with him. Since a worshiper\u2019s needs for his sacrificial meals were limited and somewhat constant, the amount actually received by the officiating priests would increase in proportion to the number of firstlings, hence in proportion to the offerer\u2019s livestock wealth. The breast and the right thigh were the priestly portions of an ordinary fellowship offering (Lev 7:31\u201332). The agreement concerning priestly revenues is called an everlasting covenant of salt, i.e., a binding covenant (see note to Lev 2:13).
\n18:20 As representative of the priestly tribe, Aaron was told that neither he nor his tribe (v. 23) was to receive land inheritance in Canaan, but instead to realize and appreciate the spiritual share and inheritance of their holy position and special divine service (cf. Deut 10:9; Josh 18:7). As the priests ministered for Israel before the LORD they were to be supported, as indicated, by the people, themselves sustained by the LORD, the Source of all blessings. This arrangement binding people and priesthood and God should have prevented Israel from developing the social evil of a landed priestly aristocracy.<\/p>\n
3. Levites to Be Supported by Tithe (18:21\u201324)<\/p>\n
18:21\u201324 Tithes are also treated in Leviticus 27:30\u201333. The former passage speaks also of a tithe on livestock, but the present instruction seems limited to field produce. In lieu of material inheritance of landed property the Levites were to receive the tithe in return for the work they performed at the sanctuary. Such language depicts the tithe as the Levites\u2019 wages, or reward (v. 31). Significantly no such mundane expression is used for the priestly portions (vv. 8\u201320). As noted at verses 4\u20135, Israelites who unlawfully approached the Tent of Meeting would bear the consequences of their sin (cf. 1:53; 8:19). Again the text stresses that the Levites would bear the responsibility for offenses against the sanctuary (cf. note to v. 1), and again the text emphasizes that as their inheritance instead of landed property, the Levites were to receive the Israelites\u2019 tithes (cf. 35:1\u20138; see note to v. 20).<\/p>\n
4. Levite Offering from Tithe Stipulated (18:25\u201332)<\/p>\n
18:25\u201332 From the tithe which they received from the people the Levites themselves were required to give the best tenth as an offering. This \u201ctithe of the tithe\u201d given by the Levites was considered like firstfruits given by the people (v. 27; cf. Exod 22:29). Like firstfruits (vv. 12\u201313) the Levites\u2019 tithe was given to Aaron, i.e., to the priests. The Levites tenth given to the LORD as an offering is properly designated the best and holiest part. After the Levites had offered a tenth, the remainder was theirs, reckoned for them as ordinary agricultural product without restrictions upon its consumption or disposal (cf. vv. 10\u201311). If a Levite properly offered the holy tenth, he would not be guilty as he consumed the remainder. If a Levite failed to give the holy offering, his eating would defile the holy offerings, in this case the priestly portion of his tithe (cf. Lev 19:8; 22:9, 15).<\/p>\n
D. WATER OF PURIFICATION ORDAINED (19:1\u201322)<\/p>\n
1. Preparation of Purificatory Ash Described (19:1\u201310)<\/p>\n
19:1\u20138 Used only here and in the implementation of this law in 31:19\u201324, the expression requirement of the law may denote emphasis upon the cleansing ritual depicted. Contact of any kind with a corpse (vv. 11, 14, 16) produced the most serious level of ceremonial impurity for which lesser means of ritual cleansing were deemed inadequate. The general laws of ceremonial purity are treated extensively in Leviticus chapters 11\u201315 to which the present passage forms an important supplement. A red heifer is perhaps better \u201ca red cow,\u201d the Hebrew term (\u05e4\u05b8\u05bc\u05e8\u05b8\u05d4 \u05d0\u05b2\u05d3\u05bb\u05de\u05b8\u05bc\u05d4, p\u0101r\u0101h \u02be\u0103d\u016bmm\u0101h) denoting simply a female bovine. The color may symbolize blood or life; the sex, while that of the sin offering of a common man (Lev 4:28), is taken by some also to symbolize life. Like a sacrificial animal the cow was to be a sound specimen, without defect or blemish (see Lev 22:21 and note). Also, the animal selected for the sacred cleansing rite was to be one not previously profaned by domestic service. Somewhat paradoxically, the preparation of the ashes for the water of purification rendered the participants temporarily unclean (vv. 7, 8, 10). Accordingly, not the high priest Aaron but instead his son Eleazar superintended the procedure outside the camp. The priestly act of sprinkling the slaughtered heifer\u2019s blood signified the consecration of the blood and the animal for sacred purposes (cf. Lev 4:6, 17; 16:14, 19). In Eleazar\u2019s presence the entire heifer was to be burned. In none of the regular Israelite sacrifices was the animal thus totally consumed; the purpose in the present instance is the reduction of the animal to sacred ash. Put in with the burning carcass, cedar wood, hyssop and scarlet wool are combined also in the cleansing ceremony for a healed leper (Lev 14:4\u20137). The cedar was noted for its longevity, hyssop seems regarded as cleansing (Ps 51:7), and scarlet approximated the color of blood. Thus, these ingredients combined to enforce the life symbolism noted at verse 2. Rendered ceremonially unclean (v. 3) the officiating priest and his helpers were to purify themselves. Until evening marks the duration of the lesser degree of ritual impurity removed by washing one\u2019s body and clothes. The participants, of course, waited until evening to reenter the camp cleansed from their defilement (cf. Lev 11:39\u201340; 15:5\u201311).
\n19:9\u201310 Mixed with water (v. 17) the ashes formed a \u201choly alkali\u201d solution ordained as a water of cleansing for the removal of the impurity produced by the ritual sin of contact with death. Hebrews 9:13 effectively contrasts such means with the cleansing power of the blood of Christ. Use of the water of purification was to be practiced as a lasting ordinance, i.e., as long as the covenant with Israel endured (cf. 15:15; Exod 12:14; Lev 3:17). This law of cleansing applied to both Israelites and resident aliens (see notes to 15:14\u201316).<\/p>\n
2. General Law of Cleansing Stated (19:11\u201313)<\/p>\n
19:11\u201313 The water of purification was provided, not for all uncleanness, but only for the serious problem of ritual defilement because of contact with human dead (see note to v. 2). Purify himself is literally \u201cde-sin himself\u201d (\u05d9\u05b4\u05ea\u05b0\u05d7\u05b7\u05d8\u05b8\u05bc\u05d0, yith\u1e25a\u1e6d\u1e6d\u0101\u02be) as in 8:21 (cf. Numbers 31). Described in greater detail in verses 17\u201319, the cleansing process was both immediately available and strictly mandatory. The text strongly warns that failure to comply with this cleansing requirement defiles the LORD\u2019s tabernacle (cf. Lev 15:31), and offenders must be cut off (cf. Gen 17:14 and Lev 7:21 and note).<\/p>\n
3. Specific Applications Made (19:14\u201322)<\/p>\n
19:14\u201316 The presence of death in a tent or other enclosed area was regarded as ritually contaminating all objects or persons within it. Further, every open container in an enclosed area was similarly contaminated by the presence of death. An earthenware vessel thus contaminated on the inside could not be cleansed but was rather to be destroyed (see Lev 6:28; 11:33 and notes). In an open field, however, in contrast to the situation described in verse 14, only actual contact with the dead, in the ways indicated, made one unclean. Because contact with a grave was defiling, Jews in later centuries whitewashed tombs to identify them (Matt 23:27).
\n19:17\u201322 This paragraph describes how the holy solution made from the ashes, literally \u201cdust\u201d (\u05e2\u05b8\u05e4\u05b8\u05e8, \u02bf\u0101ph\u0101r), was applied. The expression burned purification offering is perhaps a better rendering of the Hebrew (\u05e9\u05b0\u05c1\u05e8\u05b5\u05e4\u05b7\u05ea \u05d4\u05b7\u05d7\u05b7\u05d8\u05b8\u05bc\u05d0\u05ea, \u0161\u0259r\u0113phath ha\u1e25a\u1e6d\u1e6d\u0101\u02beth) than the older rendering, \u201cburnt sin offering.\u201d Neither slaughtered at the altar nor consumed upon it, the red cow seems not technically a sacrifice. \u201cFire of purification\u201d and \u201cburning for removal of sin\u201d (cf. v. 9) are other possible renderings. Practically speaking, the cow was \u201coffered\u201d on behalf of ritual sin. As usual, fresh water is literally \u201cliving water\u201d (\u05de\u05b7\u05d9\u05b4\u05dd \u05d7\u05b7\u05d9\u05b4\u05bc\u05d9\u05dd, may\u00eem \u1e25ay\u00eem; see note to Lev 14:5). The precise plant intended by the Hebrew word for hyssop (\u05d0\u05b5\u05d6\u05d5\u05b9\u05d1, \u02be\u0113z\u00f4b) is uncertain, but most likely the plant was the Egyptian marjoram, a small, bushy plant readily adaptable for sprinkling or brushing. Using the hyssop, a ritually clean individual should sprinkle the contaminated objects and people to purify them. The word rendered \u201csprinkle\u201d is a form of the Hebrew word \u05e0\u05b8\u05d6\u05b8\u05d4 (n\u0101z\u0101h). Another verb which means \u201cto dash\u201d or \u201cto throw\u201d (\u05d6\u05b8\u05e8\u05b7\u05e7, z\u0101raq) is used in verses 13 and 20. Either both procedures were combined, or one of the two verbs is used loosely. After the application of the special water on the seventh day, the individual being cleansed followed the ritual prescribed for lesser uncleanness, i.e., he must wash his clothes and bathe with water, and that evening he will be clean (cf. vv. 3, 7, and notes). Echoing the language of verses 10 and 13, the text again warns of the serious consequences that would follow if one does not purify himself and repeats that this is to be a lasting ordinance. This repetition emphasizes the statute\u2019s importance (cf. note to v. 2). Those who administered the water of cleansing were rendered temporarily unclean (see notes to vv. 3 and 7), and further, anything that an unclean person touches becomes unclean. The uncleanness of those defiled by death was thus somewhat contagious, capable of communicating a measure of impurity to others, as indicated (cf. Hag 2:13).<\/p>\n
E. FINAL EVENTS AT KADESH RELATED (20:1\u201321)<\/p>\n
1. Miriam Dies (20:1)<\/p>\n
20:1 Although the year is not here stated, Aaron\u2019s death (20:22\u201329), hence this entire series of events, occurred in the last year of the wandering (33:38) as the unbelieving generation\u2019s death sentence (14:32) was being completed. Thus the first month was the first month of the final year of wandering. As noted at 13:26, Kadesh, a central locale during the wilderness wanderings, was an extensive oasis in the northeast Sinai peninsula where the Desert of Zin and the Desert of Paran overlap. At this time the new generation stood both geographically and, in a sense, historically, at the same point as their fathers before them\u2014at Kadesh on the brink of conquest. Although few specifics are known about the period of wandering itself, the people had probably sojourned in the general area of Kadesh and in the direction of the Gulf of Aqabah (14:25). Although Miriam had been an important personage (12:2; Exod 15:20), her death is recorded simply and briefly.<\/p>\n
2. Water Crisis Experienced Anew (20:2\u201313)<\/p>\n
God Responds to Israel\u2019s Cry for Water (20:2\u20138)<\/p>\n
20:2\u20138 Serious shortage of water could be a recurring problem in the wilderness (cf. Exod 17:1\u20137). Again the people gathered and quarreled with Moses, in their thirst expressing their dissatisfaction with this desert and their longing for distant Egypt (cf. 11:1, 4\u20136; 14:1\u20133). Most likely the phrase when our brothers fell dead alludes specifically to the death of Korah\u2019s company (16:31\u201335) and not generally to the fate of the previous generation. The popular complaint approximated far too closely such outbursts of the rebellious generation as are recorded in 11:20, 14:1\u20133, and 16:13\u201314. Israel\u2019s grievance overlooked completely that the \u201cdreadful desert\u201d (Deut 1:19) was not Moses\u2019 desired destination but rather the scene of a generation\u2019s judgment brought on by its own infidelity (14:28\u201335). As before in similar crises, Moses and Aaron approached the Tent of Meeting, the sanctuary, and fell facedown to prayerfully lay their problem before the LORD (cf. 14:5; 16:4, 22, 45 and notes). Again, the glory of the LORD appeared to them (see notes to 14:10 and 16:42). The staff is possibly Aaron\u2019s budded rod (17:8\u201310), but more likely Moses\u2019 rod (v. 11) which was used in Egypt (Exod 4:2\u20135, 17; 7:20) and at Rephidim (Exod 17:5) and possibly stored at the sanctuary (v. 9) is intended. On this occasion, unlike Exodus 17:6, Moses was commanded simply to speak to that rock before their eyes. This time the miracle was to be even more impressive, as the water would flow at Moses\u2019 command voiced without accompanying action.<\/p>\n
Moses Sins, Is Sentenced, As Water Provided (20:9\u201313)<\/p>\n
20:9\u201313 Exhausted, embarrassed, and embittered by the people\u2019s echoing their sinful fathers (vv. 2\u20135), Moses in noncharacteristic overreaction lost patience with Israel and uttered \u201crash words\u201d (Ps 106:33), saying, Listen, you rebels, must we bring you water out of this rock? The Hebrew places the latter words in emphatic first position, so as to suggest the meaning \u201cis it from this rock we must produce water for you?\u201d i.e., \u201chow much does it take to convince you?\u201d It seems also significant that Moses\u2019 statement claimed for himself and Aaron the proposed act of power without exalting the LORD as the source of the coming blessing and thus \u201chonoring\u201d him (v. 12; cf. Exod 14:13\u201314). Saying this, Moses struck the rock twice. This act was patent disobedience (see v. 8 and note). Despite Moses\u2019 act the LORD graciously provided for his thirsting people as water gushed out, and the community \u2026 drank.
\n20:12\u201313 Addressing Moses and Aaron, the LORD indicted them for their disobedience and announced its penalty. Associated with Moses throughout the entire episode, Aaron is included in the punishment. Set forth in almost tantalizing brevity and therefore interpreted in various ways by Bible students, Moses\u2019 sin, identified here as distrust, is called elsewhere rebellion (v. 24, 27:14) and breaking faith with the LORD (Deut 32:51). Further, other passages emphasize that Israel instigated Moses\u2019 sin (Deut 1:37; 3:25; Ps 106:32). Moses sinned therefore not only in word (v. 10) and act (v. 11) but also in attitude. Most likely Moses and Aaron did not question the LORD\u2019s ultimate power, but perhaps feeling that Israel\u2019s complaint portended a possible repetition of the tragedy of chapter 14, they may have surmised that another dreadful postponement was at hand. Thus, if but for a moment, they doubted whether God would lead such a complaining people to victory and blessing. Because of their sin Moses and Aaron were forbidden to share in Israel\u2019s conquest of the land, a sentence Moses later unsuccessfully appealed (Deut 3:23\u201328). The name Meribah means \u201ccontention.\u201d This location is sometimes termed Meribath-kadesh to distinguish it from the place near Sinai previously named Meribah for similar reason (Exod 17:7; see, e.g., Deut 32:51). Although directed against Moses and Aaron, the people\u2019s complaint had questioned the LORD\u2019s purposes (vv. 2\u20135). Hence, the Israelites quarreled with the LORD and he showed himself holy. Both the provision of water despite Israel\u2019s unbelief and the punishment upon Moses and Aaron for their sinful lapse proclaimed the LORD\u2019s holiness. The particular Hebrew verb (\u05d9\u05b4\u05e7\u05b8\u05bc\u05d3\u05b5\u05e9\u05c1, yiqq\u0101d\u0113\u0161) may allude to the place-name, Kadesh. Concerning the entire episode it is noteworthy that Scripture records even the misdeeds of its heroes (cf. Gen 12:13).<\/p>\n
3. Passage Through Edom Denied (20:14\u201321)<\/p>\n
20:14\u201321 The eponymous ancestor of the Edomites was Esau, Jacob\u2019s brother (Gen 25:25, 30; 36:1), thus making Israel and Edom \u201cbrother nations.\u201d This also explains the personification of these nations as individuals in the exchange here recorded. Diplomatically Moses began his request for free passage by reciting as well known to his Edomite brethren the fortunes of Israel in Egypt, recorded in Scripture in Genesis 46:1\u2013Exodus 15:21. The angel described in Exodus 14:19 is \u201cthe angel of the LORD,\u201d i.e., the LORD in the form of an angel (cf. 22:22). The Hebrew term (\u05de\u05b7\u05dc\u05b0\u05d0\u05b8\u05da\u05b0, mal\u02be\u0101k) means \u201cmessenger,\u201d hence, left indefinite, could here be an oblique reference to Moses himself, but this seems unlikely. Diplomatically, Moses spoke of the settlement at Kadesh as a town on the edge of your territory. Edom had no fortresses near Kadesh, but her influence extended into the area. Moses guaranteed that his people would not bother Edom\u2019s resources (field \u2026 vineyard \u2026 well) nor take them without permission or payment (v. 19), but would instead strictly travel along the king\u2019s highway. This was a major ancient caravan trail which ran directly from the Gulf of Aqabah to Syria, thus passing through Edom, Moab, Ammon and the east of the Dead Sea and the Jordan Valley. Moses sought to use the road in order to place Israel in a position to attack Canaan from the east. Threatening military action, the king of Edom bluntly refused passage, saying you may not pass through, probably because he did not trust the Israelites nor Moses\u2019 capacity to control them. Knowing of Israel\u2019s escape from Egypt (vv. 14\u201316), he should also have known of their extended stay in the wilderness. Although the king\u2019s refusal is therefore militarily and politically understandable, it marked a severe change from the amicable reunion of the two progenitors (Gen 33:1\u201316) and presaged later hostility between the two peoples (cf. Amos 1:11). The Israelites sent additional emissaries to reassure the king of Israel\u2019s peaceful intent and to seek favorable decision, but this effort also failed. Indicating their desire merely to pass through on foot\u2014nothing else, the Israelites insisted, to no avail, that such passage posed no military threat. Other nations on Israel\u2019s planned route also rejected appeals for passage, but their refusal, rendered somewhat meaningless by Edom\u2019s action, is not recorded here (cf. Judg 11:15\u201317). Forced to take a circuitous route by Edom\u2019s refusal, the people of Israel turned away apparently traveling southeast toward Ezion-Geber on the Gulf of Aqabah and then turning northeast and then north to skirt Edom and Moab on the east (see 21:1, 4 and notes). An alternative analysis pictures Israel as traveling the \u201cway to the Red Sea\u201d here only temporarily to go, perhaps northward, to the Edom-Moab border, and then hewing to that (northern) Edomite frontier until they arrived in the wilderness southeast of Moab (21:10).<\/p>\n
F. ISRAEL JOURNEYS TO MOAB (20:22\u201321:35)<\/p>\n
1. Aaron Dies (20:22\u201329)<\/p>\n
20:22\u201326 Mount Hor, literally \u201cHor, the mountain,\u201d perhaps suggests a hill prominent in its area. The location is uncertain. Jewish and Christian tradition identified Hor with Jebel Nebi Harun (\u201cmount of the prophet Aaron\u201d) near Petra, but the textual description \u201con the border of the land of Edom\u201d (v. 23) has led some scholars to propose instead Jebel Madurah northeast of Kadesh as the biblical Mount Hor. The encampment near the mountain, from which the people witnessed the ascent (v. 27) was evidently called Moserah (Deut 10:6). For one to be gathered to his people is an interesting euphemism for death made all the more intriguing because it is used for people buried in a place distant from their kinsmen and their family sepulcher, as for example Abraham (Gen 25:8). More than the mere commonality of death, the phrase may suggest some concept, perhaps vague, of existence beyond death, a topic upon which fuller revelation is granted later in Scripture. Aaron, like Moses later, was prohibited entrance into Canaan as punishment because he in distrust rebelled at the waters of Meribah (see note to v. 12). The investiture of Eleazar, Aaron\u2019s oldest surviving son (3:1\u20134), with the holy high priestly garments publicly marked him as his father\u2019s successor just prior to Aaron\u2019s death. Fully described in Exodus 28:6\u201339, these holy garments were intended for the high priestly succession (Exodus 29; Leviticus 8).
\n20:27\u201329 Following Moses\u2019 obedient investiture of Eleazar with Aaron\u2019s garments \u2026 Aaron died atop Mount Hor. That (only) Moses and Eleazar came down from the mountain indicates that Aaron not only died but also was buried on Mount Hor. Learning of Aaron\u2019s death, the entire house of Israel mourned for him thirty days. So also Israel observed national mourning for Moses (Deut 34:8). This extensive mourning for Aaron emphasizes his greatness despite his occasional weakness. Even at its best, however, the mortal priesthood of Aaron stands contrasted to the superior intercession of the Lord Jesus (Heb 7:23\u201328).<\/p>\n
2. King of Arad Defeated (21:1\u20133)<\/p>\n
21:1\u20133 Inhabiting the Negev, the southern desert region of Canaan (cf. 13:17), the people of Arad are generically called \u201cCanaanites\u201d (cf. 14:25). Although a Tell Arad has been excavated in recent years, it contained no occupation level from the period of the present text. Such remains were found at nearby Tell Malchata, thus leading archaeologists to identify it as the Arad of this passage while recognizing Tell Arad as the later Judean site by this name. Tell Arad is roughly fifty miles north of Kadesh. Occurring only here, the obscure word Atharim apparently refers to a currently unidentifiable caravan trail. Some ancient versions and some expositors have derived the meaning \u201cspies\u201d because of some similarity in the respective words, but this seems linguistically unsound. Exactly when the Canaanite king attacked the Israelites is disputed, but it probably occurred as Israel marched from Kadesh to Mount Hor or encamped at Mount Hor, the Canaanite king mistakenly interpreting the move as threatening another southern invasion (cf. 14:40\u201345). Israel\u2019s march northeast from Kadesh to Mount Hor may be explained by assuming that Edom\u2019s final rejection of passage was received at Mount Hor. Accordingly, the paragraphs from 20:14 to 21:3 may be in logical, not strictly chronological, order. Confronting this determined foe, the nation of Israel, here again personified, as in 20:14, vowed to put the enemy under the sacred ban as devoted to God. This involved the total destruction of the enemy settlements (cf. Josh 6:17\u201319; see note to Lev 27:28). The name Hormah, i.e., \u201cdestruction,\u201d alludes to the execution of the war ban upon Arad. The word place seems used here generally, as often, to refer to the entire area containing the settlements (towns). Later, for similar reason, a specific town was thus named (Judges 1:17).<\/p>\n
3. Murmuring People Punished, Saved Through Bronze Serpent (21:4\u20139)<\/p>\n
21:4\u20135 Having received Edom\u2019s refusal, the people began an arduous circuitous march (cf. v. 1; 20:21 and notes). Again, as in 14:25, the Red Sea is the Gulf of Aqabah. At this point, the people grew impatient, literally \u201cthe soul of the people was shortened,\u201d because they were now journeying in the opposite direction from Canaan. Addressing Moses, the people again questioned the divinely ordained exodus, saying why have you brought us up out of Egypt to die in the desert? (cf. 20:4\u20135 and notes). In their complaint they termed the manna this miserable food. Occurring only here, the adjective rendered \u201cmiserable\u201d (\u05e7\u05b0\u05dc\u05b9\u05e7\u05b5\u05dc, q\u0259l\u014dq\u0113l) apparently comes from a root meaning \u201cto be light,\u201d hence \u201ccontemptible\u201d or \u201cunsatisfying.\u201d Sustained by nourishing manna for a generation, Israel had come to despise this \u201cbread of angels\u201d (Ps 78:25; cf. 11:4\u20139 and notes).
\n21:6\u20139 Venomous snakes, literally \u201cthe serpents, the fiery ones,\u201d (\u05d4\u05b7\u05e0\u05b0\u05bc\u05d7\u05b8\u05e9\u05b4\u05c1\u05d9\u05dd \u05d4\u05b7\u05e9\u05b0\u05bc\u05c2\u05e8\u05b8\u05e4\u05b4\u05d9\u05dd, hann\u0259\u1e25\u0101\u0161\u00eem ha\u015b\u015b\u0259r\u0101ph\u00eem) were vipers whose bite produced burning pain and inflammation and could prove fatal. On this occasion God\u2019s plague upon rebellious Israel utilized the poisonous snakes which abound in the Sinai peninsula. Confessing we sinned, the afflicted people petitioned Moses\u2019 effective intercession to take the snakes away and in response Moses prayed for the people. Told to make a snake and put it on a pole, Moses obediently made a bronze snake and elevated it. The Hebrew word rendered \u201cbronze\u201d (\u05e0\u05b0\u05d7\u05b9\u05e9\u05b6\u05c1\u05ea, n\u0259\u1e25\u014d\u0161eth) may signify either copper or bronze, an alloy of copper and tin. The copper-zinc alloy now called \u201cbrass\u201d was unknown in ancient times. Anyone bitten by a snake could look at the bronze snake and live. Thus, the means provided for healing demanded an act of faith in God. As the writer of the apocryphal Wisdom of Solomon, terming the bronze serpent a \u201ctoken of deliverance,\u201d comments, \u201cFor he who turned toward it was saved, not by what he saw, but by thee, the Savior of all\u201d (16:6\u20137). Thus also the Lord Jesus compared this deliverance through faith to ultimate salvation through faith in his redeeming death (John 3:14\u201315; cf. 1 Cor 10:9). Second Kings 18:4 informs that the bronze snake, called Nehushtan and idolatrously worshiped by later Israelites, was destroyed by King Hezekiah.<\/p>\n
4. Several Encampments Listed (21:10\u201320)<\/p>\n
These paragraphs combine a partial itinerary of Israel\u2019s journey from Mount Hor to Moab (cf. 33:41\u201349) with excerpts from ancient poems elaborating upon two points (vv. 14\u201315 and 17\u201318). Several of the place names are currently unidentifiable, but the paucity of listed campsites for the first part of the journey plus the possible identification of Punon (33:42) as modern Feinan may suggest that the Israelites, while spending \u201cmany days\u201d going \u201cabout Mount Seir\u201d (Deut 2:1\u20133), traveled south only far enough to cut across the less strategic southern Edomite territory before beginning their northward trek. The exact route is uncertain.
\n21:10\u201316 The name Oboth may mean \u201cwater-skins\u201d; the locale is uncertain. Signifying \u201cruins of Abarim\u201d or \u201cruins of the regions beyond,\u201d Iye Abarim was situated near the southeast border of Moab, but its exact location is also disputed. The Zered Valley is ordinarily identified with the Wadi el-Hesa which flows into the Dead Sea from the southeast. Called the Wadi Mojib, the Arnon flows from the Transjordan plateau through a deep, wide canyon into the Dead Sea opposite En Gedi. The text informs that the Amorites had at this time succeeded in driving the Moabites back to the Arnon, thus making it Moab\u2019s northern border (cf. vv. 26\u201329). No longer extant, the Book of the Wars of the LORD was probably an ancient collection of Israelite war songs recounting her God-given victories. The now obscure quotation refers to valleys running into the Arnon and confirms the boundary note of verse 13. In the Hebrew Waheb and the ravines (\u05d4\u05b7\u05e0\u05b0\u05bc\u05d7\u05b8\u05dc\u05b4\u05d9\u05dd, hann\u0259\u1e25\u0101l\u00eem), i.e., \u201cwadis,\u201d are direct objects, thus were preceded in their original context by a verb. Both place names are obscure, thus adding to the translation difficulties reflected in the versions. A number of tributary wadis empty into the Arnon. Ar, a chief city, perhaps the capital, of Moab may have been situated on the south bank of the Arnon, but probably marked Moab\u2019s northeast boundary. Crossing the Arnon near Ar brought Israel into Amorite territory very near the Ammonite frontier (Deut 2:18). The full expression \u201csite of Ar\u201d may allude to the city or its adjacent region. The name Beer means \u201cwell\u201d and commemorates the incident cited in the verse following. The exact wilderness location north of the Arnon is unknown.
\n21:17\u201320 Called \u201cthe song of the well,\u201d the song in verses 17 and 18 celebrates provision of water in the wilderness, this time through divinely directed discovery of a bountiful well-site (cf. Gen 21:19). In an area where water lay just below the dry surface, the leaders (princes \u2026 nobles), obediently and symbolically beginning the digging with scepters and staffs, struck water, to the amazement of the people. Although the term rendered \u201cscepters\u201d (\u05de\u05b0\u05d7\u05b9\u05e7\u05b5\u05e7, m\u0259\u1e25\u014dq\u0113q) may also mean \u201clawgiver\u201d or \u201ccommander,\u201d the poetic parallel \u201cstaffs\u201d makes the present rendering preferable (a scepter is a commander\u2019s staff; cf. Gen 49:10). The word Mattanah means \u201cgift.\u201d Some would render \u201cfrom the wilderness a gift\u201d making the line the conclusion of the song and \u201cMattanah\u201d in verse 19 another name for Beer. The location is again uncertain, but Khirbet el-Medeiyineh some twelve miles southeast of Medeba has been suggested. Apparently meaning \u201cwadi (torrent valley) of God,\u201d Nahaliel is sometimes identified with the Wadi Zerka Ma\u2019in. The name Bamoth means \u201chigh places\u201d; this site may have been located on the western heights of the Transjordan plateau. The valley (\u05d4\u05b7\u05d2\u05b7\u05bc\u05d9\u05b0\u05d0, hagay\u02be) in verse 20 is sometimes identified with the Wadi \u2018Ayuh Musa which flows into the northern end of the Dead Sea. Pisgah is literally \u201cthe Pisgah.\u201d The term, which means \u201ccleft,\u201d refers ordinarily to one of the high ranges of the Moabite tableland overlooking the Dead Sea. The Hebrew term rendered the wasteland (\u05d4\u05b7\u05d9\u05b0\u05e9\u05b4\u05c1\u05d9\u05de\u05b9\u05df, hay\u0259\u0161\u00eemon) usually designates the Wilderness of Judah across the Dead Sea from Pisgah, but some think it refers here to similar terrain east of the Jordan just north of the Dead Sea.<\/p>\n
5. King Sihon Defeated; Amorite Territory Occupied (21:21\u201330)<\/p>\n
21:21\u201322 Literally the Hebrew text here begins with the simple connective often rendered \u201cand.\u201d The messengers were sent from the encampment on the Arnon (v. 13; Deut 2:26; Judg 11:18\u201319). Thus, a general statement of itinerary (vv. 10\u201320) is followed by a more specific record of events (vv. 21\u201335). As Israel had requested passage through Edom (20:14\u201321), so also the nation requested right of passage through Amorite territory. The campaign against Sihon is treated more fully in Deuteronomy 2:24\u201337 which informs that the LORD earlier promised victory over Sihon to Moses, thus suggesting Moses knew Sihon would refuse permission. Unlike the Edomites, Moabites and Ammonites (Deut 2:5, 9, 19), the Amorites were slated for destruction as divine retribution for their sins (cf. Gen 15:16). Both Sihon and Og were Amorite kings (Deut 3:8). Still, as in 20:17, the Israelites asked let us pass \u2026 along the king\u2019s highway and promised that, if granted passage, they would not take anything at all from any field \u2026 vineyard \u2026 or well.
\n21:23\u201326 Refusing to allow passage, Sihon mustered his entire army and confronted Israel at Jahaz. A city in the tableland later assigned to Reuben (Josh 13:18), Jahaz was located in the wilderness north of the Arnon somewhere near Medeba. In response Israel defeated Sihon and occupied his entire territory. The text describes this conquered land as extending from the Arnon to the Jabbok, but only as far as the Ammonites. This gives the southern, northern, and eastern limits, respectively, of Sihon\u2019s kingdom. The Arnon is the Wadi Mojib, as noted at verse 13, and the Jabbok, an important transjordanic stream now called the Wadi Zerka, enters the Jordan about midway between the Sea of Galilee and the Dead Sea. The fact that the Ammonite border was fortified, literally \u201cstrong\u201d (\u05e2\u05b7\u05d6, \u02bfaz), explains why Sihon had been unable to conquer Ammon as he had Moab. Following the decisive battle, Israel quickly moved to occupy all the cities of the Amorites in lesser engagements, perhaps dispersing in order to do so efficiently. Sihon\u2019s capital, Heshbon, was at the site of modern Hesban fifty miles due east of Jerusalem. All its surrounding settlements is literally \u201call its daughters;\u201d this territory had earlier belonged to the king of Moab but was clearly Amorite at the time of Israel\u2019s conquest.
\n21:27\u201330 Israel\u2019s right to occupy the formerly Moabite area surrounding Heshbon is further established by the textual quotation of the \u201csong of Heshbon\u201d given in verses 27\u201330. This song, though in part now obscure, calls for the rebuilding of Heshbon (v. 27), speaks of Sihon\u2019s previous victory over Moab (vv. 28\u201329), and extols Israel\u2019s conquest of this conqueror (v. 30). Some consider the piece, in part at least, an Amorite victory ballad quoted to confirm Sihon\u2019s possession of previously Moabite land and thus justify Israel\u2019s claim upon it. The words fire went out poetically depict Sihon\u2019s war against Moab and his conquest of the major Moabite city of Ar (see note to v. 15). The god Chemosh, evidently the Moabite manifestation of the star deity Ashtar, was worshiped in part through child sacrifice (2 Kgs 3:27). The victorious Israelites boasted we have overthrown them \u2026 we have demolished them. This verse is particularly obscure and difficult, hence the translations vary widely. Dibon, modern Dhiban, some four miles north of the Arnon and thirteen miles east of the Dead Sea, was later assigned to Gad (32:33\u201334). Six miles south of Heshbon, Medeba, now called Madaba, was assigned to Reuben (Josh 13:16).<\/p>\n
6. Israel Defeats Og, Takes Bashan (21:31\u201335)<\/p>\n
Captured shortly afterward and later assigned to Gad (32:35), the fortified city of Jazer was possibly located at the site of Khirbet Jazzir some twelve miles south of the Jabbok, near es-Salt. Bashan, the northernmost region east of Jordan, was largely an extremely fertile tableland quite suited for grain and cattle production. Used in its broader political sense, as here, the term seems to designate an area reaching northward to Mount Hermon, westward to the Golan heights, eastward to Jebel Druze, and southward, at this time, to the river Jabbok. Interestingly, the powerful Amorite leader Og king of Bashan, was one of the feared giants (13:23; Deut 3:1\u201311). Og confronted the Israelites at Edrei, modern Der\u2019a near the Yarmuk River, which was one of Og\u2019s principal cities (Deut 1:4). As God had promised victory over Sihon (Deut 2:24), so now he assured Israel concerning Og, I have handed him over to you, with his whole army and his land. Totally defeating Og\u2019s whole army, Israel took possession of his land. Now securely in control of extensive territory east of Canaan, Israel, emboldened by recent successes, could encamp in the plains opposite Jericho (22:1) to prepare for the greater conquest promised by the LORD of Hosts.<\/p>\n
PART THREE: VICTORIOUS ISRAEL ENCAMPS IN PLAINS OF MOAB\u201422:1\u201336:13<\/p>\n
The third and final movement of Numbers relates Israel\u2019s deliverance from hostile conspiracy (chs. 22\u201325) and records incidents and legislation preliminary to Israel\u2019s later entrance into Canaan (chs. 26\u201336).
\nThe first part of this section, the Balaam story, describes a threat different in kind from the military foes previously encountered, but one which would have been considered dangerously serious by any ancient Near Eastern people. In fear of Israel\u2019s hordes, the Moabite king Balak, in league with neighboring Midian, summoned the famous diviner Balaam to come and place a damning curse on Israel. Called by Balak, Balaam entreated the LORD and at first heeded the LORD\u2019s refusal. Tempted, however, by increasing offers of wealth and royal favor, Balaam succumbed and presumptuously awaited divine permission, this time granted (ch. 22). Sternly warned by God en route, in the now famous incident of the talking ass (ch. 22), Balaam, though called to curse, repeatedly blessed Israel to the consternation and ultimate frustration of his pagan employers (chs. 23\u201324). Discredited in their eyes and personally disillusioned, the soothsayer voiced a final oracle and departed (ch. 24). Later, perhaps seeking to restore his shattered image among the Midianites, he precipitated his own ruin by counseling them to seduce Israel to degenerate idolatry, thus imperiling their relationship to the LORD. Delivered from this nefarious plot also, the people were instructed to take vengeance on Midian (ch. 25). When this sentence was later executed, Balaam ignominiously perished (ch. 31), his wickedness providing warning for future generations.<\/p>\n
I. Balak, Balaam Conspire Against Israel (22:1\u201325:18)<\/p>\n
A. BALAAM SUMMONED TO MOAB (22:1\u201341)<\/p>\n
1. Balak Calls Balaam to Curse Israel (22:1\u20136)<\/p>\n
22:1 The statement that the Israelites traveled to the plains of Moab and camped belongs more properly to the preceding section which it closes, but the present arrangement which treats the verse as transitional is acceptable. Northeast of the Dead Sea, opposite Jericho, the \u201cplains of Moab,\u201d a flat, wooded and watered steppe-land previously belonging to Moab (21:26) provided an excellent campsite for Israel prior to entrance into Canaan (cf. 25:1; 33:49). The phrase along the Jordan across from Jericho, more literally \u201cbeyond the Jordan of Jericho,\u201d simply marks the area as being across the Jordan River from Jericho, later the first city in Canaan to fall to Israel (Joshua 6; see note to 32:32).
\n22:2\u20133 The Moabite king Balak son of Zippor, witnessing Israel\u2019s destruction of the Amorites (21:21\u201335), decided to take action since his people Moab was terrified and filled with dread because of the Israelites (cf. Exod 15:15\u201316). The text here emphasizes Moab\u2019s terror by repetitive clauses. This fear, while understandable, was needless, as Israel had no designs on Moab (Deut 2:8\u20139).
\n22:4\u20136 The expression the Moabites said is more literally \u201cMoab said\u201d and refers to the king\u2019s activity. Speaking for the nation, hence the personification (cf. 20:14, 18), Balak sought alliance with Midian. The Midianites, the most famous of Abraham\u2019s descendants by Keturah (Gen 25:2), scattered widely in Arabia and Sinai and are mentioned in numerous biblical episodes (cf. Gen 37:28; Exod 3:1; and Judg 6:1ff.). The elders of Midian, leaders of a branch of Midianites neighboring Moab on the east (cf. Gen 36:35), may well have specifically proposed the summons of Balaam, as Midianite caravans traveled widely and could easily have learned of Balaam\u2019s fame (v. 6). Figuratively depicting Israel as a closely grazing ox, Balak expressed his fear of possible invasion and loss of territory, and the two nations decided to seek help from a famous soothsayer. A somewhat enigmatic character compromised by greed and ultimately destroyed through pride (31:8, 16), Balaam son of Beor was a pagan diviner (\u05e7\u05d5\u05b9\u05e1\u05b5\u05dd, q\u00f4s\u0113m; Josh 13:22) who nevertheless developed allegiance to the true God served by Israel and rendered, on this occasion at least, a measure of genuine service to him. Pethor, near the river, called \u201cPitru\u201d in Assyrian inscriptions, was an ancient city located some twelve miles south of Carchemish, on the Sajur River near its junction with the Euphrates (\u201cthe River\u201d). Rendered his native land is a Hebrew expression (\u05d0\u05b6\u05e8\u05b6\u05e5 \u05d1\u05b0\u05bc\u05e0\u05b5\u05d9\u05be\u05e2\u05b7\u05de\u05bc\u05d5\u05b9, \u02beere\u1e63 b\u0259n\u00ea-\u02bfamm\u00f4) taken to mean \u201cland of the sons of his people.\u201d Alternatively \u201chis people\u201d could be rendered \u201cAmaw\u201d which is now well attested as a territory in upper Mesopotamia west of the Euphrates. Interestingly, in his appeal to Balaam, Balak did not identify by name these people whom he wished Balaam to curse. Balak and his Midianite allies shared the common ancient Near Eastern belief that curses (or blessings) properly performed by a qualified diviner were powerfully effective. Accordingly, what better method could be chosen to thwart the feared Israelite onslaught than to secure the services of the outstanding soothsayer to \u201ccast a spell\u201d on Israel? Balak may even have known of Balaam\u2019s allegiance to Israel\u2019s God, which would have enhanced the project even more, as some ancients believed certain persons such as Balaam capable of magically manipulating a deity to gain their desired ends. Had his intrigue produced some strong execration against Israel, Balak, emboldened by this omen of victory over his foe, would have attacked the encamped Israelites to defeat them and drive them out of the country. Saying those you bless are blessed, and those you curse are cursed, Balak suggested that Balaam\u2019s fame had reached Moab; he was regarded as a powerful soothsayer whose word effectively achieved results.<\/p>\n
2. Balaam Declines First Summons (22:7\u201314)<\/p>\n
22:7\u201314 Balak\u2019s representatives carried with them the fee for divination because diviners were paid, sometimes, at least in part, in advance. After they informed Balaam of their request, Balaam, expecting the LORD\u2019s will in the matter to be communicated to him that night, instructed them to spend the night. As anticipated, the LORD communicated with Balaam, probably in a revelatory dream, asking who are these men with you? The question was rhetorical, focusing attention on the problem at hand (cf. Gen 3:9, 11; 4:9). When Balaam repeated the mission of the elders and their request, the LORD replied Do not go with them. You must not put a curse on those people, because they are blessed. The divine prohibition was clear and absolute. Properly, therefore, Balaam refused Balak\u2019s invitation, and his messengers returned to Balak without him to announce his refusal.<\/p>\n
3. Presumptuous Balaam Permitted Journey (22:15\u201320)<\/p>\n
22:15\u201320 By sending a larger number of more distinguished dignitaries Balak sought successfully to impress Balaam with the missions\u2019 importance and thus with his nation\u2019s potential indebtedness to the man who succeeded in cursing their foe. Promising I will reward you handsomely, literally \u201cI will surely honor you greatly,\u201d Balak sought to persuade Balaam. Although prestige and recognition are doubtless included, Balaam rightly interpreted these words as a promise of rich, almost unlimited, reward (v. 18). The truly noble sentiment Balaam expressed in response, I could not \u2026 go beyond the command of the LORD my God, was immediately betrayed by the diviner\u2019s next statement. Although Balaam clearly understood the LORD\u2019s will (v. 12), the promise of riches made him long presumptuously for a different message, saying, I will find out what else the LORD will tell me. Despite the LORD\u2019s prohibition (v. 12) Balaam intensely desired to go to Moab in search of \u201chonor.\u201d Accordingly, again appearing to Balaam as in verse 9, the LORD permitted the journey which ended so tragically for Balaam (31:8; cf. 2 Thess 2:11).<\/p>\n
4. Balaam Delivered, Counseled by Donkey (22:21\u201330)<\/p>\n
22:21\u201330 The domesticated donkey was normally used for travel, even by dignitaries (cf. Judg 5:10). Very angry, provoked by his servant\u2019s inner audacity (v. 19), perhaps also by the avarice growing within Balaam, the LORD intercepted him in such a way as to strictly warn him concerning his future actions. That the expression, the angel of the LORD, may designate here, as often, a manifestation of the LORD himself seems clear from his speaking for God in the first person (vv. 32, 34\u201335). The word rendered \u201cangel\u201d means \u201cmessenger\u201d and does not always refer to supernatural beings separate from God (cf. Gen 16:7, 10, 13). As a man of rank Balaam was accompanied by two servants. Balak\u2019s princely messengers probably traveled some distance apart from Balaam, hence are not mentioned here. With the words the donkey saw, the text subtly suggests that on this occasion a beast of burden could see the evidence of divine displeasure which the presumptuous seer, blinded by his own avaricious will, could not see. After the donkey initially avoided the opposing angel of the LORD and received a beating for her efforts, the angel of the LORD stood in a narrow path between two vineyards, with walls on both sides. The terrain depicted suggests that Balaam was nearing Moab by this time. Encountering the angel of the LORD a third time, but unable to avert fatal collision as she had in the two previous instances (vv. 23, 25), the donkey simply stopped and lay down under Balaam, whereupon her master beat her with his staff. As he had evidently enabled the animal to see the angel, so now the LORD opened the donkey\u2019s mouth, miraculously enabling it to speak. Interestingly, Balaam was so overcome with rage that, instead of being amazed that his mount spoke, he quickly and angrily answered the donkey.<\/p>\n
5. God Speaks to Balaam (22:31\u201335)<\/p>\n
22:31\u201335 Now the LORD opened Balaam\u2019s eyes, enabling the prophet to see his danger and thus appreciate the actions of his ass. The Jewish interpreter Maimonides and others sought to understand Balaam\u2019s experience with the ass as occurring in a dream-vision, but the text speaks of a real and miraculous occurrence, the exact \u201chows\u201d of which may be easily left with the wisdom of the all-powerful Creator. The sword drawn showed clearly the danger Balaam had escaped (v. 33), and he bowed low and fell facedown responding in obeisance to the manifestation of the LORD before him. Speaking to Balaam, the LORD warned him your path is a reckless one before me and identified the donkey as Balaam\u2019s means of deliverance in the three encounters. The word rendered \u201creckless\u201d (\u05d9\u05b8\u05e8\u05b7\u05d8, y\u0101ra\u1e6d) is somewhat difficult so that the translations vary, but the present translation seems most likely. Balaam\u2019s confession, I have sinned, rare in Scripture, may not have been totally sincere on this occasion, unless he was only admitting that he had abused a praiseworthy animal. Balaam\u2019s continuing deep desire to journey to Moab is reflected in his words if you are displeased. After all, the journey had originally been prohibited (v. 12), and Balaam\u2019s actions had just been identified as \u201creckless.\u201d The LORD\u2019s renewed permission to go with the men may indicate it was Balaam\u2019s inward motivation not his action, as such, that had provoked the LORD\u2019s wrath (v. 22). Again, as before (v. 20), the LORD warned Balaam he could only speak the message God would give him.<\/p>\n
6. Balaam Arrives in Moab for Attempted Cursing (22:36\u201341)<\/p>\n
22:36\u201341 The Moabite town may have been Ar, which was located on the bank of the Arnon. Saying am I really not able to reward you? the crafty Balak remonstrated with the professional soothsayer for his previous failure to heed the king\u2019s summons (vv. 13\u201314) and appealed anew to what was in fact Balaam\u2019s fatal weakness\u2014his greed (see note to v. 17). In response Balaam forthrightly confessed his limitations (I must speak only what God puts in my mouth) which the LORD had twice emphasized (vv. 20, 35). This inability, however, Balak could not fathom; he interpreted Balaam\u2019s coming as readiness to curse Israel (see note to v. 6). Hopelessly Balaam was attempting to please both the God of Israel and the king of Moab. Kiriath Huzoth, literally \u201ccity of streets,\u201d is of uncertain identification but was located in the vicinity of the Arnon (v. 36) near Bamoth Baal (v. 41). At Kiriath Huzoth, Balak sacrificed cattle and sheep, and gave some to Balaam and the princes. Offering this worship, doubtless to his own god, Balak included Balaam in a sacrificial communal meal which symbolically sealed a pact-relationship for the soothsayer, the leaders of Moab, and their god (cf. Gen 31:46; Exod 24:11). Thus Balak sought further to identify Balaam with the Moabite cause. Meaning \u201chigh places of Baal,\u201d Bamoth Baal is the fuller name of Bamoth described in 21:19\u201320. \u201cBaal\u201d indicates this hill had associations with the worship of that Canaanite deity. From here Balaam saw part of the people. Heights were regarded in the ancient Near East as nearer the deity; curses were regarded as more effective when the diviner could see the object of his curse. Balak sought to observe all the proprieties in order to ensure success for his venture. Accordingly, taking Balaam to hills that evidently had pagan cultic associations (compare 23:14, 28), he obediently prepared and offered to the LORD, whom Balaam served, extensive sacrifices (23:1\u20132, 14, 29\u201330) during which Balaam sought an oracle from God. Three times Balak thus sacrificed and patiently but expectantly awaited the desired execration only to hear his hired seer frustrate his purpose by uttering an inspired oracle of blessing upon his enemy Israel (23:7\u201310, 18\u201324; 24:3\u20139). Finally, unsolicited, Balaam voiced a last blessing upon Israel and predicted future defeat for Moab and nearby peoples (24:15\u201324).<\/p>\n
B. BALAAM DELIVERS DIVINE ORACLES (23:1\u201324:25)<\/p>\n
1. Balaam Blesses Israel, Frustrates Balak\u2019s Intent (23:1\u201312)<\/p>\n
23:1\u20135 Calling for seven altars \u2026 seven bulls and seven rams, Balaam directed that a full complement of burnt offerings (v. 3) be made, doubtless in an attempt to induce from the LORD a response favorable to Balak. Then, the two of them offered a bull and a ram on each altar, Balaam serving as priest for Balak (vv. 3\u20134). Instructing the king to stay here beside your offering as a worshiper, Balaam went to seek communion with the LORD, apparently looking for omens for divination as he went (24:1). Balaam\u2019s entire procedure combined common ancient Near Eastern religious ideas with desire to approach the LORD. Balak\u2019s offering of these animals was technically a burnt offering (\u05e2\u05b9\u05dc\u05b8\u05d4, \u02bf\u014dl\u0101h; cf. Leviticus 1). Balaam then ascended a barren height apart from, probably more elevated than, Balak\u2019s position. Manifesting himself to Balaam, the LORD consigned him to deliver to the assembled Moabites and their scheming king, not an ambiguous interpretation of some natural phenomenon taken as an omen or portent, but instead a clear, genuine oracle from God.
\n23:6\u201310 Though often translated as \u201cproverb,\u201d the Hebrew term here rendered \u201coracle\u201d (\u05de\u05b8\u05e9\u05b8\u05c1\u05dc, m\u0101\u0161\u0101l) stems from a root meaning \u201cto be like\u201d and is used not only for pithy sayings or sentences set forth in parallel lines, but also broadly for a wide range of poetic materials. Paralleled in the poetic structure the expressions Aram and eastern mountains broadly but properly allude to Balaam\u2019s homeland (22:5). Geographically a general term denoting the territories of the Arameans, Aram stretched northeast of Palestine through Upper Mesopotamia. The extensive \u201ceastern mountains\u201d included hills overlooking the Sajur River (cf. Gen 24:10; 25:20). Invited by Balak to denounce Israel (22:6), Balaam, now under inspiration, cried how can I curse those whom God has not cursed? The LORD had made this very clear to Balaam before he answered Balak\u2019s summons (22:12, 20, 35), and Balaam had so informed the king (22:18, 38). Declaring from the rocky peaks I see them (cf. 22:41), Balaam identified Israel as a people who live apart. Thus poetically Balaam confessed Israel\u2019s distinctiveness, as the parallel clause do not consider themselves one of the nations shows. Elsewhere the idea of \u201cdwelling alone\u201d denotes peaceful security (Deut 33:28; Jer 49:31; Micah 7:14). Though intended for prosperity and material blessing, Israel was made truly unique by her holy covenant with the LORD (Exod 19:5; 33:16). The rhetorical question who can count the dust of Jacob? emphasizes that divine blessing was already evident in Israel\u2019s remarkable population growth, in partial fulfillment of the promise to Abraham (cf. Gen 13:16; Exod 1:7). The fourth part could allude to the portion of the camp visible to Balaam. More attractive in the light of Assyrian cognates is the alternative rendering \u201cdust cloud\u201d in parallel with \u201cdust\u201d in the first clause. Identifying Israel as righteous, i.e., \u201cupright\u201d (\u05d9\u05b0\u05e9\u05b8\u05c1\u05e8\u05b4\u05d9\u05de, y\u0259\u0161\u0101r\u00eem), Balaam concluded by wishing that he himself might share the serene death in fullness of years accorded such people (cf. Gen 15:15; Exod 20:12).
\n23:11\u201312 Angrily, the incredulous pagan Balak asked what have you done to me? and sternly rebuked the soothsayer for blessing the enemies he had been called to curse. Although he had been warned concerning this possibility, Balak clung to his belief that a qualified diviner such as Balaam had the magical power to manipulate the deity. The passage starkly contrasts this pagan outlook with the fundamental principle of revealed religion that a prophet serves (only) as a spokesman or mouthpiece for God.<\/p>\n
2. Balak Foiled Again as Balaam Voices Second Blessing (23:13\u201326)<\/p>\n
23:13\u201317 Unable to comprehend Balaam\u2019s inability to do his bidding, Balak proposed a change of location. Why did Balak want Balaam to see only a part but not all of them? Perhaps he hoped to prevent Balaam from being, as Balak viewed it, so unduly impressed with Israel\u2019s numbers (v. 10; 22:41). In this activity Balak was following ancient belief that through persistence unfavorable omens might be replaced with favorable ones. With each repetition he needed a yet stronger curse to overcome Balaam\u2019s oracular blessing. As Zophim means \u201cwatchmen\u201d or \u201cspies,\u201d the expression field of Zophim may convey the idea of a special \u201clookout point\u201d on the top of Pisgah (21:20). Again, as before (23:1, 3), Balak built seven altars and offered on each a bull and a ram as burnt offerings, and again the LORD met with Balaam and he returned to the expectant Balak with an oracular divine message.
\n23:18\u201324 Calling upon Balak to arise, i.e., \u201crouse yourself,\u201d Balaam addressed the standing king by his patronym son of Zippor (22:2) and began his second oracle. Saying God is not a man that he should lie, the LORD\u2019s word first rebukes Balak for attempting to reverse the divinely ordained and announced blessing upon Israel. The poetic parallel nor a son of man, that he should change his mind is synonymous, \u201cson of man\u201d meaning simply \u201ca human being.\u201d That he should lie (\u05d5\u05b4\u05d9\u05db\u05b7\u05d6\u05b5\u05bc\u05d1, w\u00eekazz\u0113b) is alternatively \u201cthat he should prove unreliable,\u201d as is the sense of the verb in Habakkuk 2:3, Isaiah 58:11. To change his mind (\u05d9\u05b4\u05ea\u05b0\u05e0\u05b6\u05d7\u05b8\u05dd, yithne\u1e25\u0101m) is literally \u201cto repent,\u201d but in the sense \u201cto change his purpose.\u201d God does not modify his purpose without due cause, as in Exodus 32:14. The oracle notes Balaam\u2019s inability to reverse the LORD\u2019s command to bless expressed in verses 5, 7\u201310. Hence no misfortune is seen in Jacob, no misery observed in Israel, because the LORD found no sufficient reason for utterly cursing Israel as Balak desired. Instead, as men enthusiastically greet the advent of a new king, so figuratively the victorious divine kingship of the LORD is hailed with the shout of the King (cf. Deut 33:5; contrast 1 Sam 8:7). Strength of a wild ox is literally \u201chorns of a wild ox\u201d (\u05db\u05b0\u05bc\u05ea\u05d5\u05b9 \u05e2\u05b2\u05e4\u05b9\u05ea \u05e8\u05b0\u05d0\u05b5\u05dd, k\u0259th\u00f4\u02bf\u0103ph\u014dth r\u0259\u02be\u0113m). The wild ox was noted for its towering horns and great strength (cf. Job 39:9\u201312). Thus, the phrase figuratively depicts the massive power divinely exercised on Israel\u2019s behalf. Sorcery and divination, i.e., such devices as Balak was employing, were futile, powerless against the expressed purpose of the LORD. An alternative view renders \u201cwith\u201d or \u201cin\u201d instead of against to obtain the sense that Israel does not need such means or does not follow such pagan practices (Deut 18:9\u201314). As an exclamation see what God has done! declares the popular amazement at Israel\u2019s divinely directed success. Some understand the somewhat difficult Hebrew of the whole clause as an affirmation that God communicates \u201cto\u201d Israel his will so that Israel does not need enchantments (cf. Amos 3:7). Divinely empowered Israel is compared with a lion, the fearful and fierce \u201cking of beasts\u201d (cf. Gen 49:9; Deut 33:20; Micah 5:8). Thus the second oracle moves from defense of divine integrity (vv. 18\u201319) through affirmation of the LORD\u2019s purpose and power (vv. 20\u201323) to lay stress upon the consequent power of his people (v. 24).
\n23:25\u201326 Neither curse \u2026 nor bless is a merism, the use of opposites to indicate totality, i.e., \u201cdo nothing at all.\u201d Extremely disappointed, the angry king reacted initially by proposing cancellation of their project, but then reconsidered and arranged a third attempt. Somewhat lamely Balaam reminded Balak I must do whatever the LORD says (v. 12; 22:38). Yet, Balak would reason, if Balaam could not help, why did the diviner come?<\/p>\n
3. Balaam Proclaims Third Blessing Before Frustrated Moabites (23:27\u201324:9)<\/p>\n
23:27\u201330 In his pagan ignorance Balak clung to the vain hope that different conditions might even yet evoke from the LORD a response favorable to Moab\u2019s planned aggression (see notes to 22:6, 41). Hence, Balak took Balaam to the top of Peor, another one of the peaks opposite Jericho north of the Dead Sea. This mountain, which cannot currently be precisely identified, also had idolatrous associations (25:3; Deut 3:29; 4:46). The wasteland is Hebrew \u05d4\u05b7\u05d9\u05b0\u05e9\u05b4\u05c1\u05d9\u05de\u05b9\u05df (hay\u0259\u0161\u00eem\u014dn), as in 21:20. Once again Balaam called for seven altars and Balak offered a bull and ram on each altar as burnt offerings (cf. 23:1\u20132, 14).
\n24:1\u20132 Sorcery, literally \u201comens\u201d (\u05e0\u05b0\u05d7\u05b8\u05e9\u05b4\u05c1\u05d9\u05de, n\u0259\u1e25\u0101\u0161\u00eem), involved various natural phenomena from which it was thought the qualified diviner by careful observation could interpret the divine will. Examples of such phenomena were the flight of birds or arrows, the intestines of sacrificial animals, or even the results of casting dice (natural in the sense of not being determined by men). Thus, divination and kindred practices rested, like modern pseudosciences such as astrology, on the foundational assumption that the future or the unknown is \u201cwritten\u201d in the known phenomena if one can only \u201cread\u201d it. Resigned to the reality that the LORD only permitted him to bless Israel despite his employer\u2019s wishes to the contrary, Balaam abandoned his usual practice and instead awaited a direct message. Thus seeking such revelation, he turned his face toward the desert, i.e., westward, toward the Jeshimon (21:20; 23:28). The encampment of Israel tribe by tribe is described in 2:1\u201334. As Balaam gazed upon the assembled tribes, the Spirit of God came upon him. If contrasted with the previous phraseology (23:5, 16), this language denoting inspiration may convey a more intense overpowering of Balaam by the Spirit than before (cf. 11:17, 25\u201329; 1 Sam 10:6, 9\u201311).
\n24:3\u20134 Rendered oracle in verse 3 are two different Hebrew words, \u05de\u05b8\u05e9\u05b8\u05c1\u05dc (m\u0101\u0161\u0101l), as in 23:7, and \u05e0\u05b0\u05d0\u05bb\u05dd (n\u0259\u02beum). Frequent in the prophets for divine revelations, this latter term is here first applied to one of Balaam\u2019s utterances. The rare term (\u05e9\u05b0\u05c1\u05ea\u05bb\u05dd, \u0161\u0259thum) translated sees clearly is obscure; others propose \u201cis closed,\u201d or, with different Hebrew word division, \u201cis true\u201d (see LXX) or \u201cis perfect.\u201d The paralleled divine names God (\u05d0\u05b5\u05dc, \u02be\u0113l) and Almighty (\u05e9\u05b7\u05c1\u05d3\u05b7\u05bc\u05d9, \u0161adday) are frequently combined, as in Genesis 17:1 and Exodus 6:3. Prostrate under the divine influence (v. 2), Balaam voiced the inspired message.
\n24:5\u20137a At times blinded by greed and ambition Balaam now knew that God had opened his eyes to see clearly an inspired vision of Israel\u2019s glory. After thus describing his own inner state (vv. 3\u20134), the seer extols as divinely planted the vast encampment at peace before him (vv. 5\u20137a) and proceeds to sing again of the chosen nation\u2019s exaltation and invincibility in war (vv. 7b\u20139). Using deft synonymously parallel expressions, the poet compares the neatly arranged tents of the people of Israel to beautiful valleys (a rarer Hebrew homonym means \u201cpalm trees\u201d) and gardens. With the term aloes the text refers to the exotic Far Eastern eaglewood trees whose aromatic wood and, more commonly, perfume or incense made from it, were imported into Bible lands (Ps 45:8; Prov 7:17; S of S 4:14). Although cedars are not ordinarily found by water, the poet pictures their stately majesty as enhanced in this way (cf. Ps 104:16). Full buckets from full cisterns and seed germinating in watered soil picture poetically the rain-blessed agricultural prosperity intended for Israel.
\n24:7b\u20139 Apparently Agag was a hereditary title for the kings of the Amalekites whom Israel had first fought after leaving Egypt (Exod 17:8\u201316) and who may in some way represent all her foes (cf. 24:20). Thus, the poetic line promises political power for Israel\u2019s future rulers already anticipated in Genesis 35:11 and 36:31. Again, as in the second oracle (23:22), Israel is depicted as having the strength of a wild ox. With this power they devour hostile nations \u2026 break their bones and pierce with their arrows. This latter phrase might perhaps better be \u201ccrush their arrows\u201d or even, following a Syriac reading, \u201ccrush their loins.\u201d Like the lion imagery of 23:24, this latter part of verse 8 depicts Israel as invincibly destroying her foes, while verse 9 pictures the victoriously secure nation as a powerful lion left undisturbed at rest. May those who bless you be blessed confirms that the nation Balak sought to curse stood under the special blessing of God (cf. Gen 12:3; 27:29). Poetically, the closing second person address, you, complements the address opening the body of the oracle (v. 5).<\/p>\n
4. Balaam\u2019s Concluding Messages Recorded (24:10\u201325)<\/p>\n
24:10\u201314 To express his derisive contempt for the soothsayer who could not obtain his will from the gods, even for rich reward, Balak struck his hands together in angry clapping (cf. Job 27:23; Lam 2:15). Summoned to curse the Israelites, Balaam had blessed them these three times. One may note progressive despair in Balak\u2019s successive responses to Balaam\u2019s oracles (compare vv. 10\u201311 with 23:11 and 23:25\u201327). Saying I would reward you handsomely, but the LORD has kept you from being rewarded, Balak mocked Balaam\u2019s confidence in the LORD. Tragically, Balaam evidently later accepted this misrepresentation, as his wounded pride led him to attack Israel in another way (25:2\u20133; 31:16). As before (23:12, 26) Balaam protested that he had originally told Balak\u2019s messengers of his inability to do anything of my own accord or to go beyond the command of the LORD (22:18). Balaam then announced his intention to leave, as Balak demanded, but offered first to warn the Moabite king of what Israel would do to the Moabites in days to come. The Hebrew expression, literally \u201cat the end of the days\u201d (\u05d1\u05b0\u05bc\u05d0\u05b7 \u05d7\u05b2\u05e8\u05b4\u05d9\u05ea \u05d4\u05b7\u05d9\u05b8\u05bc\u05de\u05b4\u05d9\u05dd, b\u0259\u02bea\u1e25\u0103r\u00eeth hayy\u0101m\u00eem), here, as in Deuteronomy 31:29, refers generally to the future, not specifically to the messianic era.
\n24:15\u201319 Fourfold repetition of the clause translated he uttered his oracle (vv. 15, 20, 21, 23) frames the message as having four parts, or as four conjoined utterances. These treat the destinies of Moab and Edom (vv. 17\u201319), Amalek (v. 20), the Kenites (vv. 21\u201322), and other peoples (vv. 23\u201324). The introduction (vv. 15\u201316) parallels the previous ones (see notes to vv. 3\u20134). The Hebrew rendered Most High is \u05e2\u05b6\u05dc\u05d9\u05d5\u05b9\u05df (\u02bfely\u00f4n). The words I see him but not now reveal that, unlike the previous utterances, this one deals solely with the future. Thus, Balaam \u201csaw\u201d future Israel in a vision. Both star and scepter symbolized royalty in the ancient Near East (cf. Isa 14:12; Gen 49:10). Viewed historically the context here suggests allusion to David although similar language elsewhere depicts David\u2019s greater son, King Messiah (Rev 22:16; compare Matt 2:2). The Hebrew verbs rendered will come and will rise, literally \u201chas trod \u2026 arisen\u201d (\u05e7\u05b8\u05dd \u2026 \u05d3\u05b8\u05bc\u05e8\u05b7\u05da\u05b0, d\u0101rak \u2026 q\u0101m) are prophetic perfects which view the certain future as if it had already occurred. Foreheads is literally \u201ctwo sides\u201d (of the head), i.e., temples. The same word may mean \u201cborders.\u201d As noted in the NIV footnotes, the last line of verse 17 is obscure. The word skulls assumes a reading \u05e7\u05b8\u05d3\u05b0\u05e7\u05b9\u05d3 (qodq\u014dd) as in Jeremiah 48:45 instead of the Massoretic reading \u05e7\u05b7\u05e8\u05b0\u05e7\u05b7\u05e8 (qarqar) which is of uncertain meaning. The word Sheth (\u05e9\u05b5\u05c1\u05ea, \u0161\u0113th) is also quite difficult. If a proper noun, as understood by other ancient and modern versions, it seems confirmed by some nonbiblical texts as an obscure homonym of \u201cSeth\u201d (Gen 4:25) referring to Moabite Bedouins. Others consider it a variant of \u05e9\u05b8\u05c1\u05d0\u05d5\u05b9\u05df (\u0161\u0101\u02be\u00f4n) which means \u201ctumult\u201d and occurs in almost identical context in Jeremiah 48:45 to describe the Moabites and their neighbors as wild and warlike. In either case the term makes Moab the object of the future king\u2019s conquest. Balaam\u2019s oracle first informed Balak that Israel would later conquer his people (see v. 14). Moab\u2019s southern neighbor, Edom, in their territory, Seir, would also fall to the future king (see notes to 20:14\u201321 and compare Gen 32:3). This prediction was fulfilled when David conquered both Moab and Edom (2 Sam 8:2, 13\u201314). The city (\u05e2\u05b4\u05d9\u05e8, \u02bf\u00eer) may well allude to Balak\u2019s city Ar (21:15, 28).
\n24:20 Balaam saw Amalek could mean that he literally saw some Amalekites, but more likely he envisioned this people, as he did Israel in verse 17. The Amalekites were first among the nations to war against Israel after the people left Egypt, at which time their future destruction was decreed (Exod 17:8\u201316). This ban and Balaam\u2019s prediction were fulfilled in later Old Testament history (1 Sam 15:1\u20139; 30:1\u201320; 1 Chr 4:42\u201343).
\n24:21\u201322 As he had envisioned Amalek (v. 20), so also he saw the Kenites. Their name meaning \u201csmiths,\u201d these metalworking nomads were ordinarily friendly to Israel (see 10:29\u201332 and notes; 1 Sam 15:6\u20137). Balaam\u2019s vision, however, included future misfortune for them also. The Hebrew poetically puns on the similar sounds for nest (\u05e7\u05b5\u05df, q\u0113n), Kenites (\u05e7\u05b5\u05d9\u05e0\u05b4\u05d9, q\u00ean\u00ee) and another form for Kenites (\u05e7\u05b8\u05d9\u05b4\u05df, q\u0101yin) which is an eponym or a collective name. Though \u201cnested\u201d securely in rocky hills (cf. Obadiah 4) the Kenites would tragically some day be taken as captives. Asshur is Assyria. Some Kenites doubtless fell captive to Assyria when the northern kingdom of Israel fell in 722 B.C. (cf. Judg 4:17; 2 Kgs 15:29). The term here may, however, allude to the somewhat obscure people mentioned in Genesis 25:3, or perhaps even stand figuratively for the eastern powers generally (cf. Ezra 6:22).
\n24:23\u201324 The vision of expanding judgment became terrifying, prompting the question Ah, who can live when God does this? An ancient name for Cyprus (cf. Gen 10:4), Kittim came to be used for areas beyond Cyprus, hence peoples from across the Mediterranean generally. The vision may thus glimpse darkly the rise of Alexander the Great who conquered the eastern powers in the fourth century B.C. The conqueror Asshur (v. 22) is in turn conquered (see note to v. 22). Although he was Israel\u2019s ancestor, Eber was also a progenitor of numerous other peoples (cf. Gen 10:21\u201325; 14:13). The term may here allude to the Babylonians. They too, literally \u201che also\u201d (\u05d2\u05b7\u05dd\u05be\u05d4\u05d5\u05bc\u05d0, gam-h\u00fb\u02be), likely refers to the Kittim viewed as one people, not to Asshur-Eber. While several details in Balaam\u2019s final oracles are obscure, the closing word ruin reflects the theme\u2014destruction for peoples surrounding Israel.
\n24:25 The statement Balaam \u2026 returned home is perhaps better \u201cBalaam started to return home.\u201d Although Balaam intended to return home (vv. 11, 14) and should have done so, he instead tarried among the Midianites whom he wickedly counseled (31:16) and whose fate he shared (31:8). Had he returned home, he would have emerged from his compromised position personally victorious, but instead he chose to plunge himself into a different foreign intrigue (ch. 25).
\nThe abject failure of Balak\u2019s venture with Balaam showed God\u2019s people proving as immune to the threat of pagan divination as a faithful Israel had been to hostile enemies (21:1\u20133, 21\u201335). Thus, the story tells of one of the great \u201csaving acts of the LORD\u201d (Micah 6:5). Because of his weakness, particularly as displayed later, Balaam became for later Jewish tradition the classic wicked man, the archenemy of God\u2019s people, a role reserved in Christian tradition for Simon Magus of Acts 8:9\u201311. In the New Testament Balaam exemplifies sinful and presumptuous greed (2 Pet 2:15; Jude 11) and, on the basis of his later counsel, idolatrous immorality (Rev 2:14).<\/p>\n
C. ISRAEL ENTICED TO IDOLATROUS LEWDNESS (25:1\u201318)<\/p>\n
1. Israelites Engaged in Heathen Rites by Moabite Women<\/p>\n
25:1\u20133 Literally \u201cthe acacia trees,\u201d Shittim, the site of Israel\u2019s last encampment before entering Canaan (33:49), is perhaps modern Tell Kefrein, some ten miles east of Jericho. The sexual immorality and debauchery of Israelite men with Moabite (and Midianite) women did not occur by chance but was rather the result of a shrewd and nefarious policy proposed to Midian and Moab (31:16; Rev 2:14) by the previously discredited Balaam in the hope that the LORD would destroy his sinning people, thus accomplishing Balak\u2019s original design (22:4, 6, 11). Accordingly, the incidents recorded here are related aspects of one ingenious plot which threatened Israel (v. 18; 31:16). As the people ate the sacrificial flesh at the pagan feast, they were participating responsibly in idolatrous worship (cf. 22:40; Exod 24:15\u201316; 1 Cor 10:18). Thus, Israel joined in worshiping the Baal of Peor (cf. Ps 106:28). Violating the first commandment (Exod 20:3), numerous Israelites committed themselves in pagan worship, thus becoming \u201cattached\u201d to a heathen idol. Baal, the foremost Canaanite deity, was worshiped in numerous places as a local deity, hence the plural form Baalim, rendered Baals (Judg 2:11). Baal of Peor would thus have been the local fertility god whose worship involved not only sacrificial feasts but also such lewd practices as religious prostitution through which devotees supposedly dramatically enacted the Baal\u2019s mating with his goddess consort. The word \u201cbaal\u201d means \u201cmaster.\u201d Understandably then, the LORD\u2019s anger burned against the offending Israelites for their grievous sin (Exod 20:5).
\n25:4\u20135 The LORD demanded that the leading offenders be executed, and he brought a plague upon the people (vv. 8\u20139, 18). In context the words leaders of these people, literally \u201cthe heads of the people,\u201d denote the ringleaders in the idolatry. The exact mode of execution of the ringleaders is uncertain. Kill \u2026 and expose renders one Hebrew verb (\u05d4\u05d5\u05b9\u05e7\u05b7\u05e2, h\u00f4qa\u02bf) which could mean \u201cthrow down\u201d to suggest the offenders were cast from a height. More probable is impalement (\u201cthrowing down on a stake\u201d) which, unlike hanging, was commonly practiced in the ancient Near East. The execution was to be public, under the sun, and the corpses likely were to be left unburied and exposed. In this way the LORD\u2019s fierce anger, which was already being manifested in the plague (vv. 8\u20139, 18), would turn away from Israel. Obeying the LORD\u2019s decree, Moses instructed Israel\u2019s judges, his subordinates (Exod 18:24\u201326), to execute the offenders in their respective contingents.<\/p>\n
2. Phinehas Takes Decisive Action in Midianite Seduction (25:6\u20139)<\/p>\n
25:6\u20139 In shameless brazen defiance, an Israelite man, Zimri (v. 14), brought the Midianitess Cozbi (v. 15) into the camp, literally \u201cunto his brethren,\u201d for their sexual liaison. While Moses and the people were at the sanctuary entrance penitently weeping, doubtless seeking the removal of the plague, Zimri dared to publicly flaunt his Midianite prize. The name of Aaron\u2019s grandson Phinehas is originally Egyptian and means \u201cthe Nubian.\u201d The word rendered tent (\u05e7\u05bb\u05d1\u05b8\u05bc\u05d4, qubb\u0101h) occurs only here but evidently means \u201cvaulted tent,\u201d such as more wealthy families might possess. In righteous indignation Phinehas drove the spear through both of them, thus summarily executing the offending couple while they were copulating. Phinehas\u2019s zealous act, which served notice the iniquity would no longer be tolerated, appeased the LORD\u2019s wrath (v. 11) and the plague \u2026 was stopped. That 24,000 perished in the aftermath of the Baal Peor idolatry indicates the seriousness of the heinous offenses committed there. Citing the incident as a warning for Christians, Paul in 1 Corinthians 10:8 gives twenty-three thousand. Both are round numbers, but the present text may include those executed by the judges (v. 5).<\/p>\n
3. Phinehas Rewarded by Confirmation of Priesthood (25:10\u201313)<\/p>\n
25:10\u201313 Phinehas\u2019s zealous action expressed the LORD\u2019s attitude toward the terrible iniquity of fornication and idolatry which threatened to engulf Israel (cf. Exod 20:5). The LORD\u2019s statement quieted any criticism of Phinehas perhaps brewing among the people. Instead his decisive action was properly recognized and commemorated as righteous (Ps 106:28\u201331). Although serious, the plague had been stayed before it decimated the population (vv. 8\u20139). The expressions covenant of peace and lasting priesthood assured Phinehas of divine friendship and the promise of a secure priesthood for his posterity. This promise was historically realized as Phinehas\u2019s descendants became Israel\u2019s high priests (Judg 20:28; 1 Chr 24:1\u20136; cf. Exod 32:27\u201329). In a sense Phinehas\u2019s action had made atonement for, i.e., \u201ccovered,\u201d the sin of Israel (cf. 16:46\u201348; see note to Lev 1:4).<\/p>\n
4. Slain Couple Identified (25:14\u201315)<\/p>\n
25:14\u201315 The Israelite Zimri was not an impassioned youth but instead a prominent tribal leader (see note to 1:2.). The Midianite woman involved was also prominent, the daughter of a chieftain, one of five kings of Midian (31:8). This data underlines both the seriousness of Zimri\u2019s challenge and the heroism of Phinehas.<\/p>\n
5. Midianites Slated for Punishment (25:16\u201318)<\/p>\n
25:16\u201318 God commanded Israel to treat the Midianites as enemies, i.e., to attack them, as retribution for the distress they had caused when they deceived the Israelites in the affair of Peor. Although Balak had led in summoning Balaam to curse Israel (22:4\u20137), it was the Midianites, counseled by Balaam (31:16), who had influenced the Moabites to their combined conspiracy of seduction, a plot apparently involving the highest families of both nations. The death of the Midianite princess Cozbi (see vv. 6\u20138, 14\u201315) inevitably intensified the Midianite hostility against Israel. The campaign ordained against Midian is recorded in chapter 31.<\/p>\n
II. Israel Prepares to Enter Canaan (26:1\u201336:13)<\/p>\n
As it began with preparations for leaving Sinai, Numbers closes with preparations for entering Canaan. Intertwined in these chapters are events and ordinances generally united by this theme of preparation. Beginning with a second military census to be used also for the future land distribution (ch. 26), the text next records a legal precedent establishing inheritance rights for daughters without brothers, and relates the historic appointment of Joshua as Moses\u2019 future successor (ch. 27). These events are followed by an extensive plan for public offerings in Canaan (chs. 28\u201329) and instructions regarding women\u2019s vows (ch. 30). The ordained vengeance taken on Midian is recorded with emphasis upon the subsequent purification ritual and equitable division of spoil (ch. 31). After narrating the transjordan settlement provisionally permitted Reuben, Gad, and part of Manasseh (ch. 32), the text reviews Israel\u2019s wilderness itinerary (ch. 33) and concludes with special instructions for conquest and inheritance. These reveal invasion policy (ch. 33), mark Canaan\u2019s territorial limits (ch. 34), identify tribal leaders for the land division (ch. 34), provide special Levitical and refuge cities (ch. 35), and restrict the marriage of heiresses (ch. 36). Admittedly somewhat routine and perhaps anticlimactic after the stirring episodes of previous chapters, these concerns were nevertheless essential to Israel\u2019s future success.<\/p>\n
A. SECOND CENSUS TAKEN (26:1\u201365)<\/p>\n
1. The Census Commanded (26:1\u20134)<\/p>\n
26:1\u20134 After the plague mentioned in 25:8\u20139 the LORD instructed Moses and Eleazar, the new high priest (20:25\u201329), to take a census. Thus, while the Israelites were encamped on the plains of Moab opposite Jericho (see note to 22:1), Moses was once again commanded to enumerate Israel\u2019s soldiers by families (septs), as the previous census (ch. 1) was now outdated. Because the present census was also to be used for future land allotment (vv. 52\u201356), the style of presentation varies from that of chapter 1, the tribal clans, corresponding generally with the genealogical list of Genesis 46:8\u201327, being added here. The words take a census of the men are not found in the Hebrew text of verse 4 but are supplied from verse 2. The phrase these were the Israelites introduces the long list of tribal clans and sums following. After many vicissitudes the tribes of Israel, brought out of Egypt and its bondage by God, stood on the brink of their promised inheritance.<\/p>\n
2. Israel Numbered Again (26:5\u201351)<\/p>\n
26:5\u201311 The tribes are listed as in chapter 1 except that Manasseh appears before Ephraim (vv. 29, 35). Comparing the second with the first census reveals that although the totals were similar, the tribes had experienced several significant population changes, the most notable being Simeon\u2019s marked loss (v. 14). The descendants of Reuben had slightly declined numerically (1:21). The text notes the tragic fate of Dathan and Abiram which was described in detail in chapter 16. As noted earlier, the sons of Korah separated themselves from their father\u2019s judgment and their line of descendants later became an outstanding family in Israel.
\n26:12\u201314 The Simeonites, the descendants of Simeon, had declined drastically (cf. 1:23) to become the smallest tribe, perhaps in part due to greater involvement in the Baal-Peor incident (25:8\u20139, 14). Nemuel is elsewhere \u201cJemuel\u201d and Zerah is \u201cZohar,\u201d while no clan survived from \u201cOhad\u201d (Gen 46:10; Exod 6:15).
\n26:15\u201318 The Gadites had declined but not seriously (cf. 1:25). Ozni is called \u201cEzbon\u201d in Genesis 46:16.
\n26:19\u201322 The important tribe of Judah had experienced a small increase (cf. 1:27). The tragic deaths of Er and Onan are recorded in Genesis 38:7\u201310. Perez and Zerah were Judah\u2019s offspring by Tamar (cf. Gen 38:12\u201330).
\n26:23\u201325 The tribe of Issachar had increased somewhat (cf. 1:29). Jashub is called \u201cIob\u201d in the Hebrew text of Genesis 46:13.
\n26:26\u201327 The descendants of Zebulun had also enjoyed a modest increase (cf. 1:31).
\n26:28\u201334 Substantial growth had made Manasseh the larger of the Joseph tribes (cf. 1:35), perhaps accounting for its being listed here before Ephraim. In verse 33 the text focuses on Zelophehad, anticipating the inheritance his daughters requested and received (27:1\u201311).
\n26:35\u201337 The Ephraimites, the descendants of Ephraim, had decreased somewhat from the previous census (cf. 1:33).
\n26:38\u201341 Though later to be sharply reduced (Judges 20), the tribe of Benjamin had experienced solid growth in the wilderness (cf. 1:37). The names Ahiram \u2026 Shupham and Hupham appear as \u201cEhi,\u201d \u201cMuppim\u201d and \u201cHuppim,\u201d respectively, in Genesis 46:21 which also contains three names not surviving as clan designations.
\n26:42\u201343 Dan had increased slightly since the first census (cf. 1:39). Shusham is called \u201cHushim\u201d in Genesis 46:23.
\n26:44\u201347 Like Issachar, Manasseh, and Benjamin, the descendants of Asher had increased strongly (cf. 1:41). Why Asher\u2019s daughter Serah was singled out for mention is unknown. Evidently no clan survived from Ishvah (Gen 46:17).
\n26:48\u201351 The tribe of Naphtali had suffered a population decline (cf. 1:43). The total number approximates that of the first census, being only slightly less. Concerning the large population thus depicted, see the note to 1:46.<\/p>\n
3. Land Division Planned (26:52\u201356)<\/p>\n
26:52\u201356 The census results, perhaps confirmed and communicated by proper tribal representatives (compare 1:4\u201317), provided an equitable proportionate basis for the future distribution of land among the tribes. The LORD instructed Moses to be sure that the land is distributed by lot. The general locale assigned each tribe west of the Jordan (cf. Joshua 14\u201319) and also the specific holdings assigned to the respective clans and individuals within each tribe (33:54) were to be determined by the casting of lots. Thus, two complementary systems, the census and the lot, were utilized to ensure fairness. The exact form of the lot used in ancient Israel is uncertain (see note to Lev 16:8). Israel\u2019s use of the lot was not considered a magical practice like those forbidden in Deuteronomy 18:9\u201314 but rather an entrusting of decisions to the LORD (Josh 18:6, 8; Prov 16:33).<\/p>\n
4. Levites Counted (26:57\u201362)<\/p>\n
26:57\u201362 As before, the Levites, exempted from military service (1:47\u201350) and receiving no land inheritance (18:23\u201324), were counted separately (see 3:14\u201339 and notes). The sons of Levi, Gershon \u2026 Kohath \u2026 Merari, were the progenitors of their respective clans (cf. 3:17\u201320). The additional clans detailed in verse 58 all stemmed from individuals mentioned in earlier Levite genealogies (3:17\u201320; Exod 6:16\u201319), the Korahites descending from the Kohathite Izhar (16:1). Levite clans represented earlier but not found here may have been nearly obliterated in the plagues, especially that after Korah\u2019s rebellion which involved numerous Levites (16:8, 10). With emphasis on Amram and Jochebed and their famous children, the text focuses again on the \u201cfirst family\u201d which produced the nation\u2019s lawgiver and its high priest (cf. Exod 2:1\u20134; 6:18\u201323). The sons of Aaron are listed, as in 3:4, in the order of their birth. After the tragic deaths of Nadab and Abihu (Lev 10:1\u20132), Eleazar was in line to replace his father as high priest (20:25\u201326). Unauthorized fire is literally \u201cstrange fire\u201d (see note to Lev 10:2).
\nAlthough some Levite families had apparently been severely reduced, the tribal total reflects a modest increase (cf. 3:39). At a month old an infant is assumed viable (cf. 3:15). The text notes again that the Levites were to receive no inheritance of landed property; they were supported by the tithe (18:23\u201324), but did receive certain cities (35:1\u20138).<\/p>\n
5. Wilderness Judgment Recalled (26:63\u201365)<\/p>\n
26:63\u201365 Not one of the Israelites here counted, except Caleb and Joshua (v. 65; see 14:24, 30 and notes), were among those included in the first census (Numbers 1). According to Jewish tradition the term Israelites in verse 64, as in verse 62, excludes the Levites who were not represented among the unbelieving spies (13:4\u201316). This accounts for Eleazar\u2019s continued presence (v. 63; 3:4; Josh 14:1). The fate predicted for the rebellious wilderness generation that they would surely die (14:35) was accomplished, thus providing a signal warning for God\u2019s people throughout subsequent history (Ps 95:8\u201311; 1 Cor 10:5\u201312; Heb 3:7\u201319).<\/p>\n
B. ZELOPHEHAD\u2019S DAUGHTERS GRANTED INHERITANCE RIGHTS (27:1\u201311)<\/p>\n
1. Daughters Make Appeal for Father\u2019s Inheritance (27:1\u20134)<\/p>\n
27:1\u20134 Mentioned in the genealogical census list (26:33), the daughters of Zelophehad formally approached the leaders of Israel to seek legally the family land inheritance of their deceased father. Legal matters could be publicly and officially considered at the entrance of the Tent of Meeting, the sanctuary. The women first stated clearly that their father had neither deserved nor received special punishment as one of Korah\u2019s followers (ch. 16) but rather had died for his own sin, (i.e., had stood in that regard on equal plane with the remainder of the wilderness generation). Saying that their father had left no sons, the women affirmed that their father had no legally recognized heirs. Sons were so important to ancient Israelites that barren wives sought to provide progeny through handmaids (Gen 16:1\u20132; 30:3\u20134), and the institution of levirate marriage was specifically designed to obtain a son for a deceased Israelite (Deut 25:5\u201310). Such social measures, however, did not cover all cases, and accordingly Zelophehad had died without possibility of a male heir but with five enterprising and courageous daughters. Through his posterity settled upon his land a man\u2019s name was perpetuated in Israel. Hence, Zelophehad\u2019s daughters asked why should our father\u2019s name disappear from his clan? and requested property among our father\u2019s relatives, the Gileadites of Manasseh (26:30\u201334).<\/p>\n
2. Favorable Ruling Establishes Precedent; Order of Inheritance Stipulated (27:5\u201311)<\/p>\n
27:5\u20137 Pondering the daughters\u2019 petition Moses brought their case before the LORD to seek divine counsel (cf. 9:8; 15:34; Lev 24:12). The LORD instructed Moses that what Zelophehad\u2019s daughters are saying is right. The land intended as a possession for Zelophehad was to be transferred to his daughters as heirs. Later, these heiresses were instructed to marry within their own tribe (36:1\u201312), and in due time they received their inheritance (Josh 17:3\u20136). These principles were to be applied to all similar cases.
\n27:8\u201311 Generalizing from the specific question of daughters\u2019 rights, the LORD revealed the line of succession for heirs to be: (1) sons, (2) daughters, (3) brothers, (4) paternal uncles, and (5) nearest (paternal) kinsman. Among sons, preference was to be shown to the firstborn (Deut 21:15\u201317). Legally a son could be begotten, adopted, or obtained posthumously as a result of levirate marriage (see note to v. 3). The line of succession outlined in verses 8\u201311 was to be a legal requirement, i.e., the rule for procedure in all similar cases.<\/p>\n
C. JOSHUA COMMISSIONED TO BE MOSES\u2019 SUCCESSOR (27:12\u201323)<\/p>\n
1. Moses Told of Approaching Death (27:12\u201314)<\/p>\n
27:12\u201314 Abarim (\u201cregions beyond,\u201d \u201cborderlands\u201d) denotes the mountainous region in northwest Moab overlooking the Jordan and the Dead Sea (cf. 21:11). Specifically, Moses was to ascend the principal peak of the range, Mount Nebo (Deut 32:49). From Nebo one enjoyed a vast panoramic view of the promised land of Canaan. Prohibited from entering, Moses was nevertheless privileged to see the land, after which you too will be gathered to your people (see note to 20:24). Confirmation of his coming death doubtless imparted to Moses\u2019 words and work a greater urgency which seems particularly reflected in the moving sermonic exhortations recorded in Deuteronomy, the close of which relates Moses\u2019 death in fulfillment of the divine word contained here (Deut 32:48\u201352; 34:1\u201312). Like his brother Aaron before him (20:22\u201329), Moses was to die without entering Canaan because he did not honor the LORD when the community rebelled at the waters in the Desert of Zin. Meribah Kadesh is so named to distinguish it from another \u201cMeribah\u201d near Sinai (cf. 20:13).<\/p>\n
2. Joshua Appointed in Response to Moses\u2019 Request (27:15\u201323)<\/p>\n
27:15\u201317 The greatness of Moses is seen in his immediate and intense concern for Israel\u2019s welfare. He asked the LORD as ultimate divine ruler (cf. Gen 18:23\u201325; see note to 16:22) to appoint a man over this community as his successor so that the people would not be bereft of leadership. Though personally disappointed (Deut 3:23\u201328), Moses was profoundly unselfish because he was deeply committed to the purpose and people of the LORD. Figuratively describing a leader as a shepherd, Moses asked God to appoint one who would effectively lead and direct Israel not only militarily, but in all her national life (cf. 1 Sam 18:13; 1 Kgs 3:7; 2 Chr 1:10).
\n27:18\u201323 In response to Moses\u2019 request the LORD designated Joshua son of Nun, calling him a man in whom is the spirit. Literally simply \u201cspirit,\u201d the term depicts Joshua as endowed with leadership capacity (11:28; 14:6 and notes). As part of his commission Joshua was later especially endowed with \u201cthe spirit of wisdom\u201d (Deut 34:9). Amply qualified by ability, maturity, and experience, trained by long association with Moses, and disciplined by the wilderness ordeal, Joshua was ideally suited to succeed the aging Moses. Moses was told to lay your hand on Joshua. Signifying that task, office, and endowment were imparted to him effective upon Moses\u2019 death, this act would publicly identify Joshua as Moses\u2019 successor. Moses was to have Joshua stand before Eleazar, the high priest, and the public assembly to commission him in their presence. Literally \u201ccommand,\u201d the verb is used for the solemn charge given upon installing for office (cf. Deut 3:28; 31:7\u20138). In the future the high priest should both recognize Joshua\u2019s governmental authority and communicate to Joshua the LORD\u2019s will revealed through means of the priestly oracle, the Urim. Thus Moses was to give him some of your authority so the whole Israelite community will obey him (compare 11:17, 25). The word rendered \u201cauthority\u201d (\u05d4\u05d5\u05b9\u05d3, h\u00f4d) often conveys the idea of majestic splendor, eminence, and honor. This seems symbolically imparted to Joshua by imposition of Moses\u2019 hands (v. 18; Deut 34:9). Usually combined as Urim and Thummim (\u201clights and perfections\u201d), Urim was the priestly oracle (cf. Exod 28:30). Unlike Moses, the lawgiver possessing unique authority (12:6\u20138; Deut 34:10\u201312), Joshua was to be dependent upon the priestly oracle for divine revelation and direction. Thus, Joshua was to be installed in a manner which proclaimed continuity of human leadership but which also stressed that the new leadership would necessarily be somewhat different in character. At his command, literally \u201cat his word,\u201d refers to Eleazar\u2019s word as he declared the revelation received through the Urim. Joshua was to lead in keeping with the divine will revealed to the high priest. Under this direction Joshua and the people were to go out, and \u2026 come in, i.e., conduct themselves militarily and otherwise (see note to v. 17 and compare Deut 31:2; Josh 14:11). Doing as the LORD commanded, promptly and obediently Moses commissioned Joshua, doubtless rejoicing that God had selected this loyal and courageous leader. Public recognition of a chosen successor prior to a leader\u2019s death could make the transition smoother after the leader\u2019s death (cf. 1 Kgs 1:38\u201340).<\/p>\n
D. SCHEDULE FOR PUBLIC OFFERINGS GIVEN (28:1\u201329:40)<\/p>\n
Supplementing previous sacrifice legislation and particularly Leviticus chapter 23, these chapters ordain quantities for the various regular public offerings as they were to be observed after Israel entered Canaan. Although the rabbinic tradition that Israel offered no sacrifices in the wilderness after leaving Mount Sinai seems too sweeping, it does appear that, for the most part at least, the quantities here envisioned were neither required nor sacrificed during those wilderness years (cf. 15:2; Deut 12:8\u20139; Amos 5:25). Not only how much, but also how genuinely the Israelites sacrificed in the wilderness is a point of question. Preparation to enter Canaan therefore appropriately included emphasis upon punctilious observance of the holy sacrifices commanded by God. The quantities here specified may be profitably charted.<\/p>\n
QUANTITIES FOR PUBLIC OFFERINGS<\/p>\n
Occasion
\nBurnt Offerings
\nSin Offering
\nBull
\nRam
\nLamb
\nGoat
\nEach day
\n2
\nSabbath
\n2
\nNew Moon
\n2
\n1
\n7
\n1
\nFeast of Unleavened Bread (7 days)
\n2
\n1
\n7
\n1
\nFirst Fruits (Weeks or Pentecost)
\n2
\n1
\n7
\n1
\nFeast of Trumpets
\n1
\n1
\n7
\n1
\nDay of Atonement
\n1
\n1
\n7
\n1
\nTabernacles
\nDay: 1
\n13
\n2
\n14
\n1
\n2
\n12
\n2
\n14
\n1
\n3
\n11
\n2
\n14
\n1
\n4
\n10
\n2
\n14
\n1
\n5
\n9
\n2
\n14
\n1
\n6
\n8
\n2
\n14
\n1
\n7
\n7
\n2
\n14
\n1
\n8
\n1
\n1
\n7
\n1<\/p>\n
Several general observations concerning this data may be helpful. (1) The sacrificial animals were all to be unblemished males. (2) The burnt offerings were all to be accompanied by the proper meal and drink offerings, as in 15:1\u201316. (3) The sacrifices were to be cumulative, so that, for instance, a Feast of Trumpets (29:1) which happened to fall on a Sabbath would require the daily offerings, Sabbath offerings, and new moon offerings in addition to its special festive offerings. (4) The number seven, symbolizing perfection or completeness, is recurrent in the lists.<\/p>\n
1. Daily Offering Stated (28:1\u20138)<\/p>\n
28:1\u20132 These opening verses provide a superscription to the section commanding the Israelites to offer at the appointed time the food for my offerings made by fire, as an aroma pleasing to me. The \u201cappointed time\u201d is set by the schedule for the various occasions on which days the offerings likely began in the morning with the daily regular burnt offering (v. 4). The term rendered \u201cofferings\u201d (\u05e7\u05b8\u05e8\u05b0\u05d1\u05b8\u05bc\u05e0, qorb\u0101n) is general, meaning \u201cpresentation\u201d (cf. Mark 7:9\u201313; see note to Lev 1:2), but the full expression \u201cthe food for my offerings,\u201d literally \u201cmy offering, my food,\u201d is a bit unusual. The technical term \u201cfood\u201d figuratively depicts offerings consumed upon the altar (cf. v. 24; Lev 3:11; 21:24). On the technical terms \u201cofferings made by fire\u201d and \u201caroma pleasing\u201d see the notes to Leviticus 1:9.
\n28:3\u20138 The daily offering was two lambs a year old without defect (see note to Lev 1:3 and compare 22:21). The expression regular burnt offering (\u05e2\u05b9\u05dc\u05b8\u05d4 \u05ea\u05b8\u05de\u05b4\u05d9\u05d3, \u02bf\u014dl\u0101h th\u0101m\u00eed) is a technical designation for the regular daily sacrifice. Burnt offerings in general are treated in Leviticus chapter 1. The second lamb was to be offered each day at twilight, literally \u201cbetween the two evenings\u201d (\u05d1\u05b5\u05bc\u05d9\u05df \u05d4\u05b8\u05e2\u05b7\u05e8\u05b0\u05d1\u05b8\u05bc\u05d9\u05b4\u05dd, b\u00ean h\u0101\u02bfarb\u0101yim). The precise time indicated by this expression has been disputed. Traditional Jewish practice was to kill the lamb from the ninth to eleventh hours (3 to 5 o\u2019clock in the afternoon). Deuteronomy 16:6 gives a different expression, \u201cin the evening, when the sun goes down,\u201d which would appear to mean \u201cat sunset,\u201d which supports the rendering \u201ctwilight\u201d (cf. 9:3; Exod 12:6). Each daily offering was to be accompanied by the appropriate grain offering and drink offering (see notes to 15:1\u201316 and compare Exod 16:36). General rules for grain or meal offerings are given in Leviticus chapter 2. Fine flour and oil from pressed olives were the finest grades of wheat flour and olive oil. The daily burnt offering had been instituted at Mount Sinai (Exod 29:38\u201342). At the sanctuary, literally \u201cin the holy place,\u201d here apparently refers to the sanctuary courtyard where the sacrificial altar was located (see note to 15:5). In this instance the fermented drink (\u05e9\u05b5\u05c1\u05db\u05b6\u05e8, \u0161\u0113ker) was wine (Exod 29:40). Alternatively, the word may here be an ancient technical term for a libation. The sense of verse 8 is that the accompaniments for the evening oblation are to be like those for the morning sacrifice.<\/p>\n
2. Sabbath Offering Stated (28:9\u201310)<\/p>\n
28:9\u201310 The fundamental holy day was the Sabbath (cf. Lev 23:1\u20133). The special Sabbath grain offering of two tenths of an ephah of fine flower mixed with oil equaled the daily offering, since one tenth accompanied each lamb (15:5). The burnt offering for every Sabbath was offered in addition to the regular burnt offering. Thus on a Sabbath both daily and Sabbath offerings were to be made. Called \u201cadditional\u201d (\u05de\u05d5\u05bc\u05e1\u05b7\u05e3, m\u00fbsaph) in later tradition, the offerings for all the special occasions were offered between the times of the daily offerings (v. 23). The proper drink offering is described in verse 7.<\/p>\n
3. New Moon Offering Depicted (28:11\u201315)<\/p>\n
28:11\u201315 Although not mentioned in Leviticus chapter 23, the first of every month, the new moon, was ritually observed (cf. 10:10). As Israel\u2019s standard calendar was lunar, the observance seems to have increased in significance with the passing centuries (2 Kgs 4:23; Hosea 2:11; Amos 8:5). The sacrifices for the new moon were more elaborate than the daily or Sabbath offerings, involving two young bulls, one ram and seven male lambs along with proportionately larger amounts of grain and wine, as the text details (see 15:4\u201310 and notes). Again the burnt offering obediently offered is anthropomorphically depicted as a pleasing aroma to the LORD (see note to Lev 1:9). Rabbinic tradition understood the sin offering on the new moon as atoning for possible defilement of sanctuary or sacrifices (cf. Leviticus 4\u20135; Num 15:22\u201331). As for the Sabbath (v. 10) the special monthly sacrifices are offered besides the regular burnt offering made each day. If the new moon were also a Sabbath, the ritual would include three sets of sacrifices.<\/p>\n
4. Offering for Days of Unleavened Bread Depicted (28:16\u201325)<\/p>\n
28:16\u201325 No special offerings are scheduled for the LORD\u2019s Passover which was primarily a family observance (cf. Exod 12:2\u201328, 43\u201349). As Passover is a commemoration of the exodus (Exod 12:14\u201320, 39), so also is the special week of bread made without yeast which was ritually observed with special offerings each day equivalent to those celebrating the new moon (vv. 11\u201315). On the opening first day and on the closing seventh day the people were to hold a sacred assembly and do no regular work, i.e., pursue one\u2019s occupation (cf. Lev 23:2, 8 and notes). As on the new moon (v. 15) one male goat was sacrificed as a sin offering to make atonement for you (see note to Lev 1:4). As before, the sacrifice, termed an offering made by fire (cf. Lev 1:9), is cumulative, set forth in addition to the regular (daily) burnt offering (cf. vv. 10, 15).<\/p>\n
5. Pentecost Offering Depicted (28:26\u201331)<\/p>\n
28:26\u201331 The celebration of firstfruits during the Feast of Weeks (later called \u201cPentecost\u201d) is detailed in Leviticus 23:15\u201316. On the day of firstfruits the Israelites were to hold sacred assembly and do no regular work (cf. vv. 18, 25; Lev 23:2, 8 and notes). The special burnt offering for the Feast of Weeks equaled that for a new moon and again one male goat was to be presented as a sin offering, and these special sacrifices were in addition to the regular (daily) burnt offering (vv. 11\u201315 and notes).<\/p>\n
6. Offering for Feast of Trumpets (29:1\u20136)<\/p>\n
29:1\u20136 The special burnt offering for the civil new year Feast of Trumpets paralleled that for the new moon, also offered on this day (v. 6), except that in the former only one bullock was offered instead of two (28:11\u201315 and notes). Again, one male goat as a sin offering was sacrificed to make atonement (see notes to 28:15, 22). As specified is literally \u201caccording to their ordinance\u201d (\u05db\u05b0\u05bc\u05de\u05b4\u05e9\u05b0\u05c1\u05e4\u05b8\u05bc\u05d8\u05b8\u05dd, k\u0259mi\u0161p\u0101\u1e6d\u0101m; see 28:3\u20138, 11\u201315).<\/p>\n
7. Offering for Day of Atonement Listed (29:7\u201311)<\/p>\n
29:7\u201311 For the atonement provisions carried out on this annual day, see Leviticus 16:1\u201334. The burnt offering is equivalent to that for the Feast of Trumpets (vv. 1\u20136). Again the meal, oil, and wine accompaniments are as described in 15:2\u201312. On the male goat as a sin offering, see the note to 28:15, and on the sin offering for atonement, see Leviticus 16:3, 5. The regular burnt offering is discussed at 28:3\u20138. Thus three sets of offerings were made on the Day of Atonement.<\/p>\n
8. Offering for Tabernacles Enumerated (29:12\u201338)<\/p>\n
29:12\u201334 Completing the festival cycle of the seventh month, the Feast of Tabernacles, the last of the annual festivals, was marked by a most impressive array of public offerings. The burnt offering of thirteen young bulls was daily reduced by one until the seventh day (vv. 17, 20, 23, 26, 29, 32), and then on the separate eighth day one bull was offered (v. 36). This diminution, which is quite striking, provided for seven bulls on the seventh day and a total of seventy on the seven days of Tabernacles. Two rams and fourteen male lambs were double the number to be offered each day during the corresponding spring week, the Feast of Unleavened Bread (28:19, 24), while a total of five times as many bulls were to be offered. The grain offering is addressed in 15:2\u201312. Though omitted in verse 14, the proper drink offerings were also to be made (vv. 18, 21, 24, 27, 30, 33, 37). Except for the decreasing number of bulls the procedure for the seven days was to be identical. The male goat as a sin offering is also included (cf. 28:15), and the sacrifices are also cumulative, in addition to the regular burnt offering (cf. 28:10). The appropriate accompanying grain offerings and drink offerings are according to the number specified, literally \u201cin their number, according to their ordinance\u201d (cf. 15:1\u201312).
\n29:35\u201338 That the eighth day (v. 35), the last festival day of the year, while separate, was closely associated with the Feast of Tabernacles is evident from the fact that its solemn assembly closes the joyous season begun with holy convocation on the first day of that feast (see v. 12 and compare 28:18, 25; see also note to Lev 23:36). Again, occupational regular work was prohibited (cf. v. 12; Lev 23:8). Last used in verse 13 at the beginning of the seven day series of offerings, the technical language offering made by fire as an aroma pleasing (see notes to Lev 1:9) is now repeated because this eighth day did not strictly belong to the Feast of Booths. The burnt offering for this day was the same as that offered at the civil new year (vv. 1\u20136) and on the Day of Atonement (vv. 7\u201311).<\/p>\n
9. The Matter Concluded (29:39\u201340)<\/p>\n
29:39\u201340 The text emphasizes that the public congregational offerings were to be separate and distinct from those offerings which Israelites might bring voluntarily, either in fulfillment of what you vow or spontaneously, as freewill offerings.<\/p>\n
E. VOWS OF WOMEN REGULATED (30:1\u201316)<\/p>\n
30:1\u20132 Evidently, the heads of the tribes of Israel were here addressed in their roles as leaders and counselors of the Israelites (cf. Num 1:16; 7:2; 10:4; 13:3). Although voluntary, a vow was a serious matter. Once made by persons responsible at law, vows were unconditionally binding (Deut 23:21\u201323), but persons or property dedicated to the sanctuary could be redeemed in keeping with the regulations of Leviticus 27:1\u201333. The present passage considers the vows of women, not ordinarily independent nor responsible at law. After stating the general law of vows (v. 2), the text treats four cases: (1) the unmarried young woman (vv. 3\u20135), (2) a marrying (betrothed) maiden (vv. 6\u20138), (3) a widow or divorcee (v. 9), and (4) a married woman (vv. 11\u201315). The Hebrew words for vow and pledge are, respectively, \u05e0\u05b6\u05d3\u05b6\u05e8 (neder) and \u05d0\u05b4\u05e1\u05b8\u05bc\u05e8 (\u02beiss\u0101r). Often a general term for a vow, the commonly occurring word neder seems used here for a positive solemn and sworn promise to do or give something, whereas the word \u02beiss\u0101r, used only here, stems from a root meaning \u201cto bind\u201d and evidently denotes a negative vow to abstain from something. The special Nazirite vow (ch. 6) had both positive and negative qualities. Break is literally \u201cprofane,\u201d a causative form of the verb \u05d7\u05b8\u05dc\u05b7\u05dc (\u1e25\u0101lal). Everything he says is literally \u201caccording to all which proceeds from his mouth.\u201d While unexpressed intent was not binding, one\u2019s solemnly expressed word was binding. The trivial, frivolous, and supposedly nonbinding oaths against which Jesus (Matt 5:33\u201337) and James (James 5:12) inveighed were thus a distortion of basic principle.
\n30:3\u20135 Assuming customary early marriage for females, the text first considers the case of the young woman still living in her father\u2019s house, i.e., still under the authority of her father. If such a woman vows or pledges and her father hears about her vow or pledge but says nothing, then his informed silence was consent, thus validating the daughter\u2019s vow. On the other hand, if her father forbids her, then his voiced repudiation effectively annulled his daughter\u2019s vow. This action to thwart the daughter\u2019s oath could not be delayed (vv. 14\u201315) but must be taken when he hears about it, literally \u201cin the day of his hearing\u201d (\u05d1\u05b0\u05bc\u05d9\u05d5\u05b9\u05dd \u05e9\u05b8\u05c1\u05de\u05b0\u05e2\u05d5\u05b9, b\u0259y\u00f4m \u0161\u0101m\u02bf\u00f4). In such a circumstance, the broken vow is forgiven (the LORD will release her), the woman being legally unable to fulfill it.
\n30:6\u20138 The word marries is supplied in English. The text speaks here of betrothal, in Israelite law a binding tie (Deut 22:23\u201324; cf. Matt 1:18\u201320). Accordingly, a woman betrothed while under a vow neither validated nor vetoed by her father, though she continued until marriage to live with her father, passed under the legal control and responsibility of her husband, to whom the same rules applied in regard to her vow. A woman planning soon to be married who yet obligated herself by vow was ordinarily making a rash promise, but rashness alone did not render her vows invalid (cf. Lev 5:4; Prov 20:25; Eccl 5:2, 4\u20136).
\n30:9 Legally independent, a widow or divorced woman stood fully obligated by her vow even though she might return to her father\u2019s house (cf. Lev 22:13).
\n30:10\u201316 The vow of a wife, a woman living with her husband, was also in the same way \u201cconditioned\u201d upon her husband\u2019s approval. As with the father of the unmarried daughter (vv. 3\u20135) so also in the case of a wife, her husband may confirm or nullify any vow she makes or any sworn pledge. The text generalizes in verse 13 for the sake of clarity. Like the father of the unmarried (see note to v. 5), the husband could nullify by vocally disallowing a vow, or he could confirm by informed silence. The expression rendered to deny herself (\u05dc\u05b0\u05e2\u05b7\u05e0\u05b9\u05bc\u05ea \u05e0\u05b6\u05e4\u05b6\u05e9\u05c1, l\u0259\u02bfann\u014dth nephe\u0161) often alludes to afflicting oneself by fasting (Lev 16:29) but here denotes abstention in general. The expression from day to day apparently carries the sense \u201cfrom that day to the next.\u201d The husband\u2019s silence on the day he learned of his wife\u2019s vow represented his irrevocable endorsement of the vow, so that if he nullifies them some time after he hears about them, then he is responsible for her guilt. The broken vow is not forgiven (cf. vv. 5, 8, 12), but instead the husband, as legally responsible, incurs guilt for illegally preventing its fulfillment. For this the proper offering should be made (Lev 5:4\u20135) and the delinquent vow carried out as fully as possible. The closing verse emphasizes the divine origin of these regulations and summarizes the relationships to which the ordinances primarily apply.<\/p>\n
F. ISRAEL AVENGED UPON MIDIAN (31:1\u201354)<\/p>\n
1. Midianites Devastated in Holy War (31:1\u201312)<\/p>\n
31:1\u20132 Descended from Abraham (Gen 25:2) the Midianites were a nomadic people widespread in regions south and east of Canaan (cf. Gen 36:35; Exod 2:15). One branch of this desert people, erstwhile allies of Sihon the Amorite (Josh 13:21), had conspired with the Moabites to seek Balaam\u2019s curse against Israel (22:4) and, this failing, had led in seducing the Israelites to generate idolatry (25:1\u201318). This branch of Midianites was now to be destroyed in punishment for their vileness. In the judges\u2019 period Israel was oppressed by Midian but delivered by Gideon (Judges 6\u20138). The phrase you will be gathered to your people recalls that Moses had recently been warned of his impending death (27:12\u201314).
\n31:3\u20136 Instead of arm some of your men, the rendering \u201clet men be drafted\u201d or \u201clet men be selected\u201d has been proposed (see note to 32:17). Only a select, representative force was needed for the campaign against Midian. The LORD\u2019s vengeance planned as punishment for the Midianites had been declared in 25:16\u201318. Sent as spiritual leader in the holy war, Phinehas had previously distinguished himself by zealous opposition to the Midianite seduction (25:6\u201313). As high priest, Eleazar was to avoid contact with the dead (Lev 21:11), hence could not accompany the troops. Since the next phrase is appositional, the articles from the sanctuary carried by Phinehas may even have been the sacred trumpets themselves. Possibly the Urim (27:21) are intended (cf. also 10:35 and note). The trumpets for signaling, the silver trumpets described in 10:1\u201310, were used both to sound alarm and to call upon the LORD for help.
\n31:7\u201312 The military campaign itself is summarily treated by brief mention with the words they fought against Midian. The text emphasizes instead the holy nature of the crusade, the purification of the returning troops, and the proper distribution of the extensive booty. In carrying out the divine judgment upon Midian the Israelites killed every man, i.e., every adult male resisting or apprehended. Tribal chieftains, the five kings of Midian, had formerly exercised rule under the auspices of Sihon (Josh 13:21; cf. 25:15). The text specifies they also killed Balaam son of Beor with the sword. Tragically, the famous seer did not realize his envisioned wish for the \u201cdeath of the righteous\u201d (23:10). All the towns the normally nomadic Midianites had occupied after Sihon\u2019s conquests, as well as their more customary desert camps (cf. Gen 25:16; Ezek 25:4), were destroyed. Used generally, the Hebrew terms for plunder (\u05e9\u05b8\u05c1\u05dc\u05b8\u05dc, \u0161\u0101l\u0101l) and spoils (\u05de\u05b7\u05dc\u05b0\u05e7\u05d5\u05b9\u05d7\u05b7, malq\u00f4a\u1e25) overlap, the latter term meaning simply \u201cthat which is taken.\u201d On the plains of Moab see the note to 22:1.<\/p>\n
2. Captives Executed; Purification Rites Required (31:13\u201320)<\/p>\n
31:13\u201320 Moses, Eleazar the priest and all the leaders met the returning army outside the camp because the military company was to remain there until ritually purified. Moses\u2019 question have you allowed all the women to live? is angrily emphatic rather than simply interrogative. Seeing the women before him, Moses reminded the officers of the women\u2019s role in the seduction which had occasioned the LORD\u2019s decree against Midian. Thus, responsible for the decree, the women were surely not to escape its execution. Reference to Balaam\u2019s advice \u2026 what happened at Peor and the plague documents Balaam\u2019s involvement in the shameful episode recorded in chapter 25. Though somewhat shocking to the modern reader, the command to kill all the boys \u2026 every woman purposed the extermination of the offending Midianites. Uninvolved in the seduction and unable to perpetuate their tribal lines, the virgin young girls could be spared to serve as concubines or slaves. The regulations calling for seven days of purification (19:11\u201319) were to be carefully and fully obeyed. Soldiers, captives, clothing, and equipment were all to be properly cleansed. The expression purify yourselves is literally \u201cde-sin yourselves\u201d (8:21 and 19:12).<\/p>\n
3. Additional Purification Regulation Given (31:21\u201324)<\/p>\n
31:21\u201324 Nonflammable objects such as metals were to be purified by fire, while flammable objects were to be washed. Both kinds of objects were then to be ritually cleansed with the water of cleansing. Afterwards the participants were to wash their clothes on the seventh day, and then they would be ritually clean, permitted to reenter the camp (see 19:19).<\/p>\n
4. Spoils of War Apportioned (31:25\u201347)<\/p>\n
31:25\u201331 This opening portion delineates equitable division of booty, and the remainder of the section (vv. 32\u201347) describes its fair apportionment. After an official inventory of all the people and animals that were captured as spoils of war had been taken by the leaders, this live booty was to be divided into two equal parts, one for the troops who had campaigned and one for the people who had remained behind in the camp. This division assured a large share for the troops while also permitting all the people some participation in the material gains (cf. 1 Sam 30:21\u201325). Of the warriors\u2019 share one-fifth of one percent was to be set apart as tribute for the LORD, i.e., given to the priests. Of the people\u2019s share one-fiftieth, or two percent, was to be given to the Levites, who, as usual, were not reckoned among the secular tribes (cf. 18:20, 24). Thus, soldiers, people, priests, and Levites all participated equitably in the distribution of the spoil. Interestingly, the Levites\u2019 portion, ten times that allotted the priests, approximates the situation prevailing in the tithe (18:21\u201332).
\n31:32\u201347 Only live plunder was reckoned, thus excluding the precious objects mentioned in verses 50\u201353. Also, numerous captives had been executed (v. 17) and some livestock had probably died. The booty inventoried was, however, extremely impressive, betokening a considerable Midianite population with extensive herds (cf. Judg 6:5; 8:24\u201326). The girls and livestock were accurately apportioned as the LORD commanded. The thirty-two people designated as the tribute for the LORD (vv. 40\u201341) were probably placed under menial servitude, while the animals, as priestly property, were suitably kept, or eaten, or sold.<\/p>\n
5. Special Offering Made by Officers (31:48\u201354)<\/p>\n
31:48\u201354 The Israelite commanders informed Moses that they had counted the soldiers \u2026 and not one is missing. This marvelous fact of zero casualties was immediately recognized as evidence of the LORD\u2019s protection. The fact betokens miraculous aid and further reflects the nature of the campaign as a holy war carrying out a divine decree. The officers therefore brought a freewill offering to the LORD from the gold articles the officers had legitimately retained as booty. The word rendered necklaces (\u05db\u05bc\u05d5\u05bc\u05de\u05b8\u05d6, k\u00fbm\u0101z) is difficult but possibly an ornamental cluster or pendant is intended (cf. Exod 35:22). Here the expression to make atonement would perhaps be better translated \u201cto give a ransom\u201d (cf. Exod 30:12, 15). Likely this \u201cransom\u201d was given, however, in gratitude for the LORD\u2019s protection during the campaign. The weight of the gold in the crafted articles which the officers presented as a gift to the LORD is impressive, being just over four hundred and twenty pounds. The statement each soldier had taken plunder for himself apparently means that the common soldiers kept their booty, so that the offering was made by the officers only, in which case \u201ceach man\u201d in verse 50 means \u201ceach officer.\u201d Alternatively, the parenthetical note could simply explain that this treasure was separate from that inventoried (vv. 32\u201335). This generous freewill offering was accepted by Moses and Eleazar and brought into the Tent of Meeting, the sanctuary, as a memorial (cf. 16:38\u201340).<\/p>\n
G. REUBEN, GAD, PART OF MANASSEH PERMITTED TRANSJORDAN SETTLEMENT (32:1\u201342)<\/p>\n
1. Reuben, Gad Petition for Eastern Inheritance (32:1\u20135)<\/p>\n
32:1\u20135 The events of this chapter are succinctly highlighted in Moses\u2019 review of covenant history in Deuteronomy 3:12\u201320. While all the Israelites\u2019 herds and flocks (20:4; Exod 12:38) had recently been augmented (31:32\u201334), the Reubenites and Gadites possessed particularly extensive livestock holdings. The men of these tribes saw that the regions around Jazer and Gilead were particularly suitable for livestock. Although often used quite generally (compare Gen 31:21), the term \u201cGilead\u201d may more specifically designate land both north and south of the Jabbok River; here the latter. The well-watered and forested highland region of Gilead has been recognized in ancient and modern times as ideally suited for grazing cattle (cf. 1 Chr 5:9; S of S 4:1; Micah 7:4). Interestingly, the Hebrew text of verse 2 repeats the name of the tribes but reverses their order, a point missed by the present translation\u2019s simple paraphrase, they. Although Reuben is ordinarily listed first because of seniority, as in verse 1, the more prosperous Gad (cf. Deut 33:20\u201321) may well have initiated the request. The sequence, \u201cGadites and Reubenites,\u201d is then followed throughout the chapter. Also one may note that the tribal leaders approached Moses, Eleazar, and the leaders of the community. It seems that as Moses\u2019 death approached (27:12; 31:2) the subordinate leaders played a more prominent role in Israel\u2019s affairs (cf. 27:2; 31:13; 36:1). The cities depicting the area these tribes sought (Ataroth \u2026 Beon) are mostly currently identifiable (see notes to vv. 34\u201338). Nimrah is \u201cBethnimrah\u201d in verse 36, Sebam is called \u201cSibmah\u201d in verse 38, and Beon is perhaps better \u201cMeon,\u201d the \u201cBaal-meon\u201d of verse 38. Identifying the region as the land the LORD subdued (see 21:21\u201325 and notes), the Gadites and Reubenites plead do not make us cross the Jordan. This language could mean \u201cdo not make us march\u201d or \u201cdo not make us settle\u201d across the Jordan. Moses, doubtless correctly, understood their words in the former sense (v. 6).<\/p>\n
2. Moses Rebukes Tribal Selfishness (32:6\u201315)<\/p>\n
32:6\u201315 Thinking only of their own interests, the leaders of the two petitioning tribes had completely failed to consider the psychological impact of their proposed action which would have discouraged the Israelites, weakening an army facing strong and entrenched foes, weakening Israel\u2019s unified resolve for battle by apparent cowardice, and perhaps even encouraging a rash of similar proposals from the other tribes. Further, the proposal was manifestly unfair, as all the tribes had participated in conquering the territory east of Jordan. Recalling the tragic rebellion at Kadesh Barnea (chs. 13\u201314), Moses strictly warned Reuben and Gad that their intended action would have similar terrible consequences (vv. 8\u201315). The locations of Kadesh and the Valley of Eshcol are given in the notes to 13:23, 26. At the time of the rebellion at Kadesh the LORD had sworn that not one of the men \u2026 will see the land (14:24, 28\u201330). The LORD\u2019s sworn promise to Abraham, Isaac and Jacob is recorded in Genesis 22:16; 26:3. Mention of Caleb as the Kenizzite may mark Caleb\u2019s remote ancestry as Edomite, descended from Kenaz (Gen 36:15), but this is not certain. Forty years had measured one year for each day the spies had reconnoitered Canaan (14:34). Scathingly Moses identified the two tribes as a brood of sinners who were behaving truly like the children of their rebel fathers. If, by their actions, the Reubenites and Gadites deterred Israel from invading Canaan, this tragic wilderness destruction would be repeated.<\/p>\n
3. Revised Proposal with Invasion Role Approved (32:16\u201327)<\/p>\n
32:16\u201319 Asking only for time first to provide for their animals and their families, the Gadite and Reubenite leaders now volunteered to participate fully in the forthcoming military offensive. Literally \u201cwalls for sheep,\u201d the pens were walled enclosures of piled up stones. Their walls rebuilt, the cities would provide some protection for the tribes\u2019 families. As only those males twenty and over were mustered (26:2), the term paraphrased our women and children (\u05d8\u05b7\u05e4\u05b5\u05bc\u05e0\u05d5\u05bc, \u1e6dapp\u0113n\u00fb), literally \u201cour little ones,\u201d is an affectionate figure of speech (synecdoche) for their dependent families. The commitment we are ready to arm ourselves involves an interesting Hebrew expression (\u05e0\u05b5\u05d7\u05b8\u05dc\u05b5\u05e5 \u05d7\u05bb\u05e9\u05b4\u05c1\u05d9\u05dd, n\u0113\u1e25\u0101l\u0113\u1e63 \u1e25u\u0161\u00eem). This and older English versions understand the Hebrew root \u1e25\u0101la\u1e63 used in this chapter and in 31:3 to mean \u201cto gird for battle,\u201d hence the rendering. Others appeal to a more common meaning for the root to obtain a sense \u201cwe will be picked troops,\u201d in which case these tribes volunteered to serve as the vanguard of the invading army, dispelling any thought of cowardice by going ahead of the Israelites (cf. Josh 1:13\u201315). \u201cReady\u201d translates the somewhat obscure Hebrew term \u1e25u\u0161\u00eem which seemingly means \u201chastening.\u201d Though defeated, the inhabitants of the land yet remained a threat to raid and penetrate. The revised proposal of the two tribes reflected therefore not only military courage but also considerable faith, as their families would still be relatively undefended. The tribal leaders committed their troops for the full campaign and also relinquished claim to any additional land on the other side of the Jordan.
\n32:20\u201327 The phrase before the LORD, which has varying nuances in different contexts, may here depict the Reubenites and Gadites as marching into battle in front of the ark which symbolized the LORD\u2019s presence (see 10:33\u201336 and notes). This analysis, which seems supported by Joshua 4:11\u201313, makes the expressions \u201cbefore the LORD\u201d and \u201cahead of the Israelites\u201d (v. 17) both present the two tribes as offering vanguard service in the coming invasion. Any failure to follow through with this commitment would be sinning against the LORD, and Moses warned be sure that your sin will find you out. Personifying sin, this language pictures it as wreaking its own destructive consequences (cf. Gen 4:7). A man armed could be translated a \u201cpicked man\u201d since it echoes verse 17 by using a passive participle from the root \u1e25\u0101la\u1e63.<\/p>\n
4. Inheritance Compact Formally Concluded (32:28\u201332)<\/p>\n
32:28\u201332 Knowing he would not experience the actual invasion, Moses gave orders to the future leadership to enforce the terms of the official agreement with Reuben and Gad. Only if these tribes honored completely their promise to participate fully in the impending invasion would they be allowed to settle in Gilead (see note to v. 1). Failing to fulfill their commitment, Reuben and Gad were to be compelled to accept their possession with you in Canaan, i.e., to enter into Canaan with their families and to fight for an inheritance alongside the other tribes there. The tribal leaders\u2019 statement your servants will do what the LORD has said was tantamount to a public announcement that they would fully honor their military obligation. Interestingly, the same Hebrew expression rendered here on this side of the Jordan (\u05de\u05b5\u05e2\u05b5\u05d1\u05b6\u05e8 \u05dc\u05b7\u05d9\u05b7\u05bc\u05e8\u05b0\u05d3\u05b5\u05bc\u05df, m\u0113\u02bf\u0113ber layyard\u0113n) depicted Canaan itself in verse 19. The expression ordinarily, as here, designates the transjordan area, but it may be used by people in the transjordan area in reference to territory west of the river, as in verse 19.<\/p>\n
5. Provisional Defensive Settlement Described (32:33\u201342)<\/p>\n
32:33 Not mentioned earlier because its people were not involved in the original petition, the half-tribe of Manasseh, i.e., half, or part of, the tribe of Manasseh (Josh 22:7), also decided to participate in the settlement option. They had conquered part of Gilead (v. 39), and Moses probably knew of their desire to occupy it. The territory these tribes received was that of the previous kingdoms of Sihon and Og (see 21:21\u201335 and notes).
\n32:34\u201338 The text next relates the cities which the tribes fortified at this time as defensive settlements for their families. On Dibon see the note to 21:30. Ataroth is identified with Khirbet \u2018Attarus some eight miles northwest of Dibon and ten miles east of the Dead Sea. Aroer, a city on the north bank of the Arnon about three miles southeast of Dibon, was the southernmost city of Sihon\u2019s kingdom, hence of Israel\u2019s transjordan conquest. Presently somewhat obscure, Atroth Shophan has been tentatively identified with Rujm \u2018Atarus near Ataroth. On Jazer see the note to 21:24. Jogbehah is thought to be Jubeihat about six miles northwest of Amman. Beth Nimrah may be Tell Bleibil or Tell Nimrin roughly fifteen miles east of Jericho, while Beth Haran is possibly nearby Tell Iktanu. Plotting these sites on a map shows that the Gadites rebuilt several cities later assigned to Reuben (Josh 13:15\u201323), thus confirming that the present settlements were somewhat provisional, as the text suggests. On Heshbon see the note to 21:25. Elealeh is probably el-\u02bfAl just north of Heshbon, while Kiriathaim is possibly Khirbet el-Qureiyat about six miles northwest of Dibon. Nebo may be Khirbet Mekhayyet about five miles southwest of Heshbon, while Baal Meon is likely Ma\u02bfin, about ten miles south of Heshbon. That these names were changed refers to the fact that both \u201cNebo\u201d and \u201cBaal\u201d allude to foreign deities, hence properly might be expunged from Israelite place names. Sibmah is sometimes identified with Khirbet Qam el-Kibsh between Heshbon and Nebo.
\n32:39\u201342 On Gilead, see the note to verse 1. Here that part of Gilead north of the Jabbok is intended. Manasseh inherited all of Bashan, the erstwhile kingdom of Og (Deut 3:13\u201314), and thus the total area east of Jordan was assigned, if provisionally, to these tribes. First Chronicles 2:21\u201322 informs that Jair was descended from Machir\u2019s daughter\u2019s marriage to the Judahite Hezron. The assimilation of Jair\u2019s family to Manasseh is therefore quite unusual. Havvoth Jair means \u201ctent-villages of Jair.\u201d These were scattered in the area southeast of the Sea of Galilee. The site of Kenath is uncertain. Proposed is Qanawat, more than sixty miles east of the Sea of Galilee, but this seems discordant with Judges 8:11. Its surrounding settlements is literally \u201cits daughters,\u201d as in 21:25. Apart from this passage and Judges 8:11 Nobah is unknown in Scripture. The older city name reappears in 1 Chronicles 2:23.<\/p>\n
H. WILDERNESS ROUTE REVIEWED (33:1\u201349)<\/p>\n
An itinerary of Israel\u2019s journey from Egypt to the plains of Moab, this passage lists some forty stages of that journey which, due to the great rebellion, required nearly forty years to complete. For its first readers the list probably marked quite well the routes of Israel\u2019s wilderness sojourn, but modern students find the list perplexing at several points, chiefly because many of the ancient place names have not survived and hence numerous sites listed cannot be confidently identified. It is not surprising, therefore, that various routes, some quite speculative, have been proposed. A traditional analysis which locates Mount Sinai in the southern peninsula, considers Kadesh the focus of the years of wandering, and traces Israel\u2019s march from there around Edom to approach Sihon\u2019s kingdom from the southeast seems best to satisfy all the biblical and historical data. Within this overall framework, however, several details remain obscure.<\/p>\n
1. Exodus from Egypt Recalled (33:1\u20134)<\/p>\n
33:1\u20134 In the singular the Hebrew word rendered stages (\u05de\u05b8\u05e1\u05b7\u05bc\u05e2, mass\u0101\u02bf) means literally \u201ca pulling up,\u201d i.e., a breaking of camp, and thus a march so begun. The distance between these, perhaps formal, starting points varied considerably, as did the duration of the different encampments. In addition to the note here that by the LORD\u2019s command Moses recorded the stages in their journey, several other pentateuchal passages specifically document Moses\u2019 production of a written record (cf. Exod 17:14; 24:4; 34:27\u201328; Deut 31:9, 24). The affirmation that the Israelites \u2026 marched out boldly vividly recalls the stirring events of the exodus related in Exodus 12, Moses even adding the incidental detail about the Egyptian burials. As in Exodus 14:8 \u201cboldly\u201d is literally \u201cwith a high hand\u201d (\u05d1\u05b0\u05bc\u05d9\u05b8\u05d3 \u05e8\u05b8\u05de\u05b8\u05d4, b\u0259y\u0101d r\u0101m\u0101h). The final plague, the killing of the Egyptian firstborn, had been the climactic demonstration of the LORD\u2019s power in the exodus. The gods of Egypt, many of which were symbolized in animal form, were proven powerless to resist the LORD\u2019s judgment upon them (cf. Exod 12:12).<\/p>\n
2. Route Traced from Egypt to Sinai (33:5\u201315)<\/p>\n
33:5\u20138a The movement here listed is treated at length in Exodus 12\u201318. Also called Raamses, Rameses was both an alternative name for Goshen (see Gen 47:11) and the name of a city built by Israelite slave labor (Exod 1:11), here the latter. Succoth means \u201cbooths.\u201d This ancient site is ordinarily associated with modern Tell el-Mashkutah in the eastern delta. Although the identification is uncertain, Etham may be the same as the Egyptian Chatem (\u201cfort\u201d), a border fortification north of the Bitter Lakes. Although the geographical references Pi Hahiroth \u2026 Baal Zephon, and Migdol were doubtless clear to ancient readers, they are extremely difficult for modern readers attempting to locate the ancient sites on current maps. Pi Hahiroth was east of Baal Zephon, which is perhaps to be located in the region of later Tahpahnes, to which Jeremiah was taken (cf. Jer 43:7). (Baal Zephon, which means \u201cLord of the North,\u201d was the name of a Syrian storm-god evidently worshiped at Tahpahnes as well as elsewhere in lower Egypt.) \u201cMigdol\u201d means \u201ctower,\u201d hence \u201cfortress,\u201d and was located in the eastern delta near Tahpahnes (Jer 44:1). Although these identifications may be challenged, and there are therefore various theories as to the precise point of crossing, the evidence does combine to show a crossing of the sea in the lake region north of the Gulf of Suez, perhaps near the southern end of Lake Menzaleh.
\n33:8b\u201315 The Desert of Etham was just south of the Desert of Shur in the northwestern part of the Sinai Peninsula. The region is an arid limestone tableland. The site of Marah, which means \u201cbitter,\u201d has been identified as \u02beAin Hawarah, where there is still a spring of bitter water, but this is uncertain. After experiencing a water crisis at Marah (Exod 15:22\u201325), the Israelites found at Elim abundant springs of fresh water. Elim, which means \u201clarge trees,\u201d is usually identified with the Wadi Gharandel, about sixty-three miles from Suez. The Hebrew expression rendered Red Sea (\u05d9\u05b7\u05dd\u05be\u05e1\u05d5\u05bc\u05e3, yam-s\u00fbph) literally means \u201csea of reeds.\u201d The precise body of water intended is uncertain, as are several details of the Israelite line of march from Egypt to Sinai, but the miracle of the crossing evidently took place in the lake region north of the Gulf of Suez, which region is now part of the Suez Canal. (The rendering of yam-s\u00fbph as \u201cRed Sea\u201d dates from the LXX translation of the Old Testament into Greek). The encampment by the Red Sea is not recorded in Exodus. South of the Desert of Etham, the Desert of Sin, is identified with Debbet er-Ramleh, a sandy region in the southwest Sinai Peninsula. Dophkah and Alush are not mentioned in Exodus. Dophkah is sometimes identified with ancient mines at Serabit el-Khadim. Not far from Mount Sinai, in the southern extremity of the Sinai Peninsula, Rephidim is probably to be identified with the modern Wadi Refayid, one of several valleys leading from the plateau of the Desert of Sin to Mount Sinai. At Rephidim Moses brought forth water from the rock to resolve another water crisis (Exod 17:1\u20137). Although the identification is disputed, Mount Sinai has been traditionally identified with Jebel Musa, \u201cMount Moses,\u201d a peak in the southern part of the Sinai Peninsula. The Desert of Sinai was a high plain near the mountain. This is usually identified with er-Raha, a plain just north of Jebel Musa.<\/p>\n
3. March to Kadesh and Wanderings Listed (33:16\u201336)<\/p>\n
33:16\u201336 Many of the places mentioned in these verses are nowhere else recorded, which is perhaps appropriate since they belonged to that historical parenthesis, the story of the condemned generation. Kibroth Hattaavah (\u201cgraves of craving\u201d) and Hazeroth (\u201cenclosures\u201d) were explained at 11:34\u201335. Identification of the twelve sites from Rithmah (v. 18) to Hashmonah (v. 29) is but conjecture, as their names are otherwise unknown. Rithmah, which means \u201cbroom-plant,\u201d may however be associated with the Wadi Retemat near Kadesh, in which case the name could allude to the first encampment at Kadesh (13:26), the omission of which is otherwise striking. The names from Moseroth (v. 30) to Jotbathah (v. 33) recur, two in variant form in Deuteronomy 10:6\u20137 which, apparently speaking of later visits, places them in the vicinity of Mount Hor. Likewise unknown, Abronah was probably near Ezion Geber, later an important port at the head of the Gulf of Aqabah (1 Kgs 9:26) and presently identified with Tell el-Kheleifeh. The Desert of Zin had been the starting point for the spies (20:1; see note to 13:21).<\/p>\n
4. Journey to Plains of Moab Recalled (33:37\u201349)<\/p>\n
33:37\u201349 Chapters 20\u201321 provide fuller discussion of this part of the wilderness itinerary. Near Kadesh, Meribah (20:13) is not listed here separately, while Mount Hor, where Aaron died, is either Jebel Nebi Harun or Jebel Madurah, as noted at 20:22. Israel\u2019s encounter with the Canaanite king of Arad is documented in 21:1\u20133. The site Zalmonah has not been identified, nor is the location of Punon certainly known, but it perhaps should be identified with Khirbet Feinan. Punon is probably a variant of \u201cPinon,\u201d the name of an Edomite chief (Gen 36:41; 1 Chr 1:52). Oboth (\u201cwater-skins\u201d) and Iye Abarim (\u201cruins of Abarim\u201d) were listed also in 21:10\u201311, while Iyim is but a shortened form of Iye Abarim. On Dibon Gad see note to 21:30 and cf. 32:34. Almon Diblathaim is possibly the same as Beth Diblathaim mentioned as a Moabite town in Jeremiah 48:22. In the mountains of Abarim Moses was warned of his approaching death (27:12\u201314). Israel\u2019s last encampment before entering Canaan itself was in the plains of Moab (see note to 22:1). Beth Jeshimoth is likely Tell el-\u02bfAzeimeh, only a few miles from Shittim, modern Tell Kefrein, which is about ten miles east of Jericho. Abel Shittim (\u201cbrook of the acacia trees\u201d) is a fuller name for Shittim (\u201cacacia trees\u201d; cf. 25:1).<\/p>\n
I. INSTRUCTIONS GIVEN FOR CONQUEST, INHERITANCE (33:50\u201336:13)<\/p>\n
Careful documentation of the geographical location (plains of Moab \u2026) here and in 35:1 divides the final concerns of the book into two parts, both of which may be conveniently treated under one major heading.<\/p>\n
1. Canaanites to Be Expelled, Their Gods Destroyed,<\/p>\n
Their Land Possessed (33:50\u201356)<\/p>\n
33:50\u201356 The divine command to drive out all the inhabitants of the land before you meant that, in effect, Israel\u2019s policy toward the Canaanites was supposed to be \u201cleave or die.\u201d Revealed at Sinai (Exod 23:23\u201333) and duly repeated after the golden calf apostasy (Exod 34:11\u201316), these directions for conquest were again emphasized to the new generation soon to invade Canaan by crossing the Jordan. All evidences of heathen idolatry, carved images \u2026 cast idols \u2026 high places, were to be removed from the conquered land. The Hebrew noun rendered \u201ccarved images\u201d (sing. \u05de\u05b7\u05e9\u05b0\u05c1\u05db\u05b4\u05bc\u05d9\u05ea, ma\u0161k\u00eeth; cf. Lev 26:1) is rather rare, but the text evidently refers to idolatrous figures carved in relief upon stone. The expression \u201ccast idols\u201d reminds that in image-making in the ancient Near East, molten gold was often cast over a wooden model, and the fine details of the image then fashioned in the gold plate with a sharp graving tool (cf. Exod 20:4\u20136; 32:4; Lev 19:4). The \u201chigh places\u201d were local Canaanite hilltop sanctuaries. That divine judgment upon idolatrous and wicked Canaan provided Israel her promised land is amply documented in Genesis 15:16 and Deuteronomy 9:1\u20136. When Israel thus received her inheritance, the people were to distribute the land by lot as described in 26:52\u201356. The LORD steadfastly warned that if the people did not drive out the inhabitants, the remaining Canaanites would become barbs and thorns. Left in the land, the Canaanites would become a constant irritation as well as a \u201csnare,\u201d entrapping the nation in compromise and idolatry. After the conquest the aged Joshua similarly warned against the pernicious influence of those Canaanites who yet remained in the land (Josh 23:12\u201313). Such clear warnings that an Israel led astray would be likewise driven from the land in just retribution was later tragically realized in the Babylonian exile (cf. Lev 18:24\u201328).<\/p>\n
2. Intended Boundaries Described (34:1\u201315)<\/p>\n
As Israel prepared to penetrate into Canaan, the LORD defined the territory open for conquest. Earlier the LORD had promised Moses and the Israelites to set their bounds from the Red Sea to the \u201cSea of the Philistines,\u201d i.e., the Mediterranean, and from the desert to \u201cthe River,\u201d i.e., the Euphrates (Exod 23:31), but, because of Israel\u2019s disobedience, these limits were only realized for a brief period under Solomon centuries later (1 Kgs 4:21). Some of the place names in the present section are now problematic, but enough are known to sketch generally the geographical limits (cf. Ezek 47:13\u201320).
\n34:1\u20136 The southern side of the territory here defined as Canaan approximates the boundary actually allotted to Judah later (Josh 15:2\u20134). Israel\u2019s border on the southeast in the Desert of Zin (13:21; 20:1; 33:36) was to be the border of Edom. Starting from the southern extremity of the Salt Sea, the line runs southwest, then northwest (vv. 3\u20135), then north (v. 6), then east (vv. 7\u20139) and finally south to its origin (vv. 10\u201312) thus marking all four borders. Scorpion Pass is usually identified with Naqb es-Safa southwest of the Dead Sea. Zin may refer to some site, otherwise unknown, which gave the wilderness area its name. The end of the southwesterly line, marking the southernmost limit, was south of Kadesh Barnea (see note to 13:26). At this point the line turns northwest. Neither of the southern border sites Hazar Addar and Azmon has been identified; the first means \u201cSettlement of Addar\u201d but may combine the names of two perhaps adjacent places (cf. Josh 15:3). The wadi of Egypt is the Wadi el-\u02bfArish which the line then followed to the Sea, entering the Mediterranean some fifty miles south of Gaza. The southern border thus delineated seems to follow a series of valleys providing some natural boundary. Israel\u2019s western boundary was, of course, to be the Great Sea, the Mediterranean Sea. In biblical history other powers occupying the coastal plains normally prevented Israel\u2019s extension to the sea.
\n34:7\u201312 Because so few of the sites mentioned in description of the northern boundary can be certainly identified, it is now impossible to trace confidently the intended northern and northeastern lines. The specific coastal point of origin on the Mediterranean for the northern line is not stated. Two major analyses of the difficult geographical data in these verses have emerged, one of which assumes a starting point a few miles north of Tyre, while the other sets the start about a hundred miles farther north, thus incorporating much more of the territory today known as Lebanon and Syria. The former view more nearly resembles later actual boundaries, while the latter view brings the intended border closer to the Euphrates (Exod 23:31). Not to be confused with the homonymous southern mountain where Aaron died (20:22\u201329), Mount Hor remains unidentified. The text may allude to some prominent peak in the Lebanon Range. Turning near Lebo Hamath (see note to 13:21), the northern boundary was to go to Zedad, continue to Ziphron and end at Hazar Enan. The location of all these is now uncertain. The theory of a more extensive northern boundary equates Zedad with modern Sadad and Hazar Enan, the northeast corner, with Qayatein, an oasis on the road to Palmyra (biblical Tadmor). Adherents of the narrower frontier theory seek Hazar Enan, which means \u201cenclosure of the spring,\u201d near Banias, at the source of the Jordan. On the eastern boundary the sites of Shepham and Riblah and Ain are all unidentified. Riblah, literally \u201cthe Riblah,\u201d was not the Syrian town on the Orontes mentioned in 2 Kings 23:33, since that \u201cRiblah\u201d was consistently written without the article. The rest of the eastern line from the slopes east of the Sea of Kinnereth to the Jordan and on to the Dead Sea, the Salt Sea, is quite clear, Kinnereth being an ancient name applied to the Sea of Galilee.
\n34:13\u201315 As the LORD had commanded earlier (26:52\u201356) the people were to assign this land by lot as an inheritance. The half-tribe mentioned in verse 13 is the remainder of Manasseh not sharing in the transjordan inheritance. This eastern inheritance sought and received by the tribe of Reuben, the tribe of Gad and the half-tribe of Manasseh is treated at length in chapter 32. Their territory lay outside Canaan proper, and in later centuries they became increasingly isolated from the other tribes. Here the expression the east side of the Jordan of Jericho, toward the sunrise may serve to designate technically the site where the legal transaction of 32:28\u201333 took place. Alternatively, the whole eastern inheritance may be so designated, as in Joshua 20:8. \u201cJordan\u201d may be originally an Indo-Aryan word for \u201criver,\u201d in which case \u201cJordan-of-Jericho,\u201d the literal expression here, may designate the whole river by a prominent citadel in its valley (cf. notes to 22:1 and 32:32).<\/p>\n
3. Leaders Chosen for Land Division (34:16\u201329)<\/p>\n
34:16\u201329 For other lists of leaders assigned special tasks see 1:5\u201316 and 13:4\u201316. Interestingly, none of the men listed is a son of a man chosen for either of the previous lists. The tribal leaders are mentioned in an order roughly corresponding to the later geographical allotment to their respective tribes, from south (Judah) to north (Naphtali) (cf. Joshua 14\u201319). Eleazar the priest and Joshua son of Nun were naturally to oversee the land allocation (cf. 27:12\u201323 and notes). Selection of one leader from each tribe excluded, of course, the tribes of Reuben and Gad, who had already accepted their intended total allotment. Notably the aged stalwart Caleb was again to serve the important tribe of Judah (cf. 13:6, 30; 14:24). He later received Hebron as a special inheritance (Josh 14:6\u201315). As in 26:28 Manasseh is again listed before Ephraim perhaps because this tribe was now the larger of the Joseph tribes.<\/p>\n
4. Cities Ordained for Levites (35:1\u20135)<\/p>\n
Receiving no land inheritance as such, the Levites were to be supported basically by Israelite tithes (18:20\u201324) while the priests received various types of sacred revenues (18:8\u201320, 25\u201329). Nevertheless, to provide them greater security (cf. Deut 14:27, 29) and to disperse them and their uplifting influence throughout Israel (cf. Deut 31:9\u201313; 33:10), the Levites, including the priests, were to be provided numerous special cities complete with limited pastureland. Though perhaps imperfectly carried out and honored by later Israel, this law accomplished its essential purposes.
\n35:1\u20135 Following the general notice of conquest and land distribution (33:50\u201334:29), the text now addresses specific inheritance concerns including the Levite cities (33:1\u20135), the cities of refuge (35:6\u201334), and the inheritance of heiresses (36:1\u201313). Again, as in 33:50, the text carefully documents the transjordan encampment on the plains of Moab (22:1) as the topographical setting for the divine command. Whether the towns to live in were intended necessarily to be exclusively for Levite possession is disputed; Levite housing needs were certainly to be met. The Levite\u2019s possession constituted practical ownership (cf. Lev 25:23; 32\u201334; Josh 21:12). From a root meaning \u201cto drive out,\u201d the Hebrew noun rendered pasturelands (\u05de\u05b4\u05d2\u05b0\u05e8\u05b8\u05e9\u05c1, migr\u0101\u0161) denotes here \u201ca place for driving\u201d livestock, as verse 3 illustrates. These pasturelands were to extend out fifteen hundred feet, literally 1000 cubits, from the town wall. Although the word (\u05e7\u05b4\u05d9\u05e8, q\u00eer) is rarely used for a city wall, this seems the best rendering. Verse 5 gives the additional dimension three thousand feet, literally two thousand cubits. How these dimensions are to be understood has been the source of considerable, often ingenious, speculation. The Septuagint Greek translation has \u201ctwo thousand\u201d in both verses. Some interpreters, assuming the two thousand cubits must be the total length of each side, hence a square configuration, find the city thereby reduced to a point, a conclusion which no intelligent, much less inspired, ancient writer would have intended. Some rabbinic writers envisioned concentric bands of land around the city. Conceding the square configuration, one may add the two thousand cubits to the length of each wall. Rejecting the square configuration as neither absolutely demanded by the text nor easily applicable to rebuilt cities or mountain terrain, one may simply but reasonably understand the text as reserving for the Levites two-thousand-cubit plots extending outward one thousand cubits from each wall. Where a wall was less than two thousand cubits, the plots would overlap; where it was more, they would not touch.<\/p>\n
5. Cities Slated for Refuge (35:6\u201334)<\/p>\n
35:6\u20138 In verse 6 the textual mention of six cities of refuge anticipates the instruction following (vv. 9\u201315). The forty-eight towns, together with their pasturelands to be assigned to the Levites were to be given in proportion to the inheritance of each tribe. The actual distribution of cities to the Levites is related in Joshua 21:1\u201342 which informs that nine cities were given by Judah and Simeon, three by Naphtali, and four by each of the nine other tribes. The tribes gave therefore nearly on an equal basis, thus indicating they understood \u201clarger\u201d and \u201csmaller\u201d to refer to land quantity and quality, not to population. The priestly Kohathites received thirteen cities in Judah, Simeon, and Benjamin; the other Kohathites were allotted ten cities in Ephraim, Dan, and Manasseh west of Jordan; the Gershonites were given thirteen cities in Issachar, Asher, Naphtali, and Manasseh east of Jordan; and the Merarites received twelve cities in Reuben, Gad, and Zebulun (Josh 21:4\u20137).
\n35:9\u201315 Promised previously by the LORD (Exod 21:13), places of refuge for those committing accidental manslaughter were to be designated from among the Levitical cities. Perhaps the fullest treatment of this subject (compare Deut 4:41\u201343 and 19:1\u201313), the present passage sets forth basic provision (vv. 9\u201315) and gives legal guidelines for the court decisions necessitated. These guidelines distinguish by illustrative cases between the murderer who was prohibited asylum (vv. 16\u201321) and the manslayer who was granted refuge (vv. 22\u201328) and offer additional relevant details (vv. 29\u201334).
\nThe Hebrew noun rendered refuge (\u05de\u05b4\u05e7\u05b0\u05dc\u05b8\u05d8, miql\u0101\u1e6d) is rare, used only of these cities, but its sense is quite clear. Interestingly, in this passage the same Hebrew word (\u05e8\u05b9\u05e6\u05b5\u05d7\u05b7, r\u014d\u1e63\u0113a\u1e25) depicts both a \u201cmanslayer\u201d and a \u201cmurderer,\u201d the former being clearly differentiated by the qualifying phrase, who has killed someone accidentally. This same Hebrew verb appears in the sixth commandment\u2019s prohibition of murder (Exod 20:13). The verb ordinarily conveys the idea of violent, unauthorized killing. The Hebrew word rendered \u201caccidentally\u201d (\u05d1\u05b4\u05bc\u05e9\u05b0\u05c1\u05d2\u05b8\u05d2\u05b8\u05d4, bi\u0161g\u0101g\u0101h) is elsewhere translated \u201cunintentionally\u201d (see note to 4:2). The fuller expression for the avenger is \u201cthe avenger of blood\u201d (v. 19). \u201cAvenger\u201d is literally \u201credeemer\u201d (\u05d2\u05d5\u05b9\u05d0\u05b5\u05dc, g\u00f4\u02be\u0113l), and describes one\u2019s nearest kinsman, among whose duties in the close-knit clan structure was the avenging of the blood of his slain brother. Other duties involved kinsman-redeemer marriage (Ruth 3:13), purchase of the kin from slavery (Lev 25:48), redemption (Lev 25:25), or protective purchase (Jer 32:7\u201312) of family property, and collection of debts due a deceased kinsman (5:8). The \u201cavenger of blood\u201d is thus \u201che who performs the kinsman\u2019s office with regard to blood,\u201d as the Septuagint accurately suggested. It should be noted that the concept of kinship vengeance is found in numerous ancient and some modern societies lacking a strong centralized authority for law enforcement. Scripture regulated this custom beneficially for Israel by providing a law of refuge which clearly distinguished between kinds of bloodshed. This clear distinction became foundational for western jurisprudence. In verse 12 the Hebrew term r\u014d\u1e63\u0113a\u1e25 is general and hence properly rendered as a person accused of murder. Bloodshed brought upon the society the solemn legal responsibility of determining the nature of the bloodshed. From Deuteronomy 19:12 it seems that the basic trial was to be held in the city where the homicide occurred, a conclusion apparently supported by verse 25 below. The elders of the city of refuge involved were certainly to cooperate in the judicial procedure and to concur in the judgment (Josh 20:4\u20136). An alternative analysis would place the basic trial itself in the city of refuge. The three cities on this side of the Jordan Moses later designated as Bezer, Ramoth in Gilead, and Golan (Deut 4:43). The three cities in Canaan were later designated as Kedesh in Galilee, Shechem, and Hebron (Josh 20:7). The cities chosen thus provided one southern, one central, and one northern site on each side of the Jordan. This arrangement assured that no spot in the land was far removed from an official refuge city. Legal provision of these cities as a place of refuge applied to both Israelites and non-Israelites living among them (cf. 15:14\u201316 and notes). The condition that refuge was intended only for one who has killed another accidentally differentiates the Israelite law from the medieval European concept of unconditional sanctuary in holy places (cf. Exod 21:14).
\n35:16\u201321 From the character of a \u201cblunt instrument\u201d that caused death (iron object \u2026 stone \u2026 wooden object), the court could often infer that the killing was intentional. Because people knew that such objects could inflict death, guilt was presumptive unless there were extenuating factors (v. 23; Deut 19:5). No murderer should be given refuge but instead the murderer shall be put to death. In these cases the sentence was normally executed by the victim\u2019s nearest kinsman (v. 19; Exod 20:13; 21:12). In murder cases the law permitted, even commanded, the vendetta by one\u2019s nearest kin, but otherwise the law sought to prevent it. By protecting the innocent without sheltering the guilty, the law prevented the ruinous blood-feuds which could so easily develop where the vendetta custom was not regulated. Again, avenger translates Hebrew g\u00f4\u02be\u0113l as in verse 12. Malicious intent could also be established by demonstrated premeditation (malice aforethought) or by the known hostility between the defendant and his victim. If a murderer fled to a refuge city, Deuteronomy 19:12 reveals that the elders of his city should take custody of him and deliver him to the avenger of blood.
\n35:22\u201328 Described in verses 22\u201323 are cases exactly opposite of those in verse 20. Without evidence of malicious intent or hostility the court could determine that the death was in essence accidental. Accordingly, the assembly must judge between him and the avenger of blood according to these regulations, i.e., according to the legal guidelines given in verses 16\u201323. The \u201cavenger of blood\u201d claimed right of execution, but the court limited his right to cases of murder. The language, the assembly must protect \u2026, suggests that the trial was ordinarily elsewhere than the refuge city (cf. v. 12 and notes). The stipulation that the defendant exonerated on murder charges must stay there until the death of the high priest underlines the seriousness of even accidental manslaughter. Though acquitted, the manslayer was exiled from his home for the duration of the high priest\u2019s lifetime, ordinarily a matter of some years. A high priest\u2019s death would publicly mark the end of an era, so that all could recognize that acquitted manslayers were free to leave their enforced exiles. The high priest was especially anointed with the holy oil at his installation (Lev 8:12; cf. Exod 29:7). The security of an accused defendant who had been exonerated of murder charges lay within the city of refuge. To leave the city prematurely was to forfeit one\u2019s right to live. Outside the protection of the city the avenger of blood may kill the accused without being guilty of murder. If, however, the avenger were to kill the manslayer in the refuge city or after the high priest\u2019s death, he would himself be guilty of murder (cf. Gen 9:6; Exod 22:3).
\n35:29\u201334 As with the inheritance rights of heiresses (27:11) the refuge laws are stated as permanent legal requirements, i.e., the rules for procedure in all similar cases. A murderer was to be executed only on the testimony of witnesses. This stipulation guarded against the likelihood of mistaken identity or a prejudiced and perhaps perjuring witness (cf. Deut 17:6; 19:15). No monetary payment as ransom was to be accepted in lieu of the murderer\u2019s execution (cf. Exod 21:30). Nor was an acquitted manslayer to be allowed to buy his freedom by payment of monetary compensation. Because bloodshed pollutes the land the murderer was not to be permitted refuge or ransom, but was to be duly executed. The text emphasizes atonement cannot be made \u2026 except by the blood of the one who shed it (cf. Gen 9:6). The execution of the murderer was therefore necessary in order to \u201ccover\u201d the blood shed by his innocent victim. Thus \u201catonement\u201d here has the force of \u201cexpiation\u201d (cf. note to Lev 1:4). For cases in which the murderer was unknown, special provision was made (Deut 21:1\u20139). Such grave offenses as murder, human sacrifice (Ps 106:38), sexual degeneracy, and idolatry (Jer 3:1\u201310) would defile the land, thus endangering its inhabitants (cf. Lev 18:24\u201325 and notes). Israel was to keep her land free from spiritual pollution so that the holy LORD might continue spiritually to dwell among the Israelites (cf. Exod 25:8; Lev 11:45).<\/p>\n
6. Heiresses\u2019 Marriage Restricted (36:1\u201313)<\/p>\n
36:1\u20134 Some of the descendants of Manasseh by Makir had already received inheritance east of Jordan (32:39), but their concerned chieftains joined in raising an important legal question before Moses and the leaders (cf. 32:2) in the interest of their tribe and, indeed, of all Israel. The Gileadite leaders introduced their problem by stating inheritance laws already revealed, i.e., the LORD commanded \u2026 to give the land as an inheritance \u2026 by lot (26:55; 33:54). The chieftains then argued that the permission of inheritance by daughters established in the precedent of the daughters of Zelophehad (27:1\u201311) could endanger ancestral inheritance boundaries. If an heiress married into another tribe, her property would pass, if not at marriage, certainly at death, into her husband\u2019s tribe, since the children, who would inherit, would have their father\u2019s pedigree. The leaders expected that the allotted tribal portions should remain basically constant. The legal institution of the Year of Jubilee protected against the danger of land being sold outside a tribe (Lev 25:10), but even this offered no protection against its being inherited outside a tribe. Rather, the Jubilee would only have confirmed officially the transfer that had taken place and their inheritance will be added to that of the tribe into which they marry, and their property will be taken from the tribal inheritance of our forefathers. Such a result, compounded over years by similar cases, would destroy tribal distinctiveness by erasing tribal boundaries.
\n36:5\u20139 Through Moses the LORD revealed that the tribe of the descendants of Joseph \u2026 is right. The law did intend to maintain distinctive tribal inheritances (v. 7). In response to the Manassite leaders, the LORD commanded that Zelophehad\u2019s daughters \u2026 may marry anyone they please as long as they marry within the tribal clan of their father. This inspired ruling solved the specific problem at hand. The expression \u201ctribal clan of their father\u201d reflects tribal origins and emphasizes tribal closeness and distinctiveness. The text then generalizes by making the specific case of Zelophehad\u2019s daughters a precedent for all future heiresses (cf. 27:8\u201311).
\n36:10\u201313 Shown in chapter 27 to be courageous and outspoken, Zelophehad\u2019s daughters obediently accepted the divine restriction. A subscription to the final legislative section of Numbers (chs. 26\u201336), the notation of occasion and locale in verse 13 (see 22:1) appropriately concludes the entire volume (cf. Lev 26:46; 27:34).<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
This message sharply contrasts Moses\u2019 position with that of a lesser prophet (compare 11:25) to whom the LORD might speak in visions and dreams. These two terms are synonymously paralleled, as in Joel 2:28. Far more than merely one prophet or leader among many, Moses had proven faithful as the chief steward in all the … <\/p>\n