Verse 2

Israel vowed a vow unto the Lord--Made to feel their own weakness, they implored the aid of Heaven, and, in anticipation of it, devoted the cities of this king to future destruction. The nature and consequence of such anathemas are described (Lev. 27:1-34; Deu. 13:1-18). This vow of extermination against Arad [Num 21:2] gave name to the place Hormah (slaughter and destruction) though it was not accomplished till after the passage of the Jordan. Others think Hormah the name of a town mentioned (Jos 12:14).

Verse 4

they journeyed from mount Hor--On being refused the passage requested, they returned through the Arabah, "the way of the Red Sea," to Elath, at the head of the eastern gulf of the Red Sea, and thence passed up through the mountains to the eastern desert, so as to make the circuit of the land of Edom (Num 33:41-42). the soul of the people was much discouraged because of the way--Disappointment on finding themselves so near the confines of the promised land without entering it; vexation at the refusal of a passage through Edom and the absence of any divine interposition in their favor; and above all, the necessity of a retrograde journey by a long and circuitous route through the worst parts of a sandy desert and the dread of being plunged into new and unknown difficulties--all this produced a deep depression of spirits. But it was followed, as usually, by a gross outburst of murmuring at the scarcity of water, and of expressions of disgust at the manna.

Verse 5

our soul loatheth this light bread--that is, bread without substance or nutritious quality. The refutation of this calumny appears in the fact, that on the strength of this food they performed for forty years so many and toilsome journeys. But they had been indulging a hope of the better and more varied fare enjoyed by a settled people; and disappointment, always the more bitter as the hope of enjoyment seems near, drove them to speak against God and against Moses (Co1 10:9).

Verse 6

The Lord sent fiery serpents among the people--That part of the desert where the Israelites now were--near the head of the gulf of Akaba--is greatly infested with venomous reptiles, of various kinds, particularly lizards, which raise themselves in the air and swing themselves from branches; and scorpions, which, being in the habit of lying in long grass, are particularly dangerous to the barelegged, sandaled people of the East. The only known remedy consists in sucking the wound, or, in the case of cattle, in the application of ammonia. The exact species of serpents that caused so great mortality among the Israelites cannot be ascertained. They are said to have been "fiery," an epithet applied to them either from their bright, vivid color, or the violent inflammation their bite occasioned.

Verse 7

the people came to Moses, and said, We have sinned--The severity of the scourge and the appalling extent of mortality brought them to a sense of sin, and through the intercessions of Moses, which they implored, they were miraculously healed. He was directed to make the figure of a serpent in brass, to be elevated on a pole or standard, that it might be seen at the extremities of the camp and that every bitten Israelite who looked to it might be healed. This peculiar method of cure was designed, in the first instance, to show that it was the efficacy of God's power and grace, not the effect of nature or art, and also that it might be a type of the power of faith in Christ to heal all who look to Him because of their sins (Joh 3:14-15; see also on Kg2 18:4).

Verse 10

the children of Israel set forward--along the eastern frontier of the Edomites, encamping in various stations.

Verse 12

pitched in the valley--literally, the "woody brook-valley" of Zared (Deu 2:13; Isa 15:7; Amo 6:14). This torrent rises among the mountains to the east of Moab, and flowing west, empties itself into the Dead Sea. Ije-Abarim is supposed to have been its ford [CALMET].

Verse 13

pitched on the other side of Arnon--now El-Mojib, a deep, broad, and rapid stream, dividing the dominions of the Moabites and Amorites.

Verse 14

book of the wars of the Lord--A fragment or passage is here quoted from a poem or history of the wars of the Israelites, principally with a view to decide the position of Arnon.

Verse 15

Ar--the capital of Moab.

Verse 16

from thence they went to Beer--that is, a "well." The name was probably given to it afterwards [see Jdg 9:21], as it is not mentioned (Num. 33:1-56).

Verse 17

Then Israel sang--This beautiful little song was in accordance with the wants and feelings of travelling caravans in the East, where water is an occasion both of prayer and thanksgiving. From the princes using their official rods only, and not spades, it seems probable that this well was concealed by the brushwood or the sand, as is the case with many wells in Idumea still. The discovery of it was seasonable, and owing to the special interposition of God.

Verse 21

Israel sent messengers unto Sihon--The rejection of their respectful and pacific message was resented--Sihon was discomfited in battle--and Israel obtained by right of conquest the whole of the Amorite dominions.

Verse 24

from Arnon unto Jabbok--now the Zurka. These rivers formed the southern and northern boundaries of his usurped territory. for the border of . . . Ammon was strong--a reason stated for Sihon not being able to push his invasion further.

Verse 25

Israel dwelt in all the cities--after exterminating the inhabitants who had been previously doomed (Deu 2:34).

Verse 26

Heshbon-- (Sol 7:4) --situated sixteen English miles north of the Arnon, and from its ruins it appears to have been a large city.

Verse 27

Wherefore they that speak in proverbs--Here is given an extract from an Amorite song exultingly anticipating an extension of their conquests to Arnon. The quotation from the poem of the Amorite bard ends at Num 21:28. The two following verses appear to be the strains in which the Israelites expose the impotence of the usurpers.

Verse 29

people of Chemosh--the name of the Moabite idol (1Ki. 11:7-33; Kg2 23:13; Jer 48:46). he--that is, their god, hath surrendered his worshippers to the victorious arms of Sihon.

Verse 33

they turned and went up by the way of Bashan--a name given to that district from the richness of the soil--now Batanea or El-Bottein--a hilly region east of the Jordan lying between the mountains of Hermon on the north and those of Gilead on the south. Og--a giant, an Amoritish prince, who, having opposed the progress of the Israelites, was defeated.

Verse 34

The Lord said unto Moses, Fear him not--a necessary encouragement, for Og's gigantic stature (Deu 3:11) was calculated to inspire terror. He and all his were put to the sword. Next: Numbers Chapter 22

Verse 1

And when King Arad the Canaanite, which dwelt in the south,.... Arad seems rather to be the name of a place, city, or country, of which the Canaanite was king, than the name of a man, since we read of the king of Arad, Jos 12:14 see also Jdg 1:16 and so the Targums of Onkelos and Jerusalem here render it, the king of Arad; and the Targum of Jonathan says, he changed his seat and reigned in Arad, which might have its name from Arvad, a son of Canaan, Gen 10:18 and Jerom says (n), that Arath, the same with Arad, is a city of the Amorites, near the wilderness of Kadesh, and that to this day it is shown, a village four miles from Malatis and twenty from Hebron, in the tribe of Judah; and so Aben Ezra observes, that the ancients say, this is Sihon (the king of the Amorites), and he is called a Canaanite, because all the Amorites are Canaanites; but, according to Jarchi, the Amalekites are meant, as it is said, "the Amalekites dwell in the land of the south": Num 13:29 and so the Targum of Jonathan here,"and when Amalek heard, that dwelt in the land of the south;''what he heard is particularly expressed in the following clause: heard tell that Israel came by the way of the spies: either after the manner of spies, or rather by the way in which the spies went thirty eight years ago, which was the way of the south, where this Canaanitish king dwelt, see Num 13:17, the Septuagint version leaves the word untranslated, taking it for the name of a place, and reads, "by the way of Atharim", so the Samaritan Pentateuch and Arabic version; and did such a place appear to have been hereabout, it would be the most likely sense of the passage; for as the spies were never discovered by the Canaanites, the way they went could not be known by them; nor is it very probable that, if it had been known, it should be so called, since nothing of any consequence to them as yet followed upon it: then he fought against Israel; raised his forces and marched out against them, to oppose their passage, and engaged in a battle with them: and took some of them prisoners; according to the Targums of Jonathan and Jerusalem, great numbers of them; but Jarchi says, only one single maidservant. (n) De locis Heb. fol. 87. K.

Verse 2

And Israel vowed a vow unto the Lord,.... The Israelites made supplication to the Lord for help against their enemies, and that he would give them victory over them, and made promises to him: and said, if thou wilt indeed deliver this people into my hand; certainly and entirely deliver them, so as that a complete victory shall be obtained over them: then will I utterly destroy their cities; or "anathematize", or devote them to utter destruction (o); slay man and beast, burn their houses and take their goods, not for a spoil, for their own private use, but reserve them for the service of God; all which is implied in the vow made, as was done to Jericho, Jos 6:21 and so it is a vow, as Abendana observes, of what they would do when they came to the land of Canaan. (o) "et anathematisabo", Montanus; "devovebo", Tigurine version.

Verse 3

And the Lord hearkened to the voice of Israel,.... In their prayers and vows; with acceptance heard, and answered them according to their wish: and delivered up the Canaanites: into their hands, gave them victory over them: and they utterly destroyed them and their cities; that is, "anathematized" them, and devoted them to destruction; for as yet they did not actually destroy them, since we read of Arad afterwards, Jos 12:14, but this they did in Joshua's time, when the whole land of Canaan came into their hands; for had they entered the land now, and took and destroyed the cities belonging to Arad, they would doubtless have proceeded, and pursued their conquests, and not have returned into the wilderness again to go round about Edom, in order to enter another way; many think, as Aben Ezra observes on Num 21:1 that this section was written by Joshua, after the land was subdued: and he called the name of the place Hormah; which before was called Zephath, and it seems to have its name from various disasters which happened at this place; as the defeat of the Israelites by the Amalekites, Num 14:45, and here of the Canaanites by the Israelites, and afterwards of the inhabitants of this place by Judah and Simeon, Jdg 1:17 it had its name from "Cherem", the anathema or destruction it was devoted to.

Verse 4

And they journeyed from Mount Hor,.... After the battle with the king of Arad, and the defeat of him: by the way of the Red sea, to compass the land of Edom; which lay by it, and from whence it had the name of the Red sea, Edom signifying red; and by the way of that the Israelites must needs go, to go round that country: and the soul of the people was much discouraged because of the way; because it was going back instead of going forward to Canaan's land, and because of the length of the way; it was a round about way they were going; when, could they have been admitted to have passed through the country of Edom, the way would have been short; or had they pursued their victory over the Canaanite, they would have gone directly into the land; and this perhaps was what fretted, vexed, and discouraged them, that they were obliged to go back, and take such a circuit, when they had such an opportunity of entering; and they might be distressed also with the badness and the roughness of the way, the borders of Edom being rocky and craggy: it is in the original text, "their soul or breath was short" (p); they fetched their breath short, being weary and faint with travelling, or through anger, as angry persons do, when in a great passion: so the people of God travelling through the wilderness of this world are often discouraged, because of the difficulties, trials, and troubles they meet with in the way, from sin, Satan, and the world, and are fretful and impatient; but though they are led about and walk in a round about way, and in a rough way, yet in a right way to the city of their habitation, Psa 107:7. (p) "et abbreviata est anima", Montanus, Munster, Fagius, Vatablus; "decurtata", Piscator.

Verse 5

And the people spake against God,.... Who went before them in the pillar of cloud and fire, for leading them in such a way; that is, against Christ, as the apostle has taught us to interpret it, Co1 10:9, and is no inconsiderable proof of the deity of Christ; and so the Targum of Jonathan paraphrases it,"and the people thought in their heart, and spake against the Word of the Lord,''the essential Word and Son of God: and against Moses; his servant, for obeying the orders of the Lord, and leading and guiding the people as he directed him: wherefore have ye brought us up out of Egypt to die in the wilderness? ascribing this equally to God and to Moses; using a strange word, as Aben Ezra calls it, being in a great passion, and not considering well what they said; showing great ingratitude for such a mercy, and representing it in a wrong light, as if the intent of bringing them from thence was to slay them in the wilderness: for there is no bread; no bread corn, nothing in the wilderness to make bread of; nothing that they called and accounted bread, otherwise they had manna, as is presently owned: neither is there any water; any fresh water fit to drink, otherwise they were near the sea; what they had from the rock, lately, perhaps was now spent, and it did not follow them as the other rock had: and our soul loatheth this light bread; the manna; this very light, this exceeding light bread, the radicals of the word (q) used being doubled, which increases the signification: if to be understood of light and easy digestion, it was the more to be valued; but perhaps they meant, it had but little substance and virtue in it, and was not filling and satisfying; or rather that it was exceeding vile, mean, and despicable; so they called the bread of heaven, angel's food, this wonderful gift of Providence; in like manner is Christ, the hidden manna, treated, and his Gospel, and the precious truths of it, by unregenerate men and carnal professors, Co1 1:23. (q) "levissime", V. L. Pagninus, Montanus, Fagius, Vatablus; "vilissimi", Junius & Tremellius, Piscator.

Verse 6

And the Lord sent fiery serpents among the people,.... Of which there were great numbers in the deserts of Arabia, and about the Red sea; but hitherto the Israelites were protected from them by the cloud about them, but sinning, the Lord suffered them to come among them, to punish them; these are called fiery, either from their colour, for in Arabia, as there were serpents of a golden colour, as Aelianus (r) relates, to which the brazen serpent, after made, bore some likeness, so there were others in the same parts of Arabia of a red or scarlet colour, as Diodorus Siculus says (s), of a span long, and their bite entirely incurable; or else they are so called from the effect of them, exciting heat and thirst in those they bit; so Jarchi says, they are so called because they burn with the poison of their teeth: these, very probably, were flying ones, as may seem from Isa 14:29 and being sent of God, might come flying among the people and bite them; and such there were in the fenny and marshy parts of Arabia, of which many writers speak (t), as flying from those parts into Egypt, where they used to be met by a bird called Ibis, which killed them, and for that reason was had in great veneration by the Egyptians; and Herodotus (u) says they are nowhere but in Arabia, and also (w) that they of that kind of serpents, which are called Hydri, their wings are not feathered, but like the wings of bats, and this Bochart (x) takes to be here meant: and they bit the people, and much people of Israel died; for, as before related from Diodorus Siculus, their bites were altogether incurable; and Solinus (y) says, of the same Arabian flying serpents, that their poison is so quick, that death follows before the pain can be felt; and of that kind of serpent, the Hydrus, it is said by Leo Africanus (z), that their poison is most pernicious, and that there is no other remedy against the bite of them, but to cut off that part of the member bitten, before the poison can penetrate into the other parts of the body: the Dipsas, another kind of serpent, which others are of opinion is designed, by biting, brings immediately a thirst on persons, intolerable and almost not extinguishable, and a deadly one, unless help is most speedily had; and if this was the case here it was very bad indeed, since there was no water: Solinus (a) says, this kind of serpent kills with thirst; Aristotle (b) speaks of a serpent some call the sacred one, and that whatsoever it bites putrefies immediately all around it: these serpents, and their bites, may be emblems of the old serpent the devil, and of his fiery darts, and of sin brought in by him, and which he tempts unto, the effects of which are terrible and deadly, unless prevented by the grace of God. (r) De Animal. l. 10. c. 13. (s) Bibliothec. l. 3. p. 180. (t) Herodot. Euterpe, sive, l. 2. c. 15. Aelian. de Animal. l. 2. c. 38. Mela, l. 3. c. 9. Solin. Polyhistor, c. 45. & alii. (u) Thalia, sive, l. 3. c. 109. (w) Euterpe, sive, l. 2. c. 76. (x) Hierozoic. par. 2. l. 3. c. 13. col. 423. (y) Polyhist. c. 45. (z) Apud Scheuchzer, Physic. Sacr. vol. 2. p. 386. (a) Polyhist. c. 40. (b) Hist. Animal. l. 8. c. 29.

Verse 7

Therefore the people came to Moses, and said, we have sinned,.... Being bitten with serpents, and some having died, the rest were frightened, and came and made an humble acknowledgment of their sins to Moses: for we have spoken against the Lord, and against thee; murmuring at their being brought out of Egypt, and because they had no better provision in the wilderness; concluding they should die there for want, and never enter into the land of Canaan, of which evils they were now sensible, and confessed them: pray unto the Lord that he take away the serpents from us; or "the serpent" (c), in the singular, which is put for the plural, as it often is; or the plague of the serpent, as the Targum of Jonathan, that it might cease, and they be no more distressed by them: they were sensible they came from God, and that none could remove them but him; and knowing that Moses was powerful in prayer, and had interest with God, they entreat him to be their intercessor, though they had spoken against him and used him ill: and Moses prayed for the people; which proves him to be of a meek and forgiving spirit; who, though he had been so sadly reflected on, yet readily undertakes to pray to God for them. (c) "serpentem", Montanus; "hunc serpentem", Piscator,

Verse 8

And the Lord said unto Moses,.... Out of the cloud; or, it may be, Moses went into the sanctuary, and there prayed, and the Lord answered him from between the cherubim: make them a fiery serpent; not a real one, but the likeness of one, one that should very much resemble the fiery serpents Israel had been bitten with: and set it upon a pole; a standard, banner, or ensign, as the word signifies; perhaps meaning one of the poles on which their ensigns were carried: the Targum of Jonathan renders it, on an high place, that so it might be seen by all in the camp: and it shall come to pass, that everyone that is bitten, when he looketh upon it, shall live; which is very wonderful, that by looking to the figure of a serpent, men should be cured of the bites of real ones, and which bites were deadly; the virtue of healing could not come from the figure, but from God, who appointed it to be made, the Targum of Jonathan adds, that one bitten should live,"if he directed his heart to the Word of the Lord,''even to that divine Logos or Word of God, whose lifting up was figured hereby; see Joh 3:14.

Verse 9

And Moses made a serpent of brass,.... Which was the most proper metal to make it of, that it might resemble the fiery serpents, whether of a golden or scarlet colour: and Diodorus Siculus (d) speaks of some of the colour of brass, whose bite was immediately followed with death, and by which, if anyone was struck, he was seized with terrible pains, and a bloody sweat flowed all over him; and this was chosen also, because being burnished and bright, could be seen at a great distance, and with this metal Moses might be furnished from Punon, the next station to this, where they now were, Zalmonah, as appears from Num 33:42 a place famous for brass mines, and which Jerom (e) says, in his time, was a little village, from whence brass metal was dug, by such that were condemned to the mines: and put it upon a pole; as he was directed: and it came to pass, that if a serpent had bitten any man, when he beheld the serpent of brass, he lived: which was very marvellous, and the more so, if what physicians say is true, as Kimchi relates (f), that if a man bitten by a serpent looks upon a piece of brass he dies immediately: the lifting up of this serpent on a pole for such a purpose was a figure of the lifting up of Christ, either upon the cross, or in the ministry of the word, that whosoever looks unto him by faith may have healing; see Gill on Joh 3:14,where this type or figure is largely explained: the station the Israelites were now at, when this image was made, is called Zalmonah, which signifies an image, shadow, or resemblance, as the brazen serpent was; from Mount Hor, where they were last, to this place, according to Bunting (g), were twenty eight miles: this serpent did not remain in the place where it was set, but was taken with them, and continued until the days of Hezekiah, Kg2 18:4. (d) Bibliothec. l. 17. p. 560. (e) De locis Heb. fol. 91. G. (f) Sepher Sherash. rad. (g) Travels of the Patriarchs, &c. 83.

Verse 10

And the children of Israel set forward,.... From Zalmonah, and came to Punon, which, according to the above writer, was twenty miles from it; though here indeed, some think, the brazen serpent was set up, here being, as before observed, brass mines to furnish with that metal: and pitched in Oboth; which was twenty four miles from Punon, as says the same writer: the word signifies bottles; perhaps here the Israelites got water and filled their bottles, or, as others think, they filled them with the wine of Moab, and called the name of the place from thence; it is perhaps the same with the Eboda of Ptolemy (h), which he places in Arabia Petraea; and of which Pliny (i) also makes mention. (h) Geograph. l. 5. c. 17. (i) Nat. Hist. l. 6. c. 28.

Verse 11

And they journeyed from Oboth,.... How long they stayed there is not certain: and pitched at Ijeabarim; which, according to Bunting (k), was sixteen miles from Oboth; Jarchi says it was the way that passengers pass by Mount Nebo to the land of Canaan, and which divides between the land of Moab and the land of the Amorites: in the wilderness which is before Moab; called the wilderness of Moab, Deu 2:8. towards the sunrising; the east side of the land of Moab, Jdg 11:18. (k) Ut supra. (Travels of the Patriarchs, &c. 83.)

Verse 12

From thence they removed, and pitched in the valley of Zered. Or the brook Zered, as in Deu 13:14 that is near it: this seems to be the same station with Dibongad, Num 33:45, and which, according to the above writer, was sixteen miles from Ijeabarim. , and which, according to the above writer, was sixteen miles from Ijeabarim. Numbers 21:13 num 21:13 num 21:13 num 21:13From thence they removed, and pitched on the other side of Arnon,.... A river on the borders of Moab: which is in the wilderness that cometh out of the coasts of the Amorites; according to Jarchi, they went round the land of Moab, all to the south and east, and came not into the border of Moab, as Jephthah said, Jdg 11:18 but before they came hither they had a station at Almondiblathaim, Num 33:46. for Arnon is the border of Moab, between Moab and the Amorites; a river which divided these two countries, and bounded them; and Moses is the more particular in this account, to show that the Israelites took nothing from the Moabites, but what the Amorites had taken from them, they being charged not to distress the Moabites and Ammonites, Deu 2:9, see Jephthah's defence, Jdg 11:15.

Verse 13

Wherefore it is said in the book of the wars of the Lord,.... A history of wars in former times, which the Lord had suffered to be in the world; and which, as Aben Ezra thinks, reached from the times of Abraham and so might begin with the battle of the kings in his time, and take in others in later times, and particularly those of Sihon, king of the Amorites, and his conquests of some parts of Moab; and to this book, which might be written by some one of those nations, Moses refers in proof of what he here says: what he did in the Red sea; that is, what Sihon king of the Amorites did, or the Lord by him, "at Vaheb in Suphah", as the words may be rendered; either against a king, or rather city, of Moab, whose name was Vaheb, in the borders of the land of Moab, or how he destroyed that city Vaheb with a storm or terrible assault (l): and in the brooks of Arnon: some places situated on the streams of that river, which were taken by the Amorites from the Moabites, as the book quoted plainly testified. (l) Vid. L'Empereur. Not. in Mosis Kimchi p. 195.

Verse 14

And at the stream of the brooks that goeth down to the dwelling of Ar,.... All that part of the country which lay upon the stream, as far as the city of Ar, the metropolis of Moab, called Ar of Moab, Isa 15:1, and lieth upon the border of Moab; as that city did; so far goes the quotation out of the aforesaid book, as a proof of what was taken by the Amorites from the Moabites, and were not in their possession when Israel were upon their borders; and therefore, in taking them from the Amorites, did no wrong to Moab.

Verse 15

And from thence they went to Beer,.... A place so called from a well which sprung up here, of which the following account is given: that is, the well whereof the Lord spake unto Moses; promising him to give it to the children of Israel, without asking for it; which was a very singular favour, and for which they were thankful: saying to him: gather the people together, and I will give them water; for as they were now gone from the river Arnon, and the streams and brooks of it, they might be in want of water, though they did not murmur as they had been used to do; and without their petition for it, the Lord promises to give it to them; and that they might be witness of the miracle that would be wrought for them, they are ordered to be gathered together.

Verse 16

Then Israel sang this song,.... Being affected with the free favour and good will of God towards them: spring up, O well; for the springing up of which they prayed in faith, believing in the promise of God, that it would spring up; and so encouraged one another not only to believe it, but even to sing on account of it before it actually did: sing ye unto it; or on account of it praise the Lord for it; or "answer to it" (m), it being their manner to sing their songs by responses, or alternately. (m) "respondete ei", Montanus; "alternis canite ei", Tigurine version, Piscator.

Verse 17

The princes digged the well,.... The princes and heads of the several tribes: the nobles of the people digged it; the seventy elders, according to the Targum of Jonathan: by the direction of the lawgiver; either the Lord himself, the lawgiver of his people, who pointed out the spot, and directed the princes where to dig, that is, be did this by Moses; and who, as Jarchi thinks, is the lawgiver, and not amiss: the Targums of Jonathan and Jerusalem render the word by Scribes, in the plural number, and interpret them of Moses and Aaron: and this the princes and nobles "dug with their staves"; either their walking sticks, or their rods, the ensigns of their authority; with these they smote the ground, or stuck them in a soft and sandy place, upon which the waters bubbled up and flowed out. Dr. Shaw (n) chooses to render the words, "with their united applause", or "clapping of hands", as the word in Chaldee signifies; or it may be expressed, as by Dr. Hunt, quoted by him, "by describing" or "marking out" the figure or fashion of the well "with staves". Mr. Ainsworth thinks that this well signified Christ, the fountain of gardens, and well of living waters; and the waters of it the Spirit and his graces, which are a well of living water springing up unto everlasting life; the means of which are the labours of the governors of the church, the ministers of Christ,by preaching the word, and opening the Scriptures; and such grace is worthy of a song, and to be had with joy out of the wells of salvation, Isa 12:3, and from the wilderness they went to Mattanah; from the wilderness near Arnon, which came out of the coasts of the Amorites, Num 21:13 to a place which signifies a gift. The Targums of Jonathan and Jerusalem render it,"and from the wilderness it was given to them for a gift''that is, the well; and so the people of God, that are called out of the wilderness of this world, and come up from it, are called to partake of the gifts and blessings of grace, which are freely given unto them of God. (n) Travels, p. 67. Ed. 2.

Verse 18

And from Mattanah to Nahaliel, and from Nahaliel to Bamoth. All the Targums interpret this, and the following verse, not of the journeying of the children of Israel, but of the motion of the well, that that, from the place from whence it was given them, descended with them into the valleys, and from thence to the high places, as these words signify: and indeed those places are not mentioned in the journeys of the children of Israel, Num 33:1 and were not stations where they pitched, but places they passed through before they came to Abarim, and the wilderness of Kedemoth. and were not stations where they pitched, but places they passed through before they came to Abarim, and the wilderness of Kedemoth. Numbers 21:20 num 21:20 num 21:20 num 21:20And from Bamoth, in the valley,.... Or rather "to the valley", as the Targum of Onkelos, since Bamoth signifies high places; though, according to the Jerusalem Talmud (o), Bamoth, Baal, which seems to be the same place, was in a plain: that is in the country of Moab; the valley belonged to Moab, into which Israel came: to the top of Pisgah; not that the valley reached to the top, nor did the children of Israel go to the top of it, only Moses, but rather to the bottom, which indeed is meant; for it intends the beginning of it, where Pisgah, which was an high mountain near the plains of Moab, began, and which was properly the foot of it: which looketh towards Jeshimon; that is, Pisgah, as Jarchi rightly interprets it, which looked over a place called Jeshimon; and which signifies a wilderness, and is no other indeed than the wilderness of Kedemoth, Deu 2:26 for from thence the following messengers were sent. (o) Sheviith, fol. 38. 4.

Verse 19

And Israel sent messengers unto Sihon king of the Amorites,.... Who were one of the nations of the Canaanites, and a principal and powerful one, and who were devoted to destruction, and their land designed for the people of Israel; see Gen 15:16, at this time Sihon was their king, to whom Moses, in the name of Israel, sent a very peaceable message from the wilderness of Kedemoth, which lay near his country, Deu 2:26, saying; as follows.

Verse 20

Let me pass through thy land,.... Through some part of it, which would have been a shorter way to the river Jordan, over which Israel was to pass into the land of Canaan; the terms proposed, or things to be observed in their passage, which they would bind themselves strictly to, are the same that were made to the king of Edom. See Gill on Num 20:17. . Numbers 21:23 num 21:23 num 21:23 num 21:23And Sihon would not suffer Israel to pass through his border,.... Because he could not trust them, and confide in the promises they made, and thought it not safe to let such a body of people into any part of his dominions, Jdg 11:20 and chiefly because his heart was hardened by the Lord, that he might be delivered into the hands of Israel, as was determined, Deu 2:30, but Sihon gathered all his people together; all that were able to bear arms out of his cities, and which made no doubt a very numerous and powerful army; but then these being defeated, as they were, it became more easy to the Israelites to take their cities, where there were none left but women and children: and went out against Israel into the wilderness; the wilderness of Kedemoth; not content to reject a peaceable message, he went out in an hostile manner against Israel, even out of his own dominions; so that he was the aggressor and unprovoked, which made his ruin appear the more just, and the children of Israel to have a better claim to his country conquered by them: and he came to Jahaz; a frontier town in the land of Moab, see Isa 15:4 and which, according to Bunting (p), was sixteen miles from Abarim: and fought against Israel; at the above place, where they had a pitched battle. (p) Travels of the Patriarchs, p. 83.

Verse 21

And Israel smote him with the edge of the sword,.... Slew him and his army, entirely routed them, and got a complete victory over them; God giving them up into their hands, who otherwise were a very strong, powerful, and warlike people; see Amo 2:9. and possessed his land from Arnon unto Jabbok; two rivers, the one to the south, the other to the north of his country; the one was the boundary of his country between him and the Moabites, the other the boundary of his country between him and the Ammonites, as it follows: even unto the children of Ammon; for the border of the children of Ammon was strong; which is given as a reason why the Israelites proceeded no further in their conquest; there was another reason for that, which was the order of the Lord not to distress the Ammonites, nor meddle with them; though Jarchi makes this prohibition to be their strength, Deu 2:19, but this is given as a reason why Sihon could not extend his conquests further, because it was so well fortified, either by nature or art, or both, by the river Jabbok, by mountains and frontier towns, and particularly by Rabbah, as the Targum of Jonathan suggests, which was their royal city in later times, and a very strong place; see Sa2 12:26.

Verse 22

And Israel took all these cities,.... Which lay between the rivers Arnon and Jabbok; their particular names may be seen in Num 32:3, and Israel dwelt in all the cities of the Amorites; being given to the Reubenites and Gadites, who inhabited them, as their possession and inheritance, Num 32:2, in Heshbon, and in all the villages thereof; or "daughters thereof" (q). Heshbon was the metropolis or mother city, and all the towns and villages adjacent were as daughters to it; of which city more is said in the following verses; see Gill on Isa 15:4. (q) "filiabus ejus", Montanus, Munster, Fagius, Grotius.

Verse 23

For Heshbon was the city of Sihon the king of the Amorites,.... His royal city, where he kept his palace, where he had resided for some time, and perhaps some of his predecessors; and therefore being now in his possession when taken by the Israelites, they had a good right and title to keep it, and dwell in it: and indeed this is here given as a reason of it: who had fought against the former king of Moab; either the king that reigned before Balak, or some king of Moab, that reigned formerly, against whom one of the name of Sihon, which might be a common name to the kings of the Amorites, as Pharaoh to the Egyptians, had engaged in war: and taken all his land out of his hand, even unto Arnon; and had been in the hands of the Amorites some years; and therefore the Moabites had no reason to object to the Israelites dwelling in it, and possessing it, which they had not taken from them, but from the Amorites in a lawful war. And for proof of this, reference is had to the bards and poets of those times, who were the persons that transmitted in verse the history of famous actions to posterity.

Verse 24

Wherefore they that speak in proverbs say,.... The historical writers of those times, among the Amorites, who were usually poets, and wrote the history of the wars between the Moabites and Amorites in verse; as Homer among the Greeks wrote the wars of Troy; and the compositions of those ancient bards were short and compendious, and wrapped up in proverbial sayings, and enigmatical and figurative expressions, that they might be the better retained in memory, and therefore were called proverbialists. Jarchi says, they were Balaam and Beor that took up their parables, and said: come into Heshbon; which words are the beginning of the song, and in which the Amorites are represented as inviting Sihon, and his nobles, to enter Heshbon, which he had taken, and make it his royal seat; or as encouraging one another to go into it and repair it, having suffered much at the taking of it, which seems to be confirmed by what follows: let the city of Sihon be built and prepared; that is, let us set about rebuilding of the city, and let us fit it up for Sihon our king, and let it be called his city, and made the place of his residence, his palace, and where his court may be kept.

Verse 25

For there is a fire gone out of Heshbon,.... Not before, but after Sihon had subdued it, as Jarchi observes; and is to be understood of his soldiers going out from thence, and making desolations in the adjacent parts, like a strong fire, and the fierce flames of it there is no resisting; and so the Jerusalem Targum,"for a people mighty, and burning like fire, are gone out of Heshbon:''see Amo 1:4, a flame from the city of Sihon: which is the same thing in other words, the city of Sihon being Heshbon, and a flame the same with fire; warriors, as both the Targums of Oakelos and Jerusalem interpret it; this seems to be what those composers undertook in their poetical way to foretell would be the case in future times; concluding, from the conquests already made, that they would be extended much further, and that no opposition could hinder: it hath consumed Ar of Moab; the metropolis of the country of Moab, that is, they were as sure of it, and endeavoured to make the people by these their compositions as confident of it, that this city would fall into the hands of their armies, and be destroyed, as if it was already done; otherwise it does not appear that it ever was taken out of the hands of the Moabites, until taken by the Assyrians or Chaldeans; of this city See Gill on Isa 15:1. and the lords of the high places of Arnon; who had the government of the high, strong, and fortified places all along the river Arnon; these it is suggested would be conquered by the Amorites; all the three Targums interpret it of the priests and worshippers in the temples, and at the altars of the idols in Arnon; and it may be rendered, "the Baals of the high places of Arnon", as if the gods of those places should fall into the victors' hands; and which seems to have some confirmation from what follows; and it may be observed, that in these parts there were some places called Bamoth Baal, or the high places of Baal, see Num 22:41, and Beth Baal Meon, which has its name from its being the temple and habitation of Baal, Jos 13:17.

Verse 26

Woe to thee, Moab! thou art undone,.... The whole country ruined, or likely to be so: O people of Chemosh; which was the name of their idol, who is called the abomination of the Moabites, Kg1 11:7, he hath given his sons that escaped; that is, the idol Chemosh had given his sons, the men of the country that worshipped him, who escaped the sword of the Amorites, these: and his daughters, into captivity unto Sihon king of the Amorites; who took captive what he slew not, or would do so, Chemosh their god not being able to preserve them, but obliged to deliver them up: thus the composers of this song insult the god of the Moabites, as it was usual for conquerors so to do; see Isa 10:10, though some think these are the words of the Israelites, making their observations upon the above song, which ends at verse twenty eight, and scoffing at the idol of the Moabites.

Verse 27

We have shot at them,.... Either the Amorites at the Moabites, or else the Israelites at the Amorites; for, according to Aben Ezra, these are the words of Moses, though they, with Num 21:29, seem rather to be a continuation of the song of the old Amorite bards, describing the ruin of the country of Moab by them; and this clause may be rendered with the next, "their light, or lamp, is perished from Heshbon" (r); or their yoke, as Jarchi, and so the Vulgate Latin version; that is, their kingdom, and the glory of it, as the Targums of Onkelos and Jonathan interpret it, and so Jarchi: even unto Dibon; which was another city in the land of Moab; see Isa 15:2, and we have laid them waste even unto Nophah, which reached unto Medeba; Nophah perhaps is the same with Nebo, mentioned along with Medeba, Isa 15:2, however, they were both places in Moab, and are mentioned to show how far the desolation had or would spread; and the whole is observed to prove, that this part of the country of Moab, now possessed by the Israelites, was taken from them, not by them, but by the Amorites, a people Israel now conquered, and so had a right to what they found them in the possession of. (r) "lucerna eorum, Heshbon (seilicet) periit", Tigurine version; "regnum eorum periit a Chesbon", Pagninus, Vatablus; "imperium eorum", Munster.

Verse 28

Thus Israel dwelt in the land of the Amorites. Not the land of the Moabites; and by those means before mentioned; by conquering Sihon their king, they came into the possession of it, and took up their dwelling in it; this was the beginning of the conquest of the Canaanites, and an earnest and pledge of inheriting their land promised unto them; the Israelites that dwelt here were the tribes of Reuben and Gad. Thus Israel dwelt in the land of the Amorites. Not the land of the Moabites; and by those means before mentioned; by conquering Sihon their king, they came into the possession of it, and took up their dwelling in it; this was the beginning of the conquest of the Canaanites, and an earnest and pledge of inheriting their land promised unto them; the Israelites that dwelt here were the tribes of Reuben and Gad. Numbers 21:32 num 21:32 num 21:32 num 21:32And Moses sent to spy out Jaazer,.... Or Jazer, as it is called in Isa 16:9, another city that belonged to the Amorites, and which they had taken from the Moabites; and which came into the hands of the latter again, after the captivity of the ten tribes, as appears from the above places; according to Jerom (s), it was fifteen miles distant from Heshbon: and they took the villages thereof; not the spies, as Jarchi, but the Israelites under Moses; who upon the return of the spies, and the report they made, marched towards it, and took it, and all the towns and villages round about it; for it seems to have been a principal city: and drove out the Amorites that were there; that dwelt there, and were in possession of it; otherwise they would not have attacked it, had it, and its villages, been in the hands of the Moabites. (s) De locis Heb. fol. 92. G.

Verse 29

And they turned,.... From Jaazer, after they had taken it, and came back a little way: and went up by the way of Bashan; which was a nearer way to Canaan, a fine country abounding with oxen and sheep, having rich pastures, and very famous for its oaks; it had its name from the mountain of Bashan in it, and has been since called Batanea; it was at this time in the hands of the Amorites, and from them it was taken by Israel, as follows: who marched this way for that purpose, or at least were so directed by the providence of God for that end: and Og king of Bashan went out against them; who was of the race of the giants, and he himself of a gigantic stature, and was a king of the Amorites, as well as Sihon, Deu 3:8, he came out in an hostile manner against Israel, to stop them going any further: he, and all his people: out of his many cities, a numerous army no doubt: to the battle at Edrei; where it was fought between him and Israel. Jerom says (t) it was in his time called Adara, a famous city of Arabia, twenty four or twenty five miles from Bozra, and six from Ashtaroth Karnaim, the ancient seat of the Rephaim, or giants from whom Og sprung, Gen 14:5, and was the seat of Og now, from whence he came to Edrei or Adara, to meet and fight Israel there; see Deu 1:4. (t) De locis Heb. fol. 87. I. & 92. M.

Verse 30

And the Lord said unto Moses, fear him not,.... Og being of a gigantic stature, and his forces numerous, might cause some fear in Moses, and in the people, and therefore the Lord encouraged them not to be afraid of him and his army: for I have delivered him into thy hand, and all his people, and his land; that is, he had determined to do it, and now promised it, and it might be depended on and looked upon as if actually done: and thou shalt do to him as thou didst unto Sihon king of the Amorites, which dwelt at Heshbon; slay him and his people, and take possession of his country.

Verse 31

So they smote him and his sons, and all his people,.... They engaged in battle with him, slew him and his sons that came with him, and all his armies; and which consisted, as is probable, of all able to bear arms in all his cities; which the more easily came into the hands of the Israelites after this battle, in which such a carnage was made: until there was none left him alive; so universal was the slaughter at the battle, and in the cities that fell into their hands; they utterly destroyed men, women, and children, Deu 3:3, and they possessed his land; in which were sixty cities fenced with high walls, gates, and bars, besides a great many unwalled towns; these were possessed by the half tribe of Manasseh, Deu 3:4. Next: Numbers Chapter 22

Verse 1

Victory of Israel over the Canaanitish King of Arad. - When this Canaanitish king, who dwelt in the Negeb, i.e., the south of Palestine (vid., Num 13:17), heard that Israel was coming the way of the spies, he made war upon the Israelites, and took some of them prisoners. Arad is mentioned both here and in the parallel passage, Num 33:40, and also by the side of Hormah, in Jos 12:14, as the seat of a Canaanitish king (cf. Jdg 1:16-17). According to Eusebius and Jerome in the Onomast., it was twenty Roman miles to the south of Hebron, and has been preserved in the ruins of Tell Arad, which v. Schubert (ii. pp. 457ff.) and Robinson (ii. pp. 473, 620, and 624) saw in the distance; and, according to Roth in Petermann's geographische Mittheilungen (1858, p. 269), it was situated to the south-east of Kurmul (Carmel), in an undulating plain, without trees or shrubs, with isolated hills and ranges of hills in all directions, among which was Tell Arad. The meaning of האתרים שדרך is uncertain. The lxx, Saad., and others, take the word Atharim as the proper name of a place not mentioned again; but the Chaldee, Samar., and Syr. render it with much greater probability as an appellative noun formed from תּוּר with א prosthet., and synonymous with התּרים, the spies (Num 14:6). The way of the spies was the way through the desert of Zin, which the Israelitish spies had previously taken to Canaan (Num 13:21). The territory of the king of Arad extended to the southern frontier of Canaan, to the desert of Zin, through which the Israelites went from Kadesh to Mount Hor. The Canaanites attacked them when upon their march, and made some of them prisoners. Num 21:2-3 The Israelites then vowed to the Lord, that if He would give this people into their hands, they would "ban" their cities; and the Lord hearkened to the request, and delivered up the Canaanites, so that they put them and their cities under the ban. (On the ban, see at Lev 27:28). "And they called the place Hormah," i.e., banning, ban-place. "The place" can only mean the spot where the Canaanites were defeated by the Israelites. If the town of Zephath, or the capital of Arad, had been specially intended, it would no doubt have been also mentioned, as in Jdg 1:17. As it was not the intention of Moses to press into Canaan from the south, across the steep and difficult mountains, for the purpose of effecting its conquest, the Israelites could very well content themselves for the present with the defeat inflicted upon the Canaanites, and defer the complete execution of their vow until the time when they had gained a firm footing in Canaan. The banning of the Canaanites of Arad and its cities necessarily presupposed the immediate conquest of the whole territory, and the laying of all its cities in ashes. And so, again, the introduction of a king of Hormah, i.e., Zephath, among the kings defeated by Joshua (Jos 12:14), is no proof that Zephath was conquered and called Hormah in the time of Moses. Zephath may be called Hormah proleptically both there and in Jos 19:4, as being the southernmost border town of the kingdom of Arad, in consequence of the ban suspended by Moses over the territory of the king of Arad, and may not have received this name till after its conquest by the Judaeans and Simeonites. At the same time, it is quite conceivable that Zephath may have been captured in the time of Joshua, along with the other towns of the south, and called Hormah at that time, but that the Israelites could not hold it then; and therefore, after the departure of the Israelitish army, the old name was restored by the Canaanites, or rather only retained, until the city was retaken and permanently held by the Israelites after Joshua's death (Jdg 1:16-17), and received the new name once for all. The allusion to Hormah here, and in Num 14:45, does not warrant the opinion in any case, that it was subsequently to the death of Moses and the conquest of Canaan under Joshua that the war with the Canaanites of Arad and their overthrow occurred.

Verse 4

March of Israel through the Arabah. Plague of Serpents, and Brazen Serpent. - Num 21:4. As the Edomites refused a passage through their land when the Israelites left Mount Hor, they were obliged to take the way to the Red Sea, in order to go round the land of Edom, that is to say, to go down the Arabah to the head of the Elanitic Gulf. Num 21:5-6 As they went along this road the people became impatient ("the soul of the people was much discouraged," see Exo 6:9), and they began once more to murmur against God and Moses, because they had neither bread nor water (cf. Num 20:4.), and were tired of the loose, i.e., poor, food of manna (קלקל from קלל). The low-lying plain of the Arabah, which runs between steep mountain walls from the Dead Sea to the Red Sea, would be most likely to furnish the Israelites with very little food, except the manna which God gave them; for although it is not altogether destitute of vegetation, especially at the mouths of the wadys and winter torrents from the hills, yet on the whole it is a horrible desert, with a loose sandy soil, and drifts of granite and other stones, where terrible sand-storms sometimes arise from the neighbourhood of the Red Sea (see v. Schubert, R. ii. pp. 396ff., and Ritter, Erdk. xiv. pp. 1013ff.); and the want of food might very frequently be accompanied by the absence of drinkable water. The people rebelled in consequence, and were punished by the Lord with fiery serpents, the bite of which caused many to die. שׂרפים נחשׁים, lit., burning snakes, so called from their burning, i.e., inflammatory bite, which filled with heat and poison, just as many of the snakes were called by the Greeks, e.g., the ́ ͂, and καύσωνες (Dioscor. vii. 13: Aelian. nat. anim. vi. 51), not from the skin of these snakes with fiery red spots, which are frequently found in the Arabah, and are very poisonous. (Note: This is the account given by v. Schubert, R. ii. p. 406: "In the afternoon they brought us a very mottled snake of a large size, marked with fiery red spots and wavy stripes, which belonged to the most poisonous species, as the formation of its teeth clearly showed. According to the assertion of the Bedouins, these snakes, which they greatly dreaded, were very common in that neighbourhood.") Num 21:7 This punishment brought the people to reflection. They confessed their sin to Moses, and entreated him to deliver them from the plague through his intercession with the Lord. And the Lord helped them; in such a way, however, that the reception of help was made to depend upon the faith of the people. Num 21:8-9 At the command of God, Moses made a brazen serpent, and put it upon a standard. (Note: For the different views held by early writers concerning the brazen serpent, see Buxtorf, historia serp. aen., in his Exercitt. pp. 458ff.; Deyling, observatt. ss. ii. obs. 15, pp. 156ff.; Vitringa, observ. ss. 1, pp. 403ff.; Jo. Marck, Scripturariae Exercitt. exerc. 8, pp. 465ff.; Iluth, Serpens exaltatus non contritoris sed conterendi imago, Erl. 1758; Gottfr. Menken on the brazen serpent; Sack, Apologetick, 2 Ausg. pp. 355ff. Hoffmann, Weissagung u. Erfllung, ii. pp. 142, 143; Kurtz, History of the Old Covenant, iii. 345ff.; and the commentators on Joh 3:14 and Joh 3:15.) Whoever then of the persons bitten by the poisonous serpents looked at the brazen serpent with faith in the promise of God, lived, i.e., recovered from the serpent's bite. The serpent was to be made of brass or copper, because the colour of this metal, when the sun was shining upon it, was most like the appearance of the fiery serpents; and thus the symbol would be more like the thing itself. Even in the book of Wis. (Num 16:6-7), the brazen serpent is called "a symbol of salvation; for he that turned himself toward it was not saved by the thing that he saw, but by Thee, that art the Saviour of all." It was not merely intended, however, as Ewald supposes (Gesch. ii. p. 228), as a "sign that just as this serpent hung suspended in the air, bound and rendered harmless by the command of Jehovah, so every one who looked at this with faith in the redeeming power of Jehovah, was secured against the evil, - a figurative sign, therefore, like that of St. George and the Dragon among ourselves;" for, according to this, there would be no internal causal link between the fiery serpents and the brazen image of a serpent. It was rather intended as a figurative representation of the poisonous serpents, rendered harmless by the mercy of God. For God did not cause a real serpent to be taken, but the image of a serpent, in which the fiery serpent was stiffened, as it were, into dead brass, as a sign that the deadly poison of the fiery serpents was overcome in this brazen serpent. This is not to be regarded as a symbol of the divine healing power; nor is the selection of such a symbol to be deduced and explained, as it is by Winer, Kurtz, Knobel, and others, from the symbolical view that was common to all the heathen religions of antiquity, that the serpent was a beneficent and health-bringing power, which led to its being exalted into a symbol of the healing power, and a representation of the gods of healing. This heathen view is not only foreign to the Old Testament, and without any foundation in the fact that, in the time of Hezekiah, the people paid a superstitious worship to the brazen serpent erected by Moses (Kg2 18:4); but it is irreconcilably opposed to the biblical view of the serpent, as the representative of evil, which was founded upon Gen 3:15, and is only traceable to the magical art of serpent-charming, which the Old Testament abhorred as an idolatrous abomination. To this we may add, that the thought which lies at the foundation of this explanation, viz., that poison is to be cured by poison, has no support in Hos 13:4, but is altogether foreign to the Scriptures. God punishes sin, it is true, by sin; but He neither cures sin by sin, nor death by death. On the contrary, to conquer sin it was necessary that the Redeemer should be without sin; and to take away its power from death, it was requisite that Christ, the Prince of life, who had life in Himself, should rise again from death and the grave (Joh 5:26; Joh 11:25; Act 3:15; Ti2 1:10). The brazen serpent became a symbol of salvation on the three grounds which Luther pointed out. In the first place, the serpent which Moses was to make by the command of God was to be of brass or copper, that is to say, of a reddish colour, and (although without poison) altogether like the persons who were red and burning with heat because of the bite of the fiery serpents. In the second place, the brazen serpent was to be set up upon a pole for a sign. And in the third place, those who desired to recover from the fiery serpent's bite and live, were to look at the brazen serpent upon the pole, otherwise they could not recover or live (Luther's Sermon on Joh 3:1-15). It was in these three points, as Luther has also clearly shown, that the typical character of this symbol lay, to which Christ referred in His conversation with Nicodemus (Joh 3:14). The brazen serpent had the form of a real serpent, but was "without poison, and altogether harmless." So God sent His Son in the form of sinful flesh, and yet without sin (Rom 8:3; Co2 5:21; Pe1 2:22-24). - 2. In the lifting up of the serpent as a standard. This was a δειγματίζειν ἐν παρρησίᾳ, a ́ (a "showing openly," or "triumphing"), a triumphal exhibition of the poisonous serpents as put to death in the brazen image, just as the lifting up of Christ upon the cross was a public triumph over the evil principalities and powers below the sky (Col 2:14-15). - 3. In the cure effected through looking at the image of the serpent. Just as the Israelites had to turn their eyes to the brazen serpent in believing obedience to the word of the Lord, in order to be cured of the bite of the poisonous serpents, so much we look with faith at the Son of man lifted up upon the cross, if we would be delivered from the bite of the old serpent, from sin, death, the devil, and hell. "Christ is the antitype of the serpent, inasmuch as He took upon Himself the most pernicious of all pernicious potencies, viz., sin, and made a vicarious atonement for it" (Hengstenberg on Joh 3:14). The brazen image of the serpent was taken by the Israelites to Canaan, and preserved till the time of Hezekiah, who had it broken in pieces, because the idolatrous people had presented incense-offerings to this holy relic (Kg2 18:4).

Verse 10

March of Israel round Edom and Moab, to the Heights of Pisgah in the Field of Moab (cf. Num 33:41-47). - Num 21:10. From the camp in the Arabah, which is not more particularly described, where the murmuring people were punished by fiery serpents, Israel removed to Oboth. According to the list of stations in Num 33:41., they went from Hor to Zalmonah, the situation of which has not been determined; for C. v. Raumer's conjecture (der Zug der Israeliten, p. 45), that it was the same place as the modern Maan, has no firm basis in the fact that Maan is a station of the Syrian pilgrim caravans. From Zalmonah they went to Phunon, and only then to Oboth. The name Phunon is no doubt the same as Phinon, a tribe-seat of the Edomitish Phylarch (Gen 36:41); and according to Jerome (Onom. s. v. Fenon), it was "a little village in the desert, where copper was dug up by condemned criminals (see at Gen 36:41), between Petra and Zoar." This statement suits very well, provided we imagine the situation of Phunon to have been not in a straight line between Petra and Zoar, but more to the east, between the mountains on the edge of the desert. For the Israelites unquestionably went from the southern end of the Arabah to the eastern side of Idumaea, through the Wady el Ithm (Getum), which opens into the Arabah from the east, a few hours to the north of Akaba and the ancient Ezion-geber. They had then gone round the mountains of Edom, and begun to "turn to the north" (Deu 2:3), so that they now proceeded farther northwards, on the eastern side of the mountains of Edom, "through the territory of the sons of Esau," no doubt by the same road which is taken in the present day by the caravans which go from Gaza to Maan, through the Ghor. "This runs upon a grassy ridge, forming the western border of the coast of Arabia, and the eastern border of the cultivated land, which stretches from the land of Edom to the sources of the Jordan, on the eastern side of the Ghor" (v. Raumer, Zug, p. 45). On the western side of their mountains the Edomites had refused permission to the Israelites to pass through their land (Num 20:18.), as the mountains of Seir terminate towards the Ghor (the Arabah) in steep and lofty precipices, and there are only two or three narrow wadys which intersect them from west to east; and of these the Wady Ghuweir is the only one which is practicable for an army, and even this could be held so securely by a moderate army, that no enemy could force its way into the heart of the country (see Leake in Burckhardt, pp. 21, 22; and Robinson, ii. p. 583). It was different on the eastern side, where the mountains slope off into a wide extent of table-land, which is only slightly elevated above the desert of Arabia. Here, on the weaker side of their frontier, the Edomites lost the heart to make any attack upon the Israelites, who would now have been able to requite their hostilities. But the Lord had commanded Israel not to make war upon the sons of Esau; but when passing through their territory, to purchase food and water from them for money (Deu 2:4-6). The Edomites submitted to the necessity, and endeavoured to take advantage of it, by selling provisions, "in the same way in which, at the present day, the caravan from Mecca is supplied with provisions by the inhabitants of the mountains along the pilgrim road" (Leake in Burckhardt, p. 24). The situation of Oboth cannot be determined. Num 21:11-12 The next encampment was "Ije-Abarim in the desert, which lies before Moab towards the sun-rising," i.e., on the eastern border of Moabitis (Num 33:44). As the Wady el Ahsy, which runs into the Dead Sea, in a deep and narrow rocky bed, from the south-east, and is called el Kerahy in its lower part (Burckhardt, Syr. pp. 673-4), separates Idumaea from Moabitis; Ije-Abarim (i.e., ruins of the crossings over) must be sought for on the border of Moab to the north of this wady, but is hardly to be found, as Knobel supposes, on the range of hills called el Tarfuye, which is known by the name of Orokaraye, still farther to the south, and terminates on the south-west of Kerek, whilst towards the north it is continued in the range of hills called el Ghoweithe and the mountain range of el Zoble; even supposing that the term Abarim, "the passages or sides," is to be understood as referring to these ranges of hills and mountains which skirt the land of the Amorites and Moabites, and form the enclosing sides. For the boundary line between the hills of el-Tarfuye and those of el-Ghoweithe is so near to the Arnon, that there is not the necessary space between it and the Arnon for the encampment at the brook Zared (Num 21:12). Ije-Abarim or Jim cannot have been far from the northern shore of the el Ahsy, and was probably in the neighbourhood of Kalaat el Hassa (Ahsa), the source of the Ahsy, and a station for the pilgrim caravans (Burckhardt, p. 1035). As the Moabites were also not to be attacked by the Israelites (Deu 2:9.), they passed along the eastern border of Moabitis as far as the brook Zared (Num 21:12). This can hardly have been the Wady el-Ahsy (Robinson, ii. p. 555; Ewald, Gesch. ii. p. 259; Ritter, Erdk. xv. p. 689); for that must already have been crossed when they came to the border of Moab (Num 21:11). Nor can it well have been "the brook Zaide, which runs from the south-east, passes between the mountain ranges of Ghoweithe and Tarfuye, and enters the Arnon, of which it forms the leading source," - the view adopted by Knobel, on the very questionable ground that the name is a corruption of Zared. In all probability it was the Wady Kerek, in the upper part of its course, not far from Katrane, on the pilgrim road (v. Raumer, Zug, p. 47: Kurtz, and others). Num 21:13 The next encampment was "beyond (i.e., by the side of) the Arnon, which is in the desert, and that cometh out of the territory of the Amorites." The Arnon, i.e., the present Wady Mojeb, is formed by the union of the Seyl (i.e., brook or river) Sade, which comes from the south-east, not far from Katrane, on the pilgrim road, and the Lejum from the north-east, which receives the small rivers el Makhreys and Balua, the latter flowing from the pilgrim station Kalaat Balua, and then continues its course to the Dead Sea, through a deep and narrow valley, shut in by very steep and lofty cliffs, and covered with blocks of stone, that have been brought down from the loftier ground (Burckhardt, pp. 633ff.), so that there are only a few places where it is passable; and consequently a wandering people like the Israelites could not have crossed the Mojeb itself to force an entrance into the territory of the hostile Amorites. (Note: It is utterly inconceivable that a whole people, travelling with all their possessions as well as with their flocks, should have been exposed without necessity to the dangers and enormous difficulties that would attend the crossing of so dreadfully wild and so deep a valley, and that merely for the purpose of forcing an entrance into an enemy's country. - Ritter, Erdk. xv. p. 1207.) For the Arnon formed the boundary between Moab and the country of the Amorites. The spot where Israel encamped on the Arnon must be sought for in the upper part of its course, where it is still flowing "in the desert;" not at Wady Zade, however, although Burckhardt calls this the main source of the Mojeb, but at the Balua, which flows into the Lejum. In all probability these streams, of which the Lejum came from the north, already bore the name of Arnon; as we may gather from the expression, "that cometh out of the coasts of the Amorites." The place of Israel's encampment, "beyond the Arnon in the desert," is to be sought for, therefore, in the neighbourhood of Kalaat Balua, and on the south side of the Arnon (Balua). This is evident enough from Deu 2:24, Deu 2:26., where the Israelites are represented as entering the territory of the Amoritish king Sihon, when they crossed the Arnon, having first of all sent a deputation, with a peaceable request for permission to pass through his land (cf. Num 21:21.). Although this took place, according to Deu 2:26, "out of the wilderness of Kedemoth," an Amoritish town, it by no means follows that the Israelites had already crossed the Arnon and entered the territory of the Amorites, but only that they were standing on the border of it, and in the desert which took its name from Kedemoth, and ran up to this, the most easterly town, as the name seems to imply, of the country of the Amorites. After the conquest of the country, Kedemoth was allotted to the Reubenites (Jos 13:18), and made into a Levitical city (Jos 21:37; Ch1 6:64). The Israelites now received instructions from the Lord, to cross the river Arnon, and make war upon the Amoritish king Sihon of Heshbon, and take possession of his land, with the assurance that the Lord had given Sihon into the hand of Israel, and would fill all nations before them with fear and trembling (Deu 2:24-25). This summons, with its attendant promises, not only filled the Israelites with courage and strength to enter upon the conflict with the mightiest of all the tribes of the Canaanites, but inspired poets in the midst of them to commemorate in odes the wars of Jehovah, and His victories over His foes. A few verses are given here out of one of these odes (Deu 2:14.), not for the purpose of verifying the geographical statement, that the Arnon touches the border of Moabitis, or that the Israelites had only arrived at the border of the Moabite and Amorite territory, but as an evidence that there, on the borders of Moab, the Israelites had been inspired through the divine promises with the firm assurance that they should be able to conquer the land of the Amorites which lay before them. Num 21:14-15 "Therefore," sc., because the Lord had thus given king Sihon, with all his land, into the hand of Israel, "it is written in the book of the wars of the Lord: Vaheb (Jehovah takes) in storm, and the brooks of Arnon and the valley of the brooks, which turns to the dwelling of Ar, and leans upon the border of Moab." The book of the wars of Jehovah is neither an Amoritish book of the conflicts of Baal, in which the warlike feats performed by Sihon and other Amoritish heroes with the help of Baal were celebrated in verse, as G. Unruh fabulously asserts in his Zug der Isr. aus Aeg. nach Canaan (p. 130), nor a work "dating from the time of Jehoshaphat, containing the early history of the Israelites, from the Hebrew patriarchs till past the time of Joshua, with the law interwoven," which is the character that Knobel's critical fancy would stamp upon it, but a collection of odes of the time of Moses himself, in celebration of the glorious acts of the Lord to and for the Israelites; and "the quotation bears the same relation to the history itself, as the verses of Krner would bear to the writings of any historian of the wars of freedom, who had himself taken part in these wars, and introduced the verses into his own historical work" (Hengstenberg). (Note: "That such a book should arise in the last days of Moses, when the youthful generation began for the first time to regard and manifest itself, both vigorously and generally, as the army of Jehovah, is so far from being a surprising fact, that we can scarcely imagine a more suitable time for the commencement of such a work" (Baumgarten). And if this is the case, the allusion to this collection of odes cannot be adduced as an argument against the Mosaic authorship of the Pentateuch, since Moses certainly did not write out the history of the journey from Kadesh to the Arboth Moab until after the two kings of the Amorites had been defeated, and the land to the east of the Jordan conquered, or till the Israelites had encamped in the steppes of Moab, opposite to Jericho.) The strophe selected from the ode has neither subject nor verb in it, as the ode was well known to the contemporaries, and what had to be supplied could easily be gathered from the title, "Wars of Jehovah." Vaheb is no doubt the proper name of an Amoritish fortress; and בּסוּפה, "in storm," is to be explained according to Nah 1:3, "The Lord, in the storm is His way." "Advancing in storm, He took Vaheb and the brooks of Arnon," i.e., the different wadys, valleys cut by brooks, which open into the Arnon. הנּחלים אשׁד, lit., pouring of the brooks, from אשׁד, effusio, the pouring, then the place where brooks pour down, the slope of mountains or hills, for which the term אשׁדה is generally used in the plural, particularly to denote the slopes of the mountains of Pisgah (Deu 3:17; Deu 4:49; Jos 12:3; Jos 13:20), and the hilly region of Palestine, which formed the transition from the mountains to the plain (Jos 10:40 and Jos 12:8). שׁבת, the dwelling, used poetically for the dwelling-place, as in Sa2 23:7 and Oba 1:3. ער (Ar), the antiquated form for עיר, a city, is the same as Ar Moab in Num 21:28 and Isa 15:1, "the city of Moab, on the border of the Arnon, which is at the end of the (Moabitish) territory" (Num 22:36). It was called Areopolis by the Greeks, and was near to Aror (Deu 2:36 and Jos 13:9), probably standing at the confluence of the Lejum and Mojeb, in the "fine green pasture land, in the midst of which there is a hill with some ruins," and not far away the ruin of a small castle, with a heap of broken columns (Burckhardt, Syr. p. 636). This Ar is not to be identified with the modern Rabba, in the midst of the land of the Moabites, six hours to the south of Lejum, to which the name Areopolis was transferred in the patristic age, probably after the destruction of Ar, the ancient Areopolis, by an earthquake, of which Jerome gives an account in connection with his own childhood (see his Com. on Isa 15:1-9), possibly the earthquake which occurred in the year a.d. 342, and by which many cities of the East were destroyed, and among others Nicomedia (cf. Hengstenberg, Balaam, pp. 525-528; Ritter, Erdkunde, xv. pp. 1212ff.; and v. Raumer, Palstina, pp. 270, 271, Ed. 4). Num 21:16-19 They proceeded thence to Beer (a well), a place of encampment which received its name from the fact that here God gave the people water, not as before by a miraculous supply from a rock, but by commanding wells to be dug. This is evident from the ode with which the congregation commemorated this divine gift of grace. "Then Israel sang this song: Spring up, O well! Sing ye to it! Well which princes dug, which the nobles of the people hollowed out, with the sceptre, with their staves." ענה, as in Exo 15:21 and Exo 32:18. מחקק, ruler's staff, cf. Gen 49:10. Beer, probably the same as Beer Elim (Isa 15:8), on the north-east of Moab, was in the desert; for the Israelites proceeded thence "from the desert to Mattanah" (Num 21:18), thence to Nahaliel, and thence to Bamoth. According to Eusebius (cf. Reland, Pal. ill. p. 495), Mattanah (Μαθθανέμ) was by the valley of the Arnon, twelve Roman miles to the east (or more properly south-east or south) of Medabah, and is probably to be seen in Tedun, a place now lying in ruins, near the source of the Lejum (Burckhardt, pp. 635, 636; Hengstenberg, Balaam, p. 530; Knobel, and others). The name of Nahaliel is still retained in the form Encheileh. This is the name given to the Lejum, after it has been joined by the Balua, until its junction with the Saide (Burckhardt, p. 635). Consequently the Israelites went from Beer in the desert, in a north-westerly direction to Tedun, then westwards to the northern bank of the Encheileh, and then still farther in a north-westerly and northerly direction to Bamoth. There can be no doubt that Bamoth is identical with Bamoth Baal, i.e., heights of Baal (Num 22:4). According to Jos 13:17 (cf. Isa 15:2), Bamoth was near to Dibon (Dibn), between the Wady Wale and Wady Mojeb, and also to Beth-Baal Meon, i.e., Myun, half a German mile (2 1/2 English) to the south of Heshbon; and, according to Num 22:41, you could see Bamoth Baal from the extremity of the Israelitish camp in the steppes of Moab. Consequently Bamoth cannot be the mountain to the south of Wady Wale, upon the top of which Burckhardt says there is a very beautiful plain (p. 632; see Hengstenberg, Balaam, p. 532); because the steppes of Moab cannot be seen at all from this plain, as they are covered by the Jebel Attarus. It is rather a height upon the long mountain Attarus, which runs along the southern shore of the Zerka Maein, and may possibly be a spot upon the summit of the Jebel Attarus, "the highest point in the neighbourhood," upon which, according to Burckhardt (p. 630), there is "a heap of stones overshadowed by a very large pistachio-tree." A little farther down to the south-west of this lies the fallen town Kereijat (called Krriat by Seetzen, ii. p. 342), i.e., Kerioth, Jer 48:24; Amo 2:2. Num 21:20 From Bamoth they proceeded "to the valley, which (is) in the field of Moab, upon the top of Pisgah, and looks across the face of the desert." הפּסנּה ראשׁ, head, or height of the Pisgah, is in apposition to the field of Moab. The "field of Moab" was a portion of the table-land which stretches from Rabbath Ammn to the Arnon, which "is perfectly treeless for an immense distance in one part (viz., the neighbourhood of Eleale), but covered over with the ruins of towns that have been destroyed," and which "extends to the desert of Arabia towards the east, and slopes off to the Jordan and the Dead Sea towards the west" (v. Raumer, Pal. p. 71). It is identical with "the whole plain from Medeba to Dibon" (Jos 13:9), and "the whole plain by Medeba" (Num 21:16), in which Heshbon and its cities were situated (Num 21:17; cf. Num 21:21 and Deu 3:10). The valley in this tableland was upon the height of Pisgah, i.e., the northern part of the mountains of Abarim, and looked across the surface of the desert. Jeshimon, the desert, is the plain of Ghor el Belka, i.e., the valley of desolation on the north-eastern border of the Dead Sea, which stretches from the Wady Menshalla or Wady Ghuweir (el Guer) to the small brook el Szume (Wady es Suweimeh on Van de Velde's map) at the Dead Sea, and narrows it more and more at the northern extremity on this side. "Ghor el Belka consists in part of a barren, salt, and stony soil; though there are some portions which can be cultivated. To the north of the brook el Szume, the great plain of the Jordan begins, which is utterly without fertility till you reach the Nahr Hesbn, about two hours distant, and produces nothing but bitter, salt herbs for camels" (Seetzen, ii. pp. 373, 374), and which was probably reckoned as part of Jeshimon, since Beth-jeshimoth was situated within it (see at Num 23:28). The valley in which the Israelites were encamped in the field of Moab upon the top of Pisgah, is therefore to be sought for to the west of Heshbon, on the mountain range of Abarim, which slopes off into the Ghor el Belka. From this the Israelites advanced into the Arboth Moab (see Num 22:1). If we compare the places of encampment named in Num 21:11-20 with the list of stations in Num 33:41-49, we find, instead of the seven places, mentioned here between Ijje Abarim and the Arboth Moab,-viz., Brook Zared, on the other side of the Arnon in the desert, Beer, Mattana, Nahaliel, Bamoth, and the valley in the field of Moab upon the top of Pisgah-only three places given, viz., Dibon of Gad, Almon Diblathaim, and Mount Abarim before Nebo. That the last of these is only another name for the valley in the field of Moab upon the top of Pisgah, is undoubtedly proved by the fact that, according to Deu 34:1 (cf. Num 3:27), Mount Nebo was a peak of Pisgah, and that it was situated, according to Deu 32:49, upon the mountains of Abarim, from which it is evident at once that the Pisgah was a portion of the mountains of Abarim, and in fact the northern portion opposite to Jericho (see at Num 27:12). The two other differences in the names may be explained from the circumstance that the space occupied by the encampment of the Israelites, an army of 600,000 men, with their wives, children, and cattle, when once they reached the inhabited country with its towns and villages, where every spot had its own fixed name, must have extended over several places, so that the very same encampment might be called by one or other of the places upon which it touched. If Dibon Gad (Num 33:45) was the Dibon built (i.e., rebuilt or fortified) by the Gadites after the conquest of the land (Num 32:3, Num 32:34), and allotted to the Reubenites (Jos 13:9, Jos 13:17), which is still traceable in the ruins of Dibn, an hour to the north of the Arnon (v. Raumer, Pal. p. 261), (and there is no reason to doubt it), then the place of encampment, Nahaliel (Encheile), was identical with Dibon of Gad, and was placed after this town in Num 33:45, because the camp of the Israelites extended as far as Dibon along the northern bank of that river. Almon Diblathaim also stands in the same relation to Bamoth. The two places do not appear to have been far from one another; for Almon Diblathaim is probably identical with Beth Diblathaim, which is mentioned in Jer 48:22 along with Dibon, Nebo, and other Moabite towns, and is to be sought for to the north or north-west of Dibon. For, according to Jerome (Onom. s. v. Jassa), Jahza was between Medaba and Deblatai, for which Eusebius has written Δηβούς by mistake for Διβών; Eusebius having determined the relative position of Jahza according to a more southerly place, Jerome according to one farther north. The camp of the Israelites therefore may easily have extended from Almon or Beth-diblathaim to Bamoth, and might very well take its name from either place. (Note: Neither this difference in the names of the places of encampment, nor the material diversity, - viz., that in the chapter before us there are four places more introduced than in Num 33, whereas in every other case the list in Num 33 contains a larger number of stations than we read of in the historical account-at all warrants the hypothesis, that the present chapter is founded upon a different document from Num 33. For they may be explained in a very simple manner, as Kurtz has most conclusively demonstrated (vol. iii. pp. 383-5), from the diversity in the character of the two chapters. Num 33 is purely statistical. The catalogue given there "contains a complete list in regular order of all the stations properly so called, that is to say, of those places of encampment where Israel made a longer stay than at other times, and therefore not only constructed an organized camp, but also set up the tabernacle." In the historical account, on the other hand, the places mentioned are simply those which were of historical importance. For this reason there are fewer stations introduced between Mount Hor and Ijje Abarim than in Num 33, stations where nothing of importance occurred being passed over; but, on the other hand, there are a larger number mentioned between Ijje Abarim and Arboth Moab, and some of them places where no complete camp was constructed with the tabernacle set up, probably because they were memorable as starting-points for the expeditions into the two Amorite kingdoms.)

Verse 21

Defeat of the Amorite Kings, Sihon of Heshbon and Og of Bashan, and Conquest of their Kingdoms. Num 21:21-23 When the Israelites reached the eastern border of the kingdom of the Amorite king Sihon (see at Num 21:13), they sent messengers to him, as they had previously done to the king of Edom, to ask permission to pass peaceably through his territory upon the high road (cf. Num 21:22 and Num 20:17); and Sihon refused this request, just as the king of Edom had done, and marched with all his people against the Israelites. But whereas the Lord forbade the Israelites to make war upon their kinsmen the Edomites, He now commanded them to make war upon the Amorite king, and take possession of his land (Deu 2:24-25); for the Amorites belonged to the Canaanitish tribes which were ripe for the judgment of extermination (Gen 15:16). And if, notwithstanding this, the Israelites sent to him with words of peace (Deu 2:26), this was simply done to leave the decision of his fate in his own hand (see at Deu 2:24). Sihon came out against the Israelites into the desert as far as Jahza, where a battle was fought, in which he was defeated. The accounts of the Onom. concerning Jahza, which was situated, according to Eusebius, between Medamon (Medaba) and Debous (Dibon, see above), and according to Jerome, between Medaba and Deblatai, may be reconciled with the statement that it was in the desert, provided we assume that it was not in a straight line between the places named, but in a more easterly direction on the edge of the desert, near to the commencement of the Wady Wale, a conclusion to which the juxtaposition of Jahza and Mephaot in Jos 13:18; Jos 21:37, and Jer 48:21, also points (see at Jos 13:18). Num 21:24-26 Israel smote him with the edge of the sword, i.e., without quarter (see Gen 34:26), and took possession of his land "from Arnon (Mojeb) to the Jabbok, unto the children of Ammon," i.e., to the upper Jabbok, the modern Nahr or Moiet Ammn. The Jabbok, now called Zerka, i.e., the blue, does not take its rise, as Seetzen supposed, on the pilgrim-road by the castle of Zerka; but its source, according to Abulfeda (tab. Syr. p. 91) and Buckingham, is the Nahr Ammn, which flowed down from the ancient capital of the Ammonites, and was called the upper Jabbok, and formed the western border of the Ammonites towards the kingdom of Sihon, and subsequently towards Gad (Deu 2:37; Deu 3:16; Jos 12:2). "For the border of the Ammonites was strong" (firm), i.e., strongly fortified; "for which reason Sihon had only been able to push his conquests to the upper Jabbok, not into the territory of the Ammonites." This explanation of Knobel's is perfectly correct; since the reason why the Israelites did not press forward into the country of the Ammonites, was not the strength of their frontier, but the word of the Lord, "Make not war upon them, for I shall give thee no possession of the land of the children of Ammon" (Deu 2:19). God had only promised the patriarchs, on behalf of their posterity, that He would give them the land of Canaan, which was bounded towards the east by the Jordan (Num 34:2-12; compared with Gen 10:19 and Gen 15:19-21); and the Israelites would have received no settlement at all on the eastern side of the Jordan, had not the Canaanitish branch of the Amorites extended itself to that side in the time of Moses, and conquered a large portion of the possessions of the Moabites, and also (according to Jos 13:25, as compared with Jdg 11:13) of the Ammonites, driving back the Moabites as far as the Arnon, and the Ammonites behind the Nahr Ammn. With the defeat of the Amorites, all the land that they had conquered passed into the possession of the Israelites, who took possession of these towns (cf. Deu 2:34-36). The statement in Num 21:25, that Israel settled in all the towns of the Amorites, is somewhat anticipatory of the history itself, as the settlement did not occur till Moses gave the conquered land to the tribes of Reuben and Gad for a possession (Num 32). The only places mentioned here are Heshbon and her daughters, i.e., the smaller towns belonging to it (cf. Jos 13:17), which are enumerated singly in Num 32:34-38, and Jos 13:15-28. In explanation of the expression, "Heshbon and her daughters," it is added in Num 21:26, that Heshbon was the city, i.e., the capital of the Amorite king Sihon, who had made war upon the former king of Moab, and taken away all his land as far as the Arnon. Consequently, even down to the time of the predecessor of Balak, the king of the Moabites at that time, the land to the north of the Arnon, and probably even as far as the lower Jabbok, to which point the kingdom of Sihon extended (see Deu 3:12-13; Jos 12:5), belonged to the Moabites. And in accordance with this, the country where the Israelites encamped opposite to Jericho, before crossing the Jordan, is reckoned as part of the land of Moab (Deu 1:5; Deu 29:1; Deu 32:49; Deu 34:5-6), and called Arboth Moab (see Num 22:1); whilst the women who seduced the Israelites to join in the idolatrous worship of Baal Peor are called daughters of Moab (Num 25:1). Num 21:27-28 The glorious conquest and destruction of the capital of the powerful king of the Amorites, in the might of the Lord their God, inspired certain composers of proverbs (משׁלים denom. from משׁל) to write songs in commemoration of the victory. Three strophes are given from a song of this kind, and introduced with the words "therefore,' sc., because Heshbon had fallen in this manner, "the composers of proverbs say." The first strophe (Num 21:27 and Num 21:28) runs thus: "Come to Heshbon: Built and restored be the city of Sihon! For fire went out of Heshbon; flames from the city of Sihon. It devoured Ar Moab, the lords of the heights of Arnon." The summons to come to Heshbon and build this ruined city up again, was not addressed to the Israelites, but to the conquered Amorites, and is to be interpreted as ironical (F. v. Meyer; Ewald, Gesch. ii. pp. 267, 268): "Come to Heshbon, ye victorious Amorites, and build your royal city up again, which we have laid in ruins! A fire has gone out of it, and burned up Ar Moab, and the lords of the heights of the Arnon." The reference is to the war-fire, which the victorious Amorites kindled from Heshbon in the land of Moab under the former king of Moab; that is to say, the war in which they subjugated Ar Moab and the possessors of the heights of Arnon. Ar Moab (see at Num 21:15) appears to have been formerly the capital of all Moabitis, or at least of that portion of it which was situated upon the northern side of the Arnon; and the prominence given to it in Deu 2:9, Deu 2:18, Deu 2:29, is in harmony with this. The heights of Arnon are mentioned as the limits to which Sihon had carried his victorious supremacy over Moab. The "lords" of these heights are the Moabites. Num 21:29 Second strophe: "Woe to thee, Moab! Thou art lost, people of Chemosh! He has given up his sons as fugitives, and his daughters into captivity-To Sihon, king of the Amorites." The poet here turns to Moab, and announces its overthrow. Chemosh (כּמושׁ, from כּמושׁ = כּבשׁ, subactor, domitor) was the leading deity of the Moabites (Jer 48:7) as well as of the Ammonites (Jdg 11:24), and related not only to Milcom, a god of the Ammonites, but also to the early Canaanitish deity Baal and Moloch. According to a statement of Jerome (on Isa 15:1-9), it was only another name for Baal Peor, probably a god of the sun, which was worshipped as the king of his nation and the god of war. He is found in this character upon the coins of Areopolis, standing upon a column, with a sword in his right hand and a lance and shield in the left, and with two fire-torches by his side (cf. Ekhel doctr. numm. vet. iii. p. 504), and was appeased by the sacrifice of children in times of great distress (Kg2 3:27). Further information, and to some extent a different view, are found in the article by J. G. Mller in Herzog's Cyclopaedia. The subject to נתן is neither Moab nor Jehovah, but Chemosh. The thought is this: as Chemosh, the god of Moab, could not deliver his people from the Amorite king; so now that Israel has conquered the latter, Moab is utterly lost. In the triumph which Israel celebrated over Moab through conquering its conquerors, there is a forewarning expressed of the ultimate subjection of Moab under the sceptre of Israel. Num 21:30 Third strophe, in which the woe evoked upon Moab is justified: "We cast them down: Heshbon is lost even to Dibon; and we laid it waste even to Nophah, with fire to Medeba." ונּירם is the first pers. pl. imperf. Kal of ירה with the suffix ־ם for ־ם (as in Exo 29:30). ירה, to cast arrows, to shoot down (Exo 19:13): figuratively to throw to the ground (Exo 15:4). נשּׁים for נשּׁם, first pers. pl. imperf. Hiph. of נשׁה, synonymous with נצה, Jer 4:7. The suffixes of both verbs refer to the Moabites as the inhabitants of the cities named. Accordingly Heshbon also is construed as a masculine, because it was not the town as such, but the inhabitants, that were referred to. Heshbon, the residence of king Sihon, stood pretty nearly in the centre between the Arnon and the Jabbok (according to the Onom. twenty Roman miles from the Jordan, opposite to Jericho), and still exists in extensive ruins with deep bricked wells, under the old name of Hesbn (cf. v. Raumer, Pal. p. 262). On Dibon in the south, not more than an hour from Arnon. Nophach is probably the same as Nobach, Jdg 8:11, but not the same as Kenath, which was altered into Nobach (Num 32:42). According to Jdg 8:11, it was near Jogbeha, not far from the eastern desert; and in all probability it still exists in the ruined place called Nowakis (Burckhardt, p. 619; Buckingham, ii. p. 46; Robinson, App. p. 188), to the north-west of Ammn (Rabbath-Ammon). Nophach, therefore, is referred to as a north-eastern town or fortress, and contrasted with Dibon, which was in the south. The words which follow, עד מ אשׁר, "which to Medeba," yield no intelligible meaning. The Seventy give πῦρ ἐπὶ Μ. (fire upon Medeba), and seem to have adopted the reading עד אשׁ. In the Masoretic punctuation also, the ר in אשׁר is marked as suspicious by a punct. extraord. Apparently, therefore, אשׁר was a copyist's error of old standing for אשׁ, and is to be construed as governed by the verb נשּׁים, "with fire to Medeba." The city was about two hours to the south-east of Heshbon, and is still to be seen in ruins bearing the name of Medaba, upon the top of a hill of about half-an-hour's journey in circumference (Burckhardt, p. 625; v. Raumer, Pal. pp. 264-5). (Note: Ewald and Bleek (Einleitung in d. A. T. p. 200) are both agreed that this ode was composed on the occasion of the defeat of the Amorites by the Israelites, and particularly on the capture of the capital Heshbon, as it depicts the fall of Heshbon in the most striking way; and this city was rebuilt shortly afterwards by the Reubenites, and remained ever afterwards a city of some importance. Knobel, on the other hand, has completely misunderstood the meaning and substance of the verses quoted, and follows some of the earliest commentators, such as Clericus and others, in regarding the ode as an Amoritish production, and interpreting it as relating to the conquest and fortification of Heshbon by Sihon.) Num 21:31-32 When Israel was sitting, i.e., encamped, in the land of the Amorites, Moses reconnoitred Jaezer, after which the Israelites took "its daughters," i.e., the smaller places dependent upon Jaezer, and destroyed the Amorites who dwelt in them. It is evident from Num 32:35, that Jaezer was not only conquered, but destroyed. This city, which was situated, according to the Onom. (s. v. Jazer), ten Roman miles to the west of Philadelphia (Rabbath-Ammon), and fifteen Roman miles to the north of Heshbon, is most probably to be sought for (as Seetzen supposes, i. pp. 397, 406, iv. p. 216) in the ruins of es Szr, at the source of the Nahr Szr, in the neighbourhood of which Seetzen found some pools, which are probably the remains of "the sea of Jazer," mentioned in Jer 48:32. There is less probability in Burckhardt's conjecture, that it is to be found in the ruins of Ain Hazir, near Kherbet el Suk, to the south-west of es Salt; though v. Raumer (Pal. p. 262) decides in its favour (see my Commentary on Jos 13:25). Num 21:33-35 The Israelites then turned towards the north, and took the road to Bashan, where king Og came against them with his people, to battle at Edrei. From what point it was that the Israelites entered upon the expedition against Bashan, is not stated either here or in Deu 3:1., where Moses recapitulates these events, and gives a more detailed account of the conquests than he does here, simply because it was of no importance in relation to the main object of the history. We have probably to picture the conquest of the kingdoms of Sihon and Og as taking place in the following manner: namely, that after Sihon had been defeated at Jahza, and his capital had been speedily taken in consequence of this victory, Moses sent detachments of his army from the places of encampment mentioned in Num 21:16, Num 21:18-20, into the different divisions of his kingdom, for the purpose of taking possession of their towns. After the conquest of the whole of the territory of Sihon, the main army advanced to Bashan and defeated king Og in a great battle at Edrei, whereupon certain detachments of the army were again despatched, under courageous generals, to secure the conquest of the different parts of his kingdom (cf. Num 32:39, Num 32:41-42). The kingdom of Og embraced the northern half of Gilead, i.e., the country between the Jabbok and the Mandhur (Deu 3:13; Jos 12:5), the modern Jebel Ajlun, and "all Bashan," or "all the region of Argob" (Deu 3:4, Deu 3:13-14), the modern plain of Jaulan and Hauran, which extended eastwards to Salcah, north-eastwards to Edrei (Deu 3:10), and northwards to Geshur and Maacha (Jos 12:5). For further remarks, see Deu 3:10. There were two towns in Bashan of the name of Edrei. One of them, which is mentioned in Deu 1:4 and Jos 12:4, along with Ashtaroth, as a second residence of king Og, is described in the Onom. (s. v. Ashtaroth and Edrei) as six Roman miles, i.e., fully two hours, from Ashtaroth, and twenty-four or twenty-five miles from Bostra, and called Adraa or Adara. This is the modern Der or Dra (in Burckhardt, p. 385; Seetzen, i. pp. 363, 364), and Draah, Idderat (in Buckingham, Syr. ii. p. 146), a place which still exists, consisting of a number of miserable houses, built for the most part of basalt, and standing upon a small elevation in a treeless, hilly region, with the ruins of an old church and other smaller buildings, supposed to belong to the time when Draa, Adraa (as urbs Arabiae), was an episcopal see, on the east of the pilgrim-road between Remtha and Mezareib, by the side of a small wady (see Ritter, Erdk. xv. pp. 838ff.). The other Edrei, which is mentioned in Deu 3:10 as the north-western frontier of Bashan, was farther towards the north, and is still to be seen in the ruins of Zorah or Ethra (see at Deu 3:10). In the present instance the southern town is intended, which was not far from the south-west frontier of Bashan, as Og certainly did not allow the Israelites to advance to the northern frontier of his kingdom before he gave them battle. Num 21:34-35 Just as in the case of Sihon, the Lord had also promised the Israelites a victory over Og, and had given him into their power, so that they smote him, with his sons and all his people, without leaving any remnant, and executed the ban, according to Deu 2:34, upon both the kings. (See the notes on Deut 3).

Verse 1

Here is, 1. The descent which Arad the Canaanite made upon the camp of Israel, hearing that they came by the way of the spies; for, though the spies which Moses had sent thirty-eight years before then passed and repassed unobserved, yet their coming, and their errand, it is likely, were afterwards known to the Canaanites, gave them an alarm, and induced them to keep an eye upon Israel and get intelligence of all their motions. Now, when they understood that they were facing about towards Canaan, this Arad, thinking it policy to keep the war at a distance, made an onset upon them and fought with them. But it proved that he meddled to his own hurt; had he sat still, his people might have been last destroyed of all the Canaanites, but now they were the first. Thus those that are overmuch wicked die before their time, Ecc 7:17. 2. His success at first in this attempt. His advance-guards picked up some straggling Israelites, and took them prisoners, Num 21:1. This, no doubt, puffed him up, and he began to thin that he should have the honour of crushing this formidable body, and saving his country from the ruin which it threatened. It was likewise a trial to the faith of the Israelites and a check to them for their distrusts and discontents. 3. Israel's humble address to God upon this occasion, Num 21:2. It was a temptation to them to murmur as their fathers did, and to despair of getting possession of Canaan; but God, who thus tried them by his providence, enabled them by his grace to quit themselves well in the trial, and to trust in him for relief against this fierce and powerful assailant. They, by their elders, in prayer for success, vowed a vow. Noe, When we are desiring and expecting mercy from God we should bind our souls with a bond that we will faithfully do our duty to him, particularly that we will honour him with the mercy we are in the pursuit of. Thus Israel here promised to destroy the cities of these Canaanites, as devoted to God, and not to take the spoil of them to their own use. If God would give them victory, he should have all the praise, and they would not make a gain of it to themselves. When we are in this frame we are prepared to receive mercy. 4. The victory which the Israelites obtained over the Canaanites, Num 21:3. A strong party was sent out, probably under the command of Joshua, which not only drove back these Canaanites, but followed them to their cities, which probably lay on the edge of the wilderness, and utterly destroyed them, and so returned to the camp. Vincimur in praelie, sed non in bello - We lose a battle, but we finally triumph. What is said of the tribe of God is true of all God's Israel, a troop may overcome them, but they shall overcome at the last. The place was called Hormah, as a memorial of the destruction, for the terror of the Canaanites, and probably for warning to posterity not to attempt the rebuilding of these cities, which were destroyed as devoted to God and sacrifices to divine justice. And it appears from the instance of Jericho that the law concerning such cities was that they should never be rebuilt. There seems to be an allusion to this name in the prophecy of the fall of the New Testament Babylon (Rev 16:16), where its forces are said to be gathered together to a place called Armageddon - the destruction of a troop.

Verse 4

Here is, I. The fatigue of Israel by a long march round the land of Edom, because they could not obtain passage through it the nearest way: The soul of the people was much discouraged because of the way, Num 21:4. Perhaps the way was rough and uneven, or foul and dirty; or it fretted them to go far about, and that they were not permitted to force their passage through the Edomites' country. Those that are of a fretful discontented spirit will always find something or other to make them uneasy. II. Their unbelief and murmuring upon this occasion, Num 21:5. Though they had just now obtained a glorious victory over the Canaanites, and were going on conquering and to conquer, yet they speak very discontentedly of what God had done for them and distrustfully of what he would do, vexed that they were brought out of Egypt, that they had not bread and water as other people had by their own care and industry, but by miracle, they knew not how. They have bread enough and to spare; and yet they complain there is no bread, because, though they eat angels' food, yet they are weary of it; manna itself is loathed, and called light bread, fit for children, not for men and soldiers. What will those be pleased with whom manna will not please? Those that are disposed to quarrel will find fault where there is no fault to be found. Thus those who have long enjoyed the means of grace are apt to surfeit even on the heavenly manna, and to call it light bread. But let not the contempt which some cast upon the word of God cause us to value it the less: it is the bread of life, substantial bread, and will nourish those who by faith feed upon it to eternal life, whoever calls it light bread. III. The righteous judgment which God brought upon them for their murmuring, Num 21:6. He sent fiery serpents among them, which bit or stung many of them to death. The wilderness through which they had passed was all along infested with those fiery serpents, as appears, Deu 8:15. but hitherto God had wonderfully preserved his people from receiving hurt by them, till now that they murmured, to chastise them for which these animals, which hitherto had shunned their camp, now invade it. Justly are those made to feel God's judgments that are not thankful for his mercies. These serpents are called fiery, from their colour, or from their rage, or from the effects of their bitings, inflaming the body, putting it immediately into a high fever, scorching it with an insatiable thirst. They had unjustly complained for want of water (Num 21:5), to chastise them for which God sends upon them this thirst, which no water would quench. Those that cry without cause have justly cause given them to cry out. They distrustfully concluded that they must die in the wilderness, and God took them at their word, chose their delusions, and brought their unbelieving fears upon them; many of them did die. They had impudently flown in the face of God himself, and the poison of asps was under their lips, and now these fiery serpents (which, it should seem, were flying serpents, Isa 14:29) flew in their faces and poisoned them. They in their pride had lifted themselves up against God and Moses, and now God humbled and mortified them, by making these despicable animals a plague to them. That artillery is now turned against them which had formerly been made use of in their defence against the Egyptians. He that brought quails to feast them let them know that he could bring serpents to bite them; the whole creation is at war with those that are in arms against God. IV. Their repentance and supplication to God under this judgment, Num 21:7. They confess their fault: We have sinned. They are particular in their confession: We have spoken against the Lord, and against thee. It is to be feared that they would not have owned the sin if they had not felt the smart; but they relent under the rod; when he slew them, then they sought him. They beg the prayers of Moses for them, as conscious to themselves of their own unworthiness to be heard, and convinced of the great interest which Moses had in heaven. How soon is their tone altered! Those who had just before quarrelled with him as their worst enemy now make their court to him as their best friend, and choose him for their advocate with God. Afflictions often change men's sentiments concerning God's people, and teach them to value those prayers which, at a former period, they had scorned. Moses, to show that he had heartily forgiven them, blesses those who had cursed him, and prays for those who had despitefully used him Herein he was a type of Christ, who interceded for his persecutors, and a pattern to us to go and do likewise, and thus to show that we love our enemies. V. The wonderful provision which God made for their relief. He did not employ Moses in summoning the judgment, but, that he might recommend him to the good affection of the people, he made him instrumental in their relief, Num 21:8, Num 21:9. God ordered Moses to make the representation of a fiery serpent, which he did, in brass, and set it up on a very long pole, so that it might be seen from all parts of the camp, and every one that was stung with a fiery serpent was healed by looking up to this serpent of brass. The people prayed that God would take away the serpents from them (Num 21:7), but God saw fit not to do this: for he gives effectual relief in the best way, though not in our way. Thus those who did not die for their murmuring were yet made to smart for it, that they might the more feelingly repent and humble themselves for it; they were likewise made to receive their cure from God, by the hand of Moses, that they might be taught, if possible, never again to speak against God and Moses. This method of cure was altogether miraculous, and the more wonderful if what some naturalists say be true, that looking upon bright and burnished brass is hurtful to those that are stung with fiery serpents. God can bring about his purposes by contrary means. The Jews themselves say that it was not the sight of the brazen serpent that cured them, but, in looking up to it, they looked up to God as the Lord that healed them. But there was much of gospel in this appointment. Our Saviour has told us so (Joh 3:14, Joh 3:15), that as Moses lifted up the serpent in the wilderness so the Son of man must be lifted up, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish. Observe then a resemblance, 1. Between their disease and ours. The devil is the old serpent, a fiery serpent, hence he appears (Rev 12:3) as a great red dragon. Sin is the biting of this fiery serpent; it is painful to the startled conscience, and poisonous to the seared conscience. Satan's temptations are called his fiery darts, Eph 6:16. Lust and passion inflame the soul, so do the terrors of the Almighty, when they set themselves in array. At the last, sin bites like a serpent and stings like an adder; and even its sweets are turned into the gall of asps. 2. Between their remedy and ours. (1.) It was God himself that devised and prescribed this antidote against the fiery serpents; so our salvation by Christ was the contrivance of Infinite Wisdom; God himself has found the ransom. (2.) It was a very unlikely method of cure; so our salvation by the death of Christ is to the Jews a stumbling-block and to the Greeks foolishness. It was Moses that lifted up the serpent in the wilderness, so the law is a schoolmaster to bring us to Christ, and Moses wrote of him, Joh 3:14-16. Christ was lifted up by the rulers of the Jews, who were the successors of Moses. (3.) That which cured was shaped in the likeness of that which wounded. So Christ, though perfectly free from sin himself, yet was made in the likeness of sinful flesh (Rom 8:3), so like that it was taken for granted that this man was a sinner, Joh 9:24. (4.) The brazen serpent was lifted up; so was Christ. He was lifted up upon the cross (Joh 12:33, Joh 12:34), for his was made a spectacle to the world. He was lifted up by the preaching of the gospel. The word here used for a pole signifies a banner, or ensign, for Christ crucified stands for an ensign of the people, Isa 11:10. Some make the lifting up of the serpent to be a figure of Christ's triumphing over Satan, the old serpent, whose head he bruised, when in his cross he made an open show of the principalities and powers which he had spoiled and destroyed, Col 2:15. 3. Between the application of their remedy and ours. They looked and lived, and we, if we believe, shall not perish; it is by faith that we look unto Jesus, Heb 12:2. Look unto me, and be you saved, Isa 45:22. We must be sensible of our wound and of our danger by it, receive the record which God has given concerning his Son, and rely upon the assurance he has given us that we shall be healed and saved by him if we resign ourselves to his direction. The brazen serpent's being lifted up would not cure if it was not looked upon. If any pored on their wound, and would not look up to the brazen serpent, they inevitably died. If they slighted this method of cure, and had recourse to natural medicines, and trusted to them, they justly perished; so if sinners either despise Christ's righteousness or despair of benefit by it their wound will, without doubt, be fatal. But whoever looked up to this healing sign, though from the outmost part of the camp, though with a weak and weeping eye, was certainly healed; so whosoever believes in Christ, though as yet but weak in faith, shall not perish. There are weak brethren for whom Christ died. Perhaps for some time after the serpent was set up the camp of Israel was molested by the fiery serpents; and it is the probable conjecture of some that they carried this brazen serpent along with them through the rest of their journey, and set it up wherever they encamped, and, when they settled in Canaan, fixed it somewhere within the borders of the land; for it is not likely that the children of Israel went so far off as this was into the wilderness to burn incense to it, as we find they did, Kg2 18:4. Even those that are delivered from the eternal death which is the wages of sin must expect to feel the pain and smart of it as long as they are here in this world; but, if it be not our own fault, we may have the brazen serpent to accompany us, to be still looked up to upon all occasions, by bearing about with us continually the dying of the Lord Jesus.

Verse 10

We have here an account of the several stages and removals of the children of Israel, till they came into the plains of Moab, out of which they at length passed over Jordan into Canaan, as we read in the beginning of Joshua. Natural motions are quicker the nearer they are to their centre. The Israelites were now drawing near to the promised rest, and now they set forward, as the expression is, Num 21:10. It were well if we would do thus in our way to heaven, rid ground in the latter end of our journey, and the nearer we come to heaven be so much the more active and abundant in the work of the Lord. Two things especially are observable in the brief account here given of these removals: - 1. The wonderful success which God blessed his people with, near the brooks of Arnon, Num 21:13-15. They had now compassed the land of Edom (which they were not to invade, nor so much as to disturb, Deu 2:4, Deu 2:5), and had come to the border of Moab. It is well that there are more ways than one to Canaan. The enemies of God's people may retard their passage, but cannot prevent their entrance into the promised rest. Care is taken to let us know that the Israelites in their march religiously observed the orders which God gave them to use no hostility against the Moabites (Deu 2:9), because they were the posterity of righteous Lot; therefore they pitched on the other side of Arnon (Num 21:13), that side which was now in the possession of the Amorites, one of the devoted nations, though formerly it had belonged to Moab, as appears here, Num 21:26, Num 21:27. This care of theirs not to offer violence to the Moabites is pleaded by Jephtha long afterwards, in his remonstrance against the Ammonites (Jdg 11:15, etc.), and turned to them for a testimony. What their achievements were, now that they pitched on the banks of the river Arnon, we are not particularly told, but are referred to the book of the wars of the Lord, perhaps that book which was begun with the history of the war with the Amalekites, Exo 17:14. Write it (said God) for a memorial in a book, to which were added all the other battles which Israel fought, in order, and, among the rest, their actions on the river Arnon, at Vaheb in Suphah (as our margin reads it) and other places on that river. Or, it shall be said (as some read it) in the rehearsal, or commemoration, of the wars of the Lord, what he did in the Red Sea, when he brought Israel out of Egypt, and what he did in the brooks of Arnon, just before he brought them into Canaan. Note, In celebrating the memorials of God's favours to us, it is good to observe the series of them, and how divine goodness and mercy have constantly followed us, even from the Red Sea to the brooks of Arnon. In every stage of our lives, nay, in every step, we should take notice of what God has wrought for us; what he did at such a time, and what in such a place, ought to be distinctly remembered. 2. The wonderful supply which God blessed his people with at Beer (Num 21:16), which signifies the well or fountain. It is said (Num 21:10) they pitched in Oboth, which signifies bottles, so called perhaps because there they filled their bottles with water, which should last them for some time; but by this time, we may suppose, it was with them as it was with Hagar (Gen 21:15), The water was spent in the bottle; yet we do not find that they murmured, and therefore God, in compassion to them, brought them to a well of water, to encourage them to wait on him in humble silence and expectation and to believe that he would graciously take cognizance of their wants, though they did not complain of them. In this world, we do at the best but pitch in Oboth, where our comforts lie in close and scanty vessels; when we come to heaven we shall remove to Beer, the well of life, the fountain of living waters. Hitherto we have found, when they were supplied with water, they asked it in unjust discontent, and God gave it in just displeasure; but here we find, (1.) That God gave it in love (Num 21:16): Gather the people together, to be witnesses of the wonder, and joint-sharers in the favour, and I will give them water. Before they prayed, God granted, and anticipated them with the blessings of his goodness. (2.) That they received it with joy and thankfulness, which made the mercy doubly sweet to them, Num 21:17. Then they sang this song, to the glory of God and the encouragement of one another, Spring up, O well! Thus they pray that it may spring up, for promised mercies must be fetched in by prayer; they triumph that it does spring up, and meet it with their joyful acclamations. With joy must we draw water out of the wells of salvation, Isa 11:3. As the brazen serpent was a figure of Christ, who is lifted up for our cure, so is this well a figure of the Spirit, who is poured forth for our comfort, and from whom flow to us rivers of living waters, Joh 7:38. Does this well spring up in our souls? We should sing to it; take the comfort to ourselves, and give the glory to God; stir up this gift, sing to it, Spring up, O well! thou fountain of gardens, to water my soul (Sol 4:15), plead the promise, which perhaps alludes to this story (Isa 41:17, Isa 41:18), I will make the wilderness wells of water. (3.) That whereas before the remembrance of the miracle was perpetuated in the names given to the places, which signified the people's strife and murmuring, now it was perpetuated in a song of praise, which preserved on record the manner in which it was done (Num 21:18): The princes digged the well, the seventy elders, it is probable, by direction of the lawgiver (that is, Moses, under God) with their staves; that is, with their staves they made holes in the soft and sandy ground, and God caused the water miraculously to spring up in the holes which they made. Thus the pious Israelites long afterwards, passing through the valley of Baca, a dry and thirsty place, made wells, and God by rain from heaven filled the pools, Psa 84:6. Observe, [1.] God promised to give them water, but the must open the ground to receive it, and give it vent. God's favours must be expected in the use of such means as lie within our power, but still the excellency of the power is of God. [2.] The nobles of Israel were forward to set their hands to this work, and used their staves, probable those that were the ensigns of their honour and power, for the public service, and it is upon record to their honour. And we may suppose that it was a great confirmation to them in their offices, and a great comfort to the people, that they were made use of by the divine power as instruments to this miraculous supply. By this it appeared that the spirit of Moses, who must shortly die, rested in some measure upon the nobles of Israel. Moses did not strike the ground himself, as formerly the rock, but gave them direction to do it, that their staves might share in the honour of his rod, and they might comfortably hope that when he should leave them yet God would not, but that they also in their generation should be public blessings, and might expect the divine presence with them as long as they acted by the direction of the lawgiver. For comfort must be looked for only in the way of duty; and, if we would share in divine joys, we must carefully follow the divine direction.

Verse 21

We have here an account of the victories obtained by Israel over Sihon and Og, which must be distinctly considered, not only because they are here distinctly related, but because long afterwards the memorial of them is distinctly celebrated, and they are severally assigned as instances of everlasting mercy. He slew Sihon king of the Amorites, for his mercy endureth for ever, and Og the king of Bashan, for his mercy endureth for ever, Psa 136:19, Psa 136:20. I. Israel sent a peaceable message to Sihon king of the Amorites (Num 21:21), but received an unpeaceable return, worse than that of the Edomites to the like message, Num 20:18, Num 20:20. For the Edomites only refused them a passage, and stood upon their own defence to keep them out; but Sihon went out with his forces against Israel in the wilderness, out of his own borders, without any provocation given him (Num 21:23), and so ran himself upon his own ruin. Jephtha intimates that he was prompted by his politics to do this (Jdg 11:20), Sihon trusted not Israel to pass through his coast; but his politics deceived him, for Moses says, God hardened his spirit and made his heart obstinate, that he might deliver him into the hand of Israel, Deu 2:30. The enemies of God's church are often infatuated in those very counsels which they think most wisely taken. Sihon's army was routed, and not only so, but all his country came into the possession of Israel, Num 21:24, Num 21:25. This seizure is justified, 1. Against the Amorites themselves, for they were the aggressors, and provoked the Israelites to battle; and yet, perhaps, that would not have been sufficient to entitle Israel to their land, but that God himself, the King of nations, the Lord of the whole earth, had given them a grant of it. The Amorites formed one of the devoted nations whose land God had promised to Abraham and his seed, which promise should be performed when the iniquity of the Amorites should be full, Gen 15:16. Jephtha insists upon this grant as their title, Jdg 11:23, Jdg 11:24. The victory which God gave them over the Amorites put them in possession, and then, the promise made to their fathers having given them a right, by virtue of that they kept possession. 2. Against the Moabites, who had formerly been the lords-proprietors of this country. If they should ever lay claim to it, and should plead that God himself had provided that none of their land should be given to Israel for a possession (Deu 2:9), Moses here furnishes posterity with a replication to their plea, and Jephtha makes use of it against the Amorites 260 years afterwards, when Israel's title to this country was questioned. (1.) The justification itself is that though it was true this country had belonged to the Moabites, yet the Amorites had taken it from them some time before, and were now in full and quiet possession of it, Num 21:26. The Israelites did not take it out of the hands of the Moabites, they had before lost it to the Amorites, and were constrained to give up their pretensions to it; and, when Israel had taken it from the Amorites, they were under no obligation to restore it to the Moabites, whose title to it was long since extinguished. See here the uncertainty of worldly possessions, how often they change their owners, and how soon we may be deprived of them, even when we think ourselves most sure of them; they make themselves wings. It is our wisdom therefore to secure the good part which cannot be taken away from us. See also the wisdom of the divine Providence and its perfect foresight, by which preparation is made long before for the accomplishment of all God's purposes in their season. This country being designed in due time for Israel, it is beforehand put into the hand of the Amorites, who little think that they have it but as trustees till Israel come of age, and then must surrender it. We understand not the vast reaches of Providence, but known unto God are all his works, as appears in this instance, that he set the bounds of the people according to the number of the children of Israel, Deu 32:8. All that land which he intended for his chosen people he put into the possession of the devoted nations, that were to be driven out. (2.) For proof of the allegation, he refers to the authentic records of the country, for so their proverbs or songs were, one of which he quotes some passages out of (Num 21:27-30), which sufficiently proves what is vouched for, namely, [1.] That such and such places that are here named, though they had been in the possession of the Moabites, had by right of war become the dominion of Sihon king of the Amorites. Heshbon had become his city, and he obtained such a quiet possession of it that it was built and prepared for him (Num 21:27), and the country to Dibon and Nophah was likewise subdued, and annexed to the kingdom of the Amorites, Num 21:30, [2.] That the Moabites were utterly disabled ever to regain the possession. Even Ar of Moab, though not taken or attempted by Sihon, but still remaining the metropolis of Moab, yet was so wasted by this loss that is would never be able to make head, Num 21:28. The Moabites were undone, and even Chemosh their god had given them up, as unable to rescue them out of the hands of Sihon, Num 21:29. By all this it appears that the Moabites' claim to this country was barred for ever. There may be a further reason for inserting this Amorite poem, namely, to show that the triumphing of the wicked is short. Those that had conquered the Moabites, and insulted over them, were now themselves conquered and insulted over by the Israel of God. It is very probable that the same Sihon, king of the Amorites, that had got this country from the Moabites, now lost it to the Israelites; for, though it is said to be taken from a former king of Moab (Num 21:26), yet not by a former king of the Amorites; and then it shows how sometimes justice makes men to see the loss of that which they got by violence, and were puffed up with the gain of. They are exalted but for a little while, Job 24:24. II. Og king of Bashan, instead of being warned by the fate of his neighbours to make peace with Israel, is instigated by it to make war with them, which proves in like manner to be his destruction. Og was also an Amorite, and therefore perhaps thought himself better able to deal with Israel than his neighbours were, and more likely to prevail, because of his own gigantic strength and stature, which Moses takes notice of, Deu 3:11, where he gives a more full account of this story. Here observe, 1. That the Amorite begins the war (Num 21:33): He went out to battle against Israel. His country was very rich and pleasant. Bashan was famous for the best timber (witness the oaks of Bashan), and the best breed of cattle, witness the bulls and kine of Bashan, and the lambs and rams of that country, which are celebrated, Deu 32:14. Wicked men do their utmost to secure themselves and their possessions against the judgments of God, but all in vain, when their day comes, on which they must fall. 2. That God interests himself in the cause, bids Israel not to fear this threatening force, and promises a complete victory: "I have delivered him into thy hand (Num 21:34); the thing is as good as done already, it is all thy own, enter and take possession." Giants are but worms before God's power. 3. That Israel is more than a conqueror, not only routs the enemies' army, but gains the enemies' country, which afterwards was part of the inheritance of the two tribes and a half that were first seated on the other side Jordan. God gave Israel these successes, while Moses was yet with them, both for his comfort (that he might see the beginning of that glorious work, which he must not live to see the finishing of) and for the encouragement of the people in the war of Canaan under Joshua. Though this was to them in comparison but as the day of small things, yet it was an earnest of great things.

Verse 1

21:1–22:1 In the march toward the Promised Land, Israel moved from Mount Hor to the plains of Moab (22:1). The account of Israel’s march is punctuated by the book’s emphasis on the Lord’s patient plan to lead Israel into Canaan despite their frailties. • Although the general direction of travel is clear, the exact route taken by the Hebrews remains unknown. Many of the places are hard to identify, and the archaeological evidence from some sites does not fit the time frame usually associated with the wilderness period. An honest appraisal of the wilderness itinerary is still beset by significant geographical and historical uncertainties.

21:1 It is possible that the Canaanite king of Arad was provoked by many enemies to the south of his territory (cp. 14:44-45). • Arad and Hormah (21:3) were far to the north of Mount Hor (20:22-29; 21:4; see study note on 20:22-23). Ancient Arad is usually identified with Tell Arad, located west of the modern Israeli town of Arad and about fifty miles north of Kadesh. While excavation at Tell Arad has revealed important ruins from the Early Bronze Age (about 3300–2000 BC) and the Iron Age (about 1200–500 BC), there is no evidence of occupation during Israel’s exodus and wilderness period (the Late Bronze Age, 1500–1200 BC). Some solutions link ancient Arad with another archaeological site in the region. Others claim that all such stories come from a much later period and that there is no reason to expect a correlation between excavated data and literary traditions. Another set of solutions recognizes that the evidence is fragmentary, insufficient to settle scholarly debate or to reach a definitive conclusion. The same general kinds of problems with geographical and archaeological details are found in other parts of the Old Testament, and the solutions are often uncertain. • Atharim is otherwise unknown.

Verse 2

21:2-3 completely destroy (Hebrew kharam): Israel was instructed to completely destroy their enemies and their enemies’ property (see Lev 27:28-29; Deut 7:2; 20:17; Josh 6–7; 10:1–11:23). • This battle reflects a play on words between kharam and Hormah (Hebrew khormah, Num 21:3). It marks a turning point in Israel’s interaction with the Canaanites, who remained a formidable enemy throughout the period of the conquest.

Verse 4

21:4-9 The “vow to the Lord” and consequent victory (21:2-3) did not eliminate Israel’s criticisms against God and Moses, even though the long journey was punishment for the same kind of complaining (14:26-35).

Verse 6

21:6 This whole region provided (and still provides) habitat for extremely poisonous snakes (cp. Isa 30:6).

Verse 7

21:7-9 Jesus alluded to this incident when discussing his identity and mission (John 3:14-15). • By Hezekiah’s day (around 700 BC), this bronze snake had become an object of worship in Jerusalem (2 Kgs 18:4).

Verse 10

21:10 The location of Oboth is uncertain.

Verse 11

21:11-12 The Israelites made their way along the east side of Edom. • Iye-abarim (“ruins of Abarim” or “ruins of the region beyond”) was probably near the northern bank of Zered Brook (cp. Deut 2:13-14) which separated ancient Edom from Moab (Deut 2:8-25).

Verse 13

21:13 The Israelites traveled to the east of the Moabite territory that lay between the Zered Brook on the south and the Arnon River on the north. The far side of the Arnon River was probably north and east of the main east–west canyon of the Arnon; this “Grand Canyon” was an effective natural boundary line between Moab and the territory of the Amorites north of the Arnon (see 21:26). • The Amorites were a group of nomadic peoples who had conquered areas from Mesopotamia to Canaan in the Middle Bronze Age (about 2000–1500 BC), including Babylon (around 1830 BC) and Assur (around 1750 BC). Amorites living in the hill country of Canaan had terrified Israel’s spies (Deut 1:26-28) and had then repelled Israel’s misguided attempt to enter Canaan (Num 14:44-45; see Deut 1:42-44). At the time of Israel’s arrival, Amorites had gained control of much of Transjordan (the area east of the Jordan); see study note on Num 21:26.

Verse 14

21:14-15 The Book of the Wars of the Lord, analogous to The Book of Jashar (Josh 10:13; 2 Sam 1:18), is otherwise unknown. • Waheb (a town) and Suphah (a region) are otherwise unknown. Ar was one of the major Moabite settlements of that day (cp. 21:28; Deut 2:18; Isa 15:1).

Verse 16

21:16-18 The location of Beer is unknown (cp. Isa 15:8). The poetic fragment describes the excavation of a new well and reflects the joy that this occasioned in a semiarid region. That the laborers were princes and leaders and the tools were scepters and staffs may indicate that digging the well included a festive ceremony.

Verse 18

21:18b-20 After moving north of the Arnon, the Hebrews left the wilderness on the eastern side of Moab and the recently conquered Amorite territory (see study note on 21:21-35). They turned westward toward the ridgeline that rises up from the Jordan Rift Valley, then traveled north to Pisgah Peak (see also 23:14; Deut 3:17, 27; 34:1, 5).

Verse 21

21:21-35 The Israelite victories over King Sihon of Heshbon and King Og of Bashan were previews of the Hebrew conquest of Canaan and came to represent God’s promise to assist his people in their time of need (cp. 13:10-12; Deut 2:24–3:7; Josh 2:10; 9:10; 12:1-6; Judg 11:19-22; Neh 9:22; Pss 135:10-12; 136:17-22; Jer 48:45-46). • Because Israel had left the wilderness (cp. Num 21:18, 23) before arriving at Pisgah (21:20), this account is probably a flashback of something that took place before the movement described in 21:18-20.

21:21-24 The territory of King Sihon was sandwiched between Moab and Ammon. The Israelites were not to invade Ammon (Deut 2:19), Edom, or Moab (Deut 2:4-9) because they were kin (Gen 19:30-38; 32:3), but Israel needed to cross Transjordan to enter Canaan. Sihon’s territory was the natural route.

21:21-22 Cp. 20:14-17.

Verse 25

21:25 The area conquered at this time became home to the tribes of Reuben, Gad, and Manasseh (cp. ch 32).

Verse 26

21:26 King Sihon of the Amorites had taken the area north of the Arnon from the Moabites, who earlier controlled it. After Israel occupied this region for several hundred years, it was reclaimed by King Mesha of Moab (see 2 Kgs 3:4-27) through a campaign described in detail around 830 BC on the Mesha Inscription (also known as the Moabite Stone). • Heshbon is usually identified with Tell Hesban, which has not yielded evidence of Late Bronze Age occupation; see study note on Num 21:1.

Verse 27

21:27-30 This ancient ballad was apparently an old Amorite song focusing on the exploits of King Sihon. Other interpreters assume that Israelite balladeers created it as a taunt song to ridicule Sihon’s defeat and celebrate Israel’s victory. The logical flow of thought from 21:26 to 21:27 would favor the former interpretation, with Israel applying the song to their own victory: Sihon and the Amorites had defeated Moab; now Israel had defeated them! Cp. Judg 11:12-28.

Verse 28

21:28 King Sihon had destroyed Moab’s towns from his center of operations at Heshbon.

Verse 29

21:29 From the ancient point of view, even Moab’s supreme god Chemosh suffered defeat at the hands of the Amorite conquerors, while the people of Moab became refugees and captives.

Verse 30

21:30 The area described here is the one that Israel had just conquered (21:24), making the ballad celebrating Sihon a fitting tribute to Israel’s victory.

Verse 33

21:33-35 Ancient Bashan was located east of the Sea of Galilee. • King Og, like Sihon, was an Amorite (see study note on 21:13). This brief account of Israel’s defeat of Og is expanded in Deut 3:1-11.

Verse 35

21:35 Then Israel occupied their land: See ch 32.