NUMBERS 27 COMMENTARYEDITED BY GLENN PEASE

Zelophehad’s Daughters27 The daughters of Zelophehad son of Hepher, the son of Gilead, the son of Makir, the son of Manasseh, belonged to the clans of Manasseh son of Joseph. The names of the daughters were Mahlah, Noah Hoglah, Milkah and Tirzah. They came forward

BARNES, "Women in Israel had not, up to the present time, enjoyed any distinct right of inheritance. Yet a father, whether sons had been born to him or not, had the power, either before or at his death, to cause part of his estate to pass to a daughter; in which case her husband married into her family rather than she into his, and the children were regarded as of the family from which the estate had come. Thus, Machir, ancestor of Zelophehad, although he had a son Gilead, left also, as is probable, an inheritance to his daughter, the wife of Hezron of the tribe of Judah, by reason of which their descendants, among whom was Jair, were reckoned as belonging to the tribe of Manasseh (Num_32:41; 1Ch_2:21 ff).

CLARKE, "The daughters of Zelophehad - The singular case of these women caused an additional law to be made to the civil code of Israel, which satisfactorily ascertained and amply secured the right of succession in cases of inheritance. The law, which is as reasonable as it is just, stands thus:1. On the demise of the father the estate goes to the sons;2. If there be no son, the daughters succeed; 3. If there be no daughter, the brothers of the deceased inherit;4. If there be no brethren or paternal uncles, the estate goes to the brothers of his father;

1

5. If there be no grand uncles or brothers of the father of the deceased, then the nearest akin succeeds to the inheritance.Beyond the fifth degree the law does not proceed, because as the families of the Israelites were kept distinct in their respective tribes, there must always be some who could be called kinsmen, and were really such, having descended without interruption from the patriarch of the tribe.

GILL, "Then came the daughters of Zelophehad,.... Who are mentioned among the families of Manasseh, under that of the Hepherites, Num_26:33, their father being dead, and they having no brethren, when they heard the land was to be divided among those that were numbered, and who were only males of twenty years old and upwards, were concerned, lest they should have no share in the division of the land; and therefore came, according to the Targum of Jonathan, to the house of judgment, or court of judicature, where Moses, the princes, &c. were now sitting: the genealogy of Zelophehad is given: he was the son of Hepher, the son of Gilead, the son of Machir, the son of Manasseh, the son of Joseph; by which it appears he was of the tribe of Manasseh, and of the fourth generation from him: and these are the names of his daughters, Mahlah, Noah, ann Hoglah, and Milcah, and Tirzah; in the same order their names are given in Num_26:33, but in Num_36:11, it is a little altered, Noah and Tirzah change places, which Jarchi says shows they were upon an equality one with another.

HENRY, "Mention is made of the case of these daughters of Zelophehad in the chapter before, v. 33. It should seem, by the particular notice taken of it, that it was a singular case, and that the like did not at this time occur in all Israel, that the head of a family had no sons, but daughters only. Their case is again debated (Num_36:1-13) upon another article of it; and, according to the judgments given in their case, we find them put in possession, Jos_17:3, Jos_17:4. One would suppose that their personal character was such as added weight to their case, and caused it to be so often taken notice of.

K&D, "Claims of Zelophehad's Daughters to an Inheritance in the Promised Land. - Num_27:1-4. 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 in

2

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 (1Ch_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; Deu_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 (1Ch_2:21-22). We find another similar instance in Ezr_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.

CALVIN, "1.Then came the daughters of Zelophehad. A narrative is here introduced respecting the daughters of Zelophehad, of the family of Machir, who demanded to be admitted to a share of its inheritance; and the decision of this question might have been difficult, unless all doubt had been removed by the sentence of God Himself. For, since in the law no name is given to women, it would seem that no account of them was to be taken in the division of the land. And, in fact, God laid down this as the general rule; but a special exception is here made, i.e., that whenever a family shall be destitute of male heirs, females should succeed, for the preservation of the name. I am aware that this is a point which is open to dispute, since there are obvious arguments both for and against it, but let the decree that God pronounced suffice for us.Although (the daughters of Zelophehad) plead before Moses for their own private advantage, still the discussion arose from a good principle; inasmuch as they would not have been so anxious about the succession, if God’s promise had not been just as much a matter of certainty to them as if they were at this moment demanding to be

3

put in possession of it. They had not yet entered the land, nor were their enemies conquered; yet, relying on the testimony of Moses, they prosecute their suit as if the tranquil possession of their rights were to be accorded them that very day. And this must have had the effect of confirming the expectations of the whole people, when Moses consulted God as respecting a matter of importance, and pronounced by revelation that which was just and right; for the discussion, being openly moved before them all, must have given them encouragement, at least to imitate these women.

COFFMAN, "The narration of only two events makes up this chapter. These are:(1) the new legislation that came because of an appeal by the daughters of Zelophehad (Numbers 27:1-11), and(2) Joshua's appointment as leader of Israel upon God's announcement of the impending death of Moses.The principal critical conceit with reference to this chapter is that which would relegate it to the status of a very late interpolation into the Pentateuch following the exile.[1] The basis of such an error is the acceptance of a false premise. The false premise was stated thus by Gray: "There is no trace of such a right (the right of females to inherit) prior to the times of the exile."[2] That proposition is false, and so are all postulations based upon it. "In Egypt, where Israel had dwelt so long, inheritance passed through mothers, and under an extenuating circumstance, that is (exactly) what is being allowed in the text (here)."[3] (For more on this, along with a Biblical example to the contrary, see under Numbers 27:5.) In addition, Keil cited another example from pre-Mosaic times in the instance of Jarha (1 Chronicles 2:21,22).[4] Furthermore, the critical imagination that the post-exilic priesthood of Israel would have been in any manner whatever inclined to legislate on such a subject is ridiculous. The kings of Israel, long before the exile, ruthlessly and effectively destroyed the whole concept of the "unalienable ownership of the land," as pertaining to the original tribes in perpetuity. The appeal, along with the arguments presented by the daughters of Zelophehad, would have been an impossibility during the period of history to which some critical scholars would arbitrarily assign this chapter.Another favorite critical mistake in the interpretation of this chapter appears in this remark by Dummelow: "Moses receives intimation of his approaching death, and Joshua is appointed leader in his place."[5] The word "intimation" is not a correct designation of the information received by Moses about his impending death. Synonyms for intimation are hunch, hint, premonition, suggestion, etc.[6] The Sacred Text flatly declares that God said unto Moses, "thou shalt be gathered unto thy fathers," just as his brother Aaron died because of sin at Meribah. Back of Dummelow's remark that Moses received an intimation of his death is the critical axiom that "God never said anything at all to Moses, or to anyone else"! Christians

4

should not be deceived by that type of denial.WHEN MAY DAUGHTERS INHERIT?"Then drew near the daughters of Zelophehad, the son of Hepher, the son of Gilead, the son of Machir, the son of Manasseh, of the families of Manasseh the son of Joseph; and these are the names of his daughters: Mahlah, Noah, and Hoglah, and Milcah, and Tirzah. And they stood before Moses, and before Eleazar the priest, and before the princes and all the congregation, at the door of the tent of meeting, saying, Our father died in the wilderness, and he was not among the company of them that gathered themselves together against Jehovah in the company of Korah: but he died in his own sin; and he had no sons. Why should the name of our father be taken away from among his family, because he had no son? Give unto us a possession among the brethren of our father. And Moses brought their cause before Jehovah."Some have complained that the genealogical information here given would seem to cover only about eight generations, which "is hardly in accord with the 470 years (sojourn in Egypt) required by the narrative; some links however may have been dropped."[7] Of course, this is an abbreviated list, as are doubtless many of the others in the Pentateuch. We should ever bear in mind that Moses had no intention here of furnishing us with an auditor's record of all the things related. "The names of this passage are those of clans (or places), which is sufficient to show that this is not a history of certain individuals, but a mode of raising a legal point."[8]Although no clear-cut legislation conferred rights of inheritance upon daughters, Cook informs us that the right surely existed long before the events of this chapter. Note: "A father, whether or not sons had been born to him, had the power either before or at his death, to cause part of his estate to pass to a daughter; in which case her husband married into her family, rather than she into his; and the children were regarded as of the family from which the estate had come. A Biblical example of this is Machir, one of the ancestors of Zelophehad; although he had a son Gilead, he left also an inheritance to his daughter, the wife of Hezron of the tribe of Judah, by reason of which their descendants (including Jair) were reckoned as belonging to the tribe of Manasseh (Numbers 32:41; 1 Chronicles 2:21ff)."[9]Jamieson is probably correct in his surmise that these daughters of Zelophehad brought up the subject of their inheritance because at that very moment Moses and the High Priest, and all the princes of the people were gathered in the tent of meeting, or near it, making plans to divide up the land of Canaan among males only, with their father's house left out because there had been no sons of his to register. Consequently, they seized the opportunity to bring the matter to the attention of all the leaders of the people, which they effectively did.[10]

5

"But he died in his own sin ..." (Numbers 27:3). This admission by the daughters of Zelophehad apparently refers to the general sin of all the children of Israel who refused to go up and possess Canaan (Numbers 14:26-30).[11] They did not claim that their father was without sin, but that he was not guilty in the matter of Korah's outright rebellion against Moses (and against God).

COKE, "Numbers 27:1-2. Then came the daughters of Zelophehad, &c.— In the last register of the Israelitish families, notice was taken of Zelophehad, son of Hepher, in the tribe of Manasseh, who died without male issue, and left five daughters his only heirs, chap. Numbers 26:33. These women, being informed that the land of Canaan was to be divided among the heads of families of tribes, mentioned in that register, which consisted only of males, imagined that they, being females, were to be excluded from all settled inheritance in the lands and estates in that country, and, consequently, that the name and family of the Hepherites would become utterly extinguished; whereupon they drew up a representation of their case, which they laid before Moses in a full court of the high priest and judges, assembled with him at the tabernacle. See Exodus 18:25. By all the congregation is meant the seventy elders, or representatives of the people, chap. Numbers 11:24.

EBC, "The twenty-seventh chapter is partly occupied with the details of a case which raised a question of inheritance. Five daughters of one Zelophehad of the tribe of Manasseh appealed to Moses on the ground that they were the representatives of the household, having no brother. Were they to have no possession because they were women? Was the name of their father to be taken away because he had no son? It was not to be supposed that the want of male descendants had been a judgment on their father. He had died in the wilderness, but not as a rebel against Jehovah, like those who were in the company of Korah. He had "died in his own sins." They petitioned for an inheritance among the brethren of their father.The claim of these women appears natural if the right of heirship is acknowledged in any sense, with this reservation, however, that women might not be able properly to cultivate the land, and could not do much in the way of defending it. And these, for the time, were considerations of no small account. The five sisters may of course have been ready to undertake all that was necessary as occupiers of a farm, and no doubt they reckoned on marriage. But the original qualification that justified heirship of land was ability to use the resources of the inheritance and take part in all national duties. The decision in this case marks the beginning of another conception - that of the personal development of women. The claim of the daughters of Zelophehad was allowed, with the result that they found themselves called to the cultivation of mind and life in a manner which would not otherwise have been open to them. They received by the judgment here recorded a new position of responsibility as well as privilege. The law founded on their case must have helped to make the women of Israel intellectually and morally vigorous.

6

The rules of inheritance among an agricultural people, exposed to hostile incursions, must, like that of Numbers 27:8, assume the right of sons in preference to daughters; but under modern social conditions there are no reasons for any such preference, except indeed the sentiment of family, and the maintenance of titles of rank. But the truth is that inheritance, so-called, is every year becoming of less moral account as compared with the acquisitions that are made by personal industry and endeavour. Property is only of value as it is a means to the enlargement and fortifying of the individual life. The decision on behalf of the daughters of Zelophehad was of importance for what it implied rather than for what it actually gave. It made possible that dignity and power which we see illustrated in the career of Deborah, whose position as a "mother in Israel" does not seem to have depended much, if at all, on any accident of inheritance; it was reached by the strength of her character and the ardour of her faith.The generation that came from Egypt has passed away, and now {Numbers 27:12} Moses himself receives his call. He is to ascend the mountain of Abarim and look forth over the land Israel is to inhabit; then he is to be gathered to his people. He is reminded of the sin by which Aaron and he dishonoured God when they failed to sanctify Him at the waters of Meribah. The burden of the Book of Numbers is revealed. The brooding sadness which lies on the whole narrative is not cast by human mortality but by moral transgression and defect. There is judgment for revolt, as of those who followed Korah. There are men who like Zelophehad die "in their own sins," filling up the time allowed to imperfect obedience and faith, the limit of existence that fails short of the glory of God. And Moses, whose life is lengthened that his honourable task may be fully done, must all the more conspicuously pay the penalty of his high misdemeanour. With the goal of Israel’s great destiny in view the narrative moves from shadow to shadow. Here and throughout, this is a characteristic of Old Testament history. And the shadows deepen as they rest on lives more capable of noble service, more guilty in their disbelief and defiance of Jehovah.The rebuke which darkens over Moses at the close and lies on his grave does not obscure the greatness of the man; nor have all the criticisms of the history in which he plays so great a part overclouded his personality. The opening of Israel’s career may not now seem so marvellous in a sense as once it seemed, nor so remote from the ordinary course of Providence. Development is found where previously the complete law, institution, or system appeared to burst at once into maturity. But the features of a man look clearly forth on us from the Pentateuehal narrative; and the story of the life is so coherent as to compel a belief in its veracity, which at the same time is demanded by the circumstances of Israel. A beginning there must have been, in the line which the earliest prophets continued, and that beginning in a single mind, a single will. The Moses of these books of the exodus is one who could have unfolded the ideas from which the nationality of Israel sprang: a man of smaller mind would have made a people of more ordinary frame. Institutions that grow in the course of centuries may reflect their perfected form on the story of their origin;

7

it is, however, certain this cannot be true of a faith. That does not develop. What it is at its birth it continues to be; or, if a change takes place, it will be to the loss of definiteness and power. Kuenen himself makes the three universal religions to be Judaism, Mohammedanism, and Christianity. The analogy of the two latter is conclusive with regard to the first-that Moses was the author of Israel’s faith in Jehovah.And this involves much, both with regard to the human characteristics and the Divine inspiration of the founder, much that an after-age would have been utterly incapable of imagining. When we find a life depicted in these Penta-teuchal narratives, corresponding in all its features with the place that has to be filled, revealing one who, under the conditions of Israel’s nativity, might have made a way for it into sustaining faith, it is not difficult to accept the details in their substance. The records are certainly not Moses’ own. They are exoteric, now from the people’s point of view, now from that of the priests. But they present with wonderful fidelity and power what in the life of the founder went to stamp his faith on the national mind. And the marvellous thing is that the shadows as well as the lights in the biography serve this great end. The gloom that falls at Meribah and rests on Nebo tells of the character of Jehovah, bears witness to the Supreme Royalty which Moses lived and laboured to exalt. A living God, righteous and faithful, gracious to them that trusted and served Him, who also visited iniquity-such was the Jehovah between whom and Israel Moses stood as mediator, such the Jehovah by whose command he was to ascend the height of Abarim to die.To die, to be gathered to his people-and what then? It is at death we reckon up the account and estimate the value and power of faith. Has it made a man ready for his change, ripened his character, established his work on a foundation as of rock? The command which at Horeb Moses received long ago, and the revelation of God he there enjoyed, have had their opportunity; to what have they come?The supreme human desire is to know the nature, to understand the distinctive glory of the Most High. At the bush Moses had been made aware of the presence with him of the God of his fathers, the Fear of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob. His duty also had been made clear. But the mystery of being was still unsolved. With sublime daring, therefore, he pursued the inquiry: "Behold when I come unto the children of Israel, and shall say unto them, The God of your fathers hath sent me unto you; and they shall say to me, What is His name? what shall I say unto them? "The answer came in apocalypse, in a form of simple words:-"I AM THAT I AM." The solemn Name expressed an intensity of life, a depth and power of personal being, far transcending that of which man is conscious. It belongs to One who has no beginning, whose life is apart from time, above the forces of nature, independent of them. Jehovah says, "I am not what you see, not what nature is, standing forth into the range of your sight; I Am in eternal separation, self-existent, with underived fulness of power and life." The remoteness and incomprehensibility of God remain, although much is revealed. Whatever experience of life each man sums up for himself in saying "I am," aids him in realising the life of God. Have we aspired?

8

have we loved? have we undertaken and accomplished? have we thought deeply? Does any one in saying "I am" include the consciousness of long and varied life?-the "I Am" Of God comprehends all that. And yet He changes not. Beneath our experience of life which changes there is this great Living Essence. "I AM THAT I AM," profoundly, eternally true, self-consistent, with whom is no beginning of experience or purpose, yet controlling, harmonising, yea, originating all in the unfathomable depths of an eternal Will.Ideas like these, we must believe, shaped themselves, if not clearly, at least in dim outline before the mind of Moses, and made the faith by which he lived. And how had it proved itself as the stay of endeavour, the support of a soul under heavy burdens of duty, trial, and sorrowful consciousness? The reliance it gave had never failed. In Egypt, before Pharaoh, Moses had been sustained by it as one who had a sanction for his demands and actions which no king or priest could claim. At Sinai it had given spiritual strength and definite authority to the law. It was the spirit of every oracle, the underlying force in every judgment. Faith in Jehovah, more than natural endowments, made Moses great. His moral vision was wide and clear because of it, his power among the people as a prophet and leader rested upon it. And the fruit of it, which began to be seen when Israel learned to trust Jehovah as the one living God and girt itself for His service, has not even yet been all gathered in. We pass by the theories of philosophy regarding the unseen to rest in the revelation of God which embodies Moses’ faith. His inspiration, once for all, carried the world beyond polytheism to monotheism, unchallengeably true, inspiring, sublime.There can be no doubt that death tested the faith of Moses as a personal reliance on the Almighty. How he found sufficient help in the thought of Jehovah when Aaron died, and when his own call came, we can only surmise. For him it was a familiar certainty that the Judge of all the earth did right. His own decision went with that of Jehovah in every great moral question; and even when death was involved, however great a punishment it appeared, however sad a necessity, he must have said, Good is the will of the Lord. But there was more than acquiescence. One who had lived so long with God, finding all the springs and aims of life in Him, must have known that irresistible power would carry on what had been begun, would complete to its highest tower that building of which the foundation had been laid. Moses had wrought not for self but for God; he could leave his work in the Divine hand with absolute assurance that it would be perfected. And as for his own destiny, his personal life, what shall we say? Moses had been what he was through the grace of Him whose name is "I AM THAT I Am" He could at least look into the dim region beyond and say, "It is God’s will that I pass through the gate. I am spiritually His, and am strong in mind for His service. I have been what He has willed, excepting in my transgression. I shall be what He wills; and that cannot be ill for me; that will be best for me." God was gracious and forgave sin, though He could not suffer it to pass unjudged. Even in appointing death the Merciful One could not fail to be merciful to His servant. The thought of Moses might not carry him into the future of his own existence, into what should be after he had breathed his last. But God was

9

His; and he was God’s.So the personal drama of many acts and scenes draws to a close with forebodings of the end, and yet a little respite ere the curtain falls. The music is solemn as befits the night-fall, yet has a ring of strong purpose and inexhaustible sufficiency. It is not the "still sad music of humanity" we hear with the words, "Get thee up into this mountain of Abarim, and behold the land which I have given unto the children of Israel. And when thou hast seen it, thou also shalt be gathered unto thy people, as Aaron thy brother was gathered." It is the music of the Voice that awakens life, commands and inspires it, cheers the strong in endeavour and soothes the tired to rest. He who speaks is not weary of Moses, nor does He mean Moses to be weary of his task. But this change lies in the way of God’s strong purpose, and it is assumed that Moses will neither rebel nor repine. Far away, in an evolution unforeseen by man, will come the glorification of One who is the Life indeed; and in His revelation as the Son of the Eternal Father Moses will share. With Christ he will speak of the change of death and that faith which overcomes all change.The designation of Joshua, who had long been the minister of Moses, and perhaps for some time administrator of affairs, is recorded in the close of the chapter. The prayer of Moses assumes that by direct commission the fitness of Joshua must be signified to the people. It might be Jehovah’s will that, even yet, another should take the headship of the tribes. Moses spake unto the Lord, saying, "Let Jehovah, the God of the spirits of all flesh, appoint a man over the congregation which may go out before them, and which may come in before them, and which may lead them out and which may bring them in: that the congregation of Jehovah be not as Sheep which have no shepherd." One who has so long endeavoured to lead, and found it so difficult, whose heart and soul and strength have been devoted to make Israel Jehovah’s people, can relax his hold of things without dismay only if he is sure that God will Himself choose and endow the successor. What aimless wandering there would be if the new leader proved incompetent, wanting wisdom or grace! How far about might Israel’s way yet be, in another sense than the compassing of Edom! Before the Friend of Israel Moses pours out his prayer for a shepherd fit to lead the flock.And the oracle confirms the choice to which Providence has already pointed. Joshua the son of Nun, "a man in whom is the spirit," is to have the call and receive the charge. His investiture with official right and dignity is to be in the sight of Eleazar the priest and all the congregation. Moses shall put of his own honour upon Joshua and declare his commission. Joshua shall not have the whole burden of decision resting upon him, for Jehovah will guide him. Yet he shall not have direct access to God in the tent of meeting as Moses had. In the time of special need Eleazar "shall inquire for him by the judgment of the Urim before Jehovah." Thus instructed, he shall exercise high authority."A man in whom is the spirit"-such is the one outstanding personal qualification. "The God of the spirits of all flesh" finds in Joshua the sincere will, the faithful

10

heart. The work that is to be done is not of a spiritual kind, but grim fighting, control of an army and of a people not yet amenable to law, under circumstances that will try a leader’s firmness, sagacity, and courage. Yet, even for such a task, allegiance to Jehovah and His purpose regarding Israel, the enthusiasm of faith, high spirit, not experience-these are the commendations of the chief. Qualified thus, Joshua may occasionally make mistakes. His calculations may not always be perfect, nor the means he employs exactly fitted to the end. But his faith will enable him to recover what is momentarily lost; his courage will not fail. Above all, he will be no opportunist guided by the turn of events, yielding to pressure or what may appear necessity. The one principle of faithfulness to Jehovah will keep him and Israel in a path which must be followed, even if success in a worldly sense be not immediately found. The priest who inquires of the Lord by Urim has a higher place under Joshua’s administration than under that of Moses. The theocracy will henceforth have a twofold manifestation, less of unity than before. And here the change is of a kind which may involve the gravest consequences. The simple statement of Numbers 27:21 denotes a very great limitation of Joshua’s authority as leader. It means that though on many occasions he can both originate and execute, all matters of moment shall have to be referred to the oracle. There will be a possibility of conflict between him and the priest with regard to the occasions that require such a reference to Jehovah. In addition there may be the uncertainty of responses through the Urim, as interpreted by the priest. It is easy also to see that by this method of appealing to Jehovah the door was opened to abuses which, if not in Joshua’s time, certainly in the time of the judges, began to arise.It may appear to some absolutely necessary to refer the Urim to a far later date. The explanation given by Ewald, that the inquiry was always by some definite question, and that the answer was found by means of the lot, obviates this difficulty. The Urim and Thummim, which mean "clearness and correctness," or as in our passage the Urim alone, may have been pebbles of different colours, the one representing an affirmative, the other a negative reply. But inquiry appears to have been made by these means after certain rites, and with forms which the priest alone could use. It is evident that absolute sincerity on his part, and unswerving loyalty to Jehovah, were an important element in the whole administration of affairs. A priest who became dissatisfied with the leader might easily frustrate his plans. On the other hand, a leader dissatisfied with the responses would be tempted to suspect and perhaps set aside the priest. There can be no doubt that here a serious possibility of divided counsels entered into the history of Israel, and we are reminded of many after events. Yet the circumstances were such that the whole power could not be committed to one man. With whatever element of danger, the new order had to begin.Moses laid his hands on Joshua and gave him his charge. As one who knew his own infirmities, he could warn the new chief of the temptations he would have to resist, the patience he would have to exercise. It was not necessary to inform Joshua of the duties of his office. With these he had become familiar. But the need for calm and sober judgment required to be impressed upon him. It was here he was defective,

11

and here that his "honour" and the maintenance of his authority would have to be secured. Deuteronomy mentions only the exhortation Moses gave to be strong and of a good courage, and the assurance that Jehovah would go before Joshua, would neither fail him nor forsake him. But though much is recorded, much also remains untold. An education of forty years had prepared Joshua for the hour of his investiture. Yet the words of the chief he was so soon to lose must have had no small part in preparing him for the burden and duty which he was now called by Jehovah to sustain as leader of Israel.ELLICOTT, "Our father died in the wilderness.—The preceding chapter records the fulfilment of the sentence of exclusion pronounced on the generation which came out of Egypt after the completion of the twentieth year of their age. The argument used by the daughters of Zelophehad appears to be that their father was not one of those who signally provoked the Divine displeasure, so that he might justly have forfeited for himself and his descendants a share in the possession of the promised land. “He died,” they say, “in his own sin.” There is a Jewish tradition that Zelophehad was the man who gathered sticks on the Sabbath day, and was stoned (Numbers 14:32). The more common interpretation of the expression is that he committed only the ordinary sins of human frailty (see Numbers 5:6), and that he died “the common death of all men,” and was “visited after the visitation of all men” (see Numbers 16:29), and consequently did not entail upon his posterity any special punishment for the sins which he had committed. In obedience to the directions contained in the preceding chapter (Numbers 26:52-56), the land of Canaan was to be portioned out, in accordance with the results of the census which had recently been taken. amongst the males who were upwards of twenty years of age; and consequently the daughters of Zelophehad, would not have shared in the inheritance. Keil (in loc.) quotes several instances in which the sons of mothers who possessed landed property were received through that inheritance into the family of their mothers, and included in the tribe to which the mothers belonged. In this case the desire of the daughters of Zelophehad was that their father’s name should be perpetuated—i.e., that their sons should be enrolled as descendants of Zelophehad, and should succeed to that portion of the land which, under ordinary circumstances, would have fallen to his sons, had he left any behind him. Bishop Wordsworth observes that, inasmuch as we are to regard the inheritance of Canaan as being a figure of the heavenly possession, the answer which was returned to the inquiry of Moses respecting the daughters of Zelophehad may be regarded as an indication that “in Christ Jesus there is neither male nor female,” and that women, no less than men, are “heirs according to the promise” (Galatians 3:28-29).POOLE, "The law of inheritance: for daughters on defect of sons; and on defect of them to the brother; and if there be none, to the next kinsman, Numbers 27:1-11. God commands Moses to go up into a mountain to view the land of Canaan, and die there: the reason, Numbers 27:12-14. Moses prays to the Lord to appoint an able successor, Numbers 27:15-17. Joshua chose, and confirmed in his office by imposition of hands before all the people, Numbers 27:18-23.

12

Perceiving that the males only were numbered, and that the land was to be divided to them only, they put in their claim for a share in their father’s inheritance.

WHEDON, "Verse 1-21, 2. The five daughters of Zelophehad, discovering the defect in the order for the division of Canaan given in the last chapter, by which they were disinherited, sons only being named, (see Genesis 31:14,) confident in the justice of their claim, with commendable enterprise determined to appeal to the highest human tribunal. Their appearance at the door of the tabernacle, before the supreme court of their nation, pleading the rights of their sex, presents a scene worthy the brush of the historical painter. It is the first woman’s rights convention on record. Their success justifies the efforts of their successors in modern times to secure a removal of all disabilities which are oppressive to their sex, and illustrates the nobility of the law-making sex, who have but to be clearly shown the injustice of any of their statutes in order to be moved to a rectification of the wrong.Verses 1-11ZELOPHEHAD’S DAUGHTERS — LAW OF INHERITANCE, Numbers 27:1-11.The Hebrew law of inheritance, in common with the usage of most Oriental nations, endowed the sons only, the eldest having a double portion, the daughters all being supposed to be married and cared for by their husbands. Up to this time no provision had been made for daughters in case of failure of male issue, nor for perpetuating the father’s name. The supplementary legislation in this chapter and in xxxvi, in striking resemblance to Athenian laws, endows the brotherless daughter till she marries a near relative and brings forth a son, who bears the name, not of his father, but of his maternal grandfather, and inherits his mother’s portion. These heiresses married their “father’s brother’s sons,” and their inheritance remained in the tribe of their father. Numbers 36:11-12; Joshua 17:4. For the intermingling of legislation with the narrative, see Introduction, (1.)BI 1-11, "The daughters of Zelophehad.Women’s rights—a parableI want to use this incident for a twofold purpose.I. In respect to its general teaching.

1. I would exhibit for your imitation the faith which these five young women, the daughters of Zelophehad, possessed with regard to the promised inheritance.2. There was this feature, too, about the faith of these five women—they knew that the inheritance was only to be won by encountering great difficulties.3. I commend the faith of these women to you because, believing in the

13

land, and believing that it would be won, they were not to be put about by the ill report of some who said that it was not a good land.4. Being thus sure of the land, and feeling certain about that, we must next commend them for their anxiety to possess a portion in it. Why did they think so much about it? I heard some one say the other day, speaking of certain young people, “I do not like to see young women religious; they ought to be full of fun and mirth, and not have their minds filled with such profound thoughts.” Now, I will be bound to say that this kind of philosophy was accredited in the camp of Israel, and that there were a great many young women there who said, “Oh, there is time enough to think about the good land when we get there; let us be polishing up the mirrors; let us be seeing to our dresses; let us understand how to put our fingers upon the timbrel when the time comes for it; but as for prosing about a portion among those Hivites and Hittites, what is the good of it? We will not bother ourselves about it.” But such was the strength of the faith of these five women that it led them to feel a deep anxiety for a share in the inheritance. They were not such simpletons as to live only for the present. These women were taken up with prudent anxious thoughts about their own part in the land. And let me say that they were right in desiring to have a portion there, when they recollected that the land had been covenanted to their fathers. They might well wish to have a part in a thing good enough to be a covenant-blessing.5. But I must commend them yet again for the way in which they set about the business. I do not find that they went complaining from tent to tent that they were afraid that they had no portion. Many doubters do that; they tell their doubts and fears to others, and they get no further. But these five women went straight away to Moses. He was at their head; he was their mediator ; and then it is said that “Moses brought their cause before the Lord.” You see, these women did not try to get what they wanted by force. They did not say, “Oh, we will take care and get our share when we get there.” They did not suppose that they had any merit which they might plead, and so get it; but they went straight away to Moses, and Moses took their cause, and laid it before the Lord. Dost thou want a portion in heaven, sinner? Go straight away to Jesus, and Jesus will take thy cause, and lay it before the Lord.

II. With a view of giving the whole incident a particular direction—1. Does it not strike you that there is here a special lesson for our unconverted sisters? Here are five daughters, I suppose young women, certainly unmarried, and these five were unanimous in seeking to have a portion where God had promised it to His people. Have! any young women here who would dissent from that? I am afraid I have! Do you not desire a portion in the skies? Have you no wish for glory? Can you sell Christ for a few hours of mirth? Will you give Him up for a giddy song or an idle companion? Those are not your friends who would lead you from the paths of righteousness.2. Has it not a loud voice, too, to the children of godly parents? I like

14

these young women saying that their father did not die with Korah, but that he only died the ordinary death which fell upon others because of the sin of the wilderness; and also, their saying, “Why should the name of our father be done away from among his family because he had no son?” It is a good thing to see this respect to parents, this desire to keep up the honour of the family. (C. H. Spurgeon.)

The request of the daughters of Zelophehad; the rights of womenI. The request of the daughters of Zelophehad.

1. Was presented in an orderly and becoming manner. “They stood before Moses and before Eleazar the priest,” &c. (Num_27:2). The made their request a regular manner, and to the proper authorities!2. Was eminently fair and reasonable While their father, by reason of sin, was, in common with the generation to which he belonged, excluded from the promised land, yet he had not done anything for which his children should be deprived of an inheritance therein.3. Indicated becoming respect for their father. They vindicate him from the guilt of sharing in any of the rebellions except the general one; and they evince an earnest desire for the perpetuation of his name and family.4. Implied faith in the promise of God to give Canaan to the Israelites.5. Implied an earnest desire for a portion in the promised land.

II. The Divine answer to their request.1. Was given by Jehovah to Moses in response to his inquiries. Notice here—

(1) The humility of Moses. He does not presume to decide the case himself, &c.(2) The direction which God grants to the humble. “The meek will He guide in judgment,” &c.

2. Commended the cause of the daughters of Zelophehad. “The daughters of Zelophehad speak right.”3. Granted the request of the daughters of Zelophehad. “Thou shalt surely give them a possession,” &c. (Num_27:7).4. Included a general law of inheritance. “And thou shalt speak unto the children of Israel,” &c. (Num_27:8-11). Thus a great benefit accrued to the nation from the request of the daughters of Zelophehad. (W. Jones.)

The daughters of Zelophehad1. The rectification of things that are wrong sometimes seems to come from man and not from God. Look at this case. It was the women

15

themselves who began the reform. Providence did not stir first. The five women gave this reform to the economy of Israel. So it would seem on the face of the story, and many people look at the face and go no farther, and so they blunder. Suggestions are from God. The very idea,, which we think our own is not our own, but God’s. “He is Lord of all,” of all good ideas, noble impulses, holy inspirations, sudden movements of the soul upward into higher life and broader liberty. This is His plan of training men. He seems to stand aside, and to take no part in some obviously good movements, and men say, “This is a human movement, a political movement, a non-religious movement,” not knowing what they are talking about, forgetting that the very idea out of which it all sprang came down from the Father of lights, that the very eloquence by which it is supported is Divinely taught, that the very gold which is its sinew is His: they do not go far enough back in their investigation into the origin of things, or they would find God in movements which are often credited to human genres alone.2. Everywhere the Bible is full of the very spirit of justice. It is the Magna Charta of the civilised world. This is the spirit that gives the Bible such a wonderful hold upon the confidence of mankind. Look at this case as an example. The applicants were women. All the precedents of Israel might have been pointed to as the answer to their appeal. Why create a special law for women? Why universalise a very exceptional case? Why not put these people down as sensational reformers? Yet, the case was heard with patience, and answered with dignity. Oh, women, you should love the Bible! It is your friend. It has done more for you than all other books put together. Wherever it goes it claims liberty for you, justice for you, honour for you.3. Every question should become the subject of social sympathy and matter of religious reference. These women were heard patiently. It is something to get a hearing for our grievances. Sometimes those grievances perish in the very telling; sometimes the statement of them brings unexpected help to our assistance. This case is what may be called a secular one; it is about land and name and inheritance; and even that question was made in Israel simply a religious one. In ancient Israel, with its priestly system, men had to go to the leader and the priest first; in Christianity we can go straight to God; we have no priesthood but Christ; the way to the throne is open night and day. Oh, wronged and suffering woman, tell thy case to the Father! Oh, man, carrying a burden too heavy for thy declining strength, speak to God about the weight, and He will help thee with His great power. (J. Parker, D. D.)

A rightful claimIt does the heart good to read such words as these at a time like the present, when so little is made of the proper standing and portion of God’s people, and when so many are content to go on from day to day, and year to year, without caring even to inquire into the things which are freely given to them of God. Nothing is more sad than to see the carelessness with which many

16

professing Christians treat such allimportant questions of the standing, walk, and hope of the believer and the Church of God. If God, in the aboundings of His grace, has been pleased to bestow upon us precious privileges, as Christians, ought we not to seek earnestly to know what these privileges are? Ought we not to seek to make them our own, in the artless simplicity of faith? Is it treating our God and His revelation worthily, to be indifferent as to whether we are servants or sons—as to whether we have the Holy Ghost dwelling in us or not—as to whether we are under law or under grace—whether ours is a heavenly or an earthly calling? Surely not. If there be one thing plainer than another in Scripture, it is this, that God delights in those who appreciate and enjoy the provision of His love—those who find their joy in Himself. “And the Lord spake unto Moses, saying, The daughters of Zelophehad speak right: thou shalt surely give them a possession of an inheritance among their father’s brethren; and thou shalt cause the inheritance of their father to pass unto them” (Num_27:5-7). Here was a glorious triumph, in the presence of the whole assembly. A bold and simple faith is always sure to be rewarded. It glorifies God, and God honours it. Need we travel from section to section, and from page to page of the holy volume to prove this? Need we turn to the Abrahams, the Hannahs, the Deborahs, the Rahabs, the Ruths of Old Testament times? or to the Marys, the Elizabeths, the centurions, and the Syro-phoenicians of the New Testament times? Wherever we turn, we learn the same great practical truth that God delights in a bold and simple faith—a faith that artlessly seizes and tenaciously holds all that He has given—that positively refuses, even in the very face of nature’s weakness and death, to surrender a single hair’s breadth of the Divinelygiven inheritance. Hence, then, we are deeply indebted to the daughters of Zelophebad. They teach us a lesson of inestimable value. And more than this, their acting gave occasion to the unfolding of a fresh truth which was to form the basis of a Divine rule for all future generations. The Lord commanded Moses, saying, “If a man die, and have no son, then ye shall cause his inheritance to pass unto his daughter.” Here we have a great principle laid down, in reference to the question of inheritance, of which, humanly speaking, we should have heard nothing had it not been for the faith and faithful conduct of these remarkable women. If they had listened to the voice of timidity and unbelief—if they had refused to come forward, before the whole congregation, in the assertion of the claims of faith; then, not only would they bare lost their own inheritance and blessing, but all future daughters of Israel, in a like position, would have been deprived of their portion likewise. Whereas, on the contrary, by acting in the precious energy of faith, they preserved their inheritance; they got the blessing; they received testimony from God; their names shine on the page of inspiration; and their conduct furnished, by Divine authority, a precedent for all future generations. Thus much as to the marvellous results of faith. But then we must remember that there is moral danger arising out of the very dignity and elevation which faith confers on those who, through grace, are enabled to exercise it; and this danger must be carefully guarded against. This is strikingly illustrated in the further history of the daughters of Zelophehad, as recorded in the last chapter of our book. “And the chief fathers,” &c. (Num_36:1-5). The “fathers” of the house of Joseph must be 17

heard as well as the “daughters.” The faith of the latter was most lovely; but there was just a danger lest, in the elevation to which that faith had raised them, they might forget the claims of others, and remove the landmarks which guarded the inheritance of their fathers. This had to be thought of and provided for. It was natural to suppose that the daughters of Zelophehad would marry; and moreover it was possible they might form an alliance outside the boundaries of their tribe; and thus in the year of jubilee—that grand adjusting institution—instead of adjustment, there would be confusion, and a permanent breach in the inheritance of Manasseh. This would never do; and therefore the wisdom of those ancient fathers is very apparent. We need to be guarded on every side, in order that the integrity of faith and the testimony may be duly maintained. (C. H. Mackintosh.)

Woman is the conscience of the worldNow, to live as one wishes, is said to be the rule of children. To live as one ought is the rule of men. And it is the office of woman in the world to assist men to live as they ought; to lift them to those higher levels of moral attainment, moral beauty, and power, which of themselves they will not gain. Woman has been said to be the conscience of the world, and there is a profound truth in that. Her moral intuition is clearer, her moral affection is apt to be sweeter and more powerful. It was the startled conscience of a Roman woman that almost held Pilate back from his transcendent crime. It was the conscience of Blanche of Castile which melted the noblest king France ever had, Louis IX. It was the sense of righteousness in the Scotch, in the Dutch, in the French, in the German women which upheld the Reformation and would not let it sink and die. It was the conscience of the American women which was the one invulnerable, irresistible, unsilenced enemy of American slavery. Whatever statesmen might plan about it, whatever political economists might think about it, whatever merchants might dream about it, every woman’s heart knew, that was not blighted and overshadowed by the influence of the present system, that it rested on a lie, and it was that conscience in the American women sending half a million of men out, its instruments and ministers, on the bloody field, which finally overcame and swept from existence that detestable system. That conscience of woman is the tower which society will always need to have developed and regnant within it, and there is no other office so great. I do not care what philosopher is expanding his vast system of philosophic thought; I do not care what statesman is planning for his country’s future; I do not care what architect is lifting the edifice into the air or is strewing the canvas with the splendour of his own spirit, there is no other office so grand on earth as that committed to woman—Christianly culture, in fellowship with God, of bringing up her acute and dominant moral sense into contact with the minds of men, that ultimate and supremest law of the universe, the law of righteousness, for which the planets and the stars were builded; she glorifies herself and she glorifies God in that sublime ministry. (R. S. Storrs, D. D.)

18

PETT, "IntroductionF. FUTURE PROSPECTS IN THE LAND (chapters 26-36).We now come to the final main section of the book. It will commence with the numbering of Israel, a sign that they were making ready for the final push, and is divided up into rededication and preparations for entering the land (chapters 26-32), and warning and encouragement with respect to it (chapters 33-36). The first section concentrates on the mobilisation and dedication of the people of Yahweh, and the punishment of those who by their behaviour hinder that mobilisation and dedication.In terms of the overall pattern of the book the first section covers the mobilisation of Israel, the appointment of Joshua on whom was the Spirit and the death of Moses For Sin (chapters 26-27), which compares with the earlier murmuring of Israel, the appointment of elders on whom came the Spirit, and the plague on Miriam because of sin (chapters 11-12). This then followed by the dedication of Israel through Feasts, Offerings and Vows and the purifying of Transjordan through vengeance on the Midianites and settlement of the two and a half Tribes (chapters 28-32) which compares with the purification and dedication of Israel in chapters 5-10.Analysis of the section.(I). Preparation for Entering the Land (chapters 26-32).This can be divided up into:a Numbering of the tribes for possessing the land (Numbers 26:1-51).b Instructions concerning division of the land (Numbers 26:52-62).c Vengeance had been brought on those who had refused to enter the land (Numbers 26:63-65).d Regulation in respect of land to be inherited by women and others (Numbers 27:1-11).e Provision of a dedicated shepherd for the people of Israel (Numbers 27:12-23).e Provision of a dedicated people and future worship in the land (Numbers 28-29).

19

d Regulation in respect of dedicatory vows made by women and others (Numbers 30)c Vengeance to be obtained on Midian (Numbers 31:1-24).b Instructions concerning division of the spoils of Midian (Numbers 31:25-54).a Settlement of the Transjordanian tribes in possessing land (Numbers 32).(II) Warning and Encouragement of The Younger Generation (chapters 33-36).a Review of the journey from Egypt to the plains of Moab (Numbers 33:1-49).b Instruction concerning the successful possession of and dividing up of the land in the future (Numbers 33:50 to Numbers 34:15).c The Leaders who will divide the land for them are appointed (Numbers 34:16-29).d Provision of cities for the Levites. (Numbers 35:1-5)d Provision of cities of refuge and prevention of defilement of the land (Numbers 35:6-34).c The Leaders of the tribe of Manasseh approach Moses about the possible loss of part of their division of the land as a result of the decision about the daughters of Zelophehad (Numbers 36:1-4).b Instruction concerning women who inherit land so as to maintain the dividing up of the land which they successfully possess (Numbers 36:5-12)a Final summary of the book and colophon. The journey is over. They are in the plains of Moab opposite Jericho (Numbers 36:13).In this section stress is laid on preparation for entering the land.(I). Overall Preparation for Entering the Land (chapters 26-32).The preparations include the mobilisation of Israel, instructions as to what to do on entering the land, appointment of a new commander-in-chief in whom is the Spirit, instructions concerning the worship to be offered to Yahweh, a description of the ‘atonement’ for the sin of Baal-peor and purification of the land by the slaughter of the Midianites, and the settling in of the tribes in their land on the east of Jordan, preparatory to their soldiers joining the offensive on Canaan.Chapters 26-27.

20

1). Initial Preparations for Entering the Promised Land From The Numbering of The Army To The Appointment of Joshua As Their New Commander-in-Chief (26-27:23).Analysis.a The second ‘numbering’ of the army in readiness for entry into the land (Numbers 26:1-51).b Provision for the possession of the land (Numbers 26:52-62).c The men of the previous generation not to enter the land (Numbers 26:63-65).c Faithful men to be allowed to inherit in the land posthumously (Numbers 27:1-11).b Moses ‘possesses’ the land by viewing it but is not to enter the land (Numbers 27:12-14)a The solemn appointment of Joshua as commander-in-chief ready for entry into the land (Numbers 27:15-23).The first step in all this would be the numbering of Israel.Chapter 27 Regulation In Respect Of Land To Be Inherited By Women and Relatives Where There Is No Full Blood Male Heir And The Provision Of a Shepherd For The People of Israel (Numbers 27:12-23).This chapter divides into three sections, the provision concerning land to be granted to a man’s family posthumously where he died before entering the land and had no male heir to receive his portion; the command to Moses to ascend a mountain in Abarim (Mount Nebo - Deuteronomy 32:48-52) to behold the land and possess it by sight before he died, and the appointment of a new Shepherd for the people, at Moses’ request, in the person of Joshua, a man in whom is the Spirit, in liaison with Eleazar the Priest. Joshua was one of the two men of the old generation who was not to die.So these three incidents deal with three different types of men in their dealings with life and death. The first deals with one who was of the new generation, but who died in the wilderness (for he died for his own sins not because of the sin of the people). And yet in his daughters he would inherit the land. The second deals with the one who would die without entering the land, but not as those who died in the wilderness as a punishment had died. He (Moses) would be ‘gathered to his fathers’ as Aaron had been. But he would inherit the land by seeing it with his eyes. And the third deals with a member of the old generation who would enter the new land alive and would indeed inherit the land.

21

One question that was raised by the closing verses of the last chapter was, what about those who died in the wilderness who were not of the older generation, who did not die because of that sin? Were they to be equally punished by not receiving a portion of the new land if they had no male heirs? Of course if they had male heirs those would receive their portion. A portion of the new land would be allocated to their families. But what if they died without a male heir? Their family would receive no portion of the land that had been promised to the man prior to his dying. Their name would not be remembered in Israel, for they would possess no land, even though they had daughters. Could that be right in the eyes of Yahweh? The answer was to be ‘no, it is not right’.It is not accidental that this comes immediately after the description of those who through their unbelief died in the wilderness. They had been faced with a challenge, had been unable to trust God, and had drawn back from obedience, and had been sentenced to die miserably in the wilderness. How great a contrast there was between them and these five brave young women of the tribe of Manasseh. They too were faced up with a challenge as the Manassites began to discuss the distribution of their new possessions. They saw themselves as being frozen out, as being thrust to one side, and their father’s name as dying out from Israel. But they believed in Yahweh. They believed that He would not allow them to be treated unfairly and allow their father’s name to perish unjustly. And with great boldness and trepidation they approached Moses and the congregation of Israel to seek to have this great wrong righted. We cannot imagine what huge courage it would have taken, for rarely did young women such as they come to the door of the tent of meeting. But they believed in Yahweh and refused to be daunted, and He saw and gave them what they asked.They also stand in stark contrast to the women of Moab. It was not theirs to seek to lead men astray after other gods, and to drag men to destruction. Rather they would fight to ensure the preservation of their father’s name , and were deeply concerned for the inheritance that Yahweh had for them. This was the quality of the new generation, and Moses knew that the story would serve as an inspiration to Israel to take their courage in both hands and move forward to establish their names in the land which Yahweh had in store for them.Verse 1-2Chapter 27 Regulation In Respect Of Land To Be Inherited By Women and Relatives Where There Is No Full Blood Male Heir And The Provision Of a Shepherd For The People of Israel (Numbers 27:12-23).This chapter divides into three sections, the provision concerning land to be granted to a man’s family posthumously where he died before entering the land and had no male heir to receive his portion; the command to Moses to ascend a mountain in Abarim (Mount Nebo - Deuteronomy 32:48-52) to behold the land and possess it by sight before he died, and the appointment of a new Shepherd for the people, at

22

Moses’ request, in the person of Joshua, a man in whom is the Spirit, in liaison with Eleazar the Priest. Joshua was one of the two men of the old generation who was not to die.So these three incidents deal with three different types of men in their dealings with life and death. The first deals with one who was of the new generation, but who died in the wilderness (for he died for his own sins not because of the sin of the people). And yet in his daughters he would inherit the land. The second deals with the one who would die without entering the land, but not as those who died in the wilderness as a punishment had died. He (Moses) would be ‘gathered to his fathers’ as Aaron had been. But he would inherit the land by seeing it with his eyes. And the third deals with a member of the old generation who would enter the new land alive and would indeed inherit the land.One question that was raised by the closing verses of the last chapter was, what about those who died in the wilderness who were not of the older generation, who did not die because of that sin? Were they to be equally punished by not receiving a portion of the new land if they had no male heirs? Of course if they had male heirs those would receive their portion. A portion of the new land would be allocated to their families. But what if they died without a male heir? Their family would receive no portion of the land that had been promised to the man prior to his dying. Their name would not be remembered in Israel, for they would possess no land, even though they had daughters. Could that be right in the eyes of Yahweh? The answer was to be ‘no, it is not right’.It is not accidental that this comes immediately after the description of those who through their unbelief died in the wilderness. They had been faced with a challenge, had been unable to trust God, and had drawn back from obedience, and had been sentenced to die miserably in the wilderness. How great a contrast there was between them and these five brave young women of the tribe of Manasseh. They too were faced up with a challenge as the Manassites began to discuss the distribution of their new possessions. They saw themselves as being frozen out, as being thrust to one side, and their father’s name as dying out from Israel. But they believed in Yahweh. They believed that He would not allow them to be treated unfairly and allow their father’s name to perish unjustly. And with great boldness and trepidation they approached Moses and the congregation of Israel to seek to have this great wrong righted. We cannot imagine what huge courage it would have taken, for rarely did young women such as they come to the door of the tent of meeting. But they believed in Yahweh and refused to be daunted, and He saw and gave them what they asked.They also stand in stark contrast to the women of Moab. It was not theirs to seek to lead men astray after other gods, and to drag men to destruction. Rather they would fight to ensure the preservation of their father’s name , and were deeply concerned for the inheritance that Yahweh had for them. This was the quality of the new generation, and Moses knew that the story would serve as an inspiration to Israel to

23

take their courage in both hands and move forward to establish their names in the land which Yahweh had in store for them.The Provisions For Inheritance When They Have Entered The Land Where There Was No Male Heir (Numbers 27:1-11).Analysis.a The young unmarried daughters of Zelophehad draw near for a judgment by Moses (Numbers 27:1-2).b The case is put of their father who died having no sons before entry into the land had established his family’s portion in the land (Numbers 27:3).c The daughters request that he be granted a portion posthumously so that they may receive it as his inheritance among their father’s brothers and this preserve his name in Israel (Numbers 27:4).d The case is brought before Yahweh (Numbers 27:5).d Yahweh answers the case to Moses (Numbers 27:6).c The daughters were to receive their inheritance among their brothers (Numbers 27:7).b Provisions concerning what is to happen when a man dies having no son to ensure the carrying on of his name (Numbers 27:8-11 a).a The judgment is established as Yahweh commanded Moses (Numbers 27:11 b).The Daughters of Zelophehad Draw Near For a Judgment by Moses (Numbers 27:1-2).What follows deals with an important question. Here was a man who had obeyed Yahweh and fought for Him, and yet whose name would die because he died without a male heir before land could be granted his family. Thus no land would be allocated to his name, and his name would die out in Israel. And his family would seemingly receive no lasting inheritance. Would this be right?A further reason behind this passage was to enthuse Israel as they sought to enter the land by making them see that Yahweh would ensure that all were blessed. Even if they were slain in battle and had no male heir, their family would not be allowed to suffer. When the portions were allocated, none of the new generation would be omitted except those who had openly rebelled, even if they had died prior to the distribution without a male heir. Land would be allocated to them for their families.

24

Numbers 27:1‘Then drew near the daughters of Zelophehad, the son of Hepher, the son of Gilead, the son of Machir, the son of Manasseh, of the families of Manasseh the son of Joseph; and these are the names of his daughters; Mahlah, Noah, and Hoglah, and Milcah, and Tirzah.’In this passage five women of one family approached Moses concerning their rights of inheritance, and the continuing of the name of their father. As he had had no son the continuation of his name would depend on their receiving land in his name. So taking their courage in both hands they appealed to the tribunal of Israel. They were alone in the world. There was no male ready to come and stand with them. But they had each other, and they trusted in Yahweh.The details are given of their tribal and clan connections in view of the matter in hand, that is, their share in the inheritance of the land. Manasseh was the tribe, Gilead the sub-tribe, Hepher the clan and Zelophehad the family head. All would be important in determining what they inherited. This information would thus be laid before the judges.It should be noted that this was at this time a red hot issue. The lands of Gilead and Bashan from the Arnon northwards were being allocated to the Reubenites, the Gadites, and the descendants of Machir, one of whom had been the father of these five young, unmarried women. And they thought that they had reason to fear that they would be excluded from receiving a portion of that land. Discussion would undoubtedly already be taking place, and they may already have been informed that in view of their position they did not come into the reckoning. Their quality was shown in that they were not willing to accept this situation which would mean their father’s name being forgotten in Israel because no land was connected with it.For it was in order to obtain land that Israel had journeyed all this way. It was the hope of land that had partially sustained them. Surely then just because he had died without a male heir, that did not mean that his family was excluded from owning land?

PULPIT, "The daughters of Zelophehad. The genealogy here given agrees with those in Numbers 26:29-33 and in Joshua 17:3. These women would appear to have been in the eighth generation from Jacob, which hardly accords with the 470 years required by the narrative; some links, however, may have been dropped

PARKER, " Mahlah, Noah, Hoglah, Milcah, and TirzahNumbers 27:1

25

These are the names of five women; the five women were five sisters; the five sisters were daughters of a man called Zelophehad. This man had five girls, but no boys. He was a quiet Prayer of Manasseh , and took no part in a certain great rebellion against the Lord, in which Korah and his company justly perished. This man Zelophehad died in his own bed; he had committed no public sins; he had only sinned in the usual way, and died in the usual way, and so far there was an end of him. One day these five women put their heads together on a family subject. There was something that disturbed them, took away their sleep, and made them grievously discontented. The result of their deliberation was that they determined to make a public speech, and a great audience they had, viz, Moses, and Eleazar the priest, and the princes, and all the congregation of Israel, and they stood by the door of the tabernacle of the congregation and made their statement. They said, with wonderful conciseness of manner, keeping themselves strictly to facts, and coming to the point with admirable brevity:—Our father died in the wilderness: he was not one of those who took part in the sin of Korah; he died quietly, not tragically; he had no sons, and according to the present law of Israel the name of our father dies, and it is just as if he had never lived, though he has left five girls who bear his name and love his memory; now we ask you to look at this case; it is peculiar; see if anything can be done under such extraordinary circumstances; and give us, women though we be, give us a possession in Israel, give us property in the land, create a legal status for us amongst the brethren of our father. It was a practical speech, and, as our judges say, it started quite a novel point. It was for Moses to say what should be done, but he could not speak on the spur of the moment, so he took time to consider, and "brought their cause before the Lord." The answer from heaven was,—Certainly: the women ask only for that which is right; thou shalt cause the inheritance of their father to pass to them, and out of this particular instance there shall arise a new law of succession in Israel, "If a man die, and have no Song of Solomon , then ye shall cause his inheritance to pass unto his daughter, and if he have no daughter, then ye shall give his inheritance unto his brethren, and if he have no brethren, then ye shall give his inheritance unto his father"s brethren, and if his father have no brethren, then ye shall give his inheritance unto his kinsman that is next to him of his family, and he shall possess it: and it shall be unto the children of Israel a statute of judgment, as the Lord commanded Moses." These are the circumstances which furnish us with our subject, and it will be for us now to discover what there is in them to instruct and comfort us.1. The rectification of things that are wrong sometimes seems to come from man and not from God. Look at this case. It was the women themselves who began the reform. Providence did not stir first. The five women gave this reform to the economy of Israel. So it would seem on the face of the story, and many people look at the face and go no farther, and so they blunder and lie. Suggestions are from God. The very idea which we think our own is not our own, but God"s. "Every good gift and every perfect gift... cometh down from the Father of lights." He inspires the prayer which he means to answer. He says, Arise, when he is prepared to meet us. An idea occurs to you, and you think it admirable, and call it your own; you will change your policy; enlarge your business; go to another town; strike out another

26

line: you will alter the machinery, patent an invention, introduce yourself to a firm, and you think this is all your own doing. That is the fatal error. "We are fellow-workers with God." "He is Lord of all,"—of all good ideas, noble impulses, holy inspirations, sudden movements of the soul upward into higher life and broader liberty. This is his plan of training men. He seems to stand aside, and to take no part in some obviously good movements, and men say, "This is a human movement, a political movement, a non-religious movement," not knowing what they are talking about,—forgetting that the very idea out of which it all sprang, came down from the Father of lights, that the very eloquence by which it is supported is divinely taught, that the very gold which is its sinew is his: they do not go far enough back in their investigation into the origin of things, or they would find God in movements which are often credited to human genius alone. We do not see all. The finest threadlets are hidden from us. Now and again, in a dream, we may catch a sight of the ladder connecting heaven and earth, but it is always there, the highway of angels, the path into the skies.2. Everywhere the Bible is full of the very spirit of justice. It is the Magna Charta of the civilised world. This is the spirit that gives the Bible such a wonderful hold upon the confidence of mankind. Look at this case as an example. The applicants were women. All the precedents of Israel might have been pointed to as the answer to their appeal. Why create a special law for women? Why universalise a very exceptional case? Why not put these people down as sensational reformers? Yet, the case was heard with patience, and answered with dignity. O women, you should love the Bible! It is your friend. It has done more for you than all other books put together. Wherever it goes it claims liberty for you, justice for you, honour for you. Repay is service by noble endeavour to make it everywhere known. Not only were the applicants women, they were orphans. Their father dead, no brother to take their part, nothing left them but the memory of a man dead and gone. Yet the God of the Bible is their friend. He says, "They are right." He will not break the bruised reed. The weak are as the strong before him, and the friendless as those who are set in families. A God so just, so pitiful, so mindful of individual cases and special desires, is the God who will save the world! This God of justice is the God of love. We shall see more of him as we go from page to page of his book; one day we may see him on a Cross dying for man! Give any nation the Bible, and let that nation make the Bible its statute book, and every class in the community will have justice: masters will be just to their servants; servants will be just to their masters; family peace will be protected; social relations will be purified; common progress will be guaranteed. This spirit of justice is the social strength of the Bible. No life is to be tampered with; the small cause as well as the great is to be heard; no kid is to be seethed in its mother"s milk; no fruit tree is to be cut down even in time of war; no bird"s nest is to be wantonly destroyed; all men are to be honoured, helped, and saved. A book with a tone like this should be protected from the sneers of persons who have never actually studied its ennobling pages.3. Every question should become the subject of social sympathy and matter of religious reference. These women were heard patiently. It is something to get a

27

hearing for our grievances. Sometimes those grievances perish in the very telling; sometimes the statement of them brings unexpected help to our assistance. This case is what may be called a secular one; it is about land and name and inheritance; and even that question was made in Israel simply a religious one. It was not political. It was not an outside question. The Lord was King of Israel, and to the King the appeal must be made. Is Christianity farther from God than was Judaism? Are there some questions which we now take into our own hands? Does God take no interest in our merchandise, in our land, in our professions? Can he not still tell the physician what to do, the merchant what to buy, the mariner how to go, the lawyer how to plead? In ancient Israel, with its priestly system, men had to go to the leader and the priest first; in Christianity we can go straight to God; we have no priesthood but Christ; the way to the throne is open night and day. O wronged and suffering woman, tell thy case to the Father! O Prayer of Manasseh , carrying a burden too heavy for thy declining strength, speak to God about the weight, and he will help thee with his great power.Selected NoteIn no history can there be found, save in the Bible, an equal number of charming female portraits. But the formative influence of female character as seen in the Bible must be referred to the pure and lofty religious ideas which the Biblical books in general present. If woman there appears as the companion and friend of Prayer of Manasseh , if she rises above the condition of being a bearer of children to that noble position which is held by the mother of a family, she owes her elevation in the main to the religion of Moses and that of Jesus.... Bringing to bear on the domestic ties his own doctrine of immortality, our Lord made the marriage bond co-existent with the undying soul, only teaching that the connection would be refined with the refinement of our affections and our liberation from these tenements of clay in which we now dwell ( Matthew 5:32; Matthew 19:3, seq.; Matthew 22:23, seq.). With views so elevated as these, and with affections of the tenderest benignity, the Saviour may well have won the warm and gentle hearts of Jewish women. Accordingly, the purest and richest human light that lies on the pages of the New Testament comes from the band of high-minded, faithful, and affectionate women who are found in connection with Christ from his cradle to his cross, his tomb, and his resurrection. These ennobling influences have operated on society with equal benefit and power. Woman, in the better portions of society, is now a new being. And yet her angelic career is only just begun. She sees what she may be, and what under the gospel she ought to be; and ere very long, we trust, a way will be found to employ in purposes of good energies of the finest nature, which now waste away from want of scope, in the ease and refinements of affluence, if not in the degradations of luxury—a most precious offering made to the Moloch of fashion, but which ought to be consecrated to the service of that God who gave these endowments, and of that Saviour who has brought to light the rich capabilities, and exhibited the high and holy vocation, of the female sex.

28

2 and stood before Moses, Eleazar the priest, the leaders and the whole assembly at the entrance to the tent of meeting and said,

BARNES, "By the door of the tabernacle of the congregation - The place of solemn assembly of the elders. The daughters of Zelophehad made their suit to the princes, the heads of tribes and of families, who were making the census under the superintendence of Moses and Eleazar.

GILL, "And they stood before Moses, and before Eleazar the priest, and before the princes, and all the congregation,.... Who were now sitting in court, to hear and try causes brought before them; here were Moses the chief magistrate, Eleazar the high priest, the princes of the several tribes, and the representatives of the whole congregation, or it may be the seventy elders; a very grand and august assembly, before whom these ladies appeared, and from whom they might expect to have justice done them: by the door of the tabernacle of the congregation; near to which this court was held, both for the convenience of the people, to apply to in case of need, when they came thither to worship, and of Moses, to seek the Lord in case of any difficulty that might arise, as now did:

HENRY, "Here is, I. Their case stated by themselves, and their petition upon it presented to the highest court of judicature, which consisted of Moses as king, the princes as lords, and the congregation, or elders of the people who were chose their representatives, as the commons, Num_27:2. This august assembly sat near the door of the tabernacle, that in difficult cases they might consult the oracle. To them these young ladies made their application; for it is the duty of magistrates to defend the fatherless, Psa_82:3. We find not that the had any advocate to speak for them, but they managed their own cause ingeniously enough, which they could do the better because it was plain and honest, and spoke for itself. Now observe,BENSON, "Numbers 27:2. Before the princes — By princes, it seems, are meant the heads of the tribes, or the highest of the judges appointed Exodus 18:25, called there the heads of the people; and by all the congregation is intended the seventy elders or representatives of the people, Numbers 11:24. At the head of all these sat Moses, and next to him the high-priest. By the door of the tabernacle — Nigh unto which, it

29

appears, was the place where Moses and the chief rulers assembled for the administration of public affairs. This was very convenient, because they had frequent occasion of having recourse to God for his direction.

PETT, "Numbers 27:2‘And they stood before Moses, and before Eleazar the priest, and before the princes and all the congregation, at the door of the tent of meeting, saying,’What courage they had. Following correct procedure they brought their request officially so that it could be considered by all Israel, although more strictly by Moses, Eleazar and the chieftains. That it was at the door of the tent of meeting demonstrated that they sought a decision before Yahweh. They came hesitantly and shyly, bolstering each other up, as the representatives of their family name. They clearly had a deep certainty that Yahweh would deal rightly with them. What could have been a better example to Israel at this time than this? In context it is full of meaning. Out of context it becomes just another dispute about land.It should be noted here, as it will be noted later, that this very approach brings out that womenfolk were thus not of necessity excluded from having their part in such important matters. As with the widows and divorcees mentioned later in regard to oaths (Numbers 30:9), where they were the ‘head’ of their particular family grouping they had equal rights to all other family heads. The reason that men usually took prominence was simply because it was they who were usually the heads of the family and responsible for their welfare and protection. But that did not totally exclude women in the right circumstances.Yet it would not be easy for them. Standing in that holy place, facing the great men of the nation, they must have quailed. The courage that they mustered exceeded far that which was required to face up to the Anakim. These men of Israel whom they had to face were ‘giants’ indeed. But they believed that they were in the right. And they believed in Yahweh.PULPIT, "By the door of the tabernacle of the congregation, i.e; evidently by the entrance of the sacred enclosure. Here, in the void space, in the midst of the camp, and close to the presence-chamber of God, the princes (i.e; the tribe princes who were engaged upon the census) and the representatives of the congregation assembled for the transaction of business and for the hearing of any matters that were brought before them.

3 “Our father died in the wilderness. He was not 30

among Korah’s followers, who banded together against the Lord, but he died for his own sin and left no sons.

BARNES, "But died in his own sin - i. e., perished under the general sentence of exclusion from the land of promise passed on all the older generation, but limited to that generation alone. By virtue of the declaration in Num_14:31 the daughters of Zelophehad claim that their father’s sin should not be visited upon them.GILL, "Our father died in the wilderness,.... As all the generation of the children of Israel did, that came out of Egypt, who were twenty years old and upwards, excepting Joshua and Caleb: and he was not in the company of them that gathered themselves together against the Lord in the company of Korah; which is observed, not so much to obtain the favour and good will of Moses as to clear the memory of their father from any reproach upon it, he dying in the wilderness; and chiefly to show that the claim of his posterity to a share in the land was not forfeited, he not being in that rebellion, nor in any other; so that he and his were never under any attainder: but died in his own sin; which though common to all men, every man has his own peculiar way of sinning, and is himself only answerable for it, Isa_53:6he sinned alone, had no partner or confederate, whom he had drawn into any notorious and public sin, as mutiny, &c. to the prejudice of the state, and the rulers in it; so the Targum of Jonathan adds,"and he did not cause others to sin,''so Jarchi; some take him to be the sabbath breaker, Num_15:32, others that he was one of those that went up the hill, Num_14:44, most likely his sin was that of unbelief, disbelieving the spies that brought the good report of the land, and giving credit to those that brought an ill report of it; and so with the rest of the people murmured, for which his carcass, with others, fell in the wilderness, and entered not into the good land, through unbelief: a sin not punished in their children: and had no sons. which was the reason of this application.

HENRY, "What their plea is: That their father did not die under any attainder which might be thought to have corrupted his blood and forfeited his estate, but he died in his own sin (Num_27:3), not engaged in any mutiny or rebellion against Moses, particularly not in that of Korah and his company, nor in any way concerned in the sins of others, but chargeable only with the common iniquities of mankind, for which to his own Master he was to stand or fall, but laid not himself open to any judicial process

31

before Moses and the princes. He was never convicted of any thing that might be a bar to his children's claim. It is a comfort to parents, when they come to die, if, though they smart themselves for their own sin, yet they are not conscious to themselves of any of those iniquities which God visits upon the children.JAMISON,"Our father died in the wilderness, and he was not ... in the

company of ... Korah — This declaration might be necessary because his death might have occurred about the time of that rebellion; and especially because, as the children of these conspirators were involved along with their fathers in the awful punishment, their plea appeared the more proper and forcible that their father did not die for any cause that doomed his family to lose their lives or their inheritance.died in his own sin — that is, by the common law of mortality to which men, through sin, are subject.

CALVIN, "3.Our father died in the wilderness. The plea they allege is no contemptible one, i.e., that their father died after God had called His people to the immediate possession of the promised land; for, if the question had been carried back to an earlier period, it might have originated many quarrels. This restriction with respect to time, therefore, aided their cause. In the second place, they plead that their father had committed no crime whereby he might have been excepted from the general allotment of the land; for in the conspiracy of Dathan and Abiram, they include by synecdoche, in my opinion, the other sins, whose punishment affected the posterity of the criminals. His private sin is, therefore, contrasted with public ignominy; for so I interpret what they say of his having “died in his own sin.” And surely it is mere childish nonsense which the Jews (199) affirm of his having been the man who gathered sticks on the Sabbath-day, or one of the number of those who were slain by the bite of the serpents; and it is unnatural, too, to refer it to the curse under which the whole human race is laid. They distinguish, then, his private sin from any public crime, which would have caused him to deserve to be disinherited, lest the condition of their father should be worse than that of any other person. At the same time, they hold fast to the principle which is dictated to us by the common feelings of religion, that death, as being the curse of God, is the wages of sin. COKE, "Numbers 27:3-4. Our father died in the wilderness, &c.— In these verses we have the petition of the daughters of Zelophehad, who urged that their father dying without male issue in the wilderness, in his own sin, i.e. by a common and ordinary death, (not such a one as they shared who were partakers of the guilt of Korah and his companions,) it was not right that the name of their father should be done away, i.e. rased out of the genealogical tables; for such was the case upon any family being extinct; upon which account they request a possession among the brethren of their father. Houbigant, however, is of opinion, that name is here used for memory, which is easily transmitted from fathers to sons by a paternal inheritance; as, on the contrary, their memory is soon blotted out who leave their

32

inheritance to strangers. Philo gives Zelophehad the appellation of a man of an excellent character, and descended of a very considerable tribe; and Josephus calls him (Antiq. lib. iv. c. 7.) a person of condition and eminence. Philo's account of the petition brought by the daughters is very just and probable: Upon their father's death, says he, fearing lest the paternal estate should go out of the family, inasmuch as estates were to descend by the males, they came, with that decency and reverence which became their sex and age, to the governor of the people; and this not so much out of anxiety and concern for the estate, as from an earnest desire to preserve from extinction the name of their father, and the remembrance of his honourable birth and quality. "Our father," say they, "is dead. He lived a quiet and contemplative life, and did not forfeit it among the multitude who were judicially cut off for their perverseness and rebellion. It is not to be imputed to his sin that he left no male issue. And here we, his daughters, stand before you as humble petitioners. As our father has left us orphans, we hope to find a father in you; for a father of his country stands in a prior and nearest relation to his subjects, than even a natural father to his own family." De Vita Mos. lib. 3: TRAPP, "Numbers 27:3 Our father died in the wilderness, and he was not in the company of them that gathered themselves together against the LORD in the company of Korah; but died in his own sin, and had no sons.Ver. 3. But died in his own. sin.] i.e., By a natural and an ordinary death; not by a special plague, as that arch-rebel Korah. Death is the just hire of the least sin. [Romans 6:23] But some evildoers God doth not only put to death, but also hangs them up in gibbets, as it were, for public notice and admonition.

POOLE, " He was not in the company of Korah, nor in any other rebellion of the people, which must be understood, because all of them are opposed tohis own sin, in which alone he is said to die. But they mention this only either,1. Because he might possibly be accused to be guilty of this. Or,2. Because he, being an eminent person, might be thought guilty of that rather than of any other, because the great and famous men were more concerned in that rebellion than others. Or,3. To gain the favour of Moses, against whom that rebellion was more particularly directed, and more desperately prosecuted than any other. Or,4. Because peradventure he died about that time, and therefore might be presumed guilty of that crime. Or rather,5. Because that sin, and, as it may seem, that only of all the sins committed in the wilderness, was of such a flagitious nature, that God thought fit to extend the

33

punishment not only to the persons of those rebels, but also to their children and families, Numbers 16:27,32, as was usual in like cases, as Deuteronomy 13:15 Joshua 7:24; whence it is noted as a singular privilege granted to the children of Korah, that they died not, Numbers 26:11, whereas the children of their confederates died with them. And this makes their argument here more proper and powerful, that he did not die in that sin for which his posterity were to be cut off, and to lose either their lives or their inheritances, and therefore their claim was more just.In his own sin; either,1. For that sin mentioned Num 14, which they call his own sin, in opposition not to the rest of the people, for it was a common sin, but to his children, i.e. the sin for which he alone was to suffer in his person and not in his posterity, as God had appointed, Numbers 14:33. Or rather,2. For his own personal sins; for,1. These were more properly his own sins.2. It was a truth, and that believed by the Jews, that death was a punishment for men’s own sins.3. The punishment of that common sin was not directly and properly death, but exclusion from the land of Canaan, and death only by way of consequence upon that.

BENSON, "Numbers 27:3. But died in his own sin — The sin for which he alone was to suffer in his person, and not in his posterity, meaning, as some think, that incredulity for which all that generation was sentenced to die in the wilderness; and which, though, with respect to the rest of the people, it was not merely his own sin, since they were generally alike guilty; yet with respect to his children it was his own sin, a personal guilt, which God himself had declared should not affect his children, Numbers 14:31.But, perhaps, by his dying in his own sin, we are only to understand that he died by a common ordinary death, not such a one as they shared who were partakers of the guilt of Korah and his companions.

WHEDON, " 3. Not in the company… of Korah — This part of their plea implies that the treason of Korah attainted the blood of the conspirators, and cut off their children from heirship.Died in his own sin — As other men died in the wilderness, in no special sin nor stroke of judgment, implicating and ruining others with himself.

34

PETT, " The Case is Put of a Their Father Who Has Died Having No Sons Before He Has received His Portion of the Promised Land (Numbers 27:3).Note their concern. It was that the name of their father might be taken away, because no portion of land would be allocated to him and his family when the distributions were made now that they had conquered the land of Gilead and Bashan. If only males could inherit there would be no portion of land for his name to be attached to, because he had no male heir. But we need not doubt that they were also interested in possession of the land. Then they could take it with them when they married.Numbers 27:3“Our father died in the wilderness, and he was not among the company of those who gathered themselves together against Yahweh in the company of Korah, but he died in his own sin, and he had no sons.’They sought to establish their father’s credentials. They pointed out that he was not one of those who had rebelled against Yahweh in the company of Korah. He was not barred as a rebel. Note their mention of that here. It confirms that that incident was long remembered and that all recognised that such people did not deserve a part in the land. By their behaviour they had excluded themselves. But that was not true of their father.Nor had he died for the sin of unbelief at Kadesh. He was not one of those doomed to die in the wilderness because of gross disobedience. Rather he died for his own sin, as all sinners must die.So they did admit that he was a sinner, but only, they stressed, like all who were around him. He died because of his own sin, like all men and women die because of their sins, yet they wanted it recognised that he was no more blameworthy than any other sinner. They did not consider that his death without a male heir demonstrated that Yahweh was angry with him and was cutting his name off from Israel. And they sought confirmation of that fact.That being so did his family not deserve their portion in the land just like everyone else? Yet as he had died without a son there would be no male in the family for the portion to be allocated to. Thus unless their plea was heeded there would be no allocation to his close family. This seemed wrong to them. There would be no way to perpetuate his name.The principle behind their statement is interesting. There was a clear recognition that he died for his own sin, not for the sins of the tribe or of others. They were acknowledging individual responsibility. They also refused to accept that his early

35

death had been due to his being under judgment. It had happened, but it did not prove that he was worse than anyone else. We must beware of reading into these ancient people the prejudices of our modern day. Here were five young women who knew what they believed. And they recognised the distinction between those whose sin permanently barred them from God’s mercy, and those whose sin which, while having its own consequences, did not cut people off from His gracious provision. Here was the difference between ‘unwitting sin’ and ‘sin with a high hand’.

PULPIT, "He was not in the company of them that gathered themselves together against the Lord. He had not been amongst the two hundred and fifty who gathered themselves together in support of Korah s pretensions. It does not appear why they should have thought it necessary to make this statement, unless they felt that the fact of his having died without sons might raise suspicion against him as one who had greatly provoked the wrath of God. But died in his own sin. This cannot mean that Zelophehad was one of those who died in the wilderness in consequence of the rebellion at Kadesh (see the next note). Apparently his daughters meant to acknowledge that they had no complaint against the Divine justice because of their father's death, but only against the law because of the unnecessary hardship which it inflicted upon them.

4 Why should our father’s name disappear from his clan because he had no son? Give us property among our father’s relatives.”

BARNES, "Give unto us - As representing our father; that so he, through us his representatives, may enjoy a like inheritance with his brethren.

GILL, "Why should the name of our father be done away from among his family, because he hath no son.... Or be withdrawn, and his family lose their part and share on that account; this they thought was unreasonable: according to the Targum of Jonathan, to prevent the name of their father being lost, and his part in the land, their motion was, that their mother might marry their father's brother, according to the law in Deu_25:5, with which Jarchi agrees; but it does not appear that that law was as yet in being;

36

though how otherwise the name of their father would be preserved, than by raising up seed in that way, is not easy to say; except, as some think, it was done by a son of one of those heiresses, or by the first son of everyone of them, being called after the name of their grandfather Zelophehad, or their mother's grandfather Hepher; though the Jews (t) commonly by the "name" understand no other than the "inheritance", which seems to be confirmed by what follows: give us therefore a possession among the brethren of our fathers; a part with their uncles, or their children; by which they express their faith that the children of Israel would inherit the land, though as yet it was not conquered, nor even entered into; and might signify, as some think, their concern to have a part and portion in the heavenly inheritance the land of Canaan was typical of; and if so, as Ainsworth observes, they may be considered as five wise virgins indeed.

HENRY, ". What it is they petition for: That they might have a possession in the land of Canaan, among the brethren of their father, Num_27:4. What God had said to Moses (Num_26:53) he had faithfully made known to the people, that the land of Canaan was to be divided among those that were now numbered; these daughters knew that they were not numbered, and therefore by this rule must expect no inheritance, and the family of their father must be looked upon as extinct, and written childless, though he had all these daughters: this they thought hard, and therefore prayed to be admitted heirs to their father, and to have an inheritance in his right. If they had had a brother, they would not have applied to Moses (as one did to Christ, Luk_12:13) for an order to inherit with him. But, having no brother, they beg for a possession. Herein they discovered, (1.) A strong faith in the power and promise of God concerning the giving of the land of Canaan to Israel. Though it was yet unconquered, untouched, and in the full possession of the natives, yet they petition for their share in it as if it were all their own already. See Psa_60:6, Psa_60:7, God has spoken in his holiness, and the Gilead is mine, Manasseh is mane. (2.) An earnest desire of a place and name in the land of promise, which was a type of heaven; and if they had, as some think, an eye to that, and by this claim laid hold on eternal life, they were five wise virgins indeed; and their example should quicken us with all possible diligence to make sure our title to the heavenly inheritance, in the disposal of which, by the covenant of grace, no difference is made between male and female, Gal_3:28. (3.) A true respect and honour for their father, whose name was dear and precious to them now that he was gone, and they were therefore solicitous that it should not be done away from among his family. There is a debt which children owe to the memory of their parents, required by the fifth commandment: Honour thy father and mother.

JAMISON,"Give unto us a possession among the brethren of our father — Those young women perceived that the males only in families had been registered in the census. Because there were none in their household, their family was omitted. Song they made known their grievance to Moses, and

37

the authorities conjoined with him in administering justice. The case was important; and as the peculiarity of daughters being the sole members of a family would be no infrequent or uncommon occurrence, the law of inheritance, under divine authority, was extended not only to meet all similar cases, but other cases also - such as when there were no children left by the proprietor, and no brothers to succeed him. A distribution of the promised land was about to be made; and it is interesting to know the legal provision made in these comparatively rare cases for preserving a patrimony from being alienated to another tribe. (See on Num_36:5).TRAPP, "Numbers 27:4 Why should the name of our father be done away from among his family, because he hath no son? Give unto us [therefore] a possession among the brethren of our father.Ver. 4. Give unto us, therefore, a possession.] This plea for a part in a land not yet conquered is a proof of their faith, and could not but encourage others. Such a masculine faith was that of Mrs. Anne Askew, martyr, who thus subscribed her confession: Written by me, Anne Askew, that neither wisheth for death, nor feareth his might; and as merry as one that is bound for heaven. (a) I will not bid you good night - said Helen Stirk, a Scotchwoman, to her husband, at the place where they both suffered martyrdom - for we shall suddenly meet in the heavenly Canaan. (b) And was it not by the force of her faith, - that "substance of things hoped for, the evidence of things not seen," [Hebrews 11:1] - that Crispina gaudebat, cum tenebatur, cum audiebatur, cum damnabatur, cum ducibatur. (c) POOLE, " Be done away; as it will be, if it be not preserved by an inheritance given to us in his name and for his sake. Hence some gather that the first son of each of these heiresses was called by their father’s name, by virtue of that law, Deuteronomy 25:6, whereby the brother’s first son was to bear the name of his elder brother, whose widow he married.A possession in the land of Canaan upon the division of it, which, though not yet conquered, they concluded would certainly be so, and thereby gave glory to God by believing. BENSON, "Numbers 27:4. Be done away — As it will be, if it be not preserved by an inheritance given to us in his name and for his sake. Hence some gather, that the first son of each of these heiresses was called by their father’s name, by virtue of that law, (Deuteronomy 25:6,) by which the brother’s first son was to bear the name of his elder brother, whose widow he married. Give us a possession — In the land of Canaan, upon the division of it, which, though not yet conquered, they concluded would certainly be so, and thereby they gave glory to God.WHEDON, " 4. The name of our father — Their father having died without male issue, and there being at that time no provision whereby female children could perpetuate his name, nor his name and property could be transmitted to the nearest

38

male descendant, his name, with its family rights, would become blotted out.Give unto us… a possession — This was to be transmitted to a son bearing the name of his mother’s father.PETT, "Verse 4“Why should the name of our father be taken away from among his family, because he had no son? Give to us a possession among the brethren of our father.”Now if he had had a son that son would have received his portion in Gilead and Bashan. No one would have argued. He would also have maintained the name of the family in the clan and in Israel. Furthermore he would have seen to the marriage settlements for the girls, so that they could make good marriages. They would not have had to be married empty handed. But by his death without a male heir it was being suggested that this would not now happen. Not only would no land be attached to his name, but his daughters would in fact lose out greatly. For the fact that he had had no son would result in no land being allocated to his immediate family as a result of their victories. His name would therefore be lost, having no land for it to be attached to, and his daughters would be bereft of the support that he had deserved. The head of a related family would, of course be expected to take them under his wing, but they would go there as dependants and suppliants with no property. What they wanted was to ensure that their deceased father would posthumously receive an allocation of land, which would then be passed on to them so that they could take it with them as dowry, with his name permanently attached to the land so that he was remembered for ever.There are a number of examples elsewhere, where men who married women who owned land became members of the woman’s tribe, so vitally was the name of the tribe and the family connected with the land. See, for example, the case of Jarha, who belonged to pre-Mosaic times and is mentioned in 1 Chronicles 2:34-35. It would explain the introduction of Jair among the Manassites in Numbers 32:41; Deuteronomy 3:14. His father Segub was the son of Hezron of the tribe of Judah, but his mother was the daughter of Machir the Manassite (1 Chronicles 2:21-22). Another example is found in Ezra 2:61; Nehemiah 7:63, where the sons of a priest who had married one of the daughters of Barzillai the rich Gileadite, were called ‘sons of Barzillai’.But as we shall see later the leaders of Manasseh were concerned that if these young women received land in their father’s name, they married within the clan so that the land might be preserved to Manasseh, and this they gladly agreed to do The story would have a happy ending. A good note on which to end the book (Numbers 36:1-12).This suggests that after the conquest when land was passed on it still retained its attachment to the family name of the original recipient throughout the generations.

39

This was why the prophets were so angry at those who took advantage of bad times to add land to land, thus blotting out the memory of the land’s original owner for ever. It was a crime against the memory of Israel.

PULPIT. "Give unto us … a possession among the brethren of our father. The daughters of Zelophehad did not ask for any share of what had been their father's, but they asked that the lands which would have been assigned to their father in the settlement of Canaan might still be assigned to them, so that their father's name might attach to those lands, and be handed down with them. The request assumes that the "brethren" of Zelophehad would receive an inheritance in the promised land, either personally or as represented by their sons; hence it seems clear that Zelophehad was not of the elder generation, which had forfeited all their rights and expectations in Canaan, but of the younger, to whom the inheritance was transferred (Numbers 14:29-32). This is confirmed by the consideration that these women were not married until some time after this (Numbers 36:11; cf. Joshua 17:8, Joshua 17:4), and must, therefore, according to the almost invariable custom, have been quite young at this time. It is reasonable to suppose that the heads of separate families to whom the land was distributed would be at this time men of from forty-five to sixty years of age, comprising the elder half of the generation which grew up in the wilderness. Zelophehad would have been among these, but that he was cut off, perhaps in the plague of serpents, or in the plague of the Arboth Mesh, and left only unmarried girls to represent him.

5 So Moses brought their case before the Lord,

GILL, "And Moses brought their cause before the Lord. For it seems it was too difficult for this court to decide; and it devolving upon Moses, as the president of it, and who only could have recourse to God at all times, he carried it to him and consulted with him about it: this, as the Targums of Jonathan and Jerusalem say, was one of the four causes that came before Moses the prophet, that he solved according to the mind of the Lord, which he consulted; one was concerning the blasphemer, Lev_24:11, the other concerning those defiled by the dead, Num_9:8, the third concerning the sabbath breaker, Num_15:34 and the fourth was this; See Gill on Lev_24:12.

HENRY 5-11, "Their case determined by the divine oracle. Moses did not presume to give judgment himself, because, though their pretensions seemed just and reasonable, yet his express orders were to divide the land among those that were numbered, who were the males only; he therefore brings their cause before the Lord, and waits for his decision (Num_27:5),

40

and God himself gives the judgment upon it. He takes cognizance of the affairs, not only of nations, but of private families, and orders them in judgment, according to the counsel of his own will. 1. The petition is granted (Num_27:7): They speak right, give them a possession. Those that seek an inheritance in the land of promise shall have what they seek, and other things shall be added to them. These are claims which God will countenance and crown. 2. The point is settled for all future occasions. These daughters of Zelophehad consulted, not only their own comfort and the credit of their family, but the honour and happiness of their sex likewise; for on this particular occasion a general law was made that, in case a man had no son, his estate should go to his daughters (Num_27:8); not to the eldest, as the eldest son, but to them all in copartnership, share and share alike. Those that in such a case deprive their daughters of their right, purely to keep up the name of their family, unless a valuable consideration be allowed them, may make the entail of their lands surer than the entail of a blessing with them. Further directions are given for the disposal of inheritances, Num_27:9-11. “If a man have no issue at all, his estate shall go to his brethren; if no brethren, then to his father's brethren; and, if there be no such, then to his next kinsman.” With this the rules of our law exactly agree: and though the Jewish doctors here will have it understood that if a man have no children his estate shall go to his father, if living, before his brethren, yet there is nothing of that in the law, and our common law has an express rule against it, That an estate cannot ascend lineally; so that if a person purchase lands in fee-simple, and die without issue in the life-time of his father, his father cannot be his heir. See how God makes heirs, and in his disposal we must acquiesce.K&D 5-7, "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 Num_36:1-13 in relation to the marriage of heiresses.CALVIN, "5.And Moses brought their cause before the Lord. It is probable either that there was a difference of opinion, or that the minds of the judges were in doubt, as respecting an obscure and uncertain point. At any rate, it was expedient that the law should be laid down by God, lest any future controversy should arise; for, if a sentence had been pronounced by human judgment on the matter before them, the obstinacy of many would not perhaps have been sufficiently set at rest. It is worth while to remark the pious modesty of Moses, who was not ashamed to confess his ignorance, until he had been instructed by the mouth of God. Although he had promulgated the law forty years before, still he was always ready to learn. Besides, there is no doubt but that God impelled him to inquire of Himself, whenever any serious matters were in question, until his doctrine was absolutely perfect. And, although God does not now deliver from heaven what is to be done, nevertheless rulers are reminded that they ought to have recourse to God in points of perplexity, in order that He may instruct them by the Spirit of wisdom; and assuredly they will

41

not be without this, if they ask Him; since he is no less ready to listen to them, than He here shewed Himself to be to Moses. POOLE, "i.e. Into the tabernacle, where God was pleased to speak with Moses upon occasions, Exodus 25:22 Numbers 7:89. For it was a hard case; and though their plea seemed reasonable, yet Moses showed his humility and modesty, that he would not determine it himself without God’s particular direction.

WHEDON, " 5. Moses brought their cause before the Lord — This shows the sense of equity which inhered in Moses, and his superiority to the prejudices of his age and nation. In this particular he foreshows the Prophet like unto him, Jesus Christ, who treated woman with the utmost respect. John 4:6, note. This act of Moses also beautifully demonstrates that distrust of his own moral judgments which every good man feels in the presence of such an infallible authority as the word of God.

PETT, " The Case Is Brought Before Yahweh (Numbers 27:5).Numbers 27:5‘And Moses brought their cause before Yahweh.’Moses clearly acknowledged that they had a case for he brought the matter before Yahweh, probably by entering the inner sanctuary and standing before the veil (compare Numbers 7:89).

6 and the Lord said to him,

GILL, "And the Lord spake unto Moses,.... From off the mercy seat, where he consulted him, and from whence he promised to commune with him about any difficult matter that came before him, Exo_25:22, PETT, "Verse 6-7Yahweh Acknowledges The Rightness of Their Case. The Daughters Are To Receive Their Inheritance Among Their Brothers (Numbers 27:6-7).Numbers 27:6-7

42

‘And Yahweh spoke to Moses, saying, “The daughters of Zelophehad speak right. You shall surely give them a possession of an inheritance among their father’s brethren; and you shall cause the inheritance of their father to pass to them.”Yahweh confirmed to Moses that the land in Gilead and Bashan having been conquered they should be given the portion that would have fallen to their father, or to his male heir, if either had been alive. They would be able to inherit in their father’s name and take with them into their marriages land which would ever be seen as having been their father’s. So would his name be remembered in Israel. He would not have died without just reward for his service for Yahweh. (That is why later it will be stressed that they must marry within the family - Numbers 36:6).For us this is a reminder that God is always faithful. No man or woman will ever serve God and then through unfortunate circumstance lose their reward. None will ever be forgotten. So we too must have courage and go forward, and never flinch whatever is demanded of us.

7 “What Zelophehad’s daughters are saying is right. You must certainly give them property as an inheritance among their father’s relatives and give their father’s inheritance to them.

CLARKE, "Thou shalt surely give them - an inheritance among their father’s brethren - There is a curious anomaly here in the Hebrew text which cannot be seen in our translation. In Hebrew they, them, and their, you, ye, and your, are both of the masculine and feminine genders, according as the nouns are to which they are affixed; but these words are of no gender in English. In this verse, speaking of the brethren of the father of those women, the masculine termination הם hem, Their, is used instead of the feminine, הן hen, governed by בנות benoth, daughters. So להם lahem, to Them, and אביהם abihem, Their fathers, masculine, are found in the present text, instead of להן lahen and אביהן abihen, feminine. Interpreters have sought for a hidden meaning here, and they have found several, whether hidden here or not. One says, “the masculine gender is used because these daughters are treated as if they were heirs male.” Another, “that it is

43

because of their faith and conscientious regard to the ancient customs, and to keep the memory of their father in being, which might well benefit men.” Another, “that it signifies the free gift of God in Christ, where there is neither male nor female, bond or free, for all are one in Christ;” and so on, for where there is no rule there is no end to conjecture. Now the plain truth is, that the masculine is in the present printed text a mistake for the feminine. The Samaritan, which many think by far the most authentic copy of the Pentateuch, has the feminine gender in both places; so also have upwards of fourscore of the MSS. collated by Kennicott and De Rossi. Therefore all the curious reasons for this anomaly offered by interpreters are only serious trifling on the blunder of some heedless copyists.While on the subject of mysterious reasons and meanings, some might think it unpardonable if I passed by the mystery of the fall, recovery, and full salvation of man, signified, as some will have it, by the names of Zelophehad and his daughters.“1. Zelophehad’s daughters, claiming a portion in the promised land, may represent believers in Christ claiming an inheritance among the saints in light.2. These five virgins may be considered as the five wise virgins, (Mat_25:1-10), who took oil in their vessels with their lamps, and consequently are types of those who make a wise provision for their eternal state.3. They are examples of encouragement to weak and destitute believers, who, though they are orphans in this world, shall not be deprived of their heavenly inheritance.4. Their names are mysterious; for Zelophehad, צלפחד Tselophchad,

signifies the shadow of fear or dread.His first daughter, מחלה Machlah, infirmity;the second, נעה Noah, wandering;the third, חגלה Choglah, turning about or dancing for joy:the fourth, מלכה Milcah, a queen;the fifth, תרצה Tirtsah, well-pleasing or acceptable.

By these names we may observe our reviving by grace in Christ; for we are all born of the shadow of fear, (Tselophchad), being brought forth in sin, and through fear of death being all our life time subject to bondage, Heb_2:15. This begets (Machlah) infirmity or sickness - grief of heart for our estate. After which (Noah) wandering about for help and comfort we find it in Christ, by whom our sorrow is turned into joy (Choglah). He communicates of his royalty (Milcah) to us, making us kings and priests unto God and his Father, Rev_1:6. So we shall at last be presented unto him glorious and without blemish, being (Tirtsah) well-pleasing and acceptable in his sight.” This is a specimen of pious Ingenuity, which has been endeavoring to do the work of an Evangelist in the Church of God from the

44

time of Origen to the present day.

GILL, "The daughters of Zelophehad speak right,.... What is just and reasonable: thou shalt surely give them a possession of an inheritance among their father's brethren; their uncles, or rather the children of them; for it is reasonable to suppose their father's brethren, or their uncles, were dead also: or "in giving thou shall give" (u); which, according to Jarchi, denotes two parts or portions they should receive; the part of their father, who was of them that came out of Egypt, and his part with his brethren in the goods of Hepher: in the Misnah (w), from whence he seems to have taken it, it is;"the daughters of Zelophehad took three parts for inheritance; the part of their father, who was with them that came out of Egypt, and his part with his brethren in the goods of Hepher, and because he was the firstborn he was to take two parts:''and though this strict command was given to Moses, yet it does not respect him personally, who lived not to enter into the land to see it divided; but him who should be his successor, and chief magistrate at the time of the division of it, which was Joshua, and of whom these ladies claimed their part, and had it, Jos_17:3, and thou shalt cause the inheritance of their father to pass unto them; that is, that part which would have fallen to him by lot, had he been living, these were to take, they standing in his place; and so the portion of the land he would have had was to be divided between these live daughters of his.

COKE, "Numbers 27:7-11. The daughters of Zelophehad speak right— God, approving their petition, passes their special case into a general law hereafter to be observed. These daughters of Zelophehad were to enjoy what would have fallen to their father's share had he been alive, because they stood in his place, and represented his person: and accordingly we find, that they had their portion in the land. Joshua 1:3. While, for the future, it is provided, that the inheritance should always pass to the next of kin, whether male or female, of the family of him who is deceased. This is ordained Numbers 27:11 to be a statute of judgment unto the children of Israel; i.e. a standing law whereby to judge of succession to inheritance in all future times. We may just observe, that the Hebrew text speaks here of the daughters in the masculine, which some interpreters think to be used because they are treated as if they were heirs male: but Hallet is rather of opinion, that there is a slight fault in the copyists, especially as the Samaritan Pentateuch expresses the same thing in the feminine. See Hallet's Study of the Scriptures, vol. 2: p. 16 and Selden de Success. cap. 12: Dr. Kennicott says, that where it is the father of them אביהם abihem, in the printed text, in the masculine, it is the father of them אביהןabihen, in the feminine, in no less than four MSS. in the Bodleian, and in another of Erfurt; see Dissert. p. 413. Lord Clarendon upon the 8th verse observes, "that the disinheriting of daughters is not only against divine right, but is of modern

45

invention, and hath not antiquity to support it." According to the law of the twelve tribes, if any one died without children, brethren and sisters of the same father, the inheritance went to the next of kin. Ulpian. Instit. de Leg. Haered. TRAPP, "Numbers 27:7 The daughters of Zelophehad speak right: thou shalt surely give them a possession of an inheritance among their father’s brethren; and thou shalt cause the inheritance of their father to pass unto them.Ver. 7. And thou shalt cause the inheritance.] Let the French defend their Salic law as they can. It was a witty essay of him who styled women the second edition of the epitome of the whole world; witness Artemisia, Zenobia, Blandina, the Lady Jane Gray (whose excellent beauty, adorned with all variety of virtues, as a clear sky with stars, as a princely diadem with jewels, gave her the style of Eruditionis, pietatis, et modestiae delicium), and Queen Elizabeth, in whom, besides her sex, there was nothing womanlike or weak: as if (what philosophy saith) the souls of those noble creatures had followed the temperament of their bodies, which consist of a frame of rarer rooms, of a more exact composition than man’s cloth; and, if place be any privilege, we find theirs built in paradise, when man’s was made out of it. Besides, "in Christ Jesus there is neither male nor female," but all are one, souls having no sexes, and whosoever are "Christ’s, are Abraham’s seed, and heirs according to the promise." [Galatians 3:28-29]POOLE, " Give them: in Hebrew it is of the masculine gender, to show that women in this case should enjoy the man’s privilege, and that the heavenly Canaan, whereof this was a type, did belong no less to women than to men, Galatians 3:28.The inheritance of their fathers, i.e. which belonged to their fathers in case they had lived. BENSON, "Numbers 27:7. Cause the inheritance of their father to pass unto them — They were to enjoy what would have fallen to their father’s share, had he been alive; because they stood in his place, and represented his person. Accordingly they had their portion in the land, Joshua 17:1-3, &c.

8 “Say to the Israelites, ‘If a man dies and leaves no son, give his inheritance to his daughter.

GILL, "And thou shalt speak unto the children of Israel,.... The above affair occasioned a law to be made, in which all the people would have a concern, among whom such cases should happen, as after related:

46

saying, if a man die, and have no son, then ye shall cause his inheritance to pass unto his daughter; as in the above case of the daughters of Zelophehad; what was determined as to their particular case was made into a general law.HENRY 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 defunctorum, Fkft. a. O. 1695.CALVIN, "8.And thou shalt speak to the children of Israel. This question was the occasion of the delivery of a law, which was to be a perpetual and general rule as to the right of inheritance. But, although God prefers the daughters to all other relatives, when there is no male issue, still, with this single exception of the first degree, He admits none but males to the succession, and thus preserves the usual order. And surely it would be very unjust to exclude a man’s (natural) heirs on account of their sex; but when it became necessary to pass from his own children to other kindred, the prerogative of the male line began to be established. I speak of the land of Canaan, in which not only the name of Abraham but also that of the twelve tribes was to be preserved, in order that the memory (of God’s blessing) (200) might be more distinct and unclouded.

WHEDON, "Verses 8-118-11. A statute of judgment — A statute or law, determining order in the succession of heirs to landed estates where there were no sons; namely, daughters, father’s brothers, paternal uncles, next of kin on the father’s side. The heirship of the daughters was on the condition that they did not marry out of their own tribe, (Numbers 36:6-12;) otherwise the patrimony was forfeited. The seed of each class “to the world’s end” inherited to the exclusion of all others. According to Hebrew usage the widow was supported by the heirs till a dowry was granted her in the judgment hall. The daughters commonly received at marriage a tenth of the deceased father’s goods or personal estate, each a tenth of what remained, thus: 1/10, 9/100, 81/1000. The sons inherited the remainder.PETT, "Verses 8-11A General Case Is Then Made Of What Is To Happen When A Man Dies Having No Son (Numbers 27:8-11 a).

47

This solution would settle the concerns of many still living fathers who only had daughters. Some who had as yet no male heir would undoubtedly have been concerned about what would happen to their name, and what would happen to their families, if they were slain in the forthcoming warfare before having a male heir. (Compare how a newly married man was excluded from warfare for one year to give him time to breed an heir- Deuteronomy 24:5. It was put in terms of ‘cheering his wife’ but nothing would cheer her more than that). Now they could rest at peace. Their close family would still receive their portion posthumously after their death. Numbers 27:8-9“And you shall speak to the children of Israel, saying, “If a man die, and has no son, then you shall cause his inheritance to pass to his daughter, and if he has no daughter, then you shall give his inheritance to his brothers.’The point being established was twofold. Firstly that the family of every ‘head of family’ of the new generation would receive a portion in the land whatever happened to him, and whether he died or not, or whether he had a male heir or not. It was a guarantee that as long as he had children his name would thus be preserved and his family’s welfare ensured. If he had a daughter, she would receive his portion. And if he had no daughter his own brothers would receive it, with of course the responsibility to remember his name and look after his widow. PULPIT, "Numbers 27:8If a man die, and have no son. On this particular case a general rule of much wider incidence was founded. The Mosaic law of succession followed the same lines as the feudal law of Europe, equally disallowing disposition by will, and discouraging, if not disallowing, alienation by grant. Upon the land was to rest the whole social fabric of Israel, and all that was valued and permanent in family life and feeling was to be tied as it were to the landed inheritance. Hence the land was in every case so to pass that the name and fame, the privilege and duty, of the deceased owner might be as far as possible perpetuated. Unto his daughter. Not for her maintenance, but in order that her husband might represent her father. In most cases he would take her name, and be counted as one of her father's family. This had no doubt already become customary among the Jews, as among almost all nations. Compare the cases of Sheshan and Jarha (1 Chronicles 2:34, 1 Chronicles 2:35), of Jair (Numbers 32:41), and subsequently of the Levitical "sons of Barzillai" (Ezra 2:61). The question, however, would only become of public importance at the time when Israel became a nation of landed proprietors.

9 If he has no daughter, give his inheritance to his 48

brothers.

GILL, "And if he have no daughter,.... Dies without any issue: then ye shall give his inheritance unto his brethren; and the children descending from them; that is, if his father was dead; otherwise, if he was living, he was to be preferred to them, according to the Jewish writers; though, according to our law, no estate in fee simple ascends lineally, or goes from a son, who has made a purchase of it, to a father: in the Misnah it is said (x), the order of inheritances is thus,"if a man dies and has no son, then they cause his inheritance to pass to his daughter; a son is before a daughter, and all that descend from the son are before the daughter; the daughter is before the brethren (of her father), and those that descend from the daughter are before the brethren; the brethren (of a man) are before his father's brethren (or his uncles); and they that descend from his brethren are before his father's brethren: this is the general rule, everyone that is before in the inheritance, those that descend from him are before others, and a father is before all that descend from him.'' COFFMAN Jehovah spake unto Moses, saying, The daughters of Zelophehad speak right: thou shalt surely give them a possession of an inheritance among their father's brethren; and thou shalt cause the inheritance of their father to pass unto them. 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. And if he have no daughter, then ye shall give his inheritance unto his brethren. And if he have no brethren, then ye shall give his inheritance unto his father's brethren. And if his father have no brethren, then ye shall give his inheritance unto his kinsman that is next to him of his family, and he shall possess it: and it shall be unto the children of Israel a statute and ordinance, as Jehovah commanded Moses."It is of interest that the Hebrew text in the seventh verse here uses a masculine pronoun in the reference to the daughters of Zelophehad. Adam Clarke called this an error "due to some careless scribe,"[12] but Jewish scholars believed a purpose lay behind such usage: "Because when a woman assumes an inheritance, she is like a man for all legal purposes; therefore, this verse refers to them in the masculine sense rather than in a feminine gender."[13] We believe that the Jewish viewpoint should be accepted."The daughters of Zelophehad speak right ..." (Numbers 27:7). "Speak right" here is awkward; and it appears Orlinsky is correct in rendering this clause, "The plea ... is just."[14]Current information has completely destroyed the critical allegations that would make this chapter a late addition dating near the end of the 7th century B.C. As

49

Smick said: "The custom of inalienable property (as mandated here) (and which required daughters to inherit in some cases) is now known to have been in practice LONG BEFORE the time of Moses, as the false adoptions of Nuzu testify (C. H. Gordon in O.T. Times, p. 101)."[15]The law of the inheritance of daughters (in cases where they had no brother) was that the land should pertain to their father's brothers in perpetuity; and in case he had no brothers, it went to his uncles; and if there were no uncles, the "next of kin" inherited. The purpose of all this was to keep the land of Canaan within the tribes to whom it was originally allocated; that this was the case appears in Numbers 36 where the law was amended to prevent any marriage of the inheriting daughters outside of their tribe. The civilization of the ancient Jews was built upon the land; and it was a great crime for a Jew to part with his inheritance. The incident of Ahab and the vineyard of Naboth highlights this and also shows how mercilessly the evil kings of Israel destroyed the whole concept of inalienable ownership of the land.

10 If he has no brothers, give his inheritance to his father’s brothers.

GILL, "And if he have no brethren,.... Nor any descendants from them: then ye shall give his inheritance unto his father's brethren; that is, to his uncles, and to their children.BENSON, "Numbers 27:10-11. No brethren — Nor sisters, as appears from Numbers 27:8. A statute of judgment — A standing law or rule, whereby to judge of succession to inheritances in all future times, and whereby the magistrates should give judgment in such cases.PETT, "Numbers 27:10‘And if he has no brothers, then you shall give his inheritance to his father’s brothers.’And if he had no brothers then the land would pass to his uncles who would bear the same responsibility.

50

11 If his father had no brothers, give his inheritance to the nearest relative in his clan, that he may possess it. This is to have the force of law for the Israelites, as the Lord commanded Moses.’”

GILL, "And if his father have no brethren,.... Nor any descending from them: then ye shall give his inheritance unto his kinsman that is next to him of his family: that is nearest of kin to him, though ever so remote; that is, of his father's family, not his mother's, which was no family: and he shall possess it: here the Jews have a saying, that an Israelite is never without heirs (y): and it shall be unto the children of Israel a statute of judgment; a judicial law, that should ever remain firm, and sure, and unalterable: as the Lord commanded Moses; and therefore no man could dispose of his estate or inheritance by will, otherwise than is set forth by this command. TRAPP, "Numbers 27:11 And if his father have no brethren, then ye shall give his inheritance unto his kinsman that is next to him of his family, and he shall possess it: and it shall be unto the children of Israel a statute of judgment, as the LORD commanded Moses.Ver. 11. A statute of judgment.] A standing law; a standard for all cases of like kind in that policy at least. For we cannot consent to Carolostadius, who contended, in foro ius ex Mose discendum esse, that all other national and municipal laws were to be abolished; and that all courts were now to pass sentence according to Moses’ laws. Hic non intellexit vim et naturam Christianae libertatis, This man knew not the extent of Christian liberty, saith Melancthon.PETT, "Numbers 27:11 a‘And if his father has no brothers, then you shall give his inheritance to his kinsman that is next to him of his family, and he shall possess it.’

51

And if he also had no uncles, his nearest male relative would inherit it, and would possess it. So would the inheritance remain in the family who would have a responsibility for the remembering of his name. At least in theory, no man of the new generation would ever die forgotten (unlike the old who died in the wilderness).Numbers 27:11 b‘And it shall be to the children of Israel a statute and ordinance, as Yahweh commanded Moses.’And this was so important that it was to be a statute and ordinance in Israel, as Yahweh had commanded Moses.Note on Inheritance Laws.We have in this passage an insight into the inheritance laws of those days. Land was to pass to the male heirs, with the firstborn receiving double because of his heavier responsibilities as head of the family (Deuteronomy 21:15-17). This did not necessarily mean that the land was divided. It would often be wiser to keep the land as one and work it together. But each would have his name attached to part of the land. The women would be given their dowry when they married, something of value, in the case of the better off a dowry of gold and jewels and gorgeous clothing, and in the case of rulers even of cities. But then they would come under the auspices of their new family. Meanwhile the males would have provided for their dowries and would continue to provide for the old families. We can see why these young women were concerned. If they did not receive their father’s portion they would be thrown on charity for their provision. But it was also true that if their father’s name had no land attached to it, it would soon be forgotten. Land was closely connected with family. That was why in the year of Yubile all land would revert to the original family which had owned it (Leviticus 25:13). That was one reason why names and lands were closely linked together.End of note.

Joshua to Succeed Moses12 Then the Lord said to Moses, “Go up this mountain in the Abarim Range and see the land I have given the Israelites.

52

CLARKE, "Get thee up into this Mount Abarim - The mountain which Moses was commanded to ascend was certainly Mount Nebo, see Deu_32:49, etc., which was the same as Pisgah, see Deu_34:1. The mountains of Abarim, according to Dr. Shaw, are a long ridge of frightful, rocky, precipitous hills, which are continued all along the eastern coast of the Dead Sea, as far as the eye can reach. As in Hebrew עבר abar signifies to pass over, Abarim here probably signifies passages; and the ridge in this place had its name in all likelihood from the passage of the Israelites, as it was opposite to these that they passed the Jordan into the promised land.

GILL, "And the Lord said unto Moses,.... After the covenant made with Israel in the plains of Moab, and the song delivered to them, Deu_29:1. get thee up to this Mount Abarim; which was a range of mountains, so called from the passages by them over Jordan into the land of Canaan; one part of which was Nebo, and the top of that Pisgah, from whence Moses had the view of the good land here directed to; see Num_33:47. and see the land which I have given unto the children of Israel; for though he was now one hundred and twenty years old, his eyes were not dim, he could see at a great distance; and the height of this hill gave him an advantage of taking a prospect of the land, a great way into it; and very probably his sight might be greatly strengthened and increased at this time by the Lord, for the purpose; this may be an emblem of that sight by faith, which believers have at times of the heavenly Canaan, and sometimes are favoured with an enlarged one of it before their death.

HENRY 12-14, "Here, 1. God tells Moses of his fault, his speaking unadvisedly with his lips at the waters of strife, where he did not express, so carefully as he ought to have done, a regard to the honour both of God and Israel, Num_27:14. Though Moses was a servant of the Lord, a faithful servant, yet once he rebelled against God's commandment, and failed in his duty; and though a very honourable servant, and highly favoured, yet he shall hear of his miscarriage, and all the world shall hear of it too, again and again; for God will show his displeasure against sin, even in those that are nearest and dearest to him. Those that are in reputation for wisdom and honour have need to be constantly careful of their words and ways, lest at any time they say or do that which may be a diminution to their comfort, or to their credit, or both, a great while after. 2. He tells Moses of his death. His death was the punishment of his sin, and yet notice is given him of it in such a manner as might best serve to sweeten and mollify the sentence, and reconcile him to it. (1.) Moses must die, but he shall first have the satisfaction of seeing the land of promise, Num_27:12. God did not intend

53

with this sight of Canaan to tantalize him, or upbraid him with his folly in doing that which cut him short of it, nor had it any impression of that kind upon him, but God appointed it and Moses accepted it as a favour, his sight (we have reason to think) being wonderfully strengthened and enlarged to take such a full and distinct view of it as did abundantly gratify his innocent curiosity. This sight of Canaan signified his believing prospect of the better country, that is, the heavenly, which is very comfortable to dying saints. (2.) Moses must die, but death does not cut him off; it only gathers him to his people, brings him to rest with the holy patriarchs that had gone before him. Abraham, and Isaac, and Jacob, were his people, the people of his choice and love, and to them death gathered him. (3.) Moses must die, but only as Aaron died before him, Num_27:13. And Moses had seen how easily and cheerfully Aaron had put off the priesthood first and then the body; let not Moses therefore be afraid of dying; it was but to be gathered to his people, as Aaron was gathered. Thus the death of our near and dear relations should be improved by us, [1.] As an engagement to us to think often of dying. We are not better than our fathers or brethren; if they are gone, we are going; if they are gathered already, we must be gathered very shortly. [2.] As an encouragement to us to think of death without terror, and even to please ourselves with the thoughts of it. It is but to die as such and such died, if we live as they lived; and their end was peace, they finished their course with joy; why then should we fear any evil in that melancholy valley?

JAMISON,"Num_27:12-17. Moses being told of his approaching death, asks for a successor.

The Lord said unto Moses, Get thee up into this mount Abarim, and see the land — Although the Israelites were now on the confines of the promised land, Moses was not privileged to cross the Jordan, but died on one of the Moabitic range of mountains, to which the general name of Abarim was given (Num_33:47). The privation of this great honor was owing to the unhappy conduct he had manifested in the striking of the rock at Meribah [Num_20:12]; and while the pious leader submitted with meek acquiescence to the divine decree, he evinced the spirit of genuine patriotism in his fervent prayers for the appointment of a worthy and competent successor [Num_27:15-17].

K&D 12-14, "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, 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

54

person, upon which the whole house of Israel was now so dependent” (Baumgarten). The fulfilment of this announcement is described in Deu_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 (Deu_32:49), and at other times as the top of Pisgah (Deu_3:27; Deu_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. Ἀβαρείμ), 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. ְמֹריֶתם as ye transgressed My“ :ַּכֲאֶׁשרcommandment.” By the double use of ַּכֲאֶׁשר (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.

COFFMAN, ""And Jehovah said unto Moses, Get thee up into this mountain of Abarim, and behold the land which I have given unto the children of Israel. And when thou hast seen it, thou also shalt be gathered unto thy people, as Aaron thy brother was gathered; because ye rebelled against my word in the wilderness of Zin, in the strife of the congregation, to sanctify me at the waters before their eyes. (These are the waters of Meribah of Kadesh in the wilderness of Zin.)"Here we do not have some kind of subjective premonition or "hunch" on Moses' part to the effect that he might die. Oh, no! "Jehovah said unto Moses ..." It is difficult to imagine a more specific commandment. (1) Get up (into Abarim and see the land). (2) Then you will die (when you have seen the land). (3) How? (Your death will be as Aaron's). (4) Why? (You have failed to sanctify me before the people at the waters of Meribah).These words prepare us for an account of Moses' death, but the last nine chapters of Numbers and all of Deuteronomy come between this announcement of it and the actual record of it in Deuteronomy 34:1-8.

55

"This mountain of Abarim ..." Basing his conclusion on Deuteronomy 32:49, Plaut identified this mountain as, "Nebo, some 2,740 in altitude."[16] All the older commentaries also agree with this. "It was certainly Mount Nebo, which is the same as Pisgah."[17] It is somewhat amazing that earlier in Numbers (Numbers 21:11) this area is said to lie "beyond the sunrising," indicating that the perspective of the whole Pentateuch is that of one stationed in the Promised Land. After God's promise to Abraham that his posterity should have Canaan, the perspective of all Israel forever afterward was that of being inside Canaan, as indicated by the statements in Exodus, even while Israel was in the wilderness, that the "Great Sea" (the Mediterranean) was the "Western Sea." Of course, this is a peculiarity, but it does not mean that a late date should be assigned to any of these books."At the waters of Meribah ..." (See Numbers 20:2-13 for a comment on this episode.) "As both Aaron and Moses sinned at Kadesh against the commandment of the Lord, so they were both of them to die without entering Canaan."[18] But how did Moses sin there? He violated the commandment of God. But HOW did he do this? Did he not speak to the rock? Of course, he did, but he ALSO struck it twice. His sin was in going BEYOND the Word of God. But protesters say, Yes, but God did not tell him NOT to strike the rock! The discerning person, however, can see that when God commanded "Speak to the rock," the meaning most certainly was "Do NOT strike it!" Is it not also true that when God commands his servants to "Sing," the meaning most certainly is: "Do NOT beat drums; do NOT ring bells; do NOT play man-made instruments of music; do NOT whistle, etc." We believe that when God commanded his servants to take the bread and drink the cup of the Lord's Supper that meaning also included the PROHIBITION of any other edibles upon that sacred table other than the bread and the fruit of the vine. What would be wrong with angelfood cake and coffee, instead of bread and the wine? After all, the Lord did NOT say, "Do NOT use cake and coffee!" That is true, of course, but neither did he tell Moses NOT to strike the rock. Some will never understand this, but it is felt that the humble and the contrite heart will have no trouble at all understanding it.

COKE, "Numbers 27:12. Get thee up into this mount Abarim— It appears from Deuteronomy 32:49; Deuteronomy 32:52 that these words were spoken by the Lord to Moses, after all which follows here in the Book of Deuteronomy. Abarim was a long ridge of mountains between the river Arnon and the river Jordan; one part of these mountains was distinguished by the name of Mount Nebo. Deuteronomy 32:49 compared with Numbers 33:47-48. And from Deuteronomy 34:1 it appears, that Nebo and Pisgah were one and the same mountain. If there was any distinction between them, it was, that the top of the mountain was more particularly called Pisgah. Abarim in the Hebrew signifies passages, which name might possibly be given to these mountains, because the Israelites passed the Jordan over against them. Dr. Shaw gives us the following description of these mountains. "Beyond these plains [of Jordan] over against Jericho, where we are to look for the mountains of

56

Abarim, the northern boundary of the land of Moab, our prospect is interrupted by an exceeding high ridge of desolate mountains, no otherwise diversified than by a succession of naked rocks and precipices, rendered in several places more frightful by a multiplicity of torrents which fall on each side of them. This ridge is continued all along the eastern coast of the Dead Sea, as far as our eye can conduct us, affording us all the way a most lonesome, melancholy prospect, not a little assisted by the intermediate view of a large, stagnating, unactive expanse of water, rarely, if ever, enlivened by any flocks of waterfowl that settle upon it, or by so much as one vessel of passage or commerce that is known to frequent it." Travels, p. 277.REFLECTIONS.—Moses is warned of his death, and reminded of his sin which was the cause of it. He must not enter Canaan, but he may be gratified with a sight of it. For this purpose he is ordered to go up to mount Abarim, and there, as Aaron before him in mount Hor, after he had seen the promised land, he must be gathered to his fathers. Note; (1.) The dearest servants of God go not unpunished for their offences. (2.) Temporal death is the tribute we must all pay for sin. (3.) The dying believer is by faith enabled to see the heavenly country, and to rejoice in the prospect even on this side the grave. (4.) It is among the great comforts of death, that we are going to those whose presence and company will make the exchange of states most desirable. (5.) We should improve by the death of those whom we have seen depart before us in comfort and peace, and be encouraged to hope that our last end shall be like theirs.

ELLICOTT, " (12) Get thee up into this mount Abarim.—The position of this command, in immediate connection with the answer returned to the request of the daughters of Zelophehad, is very remarkable. They were to enter into the land of promise, and their descendants were to inherit it. The great lawgiver himself was to be excluded on account of his transgression. He does not, however, shrink from recording the sentence of exclusion in immediate connection with an incident which brings out that exclusion into greater prominence. The fulfilment of the announcement made to Moses is related in Deuteronomy 32:48-52. The mountains of Abarim form the Moabitish table-land, the northern portion of which bore the name of Pisgah. It is here that we must look for Mount Nebo, which is sometimes described as one of the mountains of Abarim (Deuteronomy 32:49), and at other times as the top of Pisgah (Deuteronomy 3:27; Deuteronomy 34:1).And see the land which I have given unto the children of Israel.—“The law,” says Bishop Wordsworth, “led men to ‘see the promises afar off, and to embrace them’ [rather, to see and greet the promises from afar, Hebrews 11:13], and it brought them to the borders of Canaan, but could not bring them into it: that was reserved for Joshua, the type of Jesus.” It must not be overlooked, however, that, although he was shut out during his lifetime from entering into the land of Canaan, Moses was permitted to stand with Elijah upon the Mount of Transfiguration (Matthew 17:3).

57

TRAPP, "Numbers 27:12 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.Ver. 12. See the land.] It was somewhat to see; but oh how fain would he have entered the land, and could not! We shall have in heaven not only vision, but fruition; we have it already in capitetenure, in Christ our head and husband, who will not be long without us, it being part of his heaven, that we shall be where he is, [John 17:24] and enjoy God, which is heaven itself; whence in Scripture God is called Heaven, "I have sinned against Heaven." And I had rather be in hell and have God present, than in heaven and God absent, saith Luther. (a)

WHEDON, "Verse 12MOSES FOREWARNED OF HIS DEATH, Numbers 27:12-14.12. Abarim literally signifies the farther parts, or possibly the fords or passages, as the word is translated Jeremiah 22:20. It is a range of high lands on the east of the Jordan in Moab, facing Jericho, and forming the eastern wall of the Jordan valley. Its most prominent out-jutting or swell is Mount Nebo, head of the Pisgah.See the land — Moses earnestly begged to be permitted to enter into Canaan, but the word of Jehovah excluding both Aaron and Moses (Numbers 20:12) could not be broken. He received this decisive answer, “Let it suffice thee; speak no more unto me of this matter.” Deuteronomy 3:26.PETT, "Verses 12-14Moses Is Told To Prepare Himself For Death After First Seeing The Land. He Pleads For A New Shepherd For The People (Numbers 27:12-17).Having established that all of the new generation who had died (in contrast with the old. The old died as a punishment. The new did not) would have their names remembered in receiving a portion of land in the future from the conquered lands, the time came for the grand old man of both generations to die. But his death was not like that of the old, it was like that of the new. Even though he too ‘died for his sin’ with which he had sinned at Kadesh, it was not a punishment for the sin at Kadesh thirty eight years previously. It was not his destiny to die under that sentence. And before he died he would gaze with wonder on the land which Yahweh had brought them to, and had promised them.Analysis.a Moses to ascend a mountain to see the land after which he will be gathered to his people (Numbers 27:12-13).

58

b It was because he rebelled against Yahweh’s command in the strife of the people (meribah) to sanctify Him (qdsh) in the eyes of the people at the waters (Numbers 27:13 a).b These waters were the waters of Meribah (strife) of Kadesh (qdsh) in the wilderness (Numbers 27:13 b).a Moses pleads for a man to replace him lest they be as sheep without a shepherd on his departure (Numbers 27:14-17).Moses To Ascend A Mountain To See The Land After Which He Will Be Gathered To His People (Numbers 27:12-13).Numbers 27:12‘And Yahweh said to Moses, “Get yourself up into this mountain of Abarim, and behold the land which I have given to the children of Israel.” ’Yahweh was merciful to His old servant. While he had forfeited his right to enter the land because of his sin, he was to be allowed to possess it with his eyes. We can compare here Genesis 13:14-16. Abraham too possessed with his eyes what would one day belong to his descendants. And now Moses was having the promises confirmed. He was not as one who was excluded from the land to die in the wilderness because of the rebellion of unbelief. He would die in a place prepared by God, having seen the land with his own eyes, knowing that it would soon belong to his people, for that was why Yahweh had caused him to bring them there.Zelophehad’s daughters were to possess the land by being allocated his portion. But Moses was to possess for a brief span the whole land. He would feast his eyes on it and see it as the land given to them by God. And Joshua would do even more. He would possess the whole land in reality. So does this chapter move on in progression.Both this and the last passage therefore emphasise the difference between the deaths of the old generation who died in the wilderness because of their unbelief, and the deaths of those who had not been involved in that extreme unbelief, and who therefore in one way or another would possess the land.So even Moses failed at the last. He was faithful in all his house, but he was a sinner. But when the greater Moses came, our Lord Jesus Christ, He would not fail or be discouraged (Isaiah 42:4). It would seem so at first when they hung Him, obedience intact, on a cross, but from that ‘failure’ would come forth the salvation of the world. He would say, ‘Lo, I come to do your will, O my God’ (Hebrews 10:7; Hebrews 10:9), and die for us all and rise again, a resurrection which would bring new significance to the death of Moses. PULPIT, "Numbers 27:12

59

And the Lord said unto Moses. It is impossible to determine the exact place of this announcement in the order of events narrated. It would appear from Numbers 31:1 that the war with the Midianites occurred later, and certainly the address to the people and to Joshua in Deuteronomy 31:1-8 presupposes the formal appointment here recorded; but the chronologer of the concluding chapters of Numbers is evidently very uncertain; they may, or may not, be arranged in order of time. We may with good reason suppose that the summons to die was only separated from its fulfillment by the brief interval necessary to complete what work was yet unfinished (such as the punishment of the Midianites and the provisional settlement of the trans-Jordanic country) before the river was crossed. Into this Mount Abarim. See on Numbers 33:47; Deuteronomy 32:49 sq; where this command is recited more in detail. Abarim was apparently the range behind the Arboth Moab, the northern portion of which opposite to Jericho was called Pisgah (Numbers 21:20; Deuteronomy 3:27), and the highest point Nebo (Deuteronomy 32:49; Deuteronomy 34:1), after the name of a neighbouring town (Numbers 33:47). And see the land. Moses had already been told that he should not enter the promised land (Numbers 20:12), yet he is allowed the consolation of seeing it with his eyes before his death. It would seem from Deuteronomy 3:25-27 that this favour was accorded him in answer to his prayer.

PARKER, " Moses Ordered to AbarimNumbers 27:12-23Here is a man receiving notice to prepare for death. We need not stumble at this reading as if it involved any impossibility, for if we were keener in vision, and more sensitive in response to providential intimations, we ourselves should know that it is quite common on the part of God to give men notice to quit this dark and narrow scene. The notice comes in various ways; but it certainly does come. We have the condemnation of death in ourselves. We know what we cannot always tell to other people. We are conscious of influences and actions which point in the direction of decay. Some men begin very early to die. That is wise. Dying should not be an act of closing the eyes in one little moment which is beyond the range of our reckoning. We may begin so soon to die as not to die at all. We should be familiar with death, and so reverently and religiously familiar with it as to abolish it Marvellous wonders can be done by expectation, by preparation, by accustoming the mind to certain issues and facts, so that when they transpire in the one critical moment which marks our history, we shall be superior to the event; the event which was expected to strike us on the head will sweep beneath our feet and pass on without leaving mark of wound or defeat upon us.When we read these words we could amend the providence. It is marvellous how God exposes himself in Providence to adverse criticism. Only he could do this. Wooden gods make mechanical arrangements, and in their clockwork no flaw must

60

be found, or down goes their deity. Never was any government so open to adverse comment as the government of the human family. Where is there a man so dull of mind that he could not amend the ways of God? God lets little children die before they can speak—poor little speechless things that can only look their pain or smile their love. He allows good lives to pass away in the night time, so that in the morning they cannot be found. He permits vice for a time to ascend the highest places in the State, and to exercise the largest influence in human affairs, when he knows all the time that virtue is standing outside shivering with cold, wet with the dews of night,—homeless, breadless, friendless. We cannot improve the sky, but who could not improve the earth? We cannot paint a lily without spoiling its beauty, but who could not raise into finer expressiveness of strength almost any human life? Things are so roughly huddled together. The men that ought to live a thousand years die before they touch the maturity of their strength; and gates that creak, creak on for ever, and lives destitute of fire and genius and nobleness, seem to be immortal. Why should Moses die? How we shall miss that man! It will be a sunset full of trouble. We do not want him to go,—let Balaam die, if the heavens must needs look down on death. Balaam is a mighty Prayer of Manasseh , a man of genius, of avarice and sensuality, combining the passions,—why should not he die? He has been slain with the sword; but why might not he have been taken up to a mountain and made a specimen of in some grander way?Not only does the Lord expose himself to adverse criticism, but he offends us morally. "For ye rebelled against my commandment in the desert of Zin, in the strife of the congregation, to sanctify me at the water before their eyes: that is the water of Meribah in Kadesh in the wilderness of Zin" ( Numbers 27:14). This makes us impatient. The punishment is out of proportion to the sin. These are little words; they take out of the occasion all its dignity. We are shocked. If the sin was so great, it should have been visited at the time. We ourselves being witnesses are bound to say Moses has deserved any Canaan under heaven. We must not allow our brother man to be run thus to earth. How, then, can we rid ourselves of the moral offence—the pain of soul—which afflicts us? By remembering that the fourteenth verse is really not in the history at all. The Speaker"s Commentary very justly says this appears like a gloss. Even those who are not scholars feel that these words have no right to be here. We read on as if God were about to crown the man and to give him rest, saying,—Noble soldier! thou hast done valiantly: come home and partake of the feast and enjoy the security of the immortals;—instead of which, we begin to read about rebellion that happened long ago, and passions that had died out of the human heart, if ever they raged there. The words were written on the margin. We go back to find reasons for things, and with our blundering pens we often write on the margin our own condemnation. We will insert marginalia; we like to account for events. Song of Solomon , when some scribe had heard that Moses had been ordered into the mount of Abarim to see the land and hear the message of God, he began to wonder why; and then, going back in history, he found out the occasion of the rebellion in the desert of Zin, at the water of Meribah in Kadesh in the wilderness of Zin, and accounted for the order to Abarim by that historical event. Do not let us attempt to account for everything. It is unprofitable work. Our great sphere of

61

service, duty, and suffering is in the future. We shall find, in the long run, that those things, even in the divinest books, which have shaken our confidence, or offended our conscience, were only scribblings on the margin made by some ill-guided hand. Yet Moses himself might have written those very words,—as we ourselves have done, on lower scales and on meaner occasions. When we have been driven into isolation, or had some heavy loss imposed upon us, or have been brought into very critical and bewildering situations, we have sat down to find the reason why, and in many a diary we have written this spiritual nonsense. We have thought of reasons, and magnified them, and fixed dates for events and causes for effects; and in the midst of our wisdom we have played the fool. The way of the Lord is right, and his judgment is good; verity and grace are the pillars of his throne.All these things, which we mourn as untimely events, suggest that this life cannot be all. We are driven to that conclusion by events when we endeavour to resist it by logic. When the great preacher died at thirty-seven years of age, in the very act of retranslating the Bible into the latest speech of religious civilisation, we said,—This is very hard. When the great missionary was just about to put on the top-stone of the temple he had built, and was taken away before he saw it finished, we said,—This is cruelty, whoever did it. When the great leader has been smitten down just when the occasion became insufferably critical, and he alone seemed to have the power to overcome every difficulty, our hearts have sunk within us, and we have been too sorrowful to pray. Then we have had forced upon us the suggestion that this life cannot be all: there must be a place of explanation, there must be a time of enlightenment, there must be a heaven of reconciliation.See how much out of place the fourteenth verse appears to be when Moses himself speaks:—"And Moses spake unto the Lord, saying, Let the Lord, the God of the spirits of all flesh, set a man over the congregation, which may go out before them, and which may go in before them, and which may lead them out, and which may bring them in; that the congregation of the Lord be not as sheep which have no shepherd" ( Numbers 27:15-17). That prayer vindicates the character of Moses,—a shepherdly prayer, an unselfish desire. He will not appoint one of his own family; he will have nothing to do with the thing personally and directly; it shall be God"s action—for it is God"s Church, and he alone can make the bishop, the minister, and the guardian of the redeemed. In this very prayer Moses shows how appreciative he was of the difficulties of the situation. The only man who could undertake the work must be a divinely-selected and a divinely-appointed man. We cannot raise our leaders out of the ground: we must receive them from the opening heavens. If they can pray, they are God"s gift to us; if they can speak the Word in small syllables so that little children may pick up somewhat of heavenly Wisdom of Solomon , they are God"s great donations to the race. Herein is that word true,—"I proceeded forth and came from God"; and herein, also, is that word true of the lesser servant,—"There was a man sent from God whose name was John." Moses held his office from the Lord. Every man must hold his appointment from the same hands, or he will be a hireling, tiring very early in the day, discontented with the service, stung by its disappointments, and overwhelmed by its responsibilities. Only

62

Omnipotence can sustain a ministry of redemption.Look for the consolations. They are abundant, but they can only be indicated by one or two examples. This interview took place between the Lord and Moses. Even if the sin was mentioned, it was mentioned in a whisper. Moses is not dragged forth before the whole congregation of Israel and condemned as an evil-doer. It was a secret interview. Jesus Christ had a secret interview with Simon Peter, who had denied him; they talked together on the lonely sea-shore, and what they said no man can tell. Moses was then honoured in the sight of Israel. "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" ( Numbers 27:18). This does not read as if the sin were the active cause in the premature removal of Moses. The Lord recognises the whole ministry of his servant, and connects him with the past and with the future of Israel. "And set him before Eleazar the priest, and before all the congregation" ( Numbers 27:19). Joshua was not called as Moses was called. Moses had his commission direct from the Most High; he was priest before Aaron prayed; but all other leaders are to be appointed otherwise, and have to pass the priestly recognition and receive the priestly touch. The Lord adds: "and give him a charge in their sight." This is not pouring contempt upon Moses; this is not visiting a sin upon the great and chivalrous leader;—this is giving him crown upon crown, honour upon honour. This is the reading that the heart answers; the spirit of man says,—This is the work of God. "And thou shalt put some of thine honour upon him, that all the congregation of the children of Israel may be obedient. And he shall stand before Eleazar the priest, who shall ask counsel for him after the judgment of Urim before the Lord" ( Numbers 27:20-21). So Moses was still the leader of Israel. Good men are not cut oft ruthlessly. Such a sun as this is not allowed to set amid thunder-clouds and tokens of trouble. The man who thus closed his history did not die;—let him go with his Lord somewhere, and let him pass upward without first going downward. It was the right end. The very mystery was part of the goodness; the concealment enlarged the dignity. They go well together, these two—even the Lord and Moses; it is right that Moses should thus pass away. Do we ever hear of him again? We read of him in the account of the Transfiguration of Christ in another mountain. Moses and Elias appeared unto the Son of God to talk of the Exodus which he should accomplish at Jerusalem—another Exodus. Moses had written one Exodus ,—Christ was to accomplish the spiritual decease or outgoing—leading forth into liberty those who were held in the bondage of death. Do we ever hear of him at a remoter period of history? You will find the answer in the Revelation of John the Divine. When the seer listened to what was proceeding in heaven, he heard there the song of Moses and the song of the Lamb. There is no speech about the sin in the desert of Zin, or the waters of Meribah in Kadesh in the wilderness of Zin. "Where sin abounded, grace did much more abound." God does not name their sins to his servants when they are about to die; He speaks to them of immortality, of heaven and higher service, of perfect and imperturbable rest. There is only one kind of forgiveness impossible, and that is self-forgiveness. God can forgive, but man cannot forgive himself; and it will be no wonder if in the dying time even what may be called the least sins should blot out the light of heaven: they will appear to be so

63

great when looked at in contrast with the purity of God. Moses may have written the fourteenth verse, some scribe may have written it,—it is not in the flow of the text, it is upon the margin of the book—a suggested reason, rather than a divine visitation. If God were to mark our sins in this way, who could live? If man were to die for one sin, what man would be living? Read the whole passage together in its noble scope, its broad and urgent flow of thought and sentiment and sacred consolation, and you will find how God dismisses his servants: he gives them honour in the sight of the people; he crowns them on earth before he crowns them in heaven; the testimony they are enabled to leave behind them is an ascription of praise to him who sustained their life and energy. "What thou knowest not now thou shalt know hereafter." We wanted Moses to remain; we would have made him king of Canaan; we would have had a glad day when we touched the promised land together; the old man should still have been chief: we would have chaired him and throned him and gathered round him, and shouted acclaims of recognition and thankfulness and delight. That is the little heaven we would have made for him; and because God meant him for a greener Canaan, a fairer paradise, a larger sphere of service and worship, we complain, or wonder, or suspect. Have we lost dear friends? Let us weep for ourselves, not for them. Have we stood at the grave, wondering how deep it is and how dark and awful? Let us rather look up into the blue heavens, rich with morning glory, and say concerning dearest loved ones,—They are not in the grave, they are risen. "Risen" is a height which has no measurement, an altitude that may go up for ever,—a word of poetry rather than of literal definition. Risen!—always rising—still ascending. Inquire for the liberated soul at any moment, go back to the point where last you left him, and some angel will say,—"He is not here, he is risen";—a speech worthy of an angel.BI 12-14, "Thou also shalt be gathered unto thy people, as Aaron thy brother was gathered.Why Moses must not enter CanaanEminent as he was in grace and holiness, he was not allowed to enter with his people into the Land of Promise. This in itself must have been a sore trial. But it was tenfold more so on account of the cause; it was a judgment. He who was the meekest of men once spoke unadvisedly with his lips. The reason, then, why Moses could not enter into the Land of Promise is evident. Moses represents the law. Now we have seen that, as a believer, Moses could not enter the Land of Promise, because on one occasion he “spake unadvisedly with his lips.” But look at him as the representative of the Law, and what lesson does his inability to enter the Land of Promise rivet on our hearts? This truth, that the law cannot bring us into the Land of Promise. There was a point to which Moses could bring Israel, and then he must lie down and die, and his work must be given into other hands, into the hands of Joshua, whose very name shows that he was an eminent type of Christ. There is a point, too, up to which the law may bring us. Where is it? It is to a knowledge of sin. “By the law,” says St. Paul, “is the knowledge of sin.” “I had not known sin,” he says “but by the law: for I had not known lust, except the law had said, Thou shalt not covet” (Rom_7:7). One great

64

purpose for which the law is given is just to teach us what we are- utterly sinful, utterly lost in ourselves. It requires perfect obedience; and, behold, in many things we offend. It makes no provision for transgression, proclaims no forgiveness. It can give no peace. The voice is terrible to the guilty. Whenever it fulfils its true purpose in the soul it empties it of self-righteousness, lays it prostrate in the dust, and makes it take the lowest place. Thus St. Paul says, “I through the law am dead to the law, that I might live unto God” (Gal_2:19). And, again, “Wherefore the law was our schoolmaster to bring us unto Christ, that we might be justified by faith” (chap. 3:24). Are you? Under Moses or Christ? What is your hope of glory? Is it that you have not sinned so much as others? that your life is very exemplary? that you leave no duty willingly unperformed, or service unattended? Do you think that somehow or other Christ must be yours, if your life is so excellent? Are these your thoughts? Then we must faithfully tell you that you are still under Moses, still clinging to a broken law; and we must remind you that the law can never bring you to heaven. It is Christ only who can save you, and bring you into the Land of Promise—Christ only who can reconcile you to God, and we can never come to Christ without utterly renouncing our own righteousness, and our own works, as entitling us to God’s favour. (G. Wagner.)

The death of MosesMoses must die, but only as Aaron died before him (Num_27:13); and Moses had seen how easily and cheerfully Aaron had put off the priesthood first, and then the body. Let not Moses, therefore, be afraid of dying; it was but to be “gathered to his people,” as Aaron was gathered. Thus the death of our near and dear relations should be improved by us.

1. As an engagement to us to think often of dying. We are not better than our fathers or brethren; if they are gone, we are going; if they are gathered already, we must be gathered very shortly.2. As an encouragement to us to think of death without terror, and even to please ourselves with the thoughts of it, it is but to die as such and such died, if we lived as they lived, and their end was peace; they “finished their course with joy”; why, then, should we fear any evil in that melancholy valley? (Matthew Henry, D. D.)

13 After you have seen it, you too will be gathered to your people, as your brother Aaron was,

65

GILL, "And when thou hast seen it,.... Which was all he was admitted to; for to go into it and see it was not allowed him, though he importuned it, Deu_3:25, thou shalt be gathered unto thy people, as Aaron thy brother was gathered; die as he did, in the same sudden, easy, quiet, and cheerful manner; see Num_20:26.TRAPP, "Numbers 27:13 And when thou hast seen it, thou also shalt be gathered unto thy people, as Aaron thy brother was gathered.Ver. 13. Gathered unto thy people.] To that great panegyris, "the general assembly and church of the firstborn in heaven"; [Hebrews 12:23] to that glorious amphitheatre, where the saints shall see and say, Iδου ο Pετρος, και ο Pαυλος, &c., as Chrysostom hath it; Look, yonder is Peter, and that is Paul, &c.; we shall "sit down with Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob"; have communion with them, not only as godly men, but as Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob.

BENSON, "Numbers 27:13. Thou shalt be gathered unto thy people — Moses must die; but death does not cut him off; it only gathers him to his people, brings him to rest with the holy patriarchs that were gone before him. Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob were his people, the people of his choice, and to them death gathered him.

WHEDON, "13. Thou also shalt be gathered unto thy people — The people of Moses were not the living generation, but the tenants of the grave. This announcement was made, “that he might go forward to his death with the fullest consciousness, 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. For the account of his death on the same summit, see Deuteronomy 32:48-52; Deuteronomy 34:1-8.PETT, "Numbers 27:13“And when you have seen it, you also shall be gathered to your people, as Aaron your brother was gathered,”Once Moses had seen the land with his own eyes he would then be ‘gathered to his people’ as Aaron had been. He would join them in the grave world. His death, while occurring earlier than it should have because of his sin, was not to be seen as punishment on the level of that meted out in the wilderness. It was a graded punishment (a reminder to us that God does grade punishment).

66

This Being Gathered To His People Was Because He Had Rebelled Against Yahweh’s Command Due To The Strife of the People (meribah) And Had Thus Failed To Sanctify Him (qdsh) In The Eyes of the People at The Waters (Numbers 27:13 a).

14 for when the community rebelled at the waters in the Desert of Zin, both of you disobeyed my command to honor me as holy before their eyes.” (These were the waters of Meribah Kadesh, in the Desert of Zin.)

CLARKE, "Ye rebelled against my commandment - See the notes on Num_20:12.

GILL, "For ye rebelled against my commandment the desert of Zin,.... Both Moses and Aaron, which was the reason why they were not suffered to go into the land of Canaan, but died a little before the children of Israel came into it: what their sin was, called here a rebelling against the commandment of the Lord; See Gill on Num_20:12, and is next suggested: in the strife of the congregation, to sanctify me before their eyes; when the congregation of Israel strove against the Lord for want of water, they did not sanctify the Lord by believing in him; but expressed some degree of diffidence before the congregation about fetching water out of the rock, or questioning whether the Lord would give it to such a rebellious people, though they had his order for it: that is the water of Meribah in Kadesh, in the wilderness of Zin; so called to distinguish it from another Meribah, or water of strife, at Rephidim, Exo_17:7.TRAPP, "Numbers 27:14 For ye rebelled against my commandment in the desert of Zin, in the strife of the congregation, to sanctify me at the water before their eyes: that [is] the water of Meribah in Kadesh in the wilderness of Zin.Ver. 14. For ye rebelled.] Sin may rebel in the saints, but not reign; neither is it they

67

that rebel, "but sin that dwelleth in" them; dwelleth, but not domineereth.WHEDON, " 14. For ye rebelled — In Numbers 20:12 (see note) the charge against Moses and Aaron is, “Ye believed me not.” The passages are in perfect harmony, for unbelief is the root of all disobedience. See απειθεια, translated by unbelief in Romans 11:30; Romans 11:32; Hebrews 4:6; Hebrews 4:11; and by disobedience in Ephesians 2:2; Ephesians 5:6; Colossians 3:6.Desert of Zin… Kadesh — Numbers 20:1, note.

PETT, "Numbers 27:14“Because you rebelled against my word in the wilderness of Zin, in the strife of the congregation, to sanctify me at the waters before their eyes.”His punishment, though milder, was due to the fact that he too had been guilty of a form of rebellion. He had not ‘believed’ fully and had rebelled against Yahweh’s word, and had thus failed to ‘reveal Him as holy’ (qdsh) at the waters in the eyes of the people, because of the people’s strife (meribah). He had allowed his view of the people to cause him to disobey Yahweh.Numbers 27:14 b‘(These are the waters of Meribah (strife) of Kadesh (sanctified place) in the wilderness of Zin.)’For that was what the waters of ‘Meribah’, of strife, in ‘Kadesh’, in the place of sanctification, were all about. Note the play on words with the previous sentence. It should have been a place of sanctification, but it became a place of strife both for the people and for Moses and Aaron. What God had intended to be for everyone’s good had brought misery to everyone because of how they took it. If only all had looked only to Yahweh, how blessed they would have been! PULPIT, "Numbers 27:14For ye rebelled against my commandment. Rather, "as ye rebelled." The same word, ַּכֲאֶׁשר, quomodo, is used hero as in the previous clause. That is the water of Meribah in Kadesh in the wilderness of Zin. These words have all the appearance of an explanatory gloss intended to make the reference more plain to the reader or hearer. It is impossible to suppose that they formed part of the Divine message; nor does it seem probable that Moses would have added them to the narrative as it stands, because, in view of Numbers 20:13, no necessity for explanation existed. It is quite possible that both Numbers 20:13 and the present clause are subsequent additions to the text intended to clear up an obvious confusion between the "strife" at Rephidim (Exodus 17:7) and that at Kadesh.

68

15 Moses said to the Lord,

GILL, "And Moses spake unto the Lord,.... Having requested to go into the land and see it, which was denied him; and perceiving he must quickly die, and being a man of a public spirit, and concerned for the welfare of the people of Israel, prays that a successor might be nominated and appointed:

HENRY 15-17, "Here, I. Moses prays for a successor. When God had told him that he must die, though it appears elsewhere that he solicited for a reprieve for himself (Deu_3:24, Deu_3:25), yet, when this could not be obtained, he begged earnestly that the work of God might be carried on, though he might not have the honour of finishing it. Envious spirits do not love their successors, but Moses was not one of these. We should concern ourselves, both in our prayers and in our endeavours, for the rising generation, that religion may flourish, and the interests of God's kingdom among men may be maintained and advanced, when we are in our graves. In this prayer Moses expresses, 1. A tender concern for the people of Israel: That the congregation of the Lord be not as sheep which have no shepherd.Our Saviour uses this comparison in his compassions for the people when they wanted good ministers, Mat_9:36. Magistrates and ministers are the shepherds of a people; if these be wanting, or be not as they should be, people are apt to wander and be scattered abroad, are exposed to enemies, and in danger of wanting food and of hurting one another, as sheep having no shepherd. 2. A believing dependence upon God, as the God of the spirits of all flesh. He is both the former and the searcher of spirits, and therefore can either find men fit or make them fit to serve his purposes, for the good of his church. Moses prays to God, not to send an angel, but to set a man over the congregation, that is, to nominate and appoint one whom he would qualify and own as ruler of his people Israel. Before God gave this blessing to Israel, he stirred up Moses to pray for it: thus Christ, before he sent forth his apostles, called to those about him to pray the Lord of the harvest that he would send forth labourers into his harvest, Mat_9:38.II. God, in answer to his prayer, appoints him a successor, even Joshua, who had long since signalized himself by his courage in fighting Amalek, his humility in ministering to Moses, and his faith and sincerity in witnessing against the report of the evil spies; this is the man whom God pitches upon to succeed Moses: A man in whom is the Spirit, the Spirit of grace (he is a good man, fearing God and hating covetousness, and acting from principle), the spirit of government (he is fit to do the work and discharge the trusts of his place), a spirit of conduct and courage; and he had also the spirit of prophecy, for the Lord often spoke unto him, Jos_4:1; Jos_6:2; Jos_7:10.

69

K&D 15-17, "Consecration of Joshua as the Successor of Moses. - Num_27:15-17. 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. א ָוב ֵצאת (“go out,” and “go in”) is a description of the conduct of men in every-day life (Deu_28:6; Deu_31:2; Jos_14:11). ְוֵהִביא ִציא ה (“lead out,” and “bring in”) signifies the superintendence of the affairs of the nation, and is founded upon the figure of a shepherd.

CALVIN, "15.And Moses spake. Moses here sets forth not only God’s providence in attending to the welfare of the people, but also his own zeal for them. Hence it appears how paternal was his affection for them, in that he not only performed his duty towards them faithfully and earnestly, and shunned no pains that it cost him, even to the end of his life, but he also makes provision for the future, and is anxious about a suitable successor, lest the people should remain without one, like a headless body. We perceive also his humility, when he does not arrogate the right of appointment to himself, nor on his own authority submit the matter to the election of the people, but establishes God as its sole arbiter. It was, indeed, permitted him to choose the officers, and this was a part of the political constitution; but this was too difficult a task, to find by man’s judgment one who should suffice for its performance; and, consequently, it behoved that the power should be intrusted to God alone, who did not indeed refuse to undertake it. And this special reason had much force in so difficult a point, viz., that the people should receive their leader at His hand, in order that the supreme power should always remain vested in Himself. As, therefore, He had chosen Moses in an extraordinary manner, and had appointed him to be His representative, so He continued the same grace in the case of Joshua. Already, indeed, had He designated him; but, out of modesty, Moses omits his name, and simply prays that God would provide for His people.The title, with which he honors God, has reference to the matter in question. It is true, indeed, that God may be often called “the God of the spirits of all flesh,” and for another reason, in chap. 16:22, Moses makes use of this expression; but he now alludes to this attribute, as much as to say, that there must be some one ready, and as it were in His hand, who should be appointed, since He has the making of all men according to His own will. Men often are mistaken and deceived in their opinions, and, even although the Spirit of God may enlighten them, they go no further than to discern the peculiar endowment for which a person is eminent; but God is not only the best judge of each man’s ability and aptitude, nor does He only penetrate to the inmost recesses of every heart; but He also fashions and refashions the men whom He chooses as His ministers, and supplies them with the faculties they require in order to be sufficient for bearing the burden. We gather from hence a useful lesson,

70

i.e., that, when we are deprived of good rulers, they should be sought from the Maker Himself, whose special gift the power of good government is. And on this ground Moses calls Him not only the Creator of men, but “of all flesh,” and expressly refers to their “spirits.”When he compares the people to sheep, it is for the purpose of awakening compassion, so that God may be more disposed to appoint them a shepherd.

COFFMAN, ""And Moses spake unto Jehovah, saying, Let Jehovah, the God of the spirits of all flesh, appoint a man over the congregation, who may go out before them, and who may come in before them, and who may lead them out, and who may bring them in; and the congregation of Jehovah be not as sheep which have no shepherd. And Jehovah said unto Moses, Take thee Joshua the son of Nun, a man in whom is the Spirit, and lay thy hand upon him; and set him before Eleazar the priest, and before all the congregation; and give him a charge in their sight. And thou shalt put of thine honor upon him, that all the congregation of the children of Israel may obey. And he shall stand before Eleazar the priest, who shall inquire for him by the judgment of the Urim before Jehovah: at his word shall they go out, and at his word they shall come in, both he, and all the children of Israel with him, even all the congregation. And Moses did as Jehovah commanded him; and he took Joshua, and set him before Eleazar the priest, and before all the congregation: and he laid his hands upon him, and gave him a charge, as Jehovah spake by Moses.""And thou shalt put of thine honor upon him ..." Joshua was not to have the same place in Israel's history as Moses had. The word here rendered "honor" has the meaning of "authority,"[19] and in some of the affairs of the Chosen People, Joshua was subordinate to the High Priest. In the whole conception of the Theocracy, this was an essential element."In whom is the Spirit ..." The American Standard Version departs from precious versions in capitalizing Spirit, whereas in the KJV, for example, it is written "spirit." The ASV follows the Douay in this. It does not appear that God guided all of His people with the Holy Spirit during that dispensation of his grace, but it cannot be denied that he did so in the instance of Joshua, and of Moses, and of all the holy prophets. Peter tells us categorically that "holy men spake from God, being moved by the Holy Spirit" (2 Peter 1:20). Also see 1 Peter 1:11. Therefore, we believe the ASV is certainly correct in making this passage a reference to the blessed Holy Spirit himself. This is very important, because it means that Joshua, who in all probability is the so-called "editor" to whom a few passages in the Pentateuch are usually assigned was INSPIRED of God no less than Moses.Whereas God spake directly with Moses, Joshua sought to know the will of God through the high priest who consulted the "Urim" (Numbers 27:21). This is apparently an abbreviation from "the Urim and the Thummin,"[20] those mysterious articles carried in the breastplate of the High Priest (Exodus 28:30),

71

which in some unknown manner were consulted with regard to God's will on certain matters. Little is known about them or their use.It should be noted that Moses offered no complaint when God told him of his impending death. He did not protest, or plead for any change or delay in the sentence. His only thoughts appear to have been concerned with the safety, the leadership, and the continued progress of Israel. What a noble and self-effacing attitude."Go out before them ... come in before them ... lead them out ... bring them in ..." (Numbers 27:17). These are the metaphors of a shepherd. God Himself was the Shepherd of Israel, and when Jesus said, "I am the Good Shepherd," no bolder claim to absolute Divinity on our Lord's part could have been stated.COKE, "Numbers 27:15-17. And Moses spake unto the Lord— The information of his approaching departure did not at all surprize Moses, who, for a long time, had been accustomed to consider death as that circumstance alone which could procure him true repose, after a life full of trouble and agitation. We find, however, Deuteronomy 3:25 that he entreated the Lord to permit him to go over Jordan, and see the promised land; but God having refused him this favour, full of submission to his will, and desirous only of the felicity of the people whom he had thus far conducted, he addresses God, in the most fervent manner, for the appointment of an able person to succeed him in his office, in which he demonstrates the generosity and goodness of his heart, in the religious and public spirit by which he was actuated. The expression, the God of the spirits of all flesh, sufficiently proves that Moses both knew and inculcated the immortality of the soul. He appeals to him, not only as the creator of souls, but as perfectly knowing their dispositions, and consequently best understanding who were fit for so weighty an employment as that of the Shepherd of His people; under which metaphor we find, among the ancients, kings and chief rulers generally designed. There are frequent instances of this allusion in the Scriptures, and in the works of Homer. BENSON, "Numbers 27:15. And Moses spake unto the Lord — Concerning his successor.We should concern ourselves both in our prayers and in our endeavours for the rising generation, that God’s kingdom may be advanced among men, when we are in our graves.PETT, "Verses 15-17Moses Pleads For a Man to Replace Him Lest The People Be As Sheep Without a Shepherd On His Departure (Numbers 27:15-17).But the heart of Moses is revealed in his reaction. The people had caused his downfall, but he still yearned that they might be watched over and cared for. And

72

he pleaded with God to provide them with a suitable shepherd.Numbers 27:15-17‘And Moses spoke to Yahweh, saying, “Let Yahweh, the God of the spirits of all flesh, appoint a man over the congregation, who may go out before them, and who may come in before them, and who may lead them out, and who may bring them in, that the congregation of Yahweh be not as sheep which have no shepherd.”Moses thought back over his long experience of these people and he pleaded with Yahweh to provide someone who would be as patient with them as he had been. It would have to be a man of patient spirit, of tender spirit, of compassionate spirit, of merciful spirit. But Who better to provide such a man than Yahweh, the God of ‘the spirits of all flesh?’ Man had been made of flesh, of the dust of the ground (Genesis 2:7), but God had breathed breath into him and he had lived (Genesis 2:7). And He Who had put that breath within man could surely therefore arrange for a man who had a spirit which could enable him to shepherd this people.Compare here Numbers 16:22 where Yahweh being the God of the spirits of all flesh (because He had imparted that spirit) was expected to be compassionate for that reason. He had made man what he is.What was needed was a man who, like a shepherd, would go out in front of them to protect them and watch for the dangers that lay ahead. He would also need to be one who came in among them to bring Yahweh’s message to them and to encourage them. He had to be one who could lead them out to face their destiny, and who could lead them in the right way, and he had to be one who could bring them in again safely to the shelter of the camp. So he prayed that God would appoint such a man.PULPIT, "Numbers 27:15And Moses spake unto the Lord. The behaviour of Moses as here recorded (see, however, on Deuteronomy 3:23 sq; which seems to throw a somewhat different light upon the matter) was singularly and touchingly disinterested. For himself not even a word of complaint at his punishment, which must have seemed, thus close at hand, more inexplicably severe than ever; all his thoughts and his prayers for the people—that one might take his place, and reap for himself and Israel the reward of all his toil and patience.

SIMEON, "APPOINTMENT OF JOSHUA TO SUCCEED MOSESNumbers 27:15-21. And Moses spake unto the Lord, saying, Let the Lord, the God of the spirits of all flesh, set a man over the congregation, which may go out before them, and which may go in before them, and which may lead them out, and which may bring them in; that the congregation of the Lord be not as sheep which have no

73

shepherd. 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; and set him before Eleazar the priest, and before all the congregation: and give him a charge in their sight. And thou shalt put some of thine honour upon him, that all the congregation of the children of Israel may be obedient. And he shall stand before Eleazar the priest, who shall ask counsel for him, after the judgment of Urim before the Lord. At his word they shall go out, and at his word they shall come in, both he, and all the children of Israel with him, even all the congregation.WHEN great and good men are taken away, we are apt to suppose that their places cannot be adequately supplied. But God “has the residue of the Spirit,” and can raise up instruments at any time to carry on his gracious purposes in the world. When Elijah was taken up to heaven in a fiery chariot, his servant Elisha was ready to imagine, that all the stay and support of Israel was removed; “My father, my father! the chariot of Israel and the horsemen thereof!” but Elijah’s mantle fell upon Elisha. Thus, when Moses had received God’s final decision respecting his dying in the wilderness, it seemed as if the nation of Israel would be left as sheep without a shepherd: but God, in answer to the prayer of Moses, appointed one to succeed him, who fulfilled his trust as well as Moses himself could have done.The points for our present consideration are,I. The concern of Moses for the people committed to him—The last forty years of his life he had spent entirely in their service: and now that he could superintend them no longer, he was anxious that a successor should be appointed by God himself; that so all occasion for rivalship might be cut off, and all discord and anarchy be prevented. In this he acted,1. As a true patriot—[Patriotism is a virtue which all public men affect, but which very few possess. Selfishness is by far the more prevailing character. Many, when they can hold the reins of government no longer, would rather be succeeded by one of moderate talents, whose inferiority should cause regret for their departed worth, than by one of transcendent abilities, whose eminence should eclipse their virtues, and cause their services to be forgotten. A regard for their own credit would outweigh their desire for the public weal. Besides, the generality of patriots exert all their influence to aggrandize their own families; and appoint to places of trust and honour, not those whom in their consciences they think most fit for the office, but those who from family or party considerations will most confirm their power, or perpetuate the honour of their name. The very reverse of all this was displayed in the conduct of Moses. He was fearful lest the people should have any reason to regret his loss. He was anxious that a person should be selected and qualified by God himself; that so the administration of their affairs might be conducted to the greatest possible advantage. And though he had children of his own, he placed them in no peculiar

74

situation either or church or state; but left them to occupy the humbler post of common Levites, whilst Aaron’s children succeeded to the priesthood, and one of another tribe was nominated as his successor in the government. Moreover, the manner of evincing his concern for the people’s welfare, was such as is little known to modern patriots; he evinced it not by declamatory harangues, but by praying to God for them. Happy would it be, if those who in this day make such professions of zeal in the service of their country, would manifest it before God in their secret chamber, entreating HIM to direct their counsels and prosper their endeavours! To secure his direction and blessing for those in power, would be a better proof of patriotism, than to be aiming incessantly at their subversion and ruin.]2. As a faithful minister—[Moses presided over Israel, both as a Church, and as a Nation: and he shewed the same regard for their spiritual, as for their temporal, interests. He well knew, that the appointment of a truly religious governor would equally conduce to their good in both respects. Hence he prayed, that God would set one over them, who should “go in and out before them,” leading them by his example, as well as directing them by his authority: and though doubtless this might principally refer to the wars which they were about to wage, yet it certainly comprehended also every part of the governor’s office, whether civil or religious. Such is the prayer which every pious minister must offer, when he finds the time of his dissolution drawing nigh. He must not be satisfied with having discharged his own duties conscientiously, but must “labour earnestly for them in prayer,” desiring to have his flock committed to one, who shall watch over them with diligence, and minister unto them with fidelity; one, who will not merely direct them aright, but will go before them in the way, as the eastern shepherds were wont to do. In this he must manifest his resemblance to the Saviour, who “had compassion on the people, because they were as sheep having no shepherd [Note: Matthew 9:36.]:” in this too he must follow the footsteps of the Apostles, who strove, both by oral and written communications, to perpetuate the effect of their labours [Note: Acts 20:25-32; 2 Peter 1:12-15.].]How pleasing and acceptable this intercession was, we see in,II. The gracious provision which God made for them—Here, as in ten thousand instances, God answered without delay the petitions presented to him—1. He selected a suitable person for the office—[“Take Joshua,” says he, “a man in whom is the Spirit.” Yes, such are the magistrates and ministers whom God appoints: he selects those in whom are suitable qualifications for the post assigned them, or, at least, persons whom he himself will fit for their office. A talent for government is implied in this expression, but it implies also real piety; which is absolutely requisite for a due discharge either

75

of the magisterial or ministerial office. None can act for God, who do not act from him, that is, by grace received from him: and consequently, none can make the best use of their authority, who are not taught by the Spirit to use it for the furtherance of religion, and for the glory of God. O that such persons were universally selected to manage the concerns both of church and state! We might hope for a far richer blessing on the nation at large, and far infinitely greater good to the Church of Christ, if such persons, and such only, were invested with the sword of magistracy, or the pastoral staff. At all events, both magistrates and ministers may learn from hence, what qualification they should chiefly seek, for a profitable discharge of their respective offices.]2. He prescribed the mode of his ordination to it—[“Set him before Eleazar, and before all the congregation,” said the Lord; “and lay thine hand upon him, and give him a charge in their sight, and put some of thine honour upon him;” that is, invest him now, before thy death, with a part of thine own authority; that all, seeing whom I have chosen, may acknowledge him as their governor, and render a willing obedience to his commands. This mode of ordaining Joshua was calculated to answer every end that could be wished. It effectually prevented all competition, and strengthened his hands for the arduous employment that was assigned him: and we may well suppose that Joshua would be deeply impressed with these ceremonies, and long retain a remembrance of the charge given him, confirmed as it was by an additional charge from God himself [Note: Deuteronomy 31:7-8; Deuteronomy 31:14-15; Deuteronomy 31:23.]. Nor is this mode of appointing Joshua uninstructive to us; for, a similar mode of consecrating persons to divine offices has ever since obtained in the Church of God. The deacons who were first ordained by the Apostles, to superintend the temporal concerns of the Church. were set apart in this way [Note: Acts 6:3; Acts 6:6.]: and both priests and elders were afterwards consecrated with nearly the same forms [Note: 1 Timothy 4:14; Acts 14:23.]. And may we not hope that similar effects are still produced on the minds of many at their solemn consecration to the work of the ministry? We have no doubt they are: and, on the Ember-days, which are especially set apart for praying to God in behalf of those who are to be ordained, a still richer blessing would rest upon them; and the imposition of hands be accompanied with a more abundant communication of the Holy Spirit to their souls [Note: Compare Deuteronomy 34:9 with 2 Timothy 1:6.].]3. He promised him all needful assistance in it—[It must of necessity be, that in the government of that people many cases would arise, wherein he would need direction from above. Moses had on such occasions enjoyed immediate access to the Deity. But another mode of communication had been fixed by God for all succeeding governors. The Urim and Thummim (which import light and perfection) were in the breast-plate, which was worn by the high-priest; and by means of that breast-plate, God, in some way unknown to us, revealed his will. To Joshua he particularly promised, that he would communicate

76

to him in this way all needful information: so that, whatever difficulties might arise, he should have infallible means of ascertaining the mind of God. Doubtless that method of obtaining instruction is now at an end: but the prayer of faith will yet prevail, so that God’s ministers and people shall not seek his race in vain. If they truly desire his direction, they shall be preserved from any important error, and be guided into all necessary truth: “The meek he will guide in judgment; the meek he will teach his way.”]From this subject we may clearly learn,1. The blessedness of the Christian church—[How happy were the Jews to have such an intercessor as Moses, and such a governor as Joshua! Follow Joshua in his course, from the moment of his appointment to the moment of his death: what a series of victories, till he had conquered the land, and distributed it according to the divine purpose! But if we envy the Jews their divinely-appointed head, what objects of envy must we be, who have the Lord Jesus Christ himself for our Head! He is the true Joshua, to whom “the Spirit is given without measure [Note: Isaiah 11:2-3; John 3:34.].” He also is made “Head of the Church,” and is “ascended up on high, that he may fill all things;” and through him the very weakest of his people shall be “more than conquerors.” Let us then “be strong in the Lord and in the power of his might,” and not doubt but that “he will bruise Satan under our feet shortly.”]2. The duty of advancing in every possible way its best interests—[If we be magistrates or ministers, our duty is proportionably difficult, and our responsibility proportionably awful. O that all who have been placed in such offices, felt as they ought the obligations that are upon them! Let ministers in particular, who have a far greater charge than that of magistrates committed to them, give themselves up wholly to the execution of their trust. Let them fear lest the blood of those who die in their sins, be laid to their charge. And let them so fulfil their ministry, that they may give up their account with joy, and not with grief.]

16 “May the Lord, the God who gives breath to all living things, appoint someone over this community.

77

BARNES, "The God of the spirits of all flesh - An acknowledgment that man, who is but flesh (compare Gen_6:3), is of himself helpless; and “lives and moves and has his being” in God Act_17:28. The words are suitably employed here to introduce an entreaty that God would not leave the congregation without a guide and leader, and in Num_16:22 as a preface to an intercession that the whole people should not suffer for the sin of a, few.

CLARKE, "The Lord, the God of the spirits of all flesh - See the notes on Num_16:22.GILL, "Let the Lord, the God of the spirits of all flesh,.... The Maker of the souls of men, called the spirits of all flesh, or of corporeal beings, to distinguish them from the angels, who, though spirits, are incorporeal; and who knows the different qualities of the souls of men, their powers, and capacities, and fitness for service, what gifts and talents they have for business; and who can bestow such upon them, which will quality them for it: set a man over the congregation: meaning in his room and stead.

JAMISON,"God of the spirits of all flesh, set a man over the congregation — The request was most suitably made to God in this character, as the Author of all the intellectual gifts and moral graces with which men are endowed, and who can raise up qualified persons for the most arduous duties and the most difficult situations.ELLICOTT, "(16) Let the Lord . . . —We have a remarkable instance here of the true greatness of Moses, as a type of Him whose words were, “Weep not for me, but weep for yourselves and for your children” (Luke 23:28). Instead of indulging in excessive grief, or in unavailing remorse, the mind of Moses was intently fixed upon the welfare of those for whose sake he had been willing that his own name should be blotted out of the Book (Exodus 32:32); and instead of appointing one of his own family, or the man of his own choice, as his successor, he commits the matter to God, and prays that He will appoint one who would be a true shepherd to the flock.

TRAPP, "Numbers 27:16 Let the LORD, the God of the spirits of all flesh, set a man over the congregation,Ver. 16. The God of the spirits of all flesh.] "Thou, Lord, that knowest the hearts of all men." [Acts 1:24] {See Trapp on "Acts 1:24"} Artificers know well the nature and properties of their own work. Deus intimior nobis intimo nostro.POOLE, "All flesh, i.e. of all men; the Searcher of spirits, that knowest who is fit for this great employment; the Father, and Giver, and Governor of spirits, who canst

78

raise and suit the spirits of men to the highest and hardest works, as thou didst those Numbers 11:16,17. See Numbers 16:22. BENSON, "Numbers 27:16. The God of the spirits of all flesh — God of all men; the Searcher of spirits, that knowest who is fit for this great employment; the Father, and Giver, and Governor of spirits, who canst raise and suit the spirits of men to the highest and hardest works.

WHEDON, " JOSHUA PUBLICLY CONSECRATED AS THE SUCCESSOR OF MOSES, Numbers 27:15-23.16. The spirits of all flesh — The distinction between mind and matter is here clearly taught by Moses. In answer to the objection that the Hebrew word ruach signifies only breath, we quote the following from Sir W. Hamilton: “The term soul, (and what I say of the term soul is true of the term spirit,) though in this country less employed than the term mind, may be regarded as another synonyme for the unknown basis of the mental phenomena. Like nearly all words significant of the internal world, there is here a metaphor borrowed from the external; and this is the case not merely in one, but, as far as we can trace the analogy, in all languages. You are aware that ψυχη, the Greek term for soul, comes from ψυχω, I breathe or blow, as πνευμα, in Greek, and spiritus, in Latin, from verbs of the same signification. In like manner, anima and animus are words which, though in Latin they have lost their primary signification, and are only known in their secondary or metaphorical sense, yet in their original physical meaning are preserved in the Greek ανεμος, wind or air. The English soul, and the German seele, come from a Gothic root saivala, which signifies to storm. Ghost, the old English word for spirit in general, and so used in our English version of the Scriptures, is the same as the German geist, and is derived from gas or gescht, which signifies air. In like manner the two words in Hebrew for soul or spirit, nephesh and ruach, are derivatives of a root which means to breathe; and in Sanscrit the word atma (analogous to the Greek ατμος, vapor or air) signifies both mind and wind or air.” Jehovah is here styled the God of all human spirits, to intimate his perfect acquaintance with the mental, moral, and spiritual characteristics of all men, and hence his ability to select the man who should succeed to the leadership of Israel, soon to be made vacant by the death of Moses.BI 16-23, "Let the Lord, the God of the spirits of all flesh, set a man over the congregation.The spiritual leaders of menI. The world’s need of spiritual leaders.

1. The great majority of every generation are uninventive, unaspiring, cringing, servile, thoughtless, ignorant. They not only walk in moral darkness, but lack the desire, if not the capacity, to struggle into the light

79

of moral principles.2. Clearly, then, they require spiritual leaders, men who shall point out to them the way of honesty, truth, purity, and holiness, marching before them in all the stateliness of the Christly morality.

II. The genuine type of spiritual leaders.1. The true spiritual leader must be a man. Not an idiot, not a charlatan, not a functionary. A “man” is a person who has right convictions of moral duty, and honestly embodies them in his daily life.2. The true spiritual leader must be a man inspired by God. No man can be a true moral leader of the people who has not within him, as the all-animating and directing force, an unutterable abhorrence of wrong and an invincible attachment to the right, whose whole nature does not beat and beam with the soul of Divine morality.

III. The Divine succession of spiritual leaders. They are all in the hands of God.1. He takes the greatest spiritual leaders away by death.2. He raises others to supply their place. One enters into another’s labours. (Homilist.)

A model ordination serviceI. That the person ordained should be chosen of God for his work. Moses asked the Lord to “set a man over the congregation,” &c. (Num_27:16-17). “And the Lord said unto Moses, Take thee Joshua,” &c. So now the Christian minister should be—

1. Called by God to His work.2. Appointed by God to his sphere of work.

II. That the ordination is to the most important work.III. That the ordination should be conducted by tried men.IV. The ordination should be accompanied with the imposition of hands.V. That the ordination should include a charge to the ordained, “Give him a charge.” The duties and responsibilities of the office should be laid before those who are being set apart to it; and the experience of godly and approved men should be made available for the direction of the inexperienced. What wise and inspiring things Moses would say to Joshua in this charge! What sage counsels drawn from his ripe experience! &c.VI. That the ordination should be conducted in the presence of the people. Moreover, such an arrangement—

1. Is more impressive to the person being ordained. There present with him are the immortal souls for whom he has to live and labour.2. Tends to influence the people beneficially. As they hear of the

80

important duties and solemn responsibilities of their minister, they should be awakened to deeper solicitude and more earnest prayer on his behalf, and to heartier co-operation with him.VII. The ordination should confer honour upon the person ordained.VIII. That a person so chosen of God, should seek special direction from Him, and seeking, shall obtain it.

1. A warning against self-sufficiency.2. A source of encouragement and strength. (W. Jones.)

“The God of the spirits of all flesh”I. The affecting view here furnished of the agency and dominion of God in connection with the human mind.

1. God imparts the powers of the spirit. We have nothing self-derived.2. He claims the affections of the spirit.3. He heals the disorders and sympathises with the sorrows of the spirit.4. He alone can constitute the happiness of the spirit.5. He will decide upon the future destiny of the spirit.

II. The moral uses of these contemplations.1. Let them teach you reverence for the human mind.2. Let them impress you with thoughts of the vast importance of personal religion.3. Let them inspire you with practical efforts to benefit and bless society. By education-by missions, &c.4. Let them kindle hope for the prospects of the human race. (S. Thodey.).

17 to go out and come in before them, one who will lead them out and bring them in, so the Lord’s people will not be like sheep without a shepherd.”

81

CLARKE, "That the congregation of the Lord be not as sheep which have no shepherd - This is a beautiful expression, and shows us in what light Moses viewed himself among his people. He was their shepherd; he sought no higher place; he fed and guided the flock of God under the direction of the Divine Spirit, and was faithful in all his Master’s house. To this saying of Moses our Lord alludes, Mat_9:36.

GILL, "Which may go out before them, and which may go in before them, and which may lead them out, and which may bring them in,.... Which may lead them out, and go before them in war, and command them in battle and bring them in peace, having conquered their enemies; or these phrases only mean the administration of civil government among them, and diligence and assiduity in it, see 2Ch_1:10, unless it has any peculiar respect to the leading the people of Israel out of the wilderness, and introducing them into the land of Canaan: that the congregation of the Lord be not as sheep which have no shepherd; and so wander about, having none to guide them into proper pastures, or to protect them from beasts of prey; which is to be in a most forlorn and distressed condition; see Mat_9:36.ELLICOTT, "(17) Which may go out before them . . . —The expression going out and coming in is used here, as in many other places, to denote the ordinary life of man (Deuteronomy 28:6; Deuteronomy 31:2). Leading out and bringing in (literally, causing to go out and to come in), as a shepherd in respect of his flock (John 10:3-9), denotes the direction of the conduct of others.POOLE, "i.e. Which may wisely conduct them in all their affairs, both when they go forth to war, or upon other occasions, and when they return home and live in peace. A metaphor from shepherds, as it here follows, which in those places used not to go behind their sheep, as ours now do, but before them, and to lead them forth to their pasture, and in due time to lead them home again. Of this phrase see Deuteronomy 28:6 Acts 1:21.

BENSON, "Numbers 27:17. Go out before them — That is, who may wisely conduct them in all their affairs, both when they go forth to war, or upon other occasions, and when they return home and live in peace. A metaphor from shepherds, who in those places used not to go behind their sheep, as ours now do, but before them, and to lead them forth to their pasture, and, in due time, to lead them home again.WHEDON, " 17. Go out… go in — This describes conduct in every-day life. Joshua 14:11, note.

82

Lead… out,… bring… in — Superintend the affairs of the nation. The imagery of the shepherd’s life is in the mind of Moses. John 10:1-16, notes.

PULPIT, "Which may go out before them, and which may go in before them. A comparison with the words of Moses in Deuteronomy 31:2, and of Caleb in Joshua 14:11, shows that the going out and coming in refer to the vigorous prosecution of daily business, and the fatigues of active service. Which may lead them out, and which may bring them in. The underlying image is that of a shepherd and his flock, which suggests itself so naturally to all that have the care and governance of men (cf. John 10:3, John 10:4, John 10:16). As sheep which have no shepherd. And are, therefore, helpless, bewildered, scattered, lost, and devoured. The image is frequent in Scripture (cf. 1 Kings 22:17; Ezekiel 34:5; Zechariah 10:2; Matthew 9:36). The words of the Septuagint are ὡσεὶ πρόβατα οἷς οὐκ ἔστι ποιμήν.

18 So the Lord said to Moses, “Take Joshua son of Nun, a man in whom is the spirit of leadership,[a] and lay your hand on him.

BARNES, "In whom is the spirit Compare Gen_41:38. Joshua was endowed by God with the requisite spiritual qualifications for the office. Moses howerer, was to lay his hands upon him, both in order to confer formal and public appointment, and also (compare Deu_34:9) to confirm and strengthen the spiritual gifts already bestowed. The previous reception of the inner grace did not dispense with that of the outward sign; compare the case of Cornelius Act_10:44-48; and Paul’s baptism after his miraculous conversion Act_9:18.

CLARKE, "In whom is the spirit - This must certainly mean the Spirit of God; and because he was endued with this Spirit, therefore he was capable of leading the people. How miserably qualified is that man for the work of God who is not guided and influenced by the Holy Ghost! God never chooses a man to accomplish his designs but that one whom he himself has qualified for the work.

GILL, "And the Lord said unto Moses,.... In answer to his request: 83

take thou Joshua the son of Nun, who had been a servant of his near forty years, and of whose humility, diligence, faithfulness and integrity he had sufficient proof, as well as of his skill and courage in military affairs, particularly at the battle with Amalek, Exo_17:9, a man in whom is the Spirit: not only in whom is a spirit or soul, which is in every man; but the Spirit of God, and that not only as a spirit of grace and sanctification, which is in every good man; but as a spirit of prophecy, as the Targums of Onkelos and Jonathan; or rather it respects

HENRY 18-21 "God directs Moses how to secure the succession to Joshua. (1.) He must ordain him: Lay thy hand upon him, Num_27:18. This was done in token of Moses' transferring the government to him, as the laying of hands on the sacrifice put the offering in the place and stead of the offerer; also in token of God's conferring the blessing of the Spirit upon him, which Moses obtained by prayer. It is said (Deu_34:9), Joshua was full of the spirit of wisdom, for Moses had laid his hands on him. This rite of imposing hands we find used in the New Testament in the setting apart of gospel ministers, denoting a solemn designation of them to the office and an earnest desire that God would qualify them for it and own them in it. It is the offering of them to Christ and his church for living sacrifices. (2.) He must present him to Eleazar and the people, set him before them, that they might know him to be designed of God for this great trust and consent to that designation. (3.) He must give him a charge, v. 19. He must be charged with the people of Israel, who were delivered into his hand as sheep into the hand of a shepherd, and for whom he must be accountable. He must be strictly charged to do his duty to them; though they were under his command, he was under God's command, and from him must receive charge. The highest must know that there is a higher than they. This charge must be given him in their sight, that it might be the more affecting to Joshua, and that the people, seeing the work and care of their prince, might be the more engaged to assist and encourage him. (4.) He must put some of his honour upon him, Num_27:20. Joshua at the most had but some of the honour of Moses, and in many instances came short of him; but this seems to be meant of his taking him now, while he lived, into partnership with him in the government and admitting him to act with authority as his assistant. It is an honour to be employed for God and his church; some of this honour must be put upon Joshua, that the people, being used to obey him while Moses lived, might the more cheerfully do it afterwards. (5.) He must appoint Eleazar the high priest, with this breast-plate of judgment, to be his privy-council (Num_27:21): He shall stand before Eleazar, by him to consult the oracle, ready to receive and observe all the instructions that should be given him by it. This was a direction to Joshua. Though he was full of the Spirit, and had all this honour put upon him, yet he must do nothing without asking counsel of God, not leaning to his own understanding. It was also a great encouragement to him. To govern Israel, and to conquer Canaan, were two hard tasks, but God assures him that in both he should be under a divine conduct; and in every difficult case God would advise him to

84

that which should be for the best. Moses had recourse to the oracle of God himself, but Joshua and the succeeding judges must use the ministry of the high priest, and consult the judgment of urim, which, the Jews say, might not be enquired of but by the king or the head of the sanhedrim, or by the agent or representative of the people, for them, and in their name. Thus the government of Israel was now purely divine, for both the designation and direction of their princes were entirely so. At the word of the priest,according to the judgment of urim, Joshua and all Israel must go out and come in; and no doubt God, who thus guided, would preserve both their going out and their coming in. Those are safe, and may be easy, that follow God, and in all their ways acknowledge him.JAMISON,"Num_27:18-23. Joshua appointed to succeed him.Take thee Joshua ... a man in whom is the spirit, and lay thine hand upon him — A strong testimony is here borne to the personality of the divine Spirit - the imposition of hands was an ancient ceremony. (See Gen_48:14; Lev_1:4; 1Ti_4:14).

K&D 18-21, "The Lord then appointed Joshua to this office as a man “who had spirit.” רּוַה (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 Num_27:19 and Num_27:20, he was to set him before Eleazar the high priest and the congregation, to command him, i.e., instruct him with regard to his office before their eyes, and (ִצָּוה)to lay of his eminence (ד upon him, i.e., to transfer a portion of his own (הdignity 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 ִיְׁשְמעּו (hearken) must be supplied from the context, viz., ֵאָליו (to him), as Deu_34:9 clearly shows. The ִמן (of) in Num_27:20 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 Num_27:21 : “Eleazar shall ask to him (for him) the judgment of the Urim before Jehovah.” Urim is an abbreviation for Urim and Thummim (Exo_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

85

their conduct and 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.

CALVIN, "18.And the Lord said unto Moses. We here see that Joshua was given in answer to the prayers of Moses, which is not stated elsewhere. But, in order that he may obtain his dignity with the consent of all, he is honored with a signal encomium: for, when God declares that the Spirit is in him, He does not merely intimate that he has a soul, but that he excels in the necessary gifts, such as intelligence. judgment, magnanimity, and skill in war: and the word “spirit” is used, in a different sense from that which it has just above, for that eminent and rare grace, which manifested itself in Joshua. For this metonymy (234) is a tolerably common figure in Scripture.The solemn rite of his consecration by the imposition of hands follows, respecting which I have treated so fully elsewhere, (235) that it is now superfluous to say much upon it. It was in use before the giving of the Law, for thus the holy patriarchs blessed their sons. We have seen that the priests were inaugurated in their office, and that victims were offered to God, with this ceremony. The apostles followed this custom in the appointment of pastors. Moses, therefore, in order to testify publicly that Joshua was no longer his own master, but dedicated to God, and no longer to be regarded as a private individual, since he was called by God to the supreme command, laid his hands upon his head.There was also another reason, viz., that, according to the requirements of the office intrusted to him, God would more and more enrich him (with His gifts;(Added from Fr.)) for there is nothing to prevent God from conferring richer endowments upon His servants according to the nature of their vocation, although they may have previously been eminent for spiritual gifts. Thus to Timothy, when he was appointed a pastor, new grace was given by the imposition of the hands of Paul, although he had before attained to no ordinary eminence. (2 Timothy 1:6.) To the same effect is what follows, that Moses should put some of his glory (236) upon him, as if resigning his own dignity; for by the word glory, not only external splendor, but rather spiritual honor is signified, whereby God commands reverence towards His servants; not that he was stripped of his own virtues by transferring them to Joshua, but because, without diminution of his own gifts, he made the person who was about to be his successor his associate in their possession.It was fitting that this should be done before all the people, that all might willingly receive him as presented to them by God.The charge given to him partly tended to confirm the authority of Joshua, and partly to bind him more solemnly to discharge his duties; for, inasmuch as Moses

86

commanded him what he was to do in the name of God, he exempted himself from all suspicion of temerity; and, on the other hand, by the introduction of this duly authorized engagement, Joshua must have been more and more encouraged to faith and diligence.

COKE, "Numbers 27:18. Take thee Joshua, the son of Nun— Hence it appears, that this high office of leader or judge of Israel was not to be hereditary; nor did the policy of Moses take one step to perpetuate it in his own posterity or family; a convincing proof of his disinterestedness, and one which shews him to have been actuated by a principle which raised him above other lawgivers, who generally took care to advance their own families. As it was necessary that this office should be discharged by a person of the most eminent qualifications, God therefore appoints Joshua, the son Nun, who had been a constant attendant upon Moses, but who was of another family, and another tribe. He is said to be a man in whom is the spirit; respecting which, see Genesis 41:38. Exodus 28:3 and Deuteronomy 34:9.And lay thine hand upon him— The ceremony of laying on of hands denoted Moses's transferring the public trust delegated to him from God, upon Joshua, from himself. This ceremony was accompanied with solemn prayer, for the influence of the Divine Spirit to qualify the party for his office; and, when performed by men endued with a prophetic spirit, as Moses and the apostles, it was a sign and attestation of those moral endowments which God was pleased to convey to him who was thus invested with an office. See Deuteronomy 34:9. 1 Timothy 4:14. 2 Timothy 1:6 and Le Clerc on the passage.

ELLICOTT, " (18) In whom is the spirit . . . —The definite article is not used in the original. The word translated “spirit” appears to denote spiritual endowment and qualifications.And lay thine hand upon him.—It is to be observed that the spiritual qualifications of Joshua did not supersede the necessity of an outward consecration to his office. Nay, more; it seems that special qualifications for the office were bestowed in connection with the imposition of the hands of Moses, for it is written in Deuteronomy 34:9 that “Joshua the son of Nun was full of the spirit of wisdom; for Moses had laid his hands upon him.”

POOLE, " The spirit; the spirit of government, of wisdom, and of the fear of the Lord, &c.Lay thine hand upon him; by which ceremony Moses did both design the person and confer the power, and by his prayers, which accompanied that rite, obtain from God all the spiritual gifts and graces necessary for his future employment, as appears from Deuteronomy 34:9. See of this custom Genesis 48:14 Leviticus 1:4

87

Numbers 8:10 1 Timothy 4:14.

BENSON, "Numbers 27:18. In whom is the spirit — Or spiritual endowments from the Holy Ghost; for it is by the influence of the Spirit of God that all good gifts are communicated to the sons of men. It particularly means here, the spirit of wisdom, courage, and the fear of God, with other gifts necessary for a well-qualified governor. Hence Joshua is said to have been full of the spirit of wisdom, Deuteronomy 34:9. Lay thy hand upon him — By which ceremony Moses did both design the person and confer the power, and by his prayers, which accompanied that rite, obtain from God all the spiritual gifts and graces necessary for his future employment.

WHEDON, " 18. Joshua — Numbers 11:28, note.In whom is the spirit — Not mere “insight and wisdom,” (Knobel,) but the endowment of the divine Spirit requisite for the high office to which he was called. The difference between the operations of the Holy Spirit on the human soul before and after the day of Pentecost is a question of vital interest. (1.) In the Old Testament the agency of the Spirit in the outward world is recognised more fully than in the New Testament. Genesis 1:2; Genesis 2:7; Job 27:3; Job 33:4. (2.) The fulness and abiding of the Spirit in the soul of the believer, sanctifying, assuring, and adorning it with the constellation of Christian graces, is peculiar to the New Testament, especially after the Pentecostal effusion. In this sense Dean Alford insists that the office and work of the Paraclete is TOTALLY DISTINCT from his operations under the Old Testament dispensation, which were outward rather than inward: such as bestowing skill upon Bezaleel, (Exodus 31:3,) strength upon Samson, (Judges 14:6,) and prophecy and kingcraft upon Saul, (1 Samuel 10:6,) and, in general, intellectual and physical excellencies rather than gracious dispositions and spiritual perceptions and joys. Comp. Deuteronomy 34:9; Daniel 6:3; and Romans 5:5; Romans 14:17; Galatians 5:22.Lay thine hand upon him — The imposition of hands is a natural form by which benediction has been expressed in all ages and nations. It is an act of a superior in age or office toward an inferior, and by its very form it appears to bestow some good gift, or to manifest a desire for its bestowal, (Genesis 48:14,) or to cure some disease. 2 Kings 5:11; Matthew 19:13. For its sacrificial meaning see Leviticus 1:4, note.

PETT, "Verses 18-23The Appointment Of A New Shepherd (Numbers 27:18-23).And now we come to the one who can enter the land alive, the one chosen by

88

Yahweh to replace Moses. Joshua had been Moses ‘servant. He had been with Moses in Mount Sinai (Exodus 24:13; Exodus 32:17). He had watched over the old tent of meeting where he had probably done scribal work for Moses (Exodus 33:11). He had led Israel to victory in its first battle (Exodus 17:9-10). He had believed and stood firm when ten of the scouts had discouraged the people (Numbers 14:6-9). So he was well trained for his new position, for Yahweh had overseen his training. And he was a man in whom was the Spirit.Analysis.a Moses to take Joshua and lay his hands on him (Numbers 27:18).b Moses to set him before Eleazar and the congregation and give him his charge (Numbers 27:19).c Moses’ honour to be put on him so that all the people obey him (Numbers 27:20).c Enquiry of Yahweh by Eleazar with Urim and Thummim results in all who go out and come in doing so at his word (Numbers 27:21).b Joshua set by Moses before Eleazar and the congregation (Numbers 27:22).a Moses lays his hands on him and gives him his charge (Numbers 27:23).Numbers 27:18‘And Yahweh said to Moses, “Take you Joshua the son of Nun, a man in whom is the Spirit, and lay your hand on him,” ’In response to Moses’ plea Yahweh pointed to his man. He was to take Joshua, the son of Nun, a man full of the Spirit of God (compare Num 12:25). God would work through him as He had worked through Moses. And Moses was to lay his hand on him. The laying on of hands was the sign that a man had been set apart for God’s service. It was also a way of identifying with the person concerned. By this all would know that he was Moses’ chosen replacement. PULPIT, "Take thee Joshua. Joshua was now for the first time designated at the request of Moses as his successor; he had, however, been clearly marked out for that office by his position as one of the two favoured survivors of the elder generation, and as the "minister" and confidant of Moses. In regard of the first he had no equal but Caleb, in regard of the second he stood quite alone. A man in whom is the spirit. רּוחַ here, although without the definite article, can only mean the Holy Spirit, as in Numbers 11:25 sq. Lay thine hand upon him. According to Deuteronomy 34:9 this was to be done in order that Joshua might receive with the imposition of hands a spiritual gift (charisma) of wisdom for the discharge of his high office. It would appear also from the next paragraph that it was done as an outward and public

89

token of the committal of authority to Joshua as the successor of Moses.

PARKER, ""A man in whom is the spirit."— Numbers 27:18The spirit is the man.—As a man thinketh in his heart so is he.—"If any man have not the Spirit of Christ, he is none of his."—There is no mistaking the true spirit.—It is one of ardour, purity, self-sacrifice, unquenchable earnestness.—We only know the true spirit by the effects which appear in the life.—It is in vain to say we have the Spirit unless we bring forth the fruits of the Spirit.—"If ye then, being evil, know how to give good gifts unto your children: how much more shall your heavenly Father give the Holy Spirit to them that ask him?"—Genius is the gift of God.—The spirit of poetry is a gift sent down from heaven: "Every good gift and every perfect gift is from above, and cometh down from the Father of lights."—The spirit was given to Be-zaleel and those who worked with him in connection with the tabernacle.— The spirit we are to cultivate is the "spirit of judgment and of burning"; we are not to judge the spirit exclusively by what may be called romantic effects; the spirit may be shown in love, tenderness, simplicity, unselfishness: whatever effects may be displayed that are not accompanied by these graces are mere fireworks, utterly destitute of spiritual value.—Here again another side is suggested by the text.—We cannot disguise the evil spirit.—That spirit is noticeable in the very tone of the voice, and in every manner and action of the life. It is a spirit of sneering and repulsion, mistaking rudeness for frankness, and even in its most reckless manifestations planning its own safety and honour.—As for the indwelling Spirit of God, we have often need to adopt the caution not to judge by appearances, but to remember that God looketh on the heart.—It is everywhere taught in the New Testament, that if we really desire the Spirit it will be granted unto us.—The great and solemn prayer which should begin every day Isaiah , "Create in me a clean heart, O God, and renew a right spirit within me."—Blessed are they who, without renown, riches, genius, have yet the spirit of a sound understanding and a devout loyalty to the doctrine and life of Christ.

19 Have him stand before Eleazar the priest and the entire assembly and commission him in their presence.

GILL, "And set him before Eleazar the priest, and before all the congregation,.... Declaring before them all that he was his successor, and

90

that they might be witnesses of what was said and done unto him, and receive and acknowledge him as such, and as having power and authority over them, which it became them to submit unto: and give him a charge in their sight: to take care of the people committed to him; to rule them in the fear of God, and according to his laws; and to be of good courage, and go before the people and introduce them into the land of Canaan; assuring him of the divine Presence and help, so that he need not fear any enemy whatever; of this charge, and as confirmed by the Lord himself, see Deu_31:7.POOLE, " That they may be witnesses of the whole action, and may acknowledge him for their supreme ruler.Give him a charge: thou shalt command him in my name to undertake the government of my people, which otherwise he will be afraid and unwilling to do, and thou shalt give him counsels and instructions for the right management of that great trust.

BENSON, "Numbers 27:19. Before all the congregation — That they may be witnesses of the whole action, and may acknowledge him for their supreme ruler. Give him charge — Thou shalt give him counsels and instructions for the right management of that great trust.

WHEDON, " 19. Eleazar the priest — The high priest. In the Pentateuch the definite article the sufficiently designated the high priest, except in Numbers 35:25, and Leviticus 21:10, where the adjective gadhol, great, is used.Give him a charge — Literally, command or instruct him in regard to this high office in the sight of the congregation.PETT, "Numbers 27:19“And set him before Eleazar the priest, and before all the congregation; and give him a charge in their sight.”Then the whole congregation of Israel were to be gathered together, and there he would be set before ‘the Priest’, Eleazar, and given his charge to fulfil his responsibility faithfully.

20 Give him some of your authority so the whole 91

Israelite community will obey him.

BARNES, "Of thine honor - i. e., of thy dignity and authority (compare Num_11:17, Num_11:28). Joshua was constituted immediately vice-leader under Moses, by way of introduction to his becoming chief after Moses’ death.

CLARKE, "And thou shalt put, etc. - mechodecha, of thine honor or מחודךauthority upon him. Thou shalt show to the whole congregation that thou hast associated him with thyself in the government of the people.

GILL, "And thou shalt put some of thine honour upon him,.... Meaning not the Spirit that was on Moses, and the gifts of the Spirit; for to do this was the work of the Lord, and not Moses, see Num_11:17, but of the honour of civil government; suggesting that he should give him a share in it, and use him not as a minister and servant, as he had been, but as his colleague and partner; and let him have some of the ensigns of power and authority, and some exercise of it; not only to inure him to government, but to make him respectable among the people: that all the congregation of Israel may be obedient; to him as their ruler and governor, hearken to his words, and obey his commands.

JAMISON,"Thou shalt put some of thine honour upon him — In the whole history of Israel there arose no prophet or ruler in all respects like unto Moses till the Messiah appeared, whose glory eclipsed all. But Joshua was honored and qualified in an eminent degree, through the special service of the high priest, who asked counsel for him after the judgment of Urim before the Lord.COKE, "Numbers 27:20. And thou shalt put some of thine honour upon him— There is nothing for some in the Hebrew. It may be rendered, and thou shalt give unto him of thine honour or glory. Some of the rabbis have supposed, that Moses was here commanded to communicate to Joshua some part of that splendor, or brightness, wherewith his face shone when he returned from the mountain: but the passage is much better understood as importing, Thou shalt communicate some of thy authority to him at present, and make him thy associate in the government. See 1 Chronicles 23:25. Daniel 11:21. Mr. Locke explains it thus, "some of thine honour; i.e. he shall have the honour to receive directions from God by Urim and Thummim,

92

for the conduct of the people. God will do him the honour to speak to him by a third person, when, in cases requiring it, he consults him; but will not do him the honour to talk with him face to face as he did to Moses. See Exodus 9:11."

POOLE, " Thou shalt not now use him as a servant, as thou hast done, but as a brother and thy partner in the government, showing respect to him, and causing others to do so, and thou shalt impart to him the ensigns and evidences of thy own authority, whatsoever they be. Some understand this honour of those spiritual endowments which did adorn Moses, which Moses was now to confer upon him. But this Joshua had before, for in him was the spirit, Numbers 26:18; and he received a further measure of the spirit by Moses’s laying on of hands, from both which this honour is distinguished; and, had he meant this, he would not have expressed it in so dark and doubtful a phrase, but have called it a putting not of honour, but of the spirit, upon him, as it is called, Numbers 11:17. And seeing the wordhonour here may very well be properly understood, why should we run to figurative significations?

BENSON, "Numbers 27:20. Put some of thine honour upon him — That is, communicate some of thy authority to him at present; no longer use him as a servant, but as a brother, and as thy associate in the government. This was enjoined in order that the people, being used to obey him while Moses lived, might do it afterward the more cheerfully.WHEDON, "Verse 20-2120, 21.Put some… honour upon him — “The eminence and authority of Moses were not to be entirely transferred to Joshua, for they were bound up with his own person alone, (Numbers 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 Urim with which Eleazar was intrusted so far as the supreme decision of the affairs of Israel was concerned.” — Keil and Delitzsch.Who shall ask — Eleazar shall ask God for Joshua. But the Septuagint reads “and they shall ask him,” that is, Joshua and the princes shall ask Eleazar, “the judgment of manifestations.”Of Urim — Abridged from Urim and Thummim. See Leviticus 8:8, and Joshua 1:1, notes.At his word — Grammatically, either the Lord’s or Eleazar’s; probably the latter,

93

by virtue of the oracle placed in his keeping. Ordinarily, the priest’s mouth and Jehovah’s. See 1 Samuel 23:9-12. It is a rule among Hebrew doctors not to ask counsel by the priest who speaketh not by the Holy Spirit and the divine majesty residing in him.PETT, "Numbers 27:20“And you shall put of your honour on him, that all the congregation of the children of Israel may obey.”Thus would the honour in which Moses was held be placed on Joshua. And he would be recognised as honoured by God. And thus the people would (hopefully) obey him as they had obeyed Moses.

21 He is to stand before Eleazar the priest, who will obtain decisions for him by inquiring of the Urim before the Lord. At his command he and the entire community of the Israelites will go out, and at his command they will come in.”

BARNES, "And he shall stand before Eleazar the priest ... - Joshua was thus to be inferior to what Moses had been. For Moses had enjoyed the privilege of unrestricted direct contact with God: Joshua, like all future rulers of Israel, was to ask counsel mediately, through the High Priest and those means of inquiring of God wherewith the high priest was entrusted. Such counsel Joshua seems to have omitted to seek when he concluded his hasty treaty with the Gibeonites (Jos_9:3 ff).

Judgment of Urim - See Exo_28:30 note.

CLARKE, "Eleazar the priest - shall ask counsel for him - Here was a remarkable difference between him and Moses. God talked with Moses face to face; but to Joshua only through the medium of the high priest.

94

GILL, "And he shall stand before Eleazar the priest,.... This was for the honour of God, whose priest Eleazar was, and whose oracle was consulted by him; for it is said (z), the high priest did not come into the presence of the king but when he pleased; and he did not stand before him, but the king stood before the high priest, as it is said, "and before Eleazar the priest shall he stand"; though it is commanded the high priest to honour the king, and to rise up and stand when he comes unto him; and the king does not stand before him, but when he consults for him by the judgment of Urim; and his posture seems to be different from other persons that consulted; for the same writer (a) observes, in answer to a question,"how do they consult? the priest stands, and his face is before the ark, and he that consults is behind him, and his face to the back of the priest;''whereas here Joshua stood before the priest, and so any king or supreme governor: who shall ask counsel for him after the judgment of Urim before the Lord: of the Urim and Thummim which were in the breastplate of judgment, and of consultation by them; see Gill on Exo_28:30 and from this place the Jews (b) infer that consultation was not made by them for a private person, but for a king, or for one the congregation stood in need of: at his word shall they go out, and at his word shall they come in; go out to war, and return from it, or do any service enjoined them; that is, either at the word of the Lord, or rather at the word of Eleazar the priest, declaring the will of God, which comes to much the same sense; or at the word of Joshua, directed by the high priest, according to the oracle of God; and he being under such direction, the people could never do amiss in obeying him, or be in any fear or danger of being led wrong by him; but he is mentioned in the next clause, as included in those that went out, and came in: both he, and all the children of Israel with him, even all the congregation; which Maimonides (c) interprets thus, "he", this is the king; "and all the children of Israel", this is the anointed for war, or he whom the congregation hath need of; "and all the congregation", these are the great sanhedrim, or seventy elders. CALVIN, "21.And he shall stand before Eleazar the priest. Joshua is here subordinated to the priest on one point, viz., to inquire of him by the Urim and Thummim: for, as we have seen before, (237) the dignity of the priesthood was exalted by this symbol, that the prince should consult God by the mouth of the priest, who, being clothed in the sacred Ephod, the emblems of which were the Urim and Thummim, gave replies as the interpreter of God Himself. This passage, then, shows that the rule of Joshua was not profane; as in all legitimate dominion religion ought surely to hold the first place; for, since all things depend upon God, it is absurd that they should be separated from His service.משפט , mishphat, that is, judgment, is here used for a rule, or prescribed course of action, as if he were commanded to seek the Law (238) from the oracles of God,

95

which the priest was to receive and deliver from him, and that in perplexing matters he was to follow nothing else.Moses adds, in conclusion, that he did what. God had enjoined, so that all might be fully assured that God would rule, no less than before, in the person of Joshua. COKE, "Numbers 27:21. He shall stand before Eleazar the priest— It is the opinion both of Jewish and Christian interpreters, that none but persons of the first dignity were allowed to consult the oracle of God in this manner; so that this privilege speaks Joshua's great pre-eminence above other Israelites: for though he was not to be admitted to so near an intercourse with God as Moses had been, yet he is here assured, that he should never want direction from the Oracle in any doubt, by consulting the high priest, who was to receive the answer in the manner prescribed, Exodus 28:30 to which place we refer for an explanation of the judgment of Urim. When it is said, at his word they shall go out, it means, as Grotius justly explains it, at the word of the LORD, by the judgment of Urim, which word was communicated by the high priest. See Calmet on the place. This passage, however, is to be understood principally of their going out, or not going out to war; upon which occasion chiefly the oracle was consulted. See Judges 1:1; Judges 20:18. 1 Samuel 14:18; 1 Samuel 28:6. We may observe, that though Joshua was greatly inferior to Moses, in that he generally consulted God by the high priest, whereas Moses had immediate access to God himself, and spake with him face to face, yet God sometimes vouchsafed the same honour to Joshua. See Deuteronomy 34:10. Joshua 3:7; Joshua 1:15; Joshua 5:13. ELLICOTT, " (21) After the judgment of Urim . . . —See Exodus 28:30, and Note.At his word . . . —i.e., Joshua and the children of Israel were to abide by the decision of the high priest, which was obtained by means of Urim and Thummim.

POOLE, " Who shall ask counsel for him, when he requires him to do so, and in important and difficult matters. See Joshua 9:14 Jude 1:1 20:18 1 Samuel 23:9.After the judgment, or, by or from the judgment, i.e. by seeking and receiving and communicating to him the judgment or sentence thereby given: or, by the judgment is here put defectively for by the breastplate of judgment, as it is called Exodus 28:30, as the testimony is oft put for the ark of the testimony. Or, concerning the judgment; or sentence, i.e. what the mind and will of God is in the matter. Or, after the manner or rite, for so the Hebrew word mishpat here used oft signifies.Urim, understand, and of Thummim, for these two generally go together; only here, as also 1 Samuel 28:6, Urim is synecdochically, put for both Urim and Thummim. For the manner of this inquiry and answer, see on Exodus 28:30.Before the Lord; ordinarily in the tabernacle near the second veil, setting his face to

96

the ark, or otherwise presenting himself as in God’s presence, as Abiathar did by David’s direction, 1 Samuel 23:9, when they were both banished from the ark.At his word, i.e. the word of the Lord, last mentioned, delivered to him by the high priest.

BENSON, "Numbers 27:21. Who shall ask counsel for him — When he requires him so to do, and in important and difficult matters. From this and similar passages, it appears that the authority of the judge, or chief magistrate in Israel, however great, was not arbitrary, since in great emergencies he was obliged to have recourse to the high-priest, who was to ask counsel for him at the oracle. And some weighty matters were proposed to the congregation and princes, or senate of Israel, for their consent or decision. After the judgment of Urim — It appears from several passages, particularly 1 Samuel 14:18; 1 Samuel 23:2; 1 Samuel 28:6; 1 Samuel 30:7; 2 Samuel 5:19, that the high-priest, in consulting the oracle, was clothed with the ephod, or the sacerdotal vestment, to which belonged the breast- plate, and the Urim and Thummim. Thus, when David wanted to consult the oracle, he said to the priest, Bring hither the ephod: see 1 Samuel 30:7. In this and other places God is said to have answered him, but in what manner we are not told, only it appears to have been by a voice, 1 Samuel 30:3. But who uttered that voice, is a question. Spencer is of opinion that it was God himself, or an angel acting by commission from God. Le Clerc again contends that it was the high-priest himself that pronounced the words, but that he spake by divine inspiration: see on Exodus 28:30. At his word shall they go out, &c. — That is, at the word of the Lord, delivered by the mouth of the priest. This shows the nature of the Jewish government, and that it is not without reason called a theocracy, or divine government; since no enterprise of moment was to be undertaken without first consulting the oracle of God by the priest. However, this is to be understood principally of their going out, or not going out, to war; upon which occasion chiefly the oracle was consulted, especially to know the event of it: see 1:1; 20:18; 1 Samuel 14:18; 1 Samuel 28:6. We may observe, that though Joshua was greatly inferior to Moses in this respect, he generally consulted God by the high- priest; whereas Moses had immediate access to God himself, and spake with him face to face; (Deuteronomy 34:10;) yet God sometimes vouchsafed the same honour to Joshua, and spake to him without the mediation of the priest: see Joshua 3:7; Joshua 4:1; Joshua 4:15; Joshua 5:13.PETT, "Numbers 27:21“And he shall stand before Eleazar the priest, who shall enquire for him by the judgment of the Urim before Yahweh, at his word shall they go out, and at his word they shall come in, both he, and all the children of Israel with him, even all the congregation.”To Joshua was given the right to enquire of Urim and Thummim, coming to the High Priest in whose breastpouch they were, and arranging for their use. He was

97

thus to replace Moses as God’s mouthpiece to the people. And whatever he decreed they would do. At his word they would come in, and at his word they would go out. They would go in and out together.But we note here that even Joshua would not enter the Dwellingplace and hear the voice of Yahweh speaking from the Mercy Seat between the cherubim (Numbers 7:89). That was unique to Moses alone. Joshua would have to use the Urim and Thummim. PULPIT, "He shall stand before Eleazar the priest. This points to the essential difference between Moses and Joshua, and all who came after until the "Prophet like unto" Moses was raised up. Moses was as much above the priests as he was above the tribe princes; but Joshua was only the civil and military head of the nation, and was as much subordinate to the high priest in one way as the high priest was subordinate to him in another. In after times no doubt the political headship quite overpowered and overshadowed the ecclesiastical, but this does not seem to have been so intended, or to have been the case in Eleazar's lifetime. Who shall ask counsel for him after the judgment of Urim before the Lord. Rather, "who shall inquire for him in the judgment of Urim." ְּבִמְׁשַפט ָהאּוִרים. Septuagint, τὴν κρίσιν τῶν δήλων. The Urim of this passage and of 1 Samuel 28:6 seems identical with the Urim and Thummim of Exodus 28:30; Le Exodus 8:8. What it actually was, and how it was used in con-suiting God, is not told us in Scripture, and has left no reliable trace in the tradition of the Jews; it must, therefore, remain for ever an insoluble mystery. It does not appear that Moses ever sought the judgment of Urim, for he possessed more direct means of ascertaining the will of God; nor does it seem ever to have been resorted to after the time of David, for the "more sure word of prophecy" superseded it. Its real use, therefore, belonged to the dark ages of Israel, after the light of Moses had set, and before the light of the prophets had arisen. At his word. Literally, after his mouth, i.e; according to the decision of Eleazar, given after consulting God by means of the Urim (cf. Joshua 9:14; 1:1).

22 Moses did as the Lord commanded him. He took Joshua and had him stand before Eleazar the priest and the whole assembly.

GILL, "And Moses did as the Lord commanded him,.... Being faithful and 98

obedient to him in all things, though ever so contrary to his own private interest and to that of his family: and he took Joshua and set him before Eleazar the priest, and before all the congregation; as his successor, whom God had named and appointed as such.

HENRY, "2. Moses does according to these directions, Num_27:22, Num_27:23. He cheerfully ordained Joshua, (1.) Though it was a present lessening to himself, and amounted almost to a resignation of the government. He was very willing that the people should look off from him, and gaze on the rising sun. (2.) Though it might appear a perpetual slur upon his family. It would not have been so much his praise if he had thus resigned his honour to a son of his own; but with his own hands first to ordain Eleazar high priest, and then Joshua, one of another tribe, chief ruler, while his own children had no preferment at all, but were left in the rank of common Levites, this was such an instance of self-denial and submission to the will of God as was more his glory than the highest advancement of his family could have been; for it confirms his character as the meekest man upon earth, and faithful to him that appointed him in all his house. This (says the excellent bishop Patrick) shows him to have had a principle which raised him above all other lawgivers, who always took care to establish their families in some share of that greatness which they themselves possessed; but hereby it appeared that Moses acted not from himself, because he acted not for himself.PETT, "Numbers 27:22‘And Moses did as Yahweh commanded him, and he took Joshua, and set him before Eleazar the priest, and before all the congregation,’And Moses did exactly as Yahweh told him. He took Joshua and set him before Eleazar ‘the Priest’, and before all the congregation.Note again that Moses did exactly what Yahweh commanded him. This refrain occurs again and again. It demonstrates why what happened at the rock at Meribah was such an appalling failure. It had been an aberration. There he had not done what Yahweh commanded him.

23 Then he laid his hands on him and commissioned him, as the Lord instructed through Moses.99

CLARKE, "He laid his hands upon him - As a proof of his being appointed to and qualified for the work. So at the word of Joshua they were to go out, and at his word to come in, Num_27:21. And thus he was a type of our blessed Lord as to his mediatorial office, and Divine appointment as man to the work of our salvation; and to this circumstance of the appointment of Joshua to this work, and his receiving of Moses’s honor and glory, St. Peter seems to refer in these words, 2Pe_1:16, 2Pe_1:17 : “We were eye-witnesses of his majesty; for he received from God the Father honor and glory, when there came such a voice to him from the excellent glory: This is my beloved Son, in whom I am well pleased; hear him.” See Mat_17:5. But one infinitely greater than either Moses or Joshua is here.

GILL, "And he laid his hands upon him,.... Jarchi observes, that he did this cheerfully, and did more than he was commanded; for the Lord said to him, "lay thine hand", but he laid both his hands: and gave him a charge, as the Lord commanded Moses; Num_27:19, this is a clear proof that Moses was no imposter, since he sought not to aggrandize his family, or serve the interest of that; nor did he in the least repine or murmur that the priesthood was given to his brother Aaron and sons, and now the civil government to his servant of the tribe of Ephraim; and as for his own posterity, they were only common Levites that waited upon the priests.COKE, "Numbers 27:23. And he laid his hands upon him, &c.— Nothing more fully shews the nature of the Jewish theocracy than this transaction. God himself appoints a governor over the state as well as the church; and whom does he appoint? Not one of the relations of Moses; not one even of the same tribe.By elevating Caleb to the dignity, he might have put at the head of the republic a man of the tribe of Judah, and a man as much distinguished by his virtues as by an heroic courage; but he prefers Joshua, of the tribe of Ephraim, to evince that nothing can give a right to the government of the Hebrews but his choice and will. In this manner, down to the time of Samuel, God immediately created the judges of the people: hence it is, that when the Israelites demanded a king, God complained that they had rejected Him himself. What completely fixes this theocracy is, that God determined the great affairs of the republic by the order of Urim.REFLECTIONS.—With tender solicitude for the people, that they may not be left as sheep without a shepherd, we have here,

100

1. Moses's prayer. He addresses God, as the God of the spirits of men, and therefore the best judge of their capacities, to choose a man to be their captain in battle, and their faithful magistrate; that after his death, there may be no disputes about the government, and the people suffer no inconvenience for want of a fit commander. Note; (1.) A real patriot extends his views to the future welfare of his nation. (2.) The rising generation should be our peculiar care, that when we are dead, the congregation of the Lord may still flourish, and his kingdom be established.2. God answers his request in the appointment of Joshua. He is a man in whom is a spirit: the spirit of grace, as a good man; the spirit of wisdom, as a great man; and the spirit of courage, as a brave man. Eminent services require eminent gifts and graces. In order to Joshua's solemn inauguration as his successor, Moses is commanded to present him to the people, and to give him a solemn charge for his future conduct before them all; to lay his hands upon him, as delegating his office to him; and to honour him, by associating him into the government with him immediately. Eleazar is appointed as his counsel, to stand before God, to inquire for him, that, being under a Divine guidance, he might be ensured of success. Note; They will certainly be guided aright, who take care always to consult the divine oracles.3. Moses cheerfully obeys. Not envious of his successor, nor solicitous about the interests of his own family, his single care is the good of the people. True patriots will imitate so worthy an example.

PETT, "Numbers 27:23‘And he laid his hands on him, and gave him a charge, as Yahweh spoke by Moses.’And Moses laid his hands on him and charged him with his responsibility to lead the people as Yahweh’s shepherd, just as Yahweh had said to him. Even before Moses was dead God was ready to move forward.

101