[Link]

html

Bookmarks
● Numbers 1
● Numbers 2:
● Numbers 3:
● Numbers 4:
● Numbers 5:
● Numbers 6:
● Numbers 7:
● Numbers 8:
● Numbers 9:
● Numbers 10:
● Numbers 11:
● Numbers 12:
● Numbers 13:
● Numbers 14:
● Numbers 15:
● Numbers 16:
● Numbers 17:
● Numbers 18:
● Numbers 19:
● Numbers 20:
● Numbers 21:
● Numbers 22:
● Numbers 23:
● Numbers 24:
● Numbers 25:
● Numbers 26:
● Numbers 27:
● Numbers 28:
● Numbers 29:
● Numbers 30:
● Numbers 31:
● Numbers 32:
● Numbers 33:
● Numbers 34:
● Numbers 35:
● Numbers 36:

[Link] [13/08/2004 [Link] p.m.]

 Keil and Delitzsch Commentary on the Old Testament

First Next ->

Numbers

I. PREPARATIONS FOR THE DEPARTURE OF ISRAEL

FROM SINAI.

Ch. 1:1-10:10.

Numbering of the People of Israel at Sinai. Ch. 1-4.

Four weeks after the erection of the tabernacle (cf. Num 1:1 and Ex 40:17), Moses
had the number of the whole congregation taken, by the command of God,
according to the families and fathers' houses of the twelve tribes, and a list made of
all the males above twenty years of age for service in the army of Jehovah (Num
1:1-3). Nine months before, the numbering of the people had taken place for the
purpose of collecting atonement-money from every male of twenty years old
upwards (Ex 30:11ff., compared with Num 38:25-26 ), and the result was 603,550,
the same number as is given here as the sum of all that were mustered in the twelve
tribes (Num 1:46). This correspondence in the number of the male population after
the lapse of a year is to be explained, as we have already observed at Ex 30:16,
simply from the fact that the result of the previous census, which was taken for the
purpose of raising head-money from every one who was fit for war, was taken as
the basis of the mustering of all who were fit for war, which took place after the
erection of the tabernacle; so that, strictly speaking, this mustering merely
consisted in the registering of those who had been numbered in the public records,
according to their families and fathers' houses.

It is most probable, however, that the numbering and registering took place

[Link] (1 of 2) [13/08/2004 [Link] p.m.]

 Keil and Delitzsch Commentary on the Old Testament

according to the classification adopted at Jethro's suggestion for the administration

of justice, viz., in thousands, hundred, fifties, and tens (Ex 18:25), and that the
number of men in the different tribes was reckoned in this way simply by
thousands, hundreds, and tens-a conclusion which we may draw from the fact, that
there are no units given in the case of any of the tribes. On this plan the
supernumerary units might be used to balance the changes that had taken place in
the actual condition of the families and fathers' houses, between the numbering and
the preparation of the muster-rolls, so that the few changes that had occurred in the
course of nine months among those who were fit for war were not taken any
further into consideration, on account of their being so inconsiderable in relation to
the total result.

A fresh census was taken 38 years later in the steppes of Moab (ch. 26), for the
division of the land of Canaan among the tribes according to the number of their
families (Num 33:54). The number which this gave was 601,730 men of twenty
years old and upwards, not a single one of whom, with the exception of Joshua and
Caleb, was included among those that were mustered at Sinai, because the whole
of that generation had died in the wilderness (Num 26:63ff.). In the historical
account, instead of these exact numbers, the number of adult males is given in a
round sum of 600,000 (Num 11:21; Ex 12:37). To this the Levites had to be added,
of whom there were 22,000 males at the first numbering and 23,000 at the second,
reckoning the whole from a month old and upwards (Num 3:39; 26:62).
Accordingly, on the precarious supposition that the results obtained from the
official registration of births and deaths in our own day furnish any approximative
standard for the people of Israel, who had grown up under essentially different
territorial and historical circumstances, the whole number of the Israelites in the
time of Moses would have been about two millions.

(Note: Statistics show that, out of 10,000 inhabitants in any country, about 5580 are over twenty years
of age (cf. Chr. Bernoulli, Hdb. der Populationistik , 1841). This is the case in Belgium, where,

First Next ->

[Link] (2 of 2) [13/08/2004 [Link] p.m.]

 Keil and Delitzsch Commentary on the Old Testament

<- Previous First Next ->

out of 1000 inhabitants, 421 are under twenty years of age. According to the Danish census of 1840,
out of 1000 inhabitants there were-

- In Denmark,

under twenty

years of age, 432; above twenty, 568

- ---Schleswig,

" " 436; above twenty, 564

- ---Holstein,

" " 460; above twenty, 540

- ---Lauenburg,

" " 458; above twenty, 542

According to this standard, if there were 600,000 males in Israel above twenty years of age, there
would be in all 1,000,000 or 1,100,000 males, and therefore, including the females, more than two
millions.)

Modern critics have taken offence at these numbers, though without sufficient
reason.

(Note: Knobel has raised the following objections to the historical truth or validity of the numbers
given above: (1.) So large a number could not possibly have lived for any considerable time in the
peninsula of Sinai, as modern travellers estimate the present population at not more than from four to
seven thousand, and state that the land could never have been capable of sustaining a population of
50,000. But the books of Moses do not affirm that the Israelites lived for forty years upon the natural

[Link] (1 of 2) [13/08/2004 [Link] p.m.]

 Keil and Delitzsch Commentary on the Old Testament

produce of the desert, but that they were fed miraculously with manna by God (see at Ex 16:31).
Moreover, the peninsula of Sinai yielded much more subsistence in ancient times than is to be found
there at present, as is generally admitted, and only denied by Knobel in the interests of rationalism.
The following are Ritter's remarks in his Erdkunde , 14 pp. 926-7: "We have repeatedly referred above
to the earlier state of the country, which must have been vastly different from that of the present time.
The abundant vegetation, for example; the larger number of trees, and their superiority in size, the
destruction of which would be followed by a decrease in the quantity of smaller shrubs, etc.; also the
greater abundance of the various kinds of food of which the children of Israel could avail themselves
in their season; the more general cultivation of the land, as seen in the monumental period of the
earliest Egyptians, viz., the period of their mines and cities, as well as in Christian times in the wide-
spread remains of monasteries, hermitages, walls, gardens, fields, and wells; and, lastly, the possibility
of a better employment of the temporary flow of water in the wadys, and of the rain, which falls by no
means unfrequently, but which would need to be kept with diligence and by artificial means for the
unfruitful periods of the year, as is the case in other districts of the same latitude. These circumstances,
which are supported by the numerous inscriptions of Sinai and Serbal, together with those in the Wady
Mokatteb and a hundred other valleys, as well as upon rocky and mountainous heights, which are now
found scattered in wild solitude and utter neglect throughout the whole of the central group of
mountains, prove that at one time a more numerous population both could and did exist there."

(2.) "If the Israelites had been a nation of several millions in the Mosaic age, with their bravery at that
time, they would have conquered the small land more easily and more rapidly than they seem to have
done according to the accounts in the books of Joshua, Judges, and Samuel, which show that they were
obliged to tolerate the Canaanites for a long time, that they were frequently oppressed by them, and
that it was not till the time of David and Solomon that their supremacy was completely established,"
This objection of Knobe's is founded upon the supposition that the tribes of Canaan were very small
and weak. But where has he learned that? As they had no less than 31 kings, according to Josh 12, and
dwelt in many hundreds of towns, they can hardly have been numerically weaker than the Israelites
with their 600,000 men, but in all probability were considerably stronger in numbers, and by no means
inferior in bravery; to say nothing of the fact that the Israelites neither conquered Canaan under Joshua
by the strength of their hands, nor failed to exterminate them

<- Previous First Next ->

[Link] (2 of 2) [13/08/2004 [Link] p.m.]

 Keil and Delitzsch Commentary on the Old Testament

<- Previous First Next ->

afterwards from want of physical strength. (3.) Of the remaining objections, viz., that so large a
number could not have gone through the Arabian Gulf in a single night, or crossed the Jordan in a day,
that Joshua could not have circumcised the whole of the males, etc., the first has been answered on pp.
350, 351, by a proof that it was possible for the Red Sea to be crossed in a given time, and the others
will be answered when we come to the particular events referred to.)

When David had the census taken by Joab, in the closing years of his reign, there
were 800,000 men capable of bearing arms in Israel, and 500,000 in Judah (2 Sam
24:9). Now, if we suppose the entire population of a country to be about four times
the number of its fighting men, there would be about five millions of inhabitants in
Palestine at that time. The area of this land, according to the boundaries given in
Num 34:2-12, the whole of which was occupied by Israel and Judah in the time of
David, with the exception of a small strip of the Phoenician coast, was more than
500 square miles.

(Note: The German mile being equal to about five English miles, this would give 12,500 square miles
English.)

Accordingly there would be 10,000 inhabitants to each square mile (German); a

dense though by no means unparalleled population;

(Note: In the kingdom of Saxony (according to the census of the year 1855) there are 7501 persons to
the square mile; in Belgium (according to the census of 1856) 8462; and in the district of Düsseldorf
there are 98·32 square miles and (according to the census of 1855) 1,007,570 inhabitants, so that there
must be 10,248 persons to the square mile. Consequently, not only could more than five millions have
lived in Palestine, but, if we take into account on the one hand what is confirmed by both biblical and
other testimonies, viz., the extraordinary fertility of the land in ancient times (cf. v. Raumer, Pal. pp.
92ff.), and on the other hand the well-known fact that the inhabitants of warm countries require less
food than Europeans living in colder climates, they could also have found a sufficient supply of food.)

so that it is certainly possible that in the time of Christ it may have been more
numerous still, according to the account of Josephus , which are confirmed by Dio

[Link] (1 of 2) [13/08/2004 [Link] p.m.]

 Keil and Delitzsch Commentary on the Old Testament

Cassius (cf. C. v. Raumer, Palästina , p. 93). And if Canaan could contain and
support five millions of inhabitants in the flourishing period of the Israelitish
kingdom, two millions or more could easily have settled and been sustained in the
time of Joshua and the Judges, notwithstanding the fact that there still remained
large tracts of land in the possession of the Canaanites and Philistines, and that the
Israelites dwelt in the midst of the Canaanitish population which had not yet been
entirely eradicated (Judg 3:1-5).

If we compare together the results of the two numbering in the second and fortieth
years of their march, we shall find a considerable increase in some of the tribes,
and a large decrease in others. The number of men of twenty years old and
upwards in the different tribes was as follows:-

1st Numbering 2nd Numbering

Reuben 46,500 43,730 Simeon 59,300 22,200 Gad 45,650 40,500 Judah 74,600
76,500 Issachar 54,400 64,300

<- Previous First Next ->

[Link] (2 of 2) [13/08/2004 [Link] p.m.]

 Keil and Delitzsch Commentary on the Old Testament

<- Previous First Next ->

Zebulon 57,400 60,500 Ephraim 40,500 32,500 Manasseh 32,200 52,700 Benjamin
35,400 45,600 Dan 62,700 64,400 Asher 41,500 53,400 Naphtali 53,400 45,400
Total 603,550 601,730

Consequently by the second numbering Dan had increased 1700, Judah 1900,
Zebulon 3100, Issachar 9900, Benjamin 10,200, Asher 11,900, Manasseh 20,900.
This increase, which was about 19 per cent. in the case of Issachar, 29 per cent. in
that of Benjamin and Asher, and 63 per cent. in that of Manasseh, is very large, no
doubt; but even that of Manasseh is not unparalleled. The total population of
Prussia increased from 10,349,031 to 17,139,288 between the end of 1816 and the
end of 1855, that is to say, more than 65 per cent. in 39 years; whilst in England
the population increased 47 per cent. between 1815 and 1849, i.e., in 34 years. On
the other hand, there was a decrease in Reuben of 2770, in Gad of 5150, and
Ephraim of 8000, in Naphtali of 8000, and in Simeon of 37,100. The cause of this
diminution of 6 per cent. in the case of Reuben, 12 per cent. in Gad, 15 per cent. in
Naphtali, 20 per cent. in Ephraim, and nearly 63 per cent. in Simeon, it is most
natural to seek for in the different judgments which fell upon the nation. If it be
true, as the earlier commentators conjectured, with great plausibility, on account of
the part taken by Zimri, a prince of the tribe (Num 25:6,14), that the Simeonites
were the worst of those who joined in the idolatrous worship of Baal Peor, the
plague, in which 24,000 men were destroyed (Num 25:9), would fall upon them
with greater severity than upon the other tribes; and this would serve as the
principal explanation of the circumstance, that in the census which was taken
immediately afterwards, the number of men in that tribe who were capable of
bearing arms had melted away to 22,200. But for all that, the total number included
in the census had only been reduced by 1820 men during the forty years of their
journeying through the wilderness.

The tribe of Levi appears very small in comparison with the rest of the tribes. In
the second year of their journey, when the first census was taken, it only numbered
22,000 males of a month old and upwards; and in the fortieth year, when the

[Link] (1 of 2) [13/08/2004 [Link] p.m.]

 Keil and Delitzsch Commentary on the Old Testament

second was taken, only 23,000 (Num 3:39; 26:62). "Reckoning," says Knobel ,
"that in Belgium, for example, in the rural districts, out of 10,000 males, 1074 die
in the first month after their birth, and 3684 between the first month and the
twentieth year, so that only 5242 are then alive, the tribe of Levi would only
number about 13,000 men of 20 years old and upwards, and consequently would
not be half as numerous as the smallest of the other tribes, whilst it would be
hardly a sixth part the size of Judah, which was the strongest of the tribes." But
notwithstanding this, the correctness of the numbers given is not to be called in
question. It is not only supported by the fact, that the number of the Levites
capable of service between the ages of 30 and 50 amounted to 8580 (Num 4:48) - a
number which bears the most perfect proportion to that of 22,000 of a month old
and upwards-but is also confirmed by the fact, that in the time of David the tribe of
Levi only numbered 38,000 of thirty years old and upwards (1 Chron 23:3); so that
in the interval between Moses and David their rate of increase was still below that
of the other tribes, which had grown from 600,000 to 1,300,000 in the same time.
Now, if we cannot discover any reason for this smaller rate of increase in the tribe
of Levi, we see, at any rate, that it was not uniform in the other tribes. If Levi was
not half as strong as Manasseh in the first numbering, neither Manasseh nor
Benjamin was half as strong as Judah; and in the second numbering, even Ephraim
had not half the number of men that Judah had.

A much greater difficulty appears to lie in the fact, that the number of all the male
first-born of the twelve tribes, which was only 22,273 according to the census
taken for the purpose of their redemption by the Levites (Num 3:43), bore no kind
of proportion to the total number of men capable of bearing arms in the whole of
the male population, as calculated from these. If the 603,550 men of twenty years
old and upwards presuppose, according

<- Previous First Next ->

[Link] (2 of 2) [13/08/2004 [Link] p.m.]

 Keil and Delitzsch Commentary on the Old Testament

<- Previous First Next ->

to what has been stated above, a population of more than a million males; then, on
the assumption that 22,273 was the sum total of the first-born sons throughout the
entire nation, there would be only one first-born to 40 or 45 males, and
consequently every father of a family must have begotten, or still have had, from 39
to 44 sons; whereas the ordinary proportion of first-born sons to the whole male
population is one to four. But the calculation which yields this enormous
disproportion, or rather this inconceivable proportion, is founded upon the
supposition that the law, which commanded the sanctification of the male first-
born, had a retrospective force, and was to be understood as requiring that not only
the first-born sons, who were born from the time when the law was given, but all
the first-born sons throughout the entire nation, should be offered to the Lord and
redeemed with five shekels each, even though they were fathers or grandfathers, or
even great-grandfathers, at that time. Now if the law is to be interpreted in this
sense, as having a retrospective force, and applying to those who were born before
it was issued, as it has been from the time of J. D. Michaelis down to that of Knobel
, it is an unwarrantable liberty to restrict its application to the first-born sons, who
had not yet become fathers themselves-a mere subterfuge, in fact, invented for the
purpose of getting rid of the disproportion, but without answering the desired end.

(Note: This is evident from the different attempts which have been made to get rid of the difficulty, in
accordance with this hypothesis. J. D. Michaelis thought that he could explain the disproportion from
the prevalence of polygamy among the Israelites; but he has overlooked the fact, that polygamy never
prevailed among the Israelites, or any other people, with anything like the universality which this
would suppose. Hävernick adopted this view, but differed so far from Michaelis , that he understood by
first-born only those who were so on both the father's and mother's side-a supposition which does not
remove the difficulty, but only renders it perfectly incredible. Others imagined, that only those first-
born were counted who had been born as the result of marriages contracted within the last six years.
Baumgarten supports this on the ground that, according to Lev 27:6, the redemption-fee for boys of
this age was five shekels (Num 3:47); but this applies to vows, and proves nothing in relation to first-
born, who could not have been the object of a vow (Lev 27:26).

Bunsen comes to the same conclusion, on the ground that it was at this age that children were generally
dedicated to Moloch ( sic! ). Lastly, Kurtz endeavours to solve the difficulty, first, by referring to the
great fruitfulness of the Israelitish women; secondly, by excluding, ( a ) the first-born of the father,

[Link] (1 of 2) [13/08/2004 [Link] p.m.]

 Keil and Delitzsch Commentary on the Old Testament

unless at the same time the first-born of the mother; ( b ) all the first-born who were fathers of families
themselves; and thirdly, by observing, that in a population of 600,000 males above 20 years of age, we
may assume that there would be about 200,000 under the age of fifteen. Now, if we deduct these
200,000 who were not yet fifteen, from the 600,000 who were above twenty, there would remain
400,000 married men. "In that case the total number of 22,273 first-born would yield this proportion,
that there would be one first-born to nine male births. And on the ground assigned under No. 2( a ),
this proportion would have to be reduced one-half. So that for every family we should have, on an
average, four or five sons, or nine children-a result by no means surprising, considering the fruitfulness
of Hebrew marriages." This would be undoubtedly true, and the facit of the calculation quite correct, as
9 x 22,273 = 200,457, if only the subtraction upon which it is based were reconcilable with the rules of
arithmetic, or if the reduction of 600,000 men to 400,000 could in any way be justified.)

If we look more closely at the law, we cannot find in the words themselves "all the
first-born, whatsoever openeth the womb" (Ex 13:2, cf. Num 3:12), or in the ratio
legis , or in the circumstances under which the law was given, either a necessity or
warrant for any such explanation or extension. According to Ex 13:2, after the
institution of the Passover and its first commemoration, God gave the command,
"Sanctify unto Me all the first-born both of man and of beast;" and added,
according to vv. 11ff., the further explanation, that when the Israelites came into the
land of Canaan, they were to set apart every first-born unto the Lord, but to redeem
their first-born sons. This further definition places it beyond all doubt, that what
God prescribed to His people was not a supplementary sanctification of all the male
first-born who were then to be found in Israel, but simply the sanctification of all
that should be born from that time forward.

<- Previous First Next ->

[Link] (2 of 2) [13/08/2004 [Link] p.m.]

 Keil and Delitzsch Commentary on the Old Testament

<- Previous First Next ->

A confirmation of this is to be found in the explanation given in Num 3:13 and

[Link] "All the first-born are Mine; for on the day that I smote all the first-born in
the land of Egypt, I hallowed unto Me all the first-born in Israel, both man and
beast." According to this distinct explanation, God had actually sanctified to
Himself all the first-born of Israel by the fact, that through the blood of the paschal
lamb He granted protection to His people form the stroke of the destroyer (Ex
12:22-23), and had instituted the Passover, in order that He might therein adopt the
whole nation of Israel, with all its sons, as the people of His possession, or induct
the nation which He had chosen as His first-born son (Ex 4:22) into the condition
of a child of God. This condition of sonship was henceforth to be practically
manifested by the Israelites, not only by the yearly repetition of the feast of
Passover, but also by the presentation of all the male first-born of their sons and
their cattle to the Lord, the first-born of the cattle being sacrificed to Him upon the
altar, and the first-born sons being redeemed from the obligation resting upon them
to serve at the sanctuary of their God. Of course the reference was only to the first-
born of men and cattle that should come into the world from that time forward, and
not to those whom God had already sanctified to Himself, by sparing the Israelites
and their cattle.

(Note: Vitringa drew the correct conclusion from Ex 13:11-12, in combination with the fact that this
law was not carried out previous to the adoption of the Levites in the place of the first-born for service
at the sanctuary-that the law was intended chiefly for the future: "This law," he observes (in his Obs.
ss. L. ii. c. 2, §13), "relates to the tabernacle to be afterwards erected, and to the regular priests to be
solemnly appointed; when this law, with many others of a similar kind, would have to be observed.
The first-born were set apart by God to be consecrated to Him, as servants of the priests and of the
sacred things, either in their own persons, or in that of others who were afterwards substituted in the
goodness of God. This command therefore presupposed the erection of the tabernacle, the ordination
of priests, the building of an altar, and the ceremonial of the sacred service, and showed from the very
nature of the case, that there could not be any application of this law of the first-born before that
time.")

This being established, it follows that the 22,273 first-born, who were exchanged
for the Levites (Num 3:45ff.), consisted only of the first-born sons who had been
born between the time of the exodus from Egypt and the numbering of the twelve
[Link] (1 of 2) [13/08/2004 [Link] p.m.]
 Keil and Delitzsch Commentary on the Old Testament

tribes, which took place thirteen months afterwards. Now, if, in order to form an
idea of the proportion which this number would bear to the whole of the male
population of the twelve tribes of Israel, we avail ourselves of the results furnished
by modern statistics, we may fairly assume, according to these, that in a nation
comprising 603,550 males above 20 years of age, there would be 190,000 to
195,100 between the ages of 20 and 30.

(Note: According to the census of the town of Basle, given by Bernoulli in his Populationistik , p. 42,
and classified by age, out of 1000 inhabitants in the year 1837, there were 326 under 20 years of age,
224 between 20 and 30, and 450 of 30 years old and upwards. Now, if we apply this ration to the
people of Israel, out of 603,550 males of 20 years old and upwards, there would be 197,653 between
the ages of 20 and 30. The statistics of the city of Vienna and its suburbs, as given by Brachelli (
Geographie und Statistik , 1861), yield very nearly the same results. At the end of the year 1856 there
were 88,973 male inhabitants under 20 years of age, 44,000 between 20 and 30, and 97,853 of 30
years old and upwards, not including the military and those who were in hospitals. According to this
ratio, out of the 603,550 Israelites above 20 years of age, 187,209 would between 20 and 30.)

And, supposing that this was the age at which the Israelites married, there would be
from 19,000 to 19,500 marriages contracted upon an average every year; and in a
nation which had grown up in a land so celebrated as Egypt was in antiquity for the
extraordinary fruitfulness of its inhabitants, almost as many first-born, say at least
19,000, might be expected to come into the world. This average number would be
greater if we fixed the age for marrying between 18 and 28, or reduced it to the
seven years between 18 and 25.

<- Previous First Next ->

[Link] (2 of 2) [13/08/2004 [Link] p.m.]

 Keil and Delitzsch Commentary on the Old Testament

<- Previous First Next ->

(Note: From a comparison with the betrothals which take place every years in the Prussian state, it is
evident that the number given in the text as the average number of marriages contracted every years is
not too high, but most assuredly too low. In the years 1858 there were 167,387 betrothals in a
population of 17,793,900; in 1816, on the other hand, there were 117,448 in a population of
10,402,600 (vid., Brachelli, Geog. und Statistik von Preussen , 1861). The first ration, if applied to
Israel with its two millions, would yield 19,000 marriages annually; the second, 22,580; whilst we
have, in addition, to bear in mind how many men there are in the European states who would gladly
marry, if they were not prevented from doing to by inability to find the means of supporting a house of
their own.)

But even without doing this, we must take into consideration the important fact that
such averages, based upon a considerable length of time, only give an
approximative idea of the actual state of things in any single year; and that, as a
matter of fact, in years of oppression and distress the numbers may sink to half the
average, whilst in other years, under peculiarly favourable circumstances, they may
rise again to double the amount.

(Note: How great the variations are in the number of marriages contracted year by year, even in large
states embracing different tribes, and when no unusual circumstances have disturbed the ordinary
course of things, is evident from the statistics of the Austrian empire as given by Brachelli , from
which we may see that in the year 1851, with a total population of 36 1/2 millions, there were 361,249
betrothals, and in the year 1854, when the population had increased by half a million, only 279,802.
The variations in particular districts are, as might be supposed, considerably larger.)

When the Israelites were groaning under the hard lash of the Egyptian taskmasters,
and then under the inhuman and cruel edict of Pharaoh, which commanded all the
Hebrew boys that were born to be immediately put to death, the number of
marriages no doubt diminished from year to year. But the longer this oppression
continued, the greater would be the number of marriages concluded at once
(especially in a nation rejoicing in the promise of numerous increase which it had
received from its God), when Moses had risen up and proved himself, by the
mighty signs and wonders with which he smote Egypt and its haughty king, to be
the man whom the God of the fathers had sent and endowed with power to redeem
His nation out of the bondage of Egypt, and lead it into Canaan, the good land that

[Link] (1 of 2) [13/08/2004 [Link] p.m.]

 Keil and Delitzsch Commentary on the Old Testament

He had promised to the fathers. At that time, when the spirits of the nation revived,
and the hope of a glorious future filled every years, there might very well have
been about 38,000 marriages contracted in a year, say from the time of the seventh
plague, three months before the exodus, and about 37,600 children born by the
second month of the second year after the exodus, 22,273 of them being boys, as
the proportion of male births to female varies very remarkably, and may be shown
to have risen even as high as 157 to 100, whilst among the Jews of modern times it
has frequently been as high as 6 to 5, and has even risen to 3 to 2 (or more exactly
29 to 20).

(Note: According to Bernoulli (p. 143), in the city of Geneva, there were 157 boys born to every 200
girls in the year 1832. He also observes, at p. 153: "It is remarkable that, according to a very frequently
observation, there are an unusual number of boys born among the Jews;" and as a proof, he cites the
fact that, according to Burdach , the lists of births in Leghorn show 120 male children born among the
Jews to 100 female, whilst, according to Hufeland , there were 528 male Jews and 365 female born in
Berlin in the course of 16 years, the proportion therefore being 145 to 100. And, according to this
same proportion, we have calculated above, that there would be 15,327 girls to 22,273 boys.)

In this way the problem before us may be solved altogether independently of the
question, whether the law relates to all the first-born sons on the father's side, or
only to those who were first-born on both father's and mother's side, and without
there having been a daughter born before. This latter view we regard as quite
unfounded, as a mere subterfuge resorted to for the purpose of removing the
supposed disproportion, and in support of which the

<- Previous First Next ->

[Link] (2 of 2) [13/08/2004 [Link] p.m.]

 Keil and Delitzsch Commentary on the Old Testament

<- Previous First Next ->

expression "opening the womb" ( fissura uteri , i.e., qui findit uterum ) is pressed
in a most unwarrantable manner. On this point, J. D. Michaelis has correctly
observed, that "the etymology ought not to be too strongly pressed, inasmuch as it
is not upon this, but upon usage chiefly, that the force of words depends." It is a
fact common to all languages, that in many words the original literal signification
falls more and more into the background in the course, of years, and at length is
gradually lost sight of altogether.

Moreover, the expression "openeth the womb" is generally employed in cases in

which a common term is required to designate the first-born of both man and beast
(Ex 13:2,12-15; 34:19-20; Num 3:12-13; 8:16-17; 18:15; Ezek 20:16); but even
then, wherever the two are distinguished, the term bªkowr (OT:1060) is applied as
a rule to the first-born sons, and Peter (OT:6363) to the first-born of animals
(comp. Ex 13:13b with v. 12 and 13a; and Num 34:20b with vv. 19 and 20a). On
the other hand, where only first-born sons are referred to, as in Deut 21:15-17, we
look in vain for the expression peter rechem , "openeth the womb." Again, the Old
Testament, like modern law, recognises only first-born sons , and does not apply
the term first-born to daughters at all; and in relation to the inheritance, even in the
case of two wives, both of whom had born sons to their husband, it recognises only
one first-born son, so that the fact of its being the first birth on the mother's side is
not taken into consideration at all (cf. Gen 46:8; 49:3; Deut 21:15-17).

And the established rule in relation to the birthright-namely, that the first son of the
father was called the first-born, and possessed all the rights of the first-born,
independently altogether of the question whether there had been daughters born
before-would no doubt be equally applicable to the sanctification of the first-born
sons. Or are we really to believe, that inasmuch as the child first born is quite as
often a girl as a boy, God exempted every father in Israel whose eldest child was a
daughter from the obligation to manifest his own sonship by consecrating his first-
born son to God, and so demanded the performance of this duty from half the
nation only? We cannot for a moment believe that such an interpretation of the law

[Link] (1 of 2) [13/08/2004 [Link] p.m.]

 Keil and Delitzsch Commentary on the Old Testament

as this would really be in accordance with the spirit of the Old Testament
economy.

Numbers 1:1

And the LORD spake unto Moses in the wilderness of Sinai, in the tabernacle of
the congregation, on the first day of the second month, in the second year after
they were come out of the land of Egypt, saying,

Num 1:1. Muster of the Twelve Tribes, with the Exception of that of Levi. - Vv. 1-
3. Before the departure of Israel from Sinai, God commanded Moses, on the first of
the second month in the second year after the exodus from Egypt, to take the
number of the whole congregation of the children of Israel, "according to their
families, according to their fathers' houses (see Ex 6:14), in (according to) the
number of their names," i.e., each one counted singly and entered, but only "every
male according to their heads of twenty years old and upwards" (see Ex 30:14),
viz., only tsaabaa' kaal-yotsee' "all who go forth of the army," i.e., all the men
capable of bearing arms, because by means of this numbering the tribes and their
subdivisions were to be organized as hosts of Jehovah, that the whole congregation
might fight as an army for the cause of their Lord (see at Ex 7:4).

Numbers 1:4-16

And with you there shall be a man of every tribe; every one head of the house of
his fathers.

<- Previous First Next ->

[Link] (2 of 2) [13/08/2004 [Link] p.m.]

 Keil and Delitzsch Commentary on the Old Testament

<- Previous First Next ->

And with you there shall be a man of every tribe; every one head of the house of
his fathers.

Moses and Aaron, who were commanded to number, or rather to muster, the
people, were to have with them "a man of every tribe, who was head-man of his
fathers' houses," i.e., a tribe-prince, viz., to help them to carry out the mustering.
Beth aboth ("fathers' houses"), in v. 2, is a technical expression for the subdivisions
in which the mishpachoth , or families of the tribes, were arranged, and is applied
in v. 4 according to its original usage, based upon the natural division of the tribes
into mishpachoth and families, to the fathers' houses which every tribe possessed in
the family of its first-born. In vv. 5-15, these heads of tribes were mentioned by
name, as in Num 2:3ff., 7:12ff., 10:14ff. In v. 16 they are designated as "called
men of the congregation," because they were called to diets of the congregation, as
representatives of the tribes, to regulate the affairs of the nation; also "princes of
the tribes of their fathers," and "heads of the thousands of Israel:" "prince," from
the nobility of their birth; and "heads," as chiefs of the alaphim composing the
tribes. Alaphim is equivalent to mishpachoth (cf. Num 10:4; Josh 22:14); because
the number of heads of families in the mishpachoth of a tribe might easily amount
to a thousand (see at Ex 18:25). In a similar manner, the term "hundred" in the old
German came to be used in several different senses (see Grimm, deutsche Rechts-
alterthümer , p. 532).

Numbers 1:17-47

And Moses and Aaron took these men which are expressed by their names:

This command was carried out by Moses and Aaron. They took for this purpose
the twelve heads of tribes who are pointed out (see at Lev 24:11) by name, and had
the whole congregation gathered together by them and enrolled in genealogical
tables. hitªyaleed , to announce themselves as born , i.e., to have themselves

[Link] (1 of 2) [13/08/2004 [Link] p.m.]

 Keil and Delitzsch Commentary on the Old Testament

entered in genealogical registers (books of generations). This entry is called a

paaqad (OT:6485), mustering , in v. 19, etc. In
vv. 20-43 the number is given of those who were mustered of all the different
tribes, and in vv. 44-47 the total of the whole nation, with the exception of the tribe
of Levi. "Their generations" (vv. 20, 22, 24, etc.), i.e., those who were begotten by
them, so that "the sons of Reuben, Simeon," etc., are mentioned as the fathers from
whom the mishpachoth and fathers' houses had sprung. The lª before shimª`own
(OT:8095) bªneey (OT:1121) in v. 22, and the following names (in vv. 24, 26,
etc.), signifies "with regard to" (as in Isa 32:1; Ps 17:4, etc.).

Numbers 1:48-54

For the LORD had spoken unto Moses, saying,

Moses was not to muster the tribe of Levi along with the children of Israel, i.e.,
with the other tribes, or take their number, but to appoint the Levites for the service
of the dwelling of the testimony (Ex 38:21), i.e., of the tabernacle, that they might
encamp around it, might take it down when the camp was broken up, and set it up
when Israel encamped again, and that no stranger ( zar , non-Levite, as in Lev
22:10) might come near it and be put to death (see ch. 3). The rest of the tribes
were to encamp every man in his place of encampment, and by his banner (see at
Num 2:2), in their hosts (see ch. 2), that wrath might not come upon the
congregation, viz., through the approach of

<- Previous First Next ->

[Link] (2 of 2) [13/08/2004 [Link] p.m.]

 Keil and Delitzsch Commentary on the Old Testament

<- Previous First Next ->

a stranger. qetsep (OT:7110), the wrath of Jehovah, breaking in judgment upon the
unholy who approached His sanctuary in opposition to His command (Num 8:19;
18:5,22). On the expression "keep the charge" ( shamar mishmereth ), see at Gen
26:5 and Lev 8:35.

Numbers 2:1-2

And the LORD spake unto Moses and unto Aaron, saying,

Order of the Twelve Tribes in the Camp and on the March. - Vv. 1, 2. The twelve
tribes were to encamp each one by his standard, by the signs of their fathers'
houses, opposite to the tabernacle (at some distance) round about, and, according
to the more precise directions given afterwards, in such order that on every side of
the tabernacle three tribes were encamped side by side and united under one
banner, so that the twelve tribes formed four large camps or divisions of an army.
Between these camps and the court surrounding the tabernacle, the three leading
mishpachoth of the Levites were to be encamped on three sides, and Moses and
Aaron with the sons of Aaron
(i.e., the priests) upon the fourth, i.e., the front or eastern side, before the entrance
(Num 3:21-38). degel (OT:1714), a standard, banner, or flag, denotes primarily the
larger field sign , possessed by every division composed of three tribes, which was
also the banner of the tribe at the head of each division; and secondarily, in a
derivative signification, it denotes the army united under one standard, like
seemei'a (NT:4592), or vexillum. It is used thus, for example, in vv. 17, 31, 34, and
in combination with machaneh (OT:4264) in vv. 3, 10, 18, and 25, where
"standard of the camp of Judah, Reuben, Ephraim, and Dan" signifies the hosts of
the tribes arranged under these banners. 'otot (OT:226), the signs (ensigns), were
the smaller flags or banners which were carried at the head of the different tribes
and subdivisions of the tribes (the fathers' houses). Neither the Mosaic law, nor the
Old Testament generally, gives us any intimation as to the form or character of the
standard ( degel ). According to rabbinical tradition, the standard of Judah bore the

[Link] (1 of 2) [13/08/2004 [Link] p.m.]

 Keil and Delitzsch Commentary on the Old Testament

figure of a lion, that of Reuben the likeness of a man or of a man's head, that of
Ephraim the figure of an ox, and that of Dan the figure of an eagle; so that the four
living creatures united in the cherubic forms described by Ezekiel were represented
upon these four standards.

(Note: Jerome Prado, in his commentary upon Ezekiel (ch. 1 p. 44), gives the following minute
description according to rabbinical tradition: "The different leaders of the tribes had their own
standards, with the crests of their ancestors depicted upon them. On the east, above the tent of Naasson
the first-born of Judah , there shone a standard of a green colour, this colour having been adopted by
him because it was in a green stone, viz., an emerald, that the name of his forefather Judah was
engraved on the breastplate of the high priest (Ex 25:15ff.), and on this standard there was depicted a
lion, the crest and hieroglyphic of his ancestor Judah, whom Jacob had compared to a lion, saying,
'Judah is a lion's whelp.' Towards the south, above the tent of Elisur the son of Reuben , there floated a
red standard, having the colour of the sardus, on which the name of his father, viz., Reuben, was
engraved upon the breastplate of the high priest.

The symbol depicted upon this standard was a human head, because Reuben was
the first-born, and head of the family. On the west, above the tent of Elishamah the
son of Ephraim , there was a golden flag, on which the head of a calf was depicted,
because it was through the vision of the calves or oxen that his ancestor Joseph had
predicted and provided for the famine in Egypt (Gen 41); and hence Moses, when
blessing the tribe of Joseph, i.e., Ephraim (Deut 33:17), said, 'his glory is that of
the first-born of a bull.' The golden splendour of the standard of Ephraim
resembled that of the chrysolite, in which the name of Ephraim was engraved upon
the breastplate. Towards the north, above the tent of Ahiezer the son of Dan , there
floated a motley standard of white and red, like

<- Previous First Next ->

[Link] (2 of 2) [13/08/2004 [Link] p.m.]

 Keil and Delitzsch Commentary on the Old Testament

<- Previous First Next ->

the jaspis (or, as some say, a carbuncle), in which the name of Dan was engraved
upon the breastplate. The crest upon this was an eagle, the great doe to serpents,
which had been chosen by the leader in the place of a serpent, because his
forefather Jacob had compared Dan to a serpent, saying, 'Dan is a serpent in the
way, an adder ( cerastes , a horned snake) in the path;' but Ahiezer substituted the
eagle, the destroyer of serpents as he shrank from carrying an adder upon his
flag.")

Numbers 2:3-31

And on the east side toward the rising of the sun shall they of the standard of the
camp of Judah pitch throughout their armies: and Nahshon the son of
Amminadab shall be captain of the children of Judah.

Order of the tribes in the camp and on the march. - Vv. 3-9. The standard of the
tribe of Judah was to encamp in front, namely towards the east, according to its
hosts; and by its side the tribes of Issachar and Zebulun, the descendants of Leah,
under the command and banner of Judah: an army of 186,400 men, which was to
march out first when the camp was broken up (v. 9), so that Judah led the way as
the champion of his brethren (Gen 49:10).

Verse 4-9. "His host, and those that were numbered of them" (cf. vv. 6, 8, 11,
etc.), i.e., the army according to its numbered men.

Verse 10-16. On the south side was the standard of Reuben, with which Simeon
and Gad, descendants of Leah and her maid Zilpah, were associated, and to which
they were subordinated. In v. 14, Reuel is a mistake for Reuel (Num 1:14; 7:42;
10:20), which is the reading given here in 118 MSS cited by Kennicott and De
Rossi , in several of the ancient editions, and in the Samaritan, Vulgate , and Jonah
Saad. , whereas the LXX, Onk., Syr. , and Pers. read Reuel. This army of 151,450

[Link] (1 of 2) [13/08/2004 [Link] p.m.]

 Keil and Delitzsch Commentary on the Old Testament

men was to break up and march as the second division.

Verse 17. The tabernacle, the camp of the Levites, was to break up after this in the
midst of the camps (i.e., of the other tribes). "As they encamp, so shall they break
up," that is to say, with Levi in the midst of the tribes, "every man in his place,
according to his banner." yaad (OT:3027), place , as in Deut 23:13; Isa 57:8.

Verse 18-24. On the west the standard of Ephraim, with the tribes of Manasseh and
Benjamin, that is to say, the whole of the descendants of Rachel, 108,100 men, as
the third division of the army.

Verse 25-30. Lastly, towards the north was the standard of Gad, with Asher and
Naphtali, the descendants of the maids Bilhah and Zilpah, 157,600 men, who were
to be the last to break up, and formed the rear on the march.

Verse 31. lªdigªleeyhem (OT:1714) ( according to their standards ) is equivalent to

lªtsibª'otaam (OT:6635) ( according to their hosts ) in vv. 9, 16, and 24, i.e.,
according to the hosts of which they consisted.

Numbers 2:32-34

<- Previous First Next ->

[Link] (2 of 2) [13/08/2004 [Link] p.m.]

 Keil and Delitzsch Commentary on the Old Testament

<- Previous First Next ->

These are those which were numbered of the children of Israel by the house of
their fathers: all those that were numbered of the camps throughout their hosts
were six hundred thousand and three thousand and five hundred and fifty.

In v. 32 we have the whole number given, 603,550 men, not including the Levites
(v. 33, see at Num 1:49); and in
v. 34 the concluding remark as to the subsequent execution of the divine command-
an anticipatory notice, as in Ex 12:50; 40:16, etc.

Numbers 3:1-4

These also are the generations of Aaron and Moses in the day that the LORD
spake with Moses in mount Sinai.

Muster of the Tribe of Levi. - As Jacob had adopted the two sons of Joseph as his
own sons, and thus promoted them to the rank of heads of tribes, the tribe of Levi
formed, strictly speaking, the thirteenth tribe of the whole nation, and was excepted
from the muster of the twelve tribes who were destined to form the army of
Jehovah, because God had chosen it for the service of the sanctuary. Out of this
tribe God had not only called Moses to be the deliverer, lawgiver, and leader of His
people, but Moses' brother Aaron, with the sons of the latter, to be the custodians
of the sanctuary. And now, lastly, the whole tribe was chosen, in the place of the
first-born of all the tribes, to assist the priests in performing the duties of the
sanctuary, and was numbered and mustered for this its special calling.

Verse 1-4. In order to indicate at the very outset the position which the Levites
were to occupy in relation to the priests (viz., Aaron and his descendants), the
account of their muster commences not only with the enumeration of the sons of
Aaron who were chosen as priests (vv. 2-4), but with the heading: "These are the

[Link] (1 of 2) [13/08/2004 [Link] p.m.]

 Keil and Delitzsch Commentary on the Old Testament

generations of Aaron and Moses in the day (i.e., at the time) when Jehovah spake
with Moses in Mount Sinai (v. 1). The toledoth (see at Gen 2:4) of Moses and
Aaron are not only the families which sprang from Aaron and Moses, but the
Levitical families generally, which were named after Aaron and Moses, because
they were both of them raised into the position of heads or spiritual fathers of the
whole tribe, namely, at the time when God spoke to Moses upon Sinai. Understood
in this way, the notice as to the time is neither a superfluous repetition, nor
introduced with reference to the subsequent numbering of the people in the steppes
of Moab (Num 26:57ff.). Aaron is placed before Moses here (see at Ex 6:26ff.), not
merely as being the elder of the two, but because his sons received the priesthood,
whilst the sons of Moses, on the contrary, were classed among the rest of the
Levitical families (cf. 1 Chron 23:14).

Verse 2-4. Names of the sons of Aaron, the "anointed priests (see Lev 8:12), whose
hand they filled to be priests," i.e., who were appointed to the priesthood (see at
Lev 7:37). On Nadab and Abihu, see Lev 10:1-2. As they had neither of them any
children when they were put to death, Eleazar and Ithamar were the only priests "in
the sight of Aaron their father," i.e., during his lifetime. "In the sight of:" as in Gen
11:28.

<- Previous First Next ->

[Link] (2 of 2) [13/08/2004 [Link] p.m.]

 Keil and Delitzsch Commentary on the Old Testament

<- Previous First Next ->

Numbers 3:5-10

And the LORD spake unto Moses, saying,

The Levites are placed before Aaron the priest, to be his servants.

Verse 6. "Bring near:" as in Ex 28:1. The expression lipªneey (OT:6440) `aamad

(OT:5975) is frequently met with in connection with the position of a servant, as
standing before his master to receive his commands.

Verse 7-8. They were to keep the charge of Aaron and the whole congregation
before the tabernacle, to attend to the service of the dwelling, i.e., to observe what
Aaron (the priest) and the whole congregation were bound to perform in relation to
the service at the dwelling-place of Jehovah. "To keep the charge:" see Num 1:53
and Gen 26:5. In v. 8 this is more fully explained: they were to keep the vessels of
the tabernacle, and to attend to all that was binding upon the children of Israel in
relation to them, i.e., to take the oversight of the furniture, to keep it safe and clean.

Verse 9. Moses was also to give the Levites to Aaron and his sons. "They are
wholly given to him out of the children of Israel:" the repetition of nªtuwnim
(OT:5414) here and in Num 8:16 is emphatic, and expressive of complete
surrender ( Ewald , §313). The Levites, however, as nethunim , must be
distinguished from the nethinim of non-Israelitish descent, who were given to the
Levites at a later period as temple slaves, to perform the lowest duties connected
with the sanctuary (see at Josh 9:27).

Verse 10. Aaron and his sons were to be appointed by Moses to take charge of the
priesthood; as no stranger, no one who was not a son of Aaron, could approach the

[Link] (1 of 2) [13/08/2004 [Link] p.m.]

 Keil and Delitzsch Commentary on the Old Testament

sanctuary without being put to death (cf. Num 1:53 and Lev 22:10).

Numbers 3:11-13

And the LORD spake unto Moses, saying,

God appointed the Levites for this service, because He had decided to adopt them
as His own in the place of all the first-born of Egypt. When He slew the first-born
of Egypt, He sanctified to Himself all the first-born of Israel, of man and beast, for
His own possession (see Ex 13:1-2). By virtue of this sanctification, which was
founded upon the adoption of the whole nation as His first-born son (see p. 341),
the nation was required to dedicate to Him its first-born sons for service at the
sanctuary, and sacrifice all the first-born of its cattle to Him. But now the Levites
and their cattle were to be adopted in their place, and the first-born sons of Israel to
be released in return (vv. 40ff.). By this arrangement, through which the care of the
service at the sanctuary was transferred to one tribe, which would and should
henceforth devote itself with undivided interest to this vocation, not only was a
more orderly performance of this service secured, than could have been effected
through the first-born of all the tribes; but so far as the whole nation was
concerned, the fulfilment of its obligations in relation to this service was
undoubtedly facilitated. Moreover, the Levites had proved themselves to be the
most suitable of all the tribes for his

<- Previous First Next ->

[Link] (2 of 2) [13/08/2004 [Link] p.m.]

 Keil and Delitzsch Commentary on the Old Testament

<- Previous First Next ->

post, through their firm and faithful defence of the honour of the Lord at the
worship of the golden calf (Ex 32:26ff.). It is in this spirit, which distinguished the
tribe of Levi, that we may undoubtedly discover the reason why they were chosen
by God for the service of the sanctuary, and not in the fact that Moses and Aaron
belonged to the tribe, and desired to form a hierarchical caste of the members of
their own tribe, such as was to be found among other nations: the magi, for
example, among the Medes, the Chaldeans among the Persians, and the Brahmins
among the Indians. yªhaaowh (OT:3068) 'aniy (OT:589) liy (OT:3807a), "to Me,
to Me, Jehovah"
(vv. 13, 41, and 45; cf. Ges. §121, 3).

Numbers 3:14-20

And the LORD spake unto Moses in the wilderness of Sinai, saying,

The muster of the Levites included all the males from a month old and upwards,
because they were to be sanctified to Jehovah in the place of the first-born; and it
was at the age of a month that the latter were either to be given up or redeemed
(comp. vv. 40 and 43 with Num 18:16). In vv. 17-20 the sons of Levi and their
sons are enumerated, who were the founders of the mishpachoth among the
Levites, as in Ex 6:16-19.

Numbers 3:21-26

Of Gershon was the family of the Libnites, and the family of the Shimites: these
are the families of the Gershonites.

The Gershonites were divided into two families, containing 7500 males. They were
to encamp under their chief Eliasaph, behind the tabernacle, i.e., on the western

[Link] (1 of 2) [13/08/2004 [Link] p.m.]

 Keil and Delitzsch Commentary on the Old Testament

side (vv. 23, 24), and were to take charge of the dwelling-place and the tent, the
covering, the curtain at the entrance, the hangings round the court with the curtains
at the door, and the cords of the tent, "in relation to all the service thereof" (vv.
25ff.); that is to say, according to the more precise injunctions in Num 4:25-27,
they were to carry the tapestry of the dwelling (the inner covering, Ex 26:1ff.), and
of the tent (i.e., the covering made of goats' hair, Ex 26:7ff.), the covering thereof
(i.e., the covering of rams' skins dyed red, and the covering of sea-cow skin upon
the top of it, Ex 27:16), the hangings of the court and the curtain at the entrance
(Ex 27:9,16), which surrounded the altar (of burnt-offering) and the dwelling round
about, and their cords, i.e., the cords of the tapestry, coverings, and curtains (Ex
27:14), and all the instruments of their service, i.e., the things used in connection
with their service (Ex 27:19), and were to attend to everything that had to be done
to them; in other words, to perform whatever was usually done with those portions
of the sanctuary that are mentioned here, especially in setting up the tabernacle or
taking it down. The suffix in meeytaaraayw (OT:4340) (v. 26) does not refer to the
court mentioned immediately before; for, according to v. 37, the Merarites were to
carry the cords of the hangings of the court, but to the "dwelling and tent," which
stand farther off. In the same way the words, "for all the service thereof," refer to
all those portions of the sanctuary that are mentioned, and mean "everything that
had to be done or attended to in connection with these things."

<- Previous First Next ->

[Link] (2 of 2) [13/08/2004 [Link] p.m.]

 Keil and Delitzsch Commentary on the Old Testament

<- Previous First Next ->

Numbers 3:27-31

And of Kohath was the family of the Amramites, and the family of the Izeharites,
and the family of the Hebronites, and the family of the Uzzielites: these are the
families of the Kohathites.

The Kohathites , who were divided into four families, and numbered 8600, were
to encamp on the south side of the tabernacle, and more especially to keep the
charge of the sanctuary (v. 28), viz., to take care of the ark of the covenant, the
table (of shew-bread), the candlestick, the altars (of incense and burnt-offering),
with the holy things required for the service performed in connection therewith,
and the curtain (the veil before the most holy place), and to perform whatever had
to be done ("all the service thereof," see at v. 26), i.e., to carry the said holy things
after they had been rolled up in covers by the priests (see Num 4:5ff.).

Numbers 3:32

And Eleazar the son of Aaron the priest shall be chief over the chief of the
Levites, and have the oversight of them that keep the charge of the sanctuary.

As the priests also formed part of the Kohathites, their chief is mentioned as well,
viz., Eleazar the eldest son of Aaron the high priest, who was placed over the
chiefs of the three Levitical families, and called pªqudaah (OT:6486), oversight of
the keepers of the charge of the sanctuary," i.e., authority, superior, of the servants
of the sanctuary.

Numbers 3:33-37

Of Merari was the family of the Mahlites, and the family of the Mushites: these

[Link] (1 of 2) [13/08/2004 [Link] p.m.]

 Keil and Delitzsch Commentary on the Old Testament

are the families of Merari.

The Merarites , who formed two families, comprising 6200 males, were to
encamp on the north side of the tabernacle, under their prince Zuriel , and to
observe the boards, bolts, pillars, and sockets of the dwelling-place (Ex
26:15,26,32,37), together with all the vessels thereof (the plugs and tools), and all
that had to be done in connection therewith, also the pillars of the court with their
sockets, the plugs and the cords (Ex 27:10,19; 35:18); that is to say, they were to
take charge of these when the tabernacle was taken down, to carry them on the
march, and to fix them when the tabernacle was set up again (Num 4:31-32).

Numbers 3:38,39

<- Previous First Next ->

[Link] (2 of 2) [13/08/2004 [Link] p.m.]

 Keil and Delitzsch Commentary on the Old Testament

<- Previous First Next ->

Numbers 3:38,39

But those that encamp before the tabernacle toward the east, even before the
tabernacle of the congregation eastward, shall be Moses, and Aaron and his
sons, keeping the charge of the sanctuary for the charge of the children of
Israel; and the stranger that cometh nigh shall be put to death.

Moses and Aaron, with the sons of the latter (the priests), were to encamp in front,
before the tabernacle, viz., on the eastern side, "as keepers of the charge of the
sanctuary for the charge of the children of Israel," i.e., to attend to everything that
was binding upon the children of Israel in relation to the care of the sanctuary, as
no stranger was allowed to approach it on pain of death (see Num 1:51).

Verse 39. The number of the Levites mustered, 22,000, does not agree with the
numbers assigned to the three families, as 7500 + 8600 + 6200 = 22,300. But the
total is correct; for, according to v. 46, the number of the first-born, 22,273,
exceeded the total number of the Levites by 273. The attempt made by the Rabbins
and others to reconcile the two, by supposing the 300 Levites in excess to be
themselves first-born, who were omitted in the general muster, because they were
not qualified to represent the first-born of the other tribes, is evidently forced and
unsatisfactory. The whole account is so circumstantial, that such a fact as this
would never have been omitted. We must rather assume that there is a copyist's
error in the number of one of the Levitical families; possibly in v. 28 we should
read shlsh (OT:7969) for shsh (OT:8337) (8300 for 8600). The puncta
extraordinaria above wª'aharon (OT:175) are intended to indicate that this word is
either suspicious or spurious (see at Gen 33:5); and it is actually omitted in Sam.,
Syr. , and 12 MSS, but without sufficient reason: for although the divine command
to muster the Levites (vv. 5 and 14) was addressed to Moses alone, yet if we
compare Num 4:1,34,37,41,45, where the Levites qualified for service are said to
have been mustered by Moses and Aaron, and still more Num 4:46, where the

[Link] (1 of 2) [13/08/2004 [Link] p.m.]

 Keil and Delitzsch Commentary on the Old Testament

elders of Israel are said to have taken part in the numbering of the Levites as well
as in that of the twelve tribes (Num 1:3-4), there can be no reason to doubt that
Aaron also took part in the mustering of the whole of the Levites, for the purpose
of adoption in the place of the first-born of Israel; and no suspicion attaches to this
introduction of his name in v. 39, although it is not mentioned in vv. 5, 11, 14, 40,
and 44.

Numbers 3:40-48

And the LORD said unto Moses, Number all the firstborn of the males of the
children of Israel from a month old and upward, and take the number of their
names.

After this, Moses numbered the first-born of the children of Israel, to exchange
them for the Levites according to the command of God, which is repeated in vv. 41
and 44-45 from vv. 11-13, and to adopt the latter in their stead for the service at the
sanctuary (on vv. 41 and 45, cf. vv. 11-13). The number of the first-born of the
twelve tribes amounted to 22,273 of a month old and upwards (v. 43). Of this
number 22,000 were exchanged for the 22,000 Levites, and the cattle of the Levites
were also set against the first-born of the cattle of the tribes of Israel, though
without their being numbered and exchanged head for head. In vv. 44 and 45 the
command of God concerning the adoption of the Levites is repeated, for the
purpose of adding the further instructions with regard to the 273, the number by
which the first-born of the tribes exceeded those of the Levites. "And as for the
redemption of the 273 (lit., the 273 to be redeemed) of the first-born of the children
of Israel which were more than the Levites, thou shalt take five shekels a head,"
etc. This was the general price established by the law for the redemption of

<- Previous First Next ->

[Link] (2 of 2) [13/08/2004 [Link] p.m.]

 Keil and Delitzsch Commentary on the Old Testament

<- Previous First Next ->

the first-born of men (see Num 18:16). On the sacred shekel, see at Ex 30:13. The
redemption money for 273 first-born, in all 1365 shekels, was to be paid to Aaron
and his sons as compensation for the persons who properly belonged to Jehovah,
and had been appointed as first-born for the service of the priests.

Numbers 3:49-51

And Moses took the redemption money of them that were over and above them
that were redeemed by the Levites:

"The redeemed of the Levites" are the 22,000 who were redeemed by means of
the Levites. In v. 50, the Chethibh hapidªyom (OT:6306) is the correct reading, and
the Keri hapªduyim (OT:6302) an unnecessary emendation. The number of the first-
born and that of the Levites has already been noticed at pp. 654, 655.

Numbers 4:1

And the LORD spake unto Moses and unto Aaron, saying,

Rules of Service, and Numbering of the Levites Qualified for Service. - After the
adoption of the Levites for service at the sanctuary, in the place of the first-born of
Israel, Moses and Aaron mustered the three families of the Levites by the command
of God for the service to be performed by those who were between the ages of 30
and
50. The particulars of the service are first of all described in detail (vv. 4-33); and
then the men in each family are taken, of the specified age for service (vv. 34-49).
The three families are not arranged according to the relative ages of their founders,
but according to the importance or sacredness of their service. The Kohathites take
the lead, because the holiest parts of the tabernacle were to be carried and kept by
this family, which included the priests, Aaron and his sons. The service to be
performed by each of the three Levitical families is introduced in every case by a
[Link] (1 of 2) [13/08/2004 [Link] p.m.]
 Keil and Delitzsch Commentary on the Old Testament

command from God to take the sum of the men from 30 years old to 50 (see vv. 1-
3, 21-23, 29 and 30).

Numbers 4:2-3

Take the sum of the sons of Kohath from among the sons of Levi, after their
families, by the house of their fathers,

Service of the Kohathites, and the number qualified for service. - Vv. 2, 3.
"Take the sum of the sons of Kohath from among the sons of Levi:" i.e., by raising
them out of the sum total of the Levites, by numbering them first and specially, viz.,
the men from 30 to 50 years of age, "every one who comes to the service," i.e.,

<- Previous First Next ->

[Link] (2 of 2) [13/08/2004 [Link] p.m.]

 Keil and Delitzsch Commentary on the Old Testament

<- Previous First Next ->

who has to enter upon service "to do work at the tabernacle." tsaabaa' (OT:6635) (
Angl. 'host' ) signifies military service, and is used here with special reference to
the service of the Levites as the militia sacra of Jehovah.

Numbers 4:4-6

This shall be the service of the sons of Kohath in the tabernacle of the
congregation, about the most holy things:

The service of the Kohathites at the tabernacle is (relates to) "the most holy" (see at
Ex 30:10). This term includes, as is afterwards explained, the most holy things in
the tabernacle, viz., the ark of the covenant, the table of shew-bread, the
candlestick, the altar of incense and altar of burnt-offering, together with all the
other things belonging to these. When the camp was broken up, the priests were to
roll them up in wrappers, and hand them over in this state to the Kohathites, for
them to carry (vv. 5-15). First of all (vv. 5, 6), Aaron and his sons were to take
down the curtain between the holy place and the most holy (see Ex 26:31), and to
cover the ark of testimony with it (Ex 25:10). Over this they were to place a
wrapper of sea-cow skin ( tachash , see Ex 25:5), and over this again another
covering of cloth made entirely of hyacinth-coloured purple (as in Ex 28:31). The
sea-cow skin as to protect the inner curtain, which was covered over the ark, from
storm and rain; the hyacinth purple, to distinguish the ark of the covenant as the
throne of the glory of Jehovah. Lastly, they were to place the staves into the rings
again, that is to say, the bearing poles, which were always left in their places on the
ark (Ex 25:15), but had necessarily to be taken out while it was being covered and
wrapped up.

Numbers 4:7-8

And upon the table of shewbread they shall spread a cloth of blue, and put

[Link] (1 of 2) [13/08/2004 [Link] p.m.]

 Keil and Delitzsch Commentary on the Old Testament

thereon the dishes, and the spoons, and the bowls, and covers to cover withal:
and the continual bread shall be thereon:

Over the table of shew-bread (Ex 25:23) they were to spread a hyacinth cloth, to
place the plates, bowls, wine-pitchers, and drink-offering bowls (Ex 25:29) upon
the top of this, and to lay shew-bread thereon; and then to spread a crimson cloth
over these vessels and the shew-bread, and cover this with a sea-cow skin, and
lastly to put the bearing poles in their places.

Numbers 4:9-10

And they shall take a cloth of blue, and cover the candlestick of the light, and his
lamps, and his tongs, and his snuffdishes, and all the oil vessels thereof,
wherewith they minister unto it:

<- Previous First Next ->

[Link] (2 of 2) [13/08/2004 [Link] p.m.]

 Keil and Delitzsch Commentary on the Old Testament

<- Previous First Next ->

The candlestick, with its lamps, snuffers, extinguishers (Ex 25:31-37), and all its
oil-vessels (oil-cans), "wherewith they serve it," i.e., prepare it for the holy service,
were to be covered with a hyacinth cloth, and then with a wrapper of sea-cow skin,
and laid upon the carriage. mowT (OT:4131) (vv. 10 and 12), bearing frame, in
Num 13:23 bearing poles.

Numbers 4:11-12

And upon the golden altar they shall spread a cloth of blue, and cover it with a
covering of badgers' skins, and shall put to the staves thereof:

So again they were to wrap up the altar of incense (Ex 30:1), to adjust its bearing
poles; and having wrapped it up in such coverings, along with the vessels
belonging to it, to lay it upon the frame.

Numbers 4:13-14

And they shall take away the ashes from the altar, and spread a purple cloth
thereon:

The altar of burnt-offering was first of all to be cleansed from the ashes; a crimson
cloth was then to be covered over it, and the whole of the furniture belonging to it
to be placed upon the top; and lastly, the whole was to be covered with a sea-cow
skin. The only thing not mentioned is the copper laver (Ex 30:18), probably
because it was carried without any cover at all. The statement in the Septuagint and
the Samaritan text, which follows v. 14. respecting its covering and conveyance
upon a frame, is no doubt a spurious interpolation.

Numbers 4:15

[Link] (1 of 2) [13/08/2004 [Link] p.m.]

 Keil and Delitzsch Commentary on the Old Testament

And when Aaron and his sons have made an end of covering the sanctuary, and
all the vessels of the sanctuary, as the camp is to set forward; after that, the sons
of Kohath shall come to bear it: but they shall not touch any holy thing, lest they
die. These things are the burden of the sons of Kohath in the tabernacle of the
congregation.

After the priests had completed the wrapping up of all these things, the Kohathites
were to come up to carry them; but they were not to touch "the holy" (the holy
things), lest they should die (see Num 1:53; 18:3, and comp. 2 Sam 6:6-7).

<- Previous First Next ->

[Link] (2 of 2) [13/08/2004 [Link] p.m.]

 Keil and Delitzsch Commentary on the Old Testament

<- Previous First Next ->

Numbers 4:16

And to the office of Eleazar the son of Aaron the priest pertaineth the oil for the
light, and the sweet incense, and the daily meat offering, and the anointing oil,
and the oversight of all the tabernacle, and of all that therein is, in the
sanctuary, and in the vessels thereof.

The oversight of the oil for the candlestick (Ex 27:20), the incense (Ex 30:34), the
continual meat-offering (Ex 29:40), and the anointing oil (Ex 30:23), belonged to
Eleazar as the head of all the Levites (Num 3:32). He had also the oversight of the
dwelling and all the holy things and furniture belonging to it; and, as a comparison
of vv. 28 and 33 clearly shows, of the services of the Kohathites also.

Numbers 4:17-18

And the LORD spake unto Moses and unto Aaron, saying,

In order to prevent as far as possible any calamity from befalling the Levites while
carrying the most holy things, the priests are again urged by the command of God
to do what has already been described in detail in vv. 5-15, lest through any
carelessness on their part they should cut off the tribe of the families of the
Kohathites, i.e., should cause their destruction; viz., if they should approach the
holy things before they had been wrapped up by Aaron and his sons in the manner
prescribed and handed over to them to carry. If the Kohathites should come for
only a single moment to look at the holy things, they would die. 'al-takªriytuw ,
"cut ye not off," i.e., "take care that the Kohathites are not cut off through your
mistake and negligence" ( Ros. ). "The tribe of the families of the Kohathites:"
shebet , the tribe, is not used here, as it frequently is, in its derivative sense of tribe
( Tribus ), but in the original literal sense of stirps.

[Link] (1 of 2) [13/08/2004 [Link] p.m.]

 Keil and Delitzsch Commentary on the Old Testament

Numbers 4:19

But thus do unto them, that they may live, and not die, when they approach unto
the most holy things: Aaron and his sons shall go in, and appoint them every one
to his service and to his burden:

"This do to them:" sc., what is prescribed in vv. 5-15 with reference to their
service.

Numbers 4:20

<- Previous First Next ->

[Link] (2 of 2) [13/08/2004 [Link] p.m.]

 Keil and Delitzsch Commentary on the Old Testament

<- Previous First Next ->

But they shall not go in to see when the holy things are covered, lest they die.

kªbala` (OT:1104), "like a swallow, a gulp," is probably a proverbial expression,

according to the analogy of Job 7:19, for "a single instant," of which the Arabic
also furnishes examples (see A. Schultens on Job 7:19). The Sept. rendering,
exa'pina (NT:1819), conveys the actual sense. A historical illustration of v. 20 is
furnished by 1 Sam 6:19.

(Note: According to Knobel , vv. 17-20 have been interpolated by the Jehovist into the Elohistic text.
But the reasons for this assumption are weak throughout. Neither the peculiar use of the word shebet ,
to which there is no corresponding parallel in the whole of the Old Testament, nor the construction of
naagash (OT:5066) with 'eet (OT:853), which is only met with in 1 Sam 9:18 and 30:21, nor the
Hiphil hikªriyt (OT:3772), can be regarded as criteria of a Jehovistic usage. And the assertion, that the
Elohist lays the emphasis upon approaching and touching the holy things (v. 15; Num 8:19; 18:3,22),
and not upon seeing or looking at them, rests upon an antithesis which is arbitrarily forced upon the
text, since not only seeing (v. 20), but touching also (v. 19), is described as causing death; so that
seeing and touching form no antithesis at all.)

Numbers 4:21-26

And the LORD spake unto Moses, saying,

The service of the Gershonites is introduced in vv. 21-23 in the same manner as
that of the Kohathites in vv. 1-3; and in vv. 24-26 it is described in accordance with
the brief notice and explanation already given in Num 3:24-26.

Numbers 4:27

At the appointment of Aaron and his sons shall be all the service of the sons of

[Link] (1 of 2) [13/08/2004 [Link] p.m.]

 Keil and Delitzsch Commentary on the Old Testament

the Gershonites, in all their burdens, and in all their service: and ye shall
appoint unto them in charge all their burdens.

Their service was to be performed "according to the mouth (i.e., according to the
appointment) of Aaron and his sons, with regard to all their carrying (all that they
were to carry), and all their doing." - "And ye (the priests) shall appoint to them for
attendance (in charge) all their carrying," i.e., all the things they were to carry.
bªmishªmeret (OT:4931) paaqad (OT:6485), to give into keeping. The
combination of paaqad (OT:6485) with bª and the accusative of the object is
analogous to bª naatan (OT:5414), to give into a persons' hand, in Gen 27:17; and
there is no satisfactory reason for any such emendations of the text as Knobel
proposes.

<- Previous First Next ->

[Link] (2 of 2) [13/08/2004 [Link] p.m.]

 Keil and Delitzsch Commentary on the Old Testament

<- Previous First Next ->

Numbers 4:28

This is the service of the families of the sons of Gershon in the tabernacle of the
congregation: and their charge shall be under the hand of Ithamar the son of
Aaron the priest.

"Their charge ( mishmereth ) is in the hand of Ithamar," i.e., is to be carried out

under his superintendence (cf. Ex 38:21).

Numbers 4:29-30

As for the sons of Merari, thou shalt number them after their families, by the
house of their fathers;

"Service of the Merarites. - Vv. 29 and 30, like vv. 22 and 23. paaqad
(OT:6485), to muster, i.e., to number, equivalent to ro'sh (OT:7218) naasaa'
(OT:5375), to take the number.

Numbers 4:31,32

And this is the charge of their burden, according to all their service in the
tabernacle of the congregation; the boards of the tabernacle, and the bars
thereof, and the pillars thereof, and sockets thereof,

Vv. 31 and 32, like Num 3:36 and 37. "The charge of their burden" (their
carrying), i.e., the things which it was their duty to carry.

Numbers 4:32-33

[Link] (1 of 2) [13/08/2004 [Link] p.m.]

 Keil and Delitzsch Commentary on the Old Testament

And the pillars of the court round about, and their sockets, and their pins, and
their cords, with all their instruments, and with all their service: and by name ye
shall reckon the instruments of the charge of their burden.

lªkaal-kªleeyhem : with regard to all their instruments, i.e., all the things used for
setting up, fastening, or undoing the beams, bolts, etc.; see Num 3:36 and Ex
27:19.

<- Previous First Next ->

[Link] (2 of 2) [13/08/2004 [Link] p.m.]

 Keil and Delitzsch Commentary on the Old Testament

<- Previous First Next ->

Numbers 4:34-48

And Moses and Aaron and the chief of the congregation numbered the sons of
the Kohathites after their families, and after the house of their fathers,

Completion of the prescribed mustering, and statement of the number of men

qualified for service in the three Levitical families: viz., 2750 Kohathites, 2630
Gershonites, and 3200 Merarites-in all, 8580 Levites fit for service: a number
which bears a just proportion to the total number of male Levites of a month old
and upwards, viz., 22,000 (see above, p. 655).

Numbers 4:49

According to the commandment of the LORD they were numbered by the hand
of Moses, every one according to his service, and according to his burden: thus
were they numbered of him, as the LORD commanded Moses.

"According to the commandment of Jehovah, they appointed them through

the hand of Moses (i.e., under his direction), each one to his service, and his
burden, and his mustered things ( pªqudaayw (OT:6485)),
i.e., the things assigned to him at the time of the mustering as his special charge
(see Ex 38:21).

Spiritual Organization of the Congregation of Israel. Ch. 5 and 6

From the outward organization of the tribes of Israel as the army of Jehovah, the
law proceeds to their internal moral and spiritual order, for the purpose of giving
an inward support, both moral and religious, to their outward or social and political

[Link] (1 of 2) [13/08/2004 [Link] p.m.]

 Keil and Delitzsch Commentary on the Old Testament

unity. This is the object of the directions concerning the removal of unclean
persons from the camp (Num 5:1-4), the restitution of anything unjustly
appropriated (vv. 5-10), the course to be pursued with a wife suspected of adultery
(vv. 11-31), and also of the laws relating to the Nazarite (Num 6:1-21), and to the
priestly blessing (vv. 22-27).

Numbers 5:1-4

And the LORD spake unto Moses, saying,

Verse 1-4. Removal of Unclean Persons out of the Camp. - As Jehovah, the Holy
One, dwelt in the midst of the

<- Previous First Next ->

[Link] (2 of 2) [13/08/2004 [Link] p.m.]

 Keil and Delitzsch Commentary on the Old Testament

<- Previous First Next ->

Verse 1-4. Removal of Unclean Persons out of the Camp. - As Jehovah, the Holy
One, dwelt in the midst of the camp of His people, those who were affected with
the uncleanness of leprosy (Lev 13), of a diseased flux, or of menstruation (Lev
15:2ff., 19ff.), and those who had become unclean through touching a corpse (Num
19:11ff., cf. Lev 21:1; 22:4), whether male or female, were to be removed out of
the camp, that they might not defile it by their uncleanness. The command of God,
to remove these persons out of the camp, was carried out at once by the nation; and
even in Canaan it was so far observed, that lepers at any rate were placed in special
pest-houses outside the cities (see at Lev 13:45-46).

Numbers 5:5-10

And the LORD spake unto Moses, saying,

Restitution in Case of a Trespass. - No crime against the property of a neighbour

was to remain without expiation in the congregation of Israel, which was
encamped or dwelt around the sanctuary of Jehovah; and the wrong committed was
not to remain without restitution, because such crimes involved unfaithfulness (
ma`al (OT:4604), see Lev 5:15) towards Jehovah. "If a man or a woman do one of
the sins of men, to commit unfaithfulness against Jehovah, and the same soul has
incurred guilt, they shall confess their sin which they have done, and (the doer)
shall recompense his debt according to its sum" ( bªro'show (OT:7218), as in Lev.
5:24 ), etc. haa'aadaam mikaal-chaTo't , one of the sins occurring among men,
not "a sin against a man" ( Luther, Ros. , etc.). The meaning is a sin, with which a
ma`al (OT:4604) was committed against Jehovah, i.e., one of the acts described in
Lev. 5:21-22 , by which injury was done to the property of a neighbour, whereby a
man brought a debt upon himself, for the wiping out of which a material restitution
of the other's property was prescribed, together with the addition of a fifth of its
value, and also the presentation of a sin-offering (Lev. 5:23-26 ).

[Link] (1 of 2) [13/08/2004 [Link] p.m.]

 Keil and Delitzsch Commentary on the Old Testament

To guard against that disturbance of fellowship and peace in the congregation,

which would arise from such trespasses as these, the law already given in Lev. 5:20
is here renewed and supplemented by the additional stipulation, that if the man
who had been unjustly deprived of some of his property had no Goël , to whom
restitution could be made for the debt, the compensation should be paid to Jehovah
for the priests. The Goël was the nearest relative, upon whom the obligation rested
to redeem a person who had fallen into slavery through poverty (Lev 25:25). The
allusion to the Goël in this connection presupposes that the injured person was no
longer alive. To this there are appended, in vv. 9 and 10, the directions which are
substantially connected with this, viz., that every heave-offering ( Terumah , see at
Lev 2:9) in the holy gifts of the children of Israel, which they presented to the
priest, was to belong to him (the priest), and also all the holy gifts which were
brought by different individuals. The reference is not to literal sacrifices, i.e., gifts
intended for the altar, but to dedicatory offerings, first-fruits, and such like. 'et-
qaadaashaayw 'iysh , "with regard to every man's, his holy gifts...to him (the
priest) shall they be; what any man gives to the priest shall belong to him." The
second clause serves to explain and confirm the first. 'eet (OT:853): as far , with
regard to, quoad (see Ewald , §277, d; Ges. §117, 2, note).

Numbers 5:11-31

And the LORD spake unto Moses, saying,

<- Previous First Next ->

[Link] (2 of 2) [13/08/2004 [Link] p.m.]

 Keil and Delitzsch Commentary on the Old Testament

<- Previous First Next ->

Sentence of God upon Wives Suspected of Adultery. - As any suspicion cherished

by a man against his wife, that she either is or has been guilty of adultery, whether
well-founded or not, is sufficient to shake the marriage connection to its very roots,
and to undermine, along with marriage, the foundation of the civil commonwealth,
it was of the greatest importance to guard against this moral evil, which was so
utterly irreconcilable with the holiness of the people of God, by appointing a
process in harmony with the spirit of the theocratical law, and adapted to bring to
light the guilt or innocence of any wife who had fallen into such suspicion, and at
the same time to warn fickle wives against unfaithfulness. This serves to explain
not only the introduction of the law respecting the jealousy-offering in this place,
but also the general importance of the subject, and the reason for its being so
elaborately described.

Verse 12-15. If a man's wife went aside, and was guilty of unfaithfulness towards
him (v. 13 is an explanatory clause), through a (another) man having lain with her
with emissio seminis, and it was hidden from the eyes of her husband, on account
of her having defiled herself secretly, and there being no witness against her, and
her not having been taken (in the act); but if, for all that, a spirit of jealousy came
upon him, and he was jealous of his wife, and she was defiled,...or she was not
defiled: the man was to take his wife to the priest, and bring as her sacrificial gift,
on her account, the tenth of an ephah of barley meal, without putting oil or incense,
"for it is a meat-offering of jealousy, a meat-offering of memory, to bring iniquity
to remembrance." As the woman's crime, of which her husband accused her, was
naturally denied by herself, and was neither to be supported by witnesses nor
proved by her being taken in the very act, the only way left to determine whether
there was any foundation or not for the spirit of jealousy excited in her husband,
and to prevent an unrighteous severance of the divinely appointed marriage, was to
let the thing be decided by the verdict of God Himself. To this end the man was to
bring his wife to the priest with a sacrificial gift, which is expressly called
qaarªbaanaah (OT:7133), her offering, brought `aaleyhaa (OT:5921) "on her
account," that is to say, with a meat-offering, the symbol of the fruit of her walk
and conduct before God. Being the sacrificial gift of a wife who had gone aside
[Link] (1 of 3) [13/08/2004 [Link] p.m.]
 Keil and Delitzsch Commentary on the Old Testament

and was suspected of adultery, this meat-offering could not possess the character of
the ordinary meat-offerings, which shadowed forth the fruit of the sanctification of
life in good works (p. 456); could not consist, that is to say, of fine wheaten flour,
but only of barley meal.

Barley was worth only half as much as wheat (2 Kings 7:1,16,18), so that only the
poorer classes, or the people generally in times of great distress, used barley meal
as their daily food (Judg 7:13; 2 Kings 4:42; Ezek 4:12; John 6:9,13), whilst those
who were better off used it for fodder (1 Kings 5:8). Barley meal was prescribed
for this sacrifice, neither as a sign that the adulteress had conducted herself like an
irrational animal ( Philo, Jonathan, Talm. , the Rabb. , etc.), nor "because the
persons presenting the offering were invoking the punishment of a crime, and not
the favour of God" ( Cler., Ros. ): for the guilt of a woman was not yet established;
nor even, taking a milder view of the matter, to indicate that the offerer might be
innocent, and in that case no offering at all was required Knobel ), but to represent
the questionable repute in which the woman stood, or the ambiguous, suspicious
character of her conduct. Because such conduct as hers did not proceed from the
Spirit of God, and was not carried out in prayer: oil and incense, the symbols of the
Spirit of God and prayer (see pp. 435 and 457), were not to be added to her
offering. It was an offering of jealousy ( qªnaa'ot (OT:7068), an intensive plural),
and the object was to bring the ground of that jealousy to light; and in this respect
it is called the "meat-offering of remembrance," sc., of the woman, before Jehovah
(cf. Num 10:10; 31:54; Ex 28:12,29; 30:16; Lev 23:24), namely, "the remembrance
of iniquity," bringing her crime to remembrance before the Lord, that it might be
judged by Him.

Verse 16-18. The priest was to bring her near to the altar at which he stood, and
place her before Jehovah, who had declared Himself to be present at the altar, and
then to take holy water, probably water out of the basin before the sanctuary, which
served for holy purposes (Ex 30:18), in an earthen vessel, and put dust in it from
the floor of

[Link] (2 of 3) [13/08/2004 [Link] p.m.]

Keil and Delitzsch Commentary on the Old Testament

<- Previous First Next ->

[Link] (3 of 3) [13/08/2004 [Link] p.m.]

 Keil and Delitzsch Commentary on the Old Testament

<- Previous First Next ->

the dwelling. He was then to loosen the hair of the woman who was standing
before Jehovah, and place the jealousy-offering in her hands, and holding the water
in his own hand, to pronounce a solemn oath of purification before her, which she
had to appropriate to herself by a confirmatory Amen, Amen. The water, which the
priest had prepared for the woman to drink, was taken from the sanctuary, and the
dust to be put into it from the floor of the dwelling, to impregnate this drink with
the power of the Holy Spirit that dwelt in the sanctuary. The dust was strewed upon
the water, not to indicate that man was formed from dust and must return to dust
again, but as an allusion to the fact, that dust was eaten by the serpent (Gen 3:14)
as the curse of sin, and therefore as the symbol of a state deserving a curse, a state
of the deepest humiliation and disgrace (Mic 7:17; Isa 49:23; Ps 72:9 ).

On the very same ground, an earthen vessel was chosen; that is to say, one quite
worthless in comparison with the copper one. The loosening of the hair of the head
(see Lev 13:45), in other cases a sign of mourning, is to be regarded here as a
removal or loosening of the female head-dress, and a symbol of the loss of the
proper ornament of female morality and conjugal fidelity. During the
administration of the oath, the offering was placed in her hands, that she might
bring the fruit of her own conduct before God, and give it up to His holy judgment.
The priest, as the representative of God, held the vessel in his hand, with the water
in it, which was called the "water of bitterness, the curse-bringing," inasmuch as, if
the crime imputed to her was well-founded, it would bring upon the woman bitter
suffering as the curse of God.

Verse 19-22. The oath which the priest required her to take is called, in v. 21,
haa'aalaah (OT:423) shªbu`at (OT:7621), "oath of cursing" (see Gen 26:28); but
it first of all presupposes the possibility of the woman being innocent, and contains
the assurance, that in that case the curse-water would do her no harm. "If no (other)
man has lain with thee, and thou hast not gone aside to union ( Tumª'aah
(OT:2932), accus. of more precise definition, as in Lev 15:2,18), under thy
husband," i.e., as a wife subject to thy husband (Ezek 23:5; Hos 4:12), "then

[Link] (1 of 3) [13/08/2004 [Link] p.m.]

 Keil and Delitzsch Commentary on the Old Testament

remain free from the water of bitterness, this curse-bringing," i.e., from the effects
of this curse-water. The imperative is a sign of certain assurance (see Gen 12:2;
20:7; cf. Ges. §130, 1). "But if thou hast gone aside under thy husband, if thou hast
defiled thyself, and a man has given thee his seed beside thy husband,". ..(the priest
shall proceed to say; this is the meaning of the repetition of laa'ishaah (OT:802)...
wªhishªbiya` (OT:7650), v. 21), "Jehovah shall make thee a curse and an oath
among thy people, by making thy hip to fall and thy belly to swell; and this curse-
bringing water shall come into thy bowels, to make the belly to vanish and the hip
to fall." To this oath that was spoken before her the woman was to reply, "true,
true," or "truly, truly," and thus confirm it as taken by herself (cf. Deut 27:15ff.;
Neh 5:13).

It cannot be determined with any certainty what was the nature of the disease
threatened in this curse. Michaelis supposes it to be dropsy of the ovary ( hydrops
ovarii ), in which a tumour is formed in the place of the ovarium , which may even
swell so as to contain 100 lbs. of fluid, and with which the patient becomes
dreadfully emaciated. Josephus says it is ordinary dropsy ( hydrops ascites: Ant.
iii. 11, 6). At any rate, the idea of the curse is this: Di' (NT:1223) oo'n (NT:5607)
ga'r (NT:1063) hee (NT:3588) hamarti'a (NT:266) dia' (NT:1223) tou'toon
(NT:5130) hee (NT:3588) timoori'a (NT:5098) ("the punishment shall come from
the same source as the sin," Theodoret ). The punishment was to answer exactly to
the crime, and to fall upon those bodily organs which had been the instruments of
the woman's sin, viz., the organs of child-bearing.

Verse 23-27. After the woman's Amen , the priest was to write "these curses," those
contained in the oath, in a book-roll, and wash them in the bitter water, i.e., wash
the writing in the vessel with water, so that the words of the curse should pass into
the water, and be imparted to it; a symbolical act, to set forth the truth, that God
imparted to the water the power to act injuriously upon a guilty body, though it
would do no harm to an innocent one. The remark in v. 24, the priest was to give
her this water to drink is anticipatory; for according to v. 26 this did not take place
till after the presentation of the sacrifice and the burning of the memorial of it upon

[Link] (2 of 3) [13/08/2004 [Link] p.m.]

 Keil and Delitzsch Commentary on the Old Testament

the altar. The woman's offering, however, was not presented to God till after the
oath of purification, because it was by the oath that she

<- Previous First Next ->

[Link] (3 of 3) [13/08/2004 [Link] p.m.]

 Keil and Delitzsch Commentary on the Old Testament

<- Previous First Next ->

first of all purified herself from the suspicion of adultery, so that the fruit of her
conduct could be given up to the fire of the holiness of God. As a known
adulteress, she could not have offered a meat-offering at all. But as the suspicion
which rested upon her was not entirely removed by her oath, since she might have
taken a false oath, the priest was to give her the curse-water to drink after the
offering, that her guilt or innocence might be brought to light in the effects
produced by the drink. This is given in v. 27 as the design of the course prescribed:
"When he hath made her to drink the water, then it shall come to pass, that if
she be defiled, and have done trespass against her husband, the water that
causeth the curse shall come (enter) into her as bitterness (i.e., producing bitter
sufferings), namely, her belly shall swell and her hip vanish: and so the woman
shall become a curse in the midst of her people."

Verse 28. "But if she have not defiled herself, and is clean (from the crime of
which she was suspected), she will remain free (from the threatened punishment of
God), and will conceive seed," i.e., be blessed with the capacity and power to
conceive and bring forth children.

Verse 29-31. Vv. 29-31 bring the law of jealousy to a formal close, with the
additional remark, that the man who adopted this course with a wife suspected of
adultery was free from sin, but the woman would bear her guilt (see Lev 5:1), i.e.,
in case she were guilty, would bear the punishment threatened by God. Nothing is
said about what was to be done in case the woman refused to take the oath
prescribed, because that would amount to a confession of her guilt, when she
would have to be put to death as an adulteress, according to the law in Lev 20:10;
and not she alone, but the adulterer also. In the law just mentioned the man is
placed on an equality with the woman with reference to the sin of adultery; and
thus the apparent partiality, that a man could sue his wife for adultery, but not the
wife her husband, is removed. But the law before us applied to the woman only,
because the man was at liberty to marry more than one wife, or to take concubines
to his own wife; so that he only violated the marriage tie, and was guilty of

[Link] (1 of 2) [13/08/2004 [Link] p.m.]

 Keil and Delitzsch Commentary on the Old Testament

adultery, when he formed an illicit connection with another man's wife. In that
case, the man whose marriage had been violated could proceed against his
adulterous wife, and in most instances convict the adulterer also, in order that he
might receive his punishment too. For a really guilty wife would not have made up
her mind so easily to take the required oath of purification, as the curse of God
under which she came was no easier to bear than the punishment of death. For this
law prescribed no ordeal whose effects were uncertain, like the ordeals of other
nations, but a judgment of God, from which the guilty could not escape, because it
had been appointed by the living God.

Numbers 6:1-21

And the LORD spake unto Moses, saying,

The Nazarite. - The legal regulations concerning the vow of the Nazarite are
appended quite appropriately to the laws intended to promote the spiritual order of
the congregation of Israel. For the Nazarite brought to light the priestly character of
the covenant nation in a peculiar form, which had necessarily to be incorporated
into the spiritual organization of the community, so that it might become a means
of furthering the sanctification of the people in covenant with the Lord.

(Note: The rules of the Talmud are found in the tract. Nasir in the Mishnah. See also Lundius, jüd.
Heiligthümer , B. iii. p. 53. Bähr, Symbolik , ii. pp. 430ff.; Hengstenberg , Egypt and the Books of

<- Previous First Next ->

[Link] (2 of 2) [13/08/2004 [Link] p.m.]

 Keil and Delitzsch Commentary on the Old Testament

<- Previous First Next ->

Moses, pp. 190ff. My Archaeologie, i. §67; and Herzog's Cyclopaedia.)

Verse 1-2. The words, "if a man or woman make a separate vow, a Nazarite vow,
to live consecrated to the Lord," with which the law is introduced, show not only
that the vow of the Nazarite was a matter of free choice, but that it was a mode of
practising godliness and piety already customary among the people. Nazir , from
nzr to separate, lit., the separated, is applied to the man who vowed that he would
make a separation to (for) Jehovah,
i.e., lead a separate life for the Lord and His service. The origin of this custom is
involved in obscurity. There is no certain clue to indicate that it was derived from
Egypt, for the so-called hair-offering vows are met with among several ancient
tribes (see the proofs in Spencer, de legg. Hebr. rit. iv. 16, and Knobel in loc. ), and
have no special relationship to the Nazarite, whilst vows of abstinence were
common to all the religions of antiquity. The Nazarite vow was taken at first for a
particular time, at the close of which the separation terminated with release from
the vow. This is the only form in which it is taken into consideration, or rules are
laid down for it in the law before us. In after times, however, we find life-long
Nazarites among the Israelites, e.g., Samson, Samuel, and John the Baptist, who
were vowed or dedicated to the Lord by their parents even before they were born
(Judg 13:5,14; 1 Sam 1:11; Luke 1:15).

(Note: This is also related by Hegesippus (in Euseb. hist. eccl. ii. 23) of James the Just, the first bishop
of Jerusalem. On other cases of this kind in the Talmud, and particularly on the later form of the
Nazarite vow-for example, that of the Apostle Paul (Acts 18:18) - see Winer, bibl. R. W. ii. pp. 138-9,
and Oehler in Herzog's Cycl.)

Verse 3-4. The vow consisted of the three following points, vv. 1-4: In the first
place, he was to abstain from wine and intoxicating drink ( shecar , see Lev 10:9);
and neither to drink vinegar of wine, strong drink, nor any juice of the grape (lit.,
dissolving of grapes, i.e., fresh must pressed out), nor to eat fresh grapes, or dried
(raisins). In fact, during the whole period of his vow, he was not to eat of anything
prepared from the vine, "from the kernels even to the husk," i.e., not the smallest

[Link] (1 of 2) [13/08/2004 [Link] p.m.]

 Keil and Delitzsch Commentary on the Old Testament

quantity of the fruit of the vine. The design of this prohibition can hardly have
been, merely that, by abstaining from intoxicating drink, the Nazarite might
preserve perfect clearness and temperance of mind, like the priests when engaged
in their duties, and so conduct himself as one sanctified to the Lord ( Bähr ); but it
goes much further, and embraces entire abstinence from all the deliciae carnis by
which holiness could be impaired. Vinegar, fresh and dried grapes, and food
prepared from grapes and raisins, e.g., raisin-cakes, are not intoxicating; but grape-
cakes, as being the dainties sought after by epicures and debauchees, are cited in
Hos 3:1 as a symbol of the sensual attractions of idolatry, a luxurious kind of food,
that was not in harmony with the solemnity of the worship of Jehovah. The
Nazarite was to avoid everything that proceeded from the vine, because its fruit
was regarded as the sum and substance of all sensual enjoyments.

Verse 5. Secondly , during the whole term of his vow of consecration, no razor
was to come upon his head. Till the days were fulfilled which he had consecrated
to the Lord, he was to be holy, "to make great the free growth (see Lev 10:6) of the
hair of his head." The free growth of the hair is called, in v. 7, "the diadem of his
God upon his head," like the golden diadem upon the turban of the high priest (Ex
29:6), and the anointing oil upon the high priest's head (Lev 21:12). By this he
sanctified his head (v. 11) to the Lord, so that the consecration of the Nazarite
culminated in his uncut hair, and expressed in the most perfect way the meaning of
his vow ( Oehler ). Letting the hair grow, therefore, was not a sign of separation,
because it was the Israelitish custom to go about with the hair cut; nor a practical
profession of a renunciation of the world, and separation from human society (
Hengstenberg , pp. 190-1); nor a sign of abstinence from every appearance of self-
gratification ( Baur on Amos 2:11); nor even a kind of humiliation and self-denial (
Lightfoot, Carpzov. appar. p. 154); still less a "sign of dependence upon some
other present power" ( M. Baumgarten ), or "the symbol of a state of perfect
liberty" ( Vitringa, obss. ss. 1, c. 6, §9; cf. Num 6:22,8). The free growth of the
hair, unhindered by the hand of man, was

<- Previous First Next ->

[Link] (2 of 2) [13/08/2004 [Link] p.m.]

 Keil and Delitzsch Commentary on the Old Testament

<- Previous First Next ->

rather "the symbol of strength and abundant vitality" (cf. 2 Sam 14:25-26). It was
not regarded by the Hebrews as a sign of sanctity, as Bähr supposes, but simply as
an ornament, in which the whole strength and fulness of vitality were exhibited,
and which the Nazarite wore in honour of the Lord, as a sign that he "belonged to
the Lord, and dedicated himself to His service," with all his vital powers.

(Note: In support of this explanation, Oehler calls to mind those heathen hair-offerings of the Athenian
youths, for example ( Plut. Thes. c. 5), which were founded upon the idea, that the hair in general was
a symbol of vital power, and the hair of the beard a sign of virility; and also more especially the
example of Samson, whose hair was not only the symbol, but the vehicle, of the power which fitted
him to be the deliverer of his people.)

Verse 6-8. Because the Nazarite wore the diadem of his God upon his head in the
growth of his hair, and was holy to the Lord during the whole period of his
consecration, he was to approach no dead person during that time, not even to
defile himself for his parents, or his brothers and sisters, when they died, according
to the law laid down for the high priest in Lev 21:11. Consequently, as a matter of
course, he was to guard most scrupulously against other defilements, not only like
ordinary Israelites, but also like the priests. Samson's mother, too, was not allowed
to eat anything unclean during the period of her pregnancy (Judg 13:4,7,14).

Verse 9-11. But if any one died suddenly in a moment "by him" ( `aalaayw
(OT:5921), in his neighbourhood), and he therefore involuntarily defiled his
consecrated head, he was to shave his head on the day of his purification, i.e., on
the seventh day (see Num 19:11,14,16, and 19), not "because such uncleanness
was more especially caught and retained by the hair," as Knobel fancies, but
because it was the diadem of his God (v. 7), the ornament of his condition, which
was sanctified to God. On the eighth day, that is to say, on the day after the legal
purification, he was to bring to the priest at the tabernacle two turtle-doves or
young pigeons, that he might make atonement for him (see at Lev 15:14-15,29ff.,
Num 14:30-31, and 12:8), on account of his having been defiled by a corpse, by
preparing the one as a sin-offering, and the other as a burnt-offering; he was also
[Link] (1 of 3) [13/08/2004 [Link] p.m.]
 Keil and Delitzsch Commentary on the Old Testament

"to sanctify his head that same day," i.e., to consecrate it to God afresh, by the
unimpeded growth of his hair.

Verse 12. He was then "to bring a yearling sheep as a trespass-offering;" and the
days that were before were "to fall," i.e., the days of consecration that had already
elapsed were not to be reckoned on account of their having fallen, "because his
consecration had become unclean." He was therefore to commence the whole time
of his consecration entirely afresh, and to observe it as required by the vow. To this
end he was to bring a trespass-offering, as a payment or recompense for being
reinstated in the former state of consecration, from which he had fallen through his
defilement, but not as compensation "for having prolonged the days of separation
through his carelessness with regard to the defilement; that is to say, for having
extended the time during which he led a separate, retired, and inactive life, and
suspended his duties to his own family and the congregation, thus doing an injury
to them, and incurring a debt in relation to them through his neglect" ( Knobel ).

For the time that the Nazarite vow lasted was not a lazy life, involving a
withdrawal from the duties of citizenship, by which the congregation might be
injured, but was perfectly reconcilable with the performance of all domestic and
social duties, the burial of the dead alone excepted; and no harm could result from
this, ether to his own relations or the community generally, of sufficient
importance to require that the omission should be repaired by a trespass-offering,
from which neither his relatives nor the congregation derived any actual advantage.
Nor was it a species of fine, for having deprived Jehovah of the time dedicated to
Him through the breach of the vow, or for withholding the payment of his vow for
so much longer a time ( Oehler in Herzog ). For the position of a Nazarite was only
assumed for a definite period, according to the vow; and after this had been
interrupted, it had to be commenced again from the very beginning: so that the
time dedicated to God was not shortened in any way by the interruption of the
period of dedication, and nothing whatever was withheld from God of what had
been vowed to

[Link] (2 of 3) [13/08/2004 [Link] p.m.]

Keil and Delitzsch Commentary on the Old Testament

<- Previous First Next ->

[Link] (3 of 3) [13/08/2004 [Link] p.m.]

 Keil and Delitzsch Commentary on the Old Testament

<- Previous First Next ->

Him, so as to need the presentation of a trespass-offering as a compensation or

fine.

And there is no more reason for saying that the payment of the vow was withheld,
inasmuch as the vow was fulfilled or paid by the punctual observance of the three
things of which it was composed; and the sacrifices to be presented after the time
of consecration was over, had not in the least the character of a payment, but
simply constituted a solemn conclusion, corresponding to the idea of the
consecration itself, and were the means by which the Nazarite came out of his state
of consecration, without involving the least allusion to satisfaction, or reparation
for any wrong that had been done.

The position of the Nazarite, therefore, as Philo, Maimonides , and others clearly
saw, was a condition of life consecrated to the Lord, resembling the sanctified
relation in which the priests stood to Jehovah, and differing from the priesthood
solely in the fact that it involved no official service at the sanctuary, and was not
based upon a divine calling and institution, but was undertaken spontaneously for a
certain time and through a special vow. The object was simply the realization of
the idea of a priestly life, with its purity and freedom from all contamination from
everything connected with death and corruption, a self-surrender to God stretching
beyond the deepest earthly ties, "a spontaneous appropriation of what was imposed
upon the priest by virtue of the calling connected with his descent, namely, the
obligation to conduct himself as a person betrothed to God, and therefore to avoid
everything that would be opposed to such surrender" ( Oehler ). In this respect the
Nazarite's sanctification of life was a step towards the realization of the priestly
character, which had been set before the whole nation as its goal at the time of its
first calling (Ex 19:5); and although it was simply the performance of a vow, and
therefore a work of perfect spontaneity, it was also a work of the Spirit of God
which dwelt in the congregation of Israel, so that Amos could describe the raising
up of Nazarites along with prophets as a special manifestation of divine grace. The
offerings, with which the vow was brought to a close after the time of consecration

[Link] (1 of 3) [13/08/2004 [Link] p.m.]

 Keil and Delitzsch Commentary on the Old Testament

had expired, and the Nazarite was released from his consecration, also
corresponded to the character we have described.

Verse 13-15. The directions as to the release from consecration are called "the law
of the Nazarite" (v. 13), because the idea of the Nazarite's vows culminated in the
sacrificial festival which terminated the consecration, and it was in this that it
attained to its fullest manifestation. "On the day of the completion of the days of his
consecration," i.e., on the day when the time of consecration expired, the Nazarite
was to bring to the tabernacle, or offer as his gifts to the Lord, a sheep of a year old
as a burnt-offering, and an ewe of a year old as a sin-offering; the latter as an
expiation for the sins committed involuntarily during the period of consecration,
the former as an embodiment of that surrender of himself, body and soul, to the
Lord, upon which every act of worship should rest. In addition to this he was to
bring a ram without blemish as a peace- offering, together with a basket of
unleavened cakes and wafers baked, which were required, according to Lev 7:12,
for every praise-offering, "and their meat and drink-offerings," i.e., the gifts of
meal, oil, and wine, which belonged, according to Num 15:3ff., to the burnt-
offerings and peace-offerings.

Verse 16. The sin-offering and burnt-offering were carried out according to the
general instructions.

Verse 17. The completion of the consecration vow was concentrated in the
preparation of the ram and the basket of unleavened bread for the peace-offering,
along with the appropriate meat-offering and drink-offering.

Verse 18. The Nazarite had also to shave his consecrated head, and put the hair
into the altar-fire under the peace-offering that was burning, and thus hand over
and sacrifice to the Lord the hair of his head which had been worn in honour of
Him.

[Link] (2 of 3) [13/08/2004 [Link] p.m.]

 Keil and Delitzsch Commentary on the Old Testament

Verse 19,20. When this had been done, the priest took the boiled shoulder of the
ram, with an unleavened cake

<- Previous First Next ->

[Link] (3 of 3) [13/08/2004 [Link] p.m.]

 Keil and Delitzsch Commentary on the Old Testament

<- Previous First Next ->

and wafer out of the basket, and placed these pieces in the hands of the Nazarite,
and waved them before Jehovah. They then became the portion of the priest, in
addition to the wave-breast and heave-leg which fell to the priest in the case of
every peace-offering (Lev 7:32-34), to set forth the participation of the Lord in the
sacrificial meal (see pp. 540, 541). But the fact that, in addition to these, the boiled
shoulder was given up symbolically to the Lord through the process of waving,
together with a cake and wafer, was intended to indicate that the table-fellowship
with the Lord, shadowed forth in the sacrificial meal of the peace-offering, took
place here in a higher degree; inasmuch as the Lord directed a portion of the
Nazarite's meal to be handed over to His representatives and servants for them to
eat, that he might thus enjoy the blessedness of having fellowship with his God, in
accordance with that condition of priestly sanctity into which the Nazarite had
entered through the vow that he had made.

Verse 20. "After that the Nazarite may drink wine" (again), probably at the
sacrificial meal, after the Lord had received His share of the sacrifice, and his
release from consecration had thus been completed.

Verse 21. "This is the law of the Nazarite, who vowed his sacrificial gifts to the
Lord on the ground of his consecration," i.e., who offered his sacrifice in
accordance with the state of a Nazarite into which he had entered. For the
sacrifices mentioned in vv. 14ff. were not the object of a special vow, but
contained in the vow of the Nazarite, and therefore already vowed ( Knobel ).
"Beside what his hand grasps," i.e., what he is otherwise able to perform (Lev
5:11), "according to the measure of his vow, which he vowed, so must he do
according to the law of his consecration," i.e., he had to offer the sacrifices
previously mentioned on the ground of his consecration vow. Beyond that he was
free to vow anything else according to his ability, to present other sacrificial gifts
to the Lord for His sanctuary and His servants, which did not necessarily belong to
the vow of the Nazarite, but were frequently added. From this the custom
afterwards grew up, that when poor persons took the Nazarite's vow upon them,

[Link] (1 of 2) [13/08/2004 [Link] p.m.]

 Keil and Delitzsch Commentary on the Old Testament

those who were better off defrayed the expenses of the sacrifices (Acts 21:24;
Josephus, Ant.
xix. 6, 1; Mishnah Nasir , ii. 5ff.).

Numbers 6:22-26

And the LORD spake unto Moses, saying,

The Priestly or Aaronic Blessing. - The spiritual character of the congregation of

Israel culminated in the blessing with which the priests were to bless the people.
The directions as to this blessing, therefore, impressed the seal of perfection upon
the whole order and organization of the people of God, inasmuch as Israel was first
truly formed into a congregation of Jehovah by the fact that God not only bestowed
His blessing upon it, but placed the communication of this blessing in the hands of
the priests, the chosen and constant mediators of the blessings of His grace, and
imposed it upon them as one portion of their official duty. The blessing which the
priests were to impart to the people, consisted of a triple blessing of two members
each, which stood related to each other thus: The second in each case contained a
special application of the first to the people, and the three gradations unfolded the
substance of the blessing step by step with ever increasing emphasis. - The first (v.
24), "Jehovah bless thee and keep thee," conveyed the blessing in the most general
form, merely describing it as coming from Jehovah, and setting forth preservation
from the evil of the world as His work.

"The blessing of God is the goodness of God in action, by which a supply of all
good pours down to us from His good favour as from their only fountain; then
follows, secondly, the prayer that He would keep the people, which

<- Previous First Next ->

[Link] (2 of 2) [13/08/2004 [Link] p.m.]

 Keil and Delitzsch Commentary on the Old Testament

<- Previous First Next ->

signifies that He alone is the defender of the Church, and that it is He who
preserves it with His guardian care" ( Calvin ). - The second (v. 25), "Jehovah
make His face shine upon thee, and be gracious unto thee," defined the blessing
more closely as the manifestation of the favour and grace of God. The face of God
is the personality of God as turned towards man. Fire goes out from Jehovah's face,
and consumes the enemy and the rebellious (Lev 10:2, cf. Num 17:10; 20:3; Ex.
13:24; Ps. 34:17 ), and also a sunlight shining with love and full of life and good
(Deut. 30:30; Ps. 27:1; 43:3; 44:4 ). If "the light of the sun is sweet, and pleasant
for the eyes to behold" (Eccl 11:7), "the light of the divine countenance, the
everlasting light (Ps 36:10), is the sum of all delight" ( Baumg. ).

This light sends rays of mercy into a heart in need of salvation, and makes it the
recipient of grace. - The third (v.
26), "Jehovah lift up His face to thee, and set (or give) thee peace" (good,
salvation), set forth the blessing of God as a manifestation of power, or a work of
power upon man, the end of which is peace ( shalom ), the sum of all the good
which God sets, prepares, or establishes for His people. 'el (OT:413) paaniym
(OT:6440) naasaa' (OT:5375), to lift up the face to any one, is equivalent to
looking at him, and does not differ from `eeynayim (OT:5869) naasaa' (OT:5375)
or siym (OT:7760) (Gen 43:29; 44:21). When affirmed of God, it denotes His
providential work upon man. When God looks at a man, He saves him out of his
distresses (Ps 4:7; 33:18; 34:16). - In these three blessings most of the fathers and
earlier theologians saw an allusion to the mystery of the Trinity, and rested their
conclusion, ( a ) upon the triple repetition of the name Jehovah; ( b ) upon the ratio
praedicati , that Jehovah, by whom the blessing is desired and imparted, is the
Father, Son, and Holy Ghost; and ( c ) upon the distinctorum benedictionis
membrorum consideratio , according to which bis trina beneficia are mentioned
(cf. Calovii Bibl. illustr. ad h. l. ).

There is truth in this, though the grounds assigned seem faulty. As the threefold
repetition of a word or sentence serves to express the thought as strongly as
[Link] (1 of 2) [13/08/2004 [Link] p.m.]
 Keil and Delitzsch Commentary on the Old Testament

possible (cf. Jer 7:4; 22:29), the triple blessing expressed in the most unconditional
manner the thought, that God would bestow upon His congregation the whole
fulness of the blessing enfolded in His Divine Being which was manifested as
Jehovah. But not only does the name Jehovah denote God as the absolute Being,
who revealed Himself as Father, Son, and Spirit in the historical development of
His purpose of salvation for the redemption of fallen man; but the substance of this
blessing, which He caused to be pronounced upon His congregation, unfolded the
grace of God in the threefold way in which it is communicated to us through the
Father, Son, and Spirit.

(Note: See the admirable elaboration of these points in Luther's exposition of the blessing. Luther
refers the first blessing to "bodily life and good." The blessing, he says, desired for the people "that
God would give them prosperity and every good, and also guard and preserve them." This is carried
out still further, in a manner corresponding to his exposition of the first article. The second blessing he
refers to "the spiritual nature and the soul," and observes, "Just as the sun, when it rises and diffuses its
rich glory and soft light over all the world, merely lifts up its face upon all the world;...so when God
gives His word, He causes His face to shine clearly and joyously upon all minds, and makes them
joyful and light, and as it were new hearts and new men. For it brings forgiveness of sins, and shows
God as a gracious and merciful Father, who pities and sympathizes with our grief and sorrow. The
third also relates to the spiritual nature and the soul, and is a desire for consolation and final victory
over the cross, death, the devil, and all the gates of hell, together with the world and the evil desires of
the flesh. The desire of this blessing is, that the Lord God will lift up the light of His word upon us,
and so keep it over us, that it may shine in our hearts with strength enough to overcome all the
opposition of the devil, death, and sin, and all adversity, terror, or despair.")

Numbers 6:27

<- Previous First Next ->

[Link] (2 of 2) [13/08/2004 [Link] p.m.]

 Keil and Delitzsch Commentary on the Old Testament

<- Previous First Next ->

And they shall put my name upon the children of Israel; and I will bless them.

This blessing was not to remain merely a pious wish, however, but to be
manifested in the people with all the power of a blessing from God. This assurance
closes the divine command: "They shall put My name upon the children of
Israel, and I will bless them."

Closing Events at Sinai. Ch. 7-9:14.

Numbers 7:1

And it came to pass on the day that Moses had fully set up the tabernacle, and
had anointed it, and sanctified it, and all the instruments thereof, both the altar
and all the vessels thereof, and had anointed them, and sanctified them;

Presentation of Dedicatory Gifts by the Princes of the Tribes. - V. 1. This

presentation took place at the time ( yowm (OT:3117)) when Moses, after having
completed the erection of the tabernacle, anointed and sanctified the dwelling and
the altar, together with their furniture (Lev 8:10-11). Chronologically considered,
this ought to have been noticed after Lev 8:10. But in order to avoid interrupting
the connection of the Sinaitic laws, it is introduced for the first time at this point,
and placed at the head of the events which immediately preceded the departure of
the people from Sinai, because these gifts consisted in part of materials that were
indispensably necessary for the transport of the tabernacle during the march
through the desert. Moreover, there was only an interval of at the most forty days
between the anointing of the tabernacle, which commenced after the first day of the
first month (cf. Ex 40:16 and Lev 8:10), and lasted eight days, and the departure
from Sinai, on the twentieth day of the second month (Num 10:11), and from this
we have to deduct six days for the Passover, which took place before their

[Link] (1 of 2) [13/08/2004 [Link] p.m.]

 Keil and Delitzsch Commentary on the Old Testament

departure (Num 9:1ff.); and it was within this period that the laws and ordinances
from Lev 11 to Num 6 had to be published, and the dedicatory offerings to be
presented. Now, as the presentation itself was distributed, according to vv. 11ff.,
over twelve or thirteen days, we may very well assume that it did not entirely
precede the publication of the laws referred to, but was carried on in part
contemporaneously with it. The presentation of the dedicatory gifts of one tribe-
prince might possibly occupy only a few hours of the day appointed for the
purpose; and the rest of the day, therefore, might very conveniently be made use of
by Moses for publishing the laws. In this case the short space of a month and a few
days would be amply sufficient for everything that took place.

Numbers 7:2-3

That the princes of Israel, heads of the house of their fathers, who were the
princes of the tribes, and were over them that were numbered, offered:

The presentation of six waggons and twelve oxen for the carriage of the
materials of the tabernacle is

<- Previous First Next ->

[Link] (2 of 2) [13/08/2004 [Link] p.m.]

 Keil and Delitzsch Commentary on the Old Testament

<- Previous First Next ->

The presentation of six waggons and twelve oxen for the carriage of the
materials of the tabernacle is mentioned first, and was no doubt the first thing that
took place. The princes of Israel, viz., the heads of the tribe-houses (fathers'
houses), or princes of the tribes (see Num 1:4ff.), "those who stood over those that
were numbered," i.e., who were their leaders or rulers, offered as their sacrificial
gift six covered waggons and twelve oxen, one ox for each prince, and a waggon
for every two. tsaab (OT:6632) `egªlot (OT:5699), hama'xas lampeeni'kas (LXX),
i.e., according to Euseb. Emis. , two-wheeled vehicles, though the Greek scholiasts
explain lampee'nee as signifying ha'maxa perifanee's basilikee' and rhe'dion
perifane's ho esti'n ha'rma skepasto'n (cf. Schleussner, Lex. in LXX s.v. ), and
Aquila , ha'maxai skepastai' , i.e., plaustra tecta ( Vulg. and Rabb. ). The meaning
"litters," which Gesenius and De Wette support, can neither be defended
etymologically, nor based upon tsabiym (OT:6632) in Isa 66:20.

Numbers 7:4-6

And the LORD spake unto Moses, saying,

At the command of God, Moses received them to apply them to the purposes of the
tabernacle, and handed them over to the Levites, "to every one according to the
measure of his service," i.e., to the different classes of Levites, according to the
requirements of their respective duties.

Numbers 7:7-9

Two wagons and four oxen he gave unto the sons of Gershon, according to their
service:

He gave two waggons and four oxen to the Gershonites, and four waggons and

[Link] (1 of 2) [13/08/2004 [Link] p.m.]

 Keil and Delitzsch Commentary on the Old Testament

eight oxen to the Merarites, as the former had less weight to carry, in the coverings
and curtains of the dwelling and the hangings of the court, than the latter, who had
to take charge of the beams and pillars (Num 4:24ff., 31ff.). "Under the hand of
Ithamar" (v. 8); as in ch. 4:28,33. The Kohathites received no waggon, because it
was their place to attend to "the sanctuary" (the holy), i.e., the holy things, which
had to be conveyed upon their shoulders, and were provided with poles for the
purpose (Num 4:4ff.).

Numbers 7:10-11

And the princes offered for dedicating of the altar in the day that it was anointed,
even the princes offered their offering before the altar.

Presentation of dedicatory gifts for the altar. - V. 10. Every prince offered "the
dedication of the altar,"

<- Previous First Next ->

[Link] (2 of 2) [13/08/2004 [Link] p.m.]

 [Link]

<- Previous First Next ->

i.e., what served for the dedication of the altar, equivalent to his sacrificial gift for
the consecration of the altar, "on the day," i.e., at the time, "that they anointed it."
"Day:" as in Gen 2:4. Moses was directed by God to receive the gifts from the
princes on separate days, one after another; so that the presentation extended over
twelve days. The reason for this regulation was not to make a greater display, as
Knobel supposes, or to avoid cutting short the important ceremony of consecration,
but was involved in the very nature of the gifts presented. Each prince, for
example, offered, (1) a silver dish ( kearah , Ex 25:29) of 130 sacred shekels
weight, i.e., about 4 1/2 lbs.; (2) a silver bowl ( mizrak , a sacrificial bowl, not a
sacrificial can, or wine-can, as in Ex 27:3) of 70 shekels weight, both filled with
fine flour mixed with oil for a meat-offering; (3) a golden spoon ( caph , as in Ex
25:29) filled with incense for an incense-offering; (4) a bullock, a ram, and a sheep
of a year old for a burnt-offering; (5) a shaggy goat for a sin-offering; (5) two oxen,
five rams, five he-goats , and five sheep of a year old for a peace-offering. Out of
these gifts the fine flour, the incense, and the sacrificial animals were intended for
sacrificing upon the altar, and that not as a provision for a lengthened period, but
for immediate use in the way prescribed. This could not have been carried out if
more than one prince had presented his gifts, and brought them to be sacrificed on
any one day. For the limited space in the court of the tabernacle would not have
allowed of 252 animals being received, slaughtered, and prepared for sacrificing all
at once, or on the same day; and it would have been also impossible to burn 36
whole animals (oxen, rams, and sheep), and the fat portions of 216 animals, upon
the altar.

Numbers 7:12-88

And he that offered his offering the first day was Nahshon the son of
Amminadab, of the tribe of Judah:

All the princes brought the same gifts. The order in which the twelve princes,
whose names have already been given at Num 1:5-15, made their presentation,

[Link] (1 of 2) [13/08/2004 [Link] p.m.]

 [Link]

corresponded to the order of the tribes in the camp (ch. 2), the tribe-prince of Judah
taking the lead, and the prince of Naphtali coming last. In the statements as to the
weight of the silver kearoth and the golden cappoth , the word shekel is invariably
omitted, as in Gen 20:16, etc. - In vv. 84-86, the dedication gifts are summed up,
and the total weight given, viz., twelve silver dishes and twelve silver bowls,
weighing together 2400 shekels, and twelve golden spoons, weighing 120 shekels
in all. On the sacred shekel, see at Ex 30:13; and on the probable value of the
shekel of gold, at Ex 38:24-25. The sacrificial animals are added together in the
same way in vv. 87, 88.

Numbers 7:89

And when Moses was gone into the tabernacle of the congregation to speak with
him, then he heard the voice of one speaking unto him from off the mercy seat
that was upon the ark of testimony, from between the two cherubims: and he
spake unto him.

Whilst the tribe-princes had thus given to the altar the consecration of a sanctuary
of their God, through their sacrificial gifts, Jehovah acknowledged it as His
sanctuary, by causing Moses, when he went into the tabernacle to speak to Him,
and to present his own entreaties and those of the people, to hear the voice of Him
that spake to him from between the two cherubim upon the ark of the covenant.
The suffix in 'itow (OT:854) points back to the name Jehovah , which, though not
expressly mentioned before, is contained implicite in ohel moëd, "the tent of

<- Previous First Next ->

[Link] (2 of 2) [13/08/2004 [Link] p.m.]

 [Link]

<- Previous First Next ->

meeting." For the holy tent became an ohel moëd first of all, from the fact that it
was there that Jehovah appeared to Moses, or met with him ( now`ad (OT:3259),
Ex 25:22). midabeer (OT:1696), part. Hithpael , to hold conversation. On the fact
itself, see the explanation in Ex 25:20,22. "This voice from the inmost sanctuary of
Moses, the representative of Israel, was Jehovah's reply to the joyfulness and
readiness with which the princes of Israel responded to Him, and made the tent, so
far as they were concerned, a place of holy meeting"' ( Baumg. ). This was the
reason for connecting the remark in v. 89 with the account of the dedicatory gifts.

Numbers 8:1-4

And the LORD spake unto Moses, saying,

Consecration of the Levites. - The command of God to consecrate the Levites for
their service, is introduced in vv. 1-4 by directions issued to Aaron with regard to
the lighting of the candlestick in the dwelling of the tabernacle. Aaron was to place
the seven lamps upon the candlestick in such a manner that they would shine
paanaayw 'el-muwl . These directions are not a mere repetition, but also a more
precise definition, of the general instructions given in Ex 25:37, when the
candlestick was made, to place the seven lamps upon the candlestick in such a
manner that each should give light over against its front, i.e., should throw its light
upon the side opposite to the front of the candlestick (see p. 434). In itself,
therefore, there is nothing at all striking in the renewal and explanation of those
directions, which committed the task of lighting the lamps to Aaron; for this had
not been done before, as Ex 27:21 merely assigns the daily preparation of the
candlestick to Aaron and his sons; and their being placed in the connection in
which we find them may be explained from the signification of the seven lamps in
relation to the dwelling of God, viz., as indicating that Israel was thereby to be
represented perpetually before the Lord as a people causing its light to shine in the
darkness of this world (p. 435).

[Link] (1 of 2) [13/08/2004 [Link] p.m.]

 [Link]

And when Aaron is commanded to attend to the lighting of the candlestick, so that
it may light up the dwelling, in these special instructions the entire fulfilment of his
service in the dwelling is enforced upon him as a duty. In this respect the
instructions themselves, coupled with the statement of the fact that Aaron had
fulfilled them, stand quite appropriately between the account of what the tribe-
princes had done for the consecration of the altar service as representatives of the
congregation, and the account of the solemn inauguration of the Levites in their
service in the sanctuary. The repetition on this occasion (v. 4) of an allusion to the
artistic character of the candlestick, which had been made according to the pattern
seen by Moses in the mount (Ex 25:31ff.), is quite in keeping with the antiquated
style of narrative adopted in these books.

Numbers 8:5-7

And the LORD spake unto Moses, saying,

Consecration of the Levites for their service in the sanctuary. - The choice of the
Levites for service in the sanctuary, in the place of the first-born of the people
generally, has been already noticed in Num 3:5ff., and the duties binding upon
them in ch. 4:4ff. But before entering upon their duties they were to be consecrated
to the

<- Previous First Next ->

[Link] (2 of 2) [13/08/2004 [Link] p.m.]

 [Link]

<- Previous First Next ->

work, and then formally handed over to the priests. This consecration is
commanded in vv. 7ff., and is not called qaadeesh (OT:6946), like the
consecration of the priests (Ex 29:1; Lev 8:11), but Taheer (OT:2891) to cleanse.
It consisted in sprinkling them with sin-water, shaving off the whole of the hair
from their bodies, and washing their clothes, accompanied by a sacrificial
ceremony, by which they were presented symbolically to the Lord as a sacrifice for
His service. The first part of this ceremony had reference to outward purification,
and represented cleansing from the defilement of sin; hence the performance of it
is called hitªchaTee' (to cleanse from sin) in v. 21. "Sprinkle sin-water upon them."
The words are addressed to Moses, who had to officiate at the inauguration of the
Levites, as he had already done at that of the priests. "Water of sin" is water having
reference to sin, designed to remove it, just as the sacrifice offered for the expiation
of sin is called chaTaa't (OT:2403) (sin) in Lev 4:14, etc.; whilst the "water of
uncleanness" in Num 19:9,13, signifies water by which uncleanness was removed
or wiped away.

The nature of this purifying water is not explained, and cannot be determined with
any certainty. We find directions for preparing sprinkling water in a peculiar
manner, for the purpose of cleansing persons who were cured of leprosy, in Lev
14:5ff., 50ff.; and also for cleansing both persons and houses that had been defiled
by a corpse, in Num 19:9ff. Neither of these, however, was applicable to the
cleansing of the Levites, as they were both of them composed of significant
ingredients, which stood in the closest relation to the special cleansing to be
effected by them, and had evidently no adaptation to the purification of the Levites.
At the same time, the expression "sin-water" precludes our understanding it to
mean simply clean water. So that nothing remains but to regard it as referring to
the water in the laver of the sanctuary, which was provided for the purpose of
cleansing the priests for the performance of their duties (Ex 30:18ff.), and might
therefore be regarded by virtue of this as cleansing from sin, and be called "sin-
water" in consequence. "And they shall cause the razor to pass over their whole
body,"

[Link] (1 of 2) [13/08/2004 [Link] p.m.]

 [Link]

i.e., shave off all the hair upon their body, "and wash their clothes, and so cleanse
themselves." ta`ar (OT:8593) he`ebiyr (OT:5674) is to be distinguished from
gilach (OT:1548).

The latter signifies to make balk or shave the hair entirely off, which was required
of the leper when he was cleansed (Lev 14:8-9); the former signifies merely cutting
the hair, which was part of the regular mode of adorning the body. The Levites also
were not required to bathe their bodies, as lepers were (Lev 13:8-9), and also the
priests at their consecration (Lev 8:6), because they were not affected with any
special uncleanness, and their duties did not require them to touch the most holy
instruments of worship. The washing of the clothes, on the other hand, was a thing
generally required as a preparation for acts of worship (Gen 35:2; Ex 19:10), and
was omitted in the case of the consecration of the priests, simply because they
received a holy official dress. hiTehaaruw (OT:2891) for hiTaaharuw (OT:2891),
as in 2 Chron 30:18.

Numbers 8:8

Then let them take a young bullock with his meat offering, even fine flour
mingled with oil, and another young bullock shalt thou take for a sin offering.

After this purification the Levites were to bring two young bullocks, one with the
corresponding meat-offering for a burnt-sacrifice, the other for a sin-offering.

<- Previous First Next ->

[Link] (2 of 2) [13/08/2004 [Link] p.m.]

 Keil and Delitzsch Commentary on the Old Testament

<- Previous First Next ->

Numbers 8:9

And thou shalt bring the Levites before the tabernacle of the congregation: and
thou shalt gather the whole assembly of the children of Israel together:

Moses was then to cause them to draw near before the tabernacle, i.e., to enter the
court, and to gather together the whole congregation of Israel, viz., in the persons
of their heads and representatives.

Numbers 8:10

And thou shalt bring the Levites before the LORD: and the children of Israel
shall put their hands upon the Levites:

After this the Levites were to come before Jehovah, i.e., in front of the altar; and
the children of Israel, i.e., the tribe-princes in the name of the Israelites, were to lay
their hands upon them, not merely "as a sign that they released them from the
possession of the nation, and assigned them and handed them over to Jehovah" (
Knobel ), but in order that by this symbolical act they might transfer to the Levites
the obligation resting upon the whole nation to serve the Lord in the persons of its
first-born sons, and might present them to the Lord as representatives of the first-
born of Israel, to serve Him as living sacrifices.

Numbers 8:11

And Aaron shall offer the Levites before the LORD for an offering of the
children of Israel, that they may execute the service of the LORD.

[Link] (1 of 2) [13/08/2004 [Link] p.m.]

 Keil and Delitzsch Commentary on the Old Testament

This transfer was to be completed by Aaron's waving the Levites as a wave-

offering before Jehovah on behalf of the children of Israel, i.e., by his offering
them symbolically to the Lord as a sacrifice presented on the part of the Israelites.
The ceremony of waving consisted no doubt in his conducting the Levites
solemnly up to the altar, and then back again. On the signification of the verb, see
at Lev 7:30. The design of the waving is given in v. 11, viz., "that they might be to
perform the service of Jehovah" (vv. 24-26 compared with Num 4:4-33).

Numbers 8:12-19

And the Levites shall lay their hands upon the heads of the bullocks: and thou
shalt offer the one for a

<- Previous First Next ->

[Link] (2 of 2) [13/08/2004 [Link] p.m.]

 Keil and Delitzsch Commentary on the Old Testament

<- Previous First Next ->

And the Levites shall lay their hands upon the heads of the bullocks: and thou
shalt offer the one for a sin offering, and the other for a burnt offering, unto the
LORD, to make an atonement for the Levites.

The Levites were then to close this transfer of themselves to the Lord with a sin-
offering and burnt-offering, in which they laid their hands upon the sacrificial
animals. By this imposition of hands they made the sacrificial animals their
representatives, in which they presented their own bodies to the Lord as a living
sacrifice well-pleasing to Him (see pp. 508, 509). The signification of the
dedication of the Levites, as here enjoined, is still further explained in
vv. 13-19. The meaning of vv. 13ff. is this: According to the command already
given (in vv. 6-12), thou shalt place the Levites before Aaron and his sons, and
wave them as a wave-offering before the Lord, and so separate them from the
midst of the children of Israel, that they may be Mine. They shall then come to
serve the tabernacle. So shalt thou cleanse them and wave them. The same reason
is assigned for this in vv. 16, 17, as in Num 3:11-13 ( kol (OT:3605) bªkowr
(OT:1060) for kaal-bªkowr , cf. Num 3:13); and in vv. 18 and 19, what was
commanded in Num 3:6-9 is described as having been carried out. On v. 19b see
Num 1:53.

Numbers 8:20-22

And Moses, and Aaron, and all the congregation of the children of Israel, did to
the Levites according unto all that the LORD commanded Moses concerning the
Levites, so did the children of Israel unto them.

Vv. 20-22 contain an account of the execution of the divine command.

Numbers 8:23-25

[Link] (1 of 2) [13/08/2004 [Link] p.m.]

 Keil and Delitzsch Commentary on the Old Testament

And the LORD spake unto Moses, saying,

The Levitical period of service is fixed here at twenty-five years of age and
upwards to the fiftieth year. "This is what concerns the Levites," i.e., what follows
applies to the Levites. "From the age of twenty-five years shall he (the Levite)
come to do service at the work of the tabernacle; and at fifty years of age shall he
return from the service of the work, and not work any further, but only serve his
brethren at the tabernacle in keeping charge," i.e., help them to look after the
furniture of the tabernacle. "Charge" ( mishmereth ), as distinguished from "work,"
signified the oversight of all the furniture of the tabernacle (see Num 3:8); "work"
(service) applied to laborious service, e.g., the taking down and setting up of the
tabernacle and cleaning it, carrying wood and water for the sacrificial worship,
slaying the animals for the daily and festal sacrifices of the congregation, etc.

26b. "So shalt thou do to the Levites (i.e., proceed with them) in their services."
mishªmaarot from mishªmeret (OT:4931), attendance upon an official post. Both
the heading and final clause, by which this law relating to the Levites' period of
service is bounded, and its position immediately after the induction of the Levites
into their office, show unmistakeably that this law was binding for all time, and
was intended to apply to the standing service of the

<- Previous First Next ->

[Link] (2 of 2) [13/08/2004 [Link] p.m.]

 Keil and Delitzsch Commentary on the Old Testament

<- Previous First Next ->

Levites at the sanctuary; and consequently that it was not at variance with the
instructions in ch. 4, to muster the Levites between thirty and fifty years of age,
and organize them for the transport of the tabernacle on the journey through the
wilderness (Num 4:3-49). The transport of the tabernacle required the strength of a
full-grown man, and therefore the more advanced age of thirty years; whereas the
duties connected with the tabernacle when standing were of a lighter description,
and could easily be performed from the twenty-fifth year (see Hengstenberg's
Dissertations, vol. ii. pp. 321ff.). At a later period, when the sanctuary was
permanently established on Mount Zion, David employed the Levites from their
twentieth year (1 Chron 23:24-25), and expressly stated that he did so because the
Levites had no longer to carry the dwelling and its furniture; and this regulation
continued in force from that time forward (cf. 2 Chron 31:17; Ezra 3:8). But if the
supposed discrepancy between the verses before us and Num 4:3,47, is removed by
this distinction, which is gathered in the most simple manner from the context,
there is no ground whatever for critics to deny that the regulation before us could
have proceeded from the pen of the Elohist.

Numbers 9:1-5

And the LORD spake unto Moses in the wilderness of Sinai, in the first month of
the second year after they were come out of the land of Egypt, saying,

The Passover at Sinai, and Instructions for a Supplementary Passover. - Vv. 1-5.
On the first institution of the Passover, before the exodus from Egypt, God had
appointed the observance of this feast as an everlasting statute for all future
generations (Ex 12:13,24-25). In the first month of the second year after the
exodus, that is to say, immediately after the erection of the tabernacle (Ex 40:2,17),
this command was renewed, and the people were commanded "to keep the
Passover in its appointed season, according to all its statutes and rights;" not to
postpone it, that is, according to an interpretation that might possibly have been put
upon Ex 12:24-25, until they came to Canaan, but to keep it there at Sinai. And

[Link] (1 of 2) [13/08/2004 [Link] p.m.]

 Keil and Delitzsch Commentary on the Old Testament

Israel kept it in the wilderness of Sinai, in exact accordance with the commands
which God had given before (Ex 12). There is no express command, it is true, that
the blood of the paschal lambs, instead of being smeared upon the lintel and posts
of the house-doors (or the entrances to the tents), was to be sprinkled upon the altar
of burnt-offering; nor is it recorded that this was actually done; but it followed of
itself from the altered circumstances, inasmuch as there was not destroying angel
to pass through the camp at Sinai and smite the enemies of Israel, whilst there was
an altar in existence now upon which all the sacrificial blood was to be poured out,
and therefore the blood of the paschal sacrifice also.

(Note: If we take into consideration still further, the fact that the law had already been issued that the
blood of all the animals slain for food, whether inside or outside the camp, was to be sprinkled upon
the altar (Lev 17:3-6), there can be no doubt that the blood of the paschal lambs would also have to be
sprinkled upon the altar, notwithstanding the difficulties referred to by Kurtz , arising from the small
number of priests to perform the task, viz., Aaron, Eleazar, and Ithamar, as Nadab and Abihu were
now dead. But (1) Kurtz estimates the number of paschal lambs much too high, viz., at 100,000 to
140,000; for when he reckons the whole number of the people at about two millions, and gives one
lamb upon an average to every fifteen or twenty persons, he includes infants and sucklings among
those who partook of the Passover. But as there were only 603,550 males of twenty years old and
upwards in the twelve tribes, we cannot reckon more than about 700,000 males as participants in the
paschal meal, since the children under ten or twelve years of age would not come into the calculation,
even if those who were between eight and twelve partook of the meal, since there would be many
adults who could not eat the Passover, because they were unclean.

Now if, as Josephus affirms ( de bell. jud. vi. 9, 3), there were never less than ten,
and often as many as twenty,

<- Previous First Next ->

[Link] (2 of 2) [13/08/2004 [Link] p.m.]

 Keil and Delitzsch Commentary on the Old Testament

<- Previous First Next ->

Now if, as Josephus affirms ( de bell. jud. vi. 9, 3), there were never less than ten,
and often as many as twenty, who joined together in the time of Christ ( ouk
e'lasson androo'n de'ka...polloi' de' kai' su'n ei'kosin athroi'zontai ), we need not
assume that there were more than 50,000 lambs required for the feast of Passover
at Sinai; because even if all the women who were clean took part in the feast, they
would confine themselves as much as possible to the quantity actually needed, and
one whole sheep of a year old would furnish flesh enough for one supper for
fifteen males and fifteen females.

(2) The slaughtering of all these lambs need not have taken place in the narrow
space afforded by the court, even if it was afterwards performed in the more roomy
courts of the later temple, as has been inferred from 2 Chron 30:16 and 35:11.
Lastly, the sprinkling of the blood was no doubt the business of the priests. But the
Levites assisted them, so that they sprinkled the blood upon the altar "out of the
hand of the Levites" (2 Chron 30:16). Moreover, we are by no means in a condition
to pronounce positively whether three priests were sufficient or not at Sinai,
because we have no precise information respecting the course pursued. The altar,
no doubt, would appear too small for the performance of the whole within the short
time of hardly three hours (from the ninth hour of the day to the eleventh). But if it
was possible, in the time of the Emperor Nero, to sprinkle the blood of 256,500
paschal lambs (for that number was actually counted under Cestius; see Josephus,
l. c. ) upon the altar of the temple of that time, which was six, or eight, or even ten
times larger, it must have been also possible, in Moses' time, for the blood of
50,000 lambs to be sprinkled upon the altar of the tabernacle, which was five cubits
in length, and the same in breadth.)

Numbers 9:6-7

And there were certain men, who were defiled by the dead body of a man, that
they could not keep the passover on that day: and they came before Moses and
before Aaron on that day:

[Link] (1 of 2) [13/08/2004 [Link] p.m.]

 Keil and Delitzsch Commentary on the Old Testament

There were certain men who were defiled by human corpses (see Lev 19:28), and
could not eat the Passover on the day appointed. These men came to Moses, and
asked, "Why are we diminished (prevented) from offering the sacrificial gift of
Jehovah at its season in the midst of the children of Israel (i.e., in common with
the rest of the Israelites)?" The exclusion of persons defiled from offering the
Passover followed from the law, that only clean persons were to participate in a
sacrificial meal (Lev 7:21), and that no one could offer any sacrifice in an unclean
state.

Numbers 9:8

And Moses said unto them, Stand still, and I will hear what the LORD will
command concerning you.

Moses told them to wait (stand), and he would hear what the Lord, of whom he
would inquire, would command.

<- Previous First Next ->

[Link] (2 of 2) [13/08/2004 [Link] p.m.]

 Keil and Delitzsch Commentary on the Old Testament

<- Previous First Next ->

Numbers 9:9-14

And the LORD spake unto Moses, saying,

Jehovah gave these general instructions: "Every one who is defiled by a corpse or
upon a distant

(Note: The ªrochoaaqoho is marked as suspicious by puncta extraordinaria , probably first of all
simply on the ground that the more exact definition is not found in v. 13. The Rabbins suppose the
marks to indicate that rechokah is not to be taken here in its literal sense, but denotes merely distance
from Jerusalem, or from the threshold of the outer court of the temple. See Mishnah Pesach
ix. 2, with the commentaries of Bartenora and Maimonides , and the conjectures of the Pesikta on the
ten passages in the Pentateuch with punctis extraordinariis , in Drusii notae uberiores ad h. v. )
journey, of you and your future families, shall keep the Passover in the second month on the
fourteenth, between the two evenings," and that in all respects according to the statute of this feast, the
three leading points of which-viz., eating the lamb with unleavened bread and bitter herbs, leaving
nothing till the next day, and not breaking a bone (Ex 12:8,10,46) - are repeated here.

But lest any one should pervert this permission, to celebrate the Passover a month
later in case of insuperable difficulties, which had only been given for the purpose
of enforcing the obligation to keep the covenant meal upon every member of the
nation, into an excuse for postponing it without any necessity and merely from
indifference, on the ground that he could make it up afterwards, the threat is held
out in v. 13, that whoever should omit to keep the feast at the legal time, if he was
neither unclean nor upon a journey, should be cut off; and in v. 14 the command is
repeated with reference to foreigners, that they were also to keep the law and
ordinance with the greatest minuteness when they observed the Passover: cf. Ex
12:48-49, according to which the stranger was required first of all to let himself be
circumcised. In v. 14b, yihªyeh (OT:1961) stands for tihªyeh (OT:1961), as in Ex
12:49; cf. Ewald , §295, d. w ... wª et...et , both...and.

[Link] (1 of 2) [13/08/2004 [Link] p.m.]

 Keil and Delitzsch Commentary on the Old Testament

Signs and Signals for the March. Ch. 9:15-10:10.

With the mustering of the people and the internal organization of the congregation,
the preparations for the march from the desert of Sinai to the promised land of
Canaan were completed; and when the feast of the Passover was ended, the time
for leaving Sinai had arrived. Nothing now remained to be noticed except the
required instructions respecting the guidance of the people in their journey through
the wilderness, to which the account of the actual departure and march is
appended. The account before us describes first of all the manner in which God
Himself conducted the march (Num 9:15-23); and secondly, instructions are given
respecting the signals to be used for regulating the order of the march (Num 10:1-
10).

Numbers 9:15-23

And on the day that the tabernacle was reared up the cloud covered the
tabernacle, namely, the tent of the testimony: and at even there was upon the
tabernacle as it were the appearance of fire, until the

<- Previous First Next ->

[Link] (2 of 2) [13/08/2004 [Link] p.m.]

 Keil and Delitzsch Commentary on the Old Testament

<- Previous First Next ->

the testimony: and at even there was upon the tabernacle as it were the
appearance of fire, until the morning.

Verse 15-23. Signs for Removing and Encamping. - On their way through the
desert from the border of Egypt to Sinai, Jehovah Himself had undertaken to guide
His people by a cloud, as the visible sign and vehicle of His gracious presence (Ex
13:21-22). This cloud had come down upon the dwelling when the tabernacle was
erected, whilst the glory of the Lord filled the holy of holies (Ex 40:34-38). In v.
15 the historian refers to this fact, and then describes more fully what had been
already briefly alluded to in Ex 40:36-37, namely, that when the cloud rose up
from the dwelling of the tabernacle it was a sign for removing, and when it came
down upon the dwelling, a sign for encamping. In v. 15a, "on the day of the setting
up of the dwelling," Ex 40:34-35, is resumed; and in v. 15b the appearance of the
cloud during the night, from evening till morning, is described in accordance with
Ex 40:38. (On the fact itself, see the exposition of Ex 13:21-22). haa`eedut
(OT:5715) lª'ohel (OT:168) mishªkaan (OT:4908), "the dwelling of the tent of
witness" ( l used for the genitive to avoid a double construct state: Ewald , §292, a
).

In the place of ohel moëd , "tent of the meeting of Jehovah with His people," we
have here "tent of witness" (or "testimony"), i.e., of the tables with the decalogue
which were laid up in the ark of the covenant (Ex 25:16), because the decalogue
formed the basis of the covenant of Jehovah with Israel, and the pledge of the
gracious presence of the Lord in the tabernacle. In the place of "dwellings of the
tent of witness," we have "dwelling of witness' (testimony) in Num 10:11, and
"tent of witness" in ch. Numbers 18:2; 17:22 , to denote the whole dwelling, as
divided into the holy place and the holy of holies, and not the holy of holies alone.
This is unmistakeably evident from a comparison of the verse before us with Ex
40:34, according to which the cloud covered not merely one portion of the
tabernacle, but the whole of the tent of meeting ( ohel moëd ). The rendering, "the
cloud covered the dwelling at the tent of witness," i.e., at that part of it in which the

[Link] (1 of 3) [13/08/2004 [Link] p.m.]

 Keil and Delitzsch Commentary on the Old Testament

witness (or "testimony") was kept, viz., the holy of holies, which Rosenmüller and
Knobel adopt, cannot be sustained, inasmuch as lª has no such meaning, but simply
conveys the idea of motion and passage into a place or condition (cf. Ewald , §217,
d ); and the dwelling or tabernacle was not first made into the tent of witness
through the cloud which covered it.

Verse 16. The covering of the dwelling, with the cloud which shone by night as a
fiery look, was constant, and not merely a phenomenon which appeared when the
tabernacle was first erected, and then vanished away again.

Verse 17. "In accordance with the rising of the cloud from the tent, then
afterwards the children of Israel broke up," i.e., whenever the cloud ascended
up from the tent, they always broke up immediately afterwards; "and at the place
where the cloud came down, there they encamped." The shaakan (OT:7931), or
settling down of the cloud, sc., upon the tabernacle, we can only understand in the
following manner, as the tabernacle was all taken to pieces during the march: viz.,
that the cloud visibly descended from the height at which it ordinarily soared above
the ark of the covenant, as it was carried in front of the army, for a signal that the
tabernacle was to be set up there; and then this had been done, it settled down upon
it.

Verse 18. As Jehovah was with His people in the cloud, the rising and falling of the
cloud was "the command of the Lord" to the Israelites to break up or to pitch the
camp. As long, therefore, as the cloud rested upon the dwelling,
i.e., remained stationary, they continued their encampment.

Verse 19-23. Whether it might rest many days long ( he'eriykª , to lengthen out the
resting), or only a few days (Gen 34:30), or only from evening till morning, and
then rise up again in the morning, or for a day and a night, or for two days, or for a
month, or for days ( yamim ), i.e., a space of time not precisely determined (cf. Gen
4:3; 40:4), they encamped without departing. "Kept the charge of the Lord" (vv. 19

[Link] (2 of 3) [13/08/2004 [Link] p.m.]

 Keil and Delitzsch Commentary on the Old Testament

and 23), i.e., observed what was to be observed towards Jehovah (see Lev 8:35).
With 'asher (OT:834) wªyeesh (OT:3426), "was it that," or "did it happen that,"
two other possible cases are introduced. After v. 20a, the apodosis, "they kept the
charge of the

<- Previous First Next ->

[Link] (3 of 3) [13/08/2004 [Link] p.m.]

 Keil and Delitzsch Commentary on the Old Testament

<- Previous First Next ->

Lord," is to be repeated in thought from v. 19. The elaboration of the account (vv.
15-23), which abounds with repetitions, is intended to bring out the importance of
the fact, and to awaken the consciousness not only of the absolute dependence of
Israel upon the guidance of Jehovah, but also of the gracious care of their God,
which was thereby displayed to the Israelites throughout all their journeyings.

Numbers 10:1-4

And the LORD spake unto Moses, saying,

The Silver Signal-Trumpets. - Although God Himself appointed the time for
removal and encampment by the movement of the cloud of His presence, signals
were also requisite for ordering and conducting the march of so numerous a body,
by means of which Moses, as commander-in-chief, might make known his
commands to the different divisions of the camp. To this end God directed him to
prepare two silver trumpets of beaten work ( mikshah , see Ex 25:18), which
should serve "for the calling of the assembly, and for the breaking up of the
camps," i.e., which were to be used for this purpose. The form of these trumpets is
not further described. No doubt they were straight, not curved, as we may infer
both from the representation of these trumpets on the triumphal arch of Titus at
Rome, and also from the fact, that none but straight trumpets occur on the old
Egyptian monuments (see my Arch. ii. p. 187). With regard to the use of them for
calling the congregation, the following directions are given in vv. 3, 4: "When they
shall blow with them (i.e., with both), the whole congregation (in all its
representatives) shall assemble at the door of the tabernacle; if they blow with only
one, the princes or heads of the families of Israel shall assemble together."

Numbers 10:5-6

When ye blow an alarm, then the camps that lie on the east parts shall go

[Link] (1 of 2) [13/08/2004 [Link] p.m.]

 Keil and Delitzsch Commentary on the Old Testament

forward.

To give the signal for breaking up the camp, they were to blow tªruw`aah
(OT:8643), i.e., a noise or alarm. At the first blast the tribes on the east, i.e., those
who were encamped in the front of the tabernacle, were to break up; at the second,
those who were encamped on the south; and so on in the order prescribed in ch. 2,
though this is not expressly mentioned here. The alarm was to be blown
lªmacª`eeyhem (OT:4550), with regard to their breaking up or marching.

Numbers 10:7

But when the congregation is to be gathered together, ye shall blow, but ye shall
not sound an alarm.

But to call the congregation together they were to blow , not to sound an alarm.
taaqa` (OT:8628) signifies blowing

<- Previous First Next ->

[Link] (2 of 2) [13/08/2004 [Link] p.m.]

 Keil and Delitzsch Commentary on the Old Testament

<- Previous First Next ->

But to call the congregation together they were to blow , not to sound an alarm.
taaqa` (OT:8628) signifies blowing in short, sharp tones. heeriya` = tªruw`aah
(OT:8643) taaqa` (OT:8628), blowing in a continued peal.

Numbers 10:8-10

And the sons of Aaron, the priests, shall blow with the trumpets; and they shall
be to you for an ordinance for ever throughout your generations.

These trumpets were to be used for the holy purposes of the congregation
generally, and therefore not only the making, but the manner of using them was
prescribed by God Himself. They were to be blown by the priests alone, and "to be
for an eternal ordinance to the families of Israel," i.e., to be preserved and used by
them in all future times, according to the appointment of God. The blast of these
trumpets was to call Israel to remembrance before Jehovah in time of war and on
their feast-days.

Verse 9. "If ye go to war in your land against the enemy who oppresses you,
and ye blow the trumpets, ye shall bring yourselves to remembrance before
Jehovah, and shall be saved (by Him) from your enemies." milchaamaah
(OT:4421) bow' (OT:935), to come into war, or go to war, is to be distinguished
from lamilªchaamaah (OT:4421) bow' (OT:935), to make ready for war, go out to
battle (Num 31:21; 32:6).

Verse 10. "And on your joyous day, and your feasts and new moons, he shall
blow the trumpets over your burnt-offerings and peace-offerings, that they
may be to you for a memorial (remembrance) before your God." - hasimªchaah
(OT:8057) yowm (OT:3117) is any day on which a practical expression was given
to their joy, in the form of a sacrifice. The mow`adiym (OT:3259) are the feasts

[Link] (1 of 2) [13/08/2004 [Link] p.m.]

 Keil and Delitzsch Commentary on the Old Testament

enumerated in chs. 28 and 29 and Lev 23. The "beginnings of the months," or new-
moon days, were not, strictly speaking, feast-days, with the exception of the
seventh new moon of the year (see at Num 28:11). On the object, viz., "for a
memorial," see Ex 28:29, and the explanation, p. 450. In accordance with this
divine appointment, so full of promise, we find that in after times the trumpets
were blown by the priests in war (Num 31:6; 2 Chron 13:12,14; 20:21-22,28) as
well as on joyful occasions, such as at the removal of the ark (1 Chron 15:24;
16:6), at the consecration of Solomon's temple (2 Chron 5:12; 7:6), the laying of
the foundation of the second temple (Ezra 3:10), the consecration of the walls of
Jerusalem (Neh 12:35,41), and other festivities (2 Chron 29:27).

II. JOURNEY FROM SINAI TO THE STEPPES OF MOAB.

Ch. 10:11-21.

The straight and shortest way from Sinai to Kadesh, on the southern border of
Canaan, was only a journey of eleven days (Deut 1:2). By this road God led His
people, whom He had received into the covenant of His grace at Sinai, and placed
under the discipline of the law, to the ultimate object of their journey through the
desert; so that, a few months after leaving Horeb or Sinai, the Israelites had already
arrived at Kadesh, in the desert of Zin, on the southern border of the promised land,
and were able to send out men as spies, to survey the inheritance of which

<- Previous First Next ->

[Link] (2 of 2) [13/08/2004 [Link] p.m.]

 Keil and Delitzsch Commentary on the Old Testament

<- Previous First Next ->

they were to take possession. The way from Sinai to the desert of Zin forms the
first stage in the history of the guidance of Israel through the wilderness to Canaan.

From Sinai to Kadesh. Ch. 10:11-14:45.

Removal of the Camp from the Desert of Sinai. Ch. 10:11-36.

Numbers 10:11-12

And it came to pass on the twentieth day of the second month, in the second year,
that the cloud was taken up from off the tabernacle of the testimony.

After all the preparations were completed for the journey of the Israelites from
Sinai to Canaan, on the 20th day of the second month, in the second year, the cloud
rose up from the tent of witness, and the children of Israel broke up out of the
desert of Sinai, lªmacª`eeyhem (OT:4550), "according to their journeys" (lit.,
breaking up; see at Gen 13:3 and Ex 40:36,38), i.e., in the order prescribed in Num
2:9,16,24,31, and described in vv. 14ff. of this chapter. "And the cloud rested in the
desert of Paran." In these words, the whole journey from the desert of Sinai to the
desert of Paran is given summarily, or as a heading; and the more minute
description follows from v. 14 to Num 12:16. The "desert of Paran" was not the
first station, but the third; and the Israelites did not arrive at it till after they had left
Hazeroth (Num 12:16). The desert of Sinai is mentioned as the starting-point of the
journey through the desert, in contrast with the desert of Paran, in the
neighbourhood of Kadesh, whence the spies were sent out to Canaan (Num
13:2,21), the goal and termination of their journey through the desert.

That the words, "the cloud rested in the desert of Paran" (v. 12b), contain a

[Link] (1 of 2) [13/08/2004 [Link] p.m.]

 Keil and Delitzsch Commentary on the Old Testament

preliminary statement (like Gen 27:23; 37:5, as compared with v. 8, and 1 Kings
6:9 as compared with v. 14, etc.), is unmistakeably apparent, from the fact that
Moses' negotiations with Hobab, respecting his accompanying the Israelites to
Canaan, as a guide who knew the road, are noticed for the first time in vv. 29ff.,
although they took place before the departure from Sinai, and that after this the
account of the breaking-up is resumed in v. 33, and the journey itself described,
Hence, although Kurtz (iii. 220) rejects this explanation of v. 12b as "forced," and
regards the desert of Paran as a place of encampment between Tabeerah and
Kibroth-hattaavah, even he cannot help identifying the breaking-up described in v.
33 with that mentioned in v. 12; that is to say, regarding v. 12 as a summary of the
events which are afterwards more fully described.

The desert of Paran is the large desert plateau which is bounded on the east by the
Arabah, the deep valley running from the southern point of the Dead Sea to the
Elanitic Gulf, and stretches westwards to the desert of Shur ( Jifar; see Gen 16:7;
Ex 15:22), that separates Egypt from Philistia: it reaches southwards to Jebel et
Tih, the foremost spur of the Horeb mountains, and northwards to the mountains of
the Amorites, the southern border of Canaan. The origin and etymology of the
name are obscure. The opinion that it was derived from p`r , to open wide, and
originally denoted the broad valley of Wady Murreh, between the Hebrew Negeb
and the desert of Tih, and was then transferred to the whole district, has very little
probability in it ( Knobel ). All that can be regarded as certain is, that the El-paran
of Gen 14:6 is a proof that in the very earliest times the name was applied to the
whole of the desert of Tih down to the Elanitic Gulf, and that the Paran of the
Bible had no historical connection either with the koo'mee (NT:2968) Fara'n
(NT:5328) and tribe of Farani'tai mentioned by Ptol. (v. 17, i. 3), or with the town
of Fara'n (NT:5328), of which the remains are still to be seen in the Wady Feiran
at Serbal, or with the tower of

<- Previous First Next ->

[Link] (2 of 2) [13/08/2004 [Link] p.m.]

 Keil and Delitzsch Commentary on the Old Testament

<- Previous First Next ->

Faran Ahrun of Edrisi , the modern Hammân Faraun , on the Red Sea, to the south
of the Wady Gharandel. By the Arabian geographers, Isztachri, Kazwini , and
others, and also by the Bedouins, it is called et Tih , i.e., the wandering of the
children of Israel, as being the ground upon which the children of Israel wandered
about in the wilderness for forty years (or more accurately, thirty-eight).

This desert plateau, which is thirty German miles (150 English) long from south to
north, and almost as broad, consists, according to Arabian geographers, partly of
sand and partly of firm soil, and is intersected through almost its entire length by
the Wady el Arish , which commences at a short distance from the northern
extremity of the southern border mountains of et Tih , and runs in nearly a straight
line from south to north, only turning in a north-westerly direction towards the
Mediterranean Sea, on the north-east of the Jebel el Helal. This wady divides the
desert of Paran into a western and an eastern half. The western half lies lower than
the eastern, and slopes off gradually, without any perceptible natural boundary,
into the flat desert of Shur ( Jifar ), on the shore of the Mediterranean Sea. The
eastern half (between the Arabah and the Wady el Arish ) consists throughout of a
lofty mountainous country, intersected by larger and smaller wadys, and with
extensive table-land between the loftier ranges, which slopes off somewhat in a
northerly direction, its southern edge being formed by the eastern spurs of the Jebel
et Tih. It is intersected by the Wady el Jerafeh , which commences at the foot of
the northern slope of the mountains of Tih , and after proceeding at first in a
northerly direction, turns higher up in a north-easterly direction towards the
Arabah, but rises in its northern portion to a strong mountain fortress, which is
called, from its present inhabitants, the highlands of the Azazimeh , and is bounded
on both south and north by steep and lofty mountain ranges.

The southern boundary is formed by the range which connects the Araif en Nakba
with the Jebel el Mukrah on the east; the northern boundary, by the mountain
barrier which stretches along the Wady Murreh from west to east, and rises
precipitously from it, and of which the following description has been given by
[Link] (1 of 2) [13/08/2004 [Link] p.m.]
 Keil and Delitzsch Commentary on the Old Testament

Rowland and Williams , the first of modern travellers to visit this district, who
entered the terra incognita by proceeding directly south from Hebron, past Arara
or Aroër, and surveyed it from the border of the Rachmah plateau, i.e., of the
mountains of the Amorites (Deut 1:7,20,44), or the southernmost plateau of the
mountains of Judah (see at Num 14:45): - "A gigantic mountain towered above us
in savage grandeur, with masses of naked rock, resembling the bastions of some
Cyclopean architecture, the end of which it was impossible for the eye to reach,
towards either the west or the east.

It extended also a long way towards the south; and with its rugged, broken, and
dazzling masses of chalk, which reflected the burning rays of the sun, it looked like
an unapproachable furnace, a most fearful desert, without the slightest trace of
vegetation. A broad defile, called Wady Murreh , ran at the foot of this bulwark,
towards the east; and after a course of several miles, on reaching the strangely
formed mountain of Moddera (Madurah), it is divided into two parts, the southern
branch still retaining the same name, and running eastwards to the Arabah, whilst
the other was called Wady Fikreh, and ran in a north-easterly direction to the Dead
Sea. This mountain barrier proved to us beyond a doubt that we were now standing
on the southern boundary of the promised land; and we were confirmed in this
opinion by the statement of the guide, that Kadesh was only a few hours distant
from the point where we were standing" ( Ritter , xiv. p. 1084). The place of
encampment in the desert of Paran is to be sought for at the north-west corner of
this lofty mountain range (see at Num 12:16).

Numbers 10:13-21

And they first took their journey according to the commandment of the LORD by
the hand of Moses.

<- Previous First Next ->

[Link] (2 of 2) [13/08/2004 [Link] p.m.]

 Keil and Delitzsch Commentary on the Old Testament

<- Previous First Next ->

And they first took their journey according to the commandment of the LORD by
the hand of Moses.

In vv. 13-28 the removal of the different camps is more fully described, according
to the order of march established in ch. 2, the order in which the different sections
of the Levites drew out and marched being particularly described in this place
alone (cf. vv. 17 and 21 with Num 2:17). First of all (lit., "at the beginning" ) the
banner of Judah drew out, with Issachar and Zebulun (vv. 14-16; cf. Num 2:3-9).
The tabernacle was then taken down, and the Gershonites and Merarites broke up,
carrying those portions of its which were assigned to them (v. 17; cf. Num 4:24ff.,
and 31ff.), that they might set up the dwelling at the place to be chosen for the next
encampment, before the Kohathites arrived with the sacred things (v. 21). The
banner of Reuben followed next with Simeon and Gad (vv. 18-21; cf. Num 2:10-
16), and the Kohathites joined them bearing the sacred things (v. 21). hamiqªdash
(OT:4720) (= haqodesh (OT:6944), Num 7:9, and haqaadaashiym (OT:6944)
qodesh (OT:6944), Num 4:4) signifies the sacred things mentioned in Num 3:31.
In v. 21b the subject is the Gershonites and Merarites, who had broken up before
with the component parts of the dwelling, and set up the dwelling, `ad-bo'aam ,
against their (the Kohathites') arrival, so that they might place the holy things at
once within it.

Numbers 10:22-28

And the standard of the camp of the children of Ephraim set forward according
to their armies: and over his host was Elishama the son of Ammihud.

Behind the sacred things came the banners of Ephraim, with Manasseh and
Benjamin (see Num 2:18-24), and Dan with Asher and Naphtali (ch. 2:25-31); so
that the camp of Dan was the "collector of all the camps according to their hosts,"
i.e., formed that division of the army which kept the hosts together.

[Link] (1 of 2) [13/08/2004 [Link] p.m.]

 Keil and Delitzsch Commentary on the Old Testament

Numbers 10:29-32

And Moses said unto Hobab, the son of Raguel the Midianite, Moses' father in
law, We are journeying unto the place of which the LORD said, I will give it you:
come thou with us, and we will do thee good: for the LORD hath spoken good
concerning Israel.

The conversation in which Moses persuaded Hobab the Midianite, the son of
Reguel (see at Ex 2:16), and his brother-in-law, to go with the Israelites, and being
well acquainted with the desert to act as their leader, preceded the departure in
order of time; but it is placed between the setting out and the march itself, as being
subordinate to the main events. When and why Hobab came into the camp of the
Israelites-whether he came with his father Reguel (or Jethro) when Israel first
arrived at Horeb, and so remained behind when Jethro left (Ex 18:27), or whether
he did not come till afterwards-was left uncertain, because it was a matter of no
consequence in relation to what is narrated here.

(Note: The grounds upon which Knobel affirms that the "Elohist" is not the author of the account in
vv. 29-36, and pronounces it a Jehovistic interpolation, are perfectly futile. The assertion that the

<- Previous First Next ->

[Link] (2 of 2) [13/08/2004 [Link] p.m.]

 [Link]

<- Previous First Next ->

Elohist had already given a full description of the departure in vv. 11-28, rests upon an oversight of the
peculiarities of the Semitic historians. The expression "they set forward" in v. 28 is an anticipatory
remark, as Knobel himself admits in other places (e.g., Gen 7:12; 8:3; Ex 7:6; 12:50; 16:34). The other
argument, that Moses' brother-in-law is not mentioned anywhere else, involves a petitio principii , and
is just as powerless a proof, as such peculiarities of style as "mount of the Lord," "ark of the covenant
of the Lord," heeyTiyb (OT:3190) to do good (v. 29), and others of a similar kind, of which the critics
have not even attempted to prove that they are at variance with the style of the Elohist, to say nothing
of their having actually done so.)

The request addressed to Hobab, that he would go with them to the place which
Jehovah had promised to give them, i.e., to Canaan, was supported by the promise
that he would do good to them (Hobab and his company), as Jehovah had spoken
good concerning Israel, i.e., had promised it prosperity in Canaan. And when
Hobab declined the request, and said that he should return into his own land, i.e., to
Midian at the south-east of Sinai (see at Ex 2:15 and 3:1), and to his kindred,
Moses repeated the request, "Leave us not, forasmuch as thou knowest our
encamping in the desert," i.e., knowest where we can pitch our tents; "therefore be
to us as eyes," i.e., be our leader and guide-and promised at the same time to do
him the good that Jehovah would do to them. Although Jehovah led the march of
the Israelites in the pillar of cloud, not only giving the sign for them to break up
and to encamp, but showing generally the direction they were to take; yet Hobab,
who was well acquainted with the desert, would be able to render very important
service to the Israelites, if he only pointed out, in those places where the sign to
encamp was given by the cloud, the springs, oases, and plots of pasture which are
often buried quite out of sight in the mountains and valleys that overspread the
desert. What Hobab ultimately decided to do, we are not told; but "as no further
refusal is mentioned, and the departure of Israel is related immediately afterwards,
he probably consented" ( Knobel ). This is raised to a certainty by the fact that, at
the commencement of the period of the Judges, the sons of the brother-in-law of
Moses went into the desert of Judah to the south of Arad along with the sons of
Judah (Judg 1:16), and therefore had entered Canaan with the Israelites, and that
they were still living in that neighbourhood in the time of Saul (1 Sam 15:6; 27:10;
30:29).

[Link] (1 of 2) [13/08/2004 [Link] p.m.]

 [Link]

Numbers 10:33-34

And they departed from the mount of the LORD three days' journey: and the ark
of the covenant of the LORD went before them in the three days' journey, to
search out a resting place for them.

"And they (the Israelites) departed from the mount of Jehovah (Ex 3:1) three days'
journey; the ark of the covenant of Jehovah going before them, to search out a
resting-place for them. And the cloud of Jehovah was over them by day, when they
broke up from the camp." Jehovah still did as He had already done on the way to
Sinai (Ex 13:21-22): He went before them in the pillar of cloud, according to His
promise (Ex 33:13), on their journey from Sinai to Canaan; with this simple
difference, however, that henceforth the cloud that embodied the presence of
Jehovah was connected with the ark of the covenant, as the visible throne of His
gracious presence which had been appointed by Jehovah Himself. To this end the
ark of the covenant was carried separately from the rest of the sacred things, in
front of the whole army; so that the cloud which went before them floated above
the ark, leading the procession, and regulating its movements in the direction it
took in such a manner that the permanent connection between the cloud and the
sanctuary might be visibly manifested even during their march. It is true that, in the
order observed in the camp and on the march, no mention is made of the ark of the
covenant going in front of the whole army; but this omission is no more a proof of
any discrepancy between this verse and Num 2:17, or of a difference of authorship,
than the separation of the different divisions of the Levites upon the march, which
is also not mentioned in Num 2:17, although the Gershonites and Merarites
actually marched

<- Previous First Next ->

[Link] (2 of 2) [13/08/2004 [Link] p.m.]

 [Link]

<- Previous First Next ->

between the banners of Judah and Reuben, and the Kohathites with the holy things
between the banners of Reuben and Ephraim (vv. 17 and 21).

(Note: As the critics do not deny that vv. 11-28 are written by the "Elohist" notwithstanding this
difference, they have no right to bring forward the account of the ark going first as a contradiction to
ch. 2, and therefore a proof that vv. 33ff. are not of Elohistic origin.)

The words, "the cloud was above them" (the Israelites), and so forth, can be
reconciled with this supposition without any difficulty, whether we understand
them as signifying that the cloud, which appeared as a guiding column floating
above the ark and moved forward along with it, also extended itself along the
whole procession, and spread out as a protecting shade over the whole army (as O.
v. Gerlach and Baumgarten suppose), or that "above them" (upon them) is to be
regarded as expressive of the fact that it accompanied them as a protection and
shade. Nor is Ps 105:39, which seems, so far as the words are concerned, rather to
favour the first explanation, really at variance with this view; for the Psalmist's
intention is not so much to give a physical description of the phenomenon, as to
describe the sheltering protection of God in poetical words as a spreading out of
the cloud above the wandering people of God, in the form of a protection against
both heat and rain (cf. Isa 4:5-6).

Moreover, vv. 33b and 34 have a poetical character, answering to the elevated
nature of their subject, and are to be interpreted as follows according to the laws of
a poetical parallelism: The one thought that the ark of the covenant, with the cloud
soaring above it, led the way and sheltered those who were marching, is divided
into two clauses; in v. 33b only the ark of the covenant is mentioned as going in
front of the Israelites, and in v. 34 only the cloud as a shelter over them: whereas
the carrying of the ark in front of the army could only accomplish the end
proposed, viz., to search out a resting-place for them, by Jehovah going above
them in the cloud, and showing the bearers of the ark both the way they were to
take, and the place where they were to rest. The ark with the tables of the law is not

[Link] (1 of 2) [13/08/2004 [Link] p.m.]

 [Link]

called "the ark of testimony" here, according to its contents, as in Ex 25:22; 26:33-
34; 30:6, etc., but the ark of the covenant of Jehovah, according to its design and
signification for Israel, which was the only point, or at any rate the principal point,
in consideration here. The resting-place which the ark of the covenant found at the
end of three days, is not mentioned in v. 34; it was not Tabeerah, however (Num
11:3), but Kibroth-hattaavah (ch. 11:34-35; cf. ch. 33:16).

Numbers 10:35,36

And it came to pass, when the ark set forward, that Moses said, Rise up, LORD,
and let thine enemies be scattered; and let them that hate thee flee before thee.

In vv. 35 and 36, the words which Moses was in the habit of uttering, both when
the ark removed and when it came to rest again, are given not only as a proof of the
joyous confidence of Moses, but as an encouragement to the congregation to
cherish the same believing confidence. When breaking up, he said, "Rise up,
Jehovah! that Thine enemies may be scattered, and they that hate Thee may flee
before Thy face;" and when it rested, "Return, Jehovah, to the ten thousand
thousands of Israel!" Moses could speak in this way, because he knew that
Jehovah and the ark of the covenant were inseparably connected, and saw in the
ark of the covenant, as the throne of Jehovah, a material pledge of the gracious
presence of the Almighty God. He said this, however, not merely with reference to
enemies who might encounter the Israelites in the desert, but with a confident
anticipation

<- Previous First Next ->

[Link] (2 of 2) [13/08/2004 [Link] p.m.]

 [Link]

<- Previous First Next ->

of the calling of Israel, to strive for the cause of the Lord in this hostile world, and
rear His kingdom upon earth. Human power was not sufficient for this; but to
accomplish this end, it was necessary that the Almighty God should go before His
people, and scatter their foes. The prayer addressed to God to do this, is an
expression of bold believing confidence-a prayer sure of its answer; and to Israel it
was the word with which the congregation of God was to carry on the conflict at all
times against the powers and authorities of a whole hostile world. It is in this sense
that in Ps 68:2, the words are held up by David before himself and his generation
as a banner of victory, "to arm the Church with confidence, and fortify it against
the violent attacks of its foes" ( Calvin ). shuwbaah (OT:7725) is construed with
an accusative: return to the ten thousands of the hosts of Israel, i.e., after having
scattered Thine enemies, turn back again to Thy people to dwell among them. The
"thousands of Israel," as in Num 1:16.

(Note: The inverted nuns , n , at the beginning and close of vv. 35, 36, which are found, according to
R. Menachem's de Lonzano Or Torah (f. 17), in all the Spanish and German MSS, and are sanctioned
by the Masorah, are said by the Talmud ( tract de sabbatho ) to be merely signa parentheseos, quae
monerent praeter historiae seriem versum 35 et 36 ad capitis finem inseri (cf. Matt. Hilleri de Arcano
Kethib et Keri libri duo , pp. 158, 159). The Cabbalists, on the other hand, according to R. Menach. l.
c., find an allusion in it to the Shechinah, "quae velut obversa ad tergum facie sequentes Israelitas ex
impenso amore respiceret" (see the note in J. H. Michaelis' Bibl. hebr. ). In other MSS, however,
which are supported by the Masora Erffurt , the inverted nun is found in the words biªncoa`
(OT:5265) (v. 35) and kªmitª'oªnniym (OT:596) haa`aam (OT:5971) wayªhiy (OT:1961) (Num 11:1):
the first, ad innuendum ut sic retrorsum agantur omnes hostes Israeliarum; the second, ut esset
symbolum perpetuum perversitatis populi, inter tot illustria signa liberationis et maximorum
beneficiorum Dei acerbe quiritantium, ad declarandam ingratitudinem et contumaciam suam (cf. J.
Buxtorf, Tiberias , p. 169).)

Occurrences at Tabeerah and Kibroth-hattaavah. Ch. 11.

Numbers 11:1-2

[Link] (1 of 2) [13/08/2004 [Link] p.m.]

 [Link]

And when the people complained, it displeased the LORD: and the LORD heard
it; and his anger was kindled; and the fire of the LORD burnt among them, and
consumed them that were in the uttermost parts of the camp.

After a three days' march the Israelites arrived at a resting-place; but the people
began at once to be discontented with their situation.

(Note: The arguments by which Knobel undertakes to prove, that in chs. 11 and 12 of the original
work different foreign accounts respecting the first encampments after leaving Sinai have been woven
together by the "Jehovist," are founded upon misinterpretations and arbitrary assumptions and
conclusions, such as the assertion that the tabernacle stood outside the camp (chs. Num 11:25; 12:5);
that Miriam entered the tabernacle (Num 12:4-5); that the original work had already reported the
arrival of Israel in Paran in Num 10:12; and that no reference is ever made to a camping-place called
Tabeerah, and others of the same kind. For the proof, see the explanation of the verses referred to.)

The people were like those who complain in the ears of Jehovah of something bad;
i.e., they behaved like persons

<- Previous First Next ->

[Link] (2 of 2) [13/08/2004 [Link] p.m.]

 Keil and Delitzsch Commentary on the Old Testament

<- Previous First Next ->

who groan and murmur because of some misfortune that has happened to them. No
special occasion is mentioned for the complaint. The words are expressive, no
doubt, of the general dissatisfaction and discontent of the people at the difficulties
and privations connected with the journey through the wilderness, to which they
gave utterance so loudly, that their complaining reached the ears of Jehovah. At
this His wrath burned, inasmuch as the complaint was directed against Him and
His guidance, "so that fire of Jehovah burned against them, and ate at the end of
the camp." bª baa`ar (OT:1197) signifies here, not to burn a person (Job 1:16), but
to burn against. "Fire of Jehovah:" a fire sent by Jehovah, but not proceeding
directly from Him, or bursting forth from the cloud, as in Lev 10:2. Whether it was
kindled through a flash of lightning, or in some other such way, cannot be more
exactly determined. There is not sufficient ground for the supposition that the fire
merely seized upon the bushes about the camp and the tents of the people, but not
upon human beings ( Ros., Knobel ). All that is plainly taught in the words is, that
the fire did not extend over the whole camp, but merely broke out at one end of it,
and sank down again,
i.e., was extinguished very quickly, at the intercession of Moses; so that in this
judgment the Lord merely manifested His power to destroy the murmurers, that He
might infuse into the whole nation a wholesome dread of His holy majesty.

Numbers 11:3

And he called the name of the place Taberah: because the fire of the LORD
burnt among them.

From this judgment the place where the fire had burned received the name of
"Tabeerah," i.e., burning, or place of burning. Now, as this spot is distinctly
described as the end or outermost edge of the camp, this "place of burning" must
not be regarded, as it is by Knobel and others, as a different station from the
"graves of lust." "Tabeerah was simply the local name give to a distant part of the
whole camp, which received soon after the name of Kibroth-hattaavah , on account

[Link] (1 of 2) [13/08/2004 [Link] p.m.]

 Keil and Delitzsch Commentary on the Old Testament

of the greater judgment which the people brought upon themselves through their
rebellion. This explains not only the omission of the name Tabeerah from the list
of encampments in Num 33:16, but also the circumstance, that nothing is said
about any removal from Tabeerah to Kibroth- Hattaavah, and that the account of
the murmuring of the people, because of the want of those supplies of food to
which they had been accustomed in Egypt, is attached, without anything further, to
the preceding narrative. There is nothing very surprising either, in the fact that the
people should have given utterance to their wish for the luxuries of Egypt, which
they had been deprived of so long, immediately after this judgment of God, if we
only understand the whole affair as taking place in exact accordance with the
words of the texts, viz., that the unbelieving and discontented mass did not discern
the chastising hand of God at all in the conflagration which broke out at the end of
the camp, because it was not declared to be a punishment from God, and was not
preceded by a previous announcement; and therefore that they gave utterance in
loud murmurings to the discontent of their hearts respecting the want of flesh,
without any regard to what had just befallen them.

Numbers 11:4-9

And the mixt multitude that was among them fell a lusting: and the children of
Israel also wept again, and said, Who shall give us flesh to eat?

The first impulse to this came from the mob that had come out of Egypt along with
the Israelites. "The mixed

<- Previous First Next ->

[Link] (2 of 2) [13/08/2004 [Link] p.m.]

 [Link]

<- Previous First Next ->

The first impulse to this came from the mob that had come out of Egypt along with
the Israelites. "The mixed multitude:" see at Ex 12:38. They felt and expressed a
longing for the better food which they had enjoyed in Egypt, and which was not to
be had in the desert, and urged on the Israelites to cry out for flesh again, especially
for the flesh and the savoury vegetables in which Egypt abounded. The words
"they wept again" ( shuwb (OT:7725) used adverbially, as in Gen 26:18, etc.) point
back to the former complaints of the people respecting the absence of flesh in the
desert of Sin (Ex 16:2ff.), although there is nothing said about their weeping there.
By the flesh which they missed, we are not to understand either the fish which they
expressly mention in the following verse (as in Lev 11:11), or merely oxen, sheep,
and goats; but the word baasaar (OT:1320) signifies flesh generally, as being a
better kind of food than the bread-like manna.

It is true they possessed herds of cattle, but these would not have been sufficient to
supply their wants, as cattle could not be bought for slaughtering, and it was
necessary to spare what they had. The greedy people also longed for other flesh,
and said, "We remember the fish which we ate in Egypt for nothing." Even if fish
could not be had for nothing in Egypt, according to the extravagant assertions of
the murmurers, it is certain that it could be procured for such nominal prices that
even the poorest of the people could eat it. The abundance of the fish in the Nile
and the neighbouring waters is attested unanimously by both classical writers (e.g.,
Diod. Sic. i. 36, 52; Herod. ii. 93; Strabo , xvii. p. 829) and modern travellers (cf.
Hengstenberg , Egypt, etc., p. 211 Eng. tr.). This also applies to the vegetables for
which the Israelites longed in the desert. The qishu'iym (OT:7180), or cucumbers,
which are still called katteh or chate in the present day, are a species differing from
the ordinary cucumbers in size and colour, and distinguished for softness and sweet
flavour, and are described by Forskal ( Flor. Aeg. p. 168), as fructus in Aegypto
omnium vulgatissimus, totis plantatus agris. 'abaTichiym : water-melons, which
are still called battieh in modern Egypt, and are both cultivated in immense
quantities and sold so cheaply in the market, that the poor as well as the rich can
enjoy their refreshing flesh and cooling juice (see Sonnini in Hengstenberg, ut sup.

[Link] (1 of 3) [13/08/2004 [Link] p.m.]

 [Link]

p. 212). chaatsiyr (OT:2682) does not signify grass here, but, according to the
ancient versions, chives , from their grass-like appearance; laudatissimus porrus in
Aegypto (Plin. h. n. 19, 33). bªtsaaliym (OT:1211): onions, which flourish better in
Egypt than elsewhere, and have a mild and pleasant taste.

According to Herod. ii. 125, they were the ordinary food of the workmen at the
pyramids; and, according to Hasselquist, Sonnini , and others, they still form
almost the only food of the poor, and are also a favourite dish with all classes,
either roasted, or boiled as a vegetable, and eaten with animal food. shuwmiym
(OT:7762): garlic, which is still called tum, tom in the East ( Seetzen , iii. p. 234),
and is mentioned by Herodotus in connection with onions, as forming a leading
article of food with the Egyptian workmen. Of all these things, which had been
cheap as well as refreshing, not one was to be had in the desert. Hence the people
complained still further, "and now our soul is dried away," i.e., faint for want of
strong and refreshing food, and wanting in fresh vital power (cf. Ps 22:16; 102:5 ):
"we have nothing ( kol (OT:3605) 'eeyn (OT:369), there is nothing in existence,
equivalent to nothing to be had) except that our eye (falls) upon this manna," i.e.,
we see nothing else before us but the manna, sc., which has no juice, and supplies
no vital force.

Greediness longs for juicy and savoury food, and in fact, as a rule, for change of
food and stimulating flavour. "This is the perverted nature of man, which cannot
continue in the quiet enjoyment of what is clean and unmixed, but, from its own
inward discord, desires a stimulating admixture of what is sharp and sour" (
Baumgarten ). To point out this inward perversion on the part of the murmuring
people, Moses once more described the nature, form, and taste of the manna, and
its mode of preparation, as a pleasant food which God sent down to His people
with the dew of heaven (see at Ex 16:14-15, and 31). But this sweet bread of
heaven wanted "the sharp and sour, which are required to give a stimulating
flavour to the food of man, on account of his sinful, restless desires, and the
incessant changes of his earthly life." In this respect the manna resembled the
spiritual food supplied by the word of God, of which the sinful heart of man may

[Link] (2 of 3) [13/08/2004 [Link] p.m.]

 [Link]

also speedily become weary, and turn to the more piquant productions of the spirit
of the world.

<- Previous First Next ->

[Link] (3 of 3) [13/08/2004 [Link] p.m.]

 Keil and Delitzsch Commentary on the Old Testament

<- Previous First Next ->

Numbers 11:10-15

Then Moses heard the people weep throughout their families, every man in the
door of his tent: and the anger of the LORD was kindled greatly; Moses also was
displeased.

When Moses heard the people weep, "according to their families, every one before
the door of his tent," i.e., heard complaining in all the families in front of every
tent, so that the weeping had become universal throughout the whole nation (cf.
Zech 12:12ff.), and the wrath of the Lord burned on account of it, and the thing
displeased Moses also, he brought his complaint to the Lord. The words "Moses
also was displeased," are introduced as a circumstantial clause, to explain the
matter more clearly, and show the reason for the complaint which Moses poured
out before the Lord, and do not refer exclusively either to the murmuring of the
people or to the wrath of Jehovah, but to both together. This follows evidently from
the position in which the clause stands between the two antecedent clauses in v. 10
and the apodosis in v. 11, and still more evidently from the complaint of Moses
which follows. For "the whole attitude of Moses shows that his displeasure was
excited not merely by the unrestrained rebellion of the people against Jehovah, but
also by the unrestrained wrath of Jehovah against the nation" ( Kurtz ). But in what
was the wrath of Jehovah manifested? It broke out against the people first of all
when they had been satiated with flesh (v. 33). There is no mention of any earlier
manifestation. Hence Moses can only have discovered a sign of the burning wrath
of Jehovah in the fact that, although the discontent of the people burst forth in loud
cries, God did not help, but withdrew with His help, and let the whole storm of the
infuriated people burst upon him.

Verse 11-14. In Moses' complaint there is an unmistakeable discontent arising

from the excessive burden of his office. "Why hast Thou done evil to Thy servant?
and why have I not found favour in Thy sight, to lay upon me the burden of all this

[Link] (1 of 2) [13/08/2004 [Link] p.m.]

 Keil and Delitzsch Commentary on the Old Testament

people?" The "burden of all this people" is the expression which he uses to denote
"the care of governing the people, and providing everything for it" ( C. a. Lap. ).
This burden, which God imposed upon him in connection with his office, appeared
to him a bad and ungracious treatment on the part of God. This is the language of
the discontent of despair, which differs from the murmuring of unbelief, in the fact
that it is addressed to God, for the purpose of entreating help and deliverance from
Him; whereas unbelief complains of the ways of God, but while complaining of its
troubles, does not pray to the Lord its God. "Have I conceived all this people,"
Moses continues, "or have I brought it forth, that Thou requirest me to carry it in
my bosom, as a nursing father carries the suckling, into the promised land?" He
does not intend by these words to throw off entirely all care for the people, but
simply to plead with God that the duty of carrying and providing for Israel rests
with Him, the Creator and Father of Israel (Ex 4:22; Isa 63:16). Moses, a weak
man, was wanting in the omnipotent power which alone could satisfy the crying of
the people for flesh. `aalay (OT:5921) yibªkuw (OT:1058), "they weep unto me,"
i.e., they come weeping to ask me to relieve their distress. "I am not able to carry
this burden alone; it is too heavy for me."

Verse 15. "If Thou deal thus with me, then kill me quite ( haarog (OT:2026)
inf. abs. , expressive of the uninterrupted process of killing; see Ewald , §280, b. ),
if I have found favour in Thine eyes (i.e., if Thou wilt show me favour), and let me
not see my misfortune." "My misfortune:" i.e., the calamity to which I must
eventually succumb.

<- Previous First Next ->

[Link] (2 of 2) [13/08/2004 [Link] p.m.]

 Keil and Delitzsch Commentary on the Old Testament

<- Previous First Next ->

Numbers 11:16-17

And the LORD said unto Moses, Gather unto me seventy men of the elders of
Israel, whom thou knowest to be the elders of the people, and officers over them;
and bring them unto the tabernacle of the congregation, that they may stand
there with thee.

There was good ground for his complaint. The burden of the office laid upon the
shoulders of Moses was really too heavy for one man; and even the discontent
which broke out in the complaint was nothing more than an outpouring of zeal for
the office assigned him by God, under the burden of which his strength would
eventually break down, unless he received some support. He was not tired of the
office, but would stake his life for it if God did not relieve him in some way, as
office and life were really one in him. Jehovah therefore relieved him in the
distress of which he complained, without blaming the words of His servant, which
bordered on despair. "Gather unto Me," He said to Moses (vv. 16, 17), "seventy
men of the elders of Israel, whom thou knowest as elders and officers ( shoterim ,
see Ex 5:6) of the people, and bring them unto the tabernacle, that they may place
themselves there with thee. I will come down (see at v. 25) and speak with thee
there, and will take of the spirit which is upon thee, and will put it upon them, that
they may bear the burden of the people with thee."

Numbers 11:18-20

And say thou unto the people, Sanctify yourselves against to morrow, and ye
shall eat flesh: for ye have wept in the ears of the LORD, saying, Who shall give
us flesh to eat? for it was well with us in Egypt: therefore the LORD will give you
flesh, and ye shall eat.

[Link] (1 of 2) [13/08/2004 [Link] p.m.]

 Keil and Delitzsch Commentary on the Old Testament

Jehovah would also relieve the complaining of the people, and that in such a way
that the murmurers should experience at the same time the holiness of His
judgments. The people were to sanctify themselves for the next day, and were then
to eat flesh (receive flesh to eat). hitªqadeesh (as in Ex 19:10), to prepare
themselves by purifications for the revelation of the glory of God in the miraculous
gift of flesh. Jehovah would give them flesh, so that they should eat it not one day,
or two, or five, or ten, or twenty, but a whole month long (of "days," as in Gen
29:14; 41:1), "till it come out of your nostrils, and become loathsome unto you," as
a punishment for having despised Jehovah in the midst of them, in their contempt
of the manna given by God, and for having shown their regret at leaving the land
of Egypt in their longing for the provisions of that land.

Numbers 11:21-23

And Moses said, The people, among whom I am, are six hundred thousand
footmen; and thou hast said, I will give them flesh, that they may eat a whole
month.

When Moses thereupon expressed his amazement at the promise of God to provide
flesh for 600,000 men for a

<- Previous First Next ->

[Link] (2 of 2) [13/08/2004 [Link] p.m.]

 Keil and Delitzsch Commentary on the Old Testament

<- Previous First Next ->

When Moses thereupon expressed his amazement at the promise of God to provide
flesh for 600,000 men for a whole month long even to satiety, and said, "Shall
flocks and herds be slain for them, to suffice them? or shall all the fish of the sea
be gathered together for them, to suffice them?" he was answered by the words, "Is
the arm of Jehovah too short (i.e., does it not reach far enough; is it too weak and
powerless)? Thou shalt see now whether My word shall come to pass unto thee or
not."

Numbers 11:24-30

And Moses went out, and told the people the words of the LORD, and gathered
the seventy men of the elders of the people, and set them round about the
tabernacle.

After receiving from the Lord this reply to his complaint. Moses went out (sc., "of
the tabernacle," where he had laid his complaint before the Lord) into the camp;
and having made known to the people the will of God, gathered together seventy
men of the elders of the people, and directed them to station themselves around the
tabernacle. "Around the tabernacle," does not signify in this passage on all four
sides, but in a semicircle around the front of the tabernacle; the verb is used in this
sense in Num 21:4, when it is applied to the march round Edom.

Verse 25. Jehovah then came down in the cloud, which soared on high above the
tabernacle, and now came down to the door of it (Num 12:5; Ex 33:9; Deut 31:15).
The statement in ch. Num 9:18ff., and Ex 40:37-38, that the cloud dwelt ( shaakan
(OT:7931)) above the dwelling of the tabernacle during the time of encampment,
can be reconciled with this without any difficulty; since the only idea that we can
form of this "dwelling upon it" is, that the cloud stood still, soaring in quietness
above the tabernacle, without moving to and fro like a cloud driven by the wind.
There is no such discrepancy, therefore, as Knobel finds in these statements. When

[Link] (1 of 2) [13/08/2004 [Link] p.m.]

 Keil and Delitzsch Commentary on the Old Testament

Jehovah had come down, He spoke to Moses, sc., to explain to him and to the
elders what was about to be done, and then laid upon the seventy elders of the
Spirit which was upon him. We are not to understand this as implying, that the
fulness of the Spirit possessed by Moses was diminished in consequence; still less
to regard it, with Calvin , as signum indignationis , or nota ignominiae , which God
intended to stamp upon him.

For the Spirit of God is not something material, which is diminished by being
divided, but resembles a flame of fire, which does not decrease in intensity, but
increases rather by extension. As Theodoret observed, "Just as a person who
kindles a thousand flames from one, does not lessen the first, whilst he
communicates light to the others, so God did not diminish the grace imparted to
Moses by the fact that He communicated of it to the seventy." God did this to show
to Moses, as well as to the whole nation, that the Spirit which Moses had received
was perfectly sufficient for the performance of the duties of his office, and that no
supernatural increase of that Spirit was needed, but simply a strengthening of the
natural powers of Moses by the support of men who, when endowed with the
power of the Spirit that was taken from him, would help him to bear the burden of
his office. We have no description of the way in which this transference took place;
it is therefore impossible to determine whether it was effected by a sign which
would strike the outward senses, or passed altogether within the sphere of the
Spirit's life, in a manner which corresponded to the nature of the Spirit itself.

In any case, however, it must have been effected in such a way, that Moses and the
elders received a convincing proof of the reality of the affair. When the Spirit
descended upon the elders, "they prophesied, and did not add;"
i.e., they did not repeat the prophesyings any further. yaacªpuw (OT:3254) wªlo'
(OT:3808) is rendered correctly by the LXX, kai' (NT:2532) ouk (NT:3756) e'ti
(NT:2089) prose'thento (NT:4369); the rendering supported

<- Previous First Next ->

[Link] (2 of 2) [13/08/2004 [Link] p.m.]

 Keil and Delitzsch Commentary on the Old Testament

<- Previous First Next ->

by the Vulgate and Onkelos, nec ultro cessaverunt ("and ceased not"), is incorrect.
hitªnabee' , "to prophesy," is to be understood generally, and especially here, not
as the foretelling of future things, but as speaking in an ecstatic and elevated state
of mind, under the impulse and inspiration of the Spirit of God, just like the
"speaking with tongues," which frequently followed the gift of the Holy Ghost in
the days of the apostles. But we are not to infer from the fact, that the prophesying
was not repeated, that the Spirit therefore departed from them after this one
extraordinary manifestation. This miraculous manifestation of the Spirit was
intended simply to give to the whole nation the visible proof that God had endowed
them with His Spirit, as helpers of Moses, and had given them the authority
required for the exercise of their calling.

Verse 26. But in order to prove to the whole congregation that the Spirit of the
Lord was working there, the Spirit came not only upon the elders assembled round
Moses, and in front of the tabernacle, but also upon two of the persons who had
been chosen, viz., Eldad and Medad, who had remained behind in the camp, for
some reason that is not reported, so that they also prophesied. "Them that were
written," conscripti , for "called," because the calling of the elders generally took
place in writing, from which we may see how thoroughly the Israelites had
acquired the art of writing in Egypt.

Verse 27-28. This phenomenon in the camp itself produced such excitement, that a
boy ( hana`ar (OT:5288), with the article like hapaaliyT (OT:6412) in Gen 14:13)
reported the thing to Moses, whereupon Joshua requested Moses to prohibit the
two from prophesying. Joshua felt himself warranted in doing this, because he had
been Moses' servant from his youth up (see at Ex 17:9), and in this capacity he
regarded the prophesying of these men in the camp as detracting from the authority
of his lord, since they had not received this gift from Moses, at least not through
his mediation. Joshua was jealous for the honour of Moses, just as the disciples of
Jesus, in Mark 9:38-39, were for the honour of their Lord; and he was reproved by
Moses, as the latter afterwards were by Christ.

[Link] (1 of 2) [13/08/2004 [Link] p.m.]

 Keil and Delitzsch Commentary on the Old Testament

Verse 29. Moses replied, "Art thou jealous for me? Would that all the Lord's
people were prophets, that Jehovah would put His Spirit upon them!" As a true
servant of God, who sought not his own glory, but the glory of his God, and the
spread of His kingdom, Moses rejoiced in this manifestation of the Spirit of God in
the midst of the nation, and desired that all might become partakers of this grace.

Verse 30. Moses returned with the elders into the camp, sc., from the tabernacle,
which stood upon an open space in the midst of the camp, at some distance from
the tents of the Levites and the rest of the tribes of Israel, which were pitched
around it, so that whoever wished to go to it, had first of all to go out of his tent.

(Note: For the purpose of overthrowing the historical character of this marvellous event, the critics,
from Vater to Knobel , have identified the appointment of the seventy elders to support Moses with the
judicial institute established at Sinai by the advice of Jethro (Ex 18), and adduce the obvious
differences between these two entirely different institutions as arguments for the supposed diversity of
documents and legends. But what ground is there for identifying things so totally different from one
another? The assertion of Knobel , that in Deut 1:9-18, Moses "evidently" refers to both events (Ex 18
and Num 11), is unfounded and untrue. Or are the same official duties and rank assigned to the elders
who were chosen as judges in Ex 18, as to the seventy elders who were called by God, and endowed
with His Spirit, that they might help Moses to govern the people who had rebelled against him and
against Jehovah on account of the want of flesh, and to restore and uphold the authority of Moses as
the divinely chosen leader of Israel, which had been shaken thereby? Can the judges of a land be
identified without reserve with the executive of the land? The mere fact, that this executive court was
chosen, like the judges, from the whole body of elders, does not warrant us in identifying the two
institutions. Nor does it follow from the fact, that at Sinai seventy of the elders of Israel ascended the
mountain with Moses, Aaron, and his sons, and there saw God (Ex 24:9ff.), that the seventy persons
chosen here were the same as the seventy mentioned there. The sameness of the numbers does not
prove that the persons were the same, but simply that the number seventy was the most suitable, on
account of its historical and symbolical significance, to form a representation of the

<- Previous First Next ->

[Link] (2 of 2) [13/08/2004 [Link] p.m.]

 Keil and Delitzsch Commentary on the Old Testament

<- Previous First Next ->

whole body of the people. For a further refutation of this futile objection, see Ranke, Unterss. üb. d.
Pent. II. pp. 183ff.)

No account has been handed down of the further action of this committee of elders.
It is impossible to determine, therefore, in what way they assisted Moses in bearing
the burden of governing the people. All that can be regarded as following
unquestionably from the purpose given here is, that they did not form a permanent
body, which continued from the time of Moses to the Captivity, and after the
Captivity was revived again in the Sanhedrim, as Talmudists, Rabbins, and many
of the earlier theologians suppose (see Selden de Synedriis, l. i. c. 14, ii. c. 4; Jo.
Marckii sylloge dissertatt. phil. theol. ad V. T. exercit. 12, pp. 343ff.). On the
opposite side vid., Relandi Antiquitates , ss. ii. 7, 3; Carpz. apparat. pp. 573f., etc.

Numbers 11:31-32

And there went forth a wind from the LORD, and brought quails from the sea,
and let them fall by the camp, as it were a day's journey on this side, and as it
were a day's journey on the other side, round about the camp, and as it were two
cubits high upon the face of the earth.

As soon as Moses had returned with the elders into the camp, God fulfilled His
second promise. "A wind arose from Jehovah, and brought quails ( salvim , see Ex
16:13) over from the sea, and threw them over the camp about a day's journey
wide from here and there (i.e., on both sides), in the neighbourhood of the camp,
and about two cubits above the surface." The wind was a south-east wind (Ps
78:26), which blew from the Arabian Gulf and brought the quails-which fly
northwards in the spring from the interior of Africa in very great numbers (see
p. 364) - from the sea to the Israelites. guwz (OT:1468), which only occurs here
and in the Psalm of Moses (Ps 90:10), signifies to drive over, in Arabic and Syriac
to pass over, not "to cut off," as the Rabbins suppose: the wind cut off the quails

[Link] (1 of 2) [13/08/2004 [Link] p.m.]

 Keil and Delitzsch Commentary on the Old Testament

from the sea. naaTash (OT:5203), to throw them scattered about (Ex 29:5 ; 31:12;
32:4).

The idea is not that the wind caused the flock of quails to spread itself out as much
as two days' journey over the camp, and to fly about two cubits above the surface
of the ground; so that, being exhausted with their flight across the sea, they fell
partly into the hands of the Israelites and partly upon the ground, as Knobel follows
the Vulgate ( volabant in aëre duobus cubitis altitudine super terram ) and many of
the Rabbins in supposing: for hamachaneh (OT:4264) `al (OT:5921) naaTash
(OT:5203) does not mean to cause to fly or spread out over the camp, but to throw
over or upon the camp. The words cannot therefore be understood in any other way
than they are in Ps 78:27-28, viz., that the wind threw them about over the camp,
so that they fell upon the ground a day's journey on either side of it, and that in
such numbers that they lay, of course not for the whole distance mentioned, but in
places about the camp, as much as two cubits deep.

It is only in this sense of the words, that the people could possibly gather quails the
whole of that day, the whole night, and the whole of the next day, in such
quantities that he who had gathered but little had collected ten homers. A homer ,
the largest measure of capacity among the Hebrews, which contained ten ephahs,
held, according to the lower reckoning of Thenius , 10,143 Parisian inches, or
about two bushels Dresden measure. By this enormous quantity, which so
immensely surpassed the natural size of the flocks of quails, God purposed to show
the people His power, to give them flesh not for one day or several days, but for a
whole month, both to put to shame their unbelief, and also to punish their
greediness. As they could not eat this quantity all at once, they spread them round
the camp to dry in the sun, in the same manner in which the Egyptians are in the
habit of drying fish ( Herod. ii. 77).

<- Previous First Next ->

[Link] (2 of 2) [13/08/2004 [Link] p.m.]

 Keil and Delitzsch Commentary on the Old Testament

<- Previous First Next ->

Numbers 11:33

And while the flesh was yet between their teeth, ere it was chewed, the wrath of
the LORD was kindled against the people, and the LORD smote the people with
a very great plague.

But while the flesh was still between their teeth, and before it was ground, i.e.,
masticated, the wrath of the Lord burned against them, and produced among the
people a very great destruction. This catastrophe is not to be regarded as "the effect
of the excessive quantity of quails that they had eaten, on account of the quails
feeding upon things which are injurious to man, so that eating the flesh of quails
produces convulsions and giddiness (for proofs, see Bochart, Hieroz. ii. pp.
657ff.)," as Knobel supposes, but as an extraordinary judgment inflicted by God
upon the greedy people, by which a great multitude of people were suddenly swept
away.

Numbers 11:34

And he called the name of that place Kibroth-hatta'avah: because there they
buried the people that lusted.

From this judgment the place of encampment received the name Kibroth-hattaavah
, i.e., graves of greediness, because there the people found their graves while
giving vent to their greedy desires.

Numbers 11:35

And the people journeyed from Kibroth-hatta'avah unto Hazeroth; and abode at
Hazeroth.

[Link] (1 of 2) [13/08/2004 [Link] p.m.]

 Keil and Delitzsch Commentary on the Old Testament

From the graves of greediness the people removed to Hazeroth , and there they
remained ( haayaah (OT:1961) as in Ex 24:12). The situation of these two places
of encampment is altogether unknown. Hazeroth , it is true, has been regarded by
many since Burckhardt (Syr. p. 808) as identical with the modern Hadhra (in
Robinson's Pal. Ain el Hudhera ), eighteen hours to the north-east of Sinai, partly
because of the resemblance in the name, and partly because there are not only low
palm-trees and bushes there, but also a spring, of which Robinson says (Pal. i. p.
223) that it is the only spring in the neighbourhood, and yields tolerably good
water, though somewhat brackish, the whole year round. But Hadhra does not
answer to the Hebrew chaatsar , to shut in, from which Hazeroth (enclosures) is
derived; and there are springs in many other places in the desert of et Tih with both
drinkable and brackish water.

Moreover, the situation of this well does not point to Hadhra , which is only two
days' journey from Sinai, so that

<- Previous First Next ->

[Link] (2 of 2) [13/08/2004 [Link] p.m.]

 Keil and Delitzsch Commentary on the Old Testament

<- Previous First Next ->

the Israelites might at any rate have pitched their tents by this well after their first
journey of three days (Num 10:33), whereas they took three days to reach the
graves of lust, and then marched from thence to Hazeroth. Consequently they
would only have come to Hadhra on the supposition that they had been about to
take the road to the sea, and intended to march along the coast to the Arabah, and
so on through the Arabah to the Dead Sea ( Robinson , p. 223); in which case,
however, they would not have arrived at Kadesh. The conjecture that Kibroth-
hattaavah is the same as Di-Sahab (Deut 1:1), the modern Dahab ( Mersa Dahab,
Minna el Dahab ), to the east of Sinai, on the Elanitic Gulf, is still more untenable.
For what end could be answered by such a circuitous route, which, instead of
bringing the Israelites nearer to the end of their journey, would have taken them to
Mecca rather than to Canaan? As the Israelites proceeded from Hazeroth to Kadesh
in the desert of Paran (Num 13:3 and 26), they must have marched from Sinai to
Canaan by the most direct route, through the midst of the great desert of et Tih,
most probably by the desert road which leads from the Wady es Sheikh into the
Wady ez-Zuranuk , which breaks through the southern border mountains of et Tih,
and passes on through the Wady ez-Zalakah over el Ain to Bir-et-Themmed , and
then due north past Jebel Araif to the Hebron road. By this route they could go
from Horeb to Kadesh Barnea in eleven days (Deut 1:2), and it is here that we are
to seek for the two stations in question. Hazeroth is probably to be found, as Fries
and Kurtz suppose, in Bir-et-Themmed , and Kibroth-hattaavah in the
neighbourhood of the southern border mountains of et Tih.

Rebellion of Miriam and Aaron against Moses. Ch. 12.

Numbers 12:1-3

And Miriam and Aaron spake against Moses because of the Ethiopian woman
whom he had married: for he had married an Ethiopian woman.

[Link] (1 of 2) [13/08/2004 [Link] p.m.]

 Keil and Delitzsch Commentary on the Old Testament

All the rebellions of the people hitherto had arisen from dissatisfaction with the
privations of the desert march, and had been directed against Jehovah rather than
against Moses. And if, in the case of the last one, at Kibroth-hattaavah, even Moses
was about to lose heart under the heavy burden of his office; the faithful covenant
God had given the whole nation a practical proof, in the manner in which He
provided him support in the seventy elders, that He had not only laid the burden of
the whole nation upon His servant Moses, but had also communicated to him the
power of His Spirit, which was requisite to enable him to carry this burden. Thus
not only was his heart filled with new courage when about to despair, but his
official position in relation to all the Israelites was greatly exalted. This elevation
of Moses excited envy on the part of his brother and sister, whom God had also
richly endowed and placed so high, that Miriam was distinguished as a prophetess
above all the women of Israel, whilst Aaron had been raised by his investiture with
the high-priesthood into the spiritual head of the whole nation.

But the pride of the natural heart was not satisfied with this. They would dispute
with their brother Moses the pre-eminence of his special calling and his exclusive
position, which they might possibly regard themselves as entitled to contest with
him not only as his brother and sister, but also as the nearest supporters of his
vocation. Miriam was the instigator of the open rebellion, as we may see both from
the fact that her name stands before that of Aaron, and also from the use of the
feminine verb tªdabeer (OT:1696) in v. 1. Aaron followed her, being no more able
to resist the suggestions of his sister, than he had formerly been to resist the desire
of the people for a golden idol (Ex 32). Miriam found an occasion for the
manifestation of her discontent in the Cushite wife whom Moses had taken. This
wife cannot have been Zipporah the Midianite: for even though Miriam might
possibly have called her a Cushite, whether because the Cushite tribes dwelt in
Arabia, or in a contemptuous sense as a Moor or

<- Previous First Next ->

[Link] (2 of 2) [13/08/2004 [Link] p.m.]

 Keil and Delitzsch Commentary on the Old Testament

<- Previous First Next ->

Hamite, the author would certainly not have confirmed this at all events inaccurate,
if not contemptuous epithet, by adding, "for he had taken a Cushite wife;" to say
nothing of the improbability of Miriam having made the marriage which her
brother had contracted when he was a fugitive in a foreign land, long before he was
called by God, the occasion of reproach so many years afterwards.

It would be quite different if, a short time before, probably after the death of
Zipporah, he had contracted a second marriage with a Cushite woman, who either
sprang from the Cushites dwelling in Arabia, or from the foreigners who had come
out of Egypt along with the Israelites. This marriage would not have been wrong in
itself, as God had merely forbidden the Israelites to marry the daughters of Canaan
(Ex 34:16), even if Moses had not contracted it "with the deliberate intention of
setting forth through this marriage with a Hamite woman the fellowship between
Israel and the heathen, so far as it could exist under the law; and thus practically
exemplifying in his own person that equality between the foreigners and Israel
which the law demanded in various ways" ( Baumgarten ), or of "prefiguring by
this example the future union of Israel with the most remote of the heathen," as O.
v. Gerlach and many of the fathers suppose. In the taunt of the brother and sister,
however, we meet with that carnal exaggeration of the Israelitish nationality which
forms so all-pervading a characteristic of this nation, and is the more reprehensible
the more it rests upon the ground of nature rather than upon the spiritual calling of
Israel ( Kurtz ).

Verse 2-3. Miriam and Aaron said, "Hath Jehovah then spoken only by Moses, and
not also by us?" Are not we-the high priest Aaron, who brings the rights of the
congregation before Jehovah in the Urim and Thummim (Ex 28:30), and the
prophetess Miriam (Ex 15:20) - also organs and mediators of divine revelation?
"They are proud of the prophetic gift, which ought rather to have fostered modesty
in them. But such is the depravity of human nature, that they not only abuse the
gifts of God towards the brother whom they despise, but by an ungodly and
sacrilegious glorification extol the gifts themselves in such a manner as to hide the

[Link] (1 of 3) [13/08/2004 [Link] p.m.]

 Keil and Delitzsch Commentary on the Old Testament

Author of the gifts" ( Calvin ) . - "And Jehovah heard." This is stated for the
purpose of preparing the way for the judicial interposition of God. When God hears
what is wrong, He must proceed to stop it by punishment. Moses might also have
heard what they said, but "the man Moses was very meek ( prau's (NT:4239),
LXX, mitis , Vulg.; not 'plagued,' geplagt , as Luther renders it), more than all men
upon the earth." No one approached Moses in meekness, because no one was
raised so high by God as he was.

The higher the position which a man occupies among his fellow-men, the harder is
it for the natural man to bear attacks upon himself with meekness, especially if
they are directed against his official rank and honour. This remark as to the
character of Moses serves to bring out to view the position of the person attacked,
and points out the reason why Moses not only abstained from all self-defence, but
did not even cry to God for vengeance on account of the injury that had been done
to him. Because he was the meekest of all men, he could calmly leave this attack
upon himself to the all-wise and righteous Judge, who had both called and
qualified him for his office. "For this is the idea of the eulogium of his meekness. It
is as if Moses had said that he had swallowed the injury in silence, inasmuch as he
had imposed a law of patience upon himself because of his meekness" ( Calvin ).

The self-praise on the part of Moses, which many have discovered in this
description of his character, and on account of which some even of the earlier
expositors regarded this verse as a later gloss, whilst more recent critics have used
it as an argument against the Mosaic authorship of the Pentateuch, is not an
expression of vain self-display, or a glorification of his own gifts and excellences,
which he prided himself upon possessing above all others. It is simply a statement,
which was indispensable to a full and correct interpretation of all the
circumstances, and which was made quite objectively, with reference to the
character which Moses had not given to himself but had acquired through the grace
of God, and which he never falsified from the very time of his calling until the day
of his death, either at the rebellion of the people at Kibroth-hattaavah (ch. 11), or at
the water of strife (at Kadesh (ch. 20). His despondency under the heavy burden of
his office in the former case (ch. 11) speaks rather for than against the meekness of
[Link] (2 of 3) [13/08/2004 [Link] p.m.]
 Keil and Delitzsch Commentary on the Old Testament

his character; and the sin at Kadesh (ch. 20) consisted simply in the fact, that he
suffered

<- Previous First Next ->

[Link] (3 of 3) [13/08/2004 [Link] p.m.]

 Keil and Delitzsch Commentary on the Old Testament

<- Previous First Next ->

himself to be brought to doubt either the omnipotence of God, or the possibility of

divine help, in account of the unbelief of the people.

(Note: There is not a word in Num 20:10 or Ps 106:32 to the effect, that "his dissatisfaction broke out
into evident passion" ( Kurtz ). And it is quite a mistake to observe, that in the case before us there was
nothing at all to provoke Moses to appeal to his meekness, since it was not his meekness that Miriam
had disputed, but only his prophetic call. If such grounds as these are interpolated into the words of
Moses, and it is to be held that an attack upon the prophetic calling does not involve such an attack
upon the person as might have excited anger, it is certainly impossible to maintain the Mosaic
authorship of this statement as to the character of Moses; for the vanity of wishing to procure the
recognition of his meekness by praising it, cannot certainly be imputed to Moses the man of God.)

No doubt it was only such a man as Moses who could speak of himself in such a
way-a man who had so entirely sacrificed his own personality to the office
assigned him by the Lord, that he was ready at any moment to stake his life for the
cause and glory of the Lord (cf. Num 11:15, and Ex 32:32), and of whom Calmet
observes with as much truth as force, "As he praises himself here without pride, so
he will blame himself elsewhere with humility," - a man or God whose character is
not to be measured by the standard of ordinary men (cf. Hengstenberg,
Dissertations , vol. ii. pp. 141ff.).

Numbers 12:4-10

And the LORD spake suddenly unto Moses, and unto Aaron, and unto Miriam,
Come out ye three unto the tabernacle of the congregation. And they three came
out.

Jehovah summoned the opponents of His servant to come at once before His
judgment-seat. He commanded Moses, Aaron, and Miriam suddenly to come out of
the camp (see at Num 11:30) to the tabernacle. Then He Himself came down in a
pillar of cloud to the door of the tabernacle, i.e., to the entrance to the court, not to
the dwelling itself, and called Aaron and Miriam out, i.e., commanded them to

[Link] (1 of 2) [13/08/2004 [Link] p.m.]

 Keil and Delitzsch Commentary on the Old Testament

come out of the court,

(Note: The discrepancy discovered by Knobel , in the fact that, according to the so-called Elohist, no
one but Moses, Aaron, and the sons of Aaron were allowed to enter the sanctuary, whereas, according
to the Jehovist, others did so-e.g., Miriam here, and Joshua in Ex 33:11 - rests entirely upon a
groundless fancy, arising from a misinterpretation, as there is not a word about entering the sanctuary,
i.e., the dwelling itself, either in the verse before us or in Ex 33:11.)

and said to them (vv. 6ff.): "If there is a prophet of Jehovah to you (i.e., if you
have one), I make Myself known to him in a vision; I speak to him in a dream ( bow
(OT:871a), lit., "in him," inasmuch as a revelation in a dream fell within the inner
sphere of the soul-life).

Not so My servant Moses: he is approved in My whole house; mouth to mouth

I speak to him, and as an appearance, and that not in enigmas; and he sees the
form of Jehovah. Why are ye not afraid to speak against My servant, against
Moses?" nªbiy'akem (OT:5030) = laakem (OT:3807a ) naabiy' (OT:5030), the
suffix used with the noun instead of the separate pronoun in the dative, as in Gen
39:21; Lev 15:3,

<- Previous First Next ->

[Link] (2 of 2) [13/08/2004 [Link] p.m.]

 Keil and Delitzsch Commentary on the Old Testament

<- Previous First Next ->

etc. The noun Jehovah is in all probability to be taken as a genitive, in connection

with the word nªbiy'akem (OT:5030) ( "a prophet to you" ), as it is in the LXX and
Vulg. , and not to be construed with the words which follow ( "I Jehovah will make
Myself known" ). The position of Jehovah at the head of the clause without a
preceding 'aanokiy (OT:595) (I) would be much more remarkable than the
separation of the dependent noun from the governing noun by the suffix, which
occurs in other cases also (e.g., Lev 6:3; 26:42, etc.); moreover, it would be by no
means suited to the sense, as no such emphasis is laid upon the fact that it was
Jehovah who made Himself known, as to require or even justify such a
construction.

The "whole house of Jehovah" (v. 7) is not "primarily His dwelling, the holy tent" (
Baumgarten ) - for, in that case, the word "whole" would be quite superfluous-but
the whole house of Israel, or the covenant nation regarded as a kingdom, to the
administration and government of which Moses had been called: as a matter of
fact, therefore, the whole economy of the Old Testament, having its central point in
the holy tent, which Jehovah had caused to be built as the dwelling-place of His
name. It did not terminate, however, in the service of the sanctuary, as we may see
from the fact that god did not make the priests who were entrusted with the duties
of the sanctuary the organs of His saving revelation, but raised up and called
prophets after Moses for that purpose. Compare the expression in Heb 3:6, "Whose
house we are." ne'eman (OT:539) with bª does not mean to be, or become,
entrusted with anything ( Baumgarten, Knobel ), but simply to be lasting, firm,
constant, in a local or temporal sense (Deut 28:59; 1 Sam 2:35; 2 Sam 7:16, etc.);
in a historical sense, to prove or attest one's self (Gen 42:20); and in an ethical
sense, to be found proof, trustworthy, true (Ps 78:8 ; 1 Sam 3:20; [Link] see
Delitzsch on Heb 3:2).

In the participle, therefore, it signifies proved, faithful, pisto's (NT:4103) (LXX).

"Mouth to mouth" answers to the "face to face" in Ex 33:11 (cf. Deut 34:10), i.e.,
without any mediation or reserve, but with the same closeness and freedom with
[Link] (1 of 3) [13/08/2004 [Link] p.m.]
 Keil and Delitzsch Commentary on the Old Testament

which friends converse together (Ex 33:11). This is still further strengthened and
elucidated by the words in apposition, "in the form of seeing (appearance), and not
in riddles," i.e., visibly, and not in a dark, hidden, enigmatical way. marª'eh
(OT:4758) is an accusative defining the mode, and signifies here not vision, as in
v. 6, but adspectus , view, sight; for it forms an antithesis to bamarª'aah
(OT:4759) in v. 6. "The form ( Eng. similitude) of Jehovah" was not the essential
nature of God, His unveiled glory-for this no mortal man can see (vid., Ex 33:18ff.)
- but a form which manifested the invisible God to the eye of man in a clearly
discernible mode, and which was essentially different, not only from the visionary
sight of God in the form of a man (Ezek 1:26; Dan 7:9 and 13), but also from the
appearances of God in the outward world of the senses, in the person and form of
the angel of Jehovah, and stood in the same relation to these two forms of
revelation, so far as directness and clearness were concerned, as the sight of a
person in a dream to that of the actual figure of the person himself. God talked with
Moses without figure, in the clear distinctness of a spiritual communication,
whereas to the prophets He only revealed Himself through the medium of ecstasy
or dream.

Through this utterance on the part of Jehovah, Moses is placed above all the
prophets, in relation to God and also to the whole nation. The divine revelation to
the prophets is thereby restricted to the two forms of inward intuition (vision and
dream). It follows from this, that it had always a visionary character, though it
might vary in intensity; and therefore that it had always more or less obscurity
about it, because the clearness of self-consciousness and the distinct perception of
an external world, both receded before the inward intuition, in a dream as well as
in a vision. The prophets were consequently simply organs, through whom Jehovah
made known His counsel and will at certain times, and in relation to special
circumstances and features in the development of His kingdom. It was not so with
Moses. Jehovah had placed him over all His house, had called him to be the
founder and organizer of the kingdom established in Israel through his mediatorial
service, and had found him faithful in His service.

With this servant ( thera'poon (NT:2324), LXX) of His, He spake mouth to mouth,
[Link] (2 of 3) [13/08/2004 [Link] p.m.]
 Keil and Delitzsch Commentary on the Old Testament

without a figure or figurative cloak, with the distinctness of a human interchange of

thought; so that at any time he could inquire of God and wait for the divine reply.
Hence Moses was not a prophet of Jehovah, like many others, not even merely the
first and

<- Previous First Next ->

[Link] (3 of 3) [13/08/2004 [Link] p.m.]

 Keil and Delitzsch Commentary on the Old Testament

<- Previous First Next ->

highest prophet, primus inter pares , but stood above all the prophets, as the
founder of the theocracy, and mediator of the Old Covenant. Upon this
unparalleled relation of Moses to God and the theocracy, so clearly expressed in
the verses before us, the Rabbins have justly founded their view as to the higher
grade of inspiration in the Thorah. This view is fully confirmed through the history
of the Old Testament kingdom of God, and the relation in which the writings of the
prophets stand to those of Moses. The prophets subsequent to Moses simply
continued to build upon the foundation which Moses laid. And if Moses stood in
this unparalleled relation to the Lord, Miriam and Aaron sinned grievously against
him, when speaking as they did. V. 9. After this address, "the wrath of Jehovah
burned against them, and He went." As a judge, withdrawing from the judgment-
seat when he has pronounced his sentence, so Jehovah went, by the cloud in which
He had come down withdrawing from the tabernacle, and ascending up on high.
And at the same moment, Miriam, the instigator of the rebellion against her brother
Moses, was covered with leprosy, and became white as snow.

Numbers 12:11-12

And Aaron said unto Moses, Alas, my lord, I beseech thee, lay not the sin upon
us, wherein we have done foolishly, and wherein we have sinned.

When Aaron saw his sister smitten in this way, he said to Moses, "Alas! my lord, I
beseech thee, lay not this sin upon us, for we have done foolishly;" i.e., let us not
bear its punishment. "Let her (Miriam) not be as the dead thing, on whose coming
out of its mother's womb half its flesh is consumed;" i.e., like a still-born child,
which comes into the world half decomposed. His reason for making this
comparison was, that leprosy produces decomposition in the living body.

Numbers 12:13

[Link] (1 of 2) [13/08/2004 [Link] p.m.]

 Keil and Delitzsch Commentary on the Old Testament

And Moses cried unto the LORD, saying, Heal her now, O God, I beseech thee.

Moses, with his mildness, took compassion upon his sister, upon whom this
punishment had fallen, and cried to the Lord, "O God, I beseech Thee, heal her."
The connection of the particle naa' (OT:4994) with 'eel (OT:410) is certainly
unusual, but yet it is analogous to the construction with such exclamations as 'owy
(OT:188) (Jer 4:31; 45:3) and hineeh (OT:2009) (Gen 12:11; 16:2, etc.); since 'eel
(OT:410) in the vocative is to be regarded as equivalent to an exclamation;
whereas the alteration into 'al (OT:408), as proposed by J. D. Michaelis and
Knobel , does not even give a fitting sense, apart altogether from the fact, that the
repetition of naa' (OT:4994) after the verb, with naa' (OT:4994) 'al (OT:408)
before it, would be altogether unexampled.

Numbers 12:14,15

<- Previous First Next ->

[Link] (2 of 2) [13/08/2004 [Link] p.m.]

 Keil and Delitzsch Commentary on the Old Testament

<- Previous First Next ->

And the LORD said unto Moses, If her father had but spit in her face, should
she not be ashamed seven days? let her be shut out from the camp seven days,
and after that let her be received in again.

Jehovah hearkened to His servant's prayer, though not without inflicting deep
humiliation upon Miriam. "If her father had but spit in her face, would she not be
ashamed seven days?" i.e., keep herself hidden from Me out of pure shame. She
was to be shut outside the camp, to be excluded from the congregation as a leprous
person for seven days, and then to be received in again. Thus restoration and
purification from her leprosy were promised to her after the endurance of seven
days' punishment. Leprosy was the just punishment for her sin. In her haughty
exaggeration of the worth of her own prophetic gift, she had placed herself on a par
with Moses, the divinely appointed head of the whole nation, and exalted herself
above the congregation of the Lord. For this she was afflicted with a disease which
shut her out of the number of the members of the people of God, and thus actually
excluded from the camp; so that she could only be received back again after she
had been healed, and by a formal purification. The latter followed as a matter of
course, from Lev 13 and 14, and did not need to be specially referred to here.

15b,16. The people did not proceed any farther till the restoration of Miriam. After
this they departed from Hazeroth, and encamped in the desert of Paran , namely at
Kadesh, on the southern boundary of Canaan. This is evident from ch. 13, more
especially v. 26, as compared with Deut 1:19ff., where it is stated not merely that
the spies, who were sent out from this place of encampment to Canaan, returned to
the congregation at Kadesh, but that they set out from Kadesh-barnea for Canaan,
because there the Israelites had come to the mountains of the Amorites, which God
had promised them for an inheritance.

With regard to the situation of Kadesh , it has already been observed at Gen 14:7,
that it is probably to be sought for in the neighbourhood of the fountain of Ain

[Link] (1 of 2) [13/08/2004 [Link] p.m.]

 Keil and Delitzsch Commentary on the Old Testament

Kades , which was discovered by Rowland , to the south of Bir Seba and Khalasa ,
on the heights of Jebel Helal , i.e., at the north-west corner of the mountain land of
Azazimeh , which is more closely described at Num 10:12 (see pp. 688, 689),
where the western slopes of this highland region sink gently down into the
undulating surface of the desert, which stretches thence to El Arish , with a breadth
of about six hours' journey, and keeps the way open between Arabia Petraea and
the south of Palestine. "In the northern third of this western slope, the mountains
recede so as to leave a free space for a plain of about an hour's journey in breadth,
which comes towards the east, and to which access is obtained through one or
more of the larger wadys that are to be seen here (such as Retemat, Kusaimeh, el
Ain, Muweileh)." At the north-eastern background of this plain, which forms
almost a rectangular figure of nine miles by five, or ten by six, stretching from
west to east, large enough to receive the camp of a wandering people, and about
twelve miles to the E.S.E. of Muweileh, there rises, like a large solitary mass, at
the edge of the mountains which run on towards the north, a bare rock, at the foot
of which there is a copious spring, falling in ornamental cascades into the bed of a
brook, which is lost in the sand about 300 or 400 yards to the west.

This place still bears the ancient name of Kudees. There can be no doubt as to the
identity of this Kudees and the biblical Kadesh. The situation agrees with all the
statements in the Bible concerning Kadesh: for example, that Israel had then
reached the border of the promised land; also that the spies who were sent out from
Kadesh returned thither by coming from Hebron to the wilderness of Paran (Num
13:26); and lastly, according to the assertions of the Bedouins, as quoted by
Rowland , this Kudes was ten or eleven days' journey from Sinai (in perfect
harmony with Deut 1:2), and was connected by passable wadys with Mount Hor.
The Israelites proceeded, no doubt, through the wady Retemat , i.e., Rithmah (see
at Num 33:18), into the plain of Kadesh. (On the town of Kadesh, see at Num
20:16.)

(Note: See Kurtz , History of the Old Covenant, vol. iii. p. 225, where the current notion, that Kadesh

<- Previous First Next ->

[Link] (2 of 2) [13/08/2004 [Link] p.m.]

 Keil and Delitzsch Commentary on the Old Testament

<- Previous First Next ->

(Note: See Kurtz , History of the Old Covenant, vol. iii. p. 225, where the current notion, that Kadesh
was situated on the western border of the Arabah, below the Dead Sea, by either Ain Hasb or Ain el
Weibeh, is successfully refuted.)

Spies Sent Out. Murmuring of the People, and their Punishment. Ch.
13 and 14.

When they had arrived at Kadesh, in the desert of Paran (Num 13:26), Moses sent
out spies by the command of God, and according to the wishes of the people, to
explore the way by which they could enter into Canaan, and also the nature of the
land, of its cities, and of its population (Num 13:1-20). The men who were sent out
passed through the land, from the south to the northern frontier, and on their return
reported that the land was no doubt one of pre-eminent goodness, but that it was
inhabited by a strong people, who had giants among them, and were in possession
of very large fortified towns (vv. 21-29); whereupon Caleb declared that it was
quite possible to conquer it, whilst the others despaired of overcoming the
Canaanites, and spread an evil report among the people concerning the land (vv. 30-
33). The congregation then raised a loud lamentation, and went so far in their
murmuring against Moses and Aaron, as to speak without reserve or secrecy of
deposing Moses, and returning to Egypt under another leader: they even wanted to
stone Joshua and Caleb, who tried to calm the excited multitude, and urged them to
trust in the Lord. But suddenly the glory of the Lord interposed with a special
manifestation of judgment (Num 14:1-10).

Jehovah made known to Moses His resolution to destroy the rebellious nation, but
suffered Himself to be moved by the intercession of Moses so far as to promise that
He would preserve the nation, though He would exclude the murmuring multitude
from the promised land (vv. 11-25). He then directed Moses and Aaron to proclaim
to the people the following punishment for their repeated rebellion: that they should

[Link] (1 of 2) [13/08/2004 [Link] p.m.]

 Keil and Delitzsch Commentary on the Old Testament

bear their iniquity for forty years in the wilderness; that the whole nation that had
come out of Egypt should die there, with the exception of Caleb and Joshua; and
that only their children should enter the promised land (vv. 26-39). The people were
shocked at this announcement, and resolved to force a way into Canaan; but, as
Moses predicted, they were beaten by the Canaanites and Amalekites, and driven
back to Hormah (vv. 40-45).

These events form a grand turning-point in the history of Israel, in which the whole
of the future history of the covenant nation is typically reflected. The constantly
repeated unfaithfulness of the nation could not destroy the faithfulness of God, or
alter His purposes of salvation. In wrath Jehovah remembered mercy; through
judgment He carried out His plan of salvation, that all the world might know that no
flesh was righteous before Him, and that the unbelief and unfaithfulness of men
could not overturn the truth of God.

(Note: According to Knobel , the account of these events arose from two or three documents
interwoven with one another in the following manner: Num 13:1-17a, 21,25-26,32, and 14:2a, 5-7,10b,
36-38, was written by the Elohist, the remainder by the Jehovist-Num 13:22-24,27-31; 14:1b, 11-25, 39-
45, being taken from his first document, and Num 13:17b - 20; 14:2b - 4,8-10a, 26-33,35, from his
second; whilst, lastly, Num 13:33, and the commencement of Num 14:1, were added from his own
resources, because it contains contradictory statements. "According to the Elohist," says this critic, "the
spies went through the whole land (Num 13:32; 14:7), and penetrated even to the north of the country
(ch. 13:21): they took forty days to this (Num 13:25; 14:34); they had among them Joshua, whose name
was altered at that time (ch. Josh 13:16), and who behaved as bravely as Caleb (Num 13:8; 14:6,38).
According to the Jehovistic completion, the spies did not go through the whole land, but only entered
into it (Num 13:27), merely going into the neighbourhood of Hebron, in the south country (Num 13:22-
23); there they saw the gigantic Anakites (Num 13:22,28,33), cut off the large bunch of grapes in the
valley of Eshcol (ch. 13:23-24), and then came back to Moses. Caleb was the

<- Previous First Next ->

[Link] (2 of 2) [13/08/2004 [Link] p.m.]

 Keil and Delitzsch Commentary on the Old Testament

<- Previous First Next ->

only one who showed himself courageous, and Joshua was not with them at all (Num 13:30; 14:24)."

But these discrepancies do not exist in the biblical narrative; on the contrary, they have been
introduced by the critic himself, by the forcible separation of passages from their context, and by
arbitrary interpolations. The words of the spies in Num 13:27, "We came into the land whither thou
sentest us, and surely it floweth with milk and honey," do not imply that they only came into the
southern portion of the land, any more than the fact that they brought a bunch of grapes from the
neighbourhood of Hebron is a proof that they did not go beyond the valley of Eshcol. Moreover, it is
not stated in Num 13:30 that Joshua was not found among the tribes. Again, the circumstance that in
Num 14:11-25 and 26-35 the same thing is said twice over-the special instructions as to the survey of
the land in Num 13:17b-20, which were quite unnecessary for intelligent leaders-the swearing of God
(Num 14:16,21,23) - the forced explanation of the name Eshcol , in Num 13:24, and other things of the
same kind-are said to furnish further proofs of the interpolation of Jehovistic clauses into the Elohistic
narrative; and lastly, a number of the words employed are supposed to place this beyond all doubt. Of
these proofs, however, the first rests upon a simple misinterpretation of the passage in question, and a
disregard of the peculiarities of Hebrew history; whilst the rest are either subjective conclusions,
dictated by the taste of vulgar rationalism, or inferences and assumptions, of which the tenability and
force need first of all to be established.)

Numbers 13:1-20

And the LORD spake unto Moses, saying,

Verse 1-17. Despatch of the Spies of Canaan. - Vv. 1ff. The command of Jehovah,
to send out men to spy out the land of Canaan, was occasioned, according to the
account given by Moses in Deut 1:22ff., by a proposal of the congregation, which
pleased Moses, so that he laid the matter before the Lord, who then commanded
him to send out for this purpose, "of every tribe of their fathers a man, every one a
ruler among them , i.e., none but men who were princes in their tribes, who held
the prominent position of princes, i.e., distinguished persons of rank; or, as it is
stated in v. 3, "heads of the children of Israel," i.e., not the tribe-princes of the
twelve tribes, but those men, out of the total number of the heads of the tribes and
families of Israel, who were the most suitable for such a mission, though the
selection was to be made in such a manner that every tribe should be represented
[Link] (1 of 2) [13/08/2004 [Link] p.m.]
 Keil and Delitzsch Commentary on the Old Testament

by one of its own chiefs.

That there were none of the twelve tribe-princes among them is apparent from a
comparison of their names (vv. 4-15) with the (totally different) names of the tribe-
princes (Num 1:3ff., 7:12ff.). Caleb and Joshua are the only spies that are known.
The order, in which the tribes are placed in the list of the names in vv. 4-15, differs
from that in Num 1:5-15 only in the fact that in v. 10 Zebulun is separated from the
other sons of Leah, and in v. 11 Manasseh is separated from Ephraim. The
expression "of the tribe of Joseph," in v. 11, stands for "of the children of Joseph,"
in Num 1:10; 34:23. At the close of the list it is still further stated, that Moses
called Hoshea (i.e., help), the son of Nun, Jehoshua , contracted into Joshua (i.e.,
Jehovah-help, equivalent to, whose help is Jehovah). This statement does not
present any such discrepancy, when compared with Ex 17:9,13; 24:13; 32:17;
33:11, and Num 11:28, where Joshua bears this name as the servant of Moses at a
still earlier period, as to point to any diversity of authorship.

As there is nothing of a genealogical character in any of these passages, so as to

warrant us in expecting to find the family name of Joshua in them, the name
Joshua, by which Hosea had become best known in history, could be used
proleptically in them all. On the other hand, however, it is not distinctly stated in
the verse before us, that this was the occasion on which Moses gave Hosea the new
name of Joshua. As the Vav consec. frequently points out

<- Previous First Next ->

[Link] (2 of 2) [13/08/2004 [Link] p.m.]

 Keil and Delitzsch Commentary on the Old Testament

<- Previous First Next ->

merely the order of thought, the words may be understood without hesitation in the
following sense: These are the names borne by the heads of the tribes to be sent out
as spies, as they stand in the family registers according to their descent; Hosea,
however, was named Joshua by Moses; which would not by any means imply that
the alteration in the name had not been made till then. It is very probable that
Moses may have given him the new name either before or after the defeat of the
Amalekites (Ex 17:9ff.), or when he took him into his service, though it has not
been mentioned before; whilst here the circumstances themselves required that it
should be stated that Hosea, as he was called in the list prepared and entered in the
documentary record according to the genealogical tables of the tribes, had received
from Moses the name of Joshua. In vv. 17-20 Moses gives them the necessary
instructions, defining more clearly the motive which the congregation had assigned
for sending them out, namely, that they might search out the way into the land and
to its towns (Deut 1:22). "Get you up there ( zeh (OT:2088) in the south country,
and go up to the mountain." Negeb , i.e., south country, lit., dryness, aridity, from
ngb (OT:5045), to be dry or arid (in Syr., Chald , and Samar. ). Hence the dry,
parched land, in contrast to the well-watered country (Josh 15:19; Judg 1:15), was
the name given to the southern district of Canaan, which forms the transition from
the desert to the strictly cultivated land, and bears for the most part the character of
a steppe, in which tracts of sand and heath are intermixed with shrubs, grass, and
vegetables, whilst here and there corn is also cultivated; a district therefore which
was better fitted for grazing than for agriculture, though it contained a number of
towns and villages (see at Josh 15:21-32). "The mountain" is the mountainous part
of Palestine, which was inhabited by Hittites, Jebusites, and Amorites (v. 29), and
was called the mountains of the Amorites, on account of their being the strongest
of the Canaanitish tribes (Deut 1:7,19ff.). It is not to be restricted, as Knobel
supposes, to the limits of the so-called mountains of Judah (Josh 15:48-62), but
included the mountains of Israel or Ephraim also (Josh 11:21; 20:7), and formed,
according to Deut 1:7, the backbone of the whole land of Canaan up to Lebanon.

Verse 18-20. They were to see the land, "what it was," i.e., what was its character,

[Link] (1 of 2) [13/08/2004 [Link] p.m.]

 Keil and Delitzsch Commentary on the Old Testament

and the people that dwelt in it, whether they were strong, i.e., courageous and
brave, or weak, i.e., spiritless and timid, and whether they were little or great, i.e.,
numerically; (v. 19) what the land was, whether good or bad, sc., with regard to
climate and cultivation, and whether the towns were camps, i.e., open villages and
hamlets, or fortified places; also (v. 20) whether the land was fat or lean, i.e.,
whether it had a fertile soil or not, and whether there were trees in it or not. All this
they were to search out courageously ( hitªchazeeq , to show one's self courageous
in any occupation), and to fetch (some) of the fruits of the land, as it was the time
of the first-ripe grapes. In Palestine the first grapes ripen as early as August, and
sometimes even in July (vid., Robinson , ii. 100, ii. 611), whilst the vintage takes
place in September and October.

Numbers 13:21-22

So they went up, and searched the land from the wilderness of Zin unto Rehob,
as men come to Hamath.

Journey of the Spies; Their Return, and Report. - V. 21. In accordance with the
instructions they had received, the men who had been sent out passed through the
land, from the desert of Zin to Rehob, in the neighbourhood of Hamath, i.e., in its
entire extent from south to north. The "Desert of Zin" (which occurs not only here,
but in Num 20:1; 27:14; 33:36; 34:3-4; Deut 32:51, and Josh 15:1,3) was the name
given to the northern edge of the great desert of Paran, viz., the broad ravine of
Wady Murreh (see p. 689), which separates the lofty and precipitous northern
border of the table-land of the Azazimeh from the southern border of the Rakhma
plateau, i.e., of the southernmost plateau of the mountains of the Amorites (or the
mountains of Judah), and runs from Jebel Madarah ( Moddera ) on the east, to the
plain of Kadesh, which forms part of the desert of Zin (cf. Num 27:14; 33:36; Deut
32:51), on the west.

<- Previous First Next ->

[Link] (2 of 2) [13/08/2004 [Link] p.m.]

 Keil and Delitzsch Commentary on the Old Testament

<- Previous First Next ->

The south frontier of Canaan passed through this from the southern end of the
Dead Sea, along the Wady el Murreh to the Wady el Arish (Num 34:3). - "Rehob,
to come (coming) to Hamath," i.e., where you enter the province of Hamath, on the
northern boundary of Canaan, is hardly one of the two Rehobs in the tribe of Asher
(Josh 19:28 and 30), but most likely Beth-rehob in the tribe of Naphtali, which was
in the neighbourhood of Dan Lais , the modern Tell el Kadhy (Judg 18:28), and
which Robinson imagined that he had identified in the ruins of the castle of Hunin
or Honin , in the village of the same name, to the south-west of Tell el Kadhy , on
the range of mountains which bound the plain towards the west above Lake Huleh
(Bibl. Researches, p. 371). In support of this conjecture, he laid the principal stress
upon the fact that the direct road to Hamath through the Wady et Teim and the
Bekaa commences here.

The only circumstance which it is hard to reconcile with this conjecture is, that
Beth-rehob is never mentioned in the Old Testament, with the exception of Judg
18:28, either among the fortified towns of the Canaanites or in the wars of the
Israelites with the Syrians and Assyrians, and therefore does not appear to have
been a place of such importance as we should naturally be led to suppose from the
character of this castle, the very situation of which points to a bold, commanding
fortress (see Lynch's Expedition), and where there are still remains of its original
foundations built of large square stones, hewn and grooved, and reminding one of
the antique and ornamental edifices of Solomon's times (cf. Ritter, Erdkunde , xv.
pp. 242ff.). - Hamath is Epiphania on the Orontes , now Hamah (see at Gen
10:18).

After the general statement, that the spies went through the whole land from the
southern to the northern frontier, two facts are mentioned in vv. 22-24, which
occurred in connection with their mission, and were of great importance to the
whole congregation. These single incidents are linked on, however, in a truly
Hebrew style, to what precedes, viz., by an imperfect with Vav consec. , just in the
same manner in which, in 1 Kings 6:9,15, the detailed account of the building of

[Link] (1 of 2) [13/08/2004 [Link] p.m.]

 Keil and Delitzsch Commentary on the Old Testament

the temple is linked on to the previous statement, that Solomon built the temple
and finished it;

(Note: A comparison of 1 Kings 6, where we cannot possibly suppose that two accounts have been
linked together or interwoven, is specially adapted to give us a clear view of the peculiar custom
adopted by the Hebrew historians, of placing the end and ultimate result of the events they narrate as
much as possible at the head of their narrative, and then proceeding with a minute account of the more
important of the attendant circumstances, without paying any regard to the chronological order of the
different incidents, or being at all afraid of repetitions, and so to prove how unwarrantable and false
are the conclusions of those critics who press such passages into the support of their hypotheses. We
have a similar passage in Josh 4:11ff., where, after relating that when all the people had gone through
the Jordan the priests also passed through with the ark of the covenant (v. 11), the historian proceeds in
vv. 12, 13, to describe the crossing of the two tribes and a half; and another in Judg 20, where, at the
very commencement (v. 35), the issue of the whole is related, viz., the defeat of the Benjamites; and
then after that there is a minute description in vv. 36-46 of the manner in which it was effected.

This style of narrative is also common in the historical works of the Arabs.) so that
the true rendering would be, "now they ascended in the south country and came to
Hebron ( wayaabo' (OT:935) is apparently an error in writing for wayaabo'uw
(OT:935)), and there were haa`anaaq (OT:6061) yªliydeey (OT:3211), the children
of Anak," three of whom are mentioned by name. These three, who were
afterwards expelled by Caleb, when the land was divided and the city of Hebron
was given to him for an inheritance (Josh 15:14; Judg 1:20), were descendants of
Arbah , the lord of Hebron, from whom the city received its name of Kirjath-Arbah
, or city of Arbah, and who is described in Josh 14:15 as "the great (i.e., the
greatest) man among the Anakim," and in Josh 15:13 as the "father of Anak," i.e.,
the founder of the Anakite family there. For it is evident enough that haa`anaaq

<- Previous First Next ->

[Link] (2 of 2) [13/08/2004 [Link] p.m.]

 Keil and Delitzsch Commentary on the Old Testament

<- Previous First Next ->

(OT:6061) ( Anak ) is not the proper name of a man in these passages, but the name
of a family or tribe, from the fact that in v. 33, where Anak's sons are spoken of in
a general and indefinite manner, `anaaq (OT:6061) bªneey (OT:1121) has not the
article; also from the fact that the three Anakites who lived in Hebron are almost
always called haa`anaaq (OT:6061) yªliydeey (OT:3211), Anak's born (vv. 22, 28),
and that haa`anaaq (OT:6061) bªneey (OT:1121) (sons of Anak), in Josh 15:14, is
still further defined by the phrase haa`anaaq (OT:6061) yªliydeey (OT:3211)
(children of Anak); and lastly, from the fact that in the place of "sons of Anak," we
find "sons of the Anakim" in Deut 1:28 and 9:2, and the "Anakim" in Deut 2:10;
11:21; Josh 14:12, etc.

Anak is supposed to signify long-necked; but this does not preclude the possibility
of the founder of the tribe having borne this name. The origin of the Anakites is
involved in obscurity. In Deut 2:10-11, they are classed with the Emim and
Rephaim on account of their gigantic stature, and probably reckoned as belonging
to the pre-Canaanitish inhabitants of the land, of whom it is impossible to decide
whether they were of Semitic origin or descendants of Ham (see p. 130). It is also
doubtful, whether the names found here in vv. 21, 28, and in Josh 15:14, are the
names of individuals, i.e., of chiefs of the Anakites, or the names of Anakite tribes.
The latter supposition is favoured by the circumstance, that the same names occur
even after the capture of Hebron by Caleb, or at least fifty years after the event
referred to here. With regard to Hebron, it is still further observed in v. 22b, that it
was built seven years before Zoan in Egypt. Zoan - the Tanis of the Greeks and
Romans, the San of the Arabs, which is called Jani, Jane in Coptic writings-was
situated upon the eastern side of the Tanitic arm of the Nile, not far from its mouth
(see Ges. Thes. p. 1177), and was the residence of Pharaoh in the time of Moses
(see
p. 337). The date of its erection is unknown; but Hebron was in existence as early
as Abraham's time (Gen 13:18; 23:2ff.).

Numbers 13:23-24

[Link] (1 of 2) [13/08/2004 [Link] p.m.]

 Keil and Delitzsch Commentary on the Old Testament

And they came unto the brook of Eshcol, and cut down from thence a branch
with one cluster of grapes, and they bare it between two upon a staff; and they
brought of the pomegranates, and of the figs.

The spies also came into the valley of Eshcol , where they gathered pomegranates
and figs, and also cut down a vine-branch with grapes upon it, which two persons
carried upon a pole, most likely on account of its extraordinary size. Bunches of
grapes are still met with in Palestine, weighing as much as eight, ten, or twelve
pounds, the grapes themselves being as large as our smaller plums (cf. Tobler
Denkblätter , pp. 111, 112). The grapes of Hebron are especially celebrated. To the
north of this city, on the way to Jerusalem, you pass through a valley with
vineyards on the hills on both sides, containing the largest and finest grapes in the
land, and with pomegranates, figs, and other fruits in great profusion ( Robinson ,
Palestine, i. 316, compared with i. 314 and ii.
442). This valley is supposed, and not without good ground, to be the Eshcol of
this chapter, which received its name of Eshcol (cluster of grapes), according to v.
24, from the bunch of grapes which was cut down there by the spies. This
statement, of course, applies to the Israelites, and would therefore still hold good,
even if the conjecture were a well-founded one, that this valley received its name
originally from the Eshcol mentioned in Gen 14:13,24, as the terebinth grove did
from Mamre the brother of Eshcol.

Numbers 13:25-29

<- Previous First Next ->

[Link] (2 of 2) [13/08/2004 [Link] p.m.]

 Keil and Delitzsch Commentary on the Old Testament

<- Previous First Next ->

And they returned from searching of the land after forty days.

In forty days the spies returned to the camp at Kadesh (see at Num 16:6), and
reported the great fertility of the land ( "it floweth with milk and honey," see at Ex
3:8), pointing, at the same time, to the fruit they had brought with them;
"nevertheless," they added ( kiy (OT:3588) 'epec (OT:657), "only that"), "the
people be strong that dwell in the land, and the cities are fortified, very large: and,
moreover, we saw the children of Anak there." Amalekites dwelt in the south (see
at Gen 36:12); Hittites, Jebusites, and Amorites in the mountains (see at Gen 10:15-
16); and Canaanites by the (Mediterranean) Sea and on the side of the Jordan, i.e.,
in the Arabah or Ghor (see at Gen 13:7 and 10:15-18).

Numbers 13:30

And Caleb stilled the people before Moses, and said, Let us go up at once, and
possess it; for we are well able to overcome it.

As these tidings respecting the towns and inhabitants of Canaan were of a character
to excite the people, Caleb calmed them before Moses by saying, "We will go up
and take it; for we shall overcome it." The fact that Caleb only is mentioned,
though, according to Num 14:6, Joshua also stood by his side, may be explained on
the simple ground, that at first Caleb was the only one to speak and maintain the
possibility of conquering Canaan.

Numbers 13:31

But the men that went up with him said, We be not able to go up against the
people; for they are stronger than we.

[Link] (1 of 2) [13/08/2004 [Link] p.m.]

 Keil and Delitzsch Commentary on the Old Testament

But his companions were of an opposite opinion, and declared that the people in
Canaan were stronger than the Israelites, and therefore it was impossible to go up
to it.

Numbers 13:32-33

And they brought up an evil report of the land which they had searched unto the
children of Israel, saying, The land, through which we have gone to search it, is
a land that eateth up the inhabitants thereof; and all the people that we saw in it
are men of a great stature.

Thus they spread an evil report of the land among the Israelites, by exaggerating
the difficulties of the conquest in

<- Previous First Next ->

[Link] (2 of 2) [13/08/2004 [Link] p.m.]

 Keil and Delitzsch Commentary on the Old Testament

<- Previous First Next ->

Thus they spread an evil report of the land among the Israelites, by exaggerating
the difficulties of the conquest in their unbelieving despair, and describing Canaan
as a land which "ate up its inhabitants." Their meaning certainly was not "that the
wretched inhabitants were worn out by the laborious task of cultivating it, or that
the land was pestilential on account of the inclemency of the weather, or that the
cultivation of the land was difficult, and attended with many evils," as Calvin
maintains. Their only wish was to lay stress upon the difficulties and dangers
connected with the conquest and maintenance of the land, on account of the tribes
inhabiting and surrounding it: the land was an apple of discord, because of its
fruitfulness and situation; and as the different nations strove for its possession, its
inhabitants wasted away ( Cler., Ros., O. v. Gerlach ). The people, they added, are
midowt (OT:4060) 'anªsheey (OT:376), "men of measures," i.e., of tall stature (cf.
Isa 45:14), "and there we saw the Nephilim , i.e., primeval tyrants (see at Gen 6:4),
Anak's sons, giants of Nephilim, and we seemed to ourselves and to them as small
as grasshoppers."

Numbers 14:1-4

And all the congregation lifted up their voice, and cried; and the people wept that
night.

Uproar among the People. - Vv. 1-4. This appalling description of Canaan had so
depressing an influence upon the whole congregation (cf. Deut [Link] they "made
their heart melt," i.e., threw them into utter despair), that they raised a loud cry, and
wept in the night in consequence. The whole nation murmured against Moses and
Aaron their two leaders, saying "Would that we had died in Egypt or in this
wilderness! Why will Jehovah bring us into this land, to fall by the sword, that our
wives and our children should become a prey (be made slaves by the enemy; cf.
Deut 1:27-28)? Let us rather return into Egypt! We will appoint a captain, they
said one to another, and go back to Egypt."

[Link] (1 of 2) [13/08/2004 [Link] p.m.]

 Keil and Delitzsch Commentary on the Old Testament

Numbers 14:5-10

Then Moses and Aaron fell on their faces before all the assembly of the
congregation of the children of Israel.

At this murmuring, which was growing into open rebellion, Moses and Aaron fell
upon their faces before the whole of the assembled congregation, namely, to pour
out their distress before the Lord, and move Him to interpose; that is to say, after
they had made an unsuccessful attempt, as we may supply from Deut 1:29-31, to
cheer up the people, by pointing them to the help they had thus far received from
God. "In such distress, nothing remained but to pour out their desires before God;
offering their prayer in public, however, and in the sight of all the people, in the
hope of turning their minds" ( Calvin ). Joshua and Caleb, who had gone with the
others to explore the land, also rent their clothes, as a sign of their deep distress at
the rebellious attitude of the people (see at Lev 10:6), and tried to convince them of
the goodness and glory of the land they had travelled through, and to incite them to
trust in the Lord. "If Jehovah take pleasure in us,"; they said, "He will bring us into
this land.

Only rebel not ye against Jehovah, neither fear ye that people of the land; for
they are our food i.e., we

<- Previous First Next ->

[Link] (2 of 2) [13/08/2004 [Link] p.m.]

 Keil and Delitzsch Commentary on the Old Testament

<- Previous First Next ->

can and shall swallow them up, or easily destroy them (cf. Num 22:4; 24:8; Deut
7:16; Ps 14:4). "Their shadow is departed from them, and Jehovah is with us: fear
them not!" "Their shadow" is the shelter and protection of God (cf. Ps 91; 121:5 ).
The shadow, which defends from the burning heat of the sun, was a very natural
figure in the sultry East, to describe defence from injury, a refuge from danger and
destruction (Isa 30:2). The protection of God had departed from the Canaanites,
because God had determined to destroy them when the measure of their iniquity
was full (Gen 15:16; cf. Ex 34:24; Lev 18:25; 20:23). But the excited people
resolved to stone them, when Jehovah interposed with His judgment, and His glory
appeared in the tabernacle to all the Israelites; that is to say, the majesty of God
flashed out before the eyes of the people in a light which suddenly burst forth from
the tabernacle (see at Ex 16:10).

Numbers 14:11-19

And the LORD said unto Moses, How long will this people provoke me? and how
long will it be ere they believe me, for all the signs which I have shewed among
them?

Intercession of Moses. - Vv. 11, 12. Jehovah resented the conduct of the people as
base contempt of His deity, and as utter mistrust of Him, notwithstanding all the
signs which He had wrought in the midst of the nation; and declared that He would
smite the rebellious people with pestilence, and destroy them, and make of Moses a
greater and still mightier people. This was just what He had done before, when the
rebellion took place at Sinai (Ex 32:10). But Moses, as a servant who was faithful
over the whole house of God, and therefore sought not his own honour, but the
honour of his God alone, stood in the breach on this occasion also (Ps 106:23),
with a similar intercessory prayer to that which he had presented at Horeb, except
that on this occasion he pleaded the honour of God among the heathen, and the
glorious revelation of the divine nature with which he had been favoured at Sinai,
as a motive for sparing the rebellious nation (vv. 13-19; cf. Ex 32:11-13, and 34:6-

[Link] (1 of 2) [13/08/2004 [Link] p.m.]

 Keil and Delitzsch Commentary on the Old Testament

7).

The first he expressed in these words (vv. 13ff.): "Not only have the Egyptians
heard that Thou hast brought out this people from among them with Thy might;
they have also told it to the inhabitants of this land. They (the Egyptians and the
other nations) have heard that Thou, Jehovah, art in the midst of this people; that
Thou, Jehovah, appearest eye to eye, and Thy cloud stands over them, and Thou
goest before them in a pillar of cloud by day and a pillar of fire by night. Now, if
Thou shouldst slay this people as one man, the nations which have heard the
tidings of Thee would say, Because Jehovah was not able to bring this people into
the land which He sware to them, He has slain them in the desert." In that case
God would be regarded by the heathen as powerless, and His honour would be
impaired (cf. Deut 32:27; Josh 7:9). It was for the sake of His own honour that
God, at a later time, did not allow the Israelites to perish in exile (cf. Isa 48:9,11;
52:5; Ezek 36:22-23). - wª'aamªruw (OT:559)... wªshaamª`uw (OT:8085) (vv. 13,
14), et audierunt et dixerunt; wª - wª = et-et , both-and.

The inhabitants of this land (v. 13) were not merely the Arabians, but, according to
Ex 15:14ff., the tribes dwelling in and round Arabia, the Philistines, Edomites,
Moabites, and Canaanites, to whom the tidings had been brought of the miracles of
God in Egypt and at the Dead Sea. shaamª`uw (OT:8085), in v. 14, can neither
stand for shaamª`uw (OT:8085) kiy (OT:3588) ( dixerunt ) se audivisse , nor for
shaamª`uw (OT:8085) 'asher (OT:834), qui audierunt. They are neither of them
grammatically admissible, as the relative pronoun cannot be readily omitted in
prose; and neither of them would give a really suitable meaning. It is rather a
rhetorical resumption of the

<- Previous First Next ->

[Link] (2 of 2) [13/08/2004 [Link] p.m.]

 Keil and Delitzsch Commentary on the Old Testament

<- Previous First Next ->

shaamª`uw (OT:8085) in v. 13, and the subject of the verb is not only "the
Egyptians," but also "the inhabitants of this land" who held communication with
the Egyptians, or "the nations" who had heard the report of Jehovah (v. 15), i.e., all
that God had hitherto done for and among the Israelites in Egypt, and on the
journey through the desert. "Eye to eye:" i.e., Thou hast appeared to them in the
closest proximity.

On the pillar of cloud and fire, see at Ex 13:21-22. "As one man," equivalent to
"with a stroke" (Judg 6:16). - In
vv. 17, 18, Moses adduces a second argument, viz., the word in which God
Himself had revealed His inmost being to him at Sinai (Ex 34:6-7). The words,
"Let the power be great," equivalent to "show Thyself great in power," are not to
be connected with what precedes, but with what follows; viz., "show Thyself
mighty by verifying Thy word, 'Jehovah, long-suffering and great in mercy,' etc.;
forgive, I beseech Thee, this people according to the greatness of Thy mercy, and
as Thou hast forgiven this people from Egypt even until now." naasaa' (OT:5375)
(v. 19) = `aawon (OT:5771) naasaa' (OT:5375) (v. 18).

Numbers 14:20-23

And the LORD said, I have pardoned according to thy word:

In answer to this importunate prayer, the Lord promised forgiveness, namely, the
preservation of the nation, but not the remission of the well-merited punishment.
At the rebellion at Sinai, He had postponed the punishment "till the day of His
visitation" (Ex 32:34). And that day had now arrived, as the people had carried
their continued rebellion against the Lord to the furthest extreme, even to an open
declaration of their intention to depose Moses, and return to Egypt under another
leader, and thus had filled up the measure of their sins. "Nevertheless," added the
Lord

[Link] (1 of 2) [13/08/2004 [Link] p.m.]

 Keil and Delitzsch Commentary on the Old Testament

(vv. 21, 22), "as truly as I live, and the glory of Jehovah will fill the whole earth,
all the men who have seen My glory and My miracles...shall not see the land which
I sware unto their fathers." The clause, "all the earth," etc., forms an apposition to
"as I live." Jehovah proves Himself to be living, by the fact that His glory fills the
whole earth.

But this was to take place, not, as Knobel , who mistakes the true connection of the
different clauses, erroneously supposes, by the destruction of the whole of that
generation, which would be talked of by all the world, but rather by the fact that,
notwithstanding the sin and opposition of these men, He would still carry out His
work of salvation to a glorious victory. The kiy (OT:3588) in v. 22 introduces the
substance of the oath, as in Isa 49:18; 1 Sam 14:39; 20:3; and according to the
ordinary form of an oath, 'im (OT:518) in v. 23 signifies "not." - "They have
tempted Me now ten times." Ten is used as the number of completeness and full
measure; and this answered to the actual fact, if we follow the Rabbins, and add to
the murmuring (1) at the Red Sea, Ex 14:11-12; (2) at Marah, Ex 15:23; (3) in the
wilderness of Sin, Ex 16:2; (4) at Rephidim, Ex 17:1; (5) at Horeb, Ex 32; (6) at
Tabeerah, Num 11:1; (7) at the graves of lust, Num 11:4ff.; and (8) here again at
Kadesh, the twofold rebellion of certain individuals against the commandments of
God at the giving of the manna (Ex 16:20 and 27). The despisers of God should
none of them see the promised land.

Numbers 14:24

<- Previous First Next ->

[Link] (2 of 2) [13/08/2004 [Link] p.m.]

 Keil and Delitzsch Commentary on the Old Testament

<- Previous First Next ->

But my servant Caleb, because he had another spirit with him, and hath followed
me fully, him will I bring into the land whereinto he went; and his seed shall
possess it.

But because there was another spirit in Caleb-i.e., not the unbelieving, despairing,
yet proud and rebellious spirit of the great mass of the people, but the spirit of
obedience and believing trust, so that "he followed Jehovah fully" (lit., "fulfilled to
walk behind Jehovah"), followed Him with unwavering fidelity-God would bring
him into the land into which he had gone, and his seed should possess it. (
'achareey (OT:310) milee' (OT:4390) here, and at Num 32:11-12; Deut 1:36; Josh
14:8-9; 1 Kings 11:6, is a constructio praegnans for 'achareey (OT:310) laaleket
(OT:3212) milee' (OT:4390); cf. 2 Chron 34:31.) According to the context, the
reference is not to Hebron particularly, but to Canaan generally, which God had
sworn unto the fathers (v. 23, and Deut 1:36, comp. with v.
35); although, when the land was divided, Caleb received Hebron for his
possession, because, according to his own statement in Josh 14:6ff., Moses had
sworn that he would give it to him. But this is not mentioned here; just as Joshua
also is not mentioned in this place, as he is at vv. 30 and 38, but Caleb only, who
opposed the exaggerated accounts of the other spies at the very first, and
endeavoured to quiet the excitement of the people by declaring that they were well
able to overcome the Canaanites (Num 13:30). This first revelation of God to
Moses is restricted to the main fact; the particulars are given afterwards in the
sentence of God, as intended for communication to the people (vv. 26-38).

Numbers 14:25

(Now the Amalekites and the Canaanites dwelt in the valley.) To morrow turn
you, and get you into the wilderness by the way of the Red sea.

The divine reply to the intercession of Moses terminated with a command to the

[Link] (1 of 2) [13/08/2004 [Link] p.m.]

 Keil and Delitzsch Commentary on the Old Testament

people to turn on the morrow, and go to the wilderness to the Red Sea, as the
Amalekites and Canaanites dwelt in the valley. "The Amalekites," etc.: this clause
furnishes the reason for the command which follows. On the Amalekites, see at
Gen 36:12, and Ex 17:8ff. The term Canaanites is a general epithet applied to all
the inhabitants of Canaan, instead of the Amorites mentioned in Deut 1:44, who
held the southern mountains of Canaan. "The valley" is no doubt the broad Wady
Murreh (see at Num 13:21), including a portion of the Negeb , in which the
Amalekites led a nomad life, whilst the Canaanites really dwelt upon the
mountains (v. 45), close up to the Wady Murreh.

Numbers 14:26-38

And the LORD spake unto Moses and unto Aaron, saying,

Sentence upon the Murmuring Congregation. - After the Lord had thus declared to
Moses in general terms His resolution to punish the incorrigible people, and not
suffer them to come to Canaan, He proceeded to tell him what announcement he
was to make to the people.

<- Previous First Next ->

[Link] (2 of 2) [13/08/2004 [Link] p.m.]

 Keil and Delitzsch Commentary on the Old Testament

<- Previous First Next ->

Verse 27. This announcement commences in a tone of anger, with an aposiopesis,

"How long this evil congregation" (sc., "shall I forgive it," the simplest plan being
to supply 'esaa' (OT:5375), as Rosenmüller suggests, from v. 18), "that they
murmur against Me?"

Verse 28-31. Jehovah swore that it should happen to the murmurers as they had
spoken. Their corpses should fall in the desert, even all who had been numbered,
from twenty years old and upwards: they should not see the land into which
Jehovah had lifted up His hand (see at Ex 6:8) to lead them, with the sole exception
of Caleb and Joshua. But their children, who, as they said, would be a prey (v. 3),
them Jehovah would bring, and they should learn to know the land which the
others had despised.

Verse 32-33. "As for you, your carcases will fall in this wilderness. But your
sons will be pasturing (i.e., will lead a restless shepherd life) in the desert forty
years, and bear your whoredom (i.e., endure the consequences of your faithless
apostasy; see Ex 34:16), until your corpses are finished in the desert," i.e., till you
have all passed away.

Verse 34. "After the number of the forty days that he have searched the land,
shall ye bear your iniquity , (reckoning) a day for a year, and know My turning
away from you," or tªnuw'aah (OT:8569), abalienatio , from now' (Num 32:7).

Verse 35. As surely as Jehovah had spoken this, would He do it to that evil
congregation, to those who had allied themselves against Him ( now`ad
(OT:3259), to bind themselves together, to conspire; Num 16:11; 27:3). There is no
ground whatever for questioning the correctness of the statement, that the spies had
travelled through Canaan for forty days, or regarding this as a so-called round
number-that is to say, as unhistorical. And if this number is firmly established,

[Link] (1 of 3) [13/08/2004 [Link] p.m.]

 Keil and Delitzsch Commentary on the Old Testament

there is also no ground for disputing the forty years' sojourn of the people in the
wilderness, although the period during which the rebellious generation, consisting
of those who were numbered at Sinai, died out, was actually thirty-eight years,
reaching from the autumn of the second year after their departure from Egypt to the
middle of the fortieth year of their wanderings, and terminating with the fresh
numbering (ch. 26) that was undertaken after the death of Aaron, and took place on
the first of the fifth month of the fortieth year (Num 20:23ff., compared with ch.
33:38).

Instead of these thirty-eight years, the forty years of the sojourn in the desert are
placed in connection with the forty days of the spies, because the people had
frequently fallen away from God, and been punished in consequence, even during
the year and a half before their rejection; and in this respect the year and a half
could be combined with the thirty-eight years which followed into one continuous
period, during which they bore their iniquity, to set distinctly before the minds of
the disobedient people the contrast between that peaceful dwelling in the promised
land which they had forfeited, and the restless wandering in the desert, which had
been imposed upon them as a punishment, and to impress upon them the causal
connection between sin and suffering. "Every year that passed, and was deducted
from the forty years of punishment, was a new and solemn exhortation to repent, as
it called to mind the occasion of their rejection" ( Kurtz ).

When Knobel observes, on the other hand, that "it is utterly improbable that all
who came out of Egypt (that is to say, all who were twenty years old and upward
when they came out) should have fallen in the desert, with the exception of two,
and that there should have been no men found among the Israelites when they
entered Canaan who were more than sixty years of age," the express statement, that
on the second numbering there was not a man among those that were numbered
who had been included in the numbering at Sinai, except Joshua and Caleb (Num
26:64ff.), is amply sufficient to overthrow this "improbability" as an unfounded
fancy. Nor is this statement

[Link] (2 of 3) [13/08/2004 [Link] p.m.]

Keil and Delitzsch Commentary on the Old Testament

<- Previous First Next ->

[Link] (3 of 3) [13/08/2004 [Link] p.m.]

 Keil and Delitzsch Commentary on the Old Testament

<- Previous First Next ->

rendered at all questionable by the fact, that "Aaron's son Eleazar, who entered
Canaan with Joshua" (Josh 14:1, etc.), was most likely more than twenty years old
at the time of his consecration at Sinai, as the Levites were not qualified for service
till their thirtieth or twenty-fifth year.

For, in the first place, the regulation concerning the Levites' age of service is not to
be applied without reserve to the priests also, so that we could infer from this that
the sons of Aaron must have been at least twenty-five or thirty years old when they
were consecrated; and besides this, the priests do not enter into the question at all,
for the tribe of Levi was excepted from the numbering in ch. 1, and therefore
Aaron's sons were not included among the persons numbered, who were sentenced
to die in the wilderness. Still less does it follow from Josh 24:7 and Judg 2:7,
where it is stated that, after the conquest of Canaan, there were many still alive
who had been eye-witnesses of the wonders of God in Egypt, that they must have
been more than twenty years old when they came out of Egypt; for youths from ten
to nineteen years of age would certainly have been able to remember such miracles
as these, even after the lapse of forty or fifty years.

Verse 36-38. But for the purpose of giving to the whole congregation a practical
proof of the solemnity of the divine threatening of punishment, the spies who had
induced the congregation to revolt, through their evil report concerning the
inhabitants of Canaan, were smitten by a "stroke before Jehovah," i.e., by a sudden
death, which proceeded in a visible manner from Jehovah Himself, whilst Joshua
and Caleb remained alive.

Numbers 14:39-45

And Moses told these sayings unto all the children of Israel: and the people
mourned greatly.

[Link] (1 of 2) [13/08/2004 [Link] p.m.]

 Keil and Delitzsch Commentary on the Old Testament

(cf. Deut 1:41-44). The announcement of the sentence plunged the people into deep
mourning. But instead of bending penitentially under the judgment of God, they
resolved to atone for their error, by preparing the next morning to go to the top of
the mountain and press forward into Canaan. And they would not even suffer
themselves to be dissuaded from their enterprise by the entreaties of Moses, who
denounced it as a transgression of the word of God which could not succeed, and
predicted their overthrow before their enemies, but went presumptuously ( la`alowt
(OT:5927) ya`ªpiluw (OT:6075)) up without the ark of the covenant and without
Moses, who did not depart out of the midst of the camp, and were smitten by the
Amalekites and Canaanites, who drove them back as far as Hormah. Whereas at
first they had refused to enter upon the conflict with the Canaanites, through their
unbelief in the might of the promise of God, now, through unbelief in the severity
of the judgment of God, they resolved to engage in this conflict by their own
power, and without the help of God, and to cancel the old sin of unbelieving
despair through the new sin of presumptuous self-confidence-an attempt which
could never succeed, but was sure to plunge deeper and deeper into misery.

Where "the top (or height) of the mountain" to which the Israelites advanced was,
cannot be precisely determined, as we have no minute information concerning the
nature of the ground in the neighbourhood of Kadesh. No doubt the allusion is to
some plateau on the northern border of the valley mentioned in v. 25, viz., the
Wady Murreh , which formed the southernmost spur of the mountains of the
Amorites, from which the Canaanites and Amalekites came against them, and
drove them back. In Deut 1:44, Moses mentions the Amorites instead of the
Amalekites and Canaanites, using the name in a broader sense for all the
Canaanites, and contenting himself with naming the leading foes with whom the
Amalekites who wandered about in the Negeb had allied themselves, as Bedouins
thirsting for booty. These tribes came down (v. 45) from the height of the mountain
to the lower

<- Previous First Next ->

[Link] (2 of 2) [13/08/2004 [Link] p.m.]

 Keil and Delitzsch Commentary on the Old Testament

<- Previous First Next ->

plateau or saddle, which the Israelites had ascended, and smote them and yakªtuwm
(OT:3807) (from kaatat (OT:3807), with the reduplication of the second radical
anticipated in the first: see Ewald , §193, c. ), "discomfited them, as far as
Hormah," or as Moses expressed it in Deut 1:44, They "chased you, as bees do"
(which pursue with great ferocity any one who attacks or disturbs them), "and
destroyed you in Seir, even unto Hormah." There is not sufficient ground for
altering "in Seir" into "from Seir," as the LXX, Syriac , and Vulgate have done. But
bªsee`iyr might signify "into Seir, as far as Hormah." As the Edomites had extended
their territory at that time across the Arabah towards the west, and taken possession
of a portion of the mountainous country which bounded the desert of Paran towards
the north (see at Num 34:3), the Israelites, when driven back by them, might easily
be chased into the territory of the Edomites. Hormah (i.e., the ban-place) is used
here proleptically (see at Num 21:3).

Occurrences During the Thirty-seven Years of Wandering in the

Wilderness. Ch. 15-19.
After the unhappy issue of the attempt to penetrate into Canaan, in opposition to
the will of God and the advice of Moses, the Israelites remained "many days" in
Kadesh, as the Lord did not hearken to their lamentations concerning the defeat
which they had suffered at the hands of the Canaanites and Amalekites. Then they
turned, and took their journey, as the Lord had commanded (Num 14:25), into the
wilderness, in the direction towards the Red Sea (Deut 1:45; 2:1); and in the first
month of the fortieth year they came again into the desert of Zin, to Kadesh (Num
20:1). All that we know respecting this journeying from Kadesh into the wilderness
in the direction towards the Red Sea, and up to the time of their return to the desert
of Zin, is limited to a number of names of places of encampment given in the list of
journeying stages in Num 33:19-30, out of which, as the situation of the majority of
them is altogether unknown, or at all events has not yet been determined, no
connected account of the journeys of Israel during this interval of thirty-seven years
can possibly be drawn.

[Link] (1 of 2) [13/08/2004 [Link] p.m.]

 Keil and Delitzsch Commentary on the Old Testament

The most important event related in connection with this period is the rebellion of
the company of Korah against Moses and Aaron, and the re-establishment of the
Aaronic priesthood and confirmation of their rights, which this occasioned (chs. 16-
18). This rebellion probably occurred in the first portion of the period in question.
In addition to this there are only a few laws recorded, which were issued during this
long time of punishment, and furnished a practical proof of the continuance of the
covenant which the Lord had made with the nation of Israel at Sinai. There was
nothing more to record in connection with these thirty-seven years, which formed
the second stage in the guidance of Israel through the desert. For, as Baumgarten
has well observed, "the fighting men of Israel had fallen under the judgment of
Jehovah, and the sacred history, therefore, was no longer concerned with them;
whilst the youth, in whom the life and hope of Israel were preserved, had as yet no
history at all." Consequently we have no reason to complain, as Ewald does (
Gesch. ii. pp. 241, 242), that "the great interval of forty years remains a perfect
void;" and still less occasion to dispose of the gap, as this scholar has done, by
supposing that the last historian left out a great deal from the history of the forty
years' wanderings. The supposed "void" was completely filled up by the gradual
dying out of the generation which had been rejected by God.

Various Laws of Sacrifice. Punishment of a Sabbath-breaker.

Command to Wear Tassels upon the Clothes. Ch. 15.

Numbers 15:1-31

<- Previous First Next ->

[Link] (2 of 2) [13/08/2004 [Link] p.m.]

 Keil and Delitzsch Commentary on the Old Testament

<- Previous First Next ->

And the LORD spake unto Moses, saying,

Verse 1-2. Regulations concerning Sacrifices. - Vv. 1-16. For the purpose of
reviving the hopes of the new generation that was growing up, and directing their
minds to the promised land, during the mournful and barren time when judgment
was being executed upon the race that had been condemned, Jehovah
communicated various laws through Moses concerning the presentation of
sacrifices in the land that He would give them (vv. 1 and 2), whereby the former
laws of sacrifice were supplemented and completed. The first of these laws had
reference to the connection between meat-offerings and drink-offerings on the one
hand, and burnt-offerings and slain-offerings on the other.

Verse 3-5. In the land of Canaan, every burnt and slain-offering, whether prepared
in fulfilment of a vow, or spontaneously, or on feast-days (cf. Lev 7:16; 22:18, and
23:38), was to be associated with a meat-offering of fine flour mixed with oil, and
a drink-offering of wine-the quantity to be regulated according to the kind of
animal that was slain in sacrifice. (See Lev 23:18, where this connection is already
mentioned in the case of the festal sacrifices.) For a lamb ( kebes (OT:3532), i.e.,
either sheep or goat, cf. v. 11), they were to take the tenth of an ephah of fine flour,
mixed with the quarter of a hin of oil and the quarter of a hin of wine, as a drink-
offering. In v. 5, the construction changes from the third to the second person.
`aasaah (OT:6213), to prepare, as in Ex 29:38.

Verse 6-7. For a ram, they were to take two tenths of fine flour, with the third of a
hin of oil and the third of a hin of wine.

Verse 8-10. For an ox, three tenths of fine flour, with half a hin of oil and half a hin
of wine. The hiqªriyb (OT:7126) (3rd person) in v. 9, between ta`aseh (OT:6213)
in v. 8, and taqªriyb (OT:7126) in v. 10, is certainly striking and unusual, but no so

[Link] (1 of 2) [13/08/2004 [Link] p.m.]

 Keil and Delitzsch Commentary on the Old Testament

offensive as to render it necessary to alter it into wªtaqªriyb (OT:7126).

Verse 11-12. The quantities mentioned were to be offered with every ox, or ram, or
lamb, of either sheep or goat, and therefore the number of the appointed quantities
of meat and drink-offerings was to correspond to the number of sacrificial animals.

Verse 13-14. These rules were to apply not only to the sacrifices of those that were
born in Israel, but also to those of the strangers living among them. By "these
things," in v. 13, we are to understand the meat and drink-offerings already
appointed.

Verse 15-25. "As for the assembly, there shall be one law for the Israelite and
the stranger,...an eternal ordinance...before Jehovah." haqaahaal (OT:6951),
which is construed absolutely, refers to the assembling of the nation before
Jehovah, or to the congregation viewed in its attitude with regard to God.

A second law (vv. 17-21) appoints, on the ground of the general regulations in Ex
22:28 and 23:19, the presentation of a heave-offering from the bread which they
would eat in the land of Canaan, viz., a first-fruit of groat-meal ( `ariycot ree'shiyt
) baked as cake ( chalaah (OT:2471)). Arisoth , which is only used in connection
with the gift of first-fruits, in Ezek 44:30; Neh 10:38, and the passage before us,
signifies most probably groats, or meal coarsely bruised, like the talmudical
`arªcan , contusum, mola, far , and indeed far hordei. This cake of the groats of
first-fruits they were to offer "as a heave-offering of the threshing-floor," i.e., as a
heave-offering of the bruised corn, in the same manner as this (therefore, in
addition to it, and along with it); and that "according to your generations" (see Ex
12:14), that is to say, for all time, to consecrate a gift of first-fruits to the Lord, not
only

<- Previous First Next ->

[Link] (2 of 2) [13/08/2004 [Link] p.m.]

 Keil and Delitzsch Commentary on the Old Testament

<- Previous First Next ->

of the grains of corn, but also of the bread made from the corn, and "to cause a
blessing to rest upon his house" (Ezek 44:30). Like all the gifts of first-fruits, this
cake also fell to the portion of the priests (see Ezek. and Neh. ut sup. ).

To these there are added, in vv. 22, 31, laws relating to sin-offerings , the first of
which, in vv. 22-26, is distinguished from the case referred to in Lev 4:13-21, by
the fact that the sin is not described here, as it is there, as "doing one of the
commandments of Jehovah which ought not to be done," but as "not doing all that
Jehovah had spoken through Moses." Consequently, the allusion here is not to sins
of commission, but to sins of omission, not following the law of God, "even (as is
afterwards explained in v. 23) all that the Lord hath commanded you by the hand
of Moses from the day that the Lord hath commanded, and thenceforward
according to your generations," i.e., since the first beginning of the giving of the
law, and during the whole of the time following ( Knobel ). These words
apparently point to a complete falling away of the congregation from the whole of
the law. Only the further stipulation in v. 24, "if it occur away from the eyes of the
congregation through error" (in oversight), cannot be easily reconciled with this,
as it seems hardly conceivable that an apostasy from the entire law should have
remained hidden from the congregation.

This "not doing all the commandments of Jehovah," of which the congregation is
supposed to incur the guilt without perceiving it, might consist either in the fact
that, in particular instances, whether from oversight or negligence, the whole
congregation omitted to fulfil the commandments of God, i.e., certain precepts of
the law, sc., in the fact that they neglected the true and proper fulfilment of the
whole law, either, as Outram supposes, "by retaining to a certain extent the
national rites, and following the worship of the true God, and yet at the same time
acting unconsciously in opposition to the law, through having been led astray by
some common errors;" or by allowing the evil example of godless rulers to seduce
them to neglect their religious duties, or to adopt and join in certain customs and
usages of the heathen, which appeared to be reconcilable with the law of Jehovah,

[Link] (1 of 2) [13/08/2004 [Link] p.m.]

 Keil and Delitzsch Commentary on the Old Testament

though they really led to contempt and neglect of the commandments of the Lord.

(Note: Maimonides (see Outram, ex veterum sententia ) understands this law as relating to extraneous
worship; and Outram himself refers to the times of the wicked kings, "when the people neglected their
hereditary rites, and, forgetting the sacred laws, fell by a common sin into the observance of the
religious rites of other nations." Undoubtedly, we have historical ground in 2 Chron 29:21ff., and Ezra
8:35, for this interpretation of our law, but further allusions are not excluded in consequence. We
cannot agree with Baumgarten , therefore, in restricting the difference between Lev 4:13ff. and the
passage before us to the fact, that the former supposes the transgression of one particular
commandment on the part of the whole congregation, whilst the latter (vv. 22, 23) refers to a continued
lawless condition on the part of Israel.)

But as a disregard or neglect of the commandments of God had to be expiated, a

burnt-offering was to be added to the sin-offering, that the separation of the
congregation from the Lord, which had arisen from the sin of omission, might be
entirely removed. The apodosis commences with wªhaayaah (OT:1961) in v. 24,
but is interrupted by m`y' 'im (OT:518), and resumed again with wª`aasuw
(OT:6213), "it shall be, if...the whole congregation shall prepare," etc. The burnt-
offering, being the principal sacrifice, is mentioned as usual before the sin-offering,
although, when presented, it followed the latter, on account of its being necessary
that the sin should be expiated before the congregation could sanctify its life and
efforts afresh to the Lord in the burnt-offering. "One kid of the goats:" see Lev
4:23. kamishªpaaT (OT:4941) (as in Lev 5:10; 9:16, etc.) refers to the right
established in vv. 8, 9, concerning the combination of the meat and drink-offering
with the burnt-offering. The sin-offering was to be treated according to the rule laid
down in Lev 4:14ff.

Verse 26. This law was to apply not only to the children of Israel, but also to the
stranger among them, "for (sc., it has happened) to the whole nation in mistake."
As the sin extended to the whole nation, in which the foreigners

<- Previous First Next ->

[Link] (2 of 2) [13/08/2004 [Link] p.m.]

 Keil and Delitzsch Commentary on the Old Testament

<- Previous First Next ->

were also included, the atonement was also to apply to the whole.

Verse 27-29. In the same way, again, there was one law for the native and the
stranger, in relation to sins of omission on the part of single individuals. The law
laid doon in Lev 5:6 (cf. Lev 4:27ff.) for the Israelites, is repeated here in vv. 27,
28, and in v. 28 it is raised into general validity for foreigners also. In v. 29,
haa'ezªraach (OT:249) is written absolutely for laa'ezªraach (OT:249).

Verse 30-31. But it was only sins committed by mistake (see at Lev 4:2) that could
be expiated by sin-offerings. Whoever, on the other hand, whether a native or a
foreigner, committed a sin "with a high hand," - i.e., so that he raised his hand, as it
were, against Jehovah, or acted in open rebellion against Him-blasphemed God,
and was to be cut off (see Gen 17:14); for he had despised the word of Jehovah,
and broken His commandment, and was to atone for it with his life. baah (OT:871a
) `awonaah (OT:5771), "its crime upon it;" i.e., it shall come upon such a soul in
the punishment which it shall endure.

Numbers 15:32-36

And while the children of Israel were in the wilderness, they found a man that
gathered sticks upon the sabbath day.

The History of the Sabbath-Breaker is no doubt inserted here as a practical

illustration of sinning "with a high hand." It shows, too, at the same time, how the
nation, as a whole, was impressed with the inviolable sanctity of the Lord's day.
From the words with which it is introduced, "and the children of Israel were in the
wilderness," all that can be gathered is, that the occurrence took place at the time
when Israel was condemned to wander about in the wilderness for forty years.
They found a man gathering sticks in the desert on the Sabbath, and brought him as

[Link] (1 of 2) [13/08/2004 [Link] p.m.]

 Keil and Delitzsch Commentary on the Old Testament

an open transgressor of the law of the Sabbath before Moses and Aaron and the
whole congregation, i.e., the college of elders, as the judicial authorities of the
congregation (Ex 18:25ff.). They kept him in custody, like the blasphemer in Lev
24:12, because it had not yet been determined what was to be done to him. It is true
that it had already been laid down in Ex 31:14-15, and 35:2, that any breach of the
law of the Sabbath should be punished by death and extermination, but the mode
had not yet been prescribed. This was done now, and Jehovah commanded stoning
(see Lev 20:2), which was executed upon the criminal without delay.

Numbers 15:37-38

And the LORD spake unto Moses, saying,

(cf. Deut 22:12). The command to wear Tassels on the Edge of the Upper Garment
appears to have been occasioned by the incident just described. The Israelites were
to wear tsiytsit (OT:6734), tassels, on the wings of their upper garments, or,
according to Deut 22:12, at the four corners of the upper garment. kªcuwt
(OT:3682), the covering in which a man wraps himself, synonymous with beged
(OT:899), was the upper garment, consisting of a four-cornered cloth or piece of
stuff, which was thrown over the body-coat (see my Bibl. Archäol. ii. pp. 36,

<- Previous First Next ->

[Link] (2 of 2) [13/08/2004 [Link] p.m.]

 Keil and Delitzsch Commentary on the Old Testament

<- Previous First Next ->

37), and is not to be referred, as Schultz supposes, to the bed-coverings also,

although this garment was actually used as a counterpane by the poor (see Ex
22:25-26). "And upon the tassel of the wing they shall put a string of hyacinth-
blue," namely, to fasten the tassel to the edge of the garment. tsiytsit (OT:6734) (
fem. , from tsiyts (OT:6731), the glittering, the bloom or flower) signifies
something flowery or bloom-like, and is used in Ezek 8:3 for a lock of hair; here it
is applied to a tassel, as being made of twisted threads: LXX kra'speda (NT:2899);
Matt 23:5, "borders." The size of these tassels is not prescribed. The Pharisees
liked to make them large, to exhibit openly their punctilious fulfilment of the law.
For the Rabbinical directions how to make them, see Carpzov. apparat. pp. 197ff.;
and Bodenschatz, kirchliche Verfassung der heutigen Juden , iv. pp. 11ff.

Numbers 15:39-41

And it shall be unto you for a fringe, that ye may look upon it, and remember all
the commandments of the LORD, and do them; and that ye seek not after your
own heart and your own eyes, after which ye use to go a whoring:

"And it shall be to you for a tassel," i.e., the fastening of the tassel with the dark
blue thread to the corners of your garments shall be to you a tassel, "that ye, when
ye see it, may remember all the commandments of Jehovah, and do them; and ye
shall not stray after your hearts and your eyes, after which ye go a whoring." The
zizith on the sky-blue thread was to serve as a memorial sign to the Israelites, to
remind them of the commandments of God, that they might have them constantly
before their eyes and follow them, and not direct their heart and eyes to the things
of this world, which turn away from the word of God, and lead astray to idolatry
(cf. Prov 4:25-26). Another reason for these instructions, as is afterwards added in
v. 40, was to remind Israel of all the commandments of the Lord, that they might
do them and be holy to their God, and sanctify their daily life to Him who had
brought them out of Egypt, to be their God, i.e., to show Himself as God to them.

[Link] (1 of 2) [13/08/2004 [Link] p.m.]

 Keil and Delitzsch Commentary on the Old Testament

Rebellion of Korah's Company. 16:1-40(17:5).

The sedition of Korah and his company, with the renewed sanction of the Aaronic
priesthood on the part of God which it occasioned, is the only important occurrence
recorded in connection with the thirty-seven years' wandering in the wilderness.
The time and place are not recorded. The fact that the departure from Kadesh is not
mentioned in ch. 14, whilst, according to Deut 1:46, Israel remained there many
days, is not sufficient to warrant the conclusion that it took place in Kadesh. The
departure from Kadesh is not mentioned even after the rebellion of Korah; and yet
we read, in Num 20:1, that the whole congregation came again into the desert of
Zin to kadesh at the beginning of the fortieth year, and therefore must previously
have gone away. All that can be laid down as probable is, that it occurred in one of
the earliest of the thirty-seven years of punishment, though we have no firm ground
even for this conjecture.

Numbers 16:1-3

Now Korah, the son of Izhar, the son of Kohath, the son of Levi, and Dathan
and Abiram, the sons of

<- Previous First Next ->

[Link] (2 of 2) [13/08/2004 [Link] p.m.]

 Keil and Delitzsch Commentary on the Old Testament

<- Previous First Next ->

Now Korah, the son of Izhar, the son of Kohath, the son of Levi, and Dathan
and Abiram, the sons of Eliab, and On, the son of Peleth, sons of Reuben, took
men:

Verse 1-2. The authors of the rebellion were Korah the Levite, a descendant of the
Kohathite Izhar, who was a brother of Amram, an ancestor (not the father) of
Aaron and Moses (see at Ex 6:18), and three Reubenites, viz., Dathan and Abiram ,
sons of Eliab, of the Reubenitish family of Pallu (Num 26:8-9), and On , the son of
Peleth, a Reubenite, not mentioned again. The last of these ( On ) is not referred to
again in the further course of this event, either because he played altogether a
subordinate part in the affair, or because he had drawn back before the conspiracy
came to a head. The persons named took ( yiqach (OT:3947)), i.e., gained over to
their plan, or persuaded to join them, 250 distinguished men of the other tribes, and
rose up with them against Moses and Aaron. On the construction wayaaquwmuw
(OT:6965)... wayiqach (OT:3947) (vv. 1 and 2), Gesenius correctly observes in his
Thesaurus (p. 760), "There is an anakolouthon rather than an ellipsis, and not
merely a copyist's error, in these words, 'and Korah,...and Dathan and Abiram,
took and rose up against Moses with 250 men,' for they took 250 men, and rose up
with them against Moses," etc.

He also points to the analogous construction in 2 Sam 18:18. Consequently there is

no necessity either to force a meaning upon laaqach (OT:3947), which is
altogether foreign to it, or to attempt an emendation of the text. "They rose up
before Moses:" this does not mean, "they stood up in front of his tent," as Knobel
explains it, for the purpose of bringing v. 2 into contradiction with v. 3, but they
created an uproar before his eyes; and with this the expression in v. 3, "and they
gathered themselves together against Moses and Aaron," may be very simply and
easily combined. The 250 men of the children of Israel who joined the rebels no
doubt belonged to the other tribes, as is indirectly implied in the statement in Num
27:3, that Zelophehad the Manassite was not in the company of Korah. These men
were "princes of the congregation," i.e., heads of the tribes, or of large divisions of
[Link] (1 of 3) [13/08/2004 [Link] p.m.]
 Keil and Delitzsch Commentary on the Old Testament

the tribes, "called men of the congregation," i.e., members of the council of the
nation which administered the affairs of the congregation (cf. 1:16), "men of name"
( sheem (OT:8034) 'anªsheey (OT:376), see Gen 6:4 ).

The leader was Korah; and the rebels are called in consequence "Korah's
company" (vv. 5, 6; Num 26:9; 27:3). He laid claim to the high-priesthood, or at
least to an equality with Aaron (v. 17). Among his associates were the Reubenites,
Dathan and Abiram, who, no doubt, were unable to get over the fact that the
birthright had been taken away from their ancestor, and with it the headship of the
house of Israel (i.e., of the whole nation). Apparently their present intention was to
seize upon the government of the nation under a self-elected high priest, and to
force Moses and Aaron out of the post assigned to them by God-that is to say, to
overthrow the constitution which God had given to His people.

Verse 3. rab-laakem , "enough for you!" ( rab (OT:7227), as in Gen 45:28), they
said to Moses and Aaron, i.e., "let the past suffice you" ( Knobel ); ye have held the
priesthood and the government quite long enough. It must now come to an end;
"for the whole congregation, all of them (i.e., all the members of the nation), are
holy, and Jehovah is in the midst of them. Wherefore lift ye yourselves above the
congregation of Jehovah?" The distinction between `eedaah (OT:5712) and
qaahaal (OT:6951) is the following: `eedaah (OT:5712) signifies conventus , the
congregation according to its natural organization; qhl signifies convocatio , the
congregation according to its divine calling and theocratic purpose. The use of the
two words in the same verse upsets the theory that yªhaaowh (OT:3068) `adat
(OT:5712) belongs to the style of the original work, and yªhaaowh (OT:3068)
qªhal (OT:6951) to that of the Jehovist. The rebels appeal to the calling of all Israel
to be the holy nation of Jehovah (Ex 19:5-6), and infer from this the equal right of
all to hold the priesthood, "leaving entirely out of sight, as blind selfishness is
accustomed to do, the transition of the universal priesthood into the special
mediatorial office and priesthood of Moses and Aaron, which had their foundation
in fact" ( Baumgarten ); or altogether overlooking the fact that God Himself had
chosen Moses and Aaron, and appointed them as mediators between Himself and

[Link] (2 of 3) [13/08/2004 [Link] p.m.]

 Keil and Delitzsch Commentary on the Old Testament

the congregation, to educate the sinful nation into a holy nation, and train it to the
fulfilment of its proper vocation. The

<- Previous First Next ->

[Link] (3 of 3) [13/08/2004 [Link] p.m.]

 Keil and Delitzsch Commentary on the Old Testament

<- Previous First Next ->

rebels, on the contrary, thought that they were holy already, because God had
called them to be a holy nation, and in their carnal self-righteousness forgot the
condition attached to their calling, "If ye will obey My voice indeed, and keep My
covenant" (Ex 19:5).

Numbers 16:4-5

And when Moses heard it, he fell upon his face:

When Moses heard these words of the rebels, he fell upon his face, to complain of
the matter to the Lord, as in Num 14:5. He then said to Korah and his company,
"To-morrow Jehovah will show who is His and holy, and will let him come near to
Him, and he whom He chooseth will draw near to Him." The meaning of low
(OT:3807a ) 'asher (OT:834) is evident from bow (OT:871a ) yibªchar (OT:977)
'asher (OT:834). He is Jehovah's, whom He chooses, so that He belongs to Him
with his whole life. The reference is to the priestly rank, to which God had chosen
Aaron and his sons out of the whole nation, and sanctified them by a special
consecration (Ex 28:1; 29:1; Lev 8:12,30), and by which they became the persons
"standing near to Him" (Lev 10:3), and were qualified to appear before Him in the
sanctuary, and present to Him the sacrifices of the nation.

Numbers 16:6-14

This do; Take you censers, Korah, and all his company;

To leave the decision of this to the Lord, Korah and his company, who laid claim
to this prerogative, were to take censers, and bring lighted incense before Jehovah.
He whom the Lord should choose was to be the sanctified one. This was to satisfy
them. With the expression rab-laakem in v. 7, Moses gives the rebels back their
own words in
[Link] (1 of 2) [13/08/2004 [Link] p.m.]
 Keil and Delitzsch Commentary on the Old Testament

v. 3. The divine decision was connected with the offering of incense, because this
was the holiest function of the priestly service, which brought the priest into the
immediate presence of God, and in connection with which Jehovah had already
shown to the whole congregation how He sanctified Himself, by a penal judgment
on those who took this office upon themselves without a divine call (Lev 10:1-3).
Vv. 8ff. He then set before them the wickedness of their enterprise, to lead them to
search themselves, and avert the judgment which threatened them.

In doing this, he made a distinction between Korah the Levite, and Dathan and
Abiram the Reubenites, according to the difference in the motives which prompted
their rebellion, and the claims which they asserted. He first of all
(vv. 8-11) reminded Korah the Levite of the way in which God had distinguished
his tribe, by separating the Levites from the rest of the congregation, to attend to
the service of the sanctuary (Num 3:5ff., 8:6ff.), and asked him, "Is this too little
for you? The God of Israel (this epithet is used emphatically for Jehovah) has
brought thee near to Himself, and all thy brethren the sons of Levi with thee, and
ye strive after the priesthood also. Therefore...thou and thy company, who have
leagued themselves against Jehovah:...and Aaron, what is he, that he murmur
against him?" These last words, as an expression of wrath, are elliptical, or rather
an aposiopesis , and are to be filled up in the following manner: "Therefore,...as
Jehovah has distinguished you in this manner,...what do ye want? Ye rebel against
Jehovah! why do ye murmur against Aaron? He has not seized upon

<- Previous First Next ->

[Link] (2 of 2) [13/08/2004 [Link] p.m.]

 Keil and Delitzsch Commentary on the Old Testament

<- Previous First Next ->

the priesthood of his own accord, but Jehovah has called him to it, and he is only a
feeble servant of God" (cf. Ex 16:7).

Moses then (vv. 12-14) sent for Dathan and Abiram, who, as is tacitly assumed,
had gone back to their tents during the warning given to Korah. But they replied,
"We shall not come up." `aalaah (OT:5927), to go up, is used either with reference
to the tabernacle, as being in a spiritual sense the culminating point of the entire
camp, or with reference to appearance before Moses, the head and ruler of the
nation. "Is it too little that thou hast brought us out of a land flowing with milk and
honey (they apply this expression in bitter irony to Egypt), to kill us in the
wilderness (deliver us up to death), that thou wilt be always playing the lord over
us?" The idea of continuance, which is implied in the inf. abs. , hisªtaareer
(OT:8323), from saarar (OT:8323), to exalt one's self as ruler ( Ges. §131, 36), is
here still further intensified by gam (OT:1571). "Moreover, thou hast not brought
us into a land flowing with milk and honey, or given us fields and vineyards for an
inheritance (i.e., thou hast not kept thy promise, Ex 4:30 compared with Num
3:7ff.). Wilt thou put out the eyes of these people?" i.e., wilt thou blind them as to
thy doings and designs?

Numbers 16:15

And Moses was very wroth, and said unto the LORD, Respect not thou their
offering: I have not taken one ass from them, neither have I hurt one of them.

Moses was so disturbed by these scornful reproaches, that he entreated the Lord,
with an assertion of his own unselfishness, not to have respect to their gift, i.e., not
to accept the sacrifice which they should bring (cf. Gen 4:4). "I have not taken one
ass from them, nor done harm to one of them," i.e., I have not treated them as a
ruler, who demands tribute of his subjects, and oppresses them (cf. 1 Sam 12:3).

Numbers 16:16-17

[Link] (1 of 2) [13/08/2004 [Link] p.m.]

 Keil and Delitzsch Commentary on the Old Testament

And Moses said unto Korah, Be thou and all thy company before the LORD,
thou, and they, and Aaron, to morrow:

In conclusion, he summoned Korah and his associates once more, to present

themselves the following day before Jehovah with censers and incense.

Numbers 16:18-22

And they took every man his censer, and put fire in them, and laid incense
thereon, and stood in the

<- Previous First Next ->

[Link] (2 of 2) [13/08/2004 [Link] p.m.]

 Keil and Delitzsch Commentary on the Old Testament

<- Previous First Next ->

door of the tabernacle of the congregation with Moses and Aaron.

The next day the rebels presented themselves with censers before the tabernacle,
along with Moses and Aaron; and the whole congregation also assembled there at
the instigation of Korah. The Lord then interposed in judgment. Appearing in His
glory to the whole congregation (just as in Num 14:10), He said to Moses and
Aaron, "Separate yourselves from this congregation; I will destroy them in a
moment." By assembling in front of the tabernacle, the whole congregation had
made common cause with the rebels. God threatened them, therefore, with sudden
destruction. But the two men of God, who ere so despised by the rebellious faction,
fell on their faces, interceding with God, and praying, "God, Thou God of the
spirits of all flesh! this one man (i.e., Korah, the author of the conspiracy) hath
sinned, and wilt Thou be wrathful with all the congregation?" i.e., let Thine anger
fall upon the whole congregation. The Creator and Preserver of all beings, who has
given and still gives life and breath to all flesh, is God of the spirits of all flesh. As
the author of the spirit of life in all perishable flesh, God cannot destroy His own
creatures in wrath; this would be opposed to His own paternal love and mercy. In
this epithet, as applied to God, therefore, Moses appeals "to the universal blessing
of creation. It is of little consequence whether these words are to be understood as
relating to all the animal kingdom, or to the human race alone; because Moses
simply prayed, that as God was the creator and architect of the world, He would
not destroy the men whom He had created, but rather have mercy upon the works
of His own hands" ( Calvin ). The intercession of the prophet Isaiah, in Isa 64:8, is
similar to this, though that is founded upon the special relation in which God stood
to Israel.

Numbers 16:23-26

And the LORD spake unto Moses, saying,

[Link] (1 of 2) [13/08/2004 [Link] p.m.]

 Keil and Delitzsch Commentary on the Old Testament

Jehovah then instructed Moses, that the congregation was to remove away (
`aalaah (OT:5927), to get up and away) from about the dwelling-place of Korah,
Dathan, and Abiram; and, as we may supply from the context, the congregation fell
back from Korah's tent, whilst Dathan and Abiram, possibly at the very first
appearance of the divine glory, drew back into their tents. Moses therefore betook
himself to the tents of Dathan and Abiram, with the elders following him, and there
also commanded the congregation to depart from the tents of these wicked men,
and not touch anything they possessed, that they might not be swept away in all
their sins.

Numbers 16:27-30

So they gat up from the tabernacle of Korah, Dathan, and Abiram, on every side:
and Dathan and Abiram came out, and stood in the door of their tents, and their
wives, and their sons, and their little children.

The congregation obeyed; but Dathan and Abiram came and placed themselves in
front of the tents, along with their wives and children, to see what Moses would do.
Moses then announced the sentence: "By this shall he know that Jehovah hath
sent me to do all these works, that not out of my own heart (i.e., that I do not act
of my own accord). If these men die like all men (i.e., if these wicked men die a
natural death like other men),

<- Previous First Next ->

[Link] (2 of 2) [13/08/2004 [Link] p.m.]

 Keil and Delitzsch Commentary on the Old Testament

<- Previous First Next ->

and the oversight of all men take place over them (i.e., if the same providence
watches over them as over all other men, and preserves them from sudden death),
Jehovah hath not sent me. But if Jehovah create a creation ( bªriy'aah (OT:1278)
baaraa' (OT:1254), i.e., work an extraordinary miracle), and the earth open its
mouth and swallow them up, with all that belongs to them, so that they go down
alive into hell, ye shall perceive that these men have despised Jehovah."

Numbers 16:31-33

And it came to pass, as he had made an end of speaking all these words, that the
ground clave asunder that was under them:

And immediately the earth clave asunder, and swallowed them up, with their
families and all their possessions, and closed above them, so that they perished
without a trace from the congregation. 'otaam (OT:853) refers to the three
ringleaders. "Their houses;" i.e., their families, not their tents, as in Num 18:31; Ex
12:3. "All the men belonging to Korah" were his servants; for, according to Num
26:11, his sons did not perish with him, but perpetuated his family (Num 26:58), to
which the celebrated Korahite singers of David's time belonged (1 Chron 6:18-22;
9:19).

Numbers 16:34

And all Israel that were round about them fled at the cry of them: for they said,
Lest the earth swallow us up also.

This fearful destruction of the ringleaders, through which Jehovah glorified Moses
afresh as His servant in a miraculous way, filled all the Israelites round about with
such terror, that they fled lªqolaam (OT:6963), "at their noise," i.e., at the

[Link] (1 of 2) [13/08/2004 [Link] p.m.]

 Keil and Delitzsch Commentary on the Old Testament

commotion with which the wicked men went down into the abyss which opened
beneath their feet, lest , as they said, the earth should swallow them up also.

Numbers 16:35

And there came out a fire from the LORD, and consumed the two hundred and
fifty men that offered incense.

The other 250 rebels, who were probably still in front of the tabernacle, were then
destroyed by fire which proceeded from Jehovah, as Nadab and Abihu had been
before (Lev 10:2).

<- Previous First Next ->

[Link] (2 of 2) [13/08/2004 [Link] p.m.]

 Keil and Delitzsch Commentary on the Old Testament

<- Previous First Next ->

(Numbers 16:36-50 corresponds to Numbers 17:1-15 in the Hebrew; not

followed here in this case.)

Numbers 16:36-40

And the LORD spake unto Moses, saying,

ch.16:36-40 (or Numbers 17:1-5). After the destruction of the sinners, the Lord
commanded that Eleazar should take up the censers "from between the burning,"
i.e., from the midst of the men that had been burned, and scatter the fire (the
burning coals in the pans) far away, that it might not be used any more. "For they
(the censers) are holy;" that is to say, they had become holy through being brought
before Jehovah (v. 39); and therefore, when the men who brought them were slain,
they fell as banned articles to the Lord (Lev 27:28). "The censers of these sinners
against their souls" (i.e., the men who have forfeited their lives through their sin:
cf. Prov 20:2; Hab 2:10), "let them make into broad plates for a covering to the
altar" (of burnt-offering). Through this application of them they became a sign, or,
according to v. 39, a memorial to all who drew near to the sanctuary, which was to
remind them continually of this judgment of God, and warn the congregation of
grasping at the priestly prerogatives. The words, yihªyeh (OT:1961) wªlo'
(OT:3808), in v. 40, introduce the predicate in the form of an apodosis to the
subject, which is written absolutely, and consists of an entire sentence. haayaah
(OT:1961) with kª signifies, "to experience the same fate as" another.

Punishment of the Murmuring Congregation, and Confirmation of the

High-priesthood of Aaron. Ch. 16:41-17:13 (or ch. 17:6-28).
(Numbers 16:36-50; 17:1-13 corresponds to Numbers 17:1-28 in the Hebrew;
not followed here in this case.)

[Link] (1 of 2) [13/08/2004 [Link] p.m.]

 Keil and Delitzsch Commentary on the Old Testament

Numbers 16:41-50

But on the morrow all the congregation of the children of Israel murmured
against Moses and against Aaron, saying, Ye have killed the people of the
LORD.

Punishment of the Murmuring Congregation. - The judgment upon the company of

Korah had filled the people round about with terror and dismay, but it had
produced no change of heart in the congregation that had risen up against its
leaders. The next morning the whole congregation began to murmur against Moses
and Aaron, and to charge them with having slain the people of Jehovah. They
referred to Korah and his company, but especially to the 250 chiefs of renown,
whom they regarded as the kernel of the nation, and called "the people of
Jehovah." They would have made Moses and Aaron responsible for their death,
because in their opinion it was they who had brought the judgment upon their
leaders; whereas it was through the intercession of Moses (Num 16:22) that the
whole congregation was saved from the destruction which threatened it. To such an
extent does the folly of the proud heart of man proceed, and the obduracy of a race
already exposed to the judgment of God.

<- Previous First Next ->

[Link] (2 of 2) [13/08/2004 [Link] p.m.]

 Keil and Delitzsch Commentary on the Old Testament

<- Previous First Next ->

Verse 42. When the congregation assembled together, Moses and Aaron turned to
the tabernacle, and saw how the cloud covered it, and the glory of the Lord
appeared. As the cloud rested continually above the tabernacle during the time of
encampment (Num 9:18ff.; Ex 40:38), we must suppose that at this time the cloud
covered it in a fuller and much more conspicuous sense, just as it had done when
the tabernacle was first erected (Num 9:15; Ex 40:34), and that at the same time the
glory of God burst forth from the dark cloud in a miraculous splendour.

Verse 43-50. Thereupon they both went into the court of ( pªneey (OT:6440) 'el
(OT:413), as in Lev 9:5) the tabernacle, and God commanded them to rise up (
heeromuw (OT:7426), Niphal of raamam (OT:7426) = ruwm (OT:7312); see Ges.
§65, Anm. 5) out of this congregation, which He would immediately destroy. But
they fell upon their faces in prayer, as in Num 16:21-22. This time, however, they
could not avert the bursting forth of the wrathful judgment, as they had done the
day before (Num 16:22). The plague had already commenced, when Moses told
Aaron to take the censer quickly into the midst of the congregation, with coals and
incense ( howleekª (OT:1980), imper. Hiph. ), to make expiation for it with an
incense-offering. And when this was done, and Aaron placed himself between the
dead and the living, the plague, which had already destroyed 14,700 men, was
stayed. The plague consisted apparently of a sudden death, as in the case of a
pestilence raging with extreme violence, though we cannot regard it as an actual
pestilence.

The means resorted to by Moses to stay the plague showed afresh how the faithful
servant of God bore the rescue of his people upon his heart. All the motives which
he had hitherto pleaded, in his repeated intercession that this evil congregation
might be spared, were now exhausted. He could not stake his life for the nation, as
at Horeb (Ex 32:32), for the nation had rejected him. He could no longer appeal to
the honour of Jehovah among the heathen, seeing that the Lord, even when
sentencing the rebellious race to fall in the desert, had assured him that the whole
earth should be filled with His glory (Num 14:20ff.). Still less could he pray to

[Link] (1 of 2) [13/08/2004 [Link] p.m.]

 Keil and Delitzsch Commentary on the Old Testament

God that He would not be wrathful with all for the sake of one or a few sinners, as
in Num 16:22, seeing that the whole congregation had taken part with the rebels. In
this condition of things there was but one way left of averting the threatened
destruction of the whole nation, namely, to adopt the means which the Lord
Himself had given to His congregation, in the high-priestly office, to wipe away
their sins, and recover the divine grace which they had forfeited through sin-viz.,
the offering of incense which embodied the high-priestly prayer, and the strength
and operation of which were not dependent upon the sincerity and earnestness of
subjective faith, but had a firm and immovable foundation in the objective force of
the divine appointment.

This was the means adopted by the faithful servant of the Lord, and the judgment
of wrath was averted in its course; the plague was averted. - The effectual
operation of the incense-offering of the high priest also served to furnish the people
with a practical proof of the power and operation of the true and divinely appointed
priesthood. "The priesthood which the company of Korah had so wickedly
usurped, had brought down death and destruction upon himself, through his
offering of incense; but the divinely appointed priesthood of Aaron averted death
and destruction from the whole congregation when incense was offered by him,
and stayed the well-merited judgment, which had broken forth upon it" ( Kurtz ).

(Numbers 17:1-13 corresponds to Numbers 17:16-28 in the Hebrew; not

followed here in this case.)

Numbers 17:1-13

And the LORD spake unto Moses, saying,

<- Previous First Next ->

[Link] (2 of 2) [13/08/2004 [Link] p.m.]

 Keil and Delitzsch Commentary on the Old Testament

<- Previous First Next ->

And the LORD spake unto Moses, saying,

17:1-13 (or ch.17:16-28). Confirmation of the High-Priesthood of Aaron. - Whilst

the Lord had thus given a practical proof to the people, that Aaron was the high
priest appointed by Him for His congregation, by allowing the high-priestly
incense offered by Aaron to expiate His wrath, and by removing the plague; He
also gave them a still further confirmation of His priesthood, by a miracle which
was well adapted to put to silence all the murmuring of the congregation.

Verse 1-5. He commanded Moses to take twelve rods of the tribe-princes of Israel,
one for the fathers' house of each of their tribes, and to write upon each the name
of the tribe; but upon that of the tribe of Levi he was to write Aaron's name,
because each rod was to stand for the head of their fathers' houses, i.e., for the
existing head of the tribe; and in the case of Levi, the tribe-head was Aaron. As
only twelve rods were taken for all the tribes of Israel, and Levi was included
among them, Ephraim and Manasseh must have been reckoned as the one tribe of
Joseph, as in Deut 27:12. These rods were to be laid by Moses in the tabernacle
before the testimony, or ark of the covenant (Ex 25:21; 29:42). And there the rod
of the man whom Jehovah chose, i.e., entrusted with the priesthood (see Num
16:5), would put forth shoots, to quiet the murmuring of the people. shaakakª
(OT:7918), Hiph. , to cause to sink, to bring to rest, construed with mee`al
(OT:5921) in a pregnant signification, to quiet in such a way that it will not rise
again.

Verse 6-11. Moses carried out this command. And when he went into the
tabernacle the following morning, behold Aaron's rod of the house of Levi had
sprouted, and put forth shoots, and had borne blossoms and matured almonds. And
Moses brought all the rods out of the sanctuary, and gave every man his own; the
rest, as we may gather from the context, being all unchanged, so that the whole
nation could satisfy itself that God had chosen Aaron. Thus was the word fulfilled

[Link] (1 of 3) [13/08/2004 [Link] p.m.]

 Keil and Delitzsch Commentary on the Old Testament

which Moses had spoken at the commencement of the rebellion of the company of
Korah (Num 16:5), and that in a way which could not fail to accredit him before
the whole congregation as sent of God.

So far as the occurrence itself is concerned, there can hardly be any need to
remark, that the natural interpretation which has lately been attempted by Ewald ,
viz., that Moses had laid several almond rods in the holy place, which had just been
freshly cut off, that he might see the next day which of them would flower the best
during the night, is directly at variance with the words of the text, and also with the
fact, that a rod even freshly cut off, when laid in a dry place, would not bear ripe
fruit in a single night. The miracle which God wrought here as the Creator of
nature, was at the same time a significant symbol of the nature and meaning of the
priesthood. The choice of the rods had also a bearing upon the object in question.
A man's rod was the sign of his position as ruler in the house and congregation;
with a prince the rod becomes a sceptre, the insignia of rule (Gen 49:10).

As a severed branch, the rod could not put forth shoots and blossom in a natural
way. But God could impart new vital powers even to the dry rod. And so Aaron
had naturally no pre-eminence above the heads of the other tribes. But the
priesthood was founded not upon natural qualifications and gifts, but upon the
power of the Spirit, which God communicates according to the choice of His
wisdom, and which He had imparted to Aaron through his consecration with holy
anointing oil. It was this which the Lord intended to show to the people, by causing
Aaron's rod to put forth branches, blossom, and fruit, through a miracle of His
omnipotence; whereas the rods of the other heads of the tribes remained as barren
as before. In this way, therefore, it was not without deep significance that Aaron's
rod not only put forth shoots, by which the divine election might be recognised, but
bore even blossom and ripe fruit. This showed that Aaron was not only qualified
for his calling, but administered his office in the full power of the Spirit, and bore
the fruit expected of him. The almond rod was especially adapted to exhibit this, as
an almond-tree flowers and bears fruit the earliest of all the trees, and has received
its name of shaaqeed (OT:8247), "awake," from this very fact (cf. Jer 1:11).

[Link] (2 of 3) [13/08/2004 [Link] p.m.]

Keil and Delitzsch Commentary on the Old Testament

<- Previous First Next ->

[Link] (3 of 3) [13/08/2004 [Link] p.m.]

 Keil and Delitzsch Commentary on the Old Testament

<- Previous First Next ->

God then commanded (vv. 10, 11) that Aaron's rod should be taken back into the
sanctuary, and preserved before the testimony, "for a sign for the rebellious, that
thou puttest an end to their murmuring, and they die not." The preservation of the
rod before the ark of the covenant, in the immediate presence of the Lord, was a
pledge to Aaron of the continuance of his election, and the permanent duration of
his priesthood; though we have no need to assume, that through a perpetual miracle
the staff continued green and blossoming. In this way the staff became a sign to the
rebellious, which could not fail to stop their murmuring.

Verse 12,13. This miracle awakened a salutary terror in all the people, so that they
cried out to Moses in mortal anguish, "behold, we die, we perish, we all perish!
Every one who comes near to the dwelling of Jehovah dies; are we all to die?"
Even if this fear of death was no fruit of faith, it was fitted for all that to prevent
any fresh outbreaks of rebellion on the part of the rejected generation.

Service and Revenues of the Priests and Levites. Ch. 18.

The practical confirmation of the priesthood of Aaron and his family, on the part of
God, is very appropriately followed by the legal regulations concerning the official
duties of the priest and Levites (vv. 1-7), and the revenues to be assigned them for
their services (vv. 8-32), as the laws hitherto given upon this subject, although they
contain many isolated stipulations, have not laid down any complete and
comprehensive arrangement. The instructions relating to this subject were
addressed by Jehovah directly to Aaron (see vv. 1 and 8), up to the law, that out of
the tenths which the Levites were to collect from the people, they were to pay a
tenth again to the priests; and this was addressed to Moses (v. 25), as the head of
all Israel.

Numbers 18:1-7

[Link] (1 of 2) [13/08/2004 [Link] p.m.]

 Keil and Delitzsch Commentary on the Old Testament

And the LORD said unto Aaron, Thou and thy sons and thy father's house with
thee shall bear the iniquity of the sanctuary: and thou and thy sons with thee
shall bear the iniquity of your priesthood.

Verse 1-7. The Official Duties and Rights of the Priests and Levites. - V. 1. To
impress upon the minds of the priests and Levites the holiness and responsibility of
their office, the service of Aaron, of his sons, and of his father's house, i.e., of the
family of the Kohathites, is described as "bearing the iniquity of the sanctuary,"
and the service which was peculiar to the Aaronides, as "bearing the iniquity of
their priesthood." "To bear the iniquity of the sanctuary" signifies not only "to have
to make expiation for all that offended against the laws of the priests and the holy
things, i.e., the desecration of these" ( Knobel ), but "iniquity or transgression at the
sanctuary," i.e., the defilement of it by the sin of those who drew near to the
sanctuary; not only of the priests and Levites, but of the whole people who defiled
the sanctuary in the midst of them with its holy vessels, not only by their sins (Lev
16:6), but even by their holy gifts (Ex 28:38), and thus brought guilt upon the
whole congregation, which the priests were to bear, i.e., to take upon themselves
and expunge, by virtue of the holiness and sanctifying power communicated to
their office (see at Ex 28:38). The "iniquity of the priesthood," however, not only
embraced every offence against the priesthood, every neglect of the most
scrupulous and conscientious fulfilment of duty in connection with their office, but
extended to all the sin which attached to the official acts of the priests, on account
of the sinfulness of their nature. It was to wipe out these sins and defilements, that
the annual expiation of the holy things on the day of atonement had been appointed
(Lev 16:16ff.). The father's house of Aaron, i.e., the Levitical family of Kohath,
was

<- Previous First Next ->

[Link] (2 of 2) [13/08/2004 [Link] p.m.]

 Keil and Delitzsch Commentary on the Old Testament

<- Previous First Next ->

also to join in bearing the iniquity of the sanctuary, because the oversight of the
holy vessels of the sanctuary devolved upon it (Num 4:4ff.).

Verse 2-4. Aaron was also to bring his (other) brethren (sc., to the sanctuary), viz.,
the tribe of Levi, that is to say, the Gershonites and Merarites, that they might
attach themselves to him and serve him, both him ( wª'ataah (OT:859)) and his
sons, before the tent of testimony, and discharge the duties that were binding upon
them, according to Num 4:24ff., 31ff. (cf. Num 3:6-7; 8:26). Only they were not to
come near to the holy vessels and the altar, for that would bring death both upon
them and the priests (see at Num 4:15). On v. 4, cf. ch. 1:53 and 3:7.

Verse 5-7. The charge of the sanctuary (i.e., the dwelling) and the altar (of burnt-
offering) devolved upon Aaron and his sons, that the wrath of God might not come
again upon the children of Israel (see Num 8:19) - namely, through such illegal
acts as Nadab and Abihu (Lev 10:2), and the company of Korah (Num 16:35), had
committed. To this end God had handed over the Levites to them as a gift, to be
their assistants (see at Num 3:9 and 8:16,19). But Aaron and his sons were to
attend to the priesthood "with regard to everything of the altar and within the vail"
(i.e., of the most holy place, see Lev 16:12). The allusion is to all the priestly duties
from the altar of burnt-offering to the most holy place, including the holy place
which lay between. This office, which brought them into the closest fellowship
with the Lord, was a favour accorded to them by the grace of God. This is
expressed in the words, "as a service of gift (a service with which I present you) I
give you the priesthood." The last words in v. 7 are the same as in Num 1:51; and
"stranger" ( zar ), as in Lev 22:10.

Numbers 18:8-18

And the LORD spake unto Aaron, Behold, I also have given thee the charge of
mine heave offerings of all the hallowed things of the children of Israel; unto

[Link] (1 of 2) [13/08/2004 [Link] p.m.]

 Keil and Delitzsch Commentary on the Old Testament

thee have I given them by reason of the anointing, and to thy sons, by an
ordinance for ever.

The Revenues of the Priests. - These are summed up in v. 8 in these words, "I give
thee the keeping of My heave-offerings in all holy gifts for a portion, as an eternal
statute." The notion of mishªmeret (OT:4931), keeping, as in Ex 12:6; 16:23,32, is
defined in the second parallel clause as maashªchaah (OT:4888), a portion (see at
Lev 7:35). The priests were to keep all the heave-offerings, as the portion which
belonged to them, out of the sacrificial gifts that the children of Israel offered to the
Lord. tªruwmot (OT:8641), heave-offerings (see at Ex 25:2, and Lev 2:9), is used
here in the broadest sense, as including all the holy gifts ( kodashim , see Lev
21:22) which the Israelites lifted off from their possessions and presented to the
Lord (as in Num 5:9). Among these, for example, were, first of all, the most holy
gifts in the meat-offerings, sin-offerings, and trespass-offerings (vv. 9, 10; see at
Lev 2:3).

The burnt-offerings are not mentioned, because the whole of the flesh of these was
burned upon the altar, and the skin alone fell to the portion of the priest (Lev 7:8).
"From the fire," sc., of the altar. 'eesh (OT:784), fire, is equivalent to 'isheh
(OT:801), firing (see Lev 1:9). These gifts they were to eat, as most holy, in a most
holy place,
i.e., in the court of the tabernacle (see Lev 6:9,19; 7:6), which is called "most holy"
here, to lay a stronger emphasis upon the precept. In the second place, these gifts
included also "the holy gifts;" viz., ( a ) (v. 11) the heave-offering of their gifts in
all wave-offerings ( tenuphoth ), i.e., the wave-breast and heave-leg of the peace-
offerings, and whatever else was waved in connection with the sacrifices (see at
Lev 7:33): these might be eaten by both the male and female members of the
priestly families, provided they were legally clean (Lev 22:3ff.);

<- Previous First Next ->

[Link] (2 of 2) [13/08/2004 [Link] p.m.]

 Keil and Delitzsch Commentary on the Old Testament

<- Previous First Next ->

( b ) (v. 12) the gifts of first-fruits: "all the fat (i.e., the best, as in Gen 45:18) of oil,
new wine, and corn," viz., ree'shiytaam (OT:7225), "the first of them," the
bikuwriym (OT:1061), "the first-grown fruits" of the land, and that of all the fruit of
the ground (Deut 26:2,10; Prov 3:9; Ezek 44:30), corn, wine, oil, honey, and tree-
fruit (Deut 8:8, compared with Lev 19:23-24), which were offered, according to 2
Chron 31:5; Neh 10:36,38, Tob. 1:6, as first-fruits every year (see Mishnah, Bikkur ,
i. 3, 10, where the first-fruits are specified according to the productions mentioned
in Deut 8:8; the law prescribed nothing in relation to the quantity of the different
first-fruits, but left this entirely to the offerer himself); ( c ) (v. 14) everything
placed under a ban (see at Lev 27:28); and ( d ) (vv. 15-18) the first-born of man
and beast. The first-born of men and of unclean beasts were redeemed according to
Num 3:47; Ex 13:12-13, and Lev 27:6,27; but such as were fit for sacrifice were
actually offered, the blood being swung against the altar, and the fat portions burned
upon it, whilst the whole of the flesh fell to the portion of the priests. So far as the
redemption of human beings was concerned (v. 16), they were "to redeem from the
monthly child," i.e., the first-born child as soon as it was a month old.

Numbers 18:19

All the heave offerings of the holy things, which the children of Israel offer unto
the LORD, have I given thee, and thy sons and thy daughters with thee, by a
statute for ever: it is a covenant of salt for ever before the LORD unto thee and to
thy seed with thee.

"All the holy heave-offerings" are not the thank-offerings ( Knobel ), but, as in v.
8, all the holy gifts enumerated in vv. 9-18. Jehovah gives these to the priests as an
eternal claim. "An eternal covenant of salt is this before Jehovah," for Aaron and
his descendants. A "covenant of salt;" equivalent to an indissoluble covenant, or
inviolable contract (see at Lev 2:13).

Numbers 18:20

[Link] (1 of 2) [13/08/2004 [Link] p.m.]

 Keil and Delitzsch Commentary on the Old Testament

And the LORD spake unto Aaron, Thou shalt have no inheritance in their land,
neither shalt thou have any part among them: I am thy part and thine inheritance
among the children of Israel.

For this reason, Aaron was to received no inheritance in the land among the
children of Israel. Aaron, as the head of the priests, represents the whole priesthood;
and with regard to the possession, the whole tribe of Levi is placed, in v. 23, on an
equality with the priests. The Levites were to receive no portion of the land as an
inheritance in Canaan (cf. Num 26:62; Deut 12:12; 14:27; Josh 14:3). Jehovah was
the portion and inheritance, not only of Aaron and his sons, but of the whole tribe of
Levi (cf. Deut 10:9; 18:2; Josh 13:33); or, as it is expressed in Josh 18:7, "the
priesthood of Jehovah was their inheritance," though not in the sense that Knobel
supposes viz., "the priesthood with its revenues," which would make the expression
"Jehovah, the God of Israel" (Josh 13:33), to be metonymical for "sacrificial gifts,
first-fruits, and tenths." The possession of the priests and Levites did not consist in
the revenues assigned to them by God, but in the possession of Jehovah, the God of
Israel. In the same sense in which the tribe of Levi was the peculiar possession of
Jehovah out of the whole of the people of possession, was Jehovah also the peculiar
possession of Levi; and just as the other tribes were to live upon what was afforded
by the land assigned them as a possession, Levi was to live upon what Jehovah
bestowed upon it.

<- Previous First Next ->

[Link] (2 of 2) [13/08/2004 [Link] p.m.]

 Keil and Delitzsch Commentary on the Old Testament

<- Previous First Next ->

And inasmuch as not only the whole land of the twelve tribes, with which Jehovah
had enfeoffed them, but the whole earth, belonged to Jehovah (Ex 19:5), He was
necessarily to be regarded as the greatest possession of all, beyond which nothing
greater is conceivable, and in comparison with which every other possession is to
be regarded as nothing. Hence it was evidently the greatest privilege and highest
honour to have Him for a portion and possession ( Bähr, Symbolik , ii. p. 44). "For
truly," as Masius writes (Com. on Josh.), "he who possesses God possesses all
things; and the worship ( cultus ) of Him is infinitely fuller of delight, and far more
productive, than the cultivation ( cultus ) of any soil."

Numbers 18:21-24

And, behold, I have given the children of Levi all the tenth in Israel for an
inheritance, for their service which they serve, even the service of the tabernacle
of the congregation.

Revenues of the Levites. - For ( cheelep (OT:2500), instead of, for) their service at
the tabernacle God assigns them "every tenth in Israel as an inheritance." On the
tenth, see at Lev 27:30-33. The institution and description of their service in vv. 22
and 23 is the same as that in Num 1:53 and 8:19. "Lest they bear sin:" see at Lev
19:17.

Numbers 18:25-28

And the LORD spake unto Moses, saying,

Appropriation of the Tithe. - Vv. 26ff. When the Levites took (received) from the
people the tithe assigned them by Jehovah, they were to lift off from it a heave-
offering for Jehovah, a tithe of the tithe for Aaron the priest (i.e., for the

[Link] (1 of 2) [13/08/2004 [Link] p.m.]

 Keil and Delitzsch Commentary on the Old Testament

priesthood; see at v. 20). "Your heave-offering shall be reckoned to you as the corn
of the threshing-floor, and the fulness (see Ex 22:28) of the wine-press," i.e.,
according to v. 30, as the revenue of the threshing-floor and wine-press; that is to
say, as corn and wine which they had reaped themselves.

Numbers 18:29

Out of all your gifts ye shall offer every heave offering of the LORD, of all the
best thereof, even the hallowed part thereof out of it.

The whole of this heave-offering of Jehovah, i.e., the tithe of the tithe, they were to
lift off from all their gifts, from all the tithes of the people which they received; "of
all the fat of it," i.e., of all the best of the heave-offering they received, they were
to lift off 'et-miqªdªshow , "its holy," i.e., the holy part, which was to be dedicated
to

<- Previous First Next ->

[Link] (2 of 2) [13/08/2004 [Link] p.m.]

 Keil and Delitzsch Commentary on the Old Testament

<- Previous First Next ->

received, they were to lift off 'et-miqªdªshow , "its holy," i.e., the holy part, which
was to be dedicated to Jehovah.

Numbers 18:30-31

Therefore thou shalt say unto them, When ye have heaved the best thereof from
it, then it shall be counted unto the Levites as the increase of the threshingfloor,
and as the increase of the winepress.

They might eat it (the tithe they had received, after taking off the priests' tithe) in
any place with their families, as it was the reward for their service at the
tabernacle.

Numbers 18:32

And ye shall bear no sin by reason of it, when ye have heaved from it the best of
it: neither shall ye pollute the holy things of the children of Israel, lest ye die.

They would load no sin upon themselves by so doing (see Lev 19:17), if they only
lifted off the best as tithe (for the priest), and did not desecrate the holy gifts, sc.,
by eating in all kinds of places, which was not allowed, according to v. 10, with
regard to the most holy gifts.

These regulations concerning the revenues of the priests and Levites were in
perfect accordance with the true idea of the Israelitish kingdom of God. Whereas in
heathen states, where there was an hereditary priestly caste, that caste was
generally a rich one, and held a firm possession in the soil (in Egypt, for example;
see at Gen 47:22), the Levites received no hereditary landed property in the land of
Israel, but only towns to dwell in among the other tribes, with pasturage for their

[Link] (1 of 2) [13/08/2004 [Link] p.m.]

 Keil and Delitzsch Commentary on the Old Testament

cattle (ch. 35), because Jehovah, the God of Israel, would be their inheritance. In
this way their earthly existence as based upon the spiritual ground and soil of faith,
in accordance with the calling assigned them to be the guardians and promoters of
the commandments, statutes, and rights of Jehovah; and their authority and
influence among the people were bound up with their unreserved surrender of
themselves to the Lord, and their firm reliance upon the possession of their God.
Now, whilst this position was to be a constant incitement to the Levites to
surrender themselves entirely to the Lord and His service, it was also to become to
the whole nation a constant admonition, inasmuch as it was a prerogative conferred
upon them by the Lord, to seek the highest of all good in the possession of the
Lord, as its portion and inheritance. - The revenue itself, however, which the Lord
assigned to the Levites and priests, as His servants, consisting of the tenths and
first-fruits, as well as certain portions of the different sacrificial gifts that were
offered to Him, appears to have been a very considerable one, especially if we
adopt the computation of J. D. Michaelis ( Mos. Recht. i. §52) with reference to the
tithes.

"A tribe," he says, "which had only 22,000 males in it (23,000 afterwards), and
therefore could hardly have numbered more than 12,000 grown-up men, received
the tithes of 600,000 Israelites; consequently one single Levite, without the
slightest necessity for sowing, and without any of the expenses of agriculture,
reaped or received

<- Previous First Next ->

[Link] (2 of 2) [13/08/2004 [Link] p.m.]

 Keil and Delitzsch Commentary on the Old Testament

<- Previous First Next ->

from the produce of the flocks and herds as much as five of the other Israelites."
But this leaves out of sight the fact that tithes are never paid so exactly as this, and
that no doubt there was as little conscientiousness in the matter then as there is at
the present day, when those who are entitled to receive a tenth often receive even
less than a twentieth. Moreover, the revenue of the tribe, which the Lord had
chosen as His own peculiar possession, was not intended to be a miserable and
beggarly one; but it was hardly equal, at any time, to the revenues which the
priestly castes of other nations derived from their endowments.

Again, the Levites had to give up the tenth of all the tithes they received to the
priests; and the priests were to offer to Jehovah upon the altar a portion of the first-
fruits, heave-offerings, and wave-offerings that were assigned to them.
Consequently, as the whole nation was to make a practical acknowledgment, in the
presentation of the tithe and first-fruits, that it had received its hereditary property
as a fief from the Lord its God, so the Levites, by their payment of the tenth to the
priests, and the priests, by presenting a portion of their revenues upon the altar,
were to make a practical confession that they had received all their revenues from
the Lord their God, and owed Him praise and adoration in return (see Bähr,
Symbolik , ii. pp. 43ff.).

The Law concerning Purification from the Uncleanness of Death. Ch.

19.

Numbers 19:1

And the LORD spake unto Moses and unto Aaron, saying,

In order that a consciousness of the continuance of the covenant relation might be

kept alive during the dying out of the race that had fallen under the judgment of

[Link] (1 of 2) [13/08/2004 [Link] p.m.]

 Keil and Delitzsch Commentary on the Old Testament

God, after the severe stroke with which the Lord had visited the whole nation in
consequence of the rebellion of the company of Korah, He gave the law concerning
purification from the uncleanness of death, in which first of all the preparation of a
sprinkling water is commanded for the removal of this uncleanness (vv. 1-10a);
and then, secondly, the use of this purifying water enjoined as an eternal statute
(vv. 10b-22). The thought that death, and the putrefaction of death, as being the
embodiment of sin, defiled and excluded from fellowship with the holy God, was a
view of the fall and its consequences which had been handed down from the
primeval age (see p. 558), and which was not only shared by the Israelites with
many of the nations of antiquity,

(Note: Vid., Bähr, Symbolik , ii. pp. 466ff.; Sommer, bibl. Abhdll. pp. 271ff.; Knobel on this chapter,
and Leyrer in Herzog's Cyclopaedia.)

but presupposed by the laws given on Sinai as a truth well known in Israel; and at
the same time confirmed, both in the prohibition of the priests from defiling
themselves with the dead, except in the case of their nearest blood-relations (Lev
21:1-6,10-12), and in the command, that every one who was defiled by a corpse
should be removed out of the camp (Num 5:2-4).

Now, so long as the mortality within the congregation did not exceed the natural
limits, the traditional modes of purification would be quite sufficient. But when it
prevailed to a hitherto unheard-of extent, in consequence of the sentence
pronounced by God, the defilements would necessarily be so crowded together,
that the whole

<- Previous First Next ->

[Link] (2 of 2) [13/08/2004 [Link] p.m.]

 Keil and Delitzsch Commentary on the Old Testament

<- Previous First Next ->

congregation would be in danger of being infected with the defilement of death,

and of forfeiting its vocation to be the holy nation of Jehovah, unless God provided
it with the means of cleansing itself from this uncleanness, without losing the
fellowship of His covenant of grace. The law which follows furnished the means.
In v. 2 this law is called hatowraah (OT:8451) chuqat (OT:2708), a "statute of
instruction," or law-statute. This combination of the two words commonly used for
law and statute, which is only met with again in Num 31:21, and there, as here, in
connection with a rule relating to purification from the uncleanness of death, is
probably intended to give emphasis to the design of the law about to be given, to
point it out as one of great importance, but not as decretum absque ulla ratione , a
decree without any reason, as the Rabbins suppose.

2-10a. Preparation of the Purifying Water. - As water is the ordinary means by

which all kinds of uncleanness are removed, it was also to be employed in the
removal of the uncleanness of death. But as this uncleanness was the strongest of
all religious defilements, fresh water alone was not sufficient to remove it; and
consequently a certain kind of sprinkling-water was appointed, which was
strengthened by the ashes of a sin-offering, and thus formed into a holy alkali. The
main point in the law which follows, therefore, was the preparation of the ashes,
and these had to be obtained by the sacrifice of a red heifer.

(Note: On this sacrifice, which is so rich in symbolical allusions, but the details of which are so
difficult to explain, compare the rabbinical statutes in the talmudical tractate Para ( Mishnah, v.
Surenh. vi. pp. 269ff.); Maimonides de vacca rufa; and Lundius jüd. Heiligth. pp. 680ff. Among
modern treatises on this subject, are Bähr's Symbolik , ii. pp. 493ff.; Hengstenberg , Egypt and the
Books of Moses, pp. 173ff.; Leyrer in Herzog's Cycl.; Kurtz in the Theol. Studien und Kritiken , 1846,
pp. 629ff. (also Sacrificial Worship of the Old Testament , pp. 422ff., Eng. transl., Tr.); and my
Archäologie , i. p. 58.)

Numbers 19:2

[Link] (1 of 2) [13/08/2004 [Link] p.m.]

 Keil and Delitzsch Commentary on the Old Testament

This is the ordinance of the law which the LORD hath commanded, saying,
Speak unto the children of Israel, that they bring thee a red heifer without spot,
wherein is no blemish, and upon which never came yoke:

The sons of Israel were to bring to Moses a red heifer, entirely without blemish,
and to give it to Eleazar the priest, that he might have it slaughtered in his presence
outside the camp. paaraah (OT:6510) is not a cow generally, but a young cow, a
heifer, da'malis (NT:1151) (LXX), juvenca , between the calf and the full-grown
cow. 'adumaah (OT:122), of a red colour, is not to be connected with tªmiymaah
(OT:8549) in the sense of "quite red," as the Rabbins interpret it; but tªmiymaah
(OT:8549), integra , is to be taken by itself, and the words which follow, "wherein
is no blemish," to be regarded as defining it still more precisely (see Lev 22:19-20).
The slaying of this heifer is called chaTaa't (OT:2403), a sin-offering, in vv. 9 and
17. To remind the congregation that death was the wages of sin, the antidote to the
defilement of death was to be taken from a sin-offering.

But as the object was not to remove and wipe away sin as such, but simply to
cleanse the congregation from the uncleanness which proceeded from death, the
curse of sin, it was necessary that the sin-offering should be modified in a peculiar
manner to accord with this special design. The sacrificial animal was not to be a
bullock, as in the case of the ordinary sin-offerings of the congregation (Lev 4:14),
but a female, because the female sex is the bearer of life (Gen 3:20), a paaraah
(OT:6510), i.e., lit., the fruit-bringing; and of a red colour, not because the blood-
red

<- Previous First Next ->

[Link] (2 of 2) [13/08/2004 [Link] p.m.]

 Keil and Delitzsch Commentary on the Old Testament

<- Previous First Next ->

colour points to sin (as Hengstenberg follows the Rabbins and earlier theologians
in supposing), but as the colour of the most "intensive life," which has its seat in
the blood, and shows itself in the red colour of the face (the cheeks and lips); and
one "upon which no yoke had ever come," i.e., whose vital energy had not yet been
crippled by labour under the yoke.

Lastly, like all the sacrificial animals, it was to be uninjured, and free from faults,
inasmuch as the idea of representation, which lay at the foundation of all the
sacrifices, but more especially of the sin-offerings, demanded natural sinlessness
and original purity, quite as much as imputed sin and transferred uncleanness.
Whilst the last-mentioned prerequisite showed that the victim was well fitted for
bearing sin, the other attributes indicated the fulness of life and power in their
highest forms, and qualified it to form a powerful antidote to death. As thus
appointed to furnish a reagent against death and mortal corruption, the sacrificial
animal was to possess throughout, viz., in colour, in sex, and in the character of its
body, the fulness of life in its greatest freshness and vigour.

Numbers 19:3-4

And ye shall give her unto Eleazar the priest, that he may bring her forth without
the camp, and one shall slay her before his face:

The sacrifice itself was to be superintended by Eleazar the priest, the eldest son of
the high priest, and his presumptive successor in office; because Aaron, or the high
priest, whose duty it was to present the sin-offerings for the congregation (Lev
4:16), could not, according to his official position, which required him to avoid all
uncleanness of death (Lev 21:11-12), perform such an act as this, which stood in
the closest relation to death and the uncleanness of death, and for that very reason
had to be performed outside the camp. The subject, to "bring her forth" and "slay
her," is indefinite; since it was not the duty of the priest to slay the sacrificial

[Link] (1 of 2) [13/08/2004 [Link] p.m.]

 Keil and Delitzsch Commentary on the Old Testament

animal, but of the offerer himself, or in the case before us, of the congregation,
which would appoint one of its own number for the purpose. All that the priest had
to do was to sprinkle the blood; at the same time the slaying was to take place
lªpaanaayw (OT:6440), before him, i.e., before his eyes. Eleazar was to sprinkle
some of the blood seven times "towards the opposite," i.e., toward the front of the
tabernacle ( seven times , as in Lev 4:17). Through this sprinkling of the blood the
slaying became a sacrifice, being brought thereby into relation to Jehovah and the
sanctuary; whilst the life, which was sacrificed for the sin of the congregation, was
given up to the Lord, and offered up in the only way in which a sacrifice, prepared
like this, outside the sanctuary, could possibly be offered.

Numbers 19:5-6

And one shall burn the heifer in his sight; her skin, and her flesh, and her blood,
with her dung, shall he burn:

After this (vv. 5, 6), they were to burn the cow, with the skin, flesh, blood, and
dung, before his (Eleazar's) eyes, and he was to throw cedar-wood, hyssop, and
scarlet wool into the fire. The burning of the sacrificial animal outside the camp
took place in the case of every sin-offering for the whole congregation, for the
reasons

<- Previous First Next ->

[Link] (2 of 2) [13/08/2004 [Link] p.m.]

 Keil and Delitzsch Commentary on the Old Testament

<- Previous First Next ->

expounded on p. 525. But in the case before us, the whole of the sacrificial act had
to be performed outside the camp, i.e., outside the sphere of the theocracy; because
the design of this sin-offering was not that the congregation might thereby be
received through the expiation of its sin into the fellowship of the God and Lord
who was present at the altar and in the sanctuary, but simply that an antidote to the
infection of death might be provided for the congregation, which had become
infected through fellowship with death; and consequently, the victim was to
represent, not the living congregation as still associated with the God who was
present in His earthly kingdom, but those members of the congregation who had
fallen victims to temporal death as the wages of sin, and, as such, were separated
from the earthly theocracy (see my Archaeology , i. p. 283).

In this sacrifice, the blood, which was generally poured out at the foot of the altar,
was burned along with the rest, and the ashes to be obtained were impregnated
with the substance thereof. But in order still further to increase the strength of these
ashes, which were already well fitted to serve as a powerful antidote to the
corruption of death, as being the incorruptible residuum of the sin-offering which
had not been destroyed by the fire, cedar-wood was thrown into the fire, as the
symbol of the incorruptible continuance of life; and hyssop, as the symbol of
purification from the corruption of death; and scarlet wool, the deep red of which
shadowed forth the strongest vital energy (see at Lev 14:6) - so that the ashes
might be regarded "as the quintessence of all that purified and strengthened life,
refined and sublimated by the fire" ( Leyrer ).

Numbers 19:7-9

Then the priest shall wash his clothes, and he shall bathe his flesh in water, and
afterward he shall come into the camp, and the priest shall be unclean until the
even.

[Link] (1 of 2) [13/08/2004 [Link] p.m.]

 Keil and Delitzsch Commentary on the Old Testament

etc. The persons who took part in this-viz., the priest, the man who attended to the
burning, and the clean man who gathered the ashes together, and deposited them in
a clean place for subsequent use-became unclean till the evening in consequence;
not from the fact that they had officiated for unclean persons, and, in a certain
sense, had participated in their uncleanness ( Knobel ), but through the uncleanness
of sin and death, which had passed over to the sin-offering; just as the man who led
into the wilderness the goat which had been rendered unclean through the
imposition of sin, became himself unclean in consequence (Lev 16:26). Even the
sprinkling water prepared from the ashes defiled every one who touched it (v. 21).
But when the ashes were regarded in relation to their appointment as the means of
purification, they were to be treated as clean. Not only were they to be collected
together by a clean man; but they were to be kept for use in a clean place, just as
the ashes of the sacrifices that were taken away from the altar were to be carried to
a clean place outside the camp (Lev 6:4). These defilements, like every other
which only lasted till the evening, were to be removed by washing (see pp. 569,
570). The ashes thus collected were to serve the congregation nidaah (OT:5079)
lªmeey (OT:4325), i.e., literally as water of uncleanness; in other words, as water
by which uncleanness was to be removed. "Water of uncleanness" is analogous to
"water of sin" in Num 8:7.

10b-22. Use of the Water of Purification. - The words in v. 10b, "And it shall be
to the children of Israel, and to the stranger in the midst of them, for an everlasting
statute," relate to the preparation and application of the sprinkling water, and
connect the foregoing instructions with those which follow. - Vv. 1-13 contain the
general rules for the use of the water; vv. 14-22 a more detailed description of the
execution of those rules.

<- Previous First Next ->

[Link] (2 of 2) [13/08/2004 [Link] p.m.]

 Keil and Delitzsch Commentary on the Old Testament

<- Previous First Next ->

Numbers 19:11-13

He that toucheth the dead body of any man shall be unclean seven days.

Whoever touched a corpse, "with regard to all the souls of men," i.e., the corpse of
a person, of whatever age or sex, was unclean for seven days, and on the third and
seventh day he was to cleanse himself ( hitªchaTee' , as in Num 8:21) with the
water ( bow (OT:871a) refers, so far as the sense is concerned, to the water of
purification). If he neglected this cleansing, he did not become clean, and he
defiled the dwelling of Jehovah (see at Lev 15:31). Such a man was to be cut off
from Israel (vid., at Gen 17:14).

Numbers 19:14-16

This is the law, when a man dieth in a tent: all that come into the tent, and all
that is in the tent, shall be unclean seven days.

Special instructions concerning the defilement. If a man died in a tent, every one
who entered it, or who was there at the time, became unclean for seven days. So
also did every "open vessel upon which there was not a covering, a string," i.e.,
that had not a covering fastened by a string, to prevent the smell of the corpse from
penetrating it. paatiyl (OT:6616), a string, is in apposition to tsaamiyd (OT:6781),
a band, or binding (see Ges. §113; Ewald , §287, e. ). This also applied to any one
in the open field, who touched a man who had either been slain by the sword or
had died a natural death, or even a bone (skeleton), or a grave.

Numbers 19:17-20

And for an unclean person they shall take of the ashes of the burnt heifer of

[Link] (1 of 2) [13/08/2004 [Link] p.m.]

 Keil and Delitzsch Commentary on the Old Testament

purification for sin, and running water shall be put thereto in a vessel:

Ceremony of purification. They were to take for the unclean person some of the
dust of the burning of the cow,
i.e., some of the ashes obtained by burning the cow, and put living, i.e., fresh water
(see Lev 14:5), upon it in a vessel. A clean man was then to take a bunch of hyssop
(see Ex 12:22), on account of its inherent purifying power, and dip it in the water,
on the third and seventh day after the defilement had taken place, and to sprinkle
the tent, with the vessels and persons in it, as well as every one who had touched a
corpse, whether a person slain, or one who had died a natural death, or a grave;
after which the persons were to wash their clothes and bathe, that they might be
clean in the evening. As the uncleanness in question is held up as the highest grade
of uncleanness, by its duration being fixed at seven days, i.e., an entire week, so
the appointment of a double purification with the sprinkling water shows the force
of the uncleanness to be removed; whilst the selection of the third and seventh days
was simply determined by the significance of the numbers themselves. In v. 20, the
threat of punishment for the

<- Previous First Next ->

[Link] (2 of 2) [13/08/2004 [Link] p.m.]

 Keil and Delitzsch Commentary on the Old Testament

<- Previous First Next ->

neglect of purification is repeated from v. 13, for the purpose of making it most
emphatic.

Numbers 19:21,22

And it shall be a perpetual statute unto them, that he that sprinkleth the water of
separation shall wash his clothes; and he that toucheth the water of separation
shall be unclean until even.

This also was to be an everlasting statute, that he who sprinkled the water of
purification, or even touched it (see at
vv. 7ff.), and he who was touched by a person defiled (by a corpse), and also the
person who touched him, should be unclean till the evening-a rule which also
applied to other forms of uncleanness.

Israel's Last Journey from Kadesh to the Heights of Pisgah in the

Fields of Moab. Ch. 20 and 21.
In the first month of the fortieth year, the whole congregation of Israel assembled
again at Kadesh, in the desert of Zin, to commence the march to Canaan. In
Kadesh, Miriam died (Num 20:1), and the people murmured against Moses and
Aaron on account of the want of water. The Lord relieved this want, by pouring
water from the rock; but Moses sinned on this occasion, so that he was not allowed
to enter Canaan (vv. 2-13). From Kadesh, Moses sent messengers to the king of
Edom, to ask permission for the Israelites to pass peaceably through his land; but
this was refused by the king of Edom (vv. 14-21). In the meantime, the Israelites
marched from Kadesh to Mount Hor, on the borders of the land of Edom; and there
Aaron died, and Eleazar was invested with the high-priesthood in his stead (vv. 22-
29). On this march they were attacked by the Canaanitish king of Arad; but they
gained a complete victory, and laid his cities under the ban (Num 19:1-3).

[Link] (1 of 2) [13/08/2004 [Link] p.m.]

 Keil and Delitzsch Commentary on the Old Testament

As the king of Edom opposed their passing through his land, they were compelled
to go from Mount Hor to the Red Sea, and round the land of Edom. On the way the
murmuring people were bitten by poisonous serpents; but the penitent among them
were healed of the bite of the serpent, by looking at the brazen serpent which
Moses set up at the command of God (vv. 4-9). After going round the Moabitish
mountains, they turned to the north, and went along the eastern side of the
Edomitish and Moabitish territory, as far as the Arnon, on the border of the
Amoritish kingdom of Sihon, with the intention of going through to the Jordan, and
so entering Canaan (vv. 10-20). But as Sihon would not allow the Israelites to pass
through his land, and made a hostile demonstration against them, they smote him
and conquered his land, and also the northern Amoritish kingdom of Og, king of
Bashan (vv. 21-35), and forced their way through the Amoritish territory to the
heights of Pisgah, for the purpose of going forward thence into the steppes of
Moab by the Jordan (Num 22:1). These marches formed the third stage in the
guidance of Israel through the desert to Canaan.

Death of Miriam. Water out of the Rock. Refusal of a Passage

through Edom. Aaron's Death. Conquest over the King of Arad. Ch.
20-21:3.

The events mentioned in the heading, which took place either in Kadesh or on the
march thence to the mountain of

<- Previous First Next ->

[Link] (2 of 2) [13/08/2004 [Link] p.m.]

 Keil and Delitzsch Commentary on the Old Testament

<- Previous First Next ->

The events mentioned in the heading, which took place either in Kadesh or on the
march thence to the mountain of Hor are grouped together in Num 20:1-21:3,
rather in a classified order than in one that is strictly chronological. The death of
Miriam took place during the time when the people were collected at Kadesh-
barnea in the desert of Zin (v. 21). But when the whole nation assembled together
in this desert there was a deficiency of water, which caused the people to murmur
against Moses, until God relieved the want by a miracle (vv. 2-13). It was from
Kadesh that messengers were sent to the king of Edom (vv. 14ff.); but instead of
waiting at Kadesh till the messengers returned, Moses appears to have proceeded
with the people in the meantime into the Arabah. When and where the messengers
returned to Moses, we are not informed. So much is certain, however, that the
Edomites did not come with an army against the Israelites (vv. 20, 21), until they
approached their land with the intention of passing through. For it was in the
Arabah, at Mount Hor, that Israel first turned to go round the land of Edom (Num
21:4). The attack of the Canaanites of Arad (Num 21:1-3) who attempted to
prevent the Israelites from advancing into the desert of Zin, occurred in the interval
between the departure from Kadesh and the arrival in the Arabah at Mount Hor; so
that if a chronological arrangement were adopted, this event would be placed in
Num 20:22, between the first and second clauses of this verse. The words "and
came to Mount Hor" (v. 22b) are anticipatory, and introduce the most important
event of all that period, viz., the death of Aaron at Mount Hor (vv. 23-29).

(Note: Even Fries (pp. 53, 54) has admitted that the account in Num 21:1; 33:40, is to be regarded as a
rehearsal of an event which took place before the arrival of the Israelites at Mount Hor, and that the
conflict with the king of Arad must have occurred immediately upon the advance of Israel into the
desert of Zin; and he correctly observes, that the sacred writer has arranged what stood in practical
connection with the sin of Moses and Aaron, and the refusal of Edom, in the closest juxtaposition to
those events: whereas, after he had once commenced his account of the tragical occurrences in ch. 20,
there was no place throughout the whole of that chapter for mentioning the conflict with Arad; and
consequently this battle could only find a place in the second line, after the record of the most
memorable events which occurred between the death of Miriam and that of Aaron, and to which it was
subordinate in actual significance.

On the other hand, Fries objects to the arrangement we have adopted above, and supposes that Israel

[Link] (1 of 2) [13/08/2004 [Link] p.m.]

 Keil and Delitzsch Commentary on the Old Testament

did not go straight from Kadesh through the Wady Murreh into the Arabah, and to the border of the
(actual) land of Edom, and then turn back to the Red Sea; but that after the failure of the negotiations
with the king of Edom, Moses turned at once from the desert of Zin and plain of Kadesh, and went
back in a south-westerly direction to the Hebron road; and having followed this road to Jebel Araif, the
south-western corner-pillar of the western Edom, turned at right angles and went by the side of Jebel
Mukrah to the Arabah, where he was compelled to alter his course again through meeting with Mount
Hor, the border-pillar of Edom at that point, and to go southwards to the Red Sea (pp. 88-9). But
although this combination steers clear of the difficulty connected with our assumption-viz., that when
Israel advanced into the Arabah to encamp at Mount Hor, they had actually trodden upon the
Edomitish territory in that part of the Arabah which connected the mountain land of Azazimeh, of
which the Edomites had taken forcible possession, with their hereditary country, the mountains of Seir-
we cannot regard this view as in harmony with the biblical account.

For, apart from the improbability of Moses going a second time to Mount Hor on the border of Edom,
after he had been compelled to desist from his advance through the desert of Zin (Wady Murreh ), and
take a circuitous route, or rather make a retrograde movement, on the western side of the Edomitish
territory of the land of Azazimeh, only to be driven back a second time, the account of the contest with
the king of Arad is hard to reconcile with this combination. In that case the king of Arad must have
attacked or overtaken the Israelites when they were collected together in the desert of Zin at Kadesh.
But this does not tally with the words of Num 21:1, "When the Canaanite heard that Israel came (was
approaching) by the way of the spies;" for if Moses turned round in Kadesh to go down the Hebron
road as far as Jebel Araif, in consequence of the refusal of Edom, the Israelites did not take the way of
the spies at all, for their way went northwards from Kadesh to Canaan. The

<- Previous First Next ->

[Link] (2 of 2) [13/08/2004 [Link] p.m.]

 Keil and Delitzsch Commentary on the Old Testament

<- Previous First Next ->

supposition of Fries (p. 54), that the words in Num 21:1, "came by the way of the spies," are a
permutation of those in Num 20:1, "came into the desert of Zin," and that the two perfectly coincide as
to time, is forced; as the Israelites are described in Num 20:1 not only as coming into the desert of Zin
in general, but as assembling together there at Kadesh.

Modern critics ( Knobel and others) have also mutilated these chapters, and left only Num 20:1 (in
part,), 2, 6, 22-29, 21:10-11; 22:1, as parts of the original work, whilst all the rest is described as a
Jehovistic addition, partly from ancient sources and partly from the invention of the Jehovist himself.
But the supposed contradiction-viz., that whilst the original work describes the Israelites as going
through northern Edom, and going round the Moabitish territory in the more restricted sense, the
Jehovist represents them as going round the land of Edom upon the west, south, and east (Num 20:21;
21:4), and also as going round the land of the Arnon in a still larger circle, and past other places as
well (Num 21:12,16,18) - rests upon a false interpretation of the passages in question. The other
arguments adduced-viz., the fact that the Jehovist gives great prominence to the hatred of the Edomites
(Num 20:18,20) and interweaves poetical sentences (Num 21:14-15,17-18,27-28), the miraculous rod
in Moses' hand (ch. 20:8), and the etymology (Num 21:3) - are all just arguing in a circle, since the
supposition that all these things are foreign to the original work, is not a fact demonstrated, but a
simple petitio principii. )

Numbers 20:1

Then came the children of Israel, even the whole congregation, into the desert of
Zin in the first month: and the people abode in Kadesh; and Miriam died there,
and was buried there.

Verse 1. Assembling of the Congregation at Kadesh. - In the first month the

children of Israel came into the desert of Zin, i.e., in the fortieth year of their
wanderings, at the commencement of which "the whole congregation" assembled
together once more in the very same place where the sentence had been passed
thirty-seven years and a half before, that they should remain in the desert for forty
years, until the rebellious generation had died out. The year is not mentioned in v.
1, but, according to Num 14:32ff., it can only be the year with which the forty
years of the sentence that they should die out in the wilderness came to an end, that
is to say, the fortieth year of their wandering. This is put beyond all doubt by what
[Link] (1 of 2) [13/08/2004 [Link] p.m.]
 Keil and Delitzsch Commentary on the Old Testament

follows. For the whole congregation proceeds from Kadesh in the desert of Zin to
Mount Hor, where Aaron died, and that, according to Num 33:38, in the fifth
month of the fortieth year after the exodus from Egypt. Miriam died during the
time that the people were staying ( yeesheeb (OT:3427)) in Kadesh, and there she
was buried.

Numbers 20:2-5

And there was no water for the congregation: and they gathered themselves
together against Moses and against Aaron.

Sin of Moses and Aaron at the Water of Strife at Kadesh. - In the arid desert the
congregation was in want of water, and the people quarrelled with Moses in
consequence. In connection with the first stay in Kadesh there is nothing said about
any deficiency of water. But as the name Kadesh embraces a large district of the
desert of Zin, and is not confined to one particular spot, there might easily be a
want of water in this place or the other. In their

<- Previous First Next ->

[Link] (2 of 2) [13/08/2004 [Link] p.m.]

 Keil and Delitzsch Commentary on the Old Testament

<- Previous First Next ->

faithless discontent, the people wished that they had died when their brethren died
before Jehovah. The allusion is not to Korah's company, as Knobel supposes, and
the word gaawa` (OT:1478), "to expire," would be altogether inapplicable to their
destruction; but the reference is to those who had died one by one during the thirty-
seven years. "Why," they murmured once more against Moses and Aaron, "have ye
brought the congregation of God into this desert, to perish there with their cattle?
Why have ye brought it out of Egypt into this evil land, where there is no seed, no
fig-trees and pomegranates, no vines, and no water to drink?"

Numbers 20:6

And Moses and Aaron went from the presence of the assembly unto the door of
the tabernacle of the congregation, and they fell upon their faces: and the glory
of the LORD appeared unto them.

Moses and Aaron then turned to the tabernacle, to ask for the help of the Lord; and
the glory of the Lord immediately appeared (see at Num 17:7 and 14:10).

Numbers 20:7-8

And the LORD spake unto Moses, saying,

The Lord relieved the want of water. Moses was to take the staff, and with Aaron
to gather together the congregation, and speak to the rock before their eyes, when it
would give forth water for the congregation and their cattle to drink.

Numbers 20:9-11

And Moses took the rod from before the LORD, as he commanded him.

[Link] (1 of 2) [13/08/2004 [Link] p.m.]

 Keil and Delitzsch Commentary on the Old Testament

Moses then took the rod "from before Jehovah," - i.e., the rod with which he had
performed miracles in Egypt (Ex 17:5), and which was laid up in the sanctuary, not
Aaron's rod which blossomed (Num 17:25 ) - and collected the congregation
together before the rock, and said to them, "Hear, ye rebels, shall we fetch you
water out of this rock?" He then smote the rock twice with his rod, whereupon
much water came out, so that the congregation and their cattle had water to drink.

Numbers 20:12

<- Previous First Next ->

[Link] (2 of 2) [13/08/2004 [Link] p.m.]

 Keil and Delitzsch Commentary on the Old Testament

<- Previous First Next ->

Numbers 20:12

And the LORD spake unto Moses and Aaron, Because ye believed me not, to
sanctify me in the eyes of the children of Israel, therefore ye shall not bring this
congregation into the land which I have given them.

The Lord then said to both of them, both Moses and Aaron, "Because ye have not
trusted firmly in Me, to sanctify Me before the eyes of the children of Israel,
therefore ye shall not bring this congregation into the land which I have given
them." The want of belief or firm confidence in the Lord, through which both of
them had sinned, was not actual unbelief or distrust in the omnipotence and grace
of God, as if God could not relieve the want of water or extend His help to the
murmuring people; for the Lord had promised His help to Moses, and Moses did
what the Lord had commanded him. It was simply the want of full believing
confidence, a momentary wavering of that immovable assurance, which the two
heads of the nation ought to have shown to the congregation, but did not show.
Moses did even more than God had commanded him. Instead of speaking to the
rock with the rod of God in his hand, as God directed him, he spoke to the
congregation, and in these inconsiderate words, "Shall we fetch you water out of
the rock?" words which, if they did not express any doubt in the help of the Lord,
were certainly fitted to strengthen the people in their unbelief, and are therefore
described in Ps 106:33 as prating (speaking unadvisedly) with the lips (cf. Lev
5:4).

He then struck the rock twice with the rod, "as if it depended upon human exertion,
and not upon the power of God alone," or as if the promise of God "would not have
been fulfilled without all the smiting on his part" ( Knobel ). In the ill-will
expressed in these words the weakness of faith was manifested, by which the
faithful servant of God, worn out with the numerous temptations, allowed himself
to be overcome, so that he stumbled, and did not sanctify the Lord before the eyes

[Link] (1 of 2) [13/08/2004 [Link] p.m.]

 Keil and Delitzsch Commentary on the Old Testament

of the people, as he ought to have done. Aaron also wavered along with Moses,
inasmuch as he did nothing to prevent Moses' fall. But their sin became a grievous
one, from the fact that they acted unworthily of their office. God punished them,
therefore, by withdrawing their office from them before they had finished the work
entrusted to them. They were not to conduct the congregation into the promised
land, and therefore were not to enter in themselves (cf. Num 27:12-13; Deut
32:48ff.). The rock, from which water issued, is distinguished by the article
hacela` (OT:5553), not as being already known, or mentioned before, but simply
as a particular rock in that neighbourhood; though the situation is not described, so
as to render it possible to search for it now.

(Note: Moses Nachmanides has given a correct interpretation of the words, "Speak to the rock before
their eyes" (v. 8): viz., "to the first rock in front of them, and standing in their sight." The fable
attributed to the Rabbins, viz., that the rock of Rephidim followed the Israelites all about in the desert,
and supplied them with water, cannot be proved from the talmudical and rabbinical passages given by
Buxtorf ( historia Petrae in deserto ) in his exercitatt. c. v. , but is simply founded upon a literal
interpretation of certain rabbinical statements concerning the identity of the well at Rephidim with that
at Kadesh, which were evidently intended to be figurative, as Abarbanel expressly affirms ( Buxtorf, l.
c. pp. 422ff.). "Their true meaning," he says, "was, that those waters which flowed out in Horeb were
the gift of God granted to the Israelites, and continued all through the desert, just like the manna. For
wherever they went, fountains of living waters were opened to them as the occasion required. And for
this reason, the rock in Kadesh was the same rock as that in Horeb. Still less ground is there for
supposing that the Apostle Paul alluded to any such rabbinical fable when he said, "They drank of that
spiritual rock that followed them" (1 Cor 10:4), and gave it a spiritual interpretation in the words, "and
that rock was Christ.")

<- Previous First Next ->

[Link] (2 of 2) [13/08/2004 [Link] p.m.]

 Keil and Delitzsch Commentary on the Old Testament

<- Previous First Next ->

Numbers 20:13

This is the water of Meribah; because the children of Israel strove with the
LORD, and he was sanctified in them.

The account closes with the words, "This is the water of strife, about which the
children of Israel strove with Jehovah, and He sanctified Himself on them." This
does not imply that the scene of this occurrence received the name of "strife-
water," but simply that the water which God brought out of the rock for the
Israelites received that name. But God sanctified Himself on them, by the fact that,
on the one hand, He put their unbelief to shame by the miraculous gift of water,
and on the other hand punished Moses and Aaron for the weakness of their faith.

(Note: The assumption of neological critics, that this occurrence is identical with the similar one at
Rephidim (Ex 17), and that this is only another saga based upon the same event, has no firm ground
whatever. The want of water in the arid desert is a fact so constantly attested by travellers, that it
would be a matter of great surprise if Israel had only experienced this want, and quarrelled with its
God and its leaders, once in the course of forty years. As early as Ex 15:22ff. the people murmured
because of the want of drinkable water, and the bitter water was turned into sweet; and immediately
after the event before us, it gave utterance to the complaint again, "We have no bread and no water"
(Num 21:4-5). But if the want remained the same, the relief of that want would necessarily be repeated
in the same or a similar manner. Moreover, the occurrences at Rephidim (or Massah-Meribah) and at
Kadesh are altogether different from each other. In Rephidim, God gave the people water out of the
rock, and the murmuring of the people was stayed. In Kadesh, God no doubt relieved the distress in
the same way; but the mediators of His mercy, Moses and Aaron, sinned at the time, so that God
sanctified Himself upon them by a judgment, because they had not sanctified Him before the
congregation. (See Hengstenberg , Dissertations, vol. ii.))

Numbers 20:14-17

And Moses sent messengers from Kadesh unto the king of Edom, Thus saith thy
brother Israel, Thou knowest all the travail that hath befallen us:

[Link] (1 of 2) [13/08/2004 [Link] p.m.]

 Keil and Delitzsch Commentary on the Old Testament

Message of the Israelites to the King of Edom. - As Israel was about to start from
Kadesh upon its march to Canaan, but wished to enter it from the east across the
Jordan, and not from the south, where the steep and lofty mountain ranges
presented obstacles which would have been difficult to overcome, if not quite
insuperable, Moses sent messengers from Kadesh to the king of Edom, to solicit
from the kindred nation a friendly and unimpeded passage through their land. He
reminded the king of the relationship of Israel, of their being brought down to
Egypt, of the oppression they had endured there, and their deliverance out of the
land, and promised him that they would not pass through fields and vineyards, nor
drink the water of their wells, but keep to the king's way, without turning to the
right hand or the left, and thus would do no injury whatever to the land (vv. 14-16).

(Note: We learn from Judg 11:17, that Israel sent messengers from Kadesh to the king of Moab also,
and with a similar commission, and that he also refused to grant the request for an unimpeded passage
through his land. This message is passed over in silence here, because the refusal of the

<- Previous First Next ->

[Link] (2 of 2) [13/08/2004 [Link] p.m.]

 Keil and Delitzsch Commentary on the Old Testament

<- Previous First Next ->

Moabites had no influence upon the further progress of the Israelites. "For if they could not pass
through Edom, the permission of the Moabites would not help them at all. It was only eventualiter that
they sought this permission." - Hengstenberg , Diss.)

By the "angel" who led Israel out of Egypt we are naturally to understand not the
pillar of cloud and fire ( Knobel ), but the angel of the Lord, the visible revealer of
the invisible God, whom the messengers describe indefinitely as "an angel," when
addressing the Edomites. Kadesh is represented in v. 16 as a city on the border of
the Edomitish territory. The reference is to Kadesh-barnea (Num 32:8; 34:4 ; Deut
1:2,19; 2:14; 9:23; Josh 10:41; 14:6-7; 15:3). This city was no doubt situated quite
in the neighbourhood of Ain Kudes , the well of Kadesh, discovered by Rowland.
This well was called En-mishpat , the fountain of judgment, in Abraham's time
(Gen 14:7); and the name Kadesh occurs first of all on the first arrival of the
Israelites in that region, in the account of the events which took place there, as
being the central point of the place of encampment, the "desert of Paran," or
"desert of Zin" (cf. Num 13:26 with v. 21, and ch. 12:16).

And even on the second arrival of the congregation in that locality, it is not
mentioned till after the desert of Zin (Num 20:1); whilst the full name Kadesh-
barnea is used by Moses for the first time in Num 32:8, when reminding the people
of those mournful occurrences in Kadesh in ch. 13 and 14. The conjecture is
therefore a very natural one, that the place in question received the name of Kadesh
first of all from that tragical occurrence (ch. 14), or possibly from the murmuring
of the congregation on account of the want of water, which led Moses and Aaron to
sin, so that the Lord sanctified ( yªqadeesh (OT:6942)) Himself upon them by a
judgment, because they had not sanctified Him before the children of Israel (vv. 12
and 13); that Barnea was the older or original name of the town, which was
situated in the neighbourhood of the "water of strife," and that this name was
afterwards united with Kadesh , and formed into a composite noun.

If this conjecture is a correct one, the name Kadesh is used proleptically, not only
[Link] (1 of 3) [13/08/2004 [Link] p.m.]
 Keil and Delitzsch Commentary on the Old Testament

in Gen 14:7, as a more precise definition of En-mishpat , but also in Gen 16:14;
20:1; and Num 13:26, and 20:1; and there is no lack of analogies for this. It is in
this too that we are probably to seek for an explanation of the fact, that in the list of
stations in ch. 33 the name Kadesh does not occur in connection with the first
arrival of the congregation in the desert of Zin, but only in connection with their
second arrival (v. 36), and that the place of encampment on their first arrival is
called Rithmah , and not Barnea , because the headquarters of the camp were in the
Wady Retemath , not at the town of Barnea , which was farther on in the desert of
Zin. The expression "town of the end of thy territory" is not to be understood as
signifying that the town belonged to the Edomites, but simply affirms that it was
situated on the border of the Edomitish territory.

The supposition that Barnea was an Edomitish town is opposed by the

circumstance that, in Num 34:4, and Josh 15:3, it is reckoned as part of the land of
Canaan; that in Josh 10:41 it is mentioned as the southernmost town, where Joshua
smote the Canaanites and conquered their land; and lastly, that in Josh 15:23 it is
probably classed among the towns allotted to the tribe of Judah, from which it
seems to follow that it must have belonged to the Amorites. "The end of the
territory" of the king of Edom is to be distinguished from "the territory of the land
of Edom" in v. 23. The land of Edom extended westwards only as far as the
Arabah, the low-lying plain, which runs from the southern point of the Dead Sea to
the head of the Elanitic Gulf. At that time, however, the Edomites had spread out
beyond the Arabah, and taken possession of a portion of the desert of Paran
belonging to the peninsula of Sinai, which was bounded on the north by the desert
of Zin (see at Num 34:3). By their not drinking of the water of the wells (v. 17), we
are to understand, according to v. 19, their not making use of the wells of the
Edomites either by violence or without compensation. The "king's way" is the
public high road, which was probably made at the cost of the state, and kept up for
the king and his armies to travel upon, and is synonymous with the "sultan-road" (
Derb es Sultan ) or "emperor road," as the open, broad, old military roads are still
called in the East (cf. Robinson , Pal. ii. 340; Seetzen , i. pp. 61, 132, ii. pp. 336,
etc.).

[Link] (2 of 3) [13/08/2004 [Link] p.m.]

Keil and Delitzsch Commentary on the Old Testament

<- Previous First Next ->

[Link] (3 of 3) [13/08/2004 [Link] p.m.]

 Keil and Delitzsch Commentary on the Old Testament

<- Previous First Next ->

This military road led, no doubt, as Leake has conjectured ( Burckhardt , Syr. pp.
21, 22), through the broad Wady el Ghuweir , which not only forms a direct and
easy passage to the level country through the very steep mountains that fall down
into the Arabah, but also a convenient road through the land of Edom ( Robinson ,
ii. pp. 552, 583, 610), and is celebrated for its splendid meadows, which are
traceable to its many springs ( Burckhardt , pp. 688, 689); for the broad Wady
Murreh runs from the northern border of the mountain-land of Azazimeh, not only
as far as the mountain of Moddera (Madurah), where it is divided, but in its
southern half as far as the Arabah (see pp. 689f.). This is very likely the "great
route through broad wadys," which the Bedouins who accompanied Rowland
assured him "was very good, and led direct to Mount Hor, but with which no
European traveller was acquainted" ( Ritter's Erdk. xiv. p. 1088). It probably opens
into the Arabah at the Wady el Weibeh , opposite to the Wady Ghuweir.

Numbers 20:18-19

And Edom said unto him, Thou shalt not pass by me, lest I come out against thee
with the sword.

The Edomites refused the visit of the Israelites in a most unbrotherly manner, and
threatened to come out against them with the sword, without paying the least
attention to the repeated assurance of the Israelitish messengers, that they would
only march upon the high road, and would pay for water for themselves and their
cattle. 'eeyn-daabaar raq , lit., "it is nothing at all; I will go through with my feet:"
i.e., we want no great thing; we will only make use of the high road.

Numbers 20:20-21

And he said, Thou shalt not go through. And Edom came out against him with
much people, and with a strong hand.

[Link] (1 of 2) [13/08/2004 [Link] p.m.]

 Keil and Delitzsch Commentary on the Old Testament

To give emphasis to his refusal, Edom went against Israel "with much people and
with a strong hand," sc., when they approached its borders. This statement, as well
as the one in v. 21, that Israel turned away before Edom, anticipates the historical
order; for, as a matter of course, the Edomites cannot have come at once with an
army on the track of the messengers, for the purpose of blocking up the road
through the Wady Murreh, which runs along the border of its territory to the west
of the Arabah.

Numbers 20:22-26

And the children of Israel, even the whole congregation, journeyed from Kadesh,
and came unto mount

<- Previous First Next ->

[Link] (2 of 2) [13/08/2004 [Link] p.m.]

 Keil and Delitzsch Commentary on the Old Testament

<- Previous First Next ->

Hor.

Death of Aaron at Mount Hor. - The Israelites left Kadesh, and passed along the
road just mentioned to Mount Hor. This mountain, which was situated, according
to Num 33:37, on the border of the land of Edom, is placed by Josephus (Ant. iv. 4,
7) in the neighbourhood of Petra; so also by Eusebius and Jerome: "Or mons, in
quo mortuus est Aaron, juxta civitatem Petram." According to modern travellers, it
is Mount Harun , on the north-western side of Wady Musa ( Petra ), which is
described by Robinson (vol. ii. p. 508) as "a cone irregularly truncated, having
three ragged points or peaks, of which that upon the north-east is the highest, and
has upon it the Muhammedan Wely, or tomb of Aaron," from which the mountain
has received its name "Harun," i.e., Aaron (vid., Burckhardt , Syr. pp. 715, 716; v.
Schubert, Reise , ii. pp. 419ff.; Ritter, Erdkunde , xiv. pp. 1127ff.). There can be no
doubt as to the general correctness of this tradition;

(Note: There is no force whatever in the arguments by which Knobel has endeavoured to prove that it
is incorrect. The first objection, viz., that the Hebrews reached Mount Hor from Kadesh in a single
march, has no foundation in the biblical text, and cannot be inferred from the circumstance that there is
no place of encampment mentioned between Kadesh and Mount Hor; for, on the one hand, we may
clearly see, not only from Num 21:10, but even from Ex 17:1, as compared with Num 33:41ff. and
12ff., that only those places of encampment are mentioned in the historical account where events
occurred that were worthy of narrating; and, on the other hand, it is evident from Num 10:33, that the
Israelites sometimes continued marching for several days before they formed an encampment again.
The second objection-viz., that if Hor was near Petra, it is impossible to see how the advance of the
Hebrews from Kadesh to Hor could be regarded by the king of Arad, who lived more than thirty hours'
journey to the north, as coming (Num 33:40), not to mention "coming by the way of the spies" (ch.
21:1), and how this king could come into conflict with the Hebrews when posted at Petra-rests upon
the erroneous assumption, that the attack of the king of Arad did not take place till after the death of
Aaron, because it is not mentioned till afterwards.

Lastly, the third objection-viz., that a march from Kadesh in a south-westerly

direction to Wady Musa, and then northwards past Zalmona to Phunon (Num
33:41), is much too adventurous-is overthrown by ch. 21:4, where the Israelites are

[Link] (1 of 2) [13/08/2004 [Link] p.m.]

 Keil and Delitzsch Commentary on the Old Testament

said to have gone from Mount Hor by the way of the Red Sea. (See the notes on
Num 21:10.)) for even if the Mohammedan tradition concerning Aaron's grave is
not well accredited, the situation of this mountain is in perfect harmony with the
statement in v. 23 and Num 33:37, viz., that the Israelites had then reached the
border of the land of Edom. The place where the people encamped is called
Mosera in Deut 10:6, and Moseroth in the list of stations in Num 33:30, and is at
all events to be sought for in the Arabah, in the neighbourhood of Mount Hor ,
though it is altogether unknown to us. The camp of 600,000 men, with their wives,
children, and flocks, would certainly require a space miles wide, and might
therefore easily stretch from the mouths of the Wady el Weibeh and Wady
Ghuweir, in the Arabah, to the neighbourhood of Mount Harun. The place of
encampment is called after this mountain, Hor , both here and in Num 33:37ff.,
because it was there that Aaron died and was buried. The Lord foretold his death to
Moses, and directed him to take off Aaron's priestly robes, and put them upon
Eleazar his son, as Aaron was not to enter the promised land, because they (Aaron
and Moses) had opposed the command of Jehovah at the water of strife (see at v.
12). "Gathered to his people," like the patriarchs (Gen 25:8,17; 35:29; 49:33).

Numbers 20:27-29

And Moses did as the LORD commanded: and they went up into mount Hor in
the sight of all the

<- Previous First Next ->

[Link] (2 of 2) [13/08/2004 [Link] p.m.]

 Keil and Delitzsch Commentary on the Old Testament

<- Previous First Next ->

congregation.

Moses executed this command, and Aaron died upon the top of the mountain,
according to Num 33:37-38, on the first day of the fifth month, in the fortieth year
after the exodus from Egypt, at the age of 123 years (which agrees with Ex 7:7 ),
and was mourned by all Israel for thirty days.

Numbers 21:1-3

And when king Arad the Canaanite, which dwelt in the south, heard tell that
Israel came by the way of the spies; then he fought against Israel, and took some
of them prisoners.

Victory of Israel over the Canaanitish King of Arad. - When this Canaanitish king,
who dwelt in the Negeb, i.e., the south of Palestine (vid., Num 13:17), heard that
Israel was coming the way of the spies, he made war upon the Israelites, and took
some of them prisoners. Arad is mentioned both here and in the parallel passage,
Num 33:40, and also by the side of Hormah , in Josh 12:14, as the seat of a
Canaanitish king (cf. Judg 1:16-17). According to Eusebius and Jerome in the
Onomast. , it was twenty Roman miles to the south of Hebron, and has been
preserved in the ruins of Tell Arad , which v. Schubert (ii. pp. 457ff.) and Robinson
(ii. pp. 473, 620, and 624) saw in the distance; and, according to Roth in
Petermann's geographische Mittheilungen (1858, p. 269), it was situated to the
south-east of Kurmul (Carmel), in an undulating plain, without trees or shrubs,
with isolated hills and ranges of hills in all directions, among which was Tell Arad.
The meaning of haa'ataariym (OT:871) derekª (OT:1870) is uncertain. The LXX,
Saad. , and others, take the word Atharim as the proper name of a place not
mentioned again; but the Chaldee, Samar. , and Syr. render it with much greater
probability as an appellative noun formed from tuwr (OT:2905) with ' (OT:589)
prosthet., and synonymous with hataariym (OT:8446), the spies (Num 14:6). The

[Link] (1 of 2) [13/08/2004 [Link] p.m.]

 Keil and Delitzsch Commentary on the Old Testament

way of the spies was the way through the desert of Zin, which the Israelitish
spies had previously taken to Canaan (Num 13:21). The territory of the king of
Arad extended to the southern frontier of Canaan, to the desert of Zin, through
which the Israelites went from Kadesh to Mount Hor. The Canaanites attacked
them when upon their march, and made some of them prisoners.

Verse 2-3. The Israelites then vowed to the Lord, that if He would give this people
into their hands, they would "ban" their cities; and the Lord hearkened to the
request, and delivered up the Canaanites, so that they put them and their cities
under the ban. (On the ban, see at Lev 27:28). "And they called the place Hormah,"
i.e., banning, ban-place. "The place" can only mean the spot where the Canaanites
were defeated by the Israelites. If the town of Zephath, or the capital of Arad, had
been specially intended, it would no doubt have been also mentioned, as in Judg
1:17. As it was not the intention of Moses to press into Canaan from the south,
across the steep and difficult mountains, for the purpose of effecting its conquest,
the Israelites could very well content themselves for the present with the defeat
inflicted upon the Canaanites, and defer the complete execution of their vow until
the time when they had gained a firm footing in Canaan. The banning of the
Canaanites of Arad and its cities necessarily presupposed the immediate conquest
of the whole territory, and the laying of all its cities in ashes.

And so, again, the introduction of a king of Hormah , i.e., Zephath , among the
kings defeated by Joshua (Josh 12:14), is no proof that Zephath was conquered and
called Hormah in the time of Moses. Zephath may be called Hormah proleptically
both there and in Josh 19:4, as being the southernmost border town of the kingdom
of Arad, in consequence of the ban suspended by Moses over the territory of the
king of Arad, and may not have received this name till after its conquest by the
Judaeans and Simeonites. At the same time, it is quite conceivable that

<- Previous First Next ->

[Link] (2 of 2) [13/08/2004 [Link] p.m.]

 Keil and Delitzsch Commentary on the Old Testament

<- Previous First Next ->

Zephath may have been captured in the time of Joshua, along with the other towns
of the south, and called Hormah at that time, but that the Israelites could not hold it
then; and therefore, after the departure of the Israelitish army, the old name was
restored by the Canaanites, or rather only retained, until the city was retaken and
permanently held by the Israelites after Joshua's death (Judg 1:16-17), and received
the new name once for all. The allusion to Hormah here, and in Num 14:45, does
not warrant the opinion in any case, that it was subsequently to the death of Moses
and the conquest of Canaan under Joshua that the war with the Canaanites of Arad
and their overthrow occurred.

March round the Land of Edom and Moab. Conquest of Sihon and
Og, Kings of the Amorites. Ch. 21:4-35.
Numbers 21:4-9

And they journeyed from mount Hor by the way of the Red sea, to compass the
land of Edom: and the soul of the people was much discouraged because of the
way.

March of Israel through the Arabah. Plague of Serpents, and Brazen Serpent. - V.
4. As the Edomites refused a passage through their land when the Israelites left
Mount Hor, they were obliged to take the way to the Red Sea, in order to go round
the land of Edom, that is to say, to go down the Arabah to the head of the Elanitic
Gulf.

Verse 5-6. As they went along this road the people became impatient ("the soul of
the people was much discouraged," see Ex 6:9), and they began once more to
murmur against God and Moses, because they had neither bread nor water (cf.
Num 20:4ff.), and were tired of the loose, i.e., poor, food of manna ( qªloqeel
(OT:7052) from qaalal (OT:7043)). The low-lying plain of the Arabah, which runs

[Link] (1 of 2) [13/08/2004 [Link] p.m.]

 Keil and Delitzsch Commentary on the Old Testament

between steep mountain walls from the Dead Sea to the Red Sea, would be most
likely to furnish the Israelites with very little food, except the manna which God
gave them; for although it is not altogether destitute of vegetation, especially at the
mouths of the wadys and winter torrents from the hills, yet on the whole it is a
horrible desert, with a loose sandy soil, and drifts of granite and other stones,
where terrible sand-storms sometimes arise from the neighbourhood of the Red Sea
(see
v. Schubert , R. ii. pp. 396ff., and Ritter, Erdk. xiv. pp. 1013ff.); and the want of
food might very frequently be accompanied by the absence of drinkable water. The
people rebelled in consequence, and were punished by the Lord with fiery serpents,
the bite of which caused many to die. sªraapiym (OT:8314) nªchaashiym
(OT:5173), lit., burning snakes, so called from their burning, i.e., inflammatory
bite, which filled with heat and poison, just as many of the snakes were called by
the Greeks, e.g., the dipsa's preestee'res , and kau'soones (NT:2742) ( Dioscor.
vii. 13: Aelian. nat. anim. vi. 51), not from the skin of these snakes with fiery red
spots, which are frequently found in the Arabah, and are very poisonous.

(Note: This is the account given by v. Schubert , R. ii. p. 406: "In the afternoon they brought us a very
mottled snake of a large size, marked with fiery red spots and wavy stripes, which belonged to the
most poisonous species, as the formation of its teeth clearly showed. According to the assertion of the
Bedouins, these snakes, which they greatly dreaded, were very common in that neighbourhood.")

Verse 7. This punishment brought the people to reflection. They confessed their sin
to Moses, and entreated him to

<- Previous First Next ->

[Link] (2 of 2) [13/08/2004 [Link] p.m.]

 Keil and Delitzsch Commentary on the Old Testament

<- Previous First Next ->

Verse 7. This punishment brought the people to reflection. They confessed their sin
to Moses, and entreated him to deliver them from the plague through his
intercession with the Lord. And the Lord helped them; in such a way, however,
that the reception of help was made to depend upon the faith of the people.

Verse 8-9. At the command of God, Moses made a brazen serpent , and put it upon
a standard.

(Note: For the different views held by early writers concerning the brazen serpent, see Buxtorf,
historia serp. aen. , in his Exercitt. pp. 458ff.; Deyling, observatt. ss. ii. obs. 15, pp. 156ff.; Vitringa,
observ. ss. 1, pp. 403ff.; Jo. Marck, Scripturariae Exercitt. exerc. 8, pp. 465ff.; Iluth, Serpens
exaltatus non contritoris sed conterendi imago , Erl. 1758; Gottfr. Menken on the brazen serpent;
Sack, Apologetick, 2 Ausg. pp. 355ff. Hofmann, Weissagung u. Erfüllung , ii. pp. 142, 143; Kurtz ,
History of the Old Covenant, iii. 345ff.; and the commentators on John 3:14 and 15.)

Whoever then of the persons bitten by the poisonous serpents looked at the brazen
serpent with faith in the promise of God, lived, i.e., recovered from the serpent's
bite. The serpent was to be made of brass or copper, because the colour of this
metal, when the sun was shining upon it, was most like the appearance of the fiery
serpents; and thus the symbol would be more like the thing itself.

Even in the book of Wisdom (Num 16:6-7), the brazen serpent is called "a symbol
of salvation; for he that turned himself toward it was not saved by the thing that he
saw, but by Thee, that art the Saviour of all." It was not merely intended, however,
as Ewald supposes ( Gesch. ii. p. 228), as a "sign that just as this serpent hung
suspended in the air, bound and rendered harmless by the command of Jehovah, so
every one who looked at this with faith in the redeeming power of Jehovah, was
secured against the evil-a figurative sign, therefore, like that of St. George and the
Dragon among ourselves;" for, according to this, there would be no internal causal
link between the fiery serpents and the brazen image of a serpent. It was rather

[Link] (1 of 3) [13/08/2004 [Link] p.m.]

 Keil and Delitzsch Commentary on the Old Testament

intended as a figurative representation of the poisonous serpents, rendered

harmless by the mercy of God. For God did not cause a real serpent to be taken,
but the image of a serpent, in which the fiery serpent was stiffened, as it were, into
dead brass, as a sign that the deadly poison of the fiery serpents was overcome in
this brazen serpent.

This is not to be regarded as a symbol of the divine healing power; nor is the
selection of such a symbol to be deduced and explained, as it is by Winer, Kurtz,
Knobel , and others, from the symbolical view that was common to all the heathen
religions of antiquity, that the serpent was a beneficent and health-bringing power,
which led to its being exalted into a symbol of the healing power, and a
representation of the gods of healing. This heathen view is not only foreign to the
Old Testament, and without any foundation in the fact that, in the time of
Hezekiah, the people paid a superstitious worship to the brazen serpent erected by
Moses (2 Kings 18:4); but it is irreconcilably opposed to the biblical view of the
serpent, as the representative of evil, which was founded upon Gen 3:15, and is
only traceable to the magical art of serpent-charming, which the Old Testament
abhorred as an idolatrous abomination. To this we may add, that the thought which
lies at the foundation of this explanation, viz., that poison is to be cured by poison,
has no support in Hos 13:4, but is altogether foreign to the Scriptures. God
punishes sin, it is true, by sin; but He neither cures sin by sin, nor death by death.
On the contrary, to conquer sin it was necessary that the Redeemer should be
without sin; and to take away its power from death, it was requisite that Christ, the
Prince of life, who had life in Himself, should rise again from death and the grave
(John 5:26; 11:25; Acts 3:15; 2 Tim 1:10).

The brazen serpent became a symbol of salvation on the three grounds which
Luther pointed out. In the first place, the serpent which Moses was to make by the
command of God was to be of brass or copper, that is to say, of a reddish colour,
and (although without poison) altogether like the persons who were red and
burning with heat because of the bite of the fiery serpents. In the second place, the
brazen serpent was to be set up upon a pole for a

[Link] (2 of 3) [13/08/2004 [Link] p.m.]

Keil and Delitzsch Commentary on the Old Testament

<- Previous First Next ->

[Link] (3 of 3) [13/08/2004 [Link] p.m.]

 Keil and Delitzsch Commentary on the Old Testament

<- Previous First Next ->

sign. And in the third place, those who desired to recover from the fiery serpent's
bite and live, were to look at the brazen serpent upon the pole, otherwise they
could not recover or live ( Luther's Sermon on John 3:1-15). It was in these three
points, as Luther has also clearly shown, that the typical character of this symbol
lay, to which Christ referred in His conversation with Nicodemus (John 3:14). The
brazen serpent had the form of a real serpent, but was "without poison, and
altogether harmless."

So God sent His Son in the form of sinful flesh, and yet without sin (Rom 8:3; 2
Cor 5:21; 1 Peter 2:22-24). 2. In the lifting up of the serpent as a standard. This
was a deigmati'zein (NT:1165) en (NT:1722) parreesi'a (NT:3954), a
thriambeu'ein (a "showing openly," or "triumphing"), a triumphal exhibition of the
poisonous serpents as put to death in the brazen image, just as the lifting up of
Christ upon the cross was a public triumph over the evil principalities and powers
below the sky (Col 2:14-15). 3. In the cure effected through looking at the image of
the serpent. Just as the Israelites had to turn their eyes to the brazen serpent in
believing obedience to the word of the Lord, in order to be cured of the bite of the
poisonous serpents, so much we look with faith at the Son of man lifted up upon
the cross, if we would be delivered from the bite of the old serpent, from sin, death,
the devil, and hell. "Christ is the antitype of the serpent, inasmuch as He took upon
Himself the most pernicious of all pernicious potencies, viz., sin, and made a
vicarious atonement for it" ( Hengstenberg on John 3:14). The brazen image of the
serpent was taken by the Israelites to Canaan, and preserved till the time of
Hezekiah, who had it broken in pieces, because the idolatrous people had presented
incense-offerings to this holy relic (2 Kings 18:4).

Numbers 21:10-20

And the children of Israel set forward, and pitched in Oboth.

[Link] (1 of 2) [13/08/2004 [Link] p.m.]

 Keil and Delitzsch Commentary on the Old Testament

March of Israel round Edom and Moab, to the Heights of Pisgah in the Field of
Moab (cf. Num 33:41-47). - V.
10. From the camp in the Arabah, which is not more particularly described, where
the murmuring people were punished by fiery serpents, Israel removed to Oboth.
According to the list of stations in Num 33:41ff., they went from Hor to Zalmonah
, the situation of which has not been determined; for C. v. Raumer's conjecture (
der Zug der Israeliten , p. 45), that it was the same place as the modern Maan , has
no firm basis in the fact that Maan is a station of the Syrian pilgrim caravans. From
Zalmonah they went to Phunon , and only then to Oboth. The name Phunon is no
doubt the same as Phinon , a tribe-seat of the Edomitish Phylarch (Gen. 34:41 );
and according to Jerome ( Onom. s. v. Fenon ), it was "a little village in the desert,
where copper was dug up by condemned criminals (see at Gen 36:41), between
Petra and Zoar." This statement suits very well, provided we imagine the situation
of Phunon to have been not in a straight line between Petra and Zoar, but more to
the east, between the mountains on the edge of the desert.

For the Israelites unquestionably went from the southern end of the Arabah to the
eastern side of Idumaea, through the Wady el Ithm ( Getum ), which opens into the
Arabah from the east, a few hours to the north of Akaba and the ancient Ezion-
geber. They had then gone round the mountains of Edom, and begun to "turn to the
north" (Deut 2:3), so that they now proceeded farther northwards, on the eastern
side of the mountains of Edom, "through the territory of the sons of Esau," no
doubt by the same road which is taken in the present day by the caravans which go
from Gaza to Maan, through the Ghor. "This runs upon a grassy ridge, forming the
western border of the coast of Arabia, and the eastern border of the cultivated land,
which stretches from the land of Edom to the sources of the Jordan, on the eastern
side of the Ghor" ( v. Raumer , Zug, p. 45). On the western side of their mountains
the Edomites had refused permission to the Israelites to pass through their land
(Num 20:18ff.), as the mountains of

<- Previous First Next ->

[Link] (2 of 2) [13/08/2004 [Link] p.m.]

 Keil and Delitzsch Commentary on the Old Testament

<- Previous First Next ->

Seir terminate towards the Ghor (the Arabah) in steep and lofty precipices, and
there are only two or three narrow wadys which intersect them from west to east;
and of these the Wady Ghuweir is the only one which is practicable for an army,
and even this could be held so securely by a moderate army, that no enemy could
force its way into the heart of the country (see Leake in Burckhardt , pp. 21, 22;
and Robinson , ii. p. 583).

It was different on the eastern side, where the mountains slope off into a wide
extent of table-land, which is only slightly elevated above the desert of Arabia.
Here, on the weaker side of their frontier, the Edomites lost the heart to make any
attack upon the Israelites, who would now have been able to requite their
hostilities. But the Lord had commanded Israel not to make war upon the sons of
Esau; but when passing through their territory, to purchase food and water from
them for money (Deut 2:4-6). The Edomites submitted to the necessity, and
endeavoured to take advantage of it, by selling provisions, "in the same way in
which, at the present day, the caravan from Mecca is supplied with provisions by
the inhabitants of the mountains along the pilgrim road" ( Leake in Burckhardt , p.
24). The situation of Oboth cannot be determined.

Verse 11-12. The next encampment was "Ije-Abarim in the desert, which lies
before Moab towards the sun-rising," i.e., on the eastern border of Moabitis (Num
33:44). As the Wady el Ahsy , which runs into the Dead Sea, in a deep and narrow
rocky bed, from the south-east, and is called el Kerahy in its lower part (
Burckhardt , Syr. pp. 673-4), separates Idumaea from Moabitis; Ije-Abarim (i.e.,
ruins of the crossings over) must be sought for on the border of Moab to the north
of this wady, but is hardly to be found, as Knobel supposes, on the range of hills
called el Tarfuye , which is known by the name of Orokaraye , still farther to the
south, and terminates on the south-west of Kerek , whilst towards the north it is
continued in the range of hills called el Ghoweithe and the mountain range of el
Zoble; even supposing that the term Abarim , "the passages or sides," is to be
understood as referring to these ranges of hills and mountains which skirt the land
[Link] (1 of 3) [13/08/2004 [Link] p.m.]
 Keil and Delitzsch Commentary on the Old Testament

of the Amorites and Moabites, and form the enclosing sides.

For the boundary line between the hills of el-Tarfuye and those of el-Ghoweithe is
so near to the Arnon, that there is not the necessary space between it and the Arnon
for the encampment at the brook Zared (v. 12). Ije-Abarim or Jim cannot have been
far from the northern shore of the el Ahsy , and was probably in the neighbourhood
of Kalaat el Hassa (Ahsa), the source of the Ahsy , and a station for the pilgrim
caravans ( Burckhardt , p. 1035). As the Moabites were also not to be attacked by
the Israelites (Deut 2:9ff.), they passed along the eastern border of Moabitis as far
as the brook Zared (v. 12). This can hardly have been the Wady el-Ahsy (
Robinson , ii. p. 555; Ewald, Gesch. ii. p. 259; Ritter, Erdk. xv. p. 689); for that
must already have been crossed when they came to the border of Moab (v. 11). Nor
can it well have been "the brook Zaide , which runs from the south-east, passes
between the mountain ranges of Ghoweithe and Tarfuye , and enters the Arnon, of
which it forms the leading source," - the view adopted by Knobel , on the very
questionable ground that the name is a corruption of Zared. In all probability it was
the Wady Kerek , in the upper part of its course, not far from Katrane , on the
pilgrim road ( v. Raumer , Zug, p. 47: Kurtz , and others).

Verse 13. The next encampment was "beyond (i.e., by the side of) the Arnon,
which is in the desert, and that cometh out of the territory of the Amorites." The
Arnon , i.e., the present Wady Mojeb , is formed by the union of the Seyl (i.e.,
brook or river) Saïde , which comes from the south-east, not far from Katrane, on
the pilgrim road, and the Lejum from the north-east, which receives the small rivers
el Makhreys and Balua , the latter flowing from the pilgrim station Kalaat Balua ,
and then continues its course to the Dead Sea, through a deep and narrow valley,
shut in by very steep and lofty cliffs, and covered with blocks of stone, that have
been brought down from the loftier ground ( Burckhardt , pp. 633ff.), so that there
are only a few places where it is passable; and consequently a wandering people
like the Israelites could not have crossed the Mojeb itself to force an entrance into
the territory of the hostile Amorites.

[Link] (2 of 3) [13/08/2004 [Link] p.m.]

Keil and Delitzsch Commentary on the Old Testament

<- Previous First Next ->

[Link] (3 of 3) [13/08/2004 [Link] p.m.]

 Keil and Delitzsch Commentary on the Old Testament

<- Previous First Next ->

(Note: It is utterly inconceivable that a whole people, travelling with all their possessions as well as
with their flocks, should have been exposed without necessity to the dangers and enormous difficulties
that would attend the crossing of so dreadfully wild and so deep a valley, and that merely for the
purpose of forcing an entrance into an enemy's country. - Ritter, Erdk. xv. p. 1207.)

For the Arnon formed the boundary between Moab and the country of the
Amorites. The spot where Israel encamped on the Arnon must be sought for in the
upper part of its course, where it is still flowing "in the desert;" not at Wady Zaïde ,
however, although Burckhardt calls this the main source of the Mojeb, but at the
Balua , which flows into the Lejum. In all probability these streams, of which the
Lejum came from the north, already bore the name of Arnon; as we may gather
from the expression, "that cometh out of the coasts of the Amorites." The place of
Israel's encampment, "beyond the Arnon in the desert," is to be sought for,
therefore, in the neighbourhood of Kalaat Balua , and on the south side of the
Arnon ( Balua ). This is evident enough from Deut 2:24,26ff., where the Israelites
are represented as entering the territory of the Amoritish king Sihon, when they
crossed the Arnon, having first of all sent a deputation, with a peaceable request for
permission to pass through his land (cf. vv. 21ff.). Although this took place,
according to Deut 2:26, "out of the wilderness of Kedemoth," an Amoritish town, it
by no means follows that the Israelites had already crossed the Arnon and entered
the territory of the Amorites, but only that they were standing on the border of it,
and in the desert which took its name from Kedemoth, and ran up to this, the most
easterly town, as the name seems to imply, of the country of the Amorites. After
the conquest of the country, Kedemoth was allotted to the Reubenites (Josh 13:18),
and made into a Levitical city (Josh 21:37; 1 Chron 6:64).

The Israelites now received instructions from the Lord, to cross the river Arnon,
and make war upon the Amoritish king Sihon of Heshbon, and take possession of
his land, with the assurance that the Lord had given Sihon into the hand of Israel,
and would fill all nations before them with fear and trembling (Deut 2:24-25). This
summons, with its attendant promises, not only filled the Israelites with courage

[Link] (1 of 2) [13/08/2004 [Link] p.m.]

 Keil and Delitzsch Commentary on the Old Testament

and strength to enter upon the conflict with the mightiest of all the tribes of the
Canaanites, but inspired poets in the midst of them to commemorate in odes the
wars of Jehovah, and His victories over His foes. A few verses are given here out
of one of these odes (vv. 14ff.), not for the purpose of verifying the geographical
statement, that the Arnon touches the border of Moabitis, or that the Israelites had
only arrived at the border of the Moabite and Amorite territory, but as an evidence
that there, on the borders of Moab, the Israelites had been inspired through the
divine promises with the firm assurance that they should be able to conquer the
land of the Amorites which lay before them.

Verse 14-15. "Therefore," sc., because the Lord had thus given king Sihon, with
all his land, into the hand of Israel, "it is written in the book of the wars of the
Lord: Vaheb (Jehovah takes) in storm, and the brooks of Arnon and the valley of
the brooks, which turns to the dwelling of Ar, and leans upon the border of Moab."
The book of the wars of Jehovah is neither an Amoritish book of the conflicts of
Baal, in which the warlike feats performed by Sihon and other Amoritish heroes
with the help of Baal were celebrated in verse, as G. Unruh fabulously asserts in
his Zug der Isr. aus Aeg. nach Canaan (p. 130), nor a work "dating from the time
of Jehoshaphat, containing the early history of the Israelites, from the Hebrew
patriarchs till past the time of Joshua, with the law interwoven," which is the
character that Knobel's critical fancy would stamp upon it, but a collection of odes
of the time of Moses himself, in celebration of the glorious acts of the Lord to and
for the Israelites; and "the quotation bears the same relation to the history itself, as
the verses of Körner would bear to the writings of any historian of the wars of
freedom, who had himself taken part in these wars, and introduced the verses into
his own historical work" ( Hengstenberg ).

(Note: "That such a book should arise in the last days of Moses, when the youthful generation

<- Previous First Next ->

[Link] (2 of 2) [13/08/2004 [Link] p.m.]

 Keil and Delitzsch Commentary on the Old Testament

<- Previous First Next ->

began for the first time to regard and manifest itself, both vigorously and generally, as the army of
Jehovah, is so far from being a surprising fact, that we can scarcely imagine a more suitable time for
the commencement of such a work" ( Baumgarten ). And if this is the case, the allusion to this
collection of odes cannot be adduced as an argument against the Mosaic authorship of the Pentateuch,
since Moses certainly did not write out the history of the journey from Kadesh to the Arboth Moab
until after the two kings of the Amorites had been defeated, and the land to the east of the Jordan
conquered, or till the Israelites had encamped in the steppes of Moab, opposite to Jericho.)

The strophe selected from the ode has neither subject nor verb in it, as the ode was
well known to the contemporaries, and what had to be supplied could easily be
gathered from the title, "Wars of Jehovah." Vaheb is no doubt the proper name of
an Amoritish fortress; and bªcuwpaah (OT:5492), "in storm," is to be explained
according to Nah 1:3, "The Lord, in the storm is His way." "Advancing in storm,
He took Vaheb and the brooks of Arnon," i.e., the different wadys, valleys cut by
brooks, which open into the Arnon. hanªchaaliym (OT:5158) 'eshed (OT:793), lit.,
pouring of the brooks, from 'eshed (OT:793), effusio , the pouring, then the place
where brooks pour down, the slope of mountains or hills, for which the term
'asheedaah (OT:794) is generally used in the plural, particularly to denote the
slopes of the mountains of Pisgah (Deut 3:17; 4:49; Josh 12:3; 13:20), and the hilly
region of Palestine, which formed the transition from the mountains to the plain
(Josh 10:40 and 12:8). shebet (OT:3427), the dwelling, used poetically for the
dwelling-place, as in 2 Sam 23:7 and Obad 3. `aar (OT:6144) ( Ar ), the antiquated
form for `iyr (OT:5892), a city, is the same as Ar Moab in v. 28 and Isa 15:1, "the
city of Moab, on the border of the Arnon, which is at the end of the (Moabitish)
territory" (Num 22:36).

It was called Areopolis by the Greeks, and was near to Aroër (Deut 2:36 and Josh
13:9), probably standing at the confluence of the Lejum and Mojeb, in the "fine
green pasture land, in the midst of which there is a hill with some ruins," and not
far away the ruin of a small castle, with a heap of broken columns ( Burckhardt ,
Syr. p. 636). This Ar is not to be identified with the modern Rabba , in the midst of
the land of the Moabites, six hours to the south of Lejum, to which the name

[Link] (1 of 3) [13/08/2004 [Link] p.m.]

 Keil and Delitzsch Commentary on the Old Testament

Areopolis was transferred in the patristic age, probably after the destruction of Ar ,
the ancient Areopolis, by an earthquake, of which Jerome gives an account in
connection with his own childhood (see his Com. on Isa 15), possibly the
earthquake which occurred in the year A.D. 342 AD, and by which many cities of
the East were destroyed, and among others Nicomedia (cf. Hengstenberg, Balaam ,
pp. 525-528; Ritter, Erdkunde , xv. pp. 1212ff.; and v. Raumer, Palästina , pp. 270,
271, Ed. 4).

Verse 16-19. They proceeded thence to Beer ( a well ), a place of encampment

which received its name from the fact that here God gave the people water, not as
before by a miraculous supply from a rock, but by commanding wells to be dug.
This is evident from the ode with which the congregation commemorated this
divine gift of grace. "Then Israel sang this song: Spring up, O well! Sing ye to it!
Well which princes dug, which the nobles of the people hollowed out, with the
sceptre, with their staves." `aanaah (OT:6030), as in Ex 15:21 and 32:18.
mªchoqeeq (OT:2710), ruler's staff, cf. Gen 49:10. Beer , probably the same as
Beer Elim (Isa 15:8), on the north-east of Moab, was in the desert; for the Israelites
proceeded thence "from the desert to Mattanah" (v.
18), thence to Nahaliel, and thence to Bamoth. According to Eusebius (cf. Reland,
Pal. ill. p. 495), Mattanah ( Maththane'm (NT:3156)) was by the valley of the
Arnon, twelve Roman miles to the east (or more properly south-east or south) of
Medabah , and is probably to be seen in Tedun , a place now lying in ruins, near
the source of the Lejum ( Burckhardt , pp. 635, 636; Hengstenberg, Balaam , p.
530; Knobel , and others).

The name of Nahaliel is still retained in the form Encheileh. This is the name given
to the Lejum, after it has been joined by the Balua, until its junction with the Saide
( Burckhardt , p. 635). Consequently the Israelites went from Beer in the desert, in
a north-westerly direction to Tedun , then westwards to the northern bank of the
Encheileh , and then still farther in a north-westerly and northerly direction to
Bamoth. There can be no doubt that Bamoth is identical with Bamoth Baal , i.e.,
heights of Baal (Num 22:4). According to Josh 13:17 (cf. Isa 15:2), Bamoth was

[Link] (2 of 3) [13/08/2004 [Link] p.m.]

Keil and Delitzsch Commentary on the Old Testament

<- Previous First Next ->

[Link] (3 of 3) [13/08/2004 [Link] p.m.]

 Keil and Delitzsch Commentary on the Old Testament

<- Previous First Next ->

near to Dibon ( Dibân ), between the Wady Wale and Wady Mojeb, and also to
Beth-Baal Meon , i.e., Myun , half a German mile (2 1/2 English) to the south of
Heshbon; and, according to Num 22:41, you could see Bamoth Baal from the
extremity of the Israelitish camp in the steppes of Moab. Consequently Bamoth
cannot be the mountain to the south of Wady Wale, upon the top of which
Burckhardt says there is a very beautiful plain (p. 632; see Hengstenberg , Balaam,
p. 532); because the steppes of Moab cannot be seen at all from this plain, as they
are covered by the Jebel Attarus. It is rather a height upon the long mountain
Attarus , which runs along the southern shore of the Zerka Maein, and may
possibly be a spot upon the summit of the Jebel Attarus, "the highest point in the
neighbourhood," upon which, according to Burckhardt (p. 630), there is "a heap of
stones overshadowed by a very large pistachio-tree." A little farther down to the
south-west of this lies the fallen town Kereijat (called Körriat by Seetzen , ii. p.
342), i.e., Kerioth , Jer 48:24; Amos 2:2.

Verse 20. From Bamoth they proceeded "to the valley, which (is) in the field of
Moab, upon the top of Pisgah, and looks across the face of the desert." hapicªgaah
(OT:6449) ro'sh (OT:7218), head, or height of the Pisgah , is in apposition to the
field of Moab. The "field of Moab" was a portion of the table-land which stretches
from Rabbath Ammân to the Arnon, which "is perfectly treeless for an immense
distance in one part (viz., the neighbourhood of Eleale ), but covered over with the
ruins of towns that have been destroyed," and which "extends to the desert of
Arabia towards the east, and slopes off to the Jordan and the Dead Sea towards the
west" ( v. Raumer , Pal. p. 71). It is identical with "the whole plain from Medeba to
Dibon" (Josh 13:9), and "the whole plain by Medeba" (v. 16), in which Heshbon
and its cities were situated (v. 17; cf. v. 21 and Deut 3:10).

The valley in this tableland was upon the height of Pisgah , i.e., the northern part
of the mountains of Abarim, and looked across the surface of the desert. Jeshimon ,
the desert, is the plain of Ghor el Belka , i.e., the valley of desolation on the north-
eastern border of the Dead Sea, which stretches from the Wady Menshalla or
[Link] (1 of 3) [13/08/2004 [Link] p.m.]
 Keil and Delitzsch Commentary on the Old Testament

Wady Ghuweir ( el Guer ) to the small brook el Szuême ( Wady es Suweimeh on

Van de Velde's map) at the Dead Sea, and narrows it more and more at the northern
extremity on this side. "Ghor el Belka consists in part of a barren, salt, and stony
soil; though there are some portions which can be cultivated. To the north of the
brook el Szuême , the great plain of the Jordan begins, which is utterly without
fertility till you reach the Nahr Hesbân , about two hours distant, and produces
nothing but bitter, salt herbs for camels" ( Seetzen , ii. pp. 373, 374), and which
was probably reckoned as part of Jeshimon , since Beth-jeshimoth was situated
within it (see at Num 23:28). The valley in which the Israelites were encamped in
the field of Moab upon the top of Pisgah, is therefore to be sought for to the west
of Heshbon, on the mountain range of Abarim, which slopes off into the Ghor el
Belka. From this the Israelites advanced into the Arboth Moab (see Num 22:1).

If we compare the places of encampment named in vv. 11-20 with the list of
stations in Num 33:41-49, we find, instead of the seven places, mentioned here
between Ijje Abarim and the Arboth Moab , - viz., Brook Zared, on the other side
of the Arnon in the desert, Beer, Mattana, Nahaliel, Bamoth, and the valley in the
field of Moab upon the top of Pisgah-only three places given, viz., Dibon of Gad,
Almon Diblathaim , and Mount Abarim before Nebo. That the last of these is only
another name for the valley in the field of Moab upon the top of Pisgah, is
undoubtedly proved by the fact that, according to Deut 34:1 (cf. Num 3:27), Mount
Nebo was a peak of Pisgah , and that it was situated, according to Deut 32:49,
upon the mountains of Abarim , from which it is evident at once that the Pisgah
was a portion of the mountains of Abarim , and in fact the northern portion
opposite to Jericho (see at Num 27:12).

The two other differences in the names may be explained from the circumstance
that the space occupied by the encampment of the Israelites, an army of 600,000
men, with their wives, children, and cattle, when once they reached the inhabited
country with its towns and villages, where every spot had its own fixed name, must
have extended over several places, so that the very same encampment might be
called by one or other of the places upon which it touched. If Dibon Gad (Num

[Link] (2 of 3) [13/08/2004 [Link] p.m.]

 Keil and Delitzsch Commentary on the Old Testament

33:45) was the Dibon built (i.e., rebuilt or fortified) by the Gadites

<- Previous First Next ->

[Link] (3 of 3) [13/08/2004 [Link] p.m.]

 Keil and Delitzsch Commentary on the Old Testament

<- Previous First Next ->

after the conquest of the land (Num 32:3,34), and allotted to the Reubenites (Josh
13:9,17), which is still traceable in the ruins of Dibân , an hour to the north of the
Arnon ( v. Raumer, Pal. p. 261), (and there is no reason to doubt it), then the place
of encampment, Nahaliel ( Encheile ), was identical with Dibon of Gad, and was
placed after this town in Num 33:45, because the camp of the Israelites extended as
far as Dibon along the northern bank of that river.

Almon Diblathaim also stands in the same relation to Bamoth. The two places do
not appear to have been far from one another; for Almon Diblathaim is probably
identical with Beth Diblathaim , which is mentioned in Jer 48:22 along with Dibon,
Nebo , and other Moabite towns, and is to be sought for to the north or north-west
of Dibon. For, according to Jerome ( Onom. s. v. Jassa ), Jahza was between
Medaba and Deblatai , for which Eusebius has written Deebou's by mistake for
Diboo'n ; Eusebius having determined the relative position of Jahza according to a
more southerly place, Jerome according to one farther north. The camp of the
Israelites therefore may easily have extended from Almon or Beth-diblathaim to
Bamoth, and might very well take its name from either place.

(Note: Neither this difference in the names of the places of encampment, nor the material diversity-
viz., that in the chapter before us there are four places more introduced than in ch. 33, whereas in
every other case the list in ch. 33 contains a larger number of stations than we read of in the historical
account-at all warrants the hypothesis, that the present chapter is founded upon a different document
from ch. 33. For they may be explained in a very simple manner, as Kurtz has most conclusively
demonstrated (vol. iii. pp. 383-5), from the diversity in the character of the two chapters. Ch. 33 is
purely statistical. The catalogue given there "contains a complete list in regular order of all the stations
properly so called, that is to say, of those places of encampment where Israel made a longer stay than
at other times, and therefore not only constructed an organized camp, but also set up the tabernacle." In
the historical account, on the other hand, the places mentioned are simply those which were of
historical importance. For this reason there are fewer stations introduced between Mount Hor and Ijje
Abarim than in ch. 33, stations where nothing of importance occurred being passed over; but, on the
other hand, there are a larger number mentioned between Ijje Abarim and Arboth Moab, and some of
them places where no complete camp was constructed with the tabernacle set up, probably because
they were memorable as starting-points for the expeditions into the two Amorite kingdoms.)

[Link] (1 of 2) [13/08/2004 [Link] p.m.]

 Keil and Delitzsch Commentary on the Old Testament

Numbers 21:21-35

And Israel sent messengers unto Sihon king of the Amorites, saying,

Defeat of the Amorite Kings, Sihon of Heshbon and Og of Bashan, and Conquest
of their Kingdoms.

Verse 21-23. When the Israelites reached the eastern border of the kingdom of the
Amorite king Sihon (see at v.
13), they sent messengers to him, as they had previously done to the king of Edom,
to ask permission to pass peaceably through his territory upon the high road (cf. v.
22 and Num 20:17); and Sihon refused this request, just as the king of Edom had
done, and marched with all his people against the Israelites. But whereas the Lord
forbade the Israelites to make war upon their kinsmen the Edomites, He now
commanded them to make war upon the Amorite king, and take possession of his
land (Deut 2:24-25); for the Amorites belonged to the Canaanitish tribes which
were ripe for the judgment of extermination (Gen 15:16). And if, notwithstanding
this, the Israelites sent to him with words of peace (Deut 2:26), this was simply
done to leave the decision of his fate in his own hand (see at

<- Previous First Next ->

[Link] (2 of 2) [13/08/2004 [Link] p.m.]

 Keil and Delitzsch Commentary on the Old Testament

<- Previous First Next ->

Deut 2:24). Sihon came out against the Israelites into the desert as far as Jahza ,
where a battle was fought, in which he was defeated. The accounts of the Onom.
concerning Jahza, which was situated, according to Eusebius , between Medamon (
Medaba ) and Debous ( Dibon , see above), and according to Jerome, between
Medaba and Deblatai , may be reconciled with the statement that it was in the
desert, provided we assume that it was not in a straight line between the places
named, but in a more easterly direction on the edge of the desert, near to the
commencement of the Wady Wale , a conclusion to which the juxtaposition of
Jahza and Mephaot in Josh 13:18; 21:37, and Jer 48:21, also points (see at Josh
13:18).

Verse 24-26. Israel smote him with the edge of the sword, i.e., without quarter (see
Gen 34:26), and took possession of his land "from Arnon (Mojeb) to the Jabbok,
unto the children of Ammon," i.e., to the upper Jabbok, the modern Nahr or Moiet
Ammân. The Jabbok , now called Zerka , i.e., the blue, does not take its rise, as
Seetzen supposed, on the pilgrim-road by the castle of Zerka; but its source,
according to Abulfeda ( tab. Syr.
p. 91) and Buckingham , is the Nahr Ammân , which flowed down from the ancient
capital of the Ammonites, and was called the upper Jabbok , and formed the
western border of the Ammonites towards the kingdom of Sihon, and subsequently
towards Gad (Deut 2:37; 3:16; Josh 12:2). "For the border of the Ammonites was
strong" (firm), i.e., strongly fortified; "for which reason Sihon had only been able
to push his conquests to the upper Jabbok, not into the territory of the Ammonites."
This explanation of Knobel's is perfectly correct; since the reason why the
Israelites did not press forward into the country of the Ammonites, was not the
strength of their frontier, but the word of the Lord, "Make not war upon them, for I
shall give thee no possession of the land of the children of Ammon" (Deut 2:19).

God had only promised the patriarchs, on behalf of their posterity, that He would
give them the land of Canaan, which was bounded towards the east by the Jordan
(Num 34:2-12; compared with Gen 10:19 and 15:19-21); and the Israelites would
[Link] (1 of 3) [13/08/2004 [Link] p.m.]
 Keil and Delitzsch Commentary on the Old Testament

have received no settlement at all on the eastern side of the Jordan, had not the
Canaanitish branch of the Amorites extended itself to that side in the time of
Moses, and conquered a large portion of the possessions of the Moabites, and also
(according to Josh 13:25, as compared with Judg 11:13) of the Ammonites, driving
back the Moabites as far as the Arnon, and the Ammonites behind the Nahr
Ammân. With the defeat of the Amorites, all the land that they had conquered
passed into the possession of the Israelites, who took possession of these towns (cf.
Deut 2:34-36). The statement in v. 25, that Israel settled in all the towns of the
Amorites, is somewhat anticipatory of the history itself, as the settlement did not
occur till Moses gave the conquered land to the tribes of Reuben and Gad for a
possession (ch. 32).

The only places mentioned here are Heshbon and her daughters, i.e., the smaller
towns belonging to it (cf. Josh 13:17), which are enumerated singly in Num 32:34-
38, and Josh 13:15-28. In explanation of the expression, "Heshbon and her
daughters," it is added in v. 26, that Heshbon was the city, i.e., the capital of the
Amorite king Sihon, who had made war upon the former king of Moab, and taken
away all his land as far as the Arnon. Consequently, even down to the time of the
predecessor of Balak, the king of the Moabites at that time, the land to the north of
the Arnon, and probably even as far as the lower Jabbok, to which point the
kingdom of Sihon extended (see Deut 3:12-13; Josh 12:5), belonged to the
Moabites. And in accordance with this, the country where the Israelites encamped
opposite to Jericho, before crossing the Jordan, is reckoned as part of the land of
Moab (Deut. 1:5; 28:69; 32:49; 34:5-6 ), and called Arboth Moab (see Num 22:1);
whilst the women who seduced the Israelites to join in the idolatrous worship of
Baal Peor are called daughters of Moab (Num 25:1).

Verse 27-28. The glorious conquest and destruction of the capital of the powerful
king of the Amorites, in the might of the Lord their God, inspired certain
composers of proverbs ( moshªliym (OT:4910) denom. from maashaal (OT:4912))
to write songs in commemoration of the victory. Three strophes are given from a
song of this kind, and introduced with the words "therefore,' sc., because Heshbon
had fallen in this manner, "the composers of proverbs say." The first strophe (vv.
[Link] (2 of 3) [13/08/2004 [Link] p.m.]
 Keil and Delitzsch Commentary on the Old Testament

27b and 28) runs thus: "Come to Heshbon: Built and restored be the

<- Previous First Next ->

[Link] (3 of 3) [13/08/2004 [Link] p.m.]

 Keil and Delitzsch Commentary on the Old Testament

<- Previous First Next ->

city of Sihon! For fire went out of Heshbon; flames from the city of Sihon. It
devoured Ar Moab, the lords of the heights of Arnon." The summons to come to
Heshbon and build this ruined city up again, was not addressed to the Israelites, but
to the conquered Amorites, and is to be interpreted as ironical ( F. v. Meyer;
Ewald, Gesch. ii. pp. 267, 268): "Come to Heshbon, ye victorious Amorites, and
build your royal city up again, which we have laid in ruins! A fire has gone out
of it, and burned up Ar Moab, and the lords of the heights of the Arnon." The
reference is to the war-fire, which the victorious Amorites kindled from Heshbon
in the land of Moab under the former king of Moab; that is to say, the war in which
they subjugated Ar Moab and the possessors of the heights of Arnon. Ar Moab (see
at v. 15) appears to have been formerly the capital of all Moabitis, or at least of that
portion of it which was situated upon the northern side of the Arnon; and the
prominence given to it in Deut 2:9,18,29, is in harmony with this. The heights of
Arnon are mentioned as the limits to which Sihon had carried his victorious
supremacy over Moab. The "lords" of these heights are the Moabites.

Verse 29. Second strophe: "Woe to thee, Moab! Thou art lost, people of
Chemosh! He has given up his sons as fugitives, and his daughters into
captivity-To Sihon, king of the Amorites." The poet here turns to Moab, and
announces its overthrow. Chemosh ( kªmowsh (OT:3645), from kaamash =
kaabash (OT:3533), subactor, domitor ) was the leading deity of the Moabites (Jer
48:7) as well as of the Ammonites (Judg 11:24), and related not only to Milcom , a
god of the Ammonites, but also to the early Canaanitish deity Baal and Moloch.
According to a statement of Jerome (on Isa 15), it was only another name for Baal
Peor , probably a god of the sun, which was worshipped as the king of his nation
and the god of war. He is found in this character upon the coins of Areopolis ,
standing upon a column, with a sword in his right hand and a lance and shield in
the left, and with two fire-torches by his side (cf. Ekhel doctr. numm. vet. iii. p.
504), and was appeased by the sacrifice of children in times of great distress (2
Kings 3:27). Further information, and to some extent a different view, are found in
the article by J. G. Müller in Herzog's Cyclopaedia. The subject to naatan

[Link] (1 of 3) [13/08/2004 [Link] p.m.]

 Keil and Delitzsch Commentary on the Old Testament

(OT:5414) is neither Moab nor Jehovah, but Chemosh. The thought is this: as
Chemosh, the god of Moab, could not deliver his people from the Amorite king; so
now that Israel has conquered the latter, Moab is utterly lost. In the triumph which
Israel celebrated over Moab through conquering its conquerors, there is a
forewarning expressed of the ultimate subjection of Moab under the sceptre of
Israel.

Verse 30. Third strophe , in which the woe evoked upon Moab is justified: "We
cast them down: Heshbon is lost even to Dibon; and we laid it waste even to
Nophah, with fire to Medeba." waniyraam (OT:3384) is the first pers. pl. imperf.
Kal of yaaraah (OT:3384) with the suffix aa-m for ee-m (as in Ex 29:30). yaaraah
(OT:3384), to cast arrows, to shoot down (Ex 19:13): figuratively to throw to the
ground (Ex 15:4). nashiym (OT:8074) for nasheem , first pers. pl. imperf. Hiph. of
naashaah (OT:5382), synonymous with naatsaah (OT:5327), Jer 4:7. The suffixes
of both verbs refer to the Moabites as the inhabitants of the cities named.
Accordingly Heshbon also is construed as a masculine, because it was not the town
as such, but the inhabitants, that were referred to. Heshbon , the residence of king
Sihon, stood pretty nearly in the centre between the Arnon and the Jabbok
(according to the Onom. twenty Roman miles from the Jordan, opposite to
Jericho), and still exists in extensive ruins with deep bricked wells, under the old
name of Hesbân (cf. v. Raumer , Pal. p. 262).

On Dibon in the south, not more than an hour from Arnon, see p. 288. Nophach is
probably the same as Nobach , Judg 8:11, but not the same as Kenath , which was
altered into Nobach (Num 32:42). According to Judg 8:11, it was near Jogbeha, not
far from the eastern desert; and in all probability it still exists in the ruined place
called Nowakis ( Burckhardt , p. 619; Buckingham , ii. p. 46; Robinson , App. p.
188), to the north-west of Ammân ( Rabbath-Ammon ). Nophach , therefore, is
referred to as a north-eastern town or fortress, and contrasted with Dibon , which
was in the south. The words which follow, m' `ad (OT:5704) 'asher (OT:834),
"which to Medeba," yield no intelligible meaning. The Seventy give pu'r epi' M
(fire upon Medeba), and seem to have adopted the reading `ad (OT:5704) 'eesh

[Link] (2 of 3) [13/08/2004 [Link] p.m.]

 Keil and Delitzsch Commentary on the Old Testament

(OT:784). In the Masoretic punctuation also, the r in 'shr (OT:838) is marked as

suspicious by a punct. extraord. Apparently, therefore, 'shr (OT:838) was a
copyist's error of old standing for 'eesh (OT:784), and is to be construed as
governed by the verb nashiym (OT:8074), "with fire to

<- Previous First Next ->

[Link] (3 of 3) [13/08/2004 [Link] p.m.]

 Keil and Delitzsch Commentary on the Old Testament

<- Previous First Next ->

Medeba." The city was about two hours to the south-east of Heshbon, and is still to
be seen in ruins bearing the name of Medaba , upon the top of a hill of about half-
an-hour's journey in circumference ( Burckhardt , p. 625; v. Raumer , Pal. pp. 264-
5).

(Note: Ewald and Bleek ( Einleitung in d. A. T. p. 200) are both agreed that this ode was composed on
the occasion of the defeat of the Amorites by the Israelites, and particularly on the capture of the
capital Heshbon, as it depicts the fall of Heshbon in the most striking way; and this city was rebuilt
shortly afterwards by the Reubenites, and remained ever afterwards a city of some importance. Knobel
, on the other hand, has completely misunderstood the meaning and substance of the verses quoted,
and follows some of the earliest commentators, such as Clericus and others, in regarding the ode as an
Amoritish production, and interpreting it as relating to the conquest and fortification of Heshbon by
Sihon.)

Verse 31-32. When Israel was sitting, i.e., encamped, in the land of the Amorites,
Moses reconnoitred Jaezer , after which the Israelites took "its daughters," i.e., the
smaller places dependent upon Jaezer, and destroyed the Amorites who dwelt in
them. It is evident from Num 32:35, that Jaezer was not only conquered, but
destroyed. This city, which was situated, according to the Onom. ( s. v. Jazer ), ten
Roman miles to the west of Philadelphia ( Rabbath-Ammon ), and fifteen Roman
miles to the north of Heshbon, is most probably to be sought for (as Seetzen
supposes, i. pp. 397, 406, iv. p. 216) in the ruins of es Szîr , at the source of the
Nahr Szîr , in the neighbourhood of which Seetzen found some pools, which are
probably the remains of "the sea of Jazer," mentioned in Jer 48:32. There is less
probability in Burckhardt's conjecture (p. 609), that it is to be found in the ruins of
Ain Hazir , near Kherbet el Suk , to the south-west of es Salt; though v. Raumer
(Pal. p. 262) decides in its favour (see my Commentary on Josh 13:25).

Verse 33-35. The Israelites then turned towards the north, and took the road to
Bashan, where king Og came against them with his people, to battle at Edrei. From
what point it was that the Israelites entered upon the expedition against Bashan, is
not stated either here or in Deut 3:1ff., where Moses recapitulates these events, and

[Link] (1 of 2) [13/08/2004 [Link] p.m.]

 Keil and Delitzsch Commentary on the Old Testament

gives a more detailed account of the conquests than he does here, simply because it
was of no importance in relation to the main object of the history. We have
probably to picture the conquest of the kingdoms of Sihon and Og as taking place
in the following manner: namely, that after Sihon had been defeated at Jahza, and
his capital had been speedily taken in consequence of this victory, Moses sent
detachments of his army from the places of encampment mentioned in vv. 16, 18-
20, into the different divisions of his kingdom, for the purpose of taking possession
of their towns.

After the conquest of the whole of the territory of Sihon, the main army advanced
to Bashan and defeated king Og in a great battle at Edrei, whereupon certain
detachments of the army were again despatched, under courageous generals, to
secure the conquest of the different parts of his kingdom (cf. Num 32:39,41-42).
The kingdom of Og embraced the northern half of Gilead, i.e., the country between
the Jabbok and the Mandhur (Deut 3:13; Josh 12:5), the modern Jebel Ajlun , and
"all Bashan," or "all the region of Argob" (Deut 3:4,13-14), the modern plain of
Jaulan and Hauran , which extended eastwards to Salcah , north-eastwards to
Edrei (Deut 3:10), and northwards to Geshur and Maacha (Josh 12:5). For further
remarks, see Deut 3:10. There were two towns in Bashan of the name of Edrei.
One of them, which is mentioned in Deut 1:4 and Josh 12:4, along with Ashtaroth ,
as a second residence of king Og, is described in the Onom. ( s. v. Ashtaroth and
Edrei ) as six Roman miles, i.e., fully two hours, from Ashtaroth, and twenty-four
or twenty-five miles from Bostra, and called Adraa or Adara. This is the modern
Derà or Draà (in Burckhardt , p. 385; Seetzen , i. pp. 363, 364), and Draah,
Idderat (in Buckingham, Syr. ii. p. 146), a place which still exists, consisting of a
number of miserable houses, built for the most part of basalt, and standing upon a
small elevation in a treeless, hilly region, with the ruins of an old church and other
smaller buildings, supposed to belong to the time when Draa, Adraa (as urbs
Arabiae ), was an episcopal see, on the east of the pilgrim-road between Remtha
and Mezareib , by the side of a small wady (see Ritter, Erdk.

<- Previous First Next ->

[Link] (2 of 2) [13/08/2004 [Link] p.m.]

 Keil and Delitzsch Commentary on the Old Testament

<- Previous First Next ->

xv. pp. 838ff.). The other Edrei , which is mentioned in Deut 3:10 as the north-
western frontier of Bashan, was farther towards the north, and is still to be seen in
the ruins of Zorah or Ethra (see at Deut 3:10). In the present instance the southern
town is intended, which was not far from the south-west frontier of Bashan, as Og
certainly did not allow the Israelites to advance to the northern frontier of his
kingdom before he gave them battle.

Verse 34,35. Just as in the case of Sihon, the Lord had also promised the Israelites
a victory over Og, and had given him into their power, so that they smote him, with
his sons and all his people, without leaving any remnant, and executed the ban,
according to Deut 2:34, upon both the kings. (See the notes on Deut 3).

III. OCCURRENCES IN THE STEPPES OF MOAB, WITH

INSTRUCTIONS

RELATING TO THE CONQUEST AND DISTRIBUTION OF

THE LAND OF CANAAN.

Ch. 22-36.

Numbers 22:1

And the children of Israel set forward, and pitched in the plains of Moab on this
side Jordan by Jericho.

After the defeat of the two Amorite kings, Sihon and Og, and the conquest of their
kingdoms in Gilead and Bashan, the Israelites removed from the height of Pisgah,
on the mountains of Abarim before Nebo (see at Num 21:20), and encamped in the
"Arboth Moab (the steppes of Moab), on the other side of the Jordan of Jericho,"
i.e., that part of the Jordan which skirted the province of Jericho. Arboth Moab was
[Link] (1 of 2) [13/08/2004 [Link] p.m.]
 Keil and Delitzsch Commentary on the Old Testament

the name given to that portion of the Arabah, or large plain of the Jordan, the
present Ghor (see at Deut 1:1), which belonged to the territory of the Moabites
previous to the spread of the Amorites under Sihon in the land to the east of the
Jordan, and which probably reached from the Dead Sea to the mouth of the Jabbok.
The site of the Israelitish camp is therefore defined with greater minuteness by the
clause "beyond the Jordan of Jericho." This place of encampment, which is
frequently alluded to (Num 26:3,63; 31:12; 33:48,50; 35:1; 36:13; Josh 13:32),
extended, according to Num 33:49, from Beth-jeshimoth to Abel-shittim.

Beth-jeshimoth (i.e., house of wastes), on the north-eastern desert border (

Jeishimon , Num 21:20) of the Dead Sea, a town allotted to the tribe of Reuben
(Josh 12:3; 13:20), was situated, according to the Onom. (s.
v. Beethasimou'th , Bethsimuth ), ten Roman miles, or four hours, to the south
(S.E.) of Jericho, on the Dead Sea; according to Josephus ( bell. jud. iv. 7, 6), it
was to the south of Julias ( Livias ), i.e., Beth-haram , or Rameh , on the northern
edge of the Wady Hesban (see at Num 32:36), or in the Ghor el Seisabân , on the
northern coast of the Dead Sea, and the southern end of the plain of the Jordan.
Abel Shittim ( hashiTiym (OT:7851) 'aabeel (OT:57)), i.e., the acacia-meadow, or,
in its briefer form, Shittim (Num 35:1), was situated, according to Josephus ( Ant.
iv. 8, 1), on the same spot as the later town of Abila , in a locality rich in date-
palms, sixty stadia from the Jordan, probably by the Wady Eshtah to the north of
the Wady Hesban; even if Knobel's supposition that the name is connected with
'eshªTaah = shiTaah (OT:7848) with ' (OT:589) prost. should not be a tenable
one. From Shittim or Sittim the Israelites advanced, under Joshua, to the
Jordan, to effect the conquest of Canaan (Josh 3:1).

<- Previous First Next ->

[Link] (2 of 2) [13/08/2004 [Link] p.m.]

 [Link]

<- Previous First Next ->

In the steppes of Moab the Israelites encamped upon the border of the promised
land, from which they were only separated by the Jordan. But before this boundary
line could be passed, there were many preparations that had to be made. In the first
place, the whole congregation was to pass through a trial of great importance to all
future generations, as bearing upon the relation in which it stood to the heathen
world; and in the second place, it was here that Moses, who was not to enter
Canaan because of his sin at the water of strife, was to bring the work of legislation
to a close before his death, and not only to issue the requisite instructions
concerning the conquest of the promised inheritance, and the division of it among
the tribes of Israel, but to impress once more upon the hearts of the whole
congregation the essential contents of the whole law, with all that the Lord had
done for Israel, that they might be confirmed in their fidelity to the Lord, and
preserved from the danger of apostasy. This last work of the faithful servant of
God, with which he brought his mediatorial work to a close, is described in the
book of Deuteronomy; whilst the laws relating to the conquest and partition of
Canaan, with the experience of Israel in the steppes of Moab, fill up the latter
portion of the present book.

Balaam and His Prophecies. Ch. 22:2-24:25.

The rapid defeat of the two mighty kings of the Amorites filled the Moabites with
such alarm at the irresistible might of Israel, that Balak their king, with the princes
of Midian, sought to bring the powers of heathen magic to bear against the nation
of God; and to this end he sent messengers with presents to Balaam, the celebrated
soothsayer, in Mesopotamia, who had the reputation of being able both to bless and
curse with great success, to entreat him to come, and so to weaken the Israelites
with his magical curses, that he might be able to smite them, and drive them out of
his land (Num 22:1-7). At first Balaam declined this invitation, in consequence of
divine instructions (vv. 8-14); but when a second and still more imposing embassy
of Moabite princes appeared before him, God gave him permission to go with
them, but on this condition, that he should do nothing but what Jehovah should tell

[Link] (1 of 2) [13/08/2004 [Link] p.m.]

 [Link]

him
(vv. 15-21).

When on the way, he was warned again by the miraculous opposition of the angel
of the Lord, to say nothing but what God should say to him (vv. 22-35). When
Balak, therefore, came to meet him, on his arrival at the border of his kingdom, to
give him a grand reception, Balaam explained to him, that he could only speak the
word which Jehovah would put into his mouth (vv. 36-40), and then proclaimed, in
four different utterances, what God inspired him to declare. First of all, as he stood
upon the height of Bamoth-baal, from which he could see the end of the Israelitish
camp, he declared that it was impossible for him to curse this matchless, numerous,
and righteous people, because they had not been cursed by their God (Num 22:41-
23:10). He then went to the head of Pisgah, where he could see all Israel, and
announced that Jehovah would bless this people, because He saw no
unrighteousness in them, and that He would dwell among them as their King,
making known His word to them, and endowing them with activity and lion-like
power (Num 23:11-24). And lastly, upon the top of Peor, where he could see Israel
encamped according to its tribes, he predicted, in two more utterances, the spread
and powerful development of Israel in its inheritance, under the blessing of God
(Num 23:25-24:9), the rise of a star out of Jacob in the far distant future, and the
appearance of a ruler in Israel, who would break to pieces all its foes (Num 24:10-
24); and upon this Balak sent him away (v. 25).

From the very earliest times opinions have been divided as to the character of
Balaam.

(Note: On Balaam and his prophecies see G. Moebius Prophetae Bileami historia , Lips. 1676;

<- Previous First Next ->

[Link] (2 of 2) [13/08/2004 [Link] p.m.]

 [Link]

<- Previous First Next ->

Lüderwald, die Geschichte Bileams deutlich u. begreiflich erklärt ( Helmst. 1787); B. R. de Geer,
Diss. de Bileamo, ejus historia et vaticiniis; Tholuck's vermischte Schriften (i. pp. 406ff.);
Hengstenberg , History of Balaam, etc. (Berlin, 1842, and English translation by Ryland: Clark, 1847);
Kurtz , History of the Old Covenant (English translation: Clark, 1859); and Gust. Baur , Gesch. der
alttestl. Weissagung, Giessen, 1861, where the literature is given more fully still.)

Some (e.g., Philo, Ambrose , and Augustine ) have regarded him as a wizard and
false prophet, devoted to the worship of idols, who was destitute of any
susceptibility for the true religion, and was compelled by God, against his will, to
give utterance to blessings upon Israel instead of curses. Others (e.g., Tertullian
and Jerome ) have supposed him to be a genuine and true prophet, who simply fell
through covetousness and ambition. But these views are both of them untenable in
this exclusive form. Witsius ( Miscell. ss. i. lib. i. c. 16, §33ff.), Hengstenberg
(Balaam and his Prophecies), and Kurtz (History of the Old Covenant), have all of
them clearly demonstrated this. The name bilª`aam (OT:1109) (LXX Balaa'm
(NT:903)) is not to be derived, as Gesenius suggests, from bal (OT:1077) and
`aam (OT:5971), non populus , not a people, but either from baala` (OT:1106) and
`aam (OT:5971) (dropping one ` ), devourer of the people ( Simonis and
Hengstenberg ), or more probably from baala` (OT:1106), with the terminal
syllable aa-m , devourer, destroyer ( Fürst, Dietrich ), which would lead to the
conclusion, that "he bore the name as a dreaded wizard and conjurer; whether he
received it at his birth, as a member of a family in which this occupation was
hereditary, and then afterwards actually became in public opinion what the giving
of the name expressed as an expectation and desire; or whether the name was given
to him at a later period, according to Oriental custom, when the fact indicated by
the name had actually made its appearance" (Hengstenberg). In its true meaning,
the name is related to that of his father, Beor.

(Note: The form Bosor , which we find instead of Beor in 2 Peter 2:15, appears to have arisen from a
peculiar mode of pronouncing the guttural ` (see Loescher de causis ling. ebr. p. 246); whereas
Vitringa maintains (in his obss. ss. l. iv. c. 9), that Peter himself invented this form, "that by this sound
of the word he might play upon the Hebrew bsr (OT:1320), which signifies flesh, and thus delicately

[Link] (1 of 2) [13/08/2004 [Link] p.m.]

 [Link]

hint that Balaam , the false prophet, deserved to be called the son of Bosor, i.e., bsr (OT:1320), or
flesh, on account of his persuading to the indulgence of carnal lusts.") bª`owr (OT:1160), from baa`ar
(OT:1197), to burn, eat off, destroy: so called on account of the destructive power attributed to his
curses ( Hengstenberg ). It is very probable, therefore, that Balaam belonged to a family in which the
mantic character, or magical art, was hereditary. These names at once warrant the conjecture that
Balaam was a heathen conjurer or soothsayer. Moreover, he is never called naabiy' (OT:5030), a
prophet, or chozeh (OT:2374), a seer, but haqoceem , the soothsayer (Josh 13:22), a title which is
never used in connection with the true prophets. For qecem (OT:7081), soothsaying, is forbidden to
the Israelites in Deut 18:10ff., as an abomination in the sight of Jehovah, and is spoken of everywhere
not only as a grievous sin (1 Sam 15:23; Ezek 13:23; 2 Kings 17:17), but as the mark of a false prophet
(Ezek 13:9; 22:28; Jer 14:14, and even in Isa 3:2, where qoceem (OT:7081) forms the antithesis to
naabiy' (OT:5030)). Again, Balaam resorts to auguries, just like a heathen soothsayer (Num 24:1,
compared with ch. 23:3,5), for the purpose of obtaining revelations; from which we may see that he
was accustomed to adopt this as his ordinary mode of soothsaying.

(Note: "The fact that he made use of so extremely uncertain a method as augury, the insufficiency of
which was admitted even by the heathen themselves (vid., Nägelsbach, homer. Theol. pp. 154ff.), and
which no true prophet among the Israelites ever employed, is to be attributed to the weakness of the
influence exerted upon him by the Spirit of God. When the Spirit worked with power, there was no
need to look round at nature for the purpose of ascertaining the will of God" ( Hengstenberg ).)

On the other hand, Balaam was not without a certain measure of the true
knowledge of God, and not without susceptibility for such revelations of the true
God as he actually received; so that, without being really a prophet, he was able to
give utterance to true prophecies from Jehovah. He not only knew Jehovah, but he
confessed Jehovah,

<- Previous First Next ->

[Link] (2 of 2) [13/08/2004 [Link] p.m.]

 Keil and Delitzsch Commentary on the Old Testament

<- Previous First Next ->

even in the presence of Balak, as well as of the Moabitish messengers. He asked

His will, and followed it (Num 22:8,13,18-19,28; 23:12), and would not go with
the messengers of Balak, therefore, till God had given him permission (Num
22:20). If he had been altogether destitute of the fear of God, he would have
complied at once with Balak's request. And again, although at the outset it is only
Elohim who makes known His will (Num 22:9,20), and even when he first of all
goes out in search of oracles, it is Elohim who comes to him (Num 23:4); yet not
only does the angel of Jehovah meet him by the way (Num 22:22ff.), but Jehovah
also puts words into his mouth, which he announces to the king of the Moabites
(Num 23:5,12,16), so that all his prophecies are actually uttered from a mind
moved and governed by the Spirit of God, and that not from any physical constraint
exerted upon him by God, but in such a manner that he enters into them with all his
heart and soul, and heartily desires to die the death of these righteous, i.e., of the
people of Israel (Num 23:10); and when he finds that it pleases Jehovah to bless
Israel, he leaves off resorting any longer to auguries (Num 24:1), and eventually
declares to the enraged monarch, that he cannot transgress the command of
Jehovah, even if the king should give him his house full of silver and gold (Num
24:13).

(Note: The significant interchange in the use of the names of God, which is seen in the fact, that from
the very outset Balaam always speaks of Jehovah (Num 22:8,13,18-19) - whereas, according to the
historian, it is only Elohim who reveals Himself to him (Num 22:9-10,12) - has been pointed out by
Hengstenberg in his Dissertations; and even Baur , in his Geschichte der alttestl. Weissagung (i. p.
334), describes it as a "fine distinction;" but neither of them satisfactorily explains this diversity. For
the assumption that Balaam is thereby tacitly accused of hypocrisy ( Hengstenberg ), or that the
intention of the writer is to intimate that "the heathen seer did not stand at first in any connection
whatever with the true God of Israel" ( Baur ), sets up a chasm between Elohim and Jehovah , with
which the fact that, according to Num 22:22, the wrath of Elohim on account of Balaam's journey was
manifested in the appearance of the angel of Jehovah , is irreconcilable. The manifestation of God in
the form of the angel of Jehovah , was only a higher stage of the previous manifestations of Elohim.
And all that follows from this is, that Balaam's original attitude towards Jehovah was a very imperfect
one, and not yet in harmony with the true nature of the God of Israel. In his Jehovah Balaam
worshipped only Elohim , i.e., only a divine being, but not the God of Israel, who was first of all
revealed to him according to His true essence, in the appearance of the angel of Jehovah, and still more

[Link] (1 of 2) [13/08/2004 [Link] p.m.]

 Keil and Delitzsch Commentary on the Old Testament

clearly in the words which He put into his mouth. This is indicated by the use of Elohim , in Num 22:9-
10,12. In the other passages, where this name of God still occurs, it is required by the thought, viz., in
Num 22:22, to express the essential identity of Elohim and the Maleach Jehovah; and in Num 22:38;
23:27, and 24:2, to show that Balaam did not speak out of his own mind, but from the inspiration of the
Spirit of God. )

This double-sidedness and ambiguity of the religious and prophetic character of

Balaam may be explained on the supposition that, being endowed with a
predisposition to divination and prophecy, he practised soothsaying and divination
as a trade; and for the purpose of bringing this art to the greatest possible
perfection, brought not only the traditions of the different nations, but all the
phenomena of his own times, within the range of his observations. In this way he
may have derived the first elements of the true knowledge of God from different
echoes of the tradition of the primeval age, which was then not quite extinct, and
may possibly have heard in his own native land some notes of the patriarchal
revelations out of the home of the tribe-fathers of Israel. But these traditions are not
sufficient of themselves to explain his attitude towards Jehovah, and his utterances
concerning Israel. Balaam's peculiar knowledge of Jehovah, the God of Israel, and
of all that He had done to His people, and his intimate acquaintance with the
promises made to the patriarchs, which strike us in his prophecies (comp. Num
23:10 with Gen. 13:16; 23:24 ; ch. Num 24:9 with Gen 49:9; and ch. Num 24:17
with Gen 49:10), can only be explained from the fact that the report of the great
things which God had done to and for Israel in Egypt and at the Dead Sea, had not
only spread among all the neighbouring tribes, as was foretold in Ex 15:14, and is
attested by Jethro, Ex 18:1ff., and Rahab the Canaanites, Josh 2:9ff., but had even
penetrated into Mesopotamia, as the countries of the Euphrates had maintained a
steady commercial intercourse from the very earliest times with Hither Asia and
the land Egypt. Through these tidings Balaam was no doubt induced not only to
procure more exact information concerning the events themselves, that he might
make a profitable use of it in connection with his own occupation,

<- Previous First Next ->

[Link] (2 of 2) [13/08/2004 [Link] p.m.]

 Keil and Delitzsch Commentary on the Old Testament

<- Previous First Next ->

but also to dedicate himself to the service of Jehovah, "in the hope of being able to
participate in the new powers conferred upon the human race; so that henceforth he
called Jehovah his God, and appeared as a prophet in His name" ( Hengstenberg ).

In this respect Balaam resembles the Jewish exorcists, who cast out demons in the
name of Jesus without following Christ (Mark 9:38-39; Luke 9:49), but more
especially Simon Magus, his "New Testament antitype," who was also so
powerfully attracted by the new divine powers of Christianity that he became a
believer, and submitted to baptism, because he saw the signs and great miracles
that were done (Acts 8:13). And from the very time when Balaam sought Jehovah,
the fame of his prophetical art appears to have spread. It was no doubt the report
that he stood in close connection with the God of Israel, which induced Balak,
according to Num 22:6, to hire him to oppose the Israelites; as the heathen king
shared the belief, which was common to all the heathen, that Balaam was able to
work upon the God he served, and to determine and regulate His will. God had
probably given to the soothsayer a few isolated but memorable glimpses of the
unseen, to prepare him for the service of His kingdom.

But "Balaam's heart was not right with God," and "he loved the wages of
unrighteousness" (Acts 8:21; 2 Peter 2:15). His thirst for honour and wealth was
not so overcome by the revelations of the true God, that he could bring himself to
give up his soothsaying, and serve the living God with an undivided heart. Thus it
came to pass, that through the appeal addressed to him by Balak, he was brought
into a situation in which, although he did not venture to attempt anything in
opposition to the will of Jehovah, his heart was never thoroughly changed; so that,
whilst he refused the honours and rewards that were promised him by Balak, and
pronounced blessings upon Israel in the strength of the Spirit of God that came
upon him, he was overcome immediately afterwards by the might of the sin of his
own unbroken heart, fell back into the old heathen spirit, and advised the
Midianites to entice the Israelites to join in the licentious worship of Baal Peor
(Num 31:16), and was eventually put to death by the Israelites when they

[Link] (1 of 2) [13/08/2004 [Link] p.m.]

 Keil and Delitzsch Commentary on the Old Testament

conquered these their foes (Num 31:8).

(Note: When modern critics, such as Knobel, Baur , etc., affirm that the tradition in Num 31:8,16; Josh
13:22 - viz., that Balaam was a kosem , or soothsayer, who advised the Midianites to seduce the
Israelites to join in the worship of Baal-is irreconcilable with the account in ch. 22-24 concerning
Balaam himself, his attitude towards Jehovah, and his prophecies with regard to Israel, they simply
display their own incapacity to comprehend, or form any psychological appreciation of, a religious
character such as Balaam; but they by no means prove that the account in ch. 22-24 is interpolated by
the Jehovist into the Elohistic original. And all that they adduce as a still further confirmation of this
hypothesis (namely, that the weaving of prophetic announcements into the historical narrative, the
interchange of the names of God, Jehovah, and Elohim, the appearance of the angel of the Lord, the
talking of the ass, etc., are foreign to the Elohistic original), are simply assertions and assumptions,
which do not become any more conclusive from the fact that they are invariably adduced when no
better arguments can be hunted up.)

Numbers 22:2-21

And Balak the son of Zippor saw all that Israel had done to the Amorites.

Verse 2-4. Balaam Hired by Balak to Curse Israel. - Vv. 2-4. As the Israelites
passed by the eastern border of the land of Moab, the Moabites did not venture to
make any attack upon them; on the contrary, they supplied them with bread and
water for money (Deut 2:29). At that time they no doubt cherished the hope that
Sihon, their own terrible conqueror, would be able with perfect ease either to
annihilate this new foe, or to drive them back into the desert from which they had
come. But when they saw this hope frustrated, and the Israelites had overthrown
the two kings of the Amorites with victorious power, and had conquered their
kingdoms, and pressed forward through

<- Previous First Next ->

[Link] (2 of 2) [13/08/2004 [Link] p.m.]

 Keil and Delitzsch Commentary on the Old Testament

<- Previous First Next ->

what was formerly Moabitish territory, even to the banks of the Jordan, the close
proximity of so powerful a people filled Balak, their king, with terror and dismay,
so that he began to think of the best means of destroying them.

There was no ground for such alarm, as the Israelites, in consequence of divine
instructions (Deut 2:9), had offered no hostilities to the Moabites, but had
conscientiously spared their territory and property; and even after the defeat of the
Amorites, had not turned their arms against them, but had advanced to the Jordan
to take possession of the land of Canaan. But the supernatural might of the people
of God was a source of such discomfort to the king of the Moabites, that a horror
of the Israelites came upon him. Feeling too weak to attack them with force of
arms, he took counsel with the elders of Midian. With these words, "This crowd
will now lick up all our environs, as the ox licketh up the green of the field," i.e.,
entirely consume all our possessions, he called their attention to the danger which
the proximity of Israel would bring upon him and his territory, to induce them to
unite with him in some common measures against this dangerous foe.

This intention is implied in his words, and clearly follows from the sequel of the
history. According to v. 7, the elders of Midian went to Balaam with the elders of
Moab; and there is no doubt that the Midiantish elders advised Balak to send for
Balaam with whom they had become acquainted upon their trading journeys (cf.
Gen 37), to come and curse the Israelites. Another circumstance also points to an
intimate connection between Balaam and the Midianites, namely, the fact that,
after he had been obliged to bless the Israelites in spite of the inclination of his own
natural heart, he went to the Midianites and advised them to make the Israelites
harmless, by seducing them to idolatry (Num 31:16). The Midianites, who are
referred to here, must be distinguished from the branch of the same tribe which
dwelt in the peninsula of Sinai (Num 10:29-30; Ex 2:15-16; 3:1). They had been
settled for a long time (cf. Gen 36:35) on the eastern border of the Moabitish and
Amoritish territory, in a grassy but treeless steppe-land, where many ruins and
wells are still to be found belonging to very ancient times ( Buckingham, Syr. ii.

[Link] (1 of 3) [13/08/2004 [Link] p.m.]

 Keil and Delitzsch Commentary on the Old Testament

pp. 79ff., 95ff.), and lived by grazing (Num 31:32ff.) and the caravan trade.

They were not very warlike, and were not only defeated by the Edomites (Gen
36:35), but were also subdued and rendered tributary by Sihon, king of the
Amorites (see at Num 31:8). In the time of the Judges, indeed, they once invaded
the land of Israel in company with the Amalekites and the sons of the East, but
they were beaten by Gideon, and entirely repulsed (Judg 6 and 7), and from that
time forth they disappear entirely from history. The "elders of Midian" are heads of
tribes, who administered the general affairs of the people, who, like the Israelites,
lived under a patriarchal constitution. The most powerful of them bore the title of
"kings" (Num 31:8) or "princes" (Josh 13:21). The clause, "and Balak, the son of
Zippor, was king of the Moabites at that time," is added as a supplementary note to
explain the relation of Balak to the Moabites.

Verse 5-6. Balak sent messengers to Balaam to Pethor in Mesopotamia. The town
of Pethor , or Pethora ( Fathou'ra , LXX), is unknown. There is something very
uncertain in Knobel's supposition, that it is connected with Fathou'sai , a place to
the south of Circessium ( Zozim. iii. 14), and with the Be'thanna mentioned by
Ptolemy , v. 18, 6, and that these are the same as Anah , Anathoo' , "Anatha (
Ammian. Marcell. xxiv. 1, 6). And the conjecture that the name is derived from
paatar (OT:6622), to interpret dreams (Gen 41:8), and marks the place as a seat of
the possessors of secret arts, is also more than doubtful, since pªshar (OT:6591)
corresponds to paatar (OT:6622) in Aramaean; although there can be no doubt that
Pethor may have been a noted seat of Babylonian magi, since these wise men were
accustomed to congregate in particular localities (cf. Strabo , xvi. 1, §6, and
Münter Relig. der Babyl. p. 86).

Balak desired Balaam to come and curse the people of Israel, who had come out of
Egypt, and were so numerous that they covered the eye of the earth (see Ex 10:5),
i.e., the whole face of the land, and sat down (were encamped) opposite to him;
that he might then perhaps be able to smite them and drive them out of the land. On

[Link] (2 of 3) [13/08/2004 [Link] p.m.]

Keil and Delitzsch Commentary on the Old Testament

<- Previous First Next ->

[Link] (3 of 3) [13/08/2004 [Link] p.m.]

 Keil and Delitzsch Commentary on the Old Testament

<- Previous First Next ->

'aaraah (OT:717) for 'or , the imperative of 'aarar (OT:779), see Ewald , §228, b. -
"For I know that he whom thou blessest is blessed, and he whom thou cursest is
cursed." Balak believed, in common with the whole of the ancient world, in the real
power and operation of the curses, anathemas, and incantations pronounced by
priests, soothsayers, and goetae. And there was a truth at the foundation of this
belief, however it may have been perverted by heathenism into phantasy and
superstition. When God endows a man with supernatural powers of His word and
Spirit, he also confers upon him the power of working upon others in a supernatural
way.

Man, in fact, by virtue of the real connection between his spirit and the higher
spiritual world, is able to appropriate to himself supernatural powers, and make
them subservient to the purpose of sin and wickedness, so as to practise magic and
witchcraft with them, arts which we cannot pronounce either mere delusion or pure
superstition, since the scriptures of both the Old and New Testaments speak of
witchcraft, and condemn it as a real power of evil and of the kingdom of darkness
(see p. 309). Even in the narrative itself, the power of Balaam to bless and to curse
is admitted; and, in addition to this, it is frequently celebrated as a great favour
displayed towards Israel, that the Lord did not hearken to Balaam, but turned the
curse into a blessing (Deut 23:5; Josh 24:10; Mic 6:3; Neh 13:2). This power of
Balaam is not therefore traced, it is true, to the might of heathen deities, but to the
might of Jehovah, whose name Balaam confessed; but yet the possibility is
assumed of his curse doing actual, and not merely imaginary, harm to the Israelites.
Moreover, the course of the history shows that in his heart Balaam was very much
inclined to fulfil the desire of the king of the Moabites, and that this subjective
inclination of his was overpowered by the objective might of the Spirit of Jehovah.

Verse 7-11. When the elders of Moab and Midian came to him with wages of
divination in their hand, he did not send them away, but told them to spend the
night at his house, that he might bring them word what Jehovah would say to him.
qªcaamiym (OT:7080), from qecem (OT:7081), soothsaying, signifies here that

[Link] (1 of 3) [13/08/2004 [Link] p.m.]

 Keil and Delitzsch Commentary on the Old Testament

which has been wrought or won by soothsaying-the soothsayer's wages; just as

bªsraah , which signifies literally glad tidings, is used in 2 Sam 4:10 for the wages
of glad tidings; and po`al (OT:6467), pª`ulaah (OT:6468), which signifies work, is
frequently used for that which is wrought, the thing acquired, or the wages. If
Balaam had been a true prophet and a faithful servant of Jehovah, he would at once
have sent the messengers away and refused their request, as he must then have
known that God would not curse His chosen people. But Balaam loved the wages
of unrighteousness. This corruptness of his heart obscured his mind, so that he
turned to God not as a mere form, but with the intention and in the hope of
obtaining the consent of God to his undertaking. And God came to him in the night,
and made known His will. Whether it was through the medium of a dream or of a
vision, is not recorded, as this was of no moment in relation to the subject in hand.
The question of God in v. 9, "Who are these men with thee?" not only served to
introduce the conversation ( Knobel ), but was intended to awaken "the slumbering
conscience of Balaam, to lead him to reflect upon the proposal which the men had
made, and to break the force of his sinful inclination"' ( Hengstenberg ).

Verse 12-14. God then expressly forbade him to go with the messengers to curse
the Israelites, as the people was blessed; and Balaam was compelled to send back
the messengers without attaining their object, because Jehovah had refused him
permission to go with them. qaabaah-liy , v. 11, imper. of naaqab (OT:5344) =
qaabab (OT:6895) (see at Lev 24:11).

Verse 15-17. The answer with which Balaam had sent the Moabitish messengers
away, encouraged Balak to cherish the hope of gaining over the celebrated
soothsayer to his purpose notwithstanding, and to send an embassy "of princes
more numerous and more honourable than those," and to make the attempt to
overcome his former resistance by more splendid promises; whether he regarded it,
as is very probable, "as the remains of a weakly fear of God, or simply as a ruse
adopted for the purpose of obtaining better conditions" ( Hengstenberg ). As a
genuine heathen, who saw nothing more in the God of Israel than a national god of
that people, he thought that it would be possible to render not only men, but gods
also, favourable to his purpose, by means of splendid honours and rich

[Link] (2 of 3) [13/08/2004 [Link] p.m.]

Keil and Delitzsch Commentary on the Old Testament

<- Previous First Next ->

[Link] (3 of 3) [13/08/2004 [Link] p.m.]

 [Link]

<- Previous First Next ->

rewards.

(Note: Compare the following remarks of Pliny ( h. n. xxviii. 4) concerning this belief among the
Romans: "Verrius Flaccus auctores ponit, quibus credat, in oppugnationibus ante omnia solitum a
Romanis sacerdotibus evocari Deum, cujus in tutela id oppidum esset, promittique illi eundem aut
ampliorem apud Romanos cultum. Et durat in Pontificum disciplina id sacrum, constatque ideo
occultatum, in cujus Dei tutela Roma esset, ne qui hostium simili modo agerent;" - and the further
explanations of this heathen notion in Hengstenberg's Balaam and his Prophecies.)

Verse 18-21. But Balaam replied to the proposals of these ambassadors: "If Balak
gave me his house full of silver and gold, I cannot transgress the mouth
(command) of Jehovah, my God, to do little or great," i.e., to attempt anything in
opposition to the will of the Lord (cf. 1 Sam 20:2; 22:15; 25:36). The inability
flowed from moral awe of God and dread of His punishment. "From beginning to
end this fact was firmly established in Balaam's mind, viz., that in the work to
which Balak summoned him he could do nothing at all except through Jehovah.
This knowledge he had acquired by virtue of his natural gifts as seer, and his
previous experience. But this clear knowledge of Jehovah was completely
obscured again by the love for the wages which ruled in his heart. Because he
loved Balak, the enemy of Israel, for the sake of the wages, whereas Jehovah loved
Israel for His own name's sake; Balaam was opposed to Jehovah in his inmost
nature and will, though he knew himself to be in unison with Him by virtue of his
natural gift. Consequently he fell into the same blindness of contradiction to which
Balak was in bondage" ( Baumgarten ).

And in this blindness he hoped to be able to turn Jehovah round to oppose Israel,
and favour the wishes of his own and Balak's heart. He therefore told the
messengers to wait again, that he might ask Jehovah a second time (v. 19). And
this time (v. 20) God allowed him to go with them, but only on the condition that
he should do nothing but what He said to him. The apparent contradiction in His
first of all prohibiting Balaam from going (v. 12), then permitting it
(v. 20), and then again, when Balaam set out in consequence of this permission,
[Link] (1 of 2) [13/08/2004 [Link] p.m.]
 [Link]

burning with anger against him (v.

22), does not indicate any variableness in the counsels of God, but vanishes at once
when we take into account the pedagogical purpose of the divine consent. When
the first messengers came and Balaam asked God whether he might go with them
and curse Israel, God forbade him to go and curse. But since Balaam obeyed this
command with inward repugnance, when he asked a second time on the arrival of
the second embassy, God permitted him to go, but on the condition already
mentioned, namely, that he was forbidden to curse.

God did this not merely because it was His own intention to put blessings instead
of curses into the prophet's mouth-and "the blessings of the celebrated prophet
might serve as means of encouraging Israel and discouraging their foes, even
though He did not actually stand in need of them" ( Knobel ) - but primarily and
principally for the sake of Balaam himself, viz., to manifest to this soothsayer, who
had so little susceptibility for higher influences, both His own omnipotence and
true deity, and also the divine election of Israel, in a manner so powerful as to
compel him to decide either for or against the God of Israel and his salvation. To
this end God permitted him to go to Balak, though not without once more warning
him most powerfully by the way of the danger to which his avarice and ambition
would expose him. This immediate intention in the guidance of Balaam, by which
God would have rescued him if possible from the way of destruction, into which he
had been led by the sin which ruled in his heart, does not at all preclude the much
further-reaching design of God, which was manifested in Balaam's blessings,
namely, to glorify His own name among the heathen and in Israel, through the
medium of this far-famed soothsayer.

Numbers 22:22-23

<- Previous First Next ->

[Link] (2 of 2) [13/08/2004 [Link] p.m.]

 [Link]

<- Previous First Next ->

And God's anger was kindled because he went: and the angel of the LORD stood
in the way for an adversary against him. Now he was riding upon his ass, and
his two servants were with him.

Balaam's Speaking Ass. - V. 22. "And the anger of God burned, that he was going
( huw' (OT:1931) howleekª (OT:1980)): and the angel of Jehovah placed himself
in the way, as an adversary to him." From the use of the participle howleekª
(OT:1980) instead of the imperfect, with which it is not interchangeable, it is
evident, on the one hand, that the anger of God was not excited by the fact that
Balaam went with the elders of Moab, but by his behaviour wither on setting out or
upon the journey;

(Note: From a failure to observe the use of the participle in distinction from the preterite, and from a
misinterpretation of the words of the angel of the Lord (v. 32), "I have come out as an adversary, for
the way leads headlong to destruction," which have been understood as implying that the angel meant
to prohibit the seer from going, whereas he only intended to warn him of the destruction towards
which he was going, the critics have invented a contradiction between the account of the speaking ass
(vv. 22-35) and the preceding part of the history. And in consequence of this, A. G. Hoffmann and
others have pronounced the section from v. 22 to v. 35 to be a later interpolation; whilst Baur , on the
other hand (in his Geschichte d. alttestl. Weissagung ), regards the account of the ass as the original
form of the narrative, and the preceding portion as a composition of the Jehovist. But there is no
"contradiction" or "evident incongruity," unless we suppose that the only reason for the appearance of
the angel of the Lord was, that he might once more forbid the seer to go, and then give him
permission, with a certain limitation.

The other difference, which E. v. Ortenberg adduces, are involved in the very
nature of the case. The manifestation of God, in the form of the Angel of Jehovah,
was necessarily different in its character from a direct spiritual revelation of the
divine will. And lastly, the difference in the expressions used to signify "three
times," in Num 22:28,32-33, and ch. 24:10, etc., prove nothing more than that king

[Link] (1 of 2) [13/08/2004 [Link] p.m.]

 [Link]

Balak did not mould his style of speaking according to that of the ass.) and, on the
other hand, that the occurrence which followed did not take place at the
commencement, but rather towards the close of, the journey. As it was a longing
for wages and honour that had induced the soothsayer to undertake the journey, the
nearer he came to his destination, under the guidance of the distinguished
Moabitish ambassadors, the more was his mind occupied with the honours and
riches in prospect; and so completely did they take possession of his heart, that he
was in danger of casting to the winds the condition which had been imposed upon
him by God. The wrath of God was kindled against this dangerous enemy of his
soul; and as he was riding upon his ass with two attendants, the angel of the Lord
stood in his way low (OT:3807a ) lªsaaTaan (OT:7854), "as an adversary to him,"
i.e., to restrain him from advancing farther on a road that would inevitably lead
him headlong into destruction (cf. v. 32). This visible manifestation of God (on the
angel of the Lord, see pp. 118ff.) was seen by the ass; but Balaam the seer was so
blinded, that it was entirely hidden from his eye, darkened as it was by sinful lust;
and this happened three times before Jehovah brought him to his senses by the
speaking of the dumb animal, and thus opened his eyes.

(Note: "To the great disgrace of the prophet, the glory of the angel was first of all apparent to the ass....
He had been boasting before this of extraordinary visions, and now what was visible to the
eyes of a beast was invisible to him. Whence came this blindness, but from the avarice by which he
had been so stupefied, that he preferred filthy lucre to the holy calling of God?" ( Calvin. ))

The "drawn sword" in the angel's hand was a manifestation of the wrath of God.
The ass turned from the road into the field before the threatening sight, and was
smitten by Balaam in consequence to turn her or guide her back into the road.

<- Previous First Next ->

[Link] (2 of 2) [13/08/2004 [Link] p.m.]

 Keil and Delitzsch Commentary on the Old Testament

<- Previous First Next ->

Numbers 22:24-25

But the angel of the LORD stood in a path of the vineyards, a wall being on this
side, and a wall on that side.

The angel then stationed himself in a pass of the vineyards where walls ( gaadeer
(OT:1447), vineyard walls, Isa 5:5) were on both sides, so that the animal, terrified
by the angel, pressed against the wall, and squeezed Balaam's foot against the wall,
for which Balaam smote her again.

Numbers 22:26-27

And the angel of the LORD went further, and stood in a narrow place, where
was no way to turn either to the right hand or to the left.

The angel moved still farther, and stationed himself in front of him, in so narrow a
pass, that there was no room to move either to the right or to the left. As the ass
could neither turn aside nor go past this time, she threw herself. down. Balaam was
still more enraged at this, and smote her with the stick ( bamaqeel (OT:4731),
which he carried; see Gen 38:18).

Numbers 22:28-31

And the LORD opened the mouth of the ass, and she said unto Balaam, What
have I done unto thee, that thou hast smitten me these three times?

"Then Jehovah opened the mouth of the ass, and she said to Balaam, What
have I done to thee, that thou hast smitten me now three times?" But Balaam,

[Link] (1 of 2) [13/08/2004 [Link] p.m.]

 Keil and Delitzsch Commentary on the Old Testament

enraged at the refractoriness of his ass, replied, "Because thou hast played me ill (
hitª`aleel (OT:5953), see Ex 10:2): if there were only a sword in my hand, verily I
should now have killed thee." But the ass replied, that she had been ridden by him
from a long time back, and had never been accustomed to act in this way towards
him. These words of the irrational beast, the truth of which Balaam was obliged to
admit, made an impression upon him, and awakened him out of his blindness, so
that God could now open his eyes, and he saw the angel of the Lord.

In this miraculous occurrence, which scoffers at the Bible constantly bring forward
as a weapon of attack upon the truth of the word of God, the circumstance that the
ass perceived the appearance of the angel of the Lord sooner than Balaam did, does
not present the slightest difficulty; for it is a well-known fact, that irrational
animals have a

<- Previous First Next ->

[Link] (2 of 2) [13/08/2004 [Link] p.m.]

 Keil and Delitzsch Commentary on the Old Testament

<- Previous First Next ->

much keener instinctive presentiment of many natural phenomena, such as

earthquakes, storms, etc., than man has with the five senses of his mind. And the
fact is equally undeniable, that many animals, e.g., horses and cows, see the so-
called second sight, and are terrified in consequence.

(Note: In support of this we will simply cite the following from the remarks made by Martin upon this
subject, and quoted by Hengstenberg in his Balaam (p. 385), from Passavant's work on animal
magnetism and clairvoyance: "That horses see it (the second sight), is also evident from their violent
and rapid snorting, when their rider has had a vision of any kind either by day or night. And in the case
of the horse it may also be observed, that it will refuse to go any farther in the same road until a
circuitous course has been taken, and even then it is quite in a sweat.")

The rock of offence in this narrative is to be found in the rational words of an

irrational and speechless ass. It is true, that in the actual meaning of the words
there is nothing beyond the sensations and feelings to which animals constantly
give utterance in gestures and inarticulate sounds, when subjected to cruel
treatment. But in this instance the feelings were expressed in the rational words of
human language, which an animal does not possess; and hence the question arises.
Are we to understand this miracle as being a purely internal fact of an ecstatic
nature, or a fact that actually came under the cognizance of the senses? If we
examine the arguments which Hengstenberg has adduced in favour of the former,
and Kurtz in support of the latter, there is nothing at all in the circumstance, that
the narrative itself says nothing about Balaam being in an ecstasy, nor in the
statement that "Jehovah opened the mouth of the ass," nor lastly, in the words of 2
Peter 2:16, "The dumb ass, speaking with man's voice, forbade the madness of the
prophet," to furnish conclusive, not to say irresistible, proofs of the assertion, that
"as the ass was corporeally and externally visible, its speaking must have been
externally and corporeally audible" ( Kurtz ).

All that is contained in the two scriptural testimonies is, that the ass spoke in a way
that was perceptible to Balaam, and that this speaking was effected by Jehovah as
something altogether extraordinary. But whether Balaam heard the words of the

[Link] (1 of 3) [13/08/2004 [Link] p.m.]

 Keil and Delitzsch Commentary on the Old Testament

animal with the outward, i.e., the bodily ear, or with an inward spiritual ear, is not
decided by them. On the other hand, neither the fact that Balaam expressed no
astonishment at the ass speaking, nor the circumstance that Balaam's companions-
viz., his two servants (v. 22) and the Moabitish messengers, who were also present,
according to v. 35-did not see the angel or hear the ass speaking, leads with
certainty to the conclusion, that the whole affair must have been a purely internal
one, which Balaam alone experienced in a state of ecstasy, since argumenta e
silentio confessedly prove but very little. With regard to Balaam, we may say with
Augustine ( quaest. 50 in Num.), "he was so carried away by his cupidity, that he
was not terrified by this marvellous miracle, and replied just as if he had been
speaking to a man, when God, although He did not change the nature of the ass
into that of a rational being, made it give utterance to whatever He pleased, for the
purpose of restraining his madness."

But with regard to the Moabitish messengers, it is very doubtful whether they were
eye-witnesses and auditors of the affair. It is quite possible that they had gone
some distance in advance, or were some distance behind, when Balaam had the
vision. On the other hand, there was no necessity to mention particularly that they
saw the appearance of the angel, and heard the speaking of the animal, as this
circumstance was not of the least importance in connection with the main purpose
of the narrative. And still less can it be said that "the ass's speaking, if transferred
to the sphere of outward reality, would obviously break through the eternal
boundary-line which has been drawn in Gen 1 between the human and the animal
world." The only thing that would have broken through this boundary, would have
been for the words of the ass to have surpassed the feelings and sensations of an
animal; that is to say, for the ass to have given utterance to truths that were
essentially human, and only comprehensible by human reason. Now that was not
the case. All that the ass said was quite within the sphere of the psychical life of an
animal.

The true explanation lies between the notion that the whole occurrence was purely
internal, and consisted

[Link] (2 of 3) [13/08/2004 [Link] p.m.]

Keil and Delitzsch Commentary on the Old Testament

<- Previous First Next ->

[Link] (3 of 3) [13/08/2004 [Link] p.m.]

 Keil and Delitzsch Commentary on the Old Testament

<- Previous First Next ->

The true explanation lies between the notion that the whole occurrence was purely
internal, and consisted exclusively in ecstasy brought by God upon Balaam, and
the grossly realistic reduction of the whole affair into the sphere of the senses and
the outward material world. The angel who met the soothsayer in the road, as he
was riding upon his ass, and who was seen at once by the ass, though he was not
seen by Balaam till Jehovah had opened his eyes, did really appear upon the road,
in the outward world of the senses. But the form in which he appeared was not a
grossly sensuous or material form, like the bodily frame of an ordinary visible
being; for in that case Balaam would inevitably have seen him, when his beast
became alarmed and restive again and again and refused to go forward, since it is
not stated anywhere that God had smitten him with blindness, like the men of
Sodom (Gen 19:11), or the people in 2 Kings 6:18.

It rather resembled the appearance of a spirit, which cannot be seen by every one
who has healthy bodily eyes, but only by those who have their senses awakened for
visions from the spirit-world. Thus, for example, the men who went to Damascus
with Paul, saw no one, when the Lord appeared to him in a miraculous light from
heaven, and spoke to him, although they also heard the voice

(Note: Or, strictly speaking, they saw the light (Acts 22:9), but saw no man (Acts 9:7); and they heard
the sound ( tee's (NT:3588) foonee's (NT:5456), the voice or noise generally, Acts 9:7), but not the
words ( tee'n (NT:3588) foonee'n (NT:5456) tou' (NT:3588) lalou'nto's (NT:2980) moi (NT:3427),
the voice or articulate words of the person speaking, Acts 22:9). The construction of akou'oo
(NT:191), with the genitive in the one case and the accusative in the other, is evidently intended to
convey this distinct and distinctive meaning. - Tr.) (Acts 9:7).

Balaam wanted the spiritual sense to discern the angel of the Lord, because his
spirit's eye was blinded by his thirst for wealth and honour. This blindness
increased to such an extent, with the inward excitement caused by the repeated
insubordination of his beast, that he lost all self-control. As the ass had never been
so restive before, if he had only been calm and thoughtful himself, he would have
looked about to discover the cause of this remarkable change, and would then, no
[Link] (1 of 2) [13/08/2004 [Link] p.m.]
 Keil and Delitzsch Commentary on the Old Testament

doubt, have discovered the presence of the angel. But as he lost all his
thoughtfulness, God was obliged to open the mouth of the dumb and irrational
animal, to show a seer by profession his own blindness. "He might have reproved
him by the words of the angel; but because the rebuke would not have been
sufficiently severe without some deep humiliation, He made the beast his teacher" (
Calvin ). The ass's speaking was produced by the omnipotence of God; but it is
impossible to decide whether the modulation was miraculously communicated to
the animal's voice, so that it actually gave utterance to the human words which fell
upon Balaam's ears ( Kurtz ), or whether the cries of the animal were formed into
rational discourse in Balaam's soul, by the direct operation of God, so that he alone
heard and understood the speech of the animal, whereas the servants who were
present heard nothing more than unintelligible cries.

(Note: See the analogous case mentioned in John 12:28-29, of the voice which came to Jesus from the
skies, when some of the people who were standing by said that it only thundered, whilst others said an
angel spoke to Him.)

In either case Balaam received a deeply humiliating admonition from the mouth of
the irrational beast, and that not only to put him to shame, but also to call him to
his senses, and render him capable of hearing the voice of God. The seer, who
prided himself upon having eyes for divine revelations, was so blind, that he could
not discern the appearance of the angel, which even the irrational beast had been
able to see.

(Note: God made use of the voice of an ass, both because it was fitting that a brutish mind should be
taught by a brute, and also, as Nyssenus says, to instruct and chastise the vanity of the augur

<- Previous First Next ->

[Link] (2 of 2) [13/08/2004 [Link] p.m.]

 Keil and Delitzsch Commentary on the Old Testament

<- Previous First Next ->

(Balaam), who was accustomed to observe the meaning of the braying of the ass and the chirping of
birds ( C. a. Lap. ).)

By this he was taught, that even a beast is more capable of discerning things from
the higher world, than a man blinded by sinful desires. It was not till after this
humiliation that God opened his eyes, so that he saw the angel of the Lord with a
drawn sword standing in his road, and fell upon his face before this fearful sight.

Numbers 22:32-34

And the angel of the LORD said unto him, Wherefore hast thou smitten thine ass
these three times? behold, I went out to withstand thee, because thy way is
perverse before me:

To humble him deeply and inwardly, the Lord help up before him the injustice of
his cruel treatment of the ass, and told him at the same time that it had saved his
life by turning out of the way. "I have come out," said the angel of the Lord, "as an
adversary; for the way leads headlong into destruction before me;" i.e., the way
which thou art going is leading thee, in my eyes, in my view, into destruction.
yaaraT (OT:3399), to plunge, sc., into destruction, both here, and also in Job
16:11, the only other passage in which it occurs.

Numbers 22:33-35

And the ass saw me, and turned from me these three times: unless she had
turned from me, surely now also I had slain thee, and saved her alive.

The angel of the Lord sought to preserve Balaam from the destruction which
threatened him, by standing in his way; but he did not see him, though his ass did.

[Link] (1 of 2) [13/08/2004 [Link] p.m.]

 Keil and Delitzsch Commentary on the Old Testament

wgw' naaTªtaah (OT:5186) 'uwlay (OT:194), "perhaps it turned out before me;
for otherwise I should surely have killed thee, and let her live." The first clause is
to be regarded, as Hengstenberg supposes, as an aposiopesis. The angel does not
state positively what was the reason why perhaps the ass had turned out of the way:
he merely hints at it lightly, and leaves it to Balaam to gather from the hint, that the
faithful animal had turned away from affection to its master, with a dim foreboding
of the danger which threatened him, and yet for that very reason, as it were as a
reward for its service of love, had been ill-treated by him. The traditional
rendering, "if the ass had not turned aside, surely," etc., cannot be defended
according to the rules of the language; and there is not sufficient ground for any
such alteration of the text as Knobel suggests, viz., into luwleey (OT:3884).

These words made an impression, and Balaam made this acknowledgment (v. 34):
"I have sinned, for I knew not that thou stoodest in the way against me; and
now, if it displease thee, I will get me back again." The angel of the Lord replied,
however (v. 35): "Go with the men; but only the word that I shall speak unto
thee, that shalt you speak." This was sufficient to show him, that it was not the
journey in itself that was displeasing to God, but the feelings and intentions with
which he had entered upon it. The whole procedure was intended to sharpen his
conscience and sober his mind, that he might pay attention to the word which the
Lord

<- Previous First Next ->

[Link] (2 of 2) [13/08/2004 [Link] p.m.]

 Keil and Delitzsch Commentary on the Old Testament

<- Previous First Next ->

would speak to him. At the same time the impression which the appearance and
words of the angel of the Lord made upon his heart, enveloped in mist as it was by
the thirst for gold and honour, was not a deep one, nor one that led him to a
thorough knowledge of his own heart; otherwise, after such a warning, he would
never have continued his journey.

Numbers 22:36-37

And when Balak heard that Balaam was come, he went out to meet him unto a
city of Moab, which is in the border of Arnon, which is in the utmost coast.

Reception of Balaam by the King of the Moabites. - Vv. 36, 37. As soon as Balak
heard of Balaam's coming, he went to meet him at a city on the border of the
Arnon, which flowed at the extreme (north) boundary (of the Moabitish territory),
viz., at Areopolis (see at Num 21:15), probably the capital of the kingdom at one
time, but now reduced to a frontier town, since Sihon the Amorite had taken all the
land as far as the Arnon; whilst Rabbah , which was farther south, had been
selected as the residence of the king. By coming as far as the frontier of his
kingdom to meet the celebrated soothsayer, Balak intended to do him special
honour. But he would not help receiving him with a gentle reproof for not having
come at his first invitation, as if he, the king, had not been in a condition to honour
him according to his merits.

Numbers 22:38

And Balaam said unto Balak, Lo, I am come unto thee: have I now any power at
all to say any thing? the word that God putteth in my mouth, that shall I speak.

But Balaam, being still mindful of the warning which he had just received from
God, replied, "Lo, I am come unto thee now: have I then any power to speak
[Link] (1 of 2) [13/08/2004 [Link] p.m.]
 Keil and Delitzsch Commentary on the Old Testament

anything (sc., of my own accord)? "The word which God puts into my mouth, that
will I speak." With this reply he sought, at the very outset, to soften down the
expectations of Balak, inasmuch as he concluded at once that his coming was a
proof of his willingness to curse ( Hengstenberg ). As a matter of fact, Balaam did
not say anything different to the king form what he had explained to his
messengers at the very first (cf. v. 18). But just as he had not told them the whole
truth, but had concealed the fact that Jehovah, his God, had forbidden the journey
at first, on the ground that he was not to curse the nation that was blessed (v. 12),
so he could not address the king in open, unambiguous words.

Numbers 22:39-40

And Balaam went with Balak, and they came unto Kirjath-huzoth.

<- Previous First Next ->

[Link] (2 of 2) [13/08/2004 [Link] p.m.]

 Keil and Delitzsch Commentary on the Old Testament

<- Previous First Next ->

He then went with Balak to Kirjath-Chuzoth , where the king had oxen and sheep
slaughtered in sacrifice, and sent flesh to Balaam as well as to the princes that were
with him for a sacrificial meal, to do honour to the soothsayer thereby. The
sacrifices were not so much thank-offerings for Balaam's happy arrival, as
supplicatory offerings for the success of the undertaking before them. "This is
evident," as Hengstenberg correctly observes, "from the place and time of their
presentation; for the place was not that where Balak first met with Balaam, and
they were only presented on the eve of the great event." Moreover, they were
offered unquestionably not to the Moabitish idols, from which Balak expected no
help, but to Jehovah, whom Balak wished to draw away, in connection with
Balaam, from His own people (Israel), that he might secure His favour to the
Moabites. The situation of Kirjath-Chuzoth , which is only mentioned here, cannot
be determined with absolute certainty. As Balak went with Balaam to Bamoth-baal
on the morning following the sacrificial meal, which was celebrated there, Kirjath-
Chuzoth cannot have been very far distant. Knobel conjectures, with some
probability, that it may have been the same as Kerioth (Jer 48:24), i.e., Kereijat or
Körriat , at the foot of Jebel Attarus, at the top of which Bamoth-baal was situated
(see at Num 21:19).

Numbers 22:41

And it came to pass on the morrow, that Balak took Balaam, and brought him up
into the high places of Baal, that thence he might see the utmost part of the
people.

But Balak conducted the soothsayer to Bamoth-baal , not because it was

consecrated to Baal, but because it was the first height on the way to the steppes of
Moab, from which they could see the camp of Israel, or at all events, "the end of
the people," i.e., the outermost portion of the camp. For "Balak started with the
supposition, that Balaam must necessarily have the Israelites in view if his curse
was to take effect" ( Hengstenberg ).

[Link] (1 of 2) [13/08/2004 [Link] p.m.]

 Keil and Delitzsch Commentary on the Old Testament

Numbers 23:1-2

And Balaam said unto Balak, Build me here seven altars, and prepare me here
seven oxen and seven rams.

Balaam's First Words. - Vv. 1-3. Preparations for the first act, which was
performed at Bamoth-baal. At Balaam's command Balak built seven altars, and
then selected seven bullocks and seven rams, which they immediately sacrificed,
namely, one bullock and one ram upon each altar. The nations of antiquity
generally accompanied all their more important undertakings with sacrifices, to
make sure of the protection and help of the gods; but this was especially the case
with their ceremonies of adjuration. According to Diod. Sic. ii. 29, the Chaldeans
sought to avert calamity and secure prosperity by sacrifices and adjurations. The
same thing is also related of other nations (see Hengstenberg , Balaam, p. 392).
Accordingly, Balaam also did everything that appeared necessary, according to his
own religious notions, to ensure the success of Balak's undertaking, and bring
about the desired result. The erection of seven altars, and the sacrifice of seven
animals of each kind, are to be explained from the sacredness acquired by this
number, through the creation of the world in seven days, as being

<- Previous First Next ->

[Link] (2 of 2) [13/08/2004 [Link] p.m.]

 Keil and Delitzsch Commentary on the Old Testament

<- Previous First Next ->

the stamp of work that was well-pleasing to God. The sacrifices were burnt-
offerings, and were offered by themselves to Jehovah, whom Balaam
acknowledged as his God.

Numbers 23:3,4

And Balaam said unto Balak, Stand by thy burnt offering, and I will go:
peradventure the LORD will come to meet me: and whatsoever he sheweth me I
will tell thee. And he went to an high place.

After the offering of the sacrifices, Balaam directed the king to stand by his burnt-
offering, i.e., by the sacrifices that had been offered for him upon the seven altars,
that he might go out for auguries. The meaning of the words, "I will go,
peradventure Jehovah will come to meet me," is apparent from Num [Link] and "he
went no more to meet with the auguries" ( nªchaashiym (OT:5173), see at Lev
19:26). Balaam went out to look for a manifestation of Jehovah in the significant
phenomena of nature. The word which Jehovah should show to him, he would
report to Balak. We have here what is just as characteristic in relation to Balaam's
religious stand-point, as it is significant in its bearing upon the genuine historical
character of the narrative, namely, an admixture of the religious ideas of both the
Israelites and the heathen, inasmuch as Balaam hoped to receive or discover, in the
phenomena of nature, a revelation from Jehovah. Because heathenism had no "sure
word of prophecy," it sought to discover the will and counsel of God, which are
displayed in the events of human history, through various signs that were
discernible in natural phenomena, or, as Chryssipus the Stoic expresses it in Cicero
de divin. ii. 63, "Signa quae a Diis hominibus portendantur."

(Note: See the remarks of Nägelsbach and Hartung on the nature of the heathen auspices, in
Hengstenberg's Balaam and his Prophecies (pp. 396-7). Hartung observes, for example: "As the gods
did not live outside the world, or separated from it, but the things of time and space were filled with
their essence, it followed, as a matter of course, that the signs of their presence were sought and seen
in all the visible and audible occurrences of nature, whether animate or inanimate. Hence all the

[Link] (1 of 2) [13/08/2004 [Link] p.m.]

 Keil and Delitzsch Commentary on the Old Testament

phenomena which affected the senses, either in the elements or in the various creatures, whether
sounds or movements, natural productions or events, of a mechanical or physical, or voluntary or
involuntary kind, might serve as the media of revelation." And again (p. 397): "The sign in itself is
useless, if it be not observed. It was therefore necessary that man and God should come to meet one
another, and that the sign should not merely be given, but should also be received.")

To look for a word of Jehovah in this way, Balaam betook himself to a "bald
height." This is the only meaning of shªpiy (OT:8195), from shaapaah (OT:8192),
to rub, to scrape, to make bare, which is supported by the usage of the language; it
is also in perfect harmony with the context, as the heathen augurs were always
accustomed to select elevated places for their auspices, with an extensive prospect,
especially the towering and barren summits of mountains that were rarely visited
by men (see Hengstenberg, ut sup. ). Ewald , however, proposes the meaning
"alone," or "to spy," for which there is not the slightest grammatical foundation.

Numbers 23:4-6

And God met Balaam: and he said unto him, I have prepared seven altars, and I
have offered upon every

<- Previous First Next ->

[Link] (2 of 2) [13/08/2004 [Link] p.m.]

 Keil and Delitzsch Commentary on the Old Testament

<- Previous First Next ->

And God met Balaam: and he said unto him, I have prepared seven altars, and I
have offered upon every altar a bullock and a ram.

"And God came to meet Balaam," who thought it necessary, as a true hariolus ,
to call the attention of God to the altars which had been built for Him, and the
sacrifices that had been offered upon them. And God made known His will to him,
though not in a natural sign of doubtful signification. He put a very distinct and
unmistakeable word into his mouth, and commanded him to make it known to the
king.

Numbers 23:7-10

And he took up his parable, and said, Balak the king of Moab hath brought me
from Aram, out of the mountains of the east, saying, Come, curse me Jacob, and
come, defy Israel.

Balaam's first saying. - Having come back to the burnt-offering, Balaam

commenced his utterance before the king and the assembled princes. maashaal
(OT:4912), lit., a simile, then a proverb, because the latter consists of comparisons
and figures, and lastly a sentence or saying. The application of this term to the
announcements made by Balaam (vv. 7, 18, Num 24:3,15,20), whereas it is never
used of the prophecies of the true prophets of Jehovah, but only of certain songs
and similes inserted in them (cf. Isa 14:4; Ezek 17:2; 24:3; Mic 2:4), is to be
accounted for not merely from the poetic form of Balaam's utterances, the
predominance of poetical imagery, the sustained parallelism , the construction of
the whole discourse in brief pointed sentences, and other peculiarities of poetic
language (e.g., bªnow (OT:1121), Num 24:3,15), but it points at the same time to
the difference which actually exists between these utterances and the predictions of
the true prophets. The latter are orations addressed to the congregation, which
deduce from the general and peculiar relation of Israel to the Lord and to His law,

[Link] (1 of 2) [13/08/2004 [Link] p.m.]

 Keil and Delitzsch Commentary on the Old Testament

the conduct of the Lord towards His people either in their own or in future times,
proclaiming judgment upon the ungodly and salvation to the righteous. "Balaam's
mental eye," on the contrary, as Hengstenberg correctly observes, "was simply
fixed upon what he saw; and this he reproduced without any regard to the
impression that it was intended to make upon those who heard it." But the very
first utterance was of such a character as to deprive Balak of all hope that his
wishes would be fulfilled.

Verse 7. "Balak, the king of Moab, fetches me from Aram, from the
mountains of the East," i.e., of Mesopotamia, which was described, as far back as
Gen 29:1, as the land of the sons of the East (cf. Num 22:5). Balaam mentions the
mountains of his home in contradistinction to the mountains of the land of the
Moabites upon which he was then standing. "Come, curse me Jacob, and come
threaten Israel." Balak had sent for him for this purpose (see Num 22:11,17).
zo`amaah (OT:2194), for zaa`ªmaah (OT:2194), imperative (see Ewald , §228,
b. ). zaa`am (OT:2194), to be angry, here to give utterance to the wrath of God,
synonymous with naaqab (OT:5344) or qaabab (OT:6895), to curse. Jacob: a
poetical name for the nation, equivalent to Israel.

Verse 8-10. "How shall I curse whom God does not curse, and how threaten
whom Jehovah does not threaten?" Balak imagined, like all the heathen, that
Balaam, as a goetes and magician, could distribute blessings and curses according
to his own will, and put such constraint upon his God as to make Him subservient
to his own will (see at Num 22:6). The seer opposes this delusion: The God of
Israel does not curse His people, and therefore His servant cannot curse them. The
following verses (vv. 9 and 10) give the reason why: "For from the top of the
rocks I see him, and from the hills I behold him. Lo, it is a people that dwelleth
apart, and is not numbered among the heathen. Who determines the dust of
Jacob, and in number the fourth part of

<- Previous First Next ->

[Link] (2 of 2) [13/08/2004 [Link] p.m.]

 Keil and Delitzsch Commentary on the Old Testament

<- Previous First Next ->

Israel? Let my soul die the death of the righteous, and my end be like his?"
There were two reasons which rendered it impossible for Balaam to curse Israel:

(1) Because they were a people both outwardly and inwardly different from other
nations, and (2) because they were a people richly blessed and highly favoured by
God. From the top of the mountains Balaam looked down upon the people of
Israel. The outward and earthly height upon which he stood was the substratum of
the spiritual height upon which the Spirit of God had placed him, and had so
enlightened his mental sight, that he was able to discern all the peculiarities and the
true nature of Israel. In this respect the first thing that met his view was the fact
that this people dwelt alone. Dwelling alone does not denote a quiet and safe
retirement, as many commentators have inferred from Deut 33:28; Jer 49:31, and
Mic 7:14; but, according to the parallel clause, "it is not reckoned among the
nations," it expresses the separation of Israel from the rest of the nations. This
separation was manifested outwardly to the seer's eye in the fact that "the host of
Israel dwelt by itself in a separate encampment upon the plain. In this his spirit
discerned the inward and essential separation of Israel from all the heathen" (
Baumgarten ).

This outward "dwelling alone" was a symbol of their inward separation from the
heathen world, by virtue of which Israel was not only saved from the fate of the
heathen world, but could not be overcome by the heathen; of course only so long as
they themselves should inwardly maintain this separation from the heathen, and
faithfully continue in covenant with the Lord their God, who had separated them
from among the nations to be His own possession. As soon as Israel lost itself in
heathen ways, it also lost its own external independence. This rule applies to the
Israel of the New Testament as well as the Israel of the Old, to the congregation or
Church of God of all ages. yitªchasheeb lo' , "it does not reckon itself among the
heathen nations," i.e., it does not share the lot of the other nations, because it has a
different God and protector from the heathen (cf. Deut 4:8; 33:29). The truth of this
has been so marvellously realized in the history of the Israelites, notwithstanding

[Link] (1 of 3) [13/08/2004 [Link] p.m.]

 Keil and Delitzsch Commentary on the Old Testament

their falling short of the idea of their divine calling, "that whereas all the mightier
kingdoms of the ancient world, Egypt, Assyria, Babel, etc., have perished without a
trace, Israel, after being rescued from so many dangers which threatened utter
destruction under the Old Testament, still flourishes in the Church of the New
Testament, and continues also to exist in that part which, though rejected now, is
destined one day to be restored" ( Hengstenberg ).

In this state of separation from the other nations, Israel rejoiced in the blessing of
its God, which was already visible in the innumerable multitude into which it had
grown. "Who has ever determined the dust of Jacob?" As the dust cannot be
numbered, so is the multitude of Israel innumerable. These words point back to the
promise in Gen 13:16, and applied quite as much to the existing state as to the
future of Israel. The beginning of the miraculous fulfilment of the promise given to
the patriarchs of an innumerable posterity, was already before their eyes (cf. Deut
10:22). Even now the fourth part of Israel is not to be reckoned. Balaam speaks of
the fourth part with reference to the division of the nation into four camps (ch. 2),
of which he could see only one from his point of view (Num 22:41), and therefore
only the fourth part of the nation. micªpaar (OT:4557) is an accusative of
definition, and the subject and verb are to be repeated from the first clause; so that
there is no necessity to alter micªpaar (OT:4557) into caapar (OT:5608) miy
(OT:4310). - But Israel was not only visibly blessed by God with an innumerable
increase; it was also inwardly exalted into a people of yªshaariym (OT:3477),
righteous or honourable men.

The predicate yªshaariym (OT:3477) is applied to Israel on account of its divine

calling, because it had a God who was just and right, a God of truth and without
iniquity (Deut 32:4), or because the God of Israel was holy, and sanctified His
people (Lev 20:7-8; Ex 31:13) and made them into a Jeshurun (Deut 32:15;
33:5,26). Righteousness, probity, is the idea and destination of this people, which
has never entirely lost it, though it has never fully realized it. Even in times of
general apostasy from the Lord, there was always an eklogee' (NT:1589) in the
nation, of which probity and righteousness could truly be predicated (cf. 1 Kings
19:18). The righteousness of the Israelites was "a product of the institutions which
[Link] (2 of 3) [13/08/2004 [Link] p.m.]
 Keil and Delitzsch Commentary on the Old Testament

God had established among them, of the revelation of His holy will which He had
given them in His law, of the forgiveness of sins which He had linked on to the
offering of sacrifices,

<- Previous First Next ->

[Link] (3 of 3) [13/08/2004 [Link] p.m.]

 Keil and Delitzsch Commentary on the Old Testament

<- Previous First Next ->

and of the communication of His Spirit, which was ever living and at work in His
Church, and in it alone" ( Hengstenberg ).

Such a people Balaam could not curse; he could only wish that the end of his own
life might resemble the end of these righteous men. Death is introduced here as the
end and completion of life. "Balaam desires for himself the entire, full,
indestructible, and inalienable blessedness of the Israelite, of which death is both
the close and completion, and also the seal and attestation" ( Kurtz ). This desire
did not involve the certain hope of a blessed life beyond the grave, which the
Israelites themselves did not then possess; it simply expressed the thought that the
death of a pious Israelite was a desirable good. And this it was, whether viewed in
the light of the past, the present, or the future. In the hour of death the pious
Israelite could look back with blessed satisfaction to a long life, rich "in traces of
the beneficent, forgiving, delivering, and saving grace of God;" he could comfort
himself with the delightful hope of living on in his children and his children's
children, and in them of participating in the future fulfilment of the divine promises
of grace; and lastly, when dying in possession of the love and grace of God, he
could depart hence with the joyful confidence of being gathered to his fathers in
Sheol (Gen 25:8).

Numbers 23:11-13

And Balak said unto Balaam, What hast thou done unto me? I took thee to curse
mine enemies, and, behold, thou hast blessed them altogether.

Balak reproached Balaam for this utterance, which announced blessings to the
Israelites instead of curses. But he met his reproaches with the remark, that he was
bound by the command of Jehovah. The infinitive absolute, baareekª (OT:1288),
after the finite verb, expresses the fact that Balaam had continued to give utterance
to nothing but blessings. lªdabeer (OT:1696) shaamar (OT:8104), to observe to

[Link] (1 of 2) [13/08/2004 [Link] p.m.]

 Keil and Delitzsch Commentary on the Old Testament

speak; shaamar (OT:8104), to notice carefully, as in Deut 5:1,29, etc. But Balak
thought that the reason might be found in the unfavourable locality; he therefore
led the seer to "the field of the watchers, upon the top of Pisgah," whence he could
see the whole of the people of Israel. The words wgw' tirª'enuw (OT:7200) 'asher
(OT:834) (v. 13) are to be rendered, "whence thou wilt see it (Israel); thou seest
only the end of it, but not the whole of it" (sc., here upon Bamoth-baal). This is
required by a comparison of the verse before us with Num 22:41, where it is most
unquestionably stated, that upon the top of Bamoth-baal Balaam only saw "the end
of the people."

For this reason Balak regarded that place as unfavourable, and wished to lead the
seer to a place from which he could see the people, without any limitation
whatever. Consequently, notwithstanding the omission of kiy (OT:3588) (for), the
words qaatseehuw (OT:7097) 'epec (OT:657) can only be intended to assign the
reason why Balak supposed the first utterances of Balaam to have been
unfavourable. qaatseehuw (OT:7097) = haa`aam (OT:5971) qªtseeh (OT:7097),
the end of the people (Num 22:41), cannot possibly signify the whole nation, or, as
Marck, de Geer, Gesenius , and Kurtz suppose, "the people from one end to the
other," in which case haa`aam (OT:5971) qªtseeh (OT:7097) (the end of the
people) would signify the very opposite of qaatseehuw (OT:7097) (the end of it);
for haa`aam (OT:5971) qªtseeh (OT:7097) is not interchangeable, or to be
identified, with miqaatseh kaal-haa`aam (Gen 19:4), "the whole people, from the
end or extremity of it," or from its last man; in other words, "to the very last man."

Still less does haa`aam (OT:5971) qªtseeh (OT:7097) 'epec (OT:657) signify "the
uttermost end of the whole people, the end of the entire people," notwithstanding
the fact that Kurtz regards the expression, "the end of the end

<- Previous First Next ->

[Link] (2 of 2) [13/08/2004 [Link] p.m.]

 Keil and Delitzsch Commentary on the Old Testament

<- Previous First Next ->

of the people," as an intolerable tautology. qaabªnow (OT:6895), imperative with

nun epenth. , from qaabab (OT:6895). The "field of the watchers," or "spies (
zophim ), upon the top of Pisgah," corresponds, no doubt, to "the field of Moab,
upon the top of Pisgah," on the west of Heshbon (see at Num 21:20). Mount Nebo ,
from which Moses surveyed the land of Canaan in all its length and breadth, was
one summit, and possibly the summit of Pisgah (see Deut 3:27; 34:1). The field of
the spies was very probably a tract of table-land upon Nebo; and so called either
because watchers were stationed there in times of disturbance, to keep a look-out
all round, or possibly because it was a place where augurs made their observations
of the heavens and of birds ( Knobel ). The locality has not been thoroughly
explored by travellers; but from the spot alluded to, it must have been possible to
overlook a very large portion of the Arboth Moab. Still farther to the north, and
nearer to the camp of the Israelites in these Arboth, was the summit of Peor , to
which Balak afterwards conducted Balaam (v. 28), and where he not only saw the
whole of the people, but could see distinctly the camps of the different tribes (Num
24:2).

14b-17. Upon Pisgah, Balak and Balaam made the same preparations for a fresh
revelation from God as upon Bamoth-baal (vv. 1-6). koh (OT:3541) in v. 15 does
not mean "here" or "yonder," but "so" or "thus," as in every other case. The thought
is this: "Do thou stay (sc., as thou art), and I will go and meet thus" (sc., in the
manner required). 'iqaareh (OT:7136) (I will go and meet) is a technical term here
for going out for auguries (Num 24:1), or for a divine revelation.

Numbers 23:18-24

And he took up his parable, and said, Rise up, Balak, and hear; hearken unto
me, thou son of Zippor:

The second saying. - "Up, Balak, and hear! Hearken to me, son of Zippor!" quwm
(OT:6965), "stand up," is a call to mental elevation, to the perception of the word

[Link] (1 of 2) [13/08/2004 [Link] p.m.]

 Keil and Delitzsch Commentary on the Old Testament

of God; for Balak was standing by his sacrifice (v. 17). he'eziyn (OT:238) with `ad
(OT:5704), as in Job 32:11, signifies a hearing which presses forward to the
speaker,
i.e., in keen and minute attention ( Hengstenberg ). bªnow (OT:1121), with the
antiquated union vowel for ben (OT:1121); see at Gen 1:24.

Verse 19. "God is not a man, that He should lie; nor a son of man, that He
should repent: hath He said, and should He not do it? and spoken, and should
not carry it out?"

Verse 20. "Behold, I have received to bless: and He hath blessed; and I cannot
turn it." Balaam meets Balak's expectation that he will take back the blessing that
he has uttered, with the declaration, that God does not alter His purposes like
changeable and fickle men, but keeps His word unalterably, and carries it into
execution. The unchangeableness of the divine purposes is a necessary
consequence of the unchangeableness of the divine nature. With regard to His own
counsels, God repents of nothing; but this does not prevent the repentance of God,
understood as an anthropopathic expression, denoting the pain experienced by the
love of God, on account of the destruction of its creatures (see at Gen 6:6, and Ex
32:14). The h before huw' (OT:1931) v. 19) is the interrogative h (see Ges. §100,
4). The two clauses of v. 19b, "Hath He spoken," etc., taken by themselves, are no
doubt of universal application; but taken in connection with the context, they relate
specially to what God had spoken through Balaam, in his first utterance with
reference to Israel, as we may see from the more precise explanation in v. 20,
"Behold, I have received to bless' ( laaqach (OT:3947), taken, accepted), etc.
heeshiyb (OT:7725), to lead back, to make a thing retrograde (Isa 43:13). Samuel
afterwards refused Saul's request in

<- Previous First Next ->

[Link] (2 of 2) [13/08/2004 [Link] p.m.]

 Keil and Delitzsch Commentary on the Old Testament

<- Previous First Next ->

these words of Balaam (v. 19a), when he entreated him to revoke his rejection on
the part of God (1 Sam 15:29).

Verse 21. After this decided reversal of Balak's expectations, Balaam carried out
still more fully the blessing which had been only briefly indicated in his first
utterance. "He beholds not wickedness in Jacob, and sees not suffering in Israel:
Jehovah his God is with him, and the shout (jubilation) of a king in the midst of
him." The subject in the first sentence is God (see Hab 1:3,13). God sees not
'aawen (OT:205), worthlessness, wickedness, and `aamaal (OT:5999), tribulation,
misery, as the consequence of sin, and therefore discovers no reason for cursing the
nation. That this applied to the people solely by virtue of their calling as the holy
nation of Jehovah, and consequently that there is no denial of the sin of individuals,
is evident from the second hemistich, which expresses the thought of the first in a
positive form: so that the words, "Jehovah his God is with him," correspond to the
words, "He beholds not wickedness;" and "the shout of a king in the midst of it," to
His not seeing suffering. Israel therefore rejoiced in the blessing of God only so
long as it remained faithful to the idea of its divine calling, and continued in
covenant fellowship with the Lord. So long the power of the world could do it no
harm. The "shout of a king" in Israel is the rejoicing of Israel at the fact that
Jehovah dwells and rules as King in the midst of it (cf. Ex 15:18; Deut 33:5).
Jehovah had manifested Himself as King, by leading them out of Egypt.

Verse 22. "God brings them out of Egypt; his strength is like that of a
buffalo." 'eel (OT:410) is God as the strong, or mighty one. The participle
mowtsiy'aam (OT:3318) is not used for the preterite, but designates the leading out
as still going on, and lasting till the introduction into Canaan. The plural suffix, aa-
m , is used ad sensum , with reference to Israel as a people. Because God leads
them, they go forward with the strength of a buffalo. tow`apowt , from yaa`eep
(OT:3287), to weary, signifies that which causes weariness, exertion, the putting
forth of power; hence the fulness of strength, ability to make or bear exertions.
rª'eem (OT:7214) is the buffalo or wild ox, an indomitable animal, which is

[Link] (1 of 3) [13/08/2004 [Link] p.m.]

 Keil and Delitzsch Commentary on the Old Testament

especially fearful on account of its horns (Job 39:9-11; Deut 33:17; Ps 22:22).

Verse 23. The fellowship of its God, in which Israel rejoiced, and to which it owed
its strength, was an actual truth. "For there is no augury in Jacob, and no
divination in Israel. At the time it is spoken to Jacob, and to Israel what God
doeth." kiy (OT:3588) does not mean, "so that, as an introduction to the sequel," as
Knobel supposes, but "for," as a causal particle. The fact that Israel was not
directed, like other nations, to the uncertain and deceitful instrumentality of augury
and divination, but enjoyed in all its concerns the immediate revelation of its God,
furnished the proof that it had its God in the midst of it, and was guided and
endowed with power by God Himself. nachash (OT:5173) and qecem (OT:7081),
oioonismo's and mantei'a , augurium et divinatio (LXX, Vulg. ), were the two
means employed by the heathen for looking into futurity. The former (see at Lev
19:26) was the unfolding of the future from signs in the phenomena of nature, and
inexplicable occurrences in animal and human life; the latter, prophesying from a
pretended or supposed revelation of the Deity within the human mind. kaa`eet
(OT:6256), "according to the time," i.e., at the right time, God revealed His acts,
His counsel, and His will to Israel in His word, which He had spoken at first to the
patriarchs, and afterwards through Moses and the prophets. In this He revealed to
His people in truth, and in a way that could not deceive, what the heathen
attempted in vain to discover through augury and divination (cf. Deut 18:14-19).

(Note: "What is here affirmed of Israel, applies to the Church of all ages, and also to every individual
believer. The Church of God knows from His word what God does, and what it has to do in
consequence. The wisdom of this world resembles augury and divination. The Church of God, which
is in possession of His word, has no need of it, and it only leads its followers to destruction, from
inability to discern the will of God. To discover this with certainty, is the great privilege of the Church
of God" ( Hengstenberg ).)

Verse 24. Through the power of its God, Israel was invincible, and would crush all
its foes. "Behold, it rises up, a people like the lioness, and lifts itself up like the
lion. It lies not down till it eats dust, and drinks the blood

[Link] (2 of 3) [13/08/2004 [Link] p.m.]

Keil and Delitzsch Commentary on the Old Testament

<- Previous First Next ->

[Link] (3 of 3) [13/08/2004 [Link] p.m.]

 Keil and Delitzsch Commentary on the Old Testament

<- Previous First Next ->

of the slain." What the patriarch Jacob prophesied of Judah, the ruler among his
brethren, in Gen 49:9, Balaam here transfers to the whole nation, to put to shame
all the hopes indulged by the Moabitish king of the conquest and destruction of
Israel.

Numbers 23:25-28

And Balak said unto Balaam, Neither curse them at all, nor bless them at all.

Balaam's Last Words. - Vv. 25-30. Balak was not deterred, however, from making
another attempt. At first, indeed, he exclaimed in indignation at these second
sayings of Balaam: "Thou shalt neither curse it, nor even bless." The double gam
(OT:1571) with lo' (OT:3808) signifies "neither-nor;" and the rendering, "if thou
do not curse it, thou shalt not bless it," must be rejected as untenable. In his
vexation at the second failure, he did not want to hear anything more from Balaam.
But when he replied again, that he had told him at the very outset that he could do
nothing but what God should say to him (cf. Num 22:38), he altered his mind, and
resolved to conduct Balaam to another place with this hope: "peradventure it will
please God that thou mayest curse me them from thence." Clericus observes
upon this passage, "It was the opinion of the heathen, that what was not obtained
through the first, second, or third victim, might nevertheless be secured through a
fourth;" and he adduces proofs from Suetonius, Curtius, Gellius , and others.

Numbers 23:29,30

And Balaam said unto Balak, Build me here seven altars, and prepare me here
seven bullocks and seven rams.

He takes the seer "to the top of Peor, which looks over the face of the desert" (

[Link] (1 of 2) [13/08/2004 [Link] p.m.]

 Keil and Delitzsch Commentary on the Old Testament

Jeshimon: see at Num 21:20), and therefore was nearer to the camp of the
Israelites. Mount Peor was one peak of the northern part of the mountains of
Abarim by the town of Beth-peor , which afterwards belonged to the Reubenites
(Josh 13:20), and opposite to which the Israelites were encamped in the steppes of
Moab (Deut 3:29; 4:46). According to Eusebius ( Onom. s. v. Fogoo'r ), Peor was
above Libias (i.e., Bethharam ),

(Note: Aupe'rkeitai de' tee's nu'n Libai'dos kaloume'nees . Jerome has "in supercilio Libiados." )

which was situated in the valley of the Jordan; and according to the account given
under Araboth Moab ,

(Note: Cai' e'sti to'pos eis deu'ro deiknu'menos para' too' o'rei Fogoo'r ho para'keitai anio'ntoon
apo' Libi'ados epi' Essebou's (i.e., Heshbon ) tee's (NT:3588) Arabi'as (NT:690) antikru' (NT:481)
Ierichoo' (NT:2410).)

<- Previous First Next ->

[Link] (2 of 2) [13/08/2004 [Link] p.m.]

 Keil and Delitzsch Commentary on the Old Testament

<- Previous First Next ->

it was close by the Arboth Moab, opposite to Jericho, on the way from Libias to
Heshbon. Peor was about seven Roman miles from Heshbon, according to the
account given s. v. Danaba; and Beth-peor ( s. v. Bethphozor ) was near Mount
Peor , opposite to Jericho, six Roman miles higher than Libias, i.e., to the east of it
(see Hengstenberg , Balaam, p. 538).

Verse 29,30. The sacrifices offered in preparation for this fresh transaction were
the same as in the former cases
(v. 14, and vv. 1, 2).

Numbers 24:1-2

And when Balaam saw that it pleased the LORD to bless Israel, he went not, as
at other times, to seek for enchantments, but he set his face toward the
wilderness.

The third saying. - Vv. 1 and 2. From the two revelations which he had received
before, Balaam, saw, i.e., perceived, that it pleased Jehovah to bless Israel. This
induced him not to go out for auguries, as on the previous occasions. kªpa`am-
bªpa`am , "as time after time," i.e., as at former times (Num 23:3 and 15). He
therefore turned his face to the desert, i.e., to the steppes of Moab, where Israel was
encamped (Num 22:1). And when he lifted up his eyes, "he saw Israel encamping
according to its tribes; and the Spirit of God came over him." The impression
made upon him by the sight of the tribes of Israel, served as the subjective
preparation for the reception of the Spirit of God to inspire him. Of both the earlier
utterances it is stated that "Jehovah put a word into his mouth" (Num 23:5 and 16);
but of this third it is affirmed that "the Spirit of God came over him." The former
were communicated to him, when he went out for a divine revelation, without his
being thrown into an ecstatic state; he heard the voice of God within him telling
him what he was to say. But this time, like the prophets in their prophesyings, he

[Link] (1 of 2) [13/08/2004 [Link] p.m.]

 Keil and Delitzsch Commentary on the Old Testament

was placed by the Spirit of God in a state of ecstatic sight; so that, with his eyes
closed as in clairvoyance, he saw the substance of the revelation from God with his
inward mental eye, which had been opened by the Spirit of God. Thus not only
does he himself describe his own condition in vv. 3 and 4, but his description is in
harmony with the announcement itself, which is manifestly the result both in form
and substance of the intuition effected within him by the Spirit of God.

Numbers 24:3-4

And he took up his parable, and said, Balaam the son of Beor hath said, and the
man whose eyes are open hath said:

Vv. 3 and 4 contain the preface to the prophecy: "The divine saying of Balaam the
son of Beor, the divine saying of the man with closed eye, the divine saying of the
hearer of divine words, who sees the vision of the Almighty, falling down and
with opened eyes." For the participial noun naa'um the meaning divine saying (
effatum , not inspiratum, Domini ) is undoubtedly established by the expression
yªhaaowh (OT:3068) nª'um (OT:5002), which recurs in Num 14:28 and Gen
22:16, and is of constant use in the predictions of the

<- Previous First Next ->

[Link] (2 of 2) [13/08/2004 [Link] p.m.]

 Keil and Delitzsch Commentary on the Old Testament

<- Previous First Next ->

prophets; and this applies even to the few passages where a human author is
mentioned instead of Jehovah, such as
vv. 3, 4, and 15, 16; also 2 Sam 23:1; Prov 30:1; and Ps 36:2, where a naa'um is
ascribed to the personified wickedness. Hence, when Balaam calls the following
prophecy a naa'um , this is done for the purpose of designating it as a divine
revelation received from the Spirit of God. He had received it, and now proclaimed
it as a man haa`ayin (OT:5869) shªtum (OT:8365), with closed eye. shaatam
(OT:8365) does not mean to open, a meaning in support of which only one passage
of the Mishnah can be adduced, but to close, like caatam (OT:5640) in Dan 8:26,
and saatam (OT:5640) in Lam 3:8, with the sh (OT:7716) softened into c or s (see
Roediger in Ges. thes. , and Dietrich's Hebrew Lexicon). "Balaam describes
himself as the man with closed eye with reference to his state of ecstasy, in which
the closing of the outer senses went hand in hand with the opening of the inner" (
Hengstenberg ).

The cessation of all perception by means of the outer senses, so far as self-
conscious reflection is concerned, was a feature that was common to both the
vision and the dream, the two forms in which the prophetic gift manifested itself
(Num 12:6), and followed from the very nature of the inward intuition. In the case
of prophets whose spiritual life was far advanced, inspiration might take place
without any closing of the outward senses. But upon men like Balaam, whose inner
religious life was still very impure and undeveloped, the Spirit of God could only
operate by closing their outward senses to impressions from the lower earthly
world, and raising them up to visions of the higher and spiritual world.

(Note: Hence, as Hengstenberg observes (Balaam, p. 449), we have to picture Balaam as giving
utterance to his prophecies with the eyes of his body closed; though we cannot argue from the fact of
his being in this condition, that an Isaiah would be in precisely the same. Compare the instructive
information concerning analogous phenomena in the sphere of natural mantik and ecstasy in
Hengstenberg (pp. 449ff.), and Tholuck's Propheten , pp. 49ff.)

[Link] (1 of 2) [13/08/2004 [Link] p.m.]

 Keil and Delitzsch Commentary on the Old Testament

What Balaam heard in this ecstatic condition was 'eel (OT:410) 'imªreey (OT:561),
the sayings of God, and what he saw shaday (OT:7706) machazeeh (OT:4236), the
vision of the Almighty. The Spirit of God came upon him with such power that he
fell down ( nopeel (OT:5307)), like Saul in 1 Sam 19:24; not merely "prostrating
himself with reverential awe at seeing and hearing the things of God" ( Knobel ),
but thrown to the ground by the Spirit of God, who "came like an armed man upon
the seer," and that in such a way that as he fell his (spirit's) eyes were opened. This
introduction to his prophecy is not an utterance of boasting vanity; but, as Calvin
correctly observes, "the whole preface has no other tendency than to prove that he
was a true prophet of God, and had received the blessing which he uttered from a
celestial oracle."

The blessing itself in vv. 5ff. contains two thoughts: (1) the glorious prosperity of
Israel, and the exaltation of its kingdom (vv. 5-7); (2) the terrible power, so fatal to
all its foes, of the people which was set to be a curse or a blessing to all the nations
(vv. 8, 9).

Numbers 24:5-6

How goodly are thy tents, O Jacob, and thy tabernacles, O Israel!

"How beautiful are thy tents, O Jacob! thy dwellings, O Israel! Like valleys
are they spread out, like gardens by the stream, like aloes which Jehovah has
planted, like cedars by the waters. Water will flow

<- Previous First Next ->

[Link] (2 of 2) [13/08/2004 [Link] p.m.]

 Keil and Delitzsch Commentary on the Old Testament

<- Previous First Next ->

out of his buckets, and his seed is by many waters. And loftier than Agag be
his king, and his kingdom will be exalted." What Balaam had seen before his
ecstasy with his bodily eyes, formed the substratum for his inward vision, in which
the dwellings of Israel came before his mental eye adorned with the richest
blessing from the Lord. The description starts, it is true, from the time then present,
but it embraces the whole future of Israel. In the blessed land of Canaan the
dwellings of Israel will spread out like valleys. nªchaaliym (OT:5158) does not
mean brooks here, but valleys watered by brooks. niTaah (OT:2930), to extend
oneself, to stretch or spread out far and wide. Yea, "like gardens by the stream,"
which are still more lovely than the grassy and flowery valleys with brooks. This
thought is carried out still further in the two following figures. 'ahaaliym (OT:174)
are aloe-trees, which grow in the East Indies, in Siam, in Cochin China, and upon
the Moluccas, and from which the aloe-wood was obtained, that was so highly
valued in the preparation of incense, on account of its fragrance. As the aloes were
valued for their fragrant smell, so the cedars were valued on account of their lofty
and luxuriant growth, and the durability of their wood. The predicate, "which
Jehovah hath planted," corresponds, so far as the actual meaning is concerned, to
mayim (OT:4325) `aleey (OT:5921), "by water;" for this was "an expression used
to designate trees that, on account of their peculiar excellence, were superior to
ordinary trees" ( Calvin; cf. Ps 104:16).

Numbers 24:7

He shall pour the water out of his buckets, and his seed shall be in many waters,
and his king shall be higher than Agag, and his kingdom shall be exalted.

And not only its dwellings, but Israel itself would also prosper abundantly. It
would have an abundance of water, that leading source of all blessing and
prosperity in the burning East. The nation is personified as a man carrying two
pails overflowing with water. daalªyaaw (OT:1805) is the dual daalªyayim . The
dual is generally used in connection with objects which are arranged in pairs, either

[Link] (1 of 2) [13/08/2004 [Link] p.m.]

 Keil and Delitzsch Commentary on the Old Testament

naturally or artificially (Ges. §88, 2). "His seed" (i.e., his posterity, not his sowing
corn, the introduction of which, in this connection, would, to say the least, be very
feeble here) "is," i.e., grows up, "by many waters," that is to say, enjoys the richest
blessings (comp. Deut 8:7 and 11:10 with Isa 44:4; 65:23). yaarom (OT:7311)
(optative), "his king be high before (higher than) Agag." Agag ( `agag , the fiery) is
not the proper name of the Amalekite king defeated by Saul (1 Sam 15:8), but the
title ( nomen dignitatis ) of the Amalekite kings in general, just as all the Egyptian
kings had the common name of Pharaoh , and the Philistine kings the name of
Abimelech.

(Note: See Hengstenberg (Dissertations, ii. 250; and Balaam, p. 458). Even Gesenius could not help
expressing some doubt about there being any reference in this prophecy to the event described in 1
Sam 15:8ff., "unless," he says, "you suppose the name Agag to have been a name that was common to
the kings of the Amalekites" ( thes. p. 19). He also points to the name Abimelech , of which he says
(p. 9): "It was the name of several kings in the land of the Philistines, as of the king of Gerar in the
times of Abraham (Gen 20:2-3; 21:22-23), and of Isaac (Gen 26:1-2), and also of the king of Gath in
the time of David (Ps 34:1; coll. 1 Sam 21:10, where the same king of called Achish ). It seems to have
been the common name and title of those kings, as Pharaoh was of the early kings of Egypt, and
Caesar and Augustus of the emperors of Rome.")

The reason for mentioning the king of the Amalekites was, that he was selected as
the impersonation of the enmity of the world against the kingdom of God, which
culminated in the kings of the heathen; the Amalekites having been the first
heathen tribe that attacked the Israelites on their journey to Canaan (Ex 17:8). The
introduction of one

<- Previous First Next ->

[Link] (2 of 2) [13/08/2004 [Link] p.m.]

 Keil and Delitzsch Commentary on the Old Testament

<- Previous First Next ->

particular king would have been neither in keeping with the context, nor
reconcilable with the general character of Balaam's utterances. Both before and
afterward, Balaam predicts in great general outlines the good that would come to
Israel; and how is it likely that he would suddenly break off in the midst to
compare the kingdom of Israel with the greatness of one particular king of the
Amalekites? Even his fourth and last prophecy merely announces in great general
terms the destruction of the different nations that rose up in hostility against Israel,
without entering into special details, which, like the conquest of the Amalekites by
Saul, had no material or permanent influence upon the attitude of the heathen
towards the people of God; for after the defeat inflicted upon this tribe by Saul,
they very speedily invaded the Israelitish territory again, and proceeded to plunder
and lay it waste in just the same manner as before (cf. 1 Sam 27:8; 30:1ff.; 2 Sam
8:12).

(Note: Even on the supposition (which is quite at variance with the character of all the prophecies of
Balaam) that in the name of Agag, the contemporary of Saul, we have a vaticinium ex eventu , the
allusion to this particular king would be exceedingly strange, as the Amalekites did not perform any
prominent part among the enemies of Israel in the time of Saul; and the command to exterminate them
was given to Saul, not because of any special harm that they had done to Israel at that time, but on
account of what they had done to Israel on their way out of Egypt (comp. 1 Sam 15:2 with Ex 17:8).)
malªkow (OT:4428), his king, is not any one particular king of Israel, but quite generally the king
whom the Israelites would afterwards receive. For malªkow (OT:4428) is substantially the same as the
parallel malªkutow (OT:4438), the kingdom of Israel, which had already been promised to the
patriarchs (Gen 17:6; 35:11), and in which the Israelites were first of all to obtain that full
development of power which corresponded to its divine appointment; just as, in fact, the development
of any people generally culminates in an organized kingdom. - The king of Israel, whose greatness was
celebrated by Balaam, was therefore neither the Messiah exclusively, nor the earthly kingdom without
the Messiah, but the kingdom of Israel that was established by David, and was exalted in the Messiah
into an everlasting kingdom, the enemies of which would all be made its footstool (Ps 2 and
110).

Numbers 24:8-9

God brought him forth out of Egypt; he hath as it were the strength of an

[Link] (1 of 2) [13/08/2004 [Link] p.m.]

 Keil and Delitzsch Commentary on the Old Testament

unicorn: he shall eat up the nations his enemies, and shall break their bones,
and pierce them through with his arrows.

In vv. 8 and 9, Balaam proclaims still further: "God leads him out of Egypt; his
strength is as that of a buffalo: he will devour nations his enemies, and crush
their bones, and dash them in pieces with his arrows. He has encamped, he lies
down like a lion, and like a lioness: who can drive him up? Blessed be they who
bless thee, and cursed they who curse thee!" The fulness of power that dwelt in
the people of Israel was apparent in the force and prowess with which their God
brought them out of Egypt. This fact Balaam repeats from the previous saying
(Num 23:22), for the purpose of linking on to it the still further announcement of
the manner in which the power of the nation would show itself upon its foes in
time to come. The words, "he will devour nations," call up the image of a lion,
which is employed in v. 9 to depict the indomitable heroic power of Israel, in
words taken from Jacob's blessing in Gen 49:9. The Piel geereem is a denom. verb
from gerem (OT:1634), with the meaning to destroy, crush the bones, like
sheereesh , to root out (cf. Ges. §52, 2; Ewald , §120, e. ). hitsaayw (OT:2671) is
not the object to yimªchats (OT:4272); for maachats (OT:4272), to dash to pieces,
does not apply to arrows, which may be broken in pieces, but not dashed to pieces;
and the singular suffix in chitsaayw (OT:2671) can only apply to the singular idea
in the verse, i.e., to Israel, and not to its enemies, who are spoken of in the plural.
Arrows are singled out as representing weapons in general.

<- Previous First Next ->

[Link] (2 of 2) [13/08/2004 [Link] p.m.]

 Keil and Delitzsch Commentary on the Old Testament

<- Previous First Next ->

(Note: The difficulty which many feel in connection with the word chitsaayw (OT:2671) cannot be
removed by alterations of the text. The only possible conjecture chalaatsaayw (OT:2504) (his loins) is
wrecked upon the singular suffix, for the dashing to pieces of the loins of Israel is not for a moment to
be thought of. Knobel's proposal, viz., to read qaamaayw (OT:6965), has no support in Deut 33:11,
and is much too violent to reckon upon any approval.)

Balaam closes this utterance, as he had done the previous one, with a quotation
from Jacob's blessing, which he introduces to show to Balak, that, according to
words addressed by Jehovah to the Israelites through their own tribe-father, they
were to overcome their foes so thoroughly, that none of them should venture to rise
up against them again. To this he also links on the words with which Isaac had
transferred to Jacob in Gen 27:29 the blessing of Abraham in Gen 12:3, for the
purpose of warning Balak to desist from his enmity against the chosen people of
God.

Numbers 24:10-11

And Balak's anger was kindled against Balaam, and he smote his hands
together: and Balak said unto Balaam, I called thee to curse mine enemies, and,
behold, thou hast altogether blessed them these three times.

This repeated blessing of Israel threw Balak into such a violent rage, that he smote
his hands together, and advised Balaam to fly to his house: adding, "I said, I will
honour thee greatly (cf. Num 22:17 and 37); but, behold, Jehovah has kept thee
back from honour." "Smiting the hands together" was either a sign of horror (Lam
2:15) or of violent rage; it is in the latter sense that it occurs both here and in Job
27:33 . In the words, "Jehovah hath kept thee back from honour," the irony with
which Balak scoffs at Balaam's confidence in Jehovah is unmistakeable.

Numbers 24:12-14

[Link] (1 of 2) [13/08/2004 [Link] p.m.]

 Keil and Delitzsch Commentary on the Old Testament

And Balaam said unto Balak, Spake I not also to thy messengers which thou
sentest unto me, saying,

But Balaam reminds him, on the other hand, of the declaration which he made to
the messengers at the very outset (Num 22:18), that he could not on any account
speak in opposition to the command of Jehovah, and then adds, "And now, behold,
I go to my people. Come, I will tell thee advisedly what this people will do to thy
people at the end of the days." yaa`ats (OT:3289), to advise; here it denotes an
announcement, which includes advice. The announcement of what Israel would do
to the Moabites in the future, contains the advice to Balak, what attitude he should
assume towards Israel, if this people was to bring a blessing upon his own people
and not a curse. On "the end of the days," see at Gen 49:1.

<- Previous First Next ->

[Link] (2 of 2) [13/08/2004 [Link] p.m.]

 Keil and Delitzsch Commentary on the Old Testament

<- Previous First Next ->

Numbers 24:15-16

And he took up his parable, and said, Balaam the son of Beor hath said, and the
man whose eyes are open hath said:

Balaam's fourth and last prophecy is distinguished from the previous ones by the
fact that, according to the announcement in v. 14, it is occupied exclusively with
the future, and foretells the victorious supremacy of Israel over all its foes, and the
destruction of all the powers of the world. This prophecy is divided into four
different prophecies by the fourfold repetition of the words, "he took up his
parable" (vv. 15, 20, 21, and 23). The first of these refers to the two nations that
were related to Israel, viz., Edom and Moab (vv. 17-19); the second to Amalek, the
arch-enemy of Israel (v. 20); the third to the Kenites, who were allied to Israel (vv.
21 and 22); and the fourth proclaims the overthrow of the great powers of the
world (vv. 23 and 24). - The introduction in vv. 15 and 16 is the same as that of the
previous prophecy in vv. 3 and 4, except that the words, "he which knew the
knowledge of the Most High," are added to the expression, "he that heard the
words of God," to show that Balaam possessed the knowledge of the Most High,
i.e., that the word of God about to be announced had already been communicated
to him, and was not made known to him now for the first time; though without
implying that he had received the divine revelation about to be uttered at the same
time as those which he had uttered before.

Numbers 24:17

I shall see him, but not now: I shall behold him, but not nigh: there shall come a
Star out of Jacob, and a Sceptre shall rise out of Israel, and shall smite the
corners of Moab, and destroy all the children of Sheth.

[Link] (1 of 2) [13/08/2004 [Link] p.m.]

 Keil and Delitzsch Commentary on the Old Testament

The prophecy itself commences with a picture from the "end of the days," which
rises up before the mental eye of the seer. "I see Him, yet not now; I behold Him,
but not nigh. A star appears out of Jacob, and a sceptre rises out of Israel, and
dashes Moab in pieces on both sides, and destroys all the sons of confusion." The
suffixes to 'erª'enuw (OT:7200) and `ashuwrenuw (OT:7789) refer to the star
which is mentioned afterwards, and which Balaam sees in spirit, but "not now,"
i.e., not as having already appeared, and "not nigh," i.e., not to appear immediately,
but to come forth out of Israel in the far distant future. "A star is so natural an
image and symbol of imperial greatness and splendour, that it has been employed
in this sense in almost every nation. And the fact that this figure and symbol are so
natural, may serve to explain the belief of the ancient world, that the birth and
accession of great kings was announced by the appearance of stars" (
Hengstenberg , who cites Justini hist.
xxxvii. 2; Plinii h. n. ii. 23; Sueton. Jul. Caes. c. 78; and Dio Cass. xlv. p. 273).

If, however, there could be any doubt that the rising star represented the
appearance of a glorious ruler or king, it would be entirely removed by the parallel,
"a sceptre arises out of Israel." The sceptre, which was introduced as a symbol of
dominion even in Jacob's blessing (Gen 49:10), is employed here as the figurative
representation and symbol of the future ruler in Israel. This ruler would destroy all
the enemies of Israel. Moab and (v. 18) Edom are the first of these that are
mentioned, viz., the two nations that were related to Israel by descent, but had risen
up in hostility against it at that time. Moab stands in the foremost rank, not merely
because Balaam was about to

<- Previous First Next ->

[Link] (2 of 2) [13/08/2004 [Link] p.m.]

 Keil and Delitzsch Commentary on the Old Testament

<- Previous First Next ->

announce to the king of Moab what Israel would do to his people in the future, but
also because the hostility of the heathen to the people of God had appeared most
strongly in Balak's desire to curse the Israelites. mow'aab (OT:4124) pa'ateey
(OT:6285), "the two corners or sides of Moab," equivalent to Moab on both sides,
from one end to the other.

For qarªqar (OT:6979), the inf. Pilp. of quwr (OT:6979) or qiyr (OT:7023), the
meaning to destroy is fully established by the parallel maachats (OT:4272), and by
Isa 22:5, whatever may be thought of its etymology and primary meaning. And
neither the Samaritan text nor the passage in Isaiah (Isa 48:45 ), which is based
upon this prophecy, at all warrants an alteration of the reading qarªqar (OT:6979)
into qaadªqod (OT:6936) (the crown of the head), since Jeremiah almost invariably
uses earlier writing in this free manner, viz., by altering the expressions employed,
and substituting in the place of unusual words wither more common ones, or such
as are similar in sound (cf. Küper, Jerem. libror, ss. interpres atque vindex , pp.
[Link]. and p. 43). - kaal-bªneey-sheet does not mean "all the sons of Seth," i.e., all
mankind, as the human race is never called by the name of Seth; and the idea that
the ruler to arise out of Israel would destroy all men, would be altogether
unsuitable. It signifies rather "all the sons of confusion," by which, according to the
analogy of Jacob and Israel (v. 17), Edom and Seir (v. 18), the Moabites are to be
understood as being men of wild, warlike confusion. sheet (OT:8352) is a
contraction of shee't (OT:7612) (Lam 3:47), and derived from shaa'aah
(OT:7582); and in Jer 48:45 it is correctly rendered shaa'own (OT:7588) bªneey
(OT:1121).

(Note: On the other hand, the rendering, "all the sons of the drinker, i.e., of Lot," which Hiller
proposed, and v. Hofmann and Kurtz have renewed, is evidently untenable. For, in the first place, the
fact related in Gen 19:32ff. does not warrant the assumption that Lot ever received the name of the
"drinker," especially as the word used in Gen 19 is not shaataah (OT:8354), but shaaqaah (OT:8248).
Moreover, the allusion to "all the sons of Lot," i.e., the Moabites and Ammonites, neither suits the
thoroughly synonymous parallelism in the saying of Balaam, nor corresponds to the general character
of his prophecies, which announced destruction primarily only to those nations that rose up in hostility
against Israel, viz., Moab, Edom, and Amalek, whereas hitherto the Ammonites had not assumed

[Link] (1 of 2) [13/08/2004 [Link] p.m.]

 Keil and Delitzsch Commentary on the Old Testament

either a hostile or friendly attitude towards them. And lastly, all the nations doomed to destruction are
mentioned by name. Now the Ammonites were not a branch of the Moabites by descent, nor was their
territory enclosed within the Moabitish territory, so that it could be included, as Hofmann supposes,
within the "four corners of Moab.")

In the announcement of destruction which is to fall upon the enemies of Israel

through the star and sceptre out of the midst of it, Moab is followed by "its
southern neighbour Edom."

Numbers 24:18

And Edom shall be a possession, Seir also shall be a possession for his enemies;
and Israel shall do valiantly.

"And Edom becomes a possession, and Seir becomes a possession, its enemies;
but Israel acquires power." Whose possession Edom and Seir are to become, is
not expressly stated; but it is evident from the context, and from 'oyªbaayw
(OT:341) (its enemies), which is not a genitive dependent upon Seir , but is in
apposition to Edom and Seir , just as tsaaraayw (OT:6862) in v. 8 is in apposition
to gowyim (OT:1471). Edom and Seir were his, i.e., Israel's enemies; therefore they
were to be taken by the ruler who was to arise out of Israel.

<- Previous First Next ->

[Link] (2 of 2) [13/08/2004 [Link] p.m.]

 Keil and Delitzsch Commentary on the Old Testament

<- Previous First Next ->

Edom is the name of the people, Seir of the country, just as in Gen 32:4; so that
Seir is not to be understood as relating to the prae-Edomitish population of the
land, which had been subjugated by the descendants of Esau, and had lost all its
independence a long time before. In Moses' days the Israelites were not allowed to
fight with the Edomites, even when they refused to allow them to pass peaceably
through their territory (see Num 20:21), but were commanded to leave them in
their possessions as a brother nation (Deut 2:4-5).

In the future, however, their relation to one another was to be a very different one;
because the hostility of Edom, already in existence, grew more and more into
obstinate and daring enmity, which broke up all the ties of affection that Israel was
to regard as holy, and thus brought about the destruction of the Edomites. - The
fulfilment of this prophecy commenced with the subjugation of the Edomites by
David (2 Sam 8:14; 1 Kings 11:15-16; 1 Chron 18:12-13), but it will not be
completed till "the end of the days," when all the enemies of God and His Church
will be made the footstool of Christ (Ps 110:1 ff.). That David did not complete the
subjugation of Edom is evident, on the one hand, from the fact that the Edomites
revolted again under Solomon, though without success (1 Kings 11:14ff.); that they
shook off the yoke imposed upon them under Joram (2 Kings 8:20); and
notwithstanding their defeat by Amaziah (2 Kings 14:7; 2 Chron 25:11) and
Uzziah (2 Kings 14:22; 2 Chron 26:2), invaded Judah a second time under Ahaz (2
Chron 28:17), and afterwards availed themselves of every opportunity to manifest
their hostility to the kingdom of Judah and the Jews generally-as for example at the
conquest of Jerusalem by the Chaldeans (Ezek 35:15; 36:5; Obad 10 and 13), and
in the wars between the Maccabees and the Syrians (1 Macc. 5:3, 65; 2 Macc.
10:15; 12:38ff.) - until they were eventually conquered by John Hyrcanus in the
year 129 BC, and compelled to submit to circumcision, and incorporated in the
Jewish state ( Josephus, Ant. xiii. 9, 1, xv. 7, 9; Wars of the Jews, iv. 5, 5).

But notwithstanding this, they got the government over the Jews into their own
hands through Antipater and Herod ( Josephus, Ant. xiv. 8, 5), and only

[Link] (1 of 2) [13/08/2004 [Link] p.m.]

 Keil and Delitzsch Commentary on the Old Testament

disappeared from the stage of history with the destruction of the Jewish state by the
Romans. On the other hand, the declarations of the prophets (Amos 9:12; Obad
17ff.), which foretell, with an unmistakeable allusion to this prophecy, the
possession of the remnant of Edom by the kingdom of Israel, and the
announcements in Isa 34 and 63:1-6, Jer 49:7ff., Ezek 25:12ff. and 35, comp. with
Ps 137:7 and Lam 4:21-22, prove still more clearly that Edom, as the leading foe of
the kingdom of God, will only be utterly destroyed when the victory of the latter
over the hostile power of the world has been fully and finally secured. - Whilst
Edom falls, Israel will acquire power. chayil (OT:2428) `aasaah (OT:6213), to
acquire ability or power (Deut 8:17-18; Ruth 4:11), not merely to show itself brave
or strong. It is rendered correctly by Onkelos, "prosperabitur in opibus;" and
Jonathan, "praevalebunt in opibus et possidebunt eos."

Numbers 24:19

Out of Jacob shall come he that shall have dominion, and shall destroy him that
remaineth of the city.

"And a ruler shall come out of Jacob, and destroy what is left out of cities."
The subject to yeerªdª

(OT:7287) is indefinite, and to be supplied from the verb itself. We have to think
of the ruler foretold as star and sceptre. The abbreviated form wªyeerªdª (OT:7287)
is not used for the future yirªdeh , but is jussive in its force. One out of Jacob shall
rule. mee`iyr (OT:5892) is employed in a collected and general sense, as in Ps
72:16. Out of every city in which there is a remnant of Edom, it shall be destroyed.
saariyd (OT:8300) is equivalent to 'edowm (OT:123) shª'eeriyt (OT:7611) (Amos
9:12). The explanation, "destroy the remnant out of the city, namely, out of the
holy city of Jerusalem" ( Ewald and Baur ), is forced, and cannot be sustained from
the

<- Previous First Next ->

[Link] (2 of 2) [13/08/2004 [Link] p.m.]

 Keil and Delitzsch Commentary on the Old Testament

<- Previous First Next ->

namely, out of the holy city of Jerusalem" ( Ewald and Baur ), is forced, and
cannot be sustained from the parallelism.

Numbers 24:20

And when he looked on Amalek, he took up his parable, and said, Amalek was
the first of the nations; but his latter end shall be that he perish for ever.

The second saying in this prophecy relates to the Amalekites. Balaam sees them,
not with the eyes of his body, but in a state of ecstasy, like the star out of Jacob.
"Beginning of the heathen is Amalek, and its end is destruction." Amalek is called
the beginning of the nations, not "as belonging to the most distinguished and
foremost of the nations in age, power, and celebrity" ( Knobel ) - for in all these
respects this Bedouin tribe, which descended from a grandson of Esau, was
surpassed by many other nations-but as the first heathen nation which opened the
conflict of the heathen nations against Israel as the people of God (see at Ex
17:8ff.). As its beginning had been enmity against Israel, its end would be "even to
the perishing" ( 'obeed (OT:8) `adeey (OT:5703)), i.e., reaching the position of one
who was perishing, falling into destruction, which commenced under Saul and was
completed under Hezekiah (see p. 208).

Numbers 24:21-22

And he looked on the Kenites, and took up his parable, and said, Strong is thy
dwellingplace, and thou puttest thy nest in a rock.

The third saying relates to the Kenites , whose origin is involved in obscurity (see
at Gen 15:19), as there are no other Kenites mentioned in the whole of the Old
Testament, with the exception of Gen 15:19, than the Kenites who went to Canaan

[Link] (1 of 2) [13/08/2004 [Link] p.m.]

 Keil and Delitzsch Commentary on the Old Testament

with Hobab the brother-in-law of Moses (Num 10:29ff.: see Judg 1:16; 4:11; 1
Sam 15:6; 27:10; 30:29); so that there are not sufficient grounds for the distinction
between Canaanitish and Midianitish Kenites, as Michaelis, Hengstenberg , and
others suppose. The hypothesis that Balaam is speaking of Canaanitish Kenites, or
of the Kenites as representatives of the Canaanites, is as unfounded as the
hypothesis that by the Kenites we are to understand the Midianites, or that the
Kenites mentioned here and in Gen 15:19 are a branch of the supposed aboriginal
Amalekites ( Ewald ). The saying concerning the Kenites runs thus: "Durable is
thy dwelling-place, and thy nest laid upon the rock; for should Kain be destroyed
until Asshur shall carry thee captive?" This saying "applies to friends and not to
foes of Israel" ( v. Hofmann ), so that it is perfectly applicable to the Kenites, who
were friendly with Israel. The antithetical association of the Amalekites and
Kenites answers perfectly to the attitude assumed at Horeb towards Israel, on the
one hand by the Amalekites, and on the other hand by the Kenites, in the person of
Jethro the leader of their tribe (see Ex 17:8ff., 18, and p. 375).

The dwelling-place of the Kenites was of lasting duration, because its nest was laid
upon a rock ( siym (OT:7760) is a passive participle, as in 2 Sam 13:32, and Obad
4). This description of the dwelling-place of the Kenites cannot be taken literally,
because it cannot be shown that either the Kenites or the Midianites dwelt in
inaccessible

<- Previous First Next ->

[Link] (2 of 2) [13/08/2004 [Link] p.m.]

 Keil and Delitzsch Commentary on the Old Testament

<- Previous First Next ->

mountains, as the Edomites are said to have done in Obad 3-4; Jer 49:16. The
words are to be interpreted figuratively, and in all probability the figure is taken
from the rocky mountains of Horeb, in the neighbourhood of which the Kenites led
a nomade life before their association with Israel (see at Ex 3:1). As v. Hofmann
correctly observes: "Kain, which had left its inaccessible mountain home in Horeb,
enclosed as it was by the desert, to join a people who were only wandering in
search of a home, by that very act really placed its rest upon a still safer rock."

This is sustained in v. 22 by the statement that Kain would not be given up to

destruction till Asshur carried it away into captivity. 'im (OT:518) kiy (OT:3588)
does not mean "nevertheless." It signifies "unless" after a negative clause, whether
the negation be expressed directly by lo' (OT:3808), or indirectly by a question;
and "only" where it is not preceded by either a direct or an indirect negation, as in
Gen 40:14; Job 42:8. The latter meaning, however, is not applicable here, because
it is unsuitable to the `ad-maah (until) which follows. Consequently 'im (OT:518)
can only be understood in the sense of "is it that," as in 1 Kings 1:27; Isa 29:16;
Job 31:16, etc., and as introducing an indirect query in a negative sense: "For is it
(the case) that Kain shall fall into destruction until...?" - equivalent to "Kain shall
not be exterminated until Asshur shall carry him away into captivity;" Kain will
only be overthrown by the Assyrian imperial power.

Kain , the tribe-father, is used poetically for the Kenite , the tribe of which he was
the founder. baa`eer (OT:1197), to exterminate, the sense in which it frequently
occurs, as in Deut 13:6; 17:7, etc. (cf. 2 Sam 4:11; 1 Kings 22:47). - For the
fulfilment of this prophecy we are not to look merely to the fact that one branch of
the Kenites, which separated itself, according to Judg 4:11, from its comrades in
the south of Judah, and settled in Naphtali near Kadesh, was probably carried away
into captivity by Tiglath-Pileser along with the population of Galilee (2 Kings
15:29); but the name Asshur, as the name of the first great kingdom of the world,
which rose up from the east against the theocracy, is employed, as we may clearly
see from v. 24, to designate all the powers of the world which took their rise in

[Link] (1 of 2) [13/08/2004 [Link] p.m.]

 Keil and Delitzsch Commentary on the Old Testament

Asshur, and proceeded forth from it (see also Ezra 6:22, where the Persian king is
still called king of Asshur or Assyria). Balaam did not foretell that this worldly
power would oppress Israel also, and lead it into captivity, because the oppression
of the Israelites was simply a transitory judgment, which served to refine the nation
of God and not to destroy it, and which was even appointed according to the
counsel of God to open and prepare the way for the conquest of the kingdoms of
the world by the kingdom of God. To the Kenites only did the captivity become a
judgment of destruction; because, although on terms of friendship with the people
of Israel, and outwardly associated with them, yet, as is clearly shown by 1 Sam
15:6, they never entered inwardly into fellowship with Israel and Jehovah's
covenant of grace, but sought to maintain their own independence side by side with
Israel, and thus forfeited the blessing of God which rested upon Israel.

(Note: This simple but historically established interpretation completely removes the objection, "that
Balaam could no more foretell destruction to the friends of Israel than to Israel itself," by which Kurtz
would preclude the attempt to refer this prophecy to the Kenites, who were in alliance with Israel. His
further objections to v. Hofmann's view are either inconclusive, or at any rate do not affect the
explanation that we have given.)

Numbers 24:23-24

And he took up his parable, and said, Alas, who shall live when God doeth this!

The fourth saying applies to Asshur , and is introduced by an exclamation of woe:

"Woe! who will live, when

<- Previous First Next ->

[Link] (2 of 2) [13/08/2004 [Link] p.m.]

 Keil and Delitzsch Commentary on the Old Testament

<- Previous First Next ->

God sets this! and ships (come) from the side of Chittim, and press Asshur, and
press Eber, and he also perishes." The words "Woe, who will live," point to the
fearfulness of the following judgment, which went deep to the heart of the seer,
because it would fall upon the sons of his own people (see at Num 22:5). The
meaning is, "Who will preserve his life in the universal catastrophe that is
coming?" ( Hengstenberg ). misumow (OT:7760), either "since the setting of it,"
equivalent to "from the time when God sets (determines) this" ( ho'tan (NT:3752)
thee' (NT:2316) tau'ta (NT:5023) ho (NT:3588) Theo's (NT:2316), quando faciet
ista Deus; LXX, Vulg. ), or "on account of the setting of it," i.e., because God
determines this. suwm (OT:7760), to set, applied to that which God establishes,
ordains, or brings to pass, as in Isa 44:7; Hab 1:12.

The suffix in suwmow is not to be referred to Asshur , as Knobel supposes, because

the prophecy relates not to Asshur "as the mighty power by which everything was
crushed and overthrown," but to a power that would come from the far west and
crush Asshur itself. The suffix refers rather to the substance of the prophecy that
follows, and is to be understood in a neuter sense. 'eel (OT:410) is "God," and not
an abbreviation of 'eeleh (OT:428), which is always written with the article in the
Pentateuch ( haa'eel (OT:411), Gen 19:8,25; 26:3-4; Lev 18:27; Deut 4:42; 7:22;
19:11), and only occurs once without the article, viz., in 1 Chron 20:8. tsym
(OT:7760), from tsiy (OT:6716) (Isa 33:21), signifies ships, like tsiyiym (OT:6728)
in the passage in Dan 11:30, which is founded upon the prophecy before us. miyad
(OT:3027), from the side, as in Ex 2:5; Deut 2:37, etc. kitiym (OT:3794) is Cyprus
with the capital Citium (see at Gen 10:4), which is mentioned as intervening
between Greece and Phoenicia, and the principal station for the maritime
commerce of Phoenicia, so that all the fleets passing from the west to the east
necessarily took Cyprus in their way (Isa 23:1 ).

The nations that would come across the sea from the side of Cyprus to humble
Asshur, are not mentioned by name, because this lay beyond the range of Balaam's
vision. He simply gives utterance to the thought, "A power comes from Chittim
[Link] (1 of 3) [13/08/2004 [Link] p.m.]
 Keil and Delitzsch Commentary on the Old Testament

over the sea, to which Asshur and Eber, the eastern and the western Shem, will
both succumb" ( v. Hofmann ). Eber neither refers to the Israelites merely as
Hebrews (LXX, Vulg. ), nor to the races beyond the Euphrates, as Onkelos and
others suppose, but, like "all the sons of Eber" in Gen 10:21, to the posterity of
Abraham who descended from Eber through Peleg, and also to the descendants of
Eber through Joktan: so that Asshur , as the representative of the Shemites who
dwelt in the far east, included Elam within itself; whilst Eber , on the other hand,
represented the western Shemites, the peoples that sprang from Arphaxad, Lud,
and Aram (Gen 10:21). "And he also shall perish for ever:" these words cannot
relate to Asshur and Eber, for their fate is already announced in the word `inuw
(OT:6031) (afflict, press), but only to the new western power that was to come
over the sea, and to which the others were to succumb.

"Whatever powers might rise up in the world of peoples, the heathen prophet of
Jehovah sees them all fall, one through another, and one after another; for at last he
loses in the distance the power to discern whence it is that the last which he sees
rise up is to receive its fatal blow" ( v. Hofmann , p. 520). The overthrow of this
last power of the world, concerning which the prophet Daniel was the fist to
receive and proclaim new revelations, belongs to "the end of the days," in which
the star out of Jacob is to rise upon Israel as a "bright morning star" (Rev 22:16).

Now if according to this the fact is firmly established, that in this last prophecy of
Balaam, "the judgment of history even upon the imperial powers of the West , and
the final victory of the King of the kingdom of God were proclaimed, though in
fading outlines, more than a thousand years before the events themselves," as
Tholuck has expressed it in his Propheten und ihre Weissagung; the announcement
of the star out of Jacob, and the sceptre out of Israel, i.e., of the King and Ruler of
the kingdom of God, who was to dash Moab to pieces and take possession of
Edom, cannot have received its complete fulfilment in the victories of David over
these enemies of Israel; but will only be fully accomplished in the future overthrow
of all the enemies of the kingdom of God. By the "end of days," both here and
everywhere else, we are to understand the Messianic era, and that not merely at its

[Link] (2 of 3) [13/08/2004 [Link] p.m.]

 Keil and Delitzsch Commentary on the Old Testament

commencement, but in its entire development, until the final completion of the
kingdom of God at the return of our

<- Previous First Next ->

[Link] (3 of 3) [13/08/2004 [Link] p.m.]

 Keil and Delitzsch Commentary on the Old Testament

<- Previous First Next ->

commencement, but in its entire development, until the final completion of the
kingdom of God at the return of our Lord to judgment.

In the "star out of Jacob," Balaam beholds not David as the one king of Israel, but
the Messiah, in whom the royalty of Israel promised to the patriarchs (Gen 17:6,16;
35:11) attains its fullest realization. The star and sceptre are symbols not of
"Israel's royalty personified" ( Hengstenberg ), but of the real King in a concrete
form, as He was to arise out of Israel at a future day. It is true that Israel received
the promised King in David, who conquered and subjugated the Moabites,
Edomites, and other neighbouring nations that were hostile to Israel. But in the
person of David and his rule the kingly government of Israel was only realized in
its first and imperfect beginnings. Its completion was not attained till the coming of
the second David (Hos 3:5; Jer 30:9; Ezek 34:24; 37:24-25), the Messiah Himself,
who breaks in pieces all the enemies of Israel, and founds an everlasting kingdom,
to which all the kingdoms and powers of this world are to be brought into
subjection (2 Sam 7:12-16; Ps 2:1; 72, and 110).

(Note: The application of the star out of Jacob to the Messiah is to be found even in Onkelos; and this
interpretation was so widely spread among the Jews, that the pseudo-Messiah who arose under
Hadrian, and whom even R. Akiba acknowledged, took the name of Bar Cochba (son of a star), on
consequence of this prophecy, from which the nickname of Bar Coziba (son of a lie) was afterward
formed, when he had submitted to the Romans, with all his followers. In the Christian Church also the
Messianic explanation was the prevalent one, from the time of Justin and Irenaeus onwards (see the
proofs in Calovii Bibl. ad h. l. ), although, according to a remark of Theodoret ( qu. 44 ad Num. ),
there were some who did not adopt it. The exclusive application of the passage to David was so
warmly defended, first of all by Grotius , and still more by Verschuir , that even Hengstenberg and
Tholuck gave up the Messianic interpretation. But they both of them came back to it afterwards, the
former in his "Balaam" and the second edition of his Christology, and the latter in his treatise on "the
Prophets." At the present time the Messianic character of the prophecy is denied by none but the
supporters of the more vulgar rationalism, such as Knobel and others; whereas G. Baur (in his History
of Old Testament Prophecy) has no doubt that the prediction of the star out of Jacob points to the
exalted and glorious King, filled with the Holy Spirit, whom Isaiah (Isa 9:5; 11:1ff.) and Micah (Mic
5:2) expected as the royal founder of the theocracy. Reinke gives a complete history of the

[Link] (1 of 2) [13/08/2004 [Link] p.m.]

 Keil and Delitzsch Commentary on the Old Testament

interpretation of this passage in his Beiträge , iv. 186ff.)

If, however, the star out of Jacob first rose upon the world in Christ, the star which
showed the wise men from the east the way to the new-born "King of the Jews,"
and went before them, till it stood above the manger at Bethlehem (Matt 2:1-11), is
intimately related to our prophecy. Only we must not understand the allusion as
being so direct, that Balaam beheld the very star which appeared to the wise men,
and made known to them the birth of the Saviour of the world. The star of the wise
men was rather an embodiment of the star seen by Balaam, which announced to
them the fulfilment of Balaam's prophecy-a visible sign by which God revealed to
them the fact, that the appearance of the star which Balaam beheld in the far distant
future had been realized at Bethlehem in the birth of Christ, the King of the Jews. -
The "wise men from the east," who had been made acquainted with the revelations
of God to Israel by the Jews of the diaspora , might feel themselves specially
attracted in their search for the salvation of the world by the predictions of Balaam,
from the fact that this seer belonged to their own country, and came "out of the
mountains of the east" (Num 23:7); so that they made his sayings the centre of their
expectations of salvation, and were also conducted through them to the Saviour of
all nations by means of supernatural illumination. "God unfolded to their minds,
which were already filled with a longing for the 'star out of Jacob' foretold by
Balaam, the meaning of the star which proclaimed the fulfilment of Balaam's
prophecy; He revealed to them, that is to say, the fact that it announced the birth of
the 'King of the Jews.' And just as Balaam had joyously exclaimed, 'I see Him,' and
'I behold Him,' they also could say, 'We have seen His star' " ( Hengstenberg ).

If, in conclusion, we compare Balaam's prophecy of the star that would come out
of Jacob, and the sceptre that would rise out of Israel, with the prediction of the
patriarch Jacob, of the sceptre that should not depart from

<- Previous First Next ->

[Link] (2 of 2) [13/08/2004 [Link] p.m.]

 Keil and Delitzsch Commentary on the Old Testament

<- Previous First Next ->

Judah, till the Shiloh came whom the nations would obey (Gen 49:10), it is easy to
observe that Balaam not only foretold more clearly the attitude of Israel to the
nations of the world, and the victory of the kingdom of God over every hostile
kingdom of the world; but that he also proclaimed the Bringer of Peace expected
by Jacob at the end of the days to be a mighty ruler, whose sceptre would break in
pieces and destroy all the enemies of the nation of God. The tribes of Israel stood
before the mental eye of the patriarch in their full development into the nation in
which all the families of the earth were to be blessed. From this point of view, the
salvation that was to blossom in the future for the children of Israel culminated in
the peaceful kingdom of the Shiloh , in whom the dominion of the victorious lion
out of Judah was to attain its fullest perfection.

But the eye of Balaam, the seer, which had been opened by the Spirit of God,
beheld the nation of Israel encamped, according to its tribes, in the face of its foes,
the nations of this world. They were endeavouring to destroy Israel; but according
to the counsel of the Almighty God and Lord of the whole world, in their warfare
against the nation that was blessed of Jehovah, they were to succumb one after the
other, and be destroyed by the king that was to arise out of Israel. This determinate
counsel of the living God was to be proclaimed by Balaam, the heathen seer out of
Mesopotamia the centre of the national development of the ancient world: and, first
of all, to the existing representatives of the nations of the world that were hostile to
Israel, that they might see what would at all times tend to their peace-might see,
that is to say, that in their hostility to Israel they were rebelling against the
Almighty God of heaven and earth, and that they would assuredly perish in the
conflict, since life and salvation were only to be found with the people of Israel,
whom God had blessed.

And even though Balaam had to make known the purpose of the Lord concerning
His people primarily, and in fact solely, to the Moabites and their neighbours, who
were like-minded with them, his announcement was also intended for Israel itself,
and was to be a pledge to the congregation of Israel for all time of the certain

[Link] (1 of 2) [13/08/2004 [Link] p.m.]

 Keil and Delitzsch Commentary on the Old Testament

fulfilment of the promises of God; and so to fill them with strength and courage,
that in all their conflicts with the powers of this world, they should rely upon the
Lord their God with the firmest confidence of faith, should strive with unswerving
fidelity after the end of their divine calling, and should build up the kingdom of
God on earth, which is to outlast all the kingdoms of the world. - In what manner
the Israelites became acquainted with the prophecies of Balaam, so that Moses
could incorporate them into the Thorah , we are nowhere told, but we can infer it
with tolerable certainty from the subsequent fate of Balaam himself.

Numbers 24:25

And Balaam rose up, and went and returned to his place: and Balak also went
his way.

At the close of this announcement Balaam and Balak departed from one another.
"Balaam rose up, and went and turned towards his place" (i.e., set out on the way
to his house); "and king Balak also went his way." limªqomow (OT:4725)
yaashaab (OT:3427) does not mean, "he returned to his place," into his home
beyond the Euphrates (equivalent to 'el-mªqomow yaashaab ), but merely "he
turned towards his place" (both here and in Gen 18:33). That he really returned
home, is not implied in the words themselves; and the question, whether he did so,
must be determined from other circumstances. In the further course of the history,
we learn that Balaam went to the Midianites, and advised them to seduce the
Israelites to unfaithfulness to Jehovah, by tempting them to join in the worship of
Peor (Num 31:16). He was still with them at the time when the Israelites engaged
in the war of vengeance against that people, and was slain by the Israelites along
with the five princes of Midian (Num 31:8; Josh 13:22). At the time when he fell
into the hands of the Israelites, he no doubt made a full communication to the

<- Previous First Next ->

[Link] (2 of 2) [13/08/2004 [Link] p.m.]

 Keil and Delitzsch Commentary on the Old Testament

<- Previous First Next ->

Israelitish general, or to Phinehas, who accompanied the army as priest, concerning

his blessings and prophecies, probably in the hope of saving his life; though he
failed to accomplish his end.

(Note: It is possible, however, as Hengstenberg imagines, that after Balaam's departure from Balak, he
took his way into the camp of the Israelites, and there made known his prophecies to Moses or to the
elders of Israel, in the hope of obtaining from them the reward which Balak had withheld, and that it
was not till after his failure to obtain full satisfaction to his ambition and covetousness here, that he
went to the Midianites, to avenge himself upon the Israelites, by the proposals that he made to them.
The objections made by Kurtz to this conjecture are not strong enough to prove that it is inadmissible,
though the possibility of the thing does not involve either its probability or its certainty.)

Whoredom of Israel, and Zeal of Phinehas. Ch. 25.

Numbers 25:1-2

And Israel abode in Shittim, and the people began to commit whoredom with the
daughters of Moab.

The Lord had defended His people Israel from Balaam's curse; but the Israelites
themselves, instead of keeping the covenant of their God, fell into the snares of
heathen seduction (vv. 1, 2). Whilst encamped at Shittim, in the steppes of Moab,
the people began to commit whoredom with the daughters of Moab: they accepted
the invitations of the latter to a sacrificial festival of their gods, took part in their
sacrificial meals, and even worshipped the gods of the Moabites, and indulged in
the licentious worship of Baal-peor. As the princes of Midian, who were allied to
Moab, had been the advisers and assistants of the Moabitish king in the attempt to
destroy the Israelites by a curse of God; so now, after the failure of that plan, they
were the soul of the new undertaking to weaken Israel and render it harmless, by
seducing it to idolatry, and thus leading it into apostasy from its God. But it was
Balaam, as is afterwards casually observed in Num 31:16, who first of all gave this

[Link] (1 of 2) [13/08/2004 [Link] p.m.]

 Keil and Delitzsch Commentary on the Old Testament

advice. This is passed over here, because the point of chief importance in relation
to the object of the narrative, was not Balaam's share in the proposal, but the
carrying out of the proposal itself. The daughters of Moab, however, also took part
in carrying it out, by forming friendly associations with the Israelites, and then
inviting them to their sacrificial festival. They only are mentioned in vv. 1, 2, as
being the daughters of the land. The participation of the Midianites appears first of
all in the shameless licentiousness of Cozbi , the daughter of the Midianitish
prince, from which we not only see that the princes of Midian performed their part,
but obtain an explanation of the reason why the judgment upon the crafty
destroyers of Israel was to be executed upon the Midianites.

(Note: Consequently there is no discrepancy between vv. 1-5 and 6-18, to warrant the violent
hypothesis of Knobel , that there are two different accounts mixed together in this chapter-An Elohistic
account in vv. 6-18, of which the commencement has been dropped, and a Jehovistic account in vv. 1-
5, of which the latter part has been cut off. The particular points adduced in proof of this fall to the
ground, when the history is correctly explained; and such assertions as these, that the name Shittim and
the allusion to the judges in v. 5, and to the wrath of Jehovah in vv. 3 and 4, are foreign to the Elohist,
are not proofs, but empty assumptions.)

Shittim, an abbreviation of Abel-shittim (see at Num 22:1), to which the camp of

the Israelites in the steppes of

<- Previous First Next ->

[Link] (2 of 2) [13/08/2004 [Link] p.m.]

 Keil and Delitzsch Commentary on the Old Testament

<- Previous First Next ->

Shittim, an abbreviation of Abel-shittim (see at Num 22:1), to which the camp of

the Israelites in the steppes of Moab reached (Num 33:49), is mentioned here
instead of Arboth-Moab , because it was at this northern point of the camp that the
Israelites came into contact with the Moabites, and that the latter invited them to
take part in their sacrificial meals; and in Josh 2:1 and 3:1, because it was from this
spot that the Israelites commenced the journey to Canaan, as being the nearest to
the place where they were to pass through the Jordan. zaanaah (OT:2181),
construed with 'el (OT:413), as in Ezek 16:28, signifies to incline to a person, to
attach one's self to him, so as to commit fornication. The word applies to carnal
and spiritual whoredom. The lust of the flesh induced the Israelites to approach the
daughters of Moab, and form acquaintances and friendships with them, in
consequence of which they were invited by them "to the slain-offerings of their
gods," i.e., to the sacrificial festivals and sacrificial meals, in connection with
which they also "adored their gods," i.e., took part in the idolatrous worship
connected with the sacrificial festival. These sacrificial meals were celebrated in
honour of the Moabitish god Baal-peor , so that the Israelites joined themselves to
him. tsaamad (OT:6775), in the Niphal , to bind one's self to a person. Baal-peor is
the Baal of Peor , who was worshipped in the city of Beth-peor (Deut 3:29; 4:46;
see at Num 23:28), a Moabitish Priapus , in honour of whom women and virgins
prostituted themselves. As the god of war, he was called Chemosh (see at Num
21:29).

Numbers 25:3-4

And Israel joined himself unto Baalpeor: and the anger of the LORD was
kindled against Israel.

And the anger of the Lord burned against the people, so that Jehovah commanded
Moses to fetch the heads of the people, i.e., to assemble them together, and to
"hang up" the men who had joined themselves to Baal-peor "before the Lord
against the sun," that the anger of God might turn away from Israel. The burning of

[Link] (1 of 2) [13/08/2004 [Link] p.m.]

 Keil and Delitzsch Commentary on the Old Testament

the wrath of God, which was to be turned away from the people by the punishment
of the guilty, as enjoined upon Moses, consisted, as we may see from vv. 8, 9, in a
plague inflicted upon the nation, which carried off a great number of the people, a
sudden death, as in Num 14:37; 17:11. howqiya` , from yaaqa` (OT:3363), to be
torn apart or torn away ( Ges., Winer ), refers to the punishment of crucifixion, a
mode of capital punishment which was adopted by most of the nations of antiquity
(see Winer, bibl. R. W. i. p. 680), and was carried out sometimes by driving a stake
into the body, and so impaling them ( anaskolopi'zein ), the mode practised by the
Assyrians and Persians ( Herod. iii. 159, and Layard's Nineveh and its Remains,
vol. ii. p. 374, and plate on p. 369), at other times by fastening them to a stake or
nailing them to a cross ( anastaurou'n (NT:450)).

In the instance before us, however, the idolaters were not impaled or crucified
alive, but, as we may see from the word hirªguw (OT:2026) in v. 5, and in
accordance with the custom frequently adopted by other nations (see Herzog's
Encyclopaedia), they were first of all put to death, and then impaled upon a stake
or fastened upon a cross, so that the impaling or crucifixion was only an
aggravation of the capital punishment, like the burning in Lev 20:14, and the
hanging ( taalaah (OT:8518)) in Deut 21:22. The rendering adopted by the LXX
and Vulgate is paradeigmati'zein (NT:3856), suspendere , in this passage, and in 2
Sam 21:6,9, exeelia'zein (to expose to the sun), and crucifigere. layhaaowh
(OT:3068), for Jehovah, as satisfaction for Him, i.e., to appease His wrath.
'owtaam (OT:853) ( them ) does not refer to the heads of the nation, but to the
guilty persons, upon whom the heads of the nation were to pronounce sentence.

Numbers 25:5

<- Previous First Next ->

[Link] (2 of 2) [13/08/2004 [Link] p.m.]

 Keil and Delitzsch Commentary on the Old Testament

<- Previous First Next ->

Numbers 25:5

And Moses said unto the judges of Israel, Slay ye every one his men that were
joined unto Baalpeor.

The judges were to put to death every one his men, i.e., such of the evil-doers as
belonged to his forum, according to the judicial arrangements instituted in Ex 18.
This command of Moses to the judges was not carried out, however, because the
matter took a different turn.

Numbers 25:6-7

And, behold, one of the children of Israel came and brought unto his brethren a
Midianitish woman in the sight of Moses, and in the sight of all the congregation
of the children of Israel, who were weeping before the door of the tabernacle of
the congregation.

Whilst the heads of the people were deliberating on the subject, and the whole
congregation was assembled before the tabernacle, weeping on account of the
divine wrath, there came an Israelite, a prince of the tribe of Simeon, who brought
a Midianitish woman, the daughter of a Midianitish chief (v. 14), to his brethren,
i.e., into the camp of the Israelites, before the eyes of Moses and all the
congregation, to commit adultery with her in his tent. This shameless wickedness,
in which the depth of the corruption that had penetrated into the congregation came
to light, inflamed the zeal of Phinehas , the son of Eleazar the high priest, to such
an extent, that he seized a spear, and rushing into the tent of the adulterer, pierced
both of them through in the very act. haqubaah (OT:6898), lit., the arched, or arch,
is applied here to the inner or hinder division of the tent, the sleeping-room and
women's room in the larger tents of the upper classes.

[Link] (1 of 2) [13/08/2004 [Link] p.m.]

 Keil and Delitzsch Commentary on the Old Testament

Numbers 25:8,9

And he went after the man of Israel into the tent, and thrust both of them
through, the man of Israel, and the woman through her belly. So the plague was
stayed from the children of Israel.

Through this judgment, which was executed by Phinehas with holy zeal upon the
daring sinners, the plague was restrained, so that it came to an end. The example
which Phinehas had made of these sinners was an act of intercession, by which the
high priest appeased the wrath of God, and averted the judgment of destruction
from the whole congregation ("he was zealous for his God," wayªkapeer
(OT:3722), v. 13). The thought upon which this expression is founded is, that the
punishment which was inflicted as a purifying chastisement served as a "covering"
against the exterminating judgment (see Herzog's Cyclopaedia).

(Note: Upon this act of Phinehas, and the similar examples of Samuel (1 Sam 15:33) and Mattathias (1
Macc. 2:24), the later Jews erected the so-called "zealot right," jus zelotarum , according to which any
one, even though not qualified by his official position, possessed the right, in cases of any daring

<- Previous First Next ->

[Link] (2 of 2) [13/08/2004 [Link] p.m.]

 Keil and Delitzsch Commentary on the Old Testament

<- Previous First Next ->

contempt of the theocratic institutions, or any daring violation of the honour of God, to proceed with
vengeance against the criminals. (See Salden, otia theol. pp. 609ff., and Buddeus, de jure zelotarum
apud Hebr. 1699, and in Oelrich's collect. T. i. Diss. 5.) The stoning of Stephen furnishes an example
of this.)

Verse 9. Twenty-four thousand men were killed by this plague. The Apostle Paul
deviates from this statement in 1 Cor 10:8, and gives the number of those that fell
as twenty-three thousand, probably from a traditional interpretation of the schools
of the scribes, according to which a thousand were deducted from the twenty-four
thousand who perished, as being the number of those who were hanged by the
judges, so that only twenty-three thousand would be killed by the plague; and it is
to these alone that Paul refers.

Numbers 25:10-15

And the LORD spake unto Moses, saying,

For this act of divine zeal the eternal possession of the priesthood was promised to
Phinehas and his posterity as Jehovah's covenant of peace. bªqanª'ow (OT:7068),
by displaying my zeal in the midst of them (viz., the Israelites). qinª'aatiy
(OT:7068) is not "zeal for me," but "my zeal," the zeal of Jehovah with which
Phinehas was filled, and impelled to put the daring sinners to death. By doing this
he had averted destruction from the Israelites, and restrained the working of
Jehovah's zeal, which had manifested itself in the plague. "I gave him my covenant
of peace" (the suffix is attached to the governing noun, as in Lev 6:3). bªriyt
(OT:1285) naatan (OT:5414), as in Gen 17:2, to give, i.e., to fulfil the covenant, to
grant what was promised in the covenant. The covenant granted to Phinehas
consisted in the fact, that an "eternal priesthood" (i.e., the eternal possession of the
priesthood) was secured to him, not for himself alone, but for his descendants also,
as a covenant, i.e., in a covenant, or irrevocable form, since God never breaks a
covenant that He has made. In accordance with this promise, the high-priesthood

[Link] (1 of 2) [13/08/2004 [Link] p.m.]

 Keil and Delitzsch Commentary on the Old Testament

which passed from Eleazar to Phinehas (Judg 20:28) continued in his family, with
the exception of a brief interruption in Eli's days (see at 1 Sam 1-3 and 14:3), until
the time of the last gradual dissolution of the Jewish state through the tyranny of
Herod and his successors (see my Archäologie , §38). - In vv. 14, 15, the names of
the two daring sinners are given. The father of Cozbi, the Midianitish princess, was
named Zur , and is described here as "head of the tribes ( 'umowt (OT:523), see at
Gen 25:16) of a father's house in Midian," i.e., as the head of several of the
Midianitish tribes that were descended from one tribe-father; in Num 31:8,
however, he is described as a king, and classed among the five kings of Midian
who were slain by the Israelites.

Numbers 25:16-18

And the LORD spake unto Moses, saying,

The Lord now commanded Moses to show hostility ( tsaarar (OT:6887) to the
Midianites, and smite them, on account of the stratagem which they had practised
upon the Israelites by tempting them to idolatry, "in order that the practical zeal of
Phinehas against sin, by which expiation had been made for the guilt, might be
adopted by all

<- Previous First Next ->

[Link] (2 of 2) [13/08/2004 [Link] p.m.]

 Keil and Delitzsch Commentary on the Old Testament

<- Previous First Next ->

the nation" ( Baumgarten ). The inf. abs. tsaarowr (OT:6887), instead of the
imperative , as in Ex 20:8, etc. p' `al-dªbar , in consideration of Peor , and indeed,
or especially, in consideration of Cozbi. The repetition is emphatic. The
wickedness of the Midianites culminated in the shameless wantonness of Cozbi the
Midianitish princess. "Their sister," i.e., one of the members of their tribe. - The
19th verse belongs to the following chapter, and forms the introduction to Num
26:1.

(Note: In the English version this division is adopted. - Tr.)

Mustering of Israel in the Steppes of Moab. Ch. 26.

Before taking vengeance upon the Midianites, as they had been commanded, the
Israelites were to be mustered as the army of Jehovah, by means of a fresh
numbering, since the generation that was mustered at Sinai (ch. 1-4) had died out
in the wilderness, with the sole exception of Caleb and Joshua (vv. 64, 65). On this
ground the command of God was issued, "after the plague,"' for a fresh census and
muster. For with the plague the last of those who came out of Egypt, and were not
to enter Canaan, had been swept away, and thus the sentence had been completely
executed. - The object of the fresh numbering, however, was not merely to muster
Israel for the war with the Midianites, and in the approaching conquest of the
promised land with the Canaanites also, but was intended to serve at the same time
as a preparation for their settlement in Canaan, viz., for the division of the
conquered land among the tribes and families of Israel. For this reason (ch. 26) the
families of the different tribes are enumerated here, which was not the case in ch.
1; and generally instructions are also given in vv. 52-56, with reference to the
division of Canaan. - The numbering was simply extended, as before, to the male
population of the age of 20 years and upwards, and was no doubt carried out, like
the previous census at Sinai, by Moses and the high priest (Eleazar), with the
assistance of the heads of the tribes, although the latter are not expressly mentioned

[Link] (1 of 2) [13/08/2004 [Link] p.m.]

 Keil and Delitzsch Commentary on the Old Testament

here. - The names of the families correspond-with very few exceptions, which have
been already noticed in pp. 239, 240-to the grandsons and great-grandsons of Jacob
mentioned in Gen 46. - With regard to the total number of the people, and the
number of the different tribes, compare the remarks at pp. 651ff.

Numbers 26:1-51

And it came to pass after the plague, that the LORD spake unto Moses and unto
Eleazar the son of Aaron the priest, saying,

Mustering of the Twelve Tribes. - Vv. 1-4. The command of God to Moses and
Eleazar is the same as in ch. 1, 2, and 3, except that it does not enter so much into
details.

Verse 3-4. "And Moses and Eleazar the priest spake with them" ( diber
(OT:1696) with the accusative, as in Gen 37:4). The pronoun refers to "the children
of Israel," or more correctly, to the heads of the nation as the representatives of the
congregation, who were to carry out the numbering. On the Arboth-Moab , see at
Num 22:1. Only the leading point in their words is mentioned, viz., "from twenty
years old and upwards" (sc., shall ye take the number of the children of Israel),
since it was very simple to supply the words "take the sum" from v. 2.

(Note: This is, at all events, easier and simpler than the alterations of the text which have been

<- Previous First Next ->

[Link] (2 of 2) [13/08/2004 [Link] p.m.]

 Keil and Delitzsch Commentary on the Old Testament

<- Previous First Next ->

(Note: This is, at all events, easier and simpler than the alterations of the text which have been
suggested for the purpose of removing the difficulty. Knobel proposes to alter wayªdabeer (OT:1696)
into wayadªbeer (OT:1696), and lee'mor (OT:559) into lipªqod (OT:6485): "Moses and Eleazar
arranged the children of Israel when they mustered them." But hidªbiyr does not mean to arrange, but
simply to drive in pairs, to subjugate (Ps 18:48, and 47:4) - an expression which, as much be
immediately apparent, is altogether inapplicable to the arrangement of the people in families for the
purpose of taking a census.) - The words from "the children of Israel" in v. 4 onwards form the
introduction to the enumeration of the different tribes (vv. 5ff.), and the verb yihªyuw (OT:1961)
(were) must be supplied. "And the children of Israel, who went forth out of Egypt, were Reuben," etc.

Verse 5-11. The families of Reuben tally with Gen 46:9; Ex 6:14, and 1 Chron 5:3.
The plural bªneey (OT:1121) (sons), in v. 8, where only one son is mentioned, is to
be explained from the fact, that several sons of this particular son (i.e., grandsons)
are mentioned afterwards. On Dathan and Abiram , see at Num 16:1 and 32ff. See
also the remark made here in vv. 10b and 11, viz., that those who were destroyed
with the company of Korah were for a sign ( neec (OT:5251), here a warning); but
that the sons of Korah were not destroyed along with their father.

Verse 12-14. The Simeonites counted only five families, as Ohad (Gen 46:10) left
no family. Nemuel is called Jemuel there, as yod and nun are often interchanged
(cf. Ges. thes. pp. 833 and 557); and Zerach is another name of the same
signification for Zohar ( Zerach , the rising of the sun; Zohar, candor , splendour).

Verse 15-18. The Gadites are the same as in Gen 46:16, except that Ozni is called
Ezbon there.

Verse 19-22. The sons and families of Judah agree with Gen 46:12 (cf. Gen
38:6ff.); also with 1 Chron 2:3-5.

Verse 23-25. The families of Issachar correspond to the sons mentioned in Gen

[Link] (1 of 2) [13/08/2004 [Link] p.m.]

 Keil and Delitzsch Commentary on the Old Testament

46:13, except that the name Job occurs there instead of Jashub. The two names
have the same signification, as Job is derived from an Arabic word which signifies
to return.

Verse 26-27. The families of Zebulun correspond to the sons named in Gen 46:14.

Verse 28-37. The descendants of Joseph were classified in two leading families,
according to his two sons Manasseh and Ephraim , who were born before the
removal of Israel to Egypt, and were raised into founders of tribes in consequence
of the patriarch Israel having adopted them as his own sons (Gen 48).

Verse 29-34. Eight families descended from Manasseh: viz., one from his son
Machir , the second from Machir's son or Manasseh's grandson Gilead , and the
other six from the six sons of Gilead. The genealogical accounts in Num 27:1;
36:1, and Josh 17:1ff., fully harmonize with this, except that Iezer (v. 30) is called
Abiezer in Josh 17:2; whereas only a part of the names mentioned here occur in the
genealogical fragments in 1 Chron 2:21-24, and 7:14-29. In v. 33, a son of Hepher
, named Zelophehad , is mentioned. He had no sons, but only daughters, whose
names are given here to prepare the way for the legal regulations mentioned in ch.
27 and 39, to which this fact gave rise.

Verse 35-37. There were four families descended from Ephraim; three from his
sons, and one from his grandson. Of the descendants of Sutelah several links are
given in 1 Chron 7:20ff.

Verse 38-41. The children of Benjamin formed seven families, five of whom were
founded by his sons, and two

<- Previous First Next ->

[Link] (2 of 2) [13/08/2004 [Link] p.m.]

 Keil and Delitzsch Commentary on the Old Testament

<- Previous First Next ->

by grandsons. (On the differences which occur between the names given here and
those in Gen 46:21, see pp. 239, 240.) Some of the sons and grandsons of
Benjamin mentioned here are also found in the genealogical fragments in 1 Chron
7:6-18, and 8:1ff.

Verse 42-43. The descendants of Dan formed only one family, named from a son
of Dan, who is called Shuham here, but Hushim in Gen 46:23; though this family
no doubt branched out into several smaller families, which are not named here,
simply because this list contains only the leading families into which the tribes
were divided.

Verse 44-47. The families of Asher agree with the sons of Asher mentioned in Gen
46:17 and 1 Chron 7:30, except that Ishuah is omitted here, because he founded no
family.

Verse 48-50. The families of Naphtali tally with the sons of Naphtali in Gen 46:24
and 1 Chron 7:30.

Verse 51. The total number of the persons mustered was 601,730.

Numbers 26:52-56

And the LORD spake unto Moses, saying,

Instructions concerning the Distribution of the Land. - In vv. 53, 54, the command
is given to distribute the land as an inheritance among the twelve tribes ("unto
these"), according to the number of the names (Num 1:2-18), i.e., to the tribes and
families that contained only a few persons, they were to make it small; to every one

[Link] (1 of 2) [13/08/2004 [Link] p.m.]

 Keil and Delitzsch Commentary on the Old Testament

according to the measure of its mustered persons ( lª must be repeated before 'iysh
(OT:376)). In vv. 55, 56, it is still further commanded that the distribution should
take place by lot. "According to the names on their paternal tribes shall they (the
children of Israel) receive it (the land) for an inheritance." The meaning of these
words can only be, that every tribe was to receive a province of its own for an
inheritance, which should be called by its name for ever. The other regulation in v.
56, "according to the measure of the lot shall its inheritance (the inheritance of
every tribe) be divided between the numerous and the small (tribe)," is no doubt to
be understood as signifying, that in the division of the tribe territories, according to
the comparative sizes of the different tribes, they were to adhere to that portion of
land which fell to every tribe in the casting of the lots.

The magnitude and limits of the possessions of the different tribes could not be
determined by the lot according to the magnitude of the tribes themselves: all that
could possibly be determined was the situation to be occupied by the tribe; so that
R. Bechai is quite correct in observing that "the casting of the lot took place for the
more convenient distribution of the different portions, whether of better or inferior
condition, that there might be no occasion for strife and covetousness," though the
motive assigned is too partial in its character. The lot was to determine the portion
of every tribe, not merely to prevent all occasion for dissatisfaction and
complaining, but in order that every tribe might receive with gratitude the
possession that fell to its lot as the inheritance assigned it by God, the result of the
lot being regarded by almost all nations as determined by God Himself (cf. Prov
16:33; 18:18). On this ground not only was the lot resorted to by the Greeks and
Romans in the distribution of conquered lands (see the proofs in Clericus,
Rosenmüller , and Knobel ), but it is still employed in the division of lands. (For
further remarks, see at Josh 14:1ff.).

<- Previous First Next ->

[Link] (2 of 2) [13/08/2004 [Link] p.m.]

 Keil and Delitzsch Commentary on the Old Testament

<- Previous First Next ->

Numbers 26:57-59

And these are they that were numbered of the Levites after their families: of
Gershon, the family of the Gershonites: of Kohath, the family of the Kohathites:
of Merari, the family of the Merarites.

Mustering of the Levites. - The enumeration of the different Levitical families into
which the three leading families of Levi, that were founded by his three sons
Gershon, Kohath, and Merari, were divided, is not complete, but is broken off in v.
58 after the notice of five different families, for the purpose of tracing once more
the descent of Moses and Aaron, the heads not of this tribe only, but of the whole
nation, and also of giving the names of the sons of the latter (vv. 59-61). And after
this the whole is concluded with a notice of the total number of those who were
mustered of the tribe of Levi (v. 62). - Of the different families mentioned, Libni
belonged to Gershon (cf. Num 3:21), Hebroni to Kohath (ch. 3:27), Machli and
Mushi to Merari (Num 3:33), and Korchi , i.e., the family of Korah (according to
ch. Num 16:1; cf. Ex 6:21 and 24), to Kohath. Moses and Aaron were descendants
of Kohath (see at Ex 6:20 and 2:1). Some difficulty is caused by the relative clause,
"whom (one) had born to Levi in Egypt" (v. 59), on account of the subject being
left indefinite. It cannot be Levi's wife, as Jarchi, Abenezra , and others suppose;
for Jochebed , the mother of Moses, was not a daughter of Levi in the strict sense
of the word, but only a Levitess or descendant of Levi, who lived about 300 years
after Levi; just as her husband Amram was not actually the son of Amram, who
bore that name (Ex 6:18), but a later descendant of this older Amram (see pp.
305ff.). The missing subject must be derived from the verb itself, viz., either
hayoledet (OT:3205) or 'imaah (OT:517) (her mother), as in 1 Kings 1:6, another
passage in which "his mother" is to be supplied (cf. Ewald , §294, b. ).

Numbers 26:60-61

[Link] (1 of 2) [13/08/2004 [Link] p.m.]

 Keil and Delitzsch Commentary on the Old Testament

And unto Aaron was born Nadab, and Abihu, Eleazar, and Ithamar.

Sons of Aaron: cf. Num 3:2 and 4; Ex. 6:23; Lev. 10:1, 2.

Numbers 26:62

And those that were numbered of them were twenty and three thousand, all
males from a month old and upward: for they were not numbered among the
children of Israel, because there was no inheritance given them among the
children of Israel.

The Levites were not mustered along with the rest of the tribes of Israel, because
the mustering took place with especial reference to the conquest of Canaan, and the
Levites were not to receive any territory as a tribe (see at

<- Previous First Next ->

[Link] (2 of 2) [13/08/2004 [Link] p.m.]

 Keil and Delitzsch Commentary on the Old Testament

<- Previous First Next ->

Num 18:20).

Numbers 26:63-65

These are they that were numbered by Moses and Eleazar the priest, who
numbered the children of Israel in the plains of Moab by Jordan near Jericho.

Concluding formula with the remark in v. 65, that the penal sentence which God
had pronounced in Num 14:29 and 38 upon the generation which came out of
Egypt, had been completely carried out.

The Daughters of Zelophehad Claim to Inherit. The Death of Moses

Foretold: Consecration of Joshua as His Successor. Ch. 27.

Numbers 27:1-4

Then came the daughters of Zelophehad, the son of Hepher, the son of Gilead,
the son of Machir, the son of Manasseh, of the families of Manasseh the son of
Joseph: and these are the names of his daughters; Mahlah, Noah, and Hoglah,
and Milcah, and Tirzah.

Claims of Zelophehad's Daughters to an Inheritance in the Promised Land. - Vv. 1-

4. The divine instructions which were given at the mustering of the tribes, to the
effect that the land was to be divided among the tribes in proportion to the larger or
smaller number of their families (Num 26:52-56), induced the daughters of
Zelophehad the Manassite of the family of Gilead, the son of Machir, to appear
before the princes of the congregation, who were assembled with Moses and
Eleazar at the tabernacle, with a request that they would assign them an inheritance

[Link] (1 of 2) [13/08/2004 [Link] p.m.]

 Keil and Delitzsch Commentary on the Old Testament

in the family of the father, as he had died in the desert without leaving any sons,
and had not taken part in the rebellion of the company of Korah, which might have
occasioned his exclusion from any participation in the promised land, but had
simply died "through his (own) sin," i.e., on account of such a sin as every one
commits, and such as all who died in the wilderness had committed as well as he.
"Why should the name of our father be cut off (cease) from the midst of his
family?" This would have been the case, for example, if no inheritance had been
assigned him in the land because he left no son.

In that case his family would have become extinct, if his daughters had married
into other families or tribes. On the other hand, if his daughters received a
possession of their own among the brethren of their father, the name of their father
would be preserved by it, since they could then marry husbands who would enter
upon their landed property, and their father's name and possession would be
perpetuated through their children. This wish on the part of the daughters was
founded upon an assumption which rested no doubt upon an ancient custom,
namely, that in the case of marriages where the wives had brought landed property
as their dowry, the sons who inherited the maternal property were received through
this inheritance into the family of their mother, i.e., of their grandfather on the
mother's side. We have an example of this in the case of Jarha , who belonged to
the pre-Mosaic times (1

<- Previous First Next ->

[Link] (2 of 2) [13/08/2004 [Link] p.m.]

 Keil and Delitzsch Commentary on the Old Testament

<- Previous First Next ->

Chron 2:34-35). In all probability this took place in every instance in which
daughters received a portion of the paternal possessions as their dowry, even
though there might be sons alive. This would explain the introduction of Jair
among the Manassites in Num 32:41; Deut 3:14. His father Segub was the son of
Hezron of the tribe of Judah, but his mother was the daughter of Machir the
Manassite (1 Chron 2:21-22). We find another similar instance in Ezra 2:61 and
Neh 7:63, where the sons of a priest who had married one of the daughters of
Barzillai the rich Gileadite, are called sons of Barzillai.

Numbers 27:5-7

And Moses brought their cause before the LORD.

This question of right ( Mishpat ) Moses brought before God, and received
instructions in reply to give the daughters of Zelophehad an inheritance among the
brethren of their father, as they had spoken right. Further instructions were added
afterwards in ch. 36 in relation to the marriage of heiresses.

Numbers 27:8-11

And thou shalt speak unto the children of Israel, saying, If a man die, and have
no son, then ye shall cause his inheritance to pass unto his daughter.

On this occasion God issued a general law of inheritance, which was to apply to all
cases as "a statute of judgment" (or right), i.e., a statute determining right. If any
one died without leaving a son, his landed property was to pass to his daughter (or
daughters); in default of daughters, to his brothers; in the absence of brothers, to
his paternal uncles; and if there were none of them, to his next of kin. - On the
intention of this law, see my Archaeol. §142 (ii. pp. 212, 213); and on the law of
inheritance generally, see J. Selden, de success. ad leges Hebr. in bona
[Link] (1 of 2) [13/08/2004 [Link] p.m.]
 Keil and Delitzsch Commentary on the Old Testament

defunctorum, Fkft. a. O. 1695.

Numbers 27:12-14

And the LORD said unto Moses, Get thee up into this mount Abarim, and see the
land which I have given unto the children of Israel.

The Death of Moses Foretold. - After these instructions concerning the division of
the land, the Lord announced to Moses his approaching end. From the mountains
of Abarim he was to see the land which the Israelites would receive, and then like
Aaron to be gathered to his people, because like him he also had sinned at the
water of strife at Kadesh. This announcement was made, "that he might go forward
to his death with the fullest consciousness,

<- Previous First Next ->

[Link] (2 of 2) [13/08/2004 [Link] p.m.]

 Keil and Delitzsch Commentary on the Old Testament

<- Previous First Next ->

and might set his house in order, that is to say, might finish as much as he could
while still alive, and provide as much as possible what would make up after his
death for the absence of his own person, upon which the whole house of Israel was
now so dependent" ( Baumgarten ). The fulfilment of this announcement is
described in Deut 32:48-52. The particular spot upon the mountains of Abarim
from which Moses saw the land of Canaan, is also minutely described there.

It was Mount Nebo , upon which he also died. The mountains of Abarim (cf. Num
33:47) are the mountain range forming the Moabitish table-land, which slope off
into the steppes of Moab. It is upon this range, the northern portion of which
opposite to Jericho bore the name of Pisgah, that we are to look for Mount Nebo ,
which is sometimes described as one of the mountains of Abarim (Deut 32:49), and
at other times as the top of Pisgah (Deut 3:27; 34:1; see at Num 21:20). Nebo is not
to be identified with Jebel Attarus , but to be sought for much farther to the north,
since, according to Eusebius ( s. v. Abarei'm ), it was opposite to Jericho, between
Livias , which was in the valley of the Jordan nearly opposite to Jericho, and
Heshbon; consequently very near to the point which is marked as the "Heights of
Nebo" on Van de Velde's map. The prospect from the heights of Nebo must have
been a very extensive one.

According to Burckhardt ( Syr. ii. pp. 106-7), "even the city of Heshbon ( Hhuzban
) itself stood upon so commanding an eminence, that the view extended at least
thirty English miles in all directions, and towards the south probably as far as sixty
miles." On the expression, "gathered unto thy people," see at Gen 25:8, and on
Aaron's death see Num 20:28. mªroytem (OT:4784) ka'asher (OT:834): "as ye
transgressed My commandment." By the double use of ka'asher (OT:834) (
quomodo , "as"), the death of Aaron, and also that of Moses, are placed in a
definite relation to the sin of these two heads of Israel. As they both sinned at
Kadesh against the commandment of the Lord, so they were both of them to die
without entering the land of Canaan. On the sin, see at Num 20:12-13, and on the
desert of Zin, at Num 13:21.
[Link] (1 of 2) [13/08/2004 [Link] p.m.]
 Keil and Delitzsch Commentary on the Old Testament

Numbers 27:15-17

And Moses spake unto the LORD, saying,

Consecration of Joshua as the Successor of Moses. - Vv. 15-17. The announcement

thus made to Moses led him to entreat the Lord to appoint a leader of His people,
that the congregation might not be like a flock without a shepherd. As "God of the
spirits of all flesh," i.e., as the giver of life and breath to all creatures (see at Num
16:22), he asks Jehovah to appoint a man over the congregation, who should go out
and in before them, and should lead them out and in, i.e., preside over and direct
them in all their affairs. waabow' (OT:935) tsee't (OT:3318) ("go out," and "go
in") is a description of the conduct of men in every-day life (Deut 28:6; 31:2; Josh
14:11). wªheebiy' (OT:935) howtsiy' (OT:3318) ("lead out," and "bring in")
signifies the superintendence of the affairs of the nation, and is founded upon the
figure of a shepherd.

Numbers 27:18-21

And the LORD said unto Moses, Take thee Joshua the son of Nun, a man in
whom is the spirit, and lay

<- Previous First Next ->

[Link] (2 of 2) [13/08/2004 [Link] p.m.]

 Keil and Delitzsch Commentary on the Old Testament

<- Previous First Next ->

And the LORD said unto Moses, Take thee Joshua the son of Nun, a man in
whom is the spirit, and lay thine hand upon him;

The Lord then appointed Joshua to this office as a man "who had spirit." ruwach
(OT:7307) ( spirit ) does not mean "insight and wisdom" ( Knobel ), but the higher
power inspired by God into the soul, which quickens the moral and religious life,
and determines its development; in this case, therefore, it was the spiritual
endowment requisite for the office he was called to fill. Moses was to consecrate
him for entering upon this office by the laying on of hands, or, as is more fully
explained in vv. 19 and 20, he was to set him before Eleazar the high priest and the
congregation, to command ( tsiuwaah (OT:6680)) him, i.e., instruct him with
regard to his office before their eyes, and to lay of his eminence ( howd (OT:1935))
upon him, i.e., to transfer a portion of his own dignity and majesty to him by the
imposition of hands, that the whole congregation might hearken to him, or trust to
his guidance.

The object to yishªmª`uw (OT:8085) (hearken) must be supplied from the context,
viz., 'eelaayw (OT:413) (to him), as Deut 34:9 clearly shows. The min (OT:4480)
(of) in v. 20 is partitive, as in Gen 4:4, etc. The eminence and authority of Moses
were not to be entirely transferred to Joshua, for they were bound up with his own
person alone (cf. Num 12:6-8), but only so much of it as he needed for the
discharge of the duties of his office. Joshua was to be neither the lawgiver nor the
absolute governor of Israel, but to be placed under the judgment of the Urim , with
which Eleazar was entrusted, so far as the supreme decision of the affairs of Israel
was concerned. This is the meaning of v. 21: "Eleazar shall ask to him (for him)
the judgment of the Urim before Jehovah." Urim is an abbreviation for Urim and
Thummim (Ex 28:30), and denotes the means with which the high priest was
entrusted of ascertaining the divine will and counsel in all the important business
of the congregation. "After his mouth" (i.e., according to the decision of the high
priest, by virtue of the right of Urim and Thummim entrusted to him), Joshua and
the whole congregation were to go out and in, i.e., to regulate their conduct and

[Link] (1 of 2) [13/08/2004 [Link] p.m.]

 Keil and Delitzsch Commentary on the Old Testament

decide upon their undertakings. "All the congregation," in distinction from 'all the
children of Israel," denotes the whole body of heads of the people, or the college of
elders, which represented the congregation and administered its affairs.

Numbers 27:22,23

And Moses did as the LORD commanded him: and he took Joshua, and set him
before Eleazar the priest, and before all the congregation:

Execution of the divine command.

Order of the Daily and Festal Offerings of the Congregation. Ch. 28

and 29.

Numbers 28:1

And the LORD spake unto Moses, saying,

When Israel was prepared for the conquest of the promised land by the fresh
numbering and mustering of its men,

<- Previous First Next ->

[Link] (2 of 2) [13/08/2004 [Link] p.m.]

 Keil and Delitzsch Commentary on the Old Testament

<- Previous First Next ->

When Israel was prepared for the conquest of the promised land by the fresh
numbering and mustering of its men, and by the appointment of Joshua as
commander, its relation to the Lord was regulated by a law which determined the
sacrifices through which it was to maintain its fellowship with its God from day to
day, and serve Him as His people (ch. 28 and 29). Through this order of sacrifice,
the object of which was to form and sanctify the whole life of the congregation into
a continuous worship, the sacrificial and festal laws already given in Ex 23:14-17;
29:38-42; 31:12-17; Lev 23:1, and Num 25:1-12, were completed and arranged
into a united and well-ordered whole. "It was very fitting that this law should be
issued a short time before the advance into Canaan; for it was there first that the
Israelites were in a position to carry out the sacrificial worship in all its full extent,
and to observe all the sacrificial and festal laws" ( Knobel ).

The law commences with the daily morning and evening burnt-offering (vv. 3-8),
which was instituted at Sinai at the dedication of the altar. It is not merely for the
sake of completeness that it is introduced here, or for the purpose of including all
the national sacrifices that were to be offered during the whole year in one general
survey; but also for an internal reason, viz., that the daily sacrifice was also to be
offered on the Sabbaths and feast-days, to accompany the general and special festal
sacrifices, and to form the common substratum for the whole of these. Then follow
in vv. 9-15 the sacrifices to be offered on the Sabbath and at the new moon; and in
v. 16-Num Num 29:38 the general sacrifices for the different yearly feasts, which
were to be added to the sacrifices that were peculiar to each particular festival,
having been appointed at the time of its first institution, and being specially
adapted to give expression to its specific character, so that, at the yearly feasts, the
congregation had to offer their different kinds of sacrifices: ( a ) the daily morning
and evening sacrifice; ( b ) the general sacrifices that were offered on every feast-
day; and ( c ) the festal sacrifices that were peculiar to each particular feast.

This cumulative arrangement is to be explained from the significance of the daily

and of the festal sacrifices. In the daily burnt-offering the congregation of Israel, as

[Link] (1 of 2) [13/08/2004 [Link] p.m.]

 Keil and Delitzsch Commentary on the Old Testament

a congregation of Jehovah, was to sanctify its life, body, soul, and spirit, to the
Lord its God; and on the Lord's feast-days it was to give expression to this
sanctification in an intensified form. This stronger practical exhibition of the
sanctification of the life was embodied in the worship by the elevation and
graduation of the daily sacrifice, through the addition of a second and much more
considerable burnt-offering, meat- offering, and drink-offering. The graduation
was regulated by the significance of the festivals. On the Sabbaths the daily
sacrifice was doubled, by the presentation of a burnt-offering consisting of two
lambs. On the other feast-days it was increased by a burnt-offering composed of
oxen, rams, and yearling lambs, which was always preceded by a sin-offering. - As
the seventh day of the week, being a Sabbath, was distinguished above the other
days of the week, as a day that was sanctified to the Lord in a higher degree than
the rest, by an enlarged burnt-offering, meat-offering, and drink-offering; so the
seventh month, being a Sabbath-month, was raised above the other months of the
year, and sanctified as a festal month, by the fact that, in addition to the ordinary
new moon sacrifices of two bullocks, one ram, and seven yearling lambs, a special
festal sacrifice was also offered, consisting of one bullock, one ram, and seven
yearling lambs (Num 29:2), which was also repeated on the day of atonement, and
at the close of the feast of Tabernacles (Num 29:8,36); and also that the feast of
Tabernacles, which fell in this month, was to be celebrated by a much larger
number of burnt-offerings, as the largest and holiest feast of the congregation of
Israel.

(Note: Knobel's remarks as to the difference in the sacrifices are not only erroneous, but likely to
mislead, and tending to obscure and distort the actual facts. "On those feast-days," he says, "which
were intended as a general festival to Jehovah, viz., the sabbatical portion of the seventh new moon,
the day of atonement, and the closing day of the yearly feasts, the sacrifices consisted of one bullock,
one ram, and seven yearling lambs (Num 29:2,8,36); whereas at the older festivals which had a
reference to nature, such as the new moons, the days of unleavened bread, and the feast of Weeks, they
consisted of two bullocks, one ram, and seven yearling lambs (Num 28:11,19,24,27; 29:6), and at the
feast of Tabernacles of even a larger number, especially of bullocks (Num 29:12ff.). In the last,
Jehovah was especially honoured, as having poured out His blessing upon nature, and granted a
plentiful harvest to the cultivation of the soil. The ox was the beast of agriculture." It was not the

<- Previous First Next ->

[Link] (2 of 2) [13/08/2004 [Link] p.m.]

 Keil and Delitzsch Commentary on the Old Testament

<- Previous First Next ->

so-called "older festivals which had reference to nature" that were distinguished by a larger number of
sacrificial animals, above those feast-days which were intended as general festivals to Jehovah, but the
feasts of the seventh month alone. Thus the seventh new moon's day was celebrated by a double new
moon's sacrifice, viz., with three bullocks, two rams, and fourteen yearling lambs; the feast of
atonement, as the introductory festival of the feast of Tabernacles, by a special festal sacrifice, whilst
the day of Passover, which corresponded to it in the first festal cycle, as the introductory festival of the
feast of unleavened bread, had no general festal sacrifices; and, lastly, the feast of Tabernacles, not
only by a very considerable increase in the number of the festal sacrifices on every one of the seven
days, but also by the addition of an eighth day, as the octave of the feast, and a festal sacrifice
answering to those of the first and seventh days of this month.)

All the feasts of the whole year, for example, formed a cycle of feast-days,
arranged according to the number seven, which had its starting-point and centre in
the Sabbath, and was regulated according to the division of time established at the
creation, into weeks, months, years, and periods of years, ascending from the
weekly Sabbath to the monthly Sabbath, the sabbatical year, and the year of
jubilee. In this cycle of holy periods, regulated as it was by the number seven, and
ever expanding into larger and larger circles, there was embodied the whole
revolution of annually recurring festivals, established to commemorate the mighty
works of the Lord for the preservation and inspiration of His people. And this was
done in the following manner: in the first place, the number of yearly feasts
amounted to exactly seven , of which the two leading feasts ( Mazzoth and the feast
of Tabernacles ) lasted seven days; in the second place, in all the feasts, some of
which were of only one day's duration, whilst others lasted seven days, there were
only seven days that were to be observed with sabbatical rest and a holy meeting;
and in the third place, the seven feasts were formed into two large festal circles,
each of which consisted of an introductory feast, the main feast of seven days, and
a closing feast of one day.

The first of these festal circles was commemorative of the elevation of Israel into
the nation of God, and its subsequent preservation. It commenced on the 14th Abib
(Nisan) with the Passover, which was appointed to commemorate the deliverance
of Israel from the destroying angel who smote the first-born of Egypt, as the

[Link] (1 of 2) [13/08/2004 [Link] p.m.]

 Keil and Delitzsch Commentary on the Old Testament

introductory festival. It culminated in the seven days' feast of unleavened bread, as

the feast of the deliverance of Israel from bondage, and its elevation into the nation
of God; and closed with the feast of Weeks, Pentecost, or the feast of Harvest,
which was kept seven weeks after the offering of the sheaf of first-fruits, on the
second day of Mazzoth. This festal circle contained only three days that were to be
kept with sabbatical rest and a holy meeting (viz., the first and seventh days of
Mazzoth and the day of Pentecost). The second festal circle fell entirely in the
seventh month, and its main object was to inspire the Israelites in their enjoyment
of the blessings of their God: for this reason it was celebrated by the presentation
of a large number of burnt-offerings.

This festal circle opened with the day of atonement, which was appointed for the
tenth day of the seventh month, as the introductory feast, culminated in the seven
days' feast of Tabernacles, and closed with the eighth day, which was added to the
seven feast-days as the octave of this festive circle, or the solemn close of all the
feasts of the year. This also included only three days that were to be
commemorated with sabbatical rest and a holy meeting (the 10th, 15th, and 22nd
of the month); but to these we have to add the day of trumpets, with which the
month commenced, which was also a Sabbath of rest with a holy meeting; and this
completes the seven days of rest (see my Archaeologie , i. §76).

Numbers 28:2

Command the children of Israel, and say unto them, My offering, and my bread
for my sacrifices made

<- Previous First Next ->

[Link] (2 of 2) [13/08/2004 [Link] p.m.]

 Keil and Delitzsch Commentary on the Old Testament

<- Previous First Next ->

by fire, for a sweet savour unto me, shall ye observe to offer unto me in their due
season.

V. 2 contains the general instruction to offer to the Lord His sacrificial gift "at the
time appointed by Him." On corban , see at Lev 1:2 (p. 510, comp. with p. 503); on
"the bread of Jehovah," at Lev 3:11; on the "sacrifice made by fire," and "a sweet
savour," at Lev 1:9; and on "moed," at Lev 23:2,4.

Numbers 28:3-6

And thou shalt say unto them, This is the offering made by fire which ye shall
offer unto the LORD; two lambs of the first year without spot day by day, for a
continual burnt offering.

"The daily sacrifice: as it had already been instituted at Sinai (Ex 29:38-42).

Numbers 28:7-8

And the drink offering thereof shall be the fourth part of an hin for the one
lamb: in the holy place shalt thou cause the strong wine to be poured unto the
LORD for a drink offering.

"In the sanctuary," i.e., peri' (NT:4012) to'n (NT:3588) boomo'n (NT:1041)
(round about the altar), as Josephus paraphrases it (Ant. iii. 10); not "with (in) holy
vessels," as Jonathan and others interpret it. "Pour out a drink-offering, as
sheekaar (OT:7941) for Jehovah." Shecar does not mean intoxicating drink here
(see at Lev 10:9), but strong drink , in distinction from water as simple drink. The
drink-offering consisted of wine only (see at Num 15:5ff.); and hence Onkelos
paraphrases it, "of old wine."

[Link] (1 of 2) [13/08/2004 [Link] p.m.]

 Keil and Delitzsch Commentary on the Old Testament

Numbers 28:9-10

And on the sabbath day two lambs of the first year without spot, and two tenth
deals of flour for a meat offering, mingled with oil, and the drink offering
thereof:

The Sabbath-offering , which was to be added to the daily sacrifice ( `al

(OT:5921), upon it), consisted of two yearling lambs as a burnt-offering, with the
corresponding meat-offering and drink-offering, according to the general rule laid
down in Num 15:3ff., and is appointed here for the first time; whereas the
sabbatical feast had already been instituted at Ex 20:8-11 and Lev 23:3. "The burnt-
offering of the Sabbath on its Sabbath," i.e., as often as the Sabbath occurred, every
Sabbath.

<- Previous First Next ->

[Link] (2 of 2) [13/08/2004 [Link] p.m.]

 Keil and Delitzsch Commentary on the Old Testament

<- Previous First Next ->

Numbers 28:11-15

And in the beginnings of your months ye shall offer a burnt offering unto the
LORD; two young bullocks, and one ram, seven lambs of the first year without
spot;

At the beginnings of the month, i.e., at the new moons , a larger burnt-offering was
to be added to the daily or continual burnt-offering, consisting of two bullocks
(young oxen), one ram, and seven yearling lambs, with the corresponding meat and
drink-offerings, as the "month's burnt-offering in its (i.e., every) month with regard
to the months of the year," i.e., corresponding to them. To this there was also to be
added a sin-offering of a shaggy goat (see at Lev 4:23). The custom of
distinguishing the beginnings of the months of new moon's days by a peculiar
festal sacrifice, without their being, strictly speaking, festal days, with sabbatical
rest and a holy meeting,

(Note: In later times, however, the new moon grew more and more into a feast-day, trade was
suspended (Amos 8:5), the pious Israelite sought instruction from the prophets (2 Kings 4:23), many
families and households presented yearly thank-offerings (1 Sam 20:6,29), and at a still later period
the most devout abstained from fasting (Judith 8:6); consequently it is frequently referred to by the
prophets as a feast resembling the Sabbath (Isa 1:13; Hos 2:13; Ezek 46:1).)

arose from the relation in which the month stood to the single day.

"If the congregation was to sanctify its life and labour to the Lord every day by a
burnt-offering, it could not well be omitted at the commencement of the larger
division of time formed by the month; on the contrary, it was only right that the
commencement of a new month should be sanctified by a special sacrifice. Whilst,
then, a burnt-offering, in which the idea of expiation was subordinate to that of
consecrating surrender to the Lord, was sufficient for the single day; for the whole
month it was necessary that, in consideration of the sins that had been committed

[Link] (1 of 2) [13/08/2004 [Link] p.m.]

 Keil and Delitzsch Commentary on the Old Testament

in the course of the past month, and had remained without expiation, a special sin-
offering should be offered for their expiation, in order that, upon the ground of the
forgiveness and reconciliation with God which had been thereby obtained, the lives
of the people might be sanctified afresh to the Lord in the burnt-offering. This
significance of the new moon sacrifice was still further intensified by the fact, that
during the presentation of the sacrifice the priests sounded the silver trumpets, in
order that it might be to the congregation for a memorial before God (Num 10:10).
The trumpet blast was intended to bring before God the prayers of the congregation
embodied in the sacrifice, that God might remember them in mercy, granting them
the forgiveness of their sins and power for sanctification, and quickening them
again in the fellowship of His saving grace" (see my Archaeologie , i. p. 369).

Numbers 28:16-22

And in the fourteenth day of the first month is the passover of the LORD.

The same number of sacrifices as at the new moon were to be offered on every one
of the seven days of the feast of unleavened bread ( Mazzoth ), from the 15th to the
21st of the month, whereas there was no general festal

<- Previous First Next ->

[Link] (2 of 2) [13/08/2004 [Link] p.m.]

 Keil and Delitzsch Commentary on the Old Testament

<- Previous First Next ->

offering on the day of the Passover, or the 14th of the month (Ex 12:3-14). With
regard to the feast of Mazzoth , the rule is repeated from Ex 12:15-20 and Lev 23:6-
8, that on the first and seventh day there was to be a Sabbath rest and holy meeting.

Numbers 28:23-25

Ye shall offer these beside the burnt offering in the morning, which is for a
continual burnt offering.

The festal sacrifices of the seven days were to be prepared "in addition to the
morning burnt-offering, which served as the continual burnt-offering." This implies
that the festal sacrifices commanded were to be prepared and offered every day
after the morning sacrifice.

Numbers 28:26-31

Also in the day of the firstfruits, when ye bring a new meat offering unto the
LORD, after your weeks be out, ye shall have an holy convocation; ye shall do no
servile work:

The same number of sacrifices is appointed for the day of the first-fruits, i.e., for
the feast of Weeks or Harvest feast (cf. Lev 23:15-22). The festal burnt-offering and
sin-offering of this one day was independent of the supplementary burnt-offering
and sin-offering of the wave-loaves appointed in Lev 23:18, and was to be offered
before these and after the daily morning sacrifice.

Numbers 29:1-6

And in the seventh month, on the first day of the month, ye shall have an holy

[Link] (1 of 2) [13/08/2004 [Link] p.m.]

 Keil and Delitzsch Commentary on the Old Testament

convocation; ye shall do no servile work: it is a day of blowing the trumpets unto

you.

The festal sacrifice for the new moon of the seventh month consisted of a burnt-
offering of one bullock, one ram, and seven yearling lambs, with the corresponding
meat-offerings and drink-offerings, and a sin-offering of a he-goat, "besides" (i.e.,
in addition to) the monthly and daily burnt-offering, meat-offering, and drink-
offering. Consequently the sacrifices presented on the seventh new moon's day
were, (1) a yearling lamb in the morning and evening, with their meat-offering and
drink-offering; (2) in the morning, after the daily sacrifice, the ordinary new
moon's sacrifice, consisting of two bullocks, one ram, and seven yearling lambs,
with their corresponding meat-offerings and drink-offerings (see at v. 11); (3) the
sin-offering of the he-goat, together with the burnt-offering of one bullock, one
ram, and seven yearling lambs, with their proper meat-offerings and drink-
offerings, the meaning of which has been pointed out at Lev 23:23ff.

<- Previous First Next ->

[Link] (2 of 2) [13/08/2004 [Link] p.m.]

 Keil and Delitzsch Commentary on the Old Testament

<- Previous First Next ->

Numbers 29:7-11

And ye shall have on the tenth day of this seventh month an holy convocation;
and ye shall afflict your souls: ye shall not do any work therein:

On the day of atonement , on the tenth of the seventh month, a similar festal
sacrifice was to be offered to the one presented on the seventh new moon's day (a
burnt-offering and sin-offering), in addition to the sin-offering of atonement
prescribed at Lev 16, and the daily burnt-offerings. For a more minute description
of this festival, see at Lev 16 and 23:26-32.

Numbers 29:12-34

And on the fifteenth day of the seventh month ye shall have an holy convocation;
ye shall do no servile work, and ye shall keep a feast unto the LORD seven days:

The feast of Tabernacles , the special regulations for the celebration of which are
contained in Lev 23:34-36 and 39-43, was distinguished above all the other feasts
of the year by the great number of burnt-offerings, which raised it into the greatest
festival of joy. On the seven feast-days, the first of which was to be celebrated with
sabbatical rest and a holy meeting, there were to be offered, in addition to the daily
burnt-offering, every day a he-goat for a sin-offering, and seventy oxen in all for a
burnt-offering during the seven days, as well as every day two rams and fourteen
yearling lambs, with the requisite meat-offerings and drink-offerings. Whilst,
therefore, the number of rams and lambs was double the number offered at the
Passover and feast of Pentecost, the number of oxen was fivefold; for, instead of
fourteen, there were seventy offered during the seven days.

This multiplication of the oxen was distributed in such a way, that instead of there

[Link] (1 of 2) [13/08/2004 [Link] p.m.]

 Keil and Delitzsch Commentary on the Old Testament

being ten offered every day, there were thirteen on the first day, twelve on the
second, and so on, deducting one every day, so that on the seventh day there were
exactly seven offered; the arrangement being probably made for the purpose of
securing the holy number seven for this last day, and indicating at the same time,
through the gradual diminution in the number of sacrificial oxen, the gradual
decrease in the festal character of the seven festal days. The reason for this
multiplication in the number of burnt-offerings is to be sought for in the nature of
the feast itself. Their living in booths had already visibly represented to the people
the defence and blessing of their God; and the foliage of these booths pointed out
the glorious advantages of the inheritance received from the Lord. But this festival
followed the completion of the ingathering of the fruits of the orchard and
vineyard, and therefore was still more adapted, on account of the rich harvest of
splendid and costly fruits which their inheritance had yielded, and which they were
about to enjoy in peace now that the labour of agriculture was over, to fill their
hearts with the greatest joy and gratitude towards the Lord and Giver of them all,
and to make this festival a speaking representation of the blessedness of the people
of God when resting from their labours. This blessedness which the Lord had
prepared for His people, was also expressed in the numerous burnt-offerings that
were sacrificed on every one of the seven days, and in which the congregation
presented itself soul and body to the Lord, upon the basis of a sin-offering, as

<- Previous First Next ->

[Link] (2 of 2) [13/08/2004 [Link] p.m.]

 Keil and Delitzsch Commentary on the Old Testament

<- Previous First Next ->

a living and holy sacrifice, to be more and more sanctified, transformed, and
perfected by the fire of His holy love (see my Archäol. i. p. 416).

Numbers 29:35-38

On the eighth day ye shall have a solemn assembly: ye shall do no servile work
therein:

The eighth day was to be azereth , a closing feast, and only belonged to the feast
of Tabernacles so far as the Sabbath rest and a holy meeting of the seventh feast-
day were transferred to it; whilst, so far as its sacrifices were concerned, it
resembled the seventh new moon's day and the day of atonement, and was thus
shown to be the octave or close of the second festal circle (see at Lev 23:36).

Numbers 29:39

These things ye shall do unto the LORD in your set feasts, beside your vows, and
your freewill offerings, for your burnt offerings, and for your meat offerings,
and for your drink offerings, and for your peace offerings.

The sacrifices already mentioned were to be presented to the Lord on the part of
the congregation, in addition to the burnt-offerings, meat-offerings, drink-
offerings, and peace-offerings which individuals or families might desire to offer
either spontaneously or in consequence of vows. On the vowing of burnt-offerings
and peace-offerings, see Num 15:3,8; Lev 22:18,21.

Numbers 29:40

And Moses told the children of Israel according to all that the LORD

[Link] (1 of 2) [13/08/2004 [Link] p.m.]

 Keil and Delitzsch Commentary on the Old Testament

commanded Moses.

V. 40 forms the conclusion of the list of sacrifices in ch. 28 and 29.

Instructions as to the Force of Vows. Ch. 30.

Numbers 30:1

<- Previous First Next ->

[Link] (2 of 2) [13/08/2004 [Link] p.m.]

 Keil and Delitzsch Commentary on the Old Testament

<- Previous First Next ->

Numbers 30:1

And Moses spake unto the heads of the tribes concerning the children of Israel,
saying, This is the thing which the LORD hath commanded.

The rules by which vows were to be legally regulated, so far as their objects and
their discharge were concerned, has been already laid down in Lev 27; but the
chapter before us contains instructions with reference to the force of vows and
renunciations. These are so far in place in connection with the general rules of
sacrifice, that vows related for the most part to the presentation of sacrifices; and
even vows of renunciation partook of the character of worship. The instructions in
question were addressed (v. 1) to "the heads of the tribes," because they entered
into the sphere of civil rights, namely, into that of family life.

Numbers 30:2

If a man vow a vow unto the LORD, or swear an oath to bind his soul with a
bond; he shall not break his word, he shall do according to all that proceedeth
out of his mouth.

At the head there stands the general rule, "If any one vow a vow to Jehovah, or
swear an oath, to bind his soul to abstinence, he shall not break his word; he shall
do according to all that has gone out of his mouth:" i.e., he shall keep or fulfil the
vow, and the promise of abstinence, in perfect accordance with his word. neder
(OT:5088) is a positive vow, or promise to give or sanctify any part of one's
property to the Lord. 'icaar (OT:632), from 'aacar (OT:631), to bind or fetter, the
negative vow, or vow of abstinence. `al-napªshow 'icaar 'ecor , to take an
abstinence upon his soul. In what such abstinence consisted is not explained,
because it was well understood from traditional customs; in all probability it

[Link] (1 of 2) [13/08/2004 [Link] p.m.]

 Keil and Delitzsch Commentary on the Old Testament

consisted chiefly in fasting and other similar abstinence from lawful things. The
Nazarite's vow, which is generally reckoned among the vows of abstinence, is
called neder in Num 6:2ff., not issar , because it consisted not merely in abstinence
from the fruit of the vine, but also in the positive act of permitting the hair to grow
freely in honour of the Lord. The expression "swear an oath" (v. 2; cf. v. 13) shows
that, as a rule, they bound themselves to abstinence by an oath. The inf. constr. ,
hishaaba` (OT:7650), is used here, as in other places, for the inf. abs. (cf. Ges.
§131, 4, note 2). yacheel (OT:2490), from chaalal (OT:2490), for yaacheel
(OT:2490), as in Ezek 39:7 (cf. Ges. §67, note 8), to desecrate (his word), i.e., to
leave it unfulfilled or break it.

Numbers 30:3-15

If a woman also vow a vow unto the LORD, and bind herself by a bond, being in
her father's house in her youth;

Vv. 3-15 contain the rules relating to positive and negative vows made by a
woman, and four different examples are given. The first case (vv. 3-5) is that of a
woman in her youth, while still unmarried, and living in her father's

<- Previous First Next ->

[Link] (2 of 2) [13/08/2004 [Link] p.m.]

 Keil and Delitzsch Commentary on the Old Testament

<- Previous First Next ->

house. If she made a vow of performance or abstinence, and her father heard of it
and remained silent, it was to stand, i.e., to remain in force. But if her father held
her back when he heard of it, i.e., forbade her fulfilling it, it was not to stand or
remain in force, and Jehovah would forgive her because of her father's refusal.
Obedience to a father stood higher than a self-imposed religious service. - The
second case (vv. 6-8) was that of a vow of performance or abstinence, made by a
woman before her marriage, and brought along with her ( `aaleyhaa (OT:5921),
"upon herself") into her marriage. In such a case the husband had to decide as to its
validity, in the same way as the father before her marriage.

In the day when he heard of it he could hold back his wife, i.e., dissolve her vow;
but if he did not do this at once, he could not hinder its fulfilment afterwards.
sªpaateyhaa (OT:8193) mibªTaa' (OT:4008), gossip of her lips, that which is
uttered thoughtlessly or without reflection (cf. Lev 5:4). This expression implies
that vows of abstinence were often made by unmarried women without thought or
reflection. - The third case (v. 9) was that of a vow made by a widow or divorced
woman. Such a vow had full force, because the woman was not dependent upon a
husband. - The fourth case (vv. 10-12) was that of a vow made by a wife in her
married state. Such a vow was to remain in force if her husband remained silent
when he heard of it, and did not restrain her. On the other hand, it was to have no
force if her husband dissolved it at once. After this there follows the general
statement (vv. 13-16), that a husband could establish or dissolve every vow of
performance or abstinence made by his wife. If, however, he remained silent "from
day to day," he confirmed it by his silence; and if afterwards he should declare it
void, he was to bear his wife's iniquity. `awonaah (OT:5771), the sin which the
wife would have had to bear if she had broken the vow of her own accord. This
consisted either in a sin-offering to expiate her sin (Lev 5:4ff.); or if this was
omitted, in the punishment which God suspended over the sin (Lev 5:1).

Numbers 30:16

[Link] (1 of 2) [13/08/2004 [Link] p.m.]

 Keil and Delitzsch Commentary on the Old Testament

These are the statutes, which the LORD commanded Moses, between a man and
his wife, between the father and his daughter, being yet in her youth in her
father's house.

v. 16, concluding formula.

War of Revenge against the Midianites. Ch. 31.

Numbers 31:1-2

And the LORD spake unto Moses, saying,

The Campaign. - After the people of Israel had been mustered as the army of
Jehovah, and their future relation to the Lord had been firmly established by the
order of sacrifice that was given to them immediately afterwards, the Lord
commanded Moses to carry out that hostility to the Midianites which had already
been commanded in Num 25:16-18. Moses was to revenge (i.e., to execute) the
revenge of the children of Israel upon the Midianites, and

<- Previous First Next ->

[Link] (2 of 2) [13/08/2004 [Link] p.m.]

 Keil and Delitzsch Commentary on the Old Testament

<- Previous First Next ->

then to be gathered to his people, i.e., to die, as had already been revealed to him
(Num 27:13). "The revenge of the children of Israel" was revenge for the
wickedness which the tribes of the Midianites who dwelt on the east of Moab (see
at Num 22:4) had practised upon the Israelites, by seducing them to the idolatrous
worship of Baal Peor. This revenge is called the "revenge of Jehovah" in v. 3,
because the seduction had violated the divinity and honour of Jehovah. The
daughters of Moab had also taken part in the seduction (Num 25:1-2); but they had
done so at the instigation of the Midianites (see p. 790), and not of their own
accord, and therefore the Midianites only were to atone for the wickedness.

Numbers 31:3-6

And Moses spake unto the people, saying, Arm some of yourselves unto the war,
and let them go against the Midianites, and avenge the LORD of Midian.

To carry out this revenge, Moses had 1000 men of each tribe delivered (
yimaacªruw (OT:4560), see at v. 16) from the families ( alaphim , see Num 1:16)
of the tribes, and equipped for war; and these he sent to the army (into the war)
along with Phinehas the son of Eleazar the high priest, who carried the holy
vessels, viz., the alarm-trumpets, in his hand. Phinehas was attached to the army,
not as the leader of the soldiers, but as the high priest with the holy trumpets (Num
10:9), because the war was a holy war of the congregation against the enemies of
themselves and their God. Phinehas had so distinguished himself by the zeal which
he had displayed against the idolaters (Num 25:7), that it was impossible to find
any other man in all the priesthood to attach to the army, who would equal him in
holy zeal, or be equally qualified to inspire the army with zeal for the holy conflict.
"The holy vessels" cannot mean the ark of the covenant on account of the plural,
which would be inapplicable to it; nor the Urim and Thummim, because Phinehas
was not yet high priest, and the expression kªleey (OT:3627) would also be
unsuitable to these. The allusion can only be to the trumpets mentioned

[Link] (1 of 2) [13/08/2004 [Link] p.m.]

 Keil and Delitzsch Commentary on the Old Testament

immediately afterwards, the wa before chatsotsªrowt (OT:2689) being the w explic.

, "and in fact." Phinehas took these in his hand, because the Lord had assigned
them to His congregation, to bring them into remembrance before Him in time of
war, and to ensure His aid (Num 10:9).

Numbers 31:7-10

And they warred against the Midianites, as the LORD commanded Moses; and
they slew all the males.

Of the campaign itself, the results are all that is recorded. No doubt it terminated
with a great battle, in which the Midianites were taken unawares and completely
routed. As it was a war of vengeance of Jehovah, the victors slew all the males, i.e.,
all the adult males, as the sequel shows, without quarter; and "upon those that were
slain," i.e., in addition to them, the five Midianitsh kings and Balaam, who first
advised the Midianites, according to v. 16, to tempt the Israelites to idolatry. The
five kings were chiefs of the larger or more powerful of the Midianitish tribes, as
Zur is expressly said to have been in Num 25:15. In Josh 13:21 they are called
"vassals of Sihon," because Sihon had subjugated them and made them tributary
when he first conquered the land. The women and children of the Midianites were
led away prisoners; and their cattle ( behemah , beasts of draft and burden, as in Ex
20:10), and their flocks, and their goods taken away as spoil. The towns in their
dwellings, and all their villages ( tiroth ,

<- Previous First Next ->

[Link] (2 of 2) [13/08/2004 [Link] p.m.]

 Keil and Delitzsch Commentary on the Old Testament

<- Previous First Next ->

tent-villages, as in Gen 25:16), were burnt down. The expression "towns in their
dwellings" leads to the conclusion that the towns were not the property of the
Midianites themselves, who were a nomad people, but that they originally
belonged in all probability to the Moabites, and had been taken possession of by
the Amorites under Sihon. This is confirmed by Josh 13:21, according to which
these five Midianitish vassals of Sihon dwelt in the land,
i.e., in the kingdom of Sihon. This also serves to explain why the conquest on their
country is not mentioned in the account before us, although it is stated in Joshua (
l.c. ), that it was allotted to the Reubenites with the kingdom of Sihon.

Numbers 31:11-12

And they took all the spoil, and all the prey, both of men and of beasts.

All this booty ( shalal , booty in goods), and all the prey in man and beast (
malkoach ), was brought by the conquerors to Moses and Eleazar and the
congregation, into the camp in the steppes of Moab. In v. 12, shªbiy (OT:3427)
applies to the women and children who were taken prisoners, malªqowach
(OT:4455) to the cattle taken as booty, and shaalaal (OT:7998) to the rest of the
prey.

Numbers 31:13-18

And Moses, and Eleazar the priest, and all the princes of the congregation, went
forth to meet them without the camp.

Treatment of the Prisoners. - When Moses went out to the front of the camp with
Eleazar and the princes of the congregation to meet the returning warriors, he was
angry with the commanders, because they had left all the women alive, since it was
[Link] (1 of 2) [13/08/2004 [Link] p.m.]
 Keil and Delitzsch Commentary on the Old Testament

they who had been the cause, at Balaam's instigation, of the falling away of the
Israelites from Jehovah to worship Peor; and he commanded all the male children
to be slain, and every woman who had lain with a man, and only the young girls
who had hitherto had no connection with a man to be left alive. hechayil
(OT:2428) pªquwdeey (OT:6485), lit., the appointed persons, i.e., the officers of
the army, who were then divided into princes (captains) over thousands and
hundreds. - "Which came from the battle," i.e., who had returned. The question in
v. 15, "Have ye left all the women alive?" is an expression of dissatisfaction, and
reproof for their having done this. limªcaar-ma`al ... haayuw (OT:1961), "they
have become to the Israelites to work unfaithfulness towards Jehovah," i.e., they
have induced them to commit an act of unfaithfulness towards Jehovah. The word
maacar (OT:4560), which only occurs in this chapter, viz., in vv. 5 and 16, appears
to be used in the sense of giving, delivering, and then, like naatan (OT:5414),
doing, making, effecting. On the fact itself, see Num 25:6ff. The object of the
command to put all the male children to death, was to exterminate the whole
nation, as it could not be perpetuated in the women. Of the female sex, all were to
be put to death who had known the lying with a man, and therefore might possibly
have been engaged in the licentious worship of Peor (Num 25:2), to preserve the
congregation from all contamination from that abominable idolatry.

<- Previous First Next ->

[Link] (2 of 2) [13/08/2004 [Link] p.m.]

 Keil and Delitzsch Commentary on the Old Testament

<- Previous First Next ->

Numbers 31:19-20

And do ye abide without the camp seven days: whosoever hath killed any person,
and whosoever hath touched any slain, purify both yourselves and your captives
on the third day, and on the seventh day.

Purification of the Warriors, the Prisoners, and the Booty. - Moses commanded
the men of war to remain for seven days outside the camp of the congregation, to
carry out upon the third and seventh day the legal purification of such persons and
things as had been rendered unclean through contact with dead bodies. Every one
who had slain a soul (person), or touched one who had been slain, was to be
purified, whether he were a warrior or a prisoner. And so also were all the clothes,
articles of leather, materials of goats' hair, and all wooden things.

Numbers 31:21-24

And Eleazar the priest said unto the men of war which went to the battle, This is
the ordinance of the law which the LORD commanded Moses;

To this end Eleazar, whose duty it was as high priest to see that the laws of
purification were properly observed, issued fuller instructions with reference to the
purification of the different articles, in accordance with the law in ch.
19. lamilªchaamaah (OT:4421) habaa'iym (OT:935), those who came to the war,
i.e., who went into the battle (see at Num 10:9). "The ordinance of the law:" as in
Num 19:2. The metal (gold, silver, copper, tin, lead), all that usually comes into the
fire, i.e., that will bear the fire, was to be drawn through the fire, that it might
become clean, and was then to be sprinkled with water of purification (Num 19:9);
but everything that would not bear the fire was to be drawn through water. - The
washing of clothes on the seventh day was according to the rule laid down in Num

[Link] (1 of 2) [13/08/2004 [Link] p.m.]

 Keil and Delitzsch Commentary on the Old Testament

19:19.

Numbers 31:25-30

And the LORD spake unto Moses, saying,

Distribution of the Booty. - God directed Moses, with Eleazar and the heads of
the fathers' houses ("fathers" for "fathers' houses:" see at Ex 6:14) of the
congregation, to take the whole of the booty in men and cattle, and divide it into
two halves: one for the men of war ( hamilªchaamaah (OT:4421) topªseey
(OT:8610), those who grasped at war, who engaged in war), the other for the
congregation, and to levy a tribute upon it ( mekec (OT:4371) = mikªcaah
(OT:4373), computatio , a certain amount: see Ex 12:4) for Jehovah. Of the half
that came to the warriors, one person and one head of cattle were to be handed over
to Eleazar the priest out of every 500 (i.e., one-fifth per cent.), as a heave-offering
for Jehovah; and of the other half that was set apart for the children of Israel, i.e.,
for the congregation, one out of every fifty (i.e., 2 per cent.) was to be taken for the
Levites. 'aachuz

<- Previous First Next ->

[Link] (2 of 2) [13/08/2004 [Link] p.m.]

 Keil and Delitzsch Commentary on the Old Testament

<- Previous First Next ->

(OT:270), laid hold of, i.e., snatched out of the whole number during the process of
counting; not seized or touched by the lot, as in 1 Chron 24:6, as there was no
reason for resorting to the lot in this instance.

The division of the booty into two equal halves, one of which was given to the
warriors, and the other to the congregation that had taken no part in the war, was
perfectly reasonable and just. As the 12,000 warriors had been chosen out of the
whole congregation to carry on the war on their behalf, the congregation itself
could properly lay claim to its share of the booty. But as the 12,000 had had all the
trouble, hardships, and dangers of the war, they could very properly reckon upon
some reward for their service; and this was granted them by their receiving quite as
much as the whole of the congregation which had taken no part in the war-in fact,
more, because the warriors only gave one-fifth per cent. of their share as a thank-
offering for the victory that had been granted them, whilst those who remained at
home had to give 2 per cent. of their share to Jehovah for the benefit of the priests
and Levites. The arrangement, however, was only made for this particular case,
and not as a law for all times, although it was a general rule that those who
remained at home received a share of the booty brought back by the warriors (cf.
Josh 22:8; 1 Sam 30:24-25; 2 Macc. 8:28, 30).

Numbers 31:31-47

And Moses and Eleazar the priest did as the LORD commanded Moses.

The booty, viz., "the rest of the booty, which the men of war had taken," i.e., all the
persons taken prisoners that had not been put to death, and all the cattle taken as
booty that had not been consumed during the march home, amounted to 675,000
head of small cattle, 72,000 oxen, 61,000 asses, and 32,000 maidens. Each half,
therefore, consisted of 337,500 head of small cattle, 36,000 oxen, 30,500 asses, and
16,000 maidens (vv. 36 and 43-46). Of the one half the priests received 675 head

[Link] (1 of 2) [13/08/2004 [Link] p.m.]

 Keil and Delitzsch Commentary on the Old Testament

of small cattle, 72 oxen, 61 asses, and 32 maidens for Jehovah; and these Moses
handed over to Eleazar, in all probability for the maintenance of the priests, in the
same manner as the tithes (Num 18:26-28, and Lev 27:30-33), so that they might
put the cattle into their own flocks (Num 35:3), and slay oxen or sheep as they
required them, whilst they sold the asses, and made slaves of the gifts; and not in
the character of a vow, in which case the clean animals would have had to be
sacrificed, and the unclean animals, as well as the human beings, to be redeemed
(Lev 27:2-13). Of the other half, the Levites received the fiftieth part (vv. 43-47),
that is to say, 6750 head of small cattle, 720 oxen, 610 asses, and 320 girls. The
wgw' machatsiyt (OT:4276) ("the half," etc.), in v. 42, is resumed in v. 47, and the
enumeration of the component parts of this half in
vv. 43-46 is to be regarded as parenthetical.

Numbers 31:48-54

And the officers which were over thousands of the host, the captains of
thousands, and captains of hundreds, came near unto Moses:

Sacred Oblations of the Officers. - When the officers reviewed the men of war
who were "in their hand," i.e., who had fought the battle under their command, and
found not a single man missing, they felt constrained to give a

<- Previous First Next ->

[Link] (2 of 2) [13/08/2004 [Link] p.m.]

 Keil and Delitzsch Commentary on the Old Testament

<- Previous First Next ->

practical expression to their gratitude for this miraculous preservation of the whole
of the men, by presenting a sacrificial gift to Jehovah; they therefore brought all the
golden articles that they had received as booty, and offered them to the Lord "for
the expiation of their souls" (see at Lev 1:4), namely, with the feeling that they
were not worthy of any such grace, and not "because they had done wrong in
failing to destroy all the enemies of Jehovah" ( Knobel ). This gift, which was
offered as a heave-offering for Jehovah, consisted of the following articles of gold:
'etsª`aadaah (OT:685), "arm-rings," according to 2 Sam 1:10 (LXX chelidoo'na ;
Suidas: chelido'nai kosmoi' peri' tou's brachio'nas kalou'ntai de' brachia'lia );
tsaamiyd (OT:6781), bands , generally armlets (Gen 24:22, etc.); Taba`at
(OT:2885), signet-rings; `aagiyl (OT:5694), hoops , - according to Ezek 16:12, ear-
rings; and kuwmaaz (OT:3558), gold balls (Ex 35:22). They amounted in all to
16,750 shekels; and the men of war had received their own booty in addition to
this. This gift, presented on the part of the officers, was brought into the tabernacle
"as a memorial of the children of Israel before Jehovah" (cf. Ex 30:16); that is to
say, it was placed in the treasury of the sanctuary.

The fact that the Israelites did not lose a single man in the battle, is certainly a
striking proof of the protection of God; but it is not so marvellous as to furnish any
good ground for calling in question the correctness of the narrative.

(Note: Rosenmüller has cited an example from Tacitus (Ann. xiii. 39), of the Romans having
slaughtered all the foe without losing a single man on the capture of a Parthian castle; and another from
Strabo (xvi. 1128), of a battle in which 1000 Arabs were slain, and only 2 Romans. And Hävernick
mentions a similar account from the life of Saladin in his Introduction (i. 2, p. 452).)

The Midianites were a nomad tribe, who lived by rearing flocks and herds, and
therefore were not a warlike people. Moreover, they were probably attacked quite
unawares, and being unprepared, were completely routed and cut down without
quarter. The quantity of booty brought home is also not so great as to appear
incredible. Judging from the 32,000 females who had never lain with a man, the
tribes governed by the five kings may have numbered about 130,000 or 150,000,
[Link] (1 of 2) [13/08/2004 [Link] p.m.]
 Keil and Delitzsch Commentary on the Old Testament

and therefore not have contained much more than 35,000 fighting men, who might
easily have been surprised by 12,000 brave warriors, and entirely destroyed. And
again, there is nothing in the statement that 675,000 sheep and goats, 72,000 oxen,
and 61,000 asses were taken as booty from these tribes, to astonish any one who
has formed correct notions of the wealth of nomad tribes in flocks and herds. The
only thing that could appear surprising is, that there are no camels mentioned.

But it is questionable, in the first place, whether the Midianites were in the habit of
rearing camels; and, in the second place, if they did possess them, it is still
questionable whether the Israelitish army took them away, and did not rather put to
death all that they found, as being of no value to the Israelites in their existing
circumstances. Lastly, the quantity of jewellery seized as booty is quite in harmony
with the well-known love of nomads, and even of barbarous tribes, for ornaments
of this kind; and the peculiar liking of the Midianites for such things is confirmed
by the account in Judg 8:26, according to which Gideon took as much as 1700
shekels in weight of golden rings from the Midianites alone, beside ornaments of
other kinds. If we take the golden shekel at 10 thalers (30 shillings: see p. 484), the
value of the ornaments taken by the officers under Moses would be about 167,500
thalers
(L.25,125). It is quite possible that the kings and other chiefs, together with their
wives, may have possessed as much as this.

Division of the Conquered Land beyond the Jordan among the Tribes
of Reuben, Gad, and Half-Manasseh. Ch. 32.

<- Previous First Next ->

[Link] (2 of 2) [13/08/2004 [Link] p.m.]

 Keil and Delitzsch Commentary on the Old Testament

<- Previous First Next ->

(Note: This chapter is also cut in pieces by Knobel: vv. 1, 2, 16-19, 24, 28-30, and 33-38, being
assigned to the Elohist; and the remainder, viz., vv. 3-5, 6-15, 20-23, 25-27, 31, 32, and 39-42, to the
Jehovist. But as the supposed Elohistic portions are fragmentary, inasmuch as it is assumed, for
example, in v. 19, that the tribes of Reuben and Gad had already asked for the land of the Jordan and
been promised it by Moses, whereas there is nothing of the kind stated in vv. 1 and 2, the Elohistic
account is said to have been handed down in a fragmentary state. The main ground for this violent
hypothesis is the fancy of the critic, that the tribes mentioned could not have been so shameless as to
wish to remain on the eastern side of the Jordan, and leave the conquest of Canaan to the other tribes,
and that the willingness to help their brethren to conquer Canaan which they afterwards express in vv.
16ff., is irreconcilable with their previous refusal to do this-arguments which need no refutation for an
unprejudiced reader of the Bible who is acquainted with the selfishness of the natural heart. The
arguments founded upon the language employed are also all weak. Because there are words in vv. 1
and 29, which the critics pronounce to be Jehovistic, they must proceed, both here and elsewhere, to
remove all that offends them with their critical scissors, in order that they may uphold the full force of
their dicta! )

Numbers 32:1-2

Now the children of Reuben and the children of Gad had a very great multitude
of cattle: and when they saw the land of Jazer, and the land of Gilead, that,
behold, the place was a place for cattle;

The Reubenites and Gadites, who had very large flocks and herds, petitioned
Moses, Eleazar, and the princes of the congregation, to give them the conquered
land of Gilead for a possession, as a land that was peculiarly adapted for flocks,
and not to make them pass over the Jordan. mª'od (OT:3966) `aatsuwm (OT:6099),
"very strong," is an apposition introduced at the close of the sentence to give
emphasis to the rab (OT:7227). The land which they wished for, they called the
"land of Jaëzer (see Num 21:32), and the land of Gilead." They put Jaëzer first,
probably because this district was especially rich in excellent pasture land. Gilead
was the land to the south and north of the Jabbok (see at Deut 3:10), the modern
provinces of Belka in the south between the Jabbok and the Arnon, and Jebel Ajlun
to the north of the Jabbok, as far as the Mandhur. Ancient Gilead still shows

[Link] (1 of 2) [13/08/2004 [Link] p.m.]

 Keil and Delitzsch Commentary on the Old Testament

numerous traces of great fertility even in its present desolation, covered over as it
is with hundreds of ruins of old towns and hamlets.

Belka is mountainous towards the north, but in the south as far as the Arnon it is
for the most part table-land; and in the mountains, as Buckingham says, "we find
on every hand a pleasant shade from fine oaks and wild pistachio-trees, whilst the
whole landscape has more of a European character. The pasturage in Belka is much
better than it is anywhere else throughout the whole of southern Syria, so that the
Bedouins say, 'You can find no country like Belka.' The oxen and sheep of this
district are considered the very best" (see v. Raumer , Pal. p. 82). The mountains of
Gilead on both sides of the Jabbok are covered for the most part with glorious
forests of oak. "Jebel Ajlun," says Robinson (Pal. App. 162), "presents the most
charming rural scenery that I have seen in Syria. A continued forest of noble trees,
chiefly the evergreen oak (Sindiân), covers a large part of it, while the ground
beneath is covered with luxuriant grass, which we found a foot or more in height,
and decked with a rich variety of flowers" (see v. Raumer, ut sup. ).

This also applies to the ancient Basan , which included the modern plains of
Jaulan and Hauran , that were also covered over with ruins of former towns and
hamlets. The plain of Hauran , though perfectly treeless, is for all that very fertile,
rich in corn, and covered in some places with such luxuriant grass that horses have
great difficulty in making their way through it; for which reason it is a favourite
resort of the Bedouins ( Burckhardt , p. 393). "The

<- Previous First Next ->

[Link] (2 of 2) [13/08/2004 [Link] p.m.]

 Keil and Delitzsch Commentary on the Old Testament

<- Previous First Next ->

whole of Hauran," says Ritter ( Erdkunde , xv. pp. 988, 989), "stretches out as a
splendid, boundless plain, between Hermon on the west, Jebel Hauran on the east,
and Jebel Ajlun to the south; but there is not a single river in which there is water
throughout the whole of the summer. It is covered, however, with a large number
of villages, every one of which has its cisterns, its ponds, or its birket; and these
are filled in the rainy season, and by the winter torrents from the snowy Jebel
Hauran. Wherever the soil, which is everywhere black, deep, dark brown, or ochre-
coloured, and remarkably fertile, is properly cultivated, and you find illimitable
corn-fields, and chiefly golden fields of wheat, which furnish Syria in all directions
with its principal food. By far the larger part of this plain, which was a luxuriant
garden in the time of the Romans, is now uncultivated, waste, and without
inhabitants, and therefore furnishes the Bedouins of the neighbourhood with the
desired paradise for themselves and their flocks."

On its western slope Jebel Hauran is covered with splendid forests of oak, and rich
in meadow land for flocks ( Burckhardt , pp. 152, 169, 170, 173, 358; Wetstein,
Reiseber. pp. 39ff. and 88). On the nature of the soil of Hauran , see at Deut 3:4.
The plain of Jaulan appears in the distance like the continuation of Hauran (
Robinson , App. 162); it has much bush-land in it, but the climate is not so healthy
as in Hauran ( Seetzen , i. pp. 353, 130,
131). "In general, Hauran, Jaulan, el Botthin, el Belka, and Ejlun, are the paradise
of nomads, and in all their wanderings eastwards they find no pasture like it" (
Seetzen , i. p. 364). maaqowm (OT:4725), a locality, or district. miqªneh mª'owm =
miqªneh (OT:4735) 'erets (OT:776) (v. 4), a district adapted for grazing.

Numbers 32:3-5

Ataroth, and Dibon, and Jazer, and Nimrah, and Heshbon, and Elealeh, and
Shebam, and Nebo, and Beon,

In v. 3 the country is more distinctly defined by the introduction of the names of a

[Link] (1 of 2) [13/08/2004 [Link] p.m.]

 Keil and Delitzsch Commentary on the Old Testament

number of important towns, whilst the clause "the country which the Lord smote
before the congregation of Israel," in which the defeat of Sihon is referred to,
describes it as one that was without a ruler, and therefore could easily be taken
possession of. For more minute remarks as to the towns themselves, see at vv. 34ff.
On the construction 'eet (OT:853) yutan (OT:5414), see at Gen 4:18. - The words,
"let us not go over the Jordan," may be understood as expressing nothing more
than the desire of the speakers not to receive their inheritance on the western side
of the Jordan, without their having any intention of withdrawing their help from the
other tribes in connection with the conquest of Canaan, according to their
subsequent declaration (vv. 16ff.); but they may also be understood as expressing a
wish to settle at once in the land to the east of the Jordan, and leave the other tribes
to conquer Canaan alone.

Moses understood them in the latter sense (vv. 6ff.), and it is probable that this was
their meaning, as, when Moses reproved them, the speakers did not reply that they
had not cherished the intention attributed to them, but simply restricted themselves
to the promise of co-operation in the conquest of Canaan. But even in this sense
their request did not manifest "a shamelessness that would hardly be historically
true" ( Knobel ). It may very well be explained from the opinion which they
cherished, and which is perfectly intelligible after the rapid and easy defeat of the
two mighty kings of the Amorites, Sihon and Og, that the remaining tribes were
quite strong enough to conquer the land of Canaan on the west of the Jordan. But
for all that, the request of the Reubenites and Gadites did indicate an utter want of
brotherly feeling, and complete indifference to the common interests of the whole
nation, so that they thoroughly deserved the reproof which they received from
Moses.

<- Previous First Next ->

[Link] (2 of 2) [13/08/2004 [Link] p.m.]

 Keil and Delitzsch Commentary on the Old Testament

<- Previous First Next ->

Numbers 32:6-13

And Moses said unto the children of Gad and to the children of Reuben, Shall
your brethren go to war, and shall ye sit here?

Moses first of all blames their want of brotherly feeling: "Shall your brethren go
into the war, and ye sit here?" He then calls their attention to the fact, that by their
disinclination they would take away the courage and inclination of the other tribes
to cross over the Jordan and conquer the land, and would bring the wrath of God
upon Israel even more than their fathers who were sent from Kadesh to spy out the
land, and who led away the heart of the people into rebellion through their
unfavourable account of the inhabitants of Canaan, and brought so severe a
judgment upon the congregation. min 'et-leeb heeniy' , to hold away the heart, i.e.,
render a person averse to anything. The Keri tªniy'uwn (OT:5106), as in v. 9, is
unquestionably to be preferred to the Kal tªnuw'uwn , in the Kethib of v. 7. - In vv.
8-13, Moses reminds them of the occurrences described in ch. 13 and
14. On the expression, "wholly followed Jehovah," cf. Num 14:24. The words, "He
drove them about in the desert," caused them to wander backwards and forwards in
it for forty years, point back to Num 14:33-35.

Numbers 32:14

And, behold, ye are risen up in your fathers' stead, an increase of sinful men, to
augment yet the fierce anger of the LORD toward Israel.

"Behold, ye rise up instead of your fathers," i.e., ye take their place, "an
increase ( tarªbuwt (OT:8635), from raabaah (OT:7227); equivalent to a brood) of
sinners, to augment yet the burning of the wrath of Jehovah against Israel." `al
(OT:5921) caapaah (OT:5595), to add to, or increase.

[Link] (1 of 2) [13/08/2004 [Link] p.m.]

 Keil and Delitzsch Commentary on the Old Testament

Numbers 32:15

For if ye turn away from after him, he will yet again leave them in the
wilderness; and ye shall destroy all this people.

"If ye draw back behind Him," i.e., resist the fulfilment of the will of God, to
bring Israel to Canaan, "He will leave it (Israel) still longer in the desert, and ye
prepare destruction for all this nation."

Numbers 32:16-19

<- Previous First Next ->

[Link] (2 of 2) [13/08/2004 [Link] p.m.]

 Keil and Delitzsch Commentary on the Old Testament

<- Previous First Next ->

And they came near unto him, and said, We will build sheepfolds here for our
cattle, and cities for our little ones:

The persons thus reproved came near to Moses, and replied, "We will build sheep-
folds here for our flocks, and towns for our children; but we will equip ourselves
hastily ( chushiym (OT:2366), part. pass. hasting) before the children of Israel, till
we bring them to their place" (i.e., to Canaan). tso'n (OT:6629) gidªrot (OT:1448),
folds or pens for flocks, that were built of stones piled up one upon another (1 Sam
24:4).

(Note: According to Wetstein ( Reiseber. p. 29), it is a regular custom with the nomads in Leja , to
surround every place, where they pitch their tents, with a Sira , i.e., with an enclosure of stones about
the height of a man, that the flocks may not be scattered in the night, and that they may know at once,
from the noise made by the falling of the smaller stones which are laid at the top, if a wolf attempts to
enter the enclosure during the night.)

By the building of towns, we are to understand the rebuilding and fortification of

them. Tap (OT:2945), the children, including the women, and such other
defenceless members of the family as were in need of protection (see at Ex 12:37).
When their families were secured in fortified towns against the inhabitants of the
land, the men who could bear arms would not return to their houses till the children
of Israel, i.e., the rest of the tribes, had all received their inheritance: for they did
not wish for an inheritance on the other side of Jordan and farther on, if ( kiy
(OT:3588)) their inheritance was assigned them on this side Jordan towards the
east. The application of the expression hayarªdeen (OT:3383) mee`eeber
(OT:5676) to the land on the east of the Jordan, as well as to that on the west,
points to a time when the Israelites had not yet obtained a firm footing in Canaan.
At that time the land to the west of the river could very naturally be spoken of as
"beyond the Jordan," from the subjective stand-point of the historian, who was
then on the east of the river; whereas, according to the objective and geographical
usage, the land "beyond Jordan" signifies the country to the east of the river. But in
order to prevent misunderstanding, in this particular instance the expression
[Link] (1 of 2) [13/08/2004 [Link] p.m.]
 Keil and Delitzsch Commentary on the Old Testament

hayarªdeen (OT:3383) `eeber (OT:5676) is defined more precisely as

mizªraachaah (OT:4217), "towards the east," when it is intended to apply to the
land on the east of the Jordan.

Numbers 32:20-27

And Moses said unto them, If ye will do this thing, if ye will go armed before the
LORD to war,

Upon this declaration Moses absolves them from all guilt, and promises them the
desired land for a possession, on condition that they fulfil their promise; but he
reminds them again of the sin that they will commit, and will have to atone for, if
their promise is not fulfilled, and closes with the admonition to build towns for
their families and pens for their flocks, and to do what they have promised. Upon
this they promise again (vv. 25-27), through their spokesman (as the singular
wayo'mer (OT:559) in v. 25, and the suffix in 'adoniy (OT:113) in v. 27, clearly
show), that they will fulfil his command. The use of the expression "before
Jehovah," in the words, "go armed before Jehovah to war," in v. 20 and 21, may be
explained from the fact, that in the war which they waged at the command of their
God, the Israelites were the army of Jehovah, with Jehovah in the midst. Hence the
ark of the covenant was taken into the war, as the vehicle and substratum of the
presence of Jehovah; whereas it remained behind in the camp, when the people
wanted to press forward into Canaan of their own accord (Num 14:44). But

<- Previous First Next ->

[Link] (2 of 2) [13/08/2004 [Link] p.m.]

 Keil and Delitzsch Commentary on the Old Testament

<- Previous First Next ->

if this is the meaning of the expression "before Jehovah," we may easily

understand why the Reubenites and Gadites do not make use of it in v. 17, namely,
because they only promise to go equipped "before the children of Israel,"
i.e., to help their brethren to conquer Canaan. In v. 32 they also adopt the
expression, after hearing it from the mouth of Moses (v. 20).

(Note: This completely sets aside the supposed discrepancy which Knobel adduces in support of his
fragmentary hypothesis, viz., that the Elohist writes "before Israel" in vv. 17 and 29, when the Jehovist
would write "before Jehovah," - a statement which is not even correct; since we find "before Jehovah"
in v. 29, which Knobel is obliged to erase from the text in order to establish his assertion.) nªqiyiym
(OT:5355), innocent, "free from guilt before Jehovah and before Israel." By drawing back from
participation in the war against the Canaanites, they would not only sin against Jehovah, who had
promised Canaan to all Israel, and commanded them to take it, but also against Israel itself, i.e.,
against the rest of the tribes, as is more fully stated in vv. 7-15. In v. 22b, "before Jehovah" signifies
according to the judgment of Jehovah, with divine approval. chaTa'tªkem (OT:2403) uwdª`uw
(OT:3045), "ye will know your sin," which will overtake ( maatsaa' (OT:4672)) or smite you, i.e., ye
will have to make atonement for them.

Numbers 32:28-30

So concerning them Moses commanded Eleazar the priest, and Joshua the son
of Nun, and the chief fathers of the tribes of the children of Israel:

Moses thereupon commanded Eleazar, Joshua, and the heads of the tribes of Israel,
i.e., the persons entrusted in Num 34:17ff. with the division of the land of Canaan,
to give the Gadites and Reubenites the land of Gilead for a possession, after the
conquest of Canaan, if they should go along with them across the Jordan equipped
for battle. But if they should not do this, they were to be made possessors (i.e., to
be settled; no'chaz (OT:270) in a passive sense, whereas in Gen 34:10; 47:27, it is
reflective, to fix oneself firmly, to settle) in the land of Canaan along with the other
tribes. In the latter case, therefore, they were not only to receive no possession in
[Link] (1 of 2) [13/08/2004 [Link] p.m.]
 Keil and Delitzsch Commentary on the Old Testament

the land to the east of the Jordan, but were to be compelled to go over the Jordan
with their wives and children, and to receive an inheritance there for the purpose of
preventing a schism of the nation.

Numbers 32:31-32

And the children of Gad and the children of Reuben answered, saying, As the
LORD hath said unto thy servants, so will we do.

The Gadites and Reubenites repeated their promise once more (v. 25), and added
still further (v. 32): "We will pass over armed before Jehovah into the land of
Canaan, and let our inheritance be with us (i.e., remain to us) beyond the
Jordan."

<- Previous First Next ->

[Link] (2 of 2) [13/08/2004 [Link] p.m.]

 Keil and Delitzsch Commentary on the Old Testament

<- Previous First Next ->

Numbers 32:33

And Moses gave unto them, even to the children of Gad, and to the children of
Reuben, and unto half the tribe of Manasseh the son of Joseph, the kingdom of
Sihon king of the Amorites, and the kingdom of Og king of Bashan, the land,
with the cities thereof in the coasts, even the cities of the country round about.

Moses then gave to the sons of Gad and Reuben, and the half-tribe of Manasseh,
the kingdom of Sihon king of the Amorites, and Og king of Bashan, namely, "the
land according to its towns, in (its) districts , (namely) the towns of the land round
about," i.e., the whole of the land with its towns and the districts belonging to
them, or surrounding the towns. It appears strange that the half-tribe of Manasseh
is included here for the first time at the close of the negotiations, whereas it is not
mentioned at all in connection with the negotiations themselves. This striking fact
may easily be explained, however, on the supposition that it was by the two tribes
of Reuben and Gad alone that the request was made for the land of Gilead as a
possession; but that when Moses granted this request, he did not overlook the fact,
that some of the families of Manasseh had conquered various portions of Gilead
and Bashan (v. 39), and therefore gave these families, at the same time, the districts
which they had conquered, for their inheritance, that the whole of the conquered
land might be distributed at once. As O. v. Gerlach observes, "the participation of
this half-tribe in the possession is accounted for in v. 39." Moses restricted himself,
however, to a general conveyance of the land that had been taken on the east of the
Jordan to these two and a half tribes for their inheritance, without sharing it
amongst them, or fixing the boundaries of the territory of each particular tribe.
That was left to the representatives of the nation mentioned in v. 28, and was
probably not carried out till the return of the fighting men belonging to these tribes,
who went with the others over the Jordan. In the verses which follow, we find only
those towns mentioned which were fortified by the tribes of Gad and Reuben, and
in which they constructed sheep-folds (vv. 34-38), and the districts which the
families of Manasseh had taken and received as their possession (vv. 39-42).

[Link] (1 of 2) [13/08/2004 [Link] p.m.]

 Keil and Delitzsch Commentary on the Old Testament

Numbers 32:34-36

And the children of Gad built Dibon, and Ataroth, and Aroer,

The Gadites built, i.e., restored and fortified, the following places. Dibon , also
called Dibon Gad, an hour's journey to the north of the central Arnon (see p. 752).
Ataroth , probably preserved in the extensive ruins of Attarus , on Jebel Attarus,
between el Körriath (Kureyat) and Makur, i.e., Machaerus (see Seetzen , ii. p. 342).
Aroer , not the Aroer before Rabbah, which was allotted to the Gadites (Josh
13:25), as v. Raumer supposes; but the Aroer of Reuben in the centre of the valley
of the Arnon (Josh 12:2; 13:9,16), which is still to be seen in the ruins of Araayr ,
on the edge of the lofty rocky wall which bounds the Modjeb ( Burckhardt , p.
633). Atroth Shophan: only mentioned here; situation unknown. Jaezer: probably
to be sought for in the ruins of es Szir , to the west of Ammän (see at Num 21:32).
Jogbehah: only mentioned again in Judg 8:11, and preserved in the ruins of
Jebeiha , about two hours to the north-west of Ammän ( Burckhardt , p. 618;
Robinson , App. p. 168).

Beth-nimrah , contracted into Nimrah (v. 3), according to Josh 13:27, in the valley
of the Jordan, and according to the Onomast. ( s. v. Beethnabra'n ) Beth-amnaram
, five Roman miles to the north of Libias ( Bethharam ), now

<- Previous First Next ->

[Link] (2 of 2) [13/08/2004 [Link] p.m.]

 Keil and Delitzsch Commentary on the Old Testament

<- Previous First Next ->

to be seen in the ruins of Nimrein or Nemrin , where the Wady Shaib enters the
Jordan ( Burckhardt , pp. 609, 661; Robinson , ii. p. 279), in a site abounding in
water and pasturage ( Seetzen , ii. pp. 318, 716). Beth-haran , or Beth-haram (Josh
13:27): Beth-ramphtha , according to Josephus , Ant. 18:2, 1, which was called
Julias , in honour of the wife of Augustus. According to the Onomast. it was called
Beth-Ramtha by the Syrians ( ramªtaa' beeyt , the form of the Aramaean stat.
emphat. ), and was named Livias by Herod Antipas, in honour of Livia , the wife of
Augustus. It has been preserved in the ruins of Rameh , not far from the mouth of
the Wady Hesbân ( Burckhardt , p. 661, and Robinson , ii. 305). The words wgw'
mibªtsaar (OT:4014) `aareey (OT:5892) in v. 36 are governed by wayibªnuw
(OT:1129) in v. 34: "they built them as fortified cities and folds for flocks," i.e.,
they fortified them, and built folds in them.

Numbers 32:37-38

And the children of Reuben built Heshbon, and Elealeh, and Kirjathaim,

The Reubenites built Heshbon , the capital of king Sihon (see Num 21:16), which
was allotted to the tribe of Reuben (Josh 13:17), but relinquished to the Gadites,
because it was situated upon the border of their territory, and given up by them to
the Levites (Josh 21:39; 1 Chron 6:66). It stood almost in the centre between the
Arnon and Jabbok, opposite to Jericho, and, according to the Onomast. , twenty
Roman miles from the Jordan, where the ruins of a large town of about a mile in
circumference are still to be seen, with deep bricked wells, and a large reservoir,
bearing the ancient name of Hesban or Hüsban ( Seetzen; Burckhardt , p. 623;
Robinson , Pal. ii. 278; cf. v. Raumer , Pal. p. 262; and Ritter's Erdkunde , xv. p.
1176). - Elealeh: half-an-hour's journey to the north-east of Heshbon, now called el
Aal , i.e., the height, upon the top of a hill, from which you can see the whole of
southern Belka; it is now in ruins with many cisterns, pieces of wall, and
foundations of houses ( Burckhardt , p.
523). - Kirjathaim , probably to the south-west of Medeba, where the ruins of el

[Link] (1 of 2) [13/08/2004 [Link] p.m.]

 Keil and Delitzsch Commentary on the Old Testament

Teym are not to be found (see at Gen 14:5).

Nebo , on Mount Nebo (see at Num 27:12). The Onomast. places the town eight
Roman miles to the south of Heshbon, whilst the mountain is six Roman miles to
the west of that town. Baal-meon , called Beon in v. 3, Beth-meon in Jer 48:23, and
more fully Beth-baal-meon in Josh 13:17, is probably to be found, not in the ruins
of Maein discovered by Seetzen and Legh , an hour's journey to the south-west of
Tueme ( Teim ), and the same distance to the north of Habbis , on the north-east of
Jebel Attarus, and nine Roman miles to the south of Heshbon, as most of the
modern commentators from Rosenmüller to Knobel suppose; but in the ruins of
Myun , mentioned by Burckhardt (p. 624), three-quarters of an hour to the south-
east of Heshbon, where we find it marked upon Kiepert's and Van de Velde's maps.

(Note: Although Baal-meon is unquestionably identified with Maein in the Onom. (see v. Raumer ,
Pal. p. 259), 1 Chron 5:8 is decidedly at variance with this. It is stated there that "Bela dwelt in Aroer ,
and even unto Nebo and Baal-meon," a statement which places Baal-meon in the neighbourhood of
Nebo , like the passage before us, and is irreconcilable with the supposition that it was identical with
Maein in the neighbourhood of Attarus. In the case of Seetzen , however, the identification of Maein
with Baal-meon is connected with the supposition, which is now generally regarded as erroneous,
namely, that Nebo is the same as the Jebel Attarus. (See, on the other hand, Hengstenberg , Balaam;
and Ritter's Erdkunde , xv. pp. 1187ff.))

Shibmah (v. 3, Shebam ), which was only 500 paces from Heshbon, according to
Jerome (on Isa 14:8), has

<- Previous First Next ->

[Link] (2 of 2) [13/08/2004 [Link] p.m.]

 Keil and Delitzsch Commentary on the Old Testament

<- Previous First Next ->

apparently disappeared, without leaving a trace behind.

(Note: The difference in the forms Shibmah, Baal-meon (v. 38), and Beth-nimrah (v. 36), instead of
Shebam, Beon , and Nimrah (v. 3), is rendered useless as a proof that v. 3 is Jehovistic, and vv. 36-38
Elohistic, from the simple fact that Baal-meon itself is a contraction of Beth-baal-meon (Josh 13:17).
If the Elohist could write this name fully in one place and abbreviated in another, he could just as well
contract it still further, and by exchanging the labials call it Beon; and so also he could no doubt omit
the Beth in the case of Nimrah , and use the masculine form Shebam in the place of Shibmah. The
contraction of the names in v. 3 is especially connected with the fact, that diplomatic exactness was
not required for an historical account, but that the abbreviated forms in common use were quite
sufficient.)

Thus all the places built by the Reubenites were but a short distance from Heshbon,
and surrounded this capita; whereas those built by the Gadites were some of them
to the south of it, on the Arnon, and others to the north, towards Rabbath-Ammon.
It is perfectly obvious from this, that the restoration of these towns took place
before the distribution of the land among these tribes, without any regard to their
possession afterwards. In the distribution, therefore, the southernmost of the towns
built by the Gadites, viz., Aroer, Dibon, and Ataroth, fell to the tribe of Reuben;
and Heshbon, which was built by the Reubenites, fell to the tribe of Gad. The
words sheem (OT:8034) muwcabot (OT:4142), "changed of name," are governed
by baanuw (OT:1129): "they built the towns with an alteration of their names,"
mutatis nominibus (for caabab (OT:5437), in the sense of changing, see Zech
14:10). There is not sufficient ground for altering the text, sheem (OT:8034) into
shuwr (OT:7791) ( Knobel ), according to the perikukloome'nas (NT:4033) of the
LXX, or the periteteuchisme'nas of Symmachus. The Masoretic text is to be found
not only in the Chaldee, the Syriac, the Vulgate, and the Saadic versions, but also
in the Samaritan. The expression itself, too, cannot be justly described as
"awkward," nor is it a valid objection that the naming is mentioned afterwards; for
altering the name of a town and giving it a new name are not tautological. The
insertion of the words, "their names being changed," before Shibmah, is an
indication that the latter place did not receive any other name. Moreover, the new
names which the builders gave to these towns did not continue in use long, but
[Link] (1 of 2) [13/08/2004 [Link] p.m.]
 Keil and Delitzsch Commentary on the Old Testament

were soon pressed out by the old ones again. "And they called by names the names
of the towns:" this is a roundabout way of saying, they called the towns by (other,
or new) names: cf. 1 Chron 6:50.

Numbers 32:39-40

And the children of Machir the son of Manasseh went to Gilead, and took it, and
dispossessed the Amorite which was in it.

Moses gave the Manassites the land which was conquered by them; in fact, the
whole of the kingdom of Bashan , including not only the province of Bashan , but
the northern half of Gilead (see at Num 21:33-34). Of this the sons of Machir
received Gilead, the modern Jebel Ajlun , between the Jabbok ( Zerka ) and the
Mandhur (Hieromax, Jarmuk ), because they had taken it and driven out the
Amorites and destroyed them (see Deut 3:13). The imperfects in v. 39 are to be
understood in the sense of pluperfects, the different parts being linked together by
w consec. according to the simple style of the Semitic historical writings explained
in the note on Gen 2:19, and the leading thought being preceded by the clauses
which explain it, instead of their being logically subordinated to it. "The sons of
Machir went to Gilead and took it...and Moses gave," etc., instead of "Moses gave
Gilead to the sons of Machir, who had gone thither and taken it...." The words
baah (OT:871a ) wayeesheb (OT:3427),
"Machir dwelt therein (in Gilead)," do not point to a later period than the time of
Moses, but simply state that the

<- Previous First Next ->

[Link] (2 of 2) [13/08/2004 [Link] p.m.]

 Keil and Delitzsch Commentary on the Old Testament

<- Previous First Next ->

Machirites took possession of Gilead. As soon as Moses had given them the
conquered land for their possession, they no doubt brought their families, like the
Gadites and Reubenites, and settled them in fortified towns, that they might dwell
there in safety, whilst the fighting men helped the other tribes to conquer Canaan.
yaashab (OT:3427) signifies not merely "to dwell," but literally to place oneself, or
settle down (e.g., Gen 36:8, etc.), and is even applied to the temporary sojourn of
the Israelites in particular encampments (Num 20:1). - Machir (v. 40): for the sons
of Machir, or Machirites (ch. 26:29).

But as Gilead does not mean the whole of the land with this name, but only the
northern half, so the sons of Machir are not the whole of his posterity, but simply
those who formed the family of Machirites which bore its father's name (Num
26:29), i.e., the seven fathers' houses or divisions of the family, the heads of which
are named in 1 Chron 5:24. The other descendants of Machir through Gilead, who
formed the six families of Gilead mentioned in Num 26:29-33, and Josh 17:2,
received their inheritance in Canaan proper (Josh 17).

Numbers 32:41

And Jair the son of Manasseh went and took the small towns thereof, and called
them Havothjair.

The family of Manasseh named after Machir included "Jair the son (i.e.,
descendant) of Manasseh." Jair, that is to say, was the grandson of a daughter of
Machir the son of Manasseh, and therefore a great-grandson of Manasseh on the
mother's side. His father Segub was the son of Hezron of the tribe of Judah, who
had married a daughter of Manasseh (1 Chron 2:21-22); so that Jair, or rather
Segub, had gone over with his descendants into the maternal tribe, contrary to the
ordinary rule, and probably because Machir had portioned his daughter with a rich
dowry like an heiress. Jair took possession of the whole of the province of Argob

[Link] (1 of 2) [13/08/2004 [Link] p.m.]

 Keil and Delitzsch Commentary on the Old Testament

in Bashan, i.e., in the plain of Jaulan and Hauran (Deut 3:4 and 14), and gave the
conquered towns the name of Havvoth Jair , i.e., Jair's-lives (see at Deut 3:14).

Numbers 32:42

And Nobah went and took Kenath, and the villages thereof, and called it Nobah,
after his own name.

Nobah , whose family is never referred to, but who probably belonged, like Jair, to
one of the families of Machirites, took the town of Kenath and its daughters, i.e.,
the smaller towns dependent upon it (see Num 21:25), and gave it his own name
Nobah. The name has not been preserved, and is not to be sought, as Kurtz
supposes, in the village of Nowa ( Newe ), in Jotan, which is mentioned by
Burckhardt (p. 443), and was once a town of half an hour's journey in
circumference. For Kenath , which is only mentioned again in 1 Chron 2:23 as
having been taken from the Israelites by Gesur and Aram, is Ca'natha , which
Josephus ( de bell. Jud. i. 19, 2), and Ptolemy speak of as belonging to Coelesyria,
and Pliny (h. n. 5, 16) to Decapolis, and which was situated, according to Jerome ,
"in the region of Trachonitis, near to Bostra." The ruins are very extensive even
now, being no less than 2 1/2 or 3 miles in circumference, and containing
magnificent remains of palaces from the times of Trajan and Hadrian. It is on the
western slope of Jebel Hauran, and is only inhabited by a few families of Druses.
The present

<- Previous First Next ->

[Link] (2 of 2) [13/08/2004 [Link] p.m.]

 Keil and Delitzsch Commentary on the Old Testament

<- Previous First Next ->

name is Kanuat. (For description, see Seetzen , i. pp. 78ff.; Burckhardt , pp. 157ff.;
cf. Ritter, Erdk. )

List of Israel's Encampments. Ch. 33:1-49.

Numbers 33:1-49

These are the journeys of the children of Israel, which went forth out of the land
of Egypt with their armies under the hand of Moses and Aaron.

As the Israelites had ended their wanderings through the desert, when they arrived
in the steppes of Moab by the Jordan opposite to Jericho (Num 22:1), and as they
began to take possession when the conquered land beyond Jordan was portioned
out (ch. 32), the history of the desert wandering closes with a list of the stations
which they had left behind them. This list was written out by Moses "at the
command of Jehovah" (v. 2), as a permanent memorial for after ages, as every
station which Israel left behind on the journey from Egypt to Canaan "through the
great and terrible desert," was a memorial of the grace and faithfulness with which
the Lord led His people safely "in the desert land and in the waste howling
wilderness, and kept him as the apple of His eye, as an eagle fluttereth over her
young, spreadeth abroad her wings, taketh them, beareth them on her wings" (Ex
19:4; Deut 32:10ff.).

Verse 1-15. The first and second verses form the heading: "These are the marches
of the children of Israel, which they marched out," i.e., the marches which they
made from one place to another, on going out of Egypt. maca` (OT:4550) does not
mean a station, but the breaking up of a camp, and then a train, or march (see at Ex
12:37, and Gen 13:3). lªtsibª'otaam (OT:6635) (see Ex 7:4). bªyaad (OT:3027),
under the guidance, as in Num 4:28, and Ex 38:21. lªmacª`eeyhem (OT:4550)
mowtsaa'eeyhem (OT:4161), "their goings out (properly, their places of departure)

[Link] (1 of 2) [13/08/2004 [Link] p.m.]

 Keil and Delitzsch Commentary on the Old Testament

according to their marches," is really equivalent to the clause which follows:

"their marches according to their places of departure." The march of the people
is not described by the stations, or places of encampment, but by the particular
spots from which they set out. Hence the constant repetition of the word wayicª`uw
(OT:5265), "and they broke up." In vv. 3-5, the departure is described according to
Ex 12:17,37-41. On the judgments of Jehovah upon the gods of Egypt, see at Ex
12:12. "With an high hand:" as in Ex 14:8. - The places of encampment from
Succoth to the desert of Sinai (vv. 5-15) agree with those in the historical account,
except that the stations at the Red Sea (v. 10) and those at Dophkah and Alush (vv.
13 and 14) are passed over there. For Raemses , see at Ex 12:37. Succoth and
Etham (Ex 13:20). Pihahiroth (Ex 14:2). "The wilderness" (v. 8) is the desert of
Shur , according to Ex 15:22. Marah , see Ex 15:23. Elim (Ex 15:27). For the Red
Sea and the wilderness of Sin , see Ex 16:1. For Dophkah, Alush , and Rephidim ,
see Ex 17:1; and for the wilderness of Sinai , Ex 19:2.

Verse 16-35. In vv. 16-36 there follow twenty-one names of places where the
Israelites encamped from the time that they left the wilderness of Sinai till they
encamped in the wilderness of Zin , i.e., Kadesh. The description of the latter as
"the wilderness of Zin, which is Kadesh," which agrees almost word for word with
Num 20:1, and still more the agreement of the places mentioned in vv. 37-49, as
the encampments of Israel after leaving Kadesh till their arrival in the steppes of
Moab, with the march of the people in the fortieth year as described in Num 20:22-
22:1, put it beyond all doubt that the encampment in the wilderness of Zin, i.e.,
Kadesh (v. 36), is to be understood as referring to the second arrival in Kadesh
after the expiration of the thirty-eight years of wandering in the desert to which the
congregation had been condemned. Consequently the twenty-one names in vv. 16-
36

<- Previous First Next ->

[Link] (2 of 2) [13/08/2004 [Link] p.m.]

 Keil and Delitzsch Commentary on the Old Testament

<- Previous First Next ->

contain not only the places of encampment at which the Israelites encamped in the
second year of their march from Sinai to the desert of Paran at Kadesh, whence the
spies were despatched into Canaan, but also those in which they encamped for a
longer period during the thirty-eight years of punishment in the wilderness.

This view is still further confirmed by the fact that the two first of the stations
named after the departure from the wilderness of Sinai, viz., Kibroth-hattaavah and
Hazeroth , agree with those named in the historical account in Num 11:34 and 35.
Now if, according to ch. 12:16, when the people left Hazeroth , they encamped in
the desert of Paran , and despatched the spies thence out of the desert of Zin (Num
13:21), who returned to the congregation after forty days "into the desert of Paran
to Kadesh" (Num 13:26), it is as natural as it well can be to seek for this place of
encampment in the desert of Paran or Zin at Kadesh under the name of Rithmah ,
which follows Hazeroth in the present list (v. 18). This natural supposition reaches
the highest degree of probability, from the fact that, in the historical account, the
place of encampment, from which the sending out of the spies took place, is
described in so indefinite a manner as the "desert of Paran," since this name does
not belong to a small desert, just capable of holding the camp of the Israelites, but
embraces the whole of the large desert plateau which stretches from the central
mountains of Horeb in the south to the mountains of the Amorites, which really
form part of Canaan, and contains no less than 400 (? 10,000 English) square miles
(see pp. 688, 689).

In this desert the Israelites could only pitch their camp in one particular spot, which
is called Rithmah in the list before us; whereas in the historical account the passage
is described, according to what the Israelites performed and experienced in this
encampment, as near to the southern border of Canaan, and is thus pointed out with
sufficient clearness for the purpose of the historical account. To this we may add
the coincidence of the name Rithmah with the Wady Abu Retemat , which is not
very far to the south of Kadesh, "a wide plain with shrubs and retem," i.e., broom (
Robinson , i. p. 279), in the neighbourhood of which, and behind the chalk

[Link] (1 of 2) [13/08/2004 [Link] p.m.]

 Keil and Delitzsch Commentary on the Old Testament

formation which bounds it towards the east, there is a copious spring of sweet
water called Ain el Kudeirât. This spot was well adapted for a place of
encampment for Israel, which was so numerous that it might easily stretch into the
desert of Zin, and as far as Kadesh.

The seventeen places of encampment, therefore, that are mentioned in vv. 19-36
between Rithmah and Kadesh , are the places at which Israel set up in the desert,
from their return from Kadesh into the "desert of the way to the Red Sea" (Num
14:25), till the reassembling of the whole congregation in the desert of Zin at
Kadesh (Num 20:1).

(Note: The different hypotheses for reducing the journey of the Israelites to a few years, have been
refuted by Kurtz (iii. §41) in the most conclusive manner possible, and in some respects more
elaborately than was actually necessary. Nevertheless Knobel has made a fresh attempt, in the interest
of his fragmentary hypothesis, to explain the twenty-one places of encampment given in vv. 16-37 as
twenty-one marches made by Israel from Sinai till their first arrival at Kadesh. As the whole distance
from Sinai to Kadesh by the straight road through the desert consists of only an eleven days' journey,
Knobel endeavours to bring his twenty-one marches into harmony with this statement, by reckoning
only five hours to each march, and postulating a few detours in addition, in which the people occupied
about a hundred hours or more. The objection which might be raised to this, namely, that the Israelites
made much longer marches than these on their way from Egypt to Sinai, he tries to set aside by
supposing that the Israelites left their flocks behind them in Egypt, and procured fresh ones from the
Bedouins at Sinai. But this assertion is so arbitrary and baseless an idea, that it is not worth while to
waste a single word upon the subject (see Ex 12:38). The reduction of the places of encampment to
simple marches is proved to be at variance with the text by the express statement in Num 10:33, that
when the Israelites left the wilderness of Sinai they went a three days' journey, until the cloud showed
them a resting-place. For it is perfectly evydent from this, that the march from one place to another
cannot be understood without further ground as being simply a day's march of five hours.)

Of all the seventeen places not a single one is known, or can be pointed out with
certainty, except Eziongeber.

<- Previous First Next ->

[Link] (2 of 2) [13/08/2004 [Link] p.m.]

 Keil and Delitzsch Commentary on the Old Testament

<- Previous First Next ->

Of all the seventeen places not a single one is known, or can be pointed out with
certainty, except Eziongeber. Only the four mentioned in vv. 30-33, Moseroth,
Bene-jaakan, Hor-hagidgad , and Jotbathah , are referred to again, viz., in Deut
10:6-7, where Moses refers to the divine protection enjoyed by the Israelites in
their wandering in the desert, in these words: "And the children of Israel took their
journey from Beeroth-bene-Jaakan to Mosera; there Aaron died, and there he was
buried.... From thence they journeyed unto Gudgodah , and from
Gudgodah to Jotbathah , a land of water-brooks." Of the identity of the places
mentioned in the two passages there can be no doubt whatever. Bene Jaakan is
simply an abbreviation of Beeroth-bene-Jaakan , wells of the children of Jaakan.
Now if the children of Jaakan were the same as the Horite family of Kanan
mentioned in Gen 36:27 - and the reading ya`aqaan (OT:3292) for wa`aqaan in 1
Chron 1:42 seems to favour this-the wells of Jaakan would have to be sought for
on the mountains that bound the Arabah on either the east or west.

Gudgodah is only a slightly altered and abbreviated form of Hor-hagidgad , the

cave of Gidgad or Gudgodah; and lastly, Moseroth is simply the plural form of
Mosera. But notwithstanding the identity of these four places, the two passages
relate to different journeys. Deut 10:6 and 7 refers to the march in the fortieth year,
when the Israelites went from Kadesh through the Wady Murreh into the Arabah to
Mount Hor , and encamped in the Arabah first of all at the wells of the children,
and then at Mosera , where Aaron died upon Mount Hor , which was in the
neighbourhood, and whence they travelled still farther southwards to Gudgodah
and Jotbathah. In the historical account in ch. 20 and 21 the three places of
encampment, Bene-jaakan, Gudgodah , and Jotbathah , are not mentioned,
because nothing worthy of note occurred there. Gudgodah was perhaps the place of
encampment mentioned in Num 21:4, the name of which is not given, where the
people were punished with fiery serpents; and Jotbathah is probably to be placed
before Zalmonah (v. 41).

The clause, "a land of water-brooks" (Deut 10:7), points to a spot in or near the
[Link] (1 of 3) [13/08/2004 [Link] p.m.]
 Keil and Delitzsch Commentary on the Old Testament

southern part of the Arabah, where some wady, or valley with a stream flowing
through it, opened into the Arabah from either the eastern or western mountains,
and formed a green oasis through its copious supply of water in the midst of the
arid steppe. But the Israelites had encamped at the very same places once before,
namely, during their thirty-seven years of wandering, in which the people, after
returning from Kadesh to the Red Sea through the centre of the great desert of et
Tih , after wandering about for some time in the broad desert plateau, went through
the Wady el Jerafeh into the Arabah as far as the eastern border of it on the slopes
of Mount Hor , and there encamped at Mosera ( Moseroth ) somewhere near Ain et
Taiyibeh (on Robinson's map), and then crossed over to Bene-jaakan , which was
probably on the western border of the Arabah, somewhere near Ain el Ghamr (
Robinson ), and then turning southwards passed along the Wady el Jeib by Hor-
gidgad ( Gudgodah ), Jotbathah , and Abronah to Eziongeber on the Red Sea; for
there can be no doubt whatever that the Eziongeber in vv. 35, 36, and that in Deut
2:8, are one and the same town, viz., the well-known port at the northern extremity
of the Elanitic Gulf, where the Israelites in the time of Solomon and Jehoshaphat
built a fleet to sail to Ophir (1 Kings 9:26; 22:49). It was not far from Elath (i.e.,
Akaba ), and is supposed to have been "the large and beautiful town of Asziun,"
which formerly stood, according to Makrizi , near to Aila , where there were many
dates, fields, and fruit-trees, though it has now long since entirely disappeared.

Consequently the Israelites passed twice through a portion of the Arabah in a

southerly direction towards the Red Sea, the second time from Wady Murreh by
Mount Hor, to go round the land of Edom, not quite to the head of the gulf, but
only to the Wady el Ithm , through which they crossed to the eastern side of
Edomitis (p. 747); the first time during the thirty-seven years of wandering from
Wady el Jerafeh to Moseroth and Bene Jaakan, and thence to Eziongeber.

Verse 36. "And they removed from Eziongeber, and encamped in the desert of
Zin, that is Kadesh:" the return to Kadesh towards the end of the thirty-ninth year
is referred to here. The fact that no places of encampment are given between
Eziongeber and Kadesh, is not to be attributed to the "plan of the author, to avoid

[Link] (2 of 3) [13/08/2004 [Link] p.m.]

 Keil and Delitzsch Commentary on the Old Testament

mentioning the

<- Previous First Next ->

[Link] (3 of 3) [13/08/2004 [Link] p.m.]

 Keil and Delitzsch Commentary on the Old Testament

<- Previous First Next ->

same places of encampment a second time," for any such plan is a mere conjecture;
but it may be simply and perfectly explained from the fact, that on this return route-
which the whole of the people, with their wives, children, and flocks, could
accomplish without any very great exertion in ten or fourteen days, as the distance
from Aila to Kadesh through the desert of Paran is only about a forty hours'
journey upon camels, and Robinson travelled from Akabah to the Wady Retemath,
near Kadesh, in four days and a half-no formal camp was pitched at all, probably
because the time of penal wandering came to an end at Eziongeber, and the time
had arrived when the congregation was to assemble again at Kadesh, and set out
thence upon its journey to Canaan. - Hence the eleven names given in vv. 19-30,
between Rithmah and Moseroth , can only refer to those stations at which the
congregation pitched their camp for a longer or shorter period during the thirty-
seven years of punishment, on their slow return from Kadesh to the Red Sea, and
previous to their entering the Arabah and encamping at Moseroth.

This number of stations, which is very small for thirty-seven years (only seventeen
from Rithmah or Kadesh to Eziongeber), is a sufficient proof that the congregation
of Israel was not constantly wandering about during the whole of that time, but
may have remained in many of the places of encampment, probably those which
furnished an abundant supply of water and pasturage, not only for weeks and
months, but even for years, the people scattering themselves in all directions round
about the place where the tabernacle was set up, and making use of such means of
support as the desert afforded, and assembling together again when this was all
gone, for the purpose of travelling farther and seeking somewhere else a suitable
spot for a fresh encampment. Moreover, the words of Deut 1:46, "ye abode in
Kadesh many days," when compared with Num 2:1, "then we turned, and took our
journey into the wilderness of the way to the Red Sea," show most distinctly, that
after the sentence passed upon the people in Kadesh (ch. 14), they did not begin to
travel back at once, but remained for a considerable time in Kadesh before going
southwards into the desert.

[Link] (1 of 2) [13/08/2004 [Link] p.m.]

 Keil and Delitzsch Commentary on the Old Testament

With regard to the direction which they took, all that can be said, so long as none
of the places of encampment mentioned in vv. 19-29 are discovered, is that they
made their way by a very circuitous route, and with many a wide detour, to
Eziongeber, on the Red Sea.

(Note: We agree so far, therefore, with the vie adopted by Fries , and followed by Kurtz (History of
Old Covenant, iii. 306-7) and Schultz (Deut. pp. 153-4), that we regard the stations given in vv. 19-35,
between Rithmah and Eziongeber , as referring to the journeys of Israel, after its condemnation in
Kadesh, during the thirty-seven years of its wandering about in the desert. But we do not regard the
view which these writers have formed of the marches themselves as being well founded, or in
accordance with the text-namely, that the people of Israel did not really come a second time in full
procession from the south to Kadesh, but that they had never left Kadesh entirely, inasmuch as then the
nation was rejected in Kadesh, the people divided themselves into larger and smaller groups, and that
portion which was estranged from Moses, or rather from the Lord, remained in Kadesh even after the
rest were scattered about; so that, in a certain sense, Kadesh formed the standing encampment and
meeting-place of the congregation even during the thirty-seven years.

According to this view, the removals and encampments mentioned in vv. 9-36 do
not describe the marches of the whole nation, but are to be understood as the circuit
made by the headquarters during the thirty-seven years, with Moses at the head and
the sanctuary in the midst ( Kurtz ), or else as showing "that Moses and Aaron,
with the sanctuary and the tribe of Levi, altered their resting-place, say from year to
year, thus securing to every part of the nation in turn the nearness of the sanctuary,
in accordance with the signals appointed by God (Num 10:11-12), and thus passed
over the space between Kadesh and Eziongeber within the first eighteen years, and
then, by a similar change of place, gradually drew near to Kadesh during the
remaining eighteen or nineteen years, and at length in the last year summoned the
whole nation (all the congregation) to assemble together at this meeting-place."

Now we cannot admit that in this view "we find all the different and scattered
statements of the Pentateuch

<- Previous First Next ->

[Link] (2 of 2) [13/08/2004 [Link] p.m.]

 Keil and Delitzsch Commentary on the Old Testament

<- Previous First Next ->

explained and rendered intelligible." In the first place, it does not do justice even to
the list of stations; for if the constantly repeated expression, "and they (the children
of Israel, v. 1) removed...and encamped," denotes the removal and encamping of
the whole congregation in vv. 3-18 and 37-49, it is certainly at variance with the
text to explain the same words in vv. 19-36 as signifying the removal and
encamping of the headquarters only, or of Moses, with Aaron and the Levites, and
the tabernacle. Again, in all the laws that were given and the events that are
described as occurring between the first halt of the congregation in Kadesh (ch. 13
and 14) and their return thither at the commencement of the fortieth year (ch. 20),
the presence of the whole congregation is taken for granted.

The sacrificial laws in ch. 15, which Moses was to address to the children of Israel
(v. 1), were given to "the whole congregation" (cf. vv. 24, 25, 26). The man who
gathered wood on the Sabbath was taken out of the camp and stoned by "all the
congregation" (Num 15:36). "All the congregation" took part in the rebellion of the
company of Korah (Num 16:19; 17:6,21 ff.). It is true this occurrence is supposed
by Kurtz to have taken place "during the halt in Kadesh," but the reasons given are
by no means conclusive (p. 105). Besides, if we assign everything that is related in
ch. 15-19 to the time when the whole congregation abode in Kadesh, this deprives
the hypothesis of its chief support in Deut 1:46, "and ye abode in Kadesh a long
time, according to the days that he abode." For in that case the long abode in
Kadesh would include the period of the laws and incidents recorded in ch. 15-19,
and yet, after all, "the whole congregation" went away.

In no case, in fact, can the words be understood as signifying that a portion of the
nation remained there during the thirty-seven years. Nor can this be inferred in any
way from the fact that their departure is not expressly mentioned; for, at all events,
the statement in Num 20:1, "and the children of Israel, the whole congregation,
came into the desert of Zin," presupposes that they had gone away. And the
"inconceivable idea, that in the last year of their wanderings, when it was their
express intention to cross the Jordan and enter Canaan from the east, they should

[Link] (1 of 2) [13/08/2004 [Link] p.m.]

 Keil and Delitzsch Commentary on the Old Testament

have gone up from Eziongeber to the southern boundary of Canaan, which they
had left thirty-seven years before, merely to come back again to the neighbourhood
of Eziongeber, after failing in their negotiations with the king of Edom, which they
might have carried on from some place much farther south, and to take the road
from that point to the country on the east of the Jordan after all" ( Fries ), loses all
the surprising character which it apparently has, if we only give up the assumption
upon which it is founded, but which has no support whatever in the biblical history,
viz., that during the thirty-seven years of their wandering in the desert, Moses was
acquainted with the fact that the Israelites were to enter Canaan from the east, or at
any rate that he had formed this plan for some time. If, on the contrary, when the
Lord rejected the murmuring nation (Num 14:26), He decided nothing with
reference to the way by which the generation that would grow up in the desert was
to enter Canaan-and it was not till after the return to Kadesh that Moses was
informed by God that they were to advance into Canaan from the east and not from
the south-it was perfectly natural that when the time of punishment had expired,
the Israelites should assemble in Kadesh again, and start from that point upon their
journey onward.)

Verse 37-49. The places of encampment on the journey of the fortieth year from
Kadesh to Mount Hor, and round Edom and Moab into the steppes of Moab, have
been discussed at ch. 20 and 21. On Mount Hor, and Aaron's death there, see at
Num 20:22. For the remark in v. 40 concerning the Canaanites of Arad, see at Num
21:1. On Zalmonah, Phunon, and Oboth , see at ch. 21:10; on Ijje Abarim , at Num
21:11; on Dibon Gad, Almon Diblathaim , and the mountains of Abarim , before
Nebo , Num 21:16-20 (see p. 752). On Arboth Moab , see ch. 22:1.

Instructions concerning the Conquest and Distribution of Canaan.

Ch. 33:50-36:13.

<- Previous First Next ->

[Link] (2 of 2) [13/08/2004 [Link] p.m.]

 Keil and Delitzsch Commentary on the Old Testament

<- Previous First Next ->

These instructions, with which the eyes of the Israelites were directed to the end of
all their wandering, viz., the possession of the promised land, are arranged in two
sections by longer introductory formulas (Num 33:50 and 35:1). The former
contains the divine commands ( a ) with regard to the extermination of the
Canaanites and their idolatry, and the division of the land among the tribes of Israel
(Num 33:50-56); ( b ) concerning the boundaries of Canaan (Num 34:1-15); ( c )
concerning the men who were to divide the land (ch. 34:16-29). The second
contains commands ( a ) respecting the towns to be given up to the Levites (Num
35:1-8); ( b ) as to the setting apart of cities of refuge for unintentional manslayers,
and the course to be adopted in relation to such manslayers (Num 35:9-34); and ( c
) a law concerning the marrying of heiresses within their own tribes (ch. 36). - The
careful dovetailing of all these legal regulations by separate introductory formulas,
is a distinct proof that the section Num 33:50-56 is not to be regarded, as
Baumgarten, Knobel , and others suppose, in accordance with the traditional
division of the chapters, as an appendix or admonitory conclusion to the list of
stations, but as the general legal foundation for the more minute instructions in ch.
34-36.

Numbers 33:50-56

And the LORD spake unto Moses in the plains of Moab by Jordan near Jericho,
saying,

Verse 50-56. Command to Exterminate the Canaanites, and Divide their Land
among the Families of Israel.

Verse 51-53. When the Israelites passed through the Jordan into the land of
Canaan, they were to exterminate all the inhabitants of the land, and to destroy all
the memorials of their idolatry; to take possession of the land and well therein, for

[Link] (1 of 2) [13/08/2004 [Link] p.m.]

 Keil and Delitzsch Commentary on the Old Testament

Jehovah had given it to them for a possession. howriysh (OT:3423), to take

possession of (vv. 53, etc.), then to drive out of their possession, to exterminate (v.
52; cf. Num 14:12, etc.). On v. 52, see Ex 34:13. masªkiyt (OT:4906), an idol of
stone (cf. Lev 26:1). maceekot (OT:4541) tsalªmeey (OT:6754), idols cast from
brass. Massecah , see at Ex 32:4 . Bamoth , altars of the Canaanites upon high
places (see Lev 26:30).

Verse 54-56. The command to divide the land by lot among the families is partly a
verbal repetition of Num 26:53-56. wgw' low yeetsee' 'el-'asher : literally, "into
that, whither the lot comes out to him, shall be to him" (i.e., to each family); in
other words, it is to receive that portion of land to which the lot that comes out of
the urn shall point it. "According to the tribes of your fathers:" see at Num 26:55. -
The command closes in vv. 55, 56, with the threat, that if they did not exterminate
the Canaanites, not only would such as were left become "thorns in their eyes and
stings in their sides," i.e., inflict the most painful injuries upon them, and make war
upon them in the land; but Jehovah would also do the very same things to the
Israelites that He had intended to do to the Canaanites, i.e., drive them out of the
land and destroy them. This threat is repeated by Joshua in his last address to the
assembled congregation (Josh 23:13).

Numbers 34:1-2

And the LORD spake unto Moses, saying,

Boundaries of the Land of Canaan. - V. 2. "When ye come into the land of Canaan,
this shall be the land

<- Previous First Next ->

[Link] (2 of 2) [13/08/2004 [Link] p.m.]

 Keil and Delitzsch Commentary on the Old Testament

<- Previous First Next ->

which will fall to you as an inheritance, the land of Canaan according to its
boundaries:" i.e., ye shall receive the land of Canaan for an inheritance, within the
following limits.

Numbers 34:3-5

Then your south quarter shall be from the wilderness of Zin along by the coast
of Edom, and your south border shall be the outmost coast of the salt sea
eastward:

The southern boundary is the same as that given in Josh 15:2-4 as the boundary
of the territory of the tribe of Judah. We have first the general description, "The
south side shall be to you from the desert of Zin on the sides of Edom onwards,"
i.e., the land was to extend towards the south as far as the desert of Zin on the sides
of Edom. `al-yªdeey , "on the sides," differs in this respect from `al-yad , "on the
side" (Ex 2:5; Josh 15:46; 2 Sam 15:2), that the latter is used to designate contact at
a single point or along a short line; the former, contact for a long distance or
throughout the whole extent (= kaal-yad , Deut 2:37). "On the sides of Edom"
signifies, therefore, that the desert of Zin stretched along the side of Edom, and
Canaan was separated from Edom by the desert of Zin. From this it follows still
further, that Edom in this passage is not the mountains of Edom, which had their
western boundary on the Arabah, but the country to the south of the desert of Zin
or Wady Murreh (see p. 709), viz., the mountain land of the Azazimeh, which still
bears the name of Seir or Serr among the Arabs (see Seetzen and Rowland in
Ritter's Erdk. xiv. pp. 840 and 1087).

The statement in Josh 15:1 also agrees with this, viz., that Judah's inheritance was
"to the territory of Edom, the desert of Zin towards the south," according to which
the desert of Zin was also to divide the territory of Edom from that of the tribe of
Judah (see the remarks on Num 14:45). With v. 3b the more minute description of

[Link] (1 of 2) [13/08/2004 [Link] p.m.]

 Keil and Delitzsch Commentary on the Old Testament

the southern boundary line commences: "The south border shall be from the end
of the Salt Sea eastward," i.e., start from "the tongue which turns to the south"
(Josh 15:2), from the southern point of the Dead Sea, where there is now a salt
marsh with the salt mountain at the south-west border of the lake. "And turn to the
south side ( minegeb (OT:5045)) of the ascent of Akrabbim" ( ascensus
scorpionum ), i.e., hardly "the steep pass of es Sufah , 1434 feet in height, which
leads in a south-westerly direction from the Dead Sea along the northern side of
Wady Fikreh , a wady three-quarters of an hour's journey in breadth, and over
which the road from Petra to Heshbon passes,"

(Note: See Robinson , vol. ii. pp. 587, 591; and v. Schubert , ii. pp. 443, 447ff.) as Knobel maintains;
for the expression naacab (OT:5437) (turn), in v. 4, according to which the southern border turned at
the height of Akrabbim, that is to say, did not go any farther in the direction from N.E. to S.W. than
from the southern extremity of the Salt Sea to this point, and was then continued in a straight line from
east to west, is not at all applicable to the position of this pass, since there would be no bend whatever
in the boundary line at the pass of es Sufah , if it ran from the Arabah through Wady Fikreh, and so
across to Kadesh. The "height of Akrabbim," from which the country round was afterwards called
Akrabattine, Akrabatene (1 Macc. 5:4; Josephus , Ant. 12:8, 1),

(Note: It must be distinguished, however, from the Akrabatta mentioned by Josephus in his Wars of
the Jews (iii. 3, 5), the modern Akrabeh in central Palestine ( Rob. Bibl. Res. p. 296), and from the
toparchy Akrabattene mentioned in Josephus (Wars of the Jews, ii. 12, 4; 20, 4; 22, 2), which was
named after this place.) is most probably the lofty row of "white cliffs" of sixty or eighty feet in height,
which run obliquely across the Arabah at a distance of about eight miles below the Dead Sea

<- Previous First Next ->

[Link] (2 of 2) [13/08/2004 [Link] p.m.]

 Keil and Delitzsch Commentary on the Old Testament

<- Previous First Next ->

and, as seen from the south-west point of the Dead Sea, appear to shut in the Ghor, and which form the
dividing line between the two sides of the great valley, which is called el Ghor on one side, and el
Araba on the other ( Robinson , ii. 489, 494, 502). Consequently it was not the Wady Fikreh, but a
wady which opened into the Arabah somewhat farther to the south, possibly the southern branch of the
Wady Murreh itself, which formed the actual boundary.

"And shall pass over to Zin" (i.e., the desert of Zin, the great Wady Murreh , see at
Num 14:21), "and its going forth shall be to the south of Kadesh-barnea," at the
western extremity of the desert of Zin (see at Num 20:16). From this point the
boundary went farther out ( yaatsaa' (OT:3318)) "to Hazar-Addar, and over (
`aabar (OT:5674)) to Azmon." According to Josh 15:3-4, it went to the south of
Kadesh-barnea over ( `aabar (OT:5674)) to Hezron , and ascended ( `aalaah
(OT:5927)) to Addar , and then turned to Karkaa , and went over to Azmon.
Consequently Hazar-Addar corresponds to Hezron and Addar (in Joshua);
probably the two places were so close to each other that they could be joined
together. Neither of them has been discovered yet. This also applies to Karkaa and
Azmon. The latter name reminds us of the Bedouin tribe Azazimeh , inhabiting the
mountains in the southern part of the desert of Zin ( Robinson , i. pp. 274, 283,
287; Seetzen , iii. pp. 45, 47). Azmon is probably to be sought for near the Wady el
Ain , to the west of the Hebron road, and not far from its entrance into the Wady el
Arish; for this is "the river (brook) of Egypt," to which the boundary turned from
Azmon, and through which it had "its outgoings at the sea," i.e., terminated at the
Mediterranean Sea. The "brook of Egypt," therefore, is frequently spoken of as the
southern boundary of the land of Israel (1 Kings 8:65; 2 Kings 24:7; 2 Chron 7:8,
and Isa 27:12, where the LXX express the name by Chinokorou'ra ). Hence the
southern boundary ran, throughout its whole length, from the Arabah on the east to
the Mediterranean on the west, along valleys which form a natural division, and
constitute more or less the boundary line between the desert and the cultivated
land.

(Note: On the lofty mountains of Madara , where the Wady Murreh is divided into two wadys (
Fikreh and Murreh ) which run to the Arabah, v. Schubert observed "some mimosen-trees," with

[Link] (1 of 2) [13/08/2004 [Link] p.m.]

 Keil and Delitzsch Commentary on the Old Testament

which, as he expresses it, "the vegetation of Arabia took leave of us, as it were, as they were the last
that we saw on our road." And Dieterici ( Reisebilder , ii. pp. 156-7) describes the mountain ridge at
Nakb es Sufah as "the boundary line between the yellow desert and green steppes," and observes still
further, that on the other side of the mountain (i.e., northwards) the plain spread out before him in its
fresh green dress. "The desert journey was over, the empire of death now lay behind us, and a new life
blew towards us from fields covered with green." - In the same way the country between Kadesh and
the Hebron road, which has become better known to us through the descriptions of travellers, is
described as a natural boundary.

Seetzen , in his account of his journey from Hebron to Sinai (iii. p. 47), observes
that the mountains of Tih commence at the Wady el Ain (fountain-valley), which
takes its name from a fountain that waters thirty date-palms and a few small corn-
fields (i.e., Ain el Kuderat , in Robinson , i. p. 280), and describes the country to
the south of the small flat Wady el Kdeis ( el Kideise ), in which many tamarisks
grew (i.e., no doubt a wady that comes from Kadesh, from which it derives its
name), as a "most dreadful wilderness, which spreads out to an immeasurable
extent in all directions, without trees, shrubs, or a single spot of green" (p. 50),
although the next day he "found as an unexpected rarity another small field of
barley, which might have been an acre in extent" (pp. 52, 53). Robinson
(i. pp. 280ff.) also found, upon the route from Sinai to Hebron, more vegetation in
the desert between the Wady el Kusaimeh and el Ain than anywhere else before
throughout his entire journey; and after passing the Wady el Ain to the west of
Kadesh, he "came upon a broad tract of tolerably fertile soil, capable of tillage, and
apparently once tilled."

Across the whole of this tract of land there were long ranges of low stone walls
visible (called "el Muzeiriât," "little plantations," by the Arabs), which had
probably served at some former time as boundary walls between the

<- Previous First Next ->

[Link] (2 of 2) [13/08/2004 [Link] p.m.]

 Keil and Delitzsch Commentary on the Old Testament

<- Previous First Next ->

cultivated fields. A little farther to the north the Wady es Serâm opens into an
extended plain, which looked almost like a meadow with its bushes, grass, and
small patches of wheat and barley. A few Azazimeh Arabs fed their camels and
flocks here. The land all round became more open, and showed broad valleys that
were capable of cultivation, and were separated by low and gradually sloping hills.
The grass become more frequent in the valleys, and herbs were found upon the
hills. "We heard (he says at p. 283) this morning for the first time the songs of
many birds, and among them the lark.")

Numbers 34:6

And as for the western border, ye shall even have the great sea for a border: this
shall be your west border.

The western boundary was to be "the great sea and its territory," i.e., the
Mediterranean Sea with its territory or coast (cf. Deut 3:16-17; Josh 13:23,27;
15:47).

Numbers 34:7-9

And this shall be your north border: from the great sea ye shall point out for you
mount Hor:

The northern boundary cannot be determined with certainty. "From the great
sea, mark out to you ( tªtaa'uw (OT:8376), from taa'aah (OT:8376) = taawaah
(OT:8427), to mark or point out), i.e., fix, Mount Hor as the boundary" - from
thence "to come to Hamath; and let the goings forth of the boundary be to Zedad.
And the boundary shall go out to Ziphron, and its goings out be at Hazar-enan."
Of all these places, Hamath , the modern Hamah , or the Epiphania of the Greeks

[Link] (1 of 2) [13/08/2004 [Link] p.m.]

 Keil and Delitzsch Commentary on the Old Testament

and Romans on the Orontes (see at Num 13:21, and Gen 10:18), is the only one
whose situation is well known; but the geographical description of the northern
boundary of the land of Israel chamaat (OT:2534) lªbo' (OT:935) (Num 13:21;
Josh 13:5; Judg 3:3; 1 Kings 8:65; 2 Kings 14:25; 1 Chron 13:5; 2 Chron 7:8;
Amos 6:14; Ezek 47:15,20; 48:1) is so indefinite, that the boundary line cannot be
determined with exactness.

For no proof can be needed in the present day that chamaat (OT:2534) lªbo'
(OT:935) cannot mean "to Hamath" ( Ges. thes. i. p. 185; Studer on Judg 3:3, and
Baur on Amos 6:2), in such a sense as would make the town of Hamath the border
town, and bo' (OT:935) a perfectly superfluous pleonasm. In all the passages
mentioned, Hamath refers, not to the town of that name ( Epiphania on the
Orontes), but to the kingdom of Hamath , which was named after its capital, as is
proved beyond all doubt by 2 Chron 8:4, where Solomon is said to have built store
cities "in Hamath." The city of Hamath never belonged to the kingdom of Israel,
not even under David and Solomon, and was not reconquered by Jeroboam II, as
Baur supposes (see my Commentary on the Books of Kings, and Thenius on 2
Kings 14:25). How far the territory of the kingdom of Hamath extended towards
the south in the time of Moses, and how much of it was conquered by Solomon (2
Chron 8:4), we are nowhere informed.

We simply learn from 2 Kings 25:21, that Riblah (whether the same Riblah as is
mentioned in v. 11 as a town upon

<- Previous First Next ->

[Link] (2 of 2) [13/08/2004 [Link] p.m.]

 Keil and Delitzsch Commentary on the Old Testament

<- Previous First Next ->

We simply learn from 2 Kings 25:21, that Riblah (whether the same Riblah as is
mentioned in v. 11 as a town upon the eastern boundary, is very doubtful) was
situated in the land of Hamath in the time of the Chaldeans. Now if this Riblah has
been preserved in the modern Ribleh , a miserable village on the Orontes, in the
northern part of the Bekaa , ten or twelve hours' journey to the south-west of Hums
, and fourteen hours to the north of Baalbek ( Robinson , iii. p. 461, App. 176, and
Bibl. Researches, p. 544), the land of Canaan would have reached a little farther
northwards, and almost to Hums ( Emesa ). Knobel moves the boundary still
farther to the north. He supposes Mount Hor to be Mons Casius , to the south-west
of Antioch, on the Orontes, and agrees with Robinson
(iii. 461) in identifying Zedad , in the large village of Zadad ( Sudud in Rob. ),
which is inhabited exclusively by Syriac Christians, who still speak Syriac
according to Seetzen (i. 32 and 279), a town containing about 3000 inhabitants (
Wetstein, Reiseber. p. 88), to the south-east of Hums , on the east of the road from
Damascus to Hunes, a short day's journey to the north of Nebk , and four (or,
according to Van de Velde's memoir, from ten to twelve) hours' journey to the
south of Hasya ( Robinson , iii. p. 461; Ritter, Erdk. xvii. pp. 1443-4).

Ziphron , which was situated upon the border of the territory of Hamath and
Damascus, if it is the same as the one mentioned in Ezek 47:16, is supposed by
Knobel and Wetstein (p. 88) to be preserved in the ruins of Zifran , which in all
probability have never been visited by any European, fourteen hours to the north-
east of Damascus, near to the road from Palmyra. Lastly, Hazar-enan (equivalent
to fountain-court) is supposed to be the station called Centum Putea ( Bou'tea in
Ptol. v. 15, 24), mentioned in the Tabul. Peuting. x. 3, on the road from Apamia to
Palmyra , twenty-seven miles, or about eleven hours, to the north-west of Palmyra.
- But we may say with certainty that all these conclusions are incorrect, because
they are irreconcilable with the eastern boundary described in vv. 10, 11. For
example, according to vv. 10, 11, the Israelites were to draw (fix) the eastern
boundary "from Hazar-enan to Shepham," which, as Knobel observes, "cannot be
determined with exactness, but was farther south than Hazar-enan , as it was a

[Link] (1 of 3) [13/08/2004 [Link] p.m.]

 Keil and Delitzsch Commentary on the Old Testament

point on the eastern boundary which is traced here from north to south, and also
farther west, as we may infer from the allusion to Riblah, probably at the northern
end of Antilibanus"

(?). From Shepham the boundary was "to go down to Riblah," which Knobel finds
in the Ribleh mentioned above. Now, if we endeavour to fix the situation of these
places according to the latest and most trustworthy maps, the incorrectness of the
conclusions referred to becomes at once apparent. From Zadad ( Sudad ) to Zifran ,
the line of the northern boundary would not have gone from west to east, but from
north to south, or rather towards the south-west, and from Zifran to Centum Putea
still more decidedly in a south-westerly direction. Consequently the northern
boundary would have described a complete semicircle, commencing in the north-
west and terminating in the south-east. But if even in itself this appears very
incredible, it becomes perfectly impossible when we take the eastern boundary into
consideration. For if this went down to the south-west from Hazar-enan to
Shepham according to Knobel's conclusions, instead of going down (v. 11) from
Shepham to Riblah , it would have gone up six or seven geographical miles from
south to north, and then have gone down again from north to south along the
eastern coast of the Lake of Gennesareth. Now it is impossible that Moses should
have fixed such a boundary to the land of Israel on the north-east, and equally
impossible that a later Hebrew, acquainted with the geography of his country,
should have described it in this way.

If, in order to obtain a more accurate view of the extent of the land towards the
north and north-east, we compare the statements of the book of Joshua concerning
the conquered land with the districts which still remained to be taken at the time of
the distribution; Joshua had taken the land "from the bald mountain which ascends
towards Seir," i.e., probably the northern ridge of the Azazimeh mountains, with its
white masses of chalk ( Fries, ut sup. p. 76; see also at Josh 11:17), "to Baal-gad ,
in the valley of Lebanon, below Mount Hermon" (Josh 11:17; cf. Num 12:7). But
Baal-gad in the valley ( biqª`aah (OT:1237)) of Lebanon is not Heliopolis (now
Baalbek in the Bekaa , or Coelesyria ), as many, from Iken and J. D. Michaelis

[Link] (2 of 3) [13/08/2004 [Link] p.m.]

 Keil and Delitzsch Commentary on the Old Testament

down to Knobel , suppose; for "the Bekaa is not under the Hermon," and "there is
no proof, or even probability, that Joshua's conquests reached so far, or that
Baalbek was ever regarded as the northern boundary of Palestine, nor even that the
adjoining portion of Anti-Lebanon was

<- Previous First Next ->

[Link] (3 of 3) [13/08/2004 [Link] p.m.]

 Keil and Delitzsch Commentary on the Old Testament

<- Previous First Next ->

ever called Hermon" ( Robinson , Biblical Researches, p. 409).

Baal-gad , which is called Baal-hermon in Judg 3:3 and 1 Chron 5:23, was the
later Paneas or Caesarea Philippi , the modern Banias , at the foot of the Hermon
(cf. v. Raumer , Pal. p. 245; Rob. Bibl. Res. pp. 408-9, Pal. iii. pp. 347ff.). This is
placed beyond all doubt by 1 Chron 5:23, according to which the Manassites, who
were increasing in numbers, dwelt "from Bashan to Baal-hermon, and Senir, and
the mountains of Hermon," since this statement proves that Baal-hermon was
between Bashan and the mountains of Hermon. In harmony with this, the following
places in the north of Canaan are mentioned in Josh 13:4-5, and Judg 3:3, as being
left unconquered by Joshua:-(1.) "All the land of the Canaanites (i.e., of the
Phoenicians who dwelt on the coast), and the cave of the Sidonians to Aphek;"
mª`aaraah (OT:4631), probably the spelunca inexpugnabilis in territorio
Sidoniensi, quae vulgo dicitur cavea de Tyrum ( Wilh. Tyr. xix. 11), the present
Mughr Jezzin , i.e., caves of Jezzin , to the east of Sidon upon Lebanon ( Ritter,
Erdk. xvii. pp. 99, 100); and Aphek , probably the modern Afka , to the north-east
of Beirut ( Robinson , Bibl. Res.).

(2.) "The land of the Giblites," i.e., the territory of Byblos , and "all Lebanon
towards the east, from Baal-gad below Hermon, till you come to Hamath," i.e., not
Antilibanus, but Lebanon, which lies to the east of the land of the Giblites. The
land of the Giblites, or territory of Gebal , which is cited here as the northernmost
district of the unconquered land, so that its northern boundary must have coincided
with the northern boundary of Canaan, can hardly have extended to the latitude of
Tripoli, but probably only reached to the cedar grove at Bjerreh , in the
neighbourhood of which the highest peaks of the Lebanon are found. The territory
of the tribes of Asher and Naphtali (Josh 19:24-39) did not reach farther up than
this. From all these accounts, we must not push the northern boundary of Canaan
as far as the Eleutherus, Nahr el Kebir , but must draw it farther to the south,
across the northern portion of the Lebanon; so that we may look for Hazar-enan
(fountain-court), which is mentioned as the end of the northern boundary, and the
[Link] (1 of 2) [13/08/2004 [Link] p.m.]
 Keil and Delitzsch Commentary on the Old Testament

starting-point of the eastern, near the fountain of Lebweh. This fountain forms the
water-shed in the Bekaa, between the Orontes, which flows to the north, and the
Leontes, which flows to the south (cf. Robinson , Bibl. Res. p. 531), and is not only
a very large fountain of the finest clear water, springing at different points from
underneath a broad piece of coarse gravel, which lies to the west of a vein of
limestone, but the whole of the soil is of such a character, that "you have only to
dig in the gravel, to get as many springs as you please."

The quantity of water which is found here is probably even greater than that at the
Anjar. In addition to the four principal streams, there are three or four smaller ones
( Robinson , Bibl. Res. p. 532), so that this place might be called, with perfect
justice, by the name of fountain-court. The probability of this conjecture is also
considerably increased by the fact, that the Ain , mentioned in v. 11 as a point upon
the eastern boundary, can also be identified without any difficulty (see at v. 11).

Numbers 34:10-12

And ye shall point out your east border from Hazar-enan to Shepham:

The Eastern Boundary. - If we endeavour to trace the upper line of the eastern
boundary from the fountain-place just mentioned, it ran from Hazar-enan to
Shepham , the site of which is unknown, and "from Shepham it was to go down to
Riblah , on the east of Ain" (the fountain). The article haaribªlaah (OT:7247), and
still more the precise description, "to the east of Ain, the fountain, or fountain
locality" ( Knobel ), show plainly that this Riblah is

<- Previous First Next ->

[Link] (2 of 2) [13/08/2004 [Link] p.m.]

 Keil and Delitzsch Commentary on the Old Testament

<- Previous First Next ->

to be distinguished from the Riblah in the land of Hamath (2 Kings 23:33; 25:21;
Jer 39:9; 52:27), with which it is mostly identified. Ain is supposed to be "the great
fountain of Neba Anjar , at the foot of Antilibanus, which is often called Birket
Anjar , on account of its taking its rise in a small reservoir or pool" ( Robinson ,
Bibl. Res. p. 498), and near to which Mej-del-Anjar is to be seen, consisting of "the
ruins of the walls and towers of a fortified town, or rather of a large citadel" (
Robinson , p. 496; cf. Ritter , xvii. pp. 181ff.).

(Note: Knobel regards Ain as the source of the Orontes, i.e., Neba Lebweh , and yet, notwithstanding
this, identifies Riblah with the village of Ribleh mentioned above. But can this Ribleh , which is at
least eight hours to the north of Neba Lebweh , be described as on the east of Ain , i.e., Neba Lebweh?
)

From this point the boundary went farther down, and pressed ( maachaah
(OT:4229)) "upon the shoulder of the lake of Chinnereth towards the east," i.e.,
upon the north-east shore of the Sea of Galilee (see Josh 19:35). Hence it ran down
along the Jordan to the Salt Sea (Dead Sea). According to these statements,
therefore, the eastern boundary went from Bekaa along the western slopes of
Antilibanus, over or past Rasbeya and Banyas , at the foot of Hermon, along the
edge of the mountains which bound the Huleh basin towards the east, down to the
north-east corner of the Sea of Galilee; so that Hermon itself ( Jebel es Sheikh ) did
not belong to the land of Israel.

Numbers 34:13-15

And Moses commanded the children of Israel, saying, This is the land which ye
shall inherit by lot, which the LORD commanded to give unto the nine tribes,
and to the half tribe:

This land, according to the boundaries thus described, the Israelites were to
distribute by lot (Num 26:56), to give it to the nine tribes and a half, as the tribes of
[Link] (1 of 2) [13/08/2004 [Link] p.m.]
 Keil and Delitzsch Commentary on the Old Testament

Reuben, Gad, and half Manasseh had already received their inheritance on the
other side of the Jordan (Num 32:33ff.).

Numbers 34:16-29

And the LORD spake unto Moses, saying,

List of the Men Appointed to Distribute the Land. - In addition to Eleazar and
Joshua, the former of whom was to stand at the head as high priest, in accordance
with the divine appointment in Num 27:21, and the latter to occupy the second
place as commander of the army, a prince was selected from each of the ten tribes
who were interested in the distribution, as Reuben and Gad had nothing to do with
it. Of these princes, namely heads of fathers' houses of the tribes (Josh 14:1), not
heads of tribes (see at Num 13:2), Caleb, who is well known from ch. 13, is the
only one whose name if known. The others are not mentioned anywhere else. The
list of tribes, in the enumeration of their princes, corresponds, with some
exceptions, to the situation of the territory which the tribes received in Canaan,
reckoning from south to north, and deviates considerably from the order in which
the lots came out for the

<- Previous First Next ->

[Link] (2 of 2) [13/08/2004 [Link] p.m.]

 Keil and Delitzsch Commentary on the Old Testament

<- Previous First Next ->

different tribes, as described in Josh 15-19. naachal (OT:5158) in the Kal , in vv.
17 and 18, signifies to give for an inheritance, just as in Ex 34:8, to put into
possession. There is not sufficient ground for altering the Kal into Piel , especially
as the Piel in v. 29 is construed with the accusative of the person, and with the
thing governed by b ; whereas in v. 17 the Kal is construed with the person
governed by l , and the accusative of the thing.

Numbers 35:1-3

And the LORD spake unto Moses in the plains of Moab by Jordan near Jericho,
saying,

Appointment of Towns for the Levites. - As the Levites were to receive no

inheritance of their own, i.e., no separate tribe-territory, in the land of Canaan
(Num 18:20 and 23), Moses commanded the children of Israel, i.e., the rest of the
tribes, in accordance with the divine instructions, to give (vacate) towns to the
Levites to dwell in of the inheritance that fell to them for a possession, with
pasturage by the cities round about them for their cattle. "Towns to dwell in," i.e.,
not the whole of the towns as their own property, but as many houses in the towns
as sufficed for the necessities of the Levites as their hereditary possession, which
could be redeemed, if sold at any time, and which reverted to them without
compensation in the year of jubilee, even if not redeemed before (Lev 25:32-33);
but any portion of the towns which was not taken possession of by them, together
with the fields and villages, continued the property of those tribes to which they
had been assigned by lot (cf. Josh 21:12, and my commentary on this passage: also
Bähr, Symbolik , ii. p. 50; Ewald, Gesch. ii. p. 403). They were also to give them
migªraash (OT:4054) (from gaarash (OT:1644), to drive, drive out), pasturage or
fields, to feed their flocks upon, all round the cities; and according to Lev 25:34,
this was not to be sold, but to remain the eternal possession of the Levites.
libªhemªtaam (OT:929), for their oxen and beasts of burden, and lirªkuwshaam
(OT:7399), for their (remaining) possessions in flocks (sheep and goats), which are

[Link] (1 of 2) [13/08/2004 [Link] p.m.]

 Keil and Delitzsch Commentary on the Old Testament

generally described in other cases as Mikneh , in distinction from behemah (e.g.,

Num 32:26; Gen 34:23; 36:6). lªkaal-chayaataam , and for all their animals, is
merely a generalizing summary signifying all the animals which they possessed.

Numbers 35:4-5

And the suburbs of the cities, which ye shall give unto the Levites, shall reach
from the wall of the city and outward a thousand cubits round about.

The pasture lands of the different towns were to measure "from the town wall
outwards a thousand cubits round about," i.e., on each of the four sides. "And
measure from without the city, the east side 2000 cubits, and the south side 2000
cubits, and the west side 2000 cubits, and the north side 2000 cubits, and the city
in the middle," i.e., so that the town stood in the middle of the measured lines, and
the space which they occupied was not included in the 2000 cubits. The meaning
of these instructions, which have caused great perplexity to commentators, and
have latterly been explained by Saalschütz ( Mos. R. pp. 100, 101) in a
marvellously erroneous manner, was correctly expounded by J. D. Michaelis in the
notes to his translation. We must picture the towns and the surrounding fields as
squares, the pasturage as stretching 1000 cubits from the city wall in every
direction, as the accompanying figures show, and the length of each outer side as
2000 cubits, apart from the length of the city wall: so that, if the town itself
occupied a square of 1000 cubits (see fig. a ), the outer side of the town fields
would

<- Previous First Next ->

[Link] (2 of 2) [13/08/2004 [Link] p.m.]

 Keil and Delitzsch Commentary on the Old Testament

<- Previous First Next ->

measure 2000 + 1000 cubits in every direction; but if each side of the city wall was
only 500 cubits long (see fig. b ), the outer side of the town fields would measure
2000 + 500 cubits in every direction.

Numbers 35:6-8

And among the cities which ye shall give unto the Levites there shall be six cities
for refuge, which ye shall appoint for the manslayer, that he may flee thither:
and to them ye shall add forty and two cities.

Of these cities which were given up to the Levites, six were to serve as cities of
refuge (see at v. 12) for manslayers, and in addition to these ( `aleeyhem
(OT:5921), over upon them) the Israelites were to give of their possessions forty-
two others, that is to say, forty-eight in all; and they were to do this, giving much
from every tribe that had much, and little from the one which had little (Num
26:54). With the accusatives he`aariym (OT:5892) 'eet (OT:853) and `aareey
(OT:5892) sheesh (OT:8337) `eet (OT:6256) (v. 6), the writer has already in his
mind the verbs tarªbuw (OT:7235) and tamª`iyTuw (OT:4591) of v. 8, where he
takes up the object again in the word wªhe`aariym (OT:5892). According to Josh
21, the Levites received nine cities in the territory of Judah and Simeon, four in the
territory of each of the other tribes, with the exception of Naphtali, in which there
were only three, that is to say, ten in the land to the east of the Jordan, and thirty-
eight in Canaan proper, of which the thirteen given up by Judah, Simeon, and
Benjamin were assigned to the families of the priests, and the other thirty-five to
the three Levitical families.

This distribution of the Levites among all the tribes-by which the curse of division
and dispersion in Israel, which had been pronounced upon Levi in Jacob's blessing
(Gen 49:7), was changed into a blessing both for the Levites themselves and also
for all Israel-was in perfect accordance with the election and destination of this

[Link] (1 of 2) [13/08/2004 [Link] p.m.]

 Keil and Delitzsch Commentary on the Old Testament

tribe. Called out of the whole nation to be the peculiar possession of Jehovah, to
watch over His covenant, and teach Israel His rights and His law (Deut 33:9-10;
Lev 10:11; Deut 31:9-13), the Levites were to form and set forth among all the
tribes the eklogee' (NT:1589) of the nation of Jehovah's possession, and by their
walk as well as by their calling to remind the Israelites continually of their own
divine calling; to foster and preserve the law and testimony of the Lord in Israel,
and to awaken and spread the fear of God and piety among all the tribes. Whilst
their distribution among all the tribes corresponded to this appointment, the fact
that they were not scattered in all the towns and villages of the other tribes, but
were congregated together in separate towns among the different tribes, preserved
them from the disadvantages of standing alone, and defended them from the danger
of moral and spiritual declension. Lastly, in the number forty-eight, the
quadrupling of the number of the tribes (twelve) is unmistakeable. Now, as the
number four is the seal of the kingdom of God in the world, the idea of the
kingdom of God is also represented in the four times twelve towns (cf. Bähr,
Symbolik , ii. pp. 50, 51).

Numbers 35:9-11

And the LORD spake unto Moses, saying,

Selection and Appointment of Cities of Refuge for Unpremeditated Manslayers. -

Vv. 10, 11. When the Israelites

<- Previous First Next ->

[Link] (2 of 2) [13/08/2004 [Link] p.m.]

 Keil and Delitzsch Commentary on the Old Testament

<- Previous First Next ->

had come into the land of Canaan, they were to choose towns conveniently situated
as cities of refuge, to which the manslayer, who had slain a person ( nephesh ) by
accident ( bishªgaagaah (OT:7684): see at Lev 4:2), might flee. hiqªraah
(OT:7136), from qaaraah (OT:7135), to hit, occurrit , as well as accidit; signifies
here to give or make,
i.e., to choose something suitable ( Dietrich ), but not "to build or complete" (
Knobel ), in the sense of qeeraah , as the only meaning which this word has is
contignare , to join with beams or rafters; and this is obviously unsuitable here.
Through these directions, which are repeated and still further expanded in Deut
19:1-13, God fulfilled the promise which He gave in Ex [Link] that He would
appoint a place for the man who should unintentionally slay his neighbour, to
which he might flee from the avenger of blood.

Numbers 35:12-15

And they shall be unto you cities for refuge from the avenger; that the manslayer
die not, until he stand before the congregation in judgment.

These towns were to serve for a refuge from the avenger of blood, that the
manslayer might not die before he had taken his trial in the presence of the
congregation. The number of cities was fixed at six, three on the other side of the
Jordan, and three on this side in the land of Canaan, to which both the children of
Israel, and also the foreigners and settlers who were dwelling among them, might
flee. In Deut 19:2ff., Moses advises the congregation to prepare ( heekiyn
(OT:3559)) the way to these cities, and to divide the territory of the land which
Jehovah would give them into three parts ( shileesh (OT:8029)), i.e., to set apart a
free city in every third of the land, that every manslayer might flee thither, i.e.,
might be able to reach the free city without being detained by length of distance or
badness of road, lest, as is added in v. 6, the avenger of blood pursue the slayer
while his heart is hot ( yeecham (OT:3179), imperf. Kal of chaamam (OT:2552)),
and overtake him because the way is long, and slay him ( nepesh (OT:5315)

[Link] (1 of 2) [13/08/2004 [Link] p.m.]

 Keil and Delitzsch Commentary on the Old Testament

hikaah (OT:5221), as in Gen 37:21), whereas he was not worthy of death (i.e.,
there was no just ground for putting him to death), "because he had not done it out
of hatred." The three cities of refuge on the other side were selected by Moses
himself (Deut 4:41-43); the three in Canaan were not appointed till the land was
distributed among the nine tribes and a half (Josh 20:7). Levitical or priests' towns
were selected for all six, not only because it was to the priests and Levites that they
would first of all look for an administration of justice ( Schultz on Deut 19:3), but
also on the ground that these cities were the property of Jehovah, in a higher sense
than the rest of the land, and for this reason answered the idea of cities of refuge,
where the manslayer, when once received, was placed under the protection of
divine grace, better than any other places possibly could.

The establishment of cities of refuge presupposed the custom and right of revenge.
The custom itself goes back to the very earliest times of the human race (Gen
4:15,24; 27:45); it prevailed among the Israelites, as well as the other nations of
antiquity, and still continues among the Arabs in unlimited force (cf. Niebuhr ,
Arab. pp. 32ff.; Burckhardt , Beduinen, 119, 251ff.). "Revenge of blood prevailed
almost everywhere, so long as there was no national life generated, or it was still in
the first stages of its development; and consequently the expiation of any personal
violation of justice was left to private revenge, and more especially to family zeal"
( Oehler in Herzog's B. Cycl., where the proofs may be seen). The warrant for this
was the principle of retribution, the jus talionis , which lay at the foundation of the
divine order of the world in general, and the Mosaic law in particular, and which
was sanctioned by God, so far as murder was concerned, even in the time of Noah,
by the command, "Whoso sheddeth man's blood," etc. (Gen 9:5-6).

This warrant, however, or rather obligation to avenge murder, was subordinated to

the essential principle of the

<- Previous First Next ->

[Link] (2 of 2) [13/08/2004 [Link] p.m.]

 Keil and Delitzsch Commentary on the Old Testament

<- Previous First Next ->

theocracy, under the Mosaic law. Whilst God Himself would avenge the blood that
was shed, not only upon men, but upon animals also (Gen 9:5), and commanded
blood-revenge, He withdrew the execution of it from subjective caprice, and
restricted it to cases of premeditated slaying or murder, by appointing cities of
refuge, which were to protect the manslayer from the avenger, until he took his
trial before the congregation. go'eel (OT:1350), redeemer, is "that particular
relative whose special duty it was to restore the violated family integrity, who had
to redeem not only landed property that had been alienated from the family (Lev
25:25ff.), or a member of the family that had fallen into slavery (Lev 25:47ff.), but
also the blood that had been taken away from the family by murder" ( Oehler ).

In the latter respect he was called hadaam (OT:1818) go'eel (OT:1350), (vv. 19,
21, 24ff.; Deut 19:6,12). From 2 Sam 14:7, we may see that it was the duty of the
whole family to take care that blood-revenge was carried out. The performance of
the duty itself, however, was probably regulated by the closeness of the
relationship, and corresponded to the duty of redeeming from bondage (Lev
25:49), and to the right of inheritance (Num 27:8ff.). What standing before the
congregation was to consist of, is defined more fully in what follows (vv. 24, 25).
If we compare with this Josh 20:4ff., the manslayer, who fled from the avenger of
blood into a free city, was to stand before the gates of the city, and state his cause
before the elders. They were then to receive him into the city, and give him a place
that he might dwell among them, and were not to deliver him up to the avenger of
blood till he had stood before the congregation for judgment. Consequently, if the
slayer of a man presented himself with the request to be received, the elders of the
free city had to make a provisional inquiry into his case, to decide whether they
should grant him protection in the city; and then if the avenger of blood appeared,
they were not to deliver up the person whom they had received, but to hand him
over, on the charge of the avenger of blood, to the congregation to whom he
belonged, or among whom the act had taken place, that they might investigate the
case, and judge whether the deed itself was wilful or accidental.

Numbers 35:16-18
[Link] (1 of 2) [13/08/2004 [Link] p.m.]
 Keil and Delitzsch Commentary on the Old Testament

And if he smite him with an instrument of iron, so that he die, he is a murderer:

the murderer shall surely be put to death.

Special instructions are given in vv. 16-28, with reference to the judicial procedure.
First of all (vv. 16-21), with regard to qualified slaying or murder. If any person
has struck another with an iron instrument (an axe, hatchet, hammer, etc.), or "with
a stone of the hand, from which one dies," i.e., with a stone which filled the hand-a
large stone, therefore, with which it was possible to kill-or "with a wooden
instrument of the hand, from which one dies," i.e., with a thick club, or a large,
strong wooden instrument, and he then died (so that he died in consequence), he
was a murderer, who was to be put to death. "For the suspicion would rest upon
any one who had used an instrument, that endangered life and therefore was not
generally used in striking, that he had intended to take life away" ( Knobel ).

Numbers 35:19

The revenger of blood himself shall slay the murderer: when he meeteth him, he
shall slay him.

<- Previous First Next ->

[Link] (2 of 2) [13/08/2004 [Link] p.m.]

 Keil and Delitzsch Commentary on the Old Testament

<- Previous First Next ->

The avenger of blood could put him to death, when he hit upon him, i.e., whenever
and wherever he met with him.

Numbers 35:20-23

But if he thrust him of hatred, or hurl at him by laying of wait, that he die;

And so also the man who hit another in hatred, or threw at him by lying in wait, or
struck him with the hand in enmity, so that he died. And if a murderer of this kind
fled into a free city, the elders of his city were to have him fetched out and
delivered up to the avenger of blood (Deut 19:11-12). Then follow, in vv. 22-28,
the proceedings to be taken with an unintentional manslayer, viz., if any one hit
another "in the moment," i.e., suddenly, unawares (Num 6:9), without enmity, or
by throwing anything upon him, without lying in wait, or by letting a stone, by
which a man might be killed, fall upon him without seeing him, so that he died in
consequence, but without being his enemy, or watching to do him harm. In using
the expression bªkaal-'eben , the writer had probably hishªliykª (OT:7993) still in
his mind; but he dropped this word, and wrote wayapeel (OT:5307) in the form of
a fresh sentence. The thing intended is explained still more clearly in Deut 19:4-5.
Instead of bªpeta` (OT:6621), we find there bibªliy-da`at , without knowing
unintentionally. The words, "without being his enemy," are paraphrased there by,
"without hating him from yesterday and the day before yesterday" (i.e.,
previously), and are explained by an example taken from the life: "When a man
goeth into the wood with his neighbour to hew wood, and his hand fetcheth a
stroke with the axe to cut down the tree, and the iron slippeth ( naashal
(OT:5394) Niphal of shaalal (OT:7997)) from the wood (handle), and lighteth
upon his neighbour."

Numbers 35:24-25

[Link] (1 of 2) [13/08/2004 [Link] p.m.]

 Keil and Delitzsch Commentary on the Old Testament

Then the congregation shall judge between the slayer and the revenger of blood
according to these judgments:

In such a case as this, the congregation was to judge between the slayer and the
avenger of blood, according to the judgments before them. They were to rescue the
innocent man from the avenger of blood, to bring him back to his
(i.e., the nearest) city of refuge to which he had fled, that he might dwell there till
the death of the high priest, who had been anointed with the holy oil.

Numbers 35:26-28

But if the slayer shall at any time come without the border of the city of his
refuge, whither he was fled;

If he left the city of refuge before this, and the avenger of blood got hold of him,
and slew him outside the borders

<- Previous First Next ->

[Link] (2 of 2) [13/08/2004 [Link] p.m.]

 Keil and Delitzsch Commentary on the Old Testament

<- Previous First Next ->

If he left the city of refuge before this, and the avenger of blood got hold of him,
and slew him outside the borders (precincts) of the city, it was not to be reckoned
to him as blood ( daam (OT:1818) low (OT:3807a ) 'eeyn (OT:369), like daamiym
(OT:1818) low (OT:3807a ) 'eeyn (OT:369), Ex 22:1). But after the death of the
high priest he might return "into the land of his possession," i.e., his hereditary
possession (cf. Lev 27:22), sc., without the avenger of blood being allowed to
pursue him any longer.

In these regulations "all the rigour of the divine justice is manifested in the most
beautiful concord with His compassionate mercy. Through the destruction of life,
even when not wilful, human blood had been shed, and demanded expiation. Yet
this expiation did not consist in the death of the offender himself, because he had
not sinned wilfully." Hence an asylum was provided for him in the free city, to
which he might escape, and where he would lie concealed. This sojourn in the free
city was not to be regarded as banishment, although separation from house, home,
and family was certainly a punishment; but it was a concealment under "the
protection of the mercy of God, which opened places of escape in the cities of
refuge from the carnal ardour of the avenger of blood, where the slayer remained
concealed until his sin was expiated by the death of the high priest." For the fact,
that the death of the high priest was hereby regarded as expiatory, as many of the
Rabbins, fathers, and earlier commentators maintain (see my Comm. on Joshua, p.
448), is unmistakeably evident from the addition of the clause, "who has been
anointed with the holy oil," which would appear unmeaning and superfluous on
any other view.

This clause points to the inward connection between the return of the slayer and the
death of the high priest. "The anointing with the holy oil was a symbol of the
communication of the Holy Ghost, by which the high priest was empowered to act
as mediator and representative of the nation before God, so that he alone could
carry out the yearly and general expiation for the whole nation, on the great day of
atonement. But as his life and work acquired a representative signification through

[Link] (1 of 2) [13/08/2004 [Link] p.m.]

 Keil and Delitzsch Commentary on the Old Testament

this anointing with the Holy Ghost, his death might also be regarded as a death for
the sins of the people, by virtue of the Holy Ghost imparted to him, through which
the unintentional manslayer received the benefits of the propitiation for his sin
before God, so that he could return cleansed to his native town, without further
exposure to the vengeance of the avenger of blood" (Comm. on Joshua, p. 448).
But inasmuch as, according to this view, the death of the high priest had the same
result in a certain sense, in relation to his time of office, as his function on the day
of atonement had had every year, "the death of the earthly high priest became
thereby a type of that of the heavenly One, who, through the eternal (holy) Spirit,
offered Himself without spot to God, that we might be redeemed from our
transgressions, and receive the promised eternal inheritance (Heb 9:14-15). Just as
the blood of Christ wrought out eternal redemption, only because through the
eternal Spirit He offered Himself without spot to God, so the death of the high
priest of the Old Testament secured the complete deliverance of the manslayer
form his sin, only because he had been anointed with the holy oil, the symbol of
the Holy Ghost" (p. 449).

Numbers 35:29-32

So these things shall be for a statute of judgment unto you throughout your
generations in all your dwellings.

If, therefore, the confinement of the unintentional manslayer in the city of refuge
was neither an ordinary exile nor merely a means of rescuing him from the revenge
of the enraged goel , but an appointment of the just and merciful God for the
expiation of human blood even though not wilfully shed, that, whilst there was no
violation of judicial righteousness, a barrier might be set to the unrighteousness of
family revenge; it was necessary to guard against any

<- Previous First Next ->

[Link] (2 of 2) [13/08/2004 [Link] p.m.]

 Keil and Delitzsch Commentary on the Old Testament

<- Previous First Next ->

such abuse of this gracious provision of the righteous God, as that into which the
heathen right of asylum had degenerated.

(Note: On the asyla , in general, see Winer's Real-Wörterbuch , art. Freistatt; Pauly , Real-encyckl.
der class. Alterthums-wissenschaft, Bd. i. s. v. Asylum; but more especially K. Dann, "über den
Ursprung des Asylrechts und dessen Schicksale und Ueberreste in Europa," in his Ztschr. für
deutsches Recht , Lpz. 1840. "The asyla of the Greeks, Romans , and Germans differed altogether
from those of the Hebrews; for whilst the latter were never intended to save the wilful criminal from
the punishment he deserved, but were simply established for the purpose of securing a just sentence,
the former actually answered the purpose of rescuing the criminal from the punishment which he
legally deserved.")

The instructions which follow in vv. 29-34 were intended to secure this object. In
v. 29, there is first of all the general law, that these instructions (those given in vv.
11-28) were to be for a statute of judgment (see Num 27:11) for all future ages
("throughout your generations," see Ex 12:14,20). Then, in v. 30, a just judgment is
enforced in the treatment of murder. "Whoso killeth any person (these words are
construed absolutely), at the mouth (the testimony) of witnesses shall the murderer
be put to death; and one witness shall not answer (give evidence) against a person
to die;" i.e., if the taking of life were in question, capital punishment was not to be
inflicted upon the testimony of one person only, but upon that of a plurality of
witnesses. One witness could not only be more easily mistaken than several, but
would be more likely to be partial than several persons who were unanimous in
bearing witness to one and the same thing.

The number of witnesses was afterwards fixed at two witnesses, at least, in the case
of capital crimes (Deut 17:6), and two or three in the case of every crime (Deut
19:15; cf. John 8:17; 2 Cor 13:1; Heb 10:28). - Lastly (vv. 31ff.), the command is
given not to take redemption money, either for the life of the murderer, who was a
wicked man to die, i.e., deserving of death (such a man was to be put to death); nor
"for fleeing into the city of refuge, to return to dwell in the land till the death of the
[Link] (1 of 2) [13/08/2004 [Link] p.m.]
 Keil and Delitzsch Commentary on the Old Testament

high priest:" that is to say, they were neither to allow the wilful murderer to come
to terms with the relative of the man who had been put to death, by the payment of
a redemption fee, and so to save his life, as is not unfrequently the case in the East
at the present day (cf. Robinson , Pal. i. p. 209, and Lane's Manners and Customs);
nor even to allow the unintentional murderer to purchase permission to return
home from the city of refuge before the death of the high priest, by the payment of
a money compensation.

Numbers 35:33

So ye shall not pollute the land wherein ye are: for blood it defileth the land: and
the land cannot be cleansed of the blood that is shed therein, but by the blood of
him that shed it.

The Israelites were not to desecrate their land by sparing the murderer; as blood,
i.e., bloodshed or murder, desecrated the land, and there was no expiation ( yªkupar
(OT:3722)) to the land for the blood that was shed in it, except through the blood
of the man who had shed it, i.e., through the execution of the murderer, by which
justice would be satisfied.

<- Previous First Next ->

[Link] (2 of 2) [13/08/2004 [Link] p.m.]

 Keil and Delitzsch Commentary on the Old Testament

<- Previous First Next ->

Numbers 35:34

Defile not therefore the land which ye shall inhabit, wherein I dwell: for I the
LORD dwell among the children of Israel.

And they were not to desecrate the land in which they dwelt by tolerating
murderers, because Jehovah, the Holy One, dwelt in it, among the children of Israel
(cf. Lev 18:25ff.).

Law Concerning the Marriage of Heiresses. Ch. 36.

Numbers 36:1-3

And the chief fathers of the families of the children of Gilead, the son of Machir,
the son of Manasseh, of the families of the sons of Joseph, came near, and spake
before Moses, and before the princes, the chief fathers of the children of Israel:

The occasion for this law was a representation made to Moses and the princes of
the congregation by the heads of the fathers' houses ( haa'aabowt (OT:1 ) for beeyt-
haa'aabowt , as in Ex 6:25, etc.) of the family of Gilead the Manassite, to which
Zelophehad (Num 26:33) belonged, to the effect that, by allotting an hereditary
possession to the daughters of Zelophehad, the tribe-territory assigned to the
Manassites would be diminished if they should marry into another tribe. They
founded their appeal upon the command of Jehovah, that the land was to be
distributed by lot among the Israelites for an inheritance (v. 2 compared with Num
26:55-56, and 33:54); and although it is not expressly stated, yet on the ground of
the promise of the everlasting possession of Canaan (Gen 17:8), and the provision
made by the law, that an inheritance was not to be alienated (Lev 25:10,13,23ff.),
they understood it as signifying that the portion assigned to each tribe was to
[Link] (1 of 2) [13/08/2004 [Link] p.m.]
 Keil and Delitzsch Commentary on the Old Testament

continue unchanged to all generations. (The singular pronoun, my Lord, in v. 2,

refers to the speaker, as in Num 32:27.) Now, as the inheritance of their brother,
i.e., their tribe-mate Zelophehad, had been given to his daughters (Num 27:1), if
they should be chosen as wives by any of the children of the (other) tribes of Israel,
i.e., should marry into another tribe, their inheritance would be taken away from the
tribe-territory of Manasseh, and would be added to that of the tribe into which they
were received. The suffix laahem (OT:3807a) (v. 3) refers ad sensum to maTeh
(OT:4294), the tribe regarded according to its members.

Numbers 36:4

And when the jubile of the children of Israel shall be, then shall their inheritance
be put unto the inheritance of the tribe whereunto they are received: so shall
their inheritance be taken away from the

<- Previous First Next ->

[Link] (2 of 2) [13/08/2004 [Link] p.m.]

 Keil and Delitzsch Commentary on the Old Testament

<- Previous First Next ->

inheritance of the tribe of our fathers.

And when the year of jubilee came round (see Lev 25:10), their inheritance would
be entirely withdrawn from the tribe of Manasseh. Strictly speaking, the hereditary
property would pass at once, when the marriage took place, to the tribe into which
an heiress married, and not merely at the year of jubilee. But up to the year of
jubilee it was always possible that the hereditary property might revert to the tribe
of Manasseh, either through the marriage being childless, or through the purchase
of the inheritance. But in the year of jubilee all landed property that had been
alienated was to return to its original proprietor or his heir (Lev 25:33ff.). In this
way the transfer of an inheritance from one tribe to another, which took place in
consequence of a marriage, would be established in perpetuity. And it was in this
sense that the elders of the tribe of Manasseh meant that a portion of the
inheritance which had fallen to them by lot would be taken away from their tribe at
the year of jubilee.

Numbers 36:5-9

And Moses commanded the children of Israel according to the word of the
LORD, saying, The tribe of the sons of Joseph hath said well.

Moses declared that what they had affirmed was right ( keen (OT:3651)), and then,
by command of Jehovah, he told the daughters of Zelophehad that they might
marry whoever pleased them (the suffix - hem , attached to bª`eeyneey (OT:5869),
for - hen , as in Ex 1:21; Gen 31:9, etc.), but that he must belong to the family of
their father's tribe, that is to say, must be a Manassite. For (v. 7) the inheritance
was not to turn away the Israelites from one tribe to another (not to be transferred
from one to another), but every Israelite was to keep to the inheritance of his
father's tribe, and no one was to enter upon the possession of another tribe by
marrying an heiress belonging to that tribe. This is afterwards extended, in vv. 8

[Link] (1 of 2) [13/08/2004 [Link] p.m.]

 Keil and Delitzsch Commentary on the Old Testament

and 9, into a general law for every heiress in Israel.

Numbers 36:10-12

Even as the LORD commanded Moses, so did the daughters of Zelophehad:

In vv. 10-12 it is related that, in accordance with these instructions, the five
daughters of Zelophehad, whose names are repeated from Num 26:33 and 27:1
(see also Josh 17:3), married husbands from the families of the Manassites,
namely, sons of their cousins (? uncles), and thus their inheritance remained in
their father's tribe ( `al (OT:5921) haayaah (OT:1961), to be and remain upon
anything).

Numbers 36:13

These are the commandments and the judgments, which the LORD commanded
by the hand of Moses

<- Previous First Next ->

[Link] (2 of 2) [13/08/2004 [Link] p.m.]

 Keil and Delitzsch Commentary on the Old Testament

<- Previous First

These are the commandments and the judgments, which the LORD commanded
by the hand of Moses unto the children of Israel in the plains of Moab by Jordan

The conclusion refers not merely to the laws and rights contained in Num 33:50-
36:13, but includes the rest of the laws given in the steppes of Moab (ch. 25-30),
and forms the conclusion tot he whole book, which places the lawgiving in the
steppes of Moab by the side of the lawgiving at Mount Sinai (Lev. 26:46; 47:34 )
and bring sit to a close, though without in any way implying that the explanation (
bee'eer (OT:874), Deut 1:5), further development, and hortatory enforcement of
the law and its testimonies, statutes, and judgments (Deut 1:5; 4:44ff., Num
12:1ff.), which follow in Deuteronomy , are not of Mosaic origin.

(from Keil & Delitzsch Commentary on the Old Testament: New Updated Edition,
Electronic Database. Copyright
(c) 1996 by Hendrickson Publishers, Inc.)

<- Previous First

[Link] [13/08/2004 [Link] p.m.]