Text -- Numbers 5:29-31 (NET)

5:29 “‘This is the law for cases of jealousy, when a wife, while under her husband’s authority, goes astray and defiles herself, 5:30 or when jealous feelings come over a man and he becomes suspicious of his wife; then he must have the woman stand before the Lord, and the priest will carry out all this law upon her. 5:31 Then the man will be free from iniquity, but that woman will bear the consequences of her iniquity.’”

Commentary -- Word/Phrase Notes (per phrase)

Wesley: Num 5:31

Which he should not have been, if he had either indulged her in so great a wickedness, and not endeavoured to bring her to repentance or punishment, or cherished suspicions in his breast, and thereupon proceeded to hate her or cast her off. Whereas now, whatsoever the consequence is, the husband shall not be censured for bringing such curses upon her, or for defaming her, if she appear to be innocent.

Wesley: Num 5:31

That is, the punishment of her iniquity, whether she was false to her husband, or by any light carriage gave him occasion to suspect her.

JFB: Num 5:29

Adultery discovered and proved was punished with death. But strongly suspected cases would occur, and this law made provision for the conviction of the guilty person. It was, however, not a trial conducted according to the forms of judicial process, but an ordeal through which a suspected adulteress was made to go--the ceremony being of that terrifying nature, that, on the known principles of human nature, guilt or innocence could not fail to appear. From the earliest times, the jealousy of Eastern people has established ordeals for the detection and punishment of suspected unchastity in wives. The practice was deep-rooted as well as universal. And it has been thought, that the Israelites being strongly biassed in favor of such usages, this law of jealousies "was incorporated among the other institutions of the Mosaic economy, in order to free it from the idolatrous rites which the heathens had blended with it." Viewed in this light, its sanction by divine authority in a corrected and improved form exhibits a proof at once of the wisdom and condescension of God.

Clarke: Num 5:29

This is the law of jealousies - And this is the most singular law in the whole Pentateuch: a law that seems to have been copied by almost all the nations of the earth, whether civilized or barbarian, as we find that similar modes of trial for suspected offenses were used when complete evidence was wanting to convict; and where it was expected that the object of their worship would interfere for the sake of justice, in order that the guilty should be brought to punishment, and the innocent be cleared. For general information on this head see at the end of this chapter. (See Num 5:31 (note)).

Clarke: Num 5:31

This woman shall bear her iniquity - That is, her belly shall swell, and her thigh shall rot; see Num 5:22 (note). But if not guilty after such a trial, she had great honor, and, according to the rabbins, became strong, healthy, and fruitful; for if she was before barren, she now began to bear children; if before she had only daughters, she now began to have sons; if before she had hard travail, she now had easy; in a word, she was blessed in her body, her soul, and her substance: so shall it be done unto the holy and faithful woman, for such the Lord delighteth to honor; see 1Ti 2:15

On the principal subject of this chapter. I shall here introduce a short account of the trial by ordeal, as practiced in different parts of the world, and which is supposed to have taken its origin from the waters of jealousy

The trial by what was afterwards called Ordeal is certainly of very remote antiquity, and was evidently of Divine appointment. In this place we have an institution relative to a mode of trial precisely of that kind which among our ancestors was called ordeal; and from this all similar trials in Asia, Africa, and Europe, have very probably derived their origin

Ordeal, Latin, ordalium , is, according to Verstegan, from the Saxon, ordal and ordel , and is derived by some from great, and Dael , judgment, signifying the greatest, most solemn, and decisive mode of judgment - Hickes. Others derive it from the Francic or Teutonic Urdela, which signifies simply to judge. But Lye, in his Anglo-Saxon Dictionary, derives the term from an Anglo-Saxon word, which is often in Anglo-Saxon, a privative particle, and, distinction or difference; and hence applied to that kind of judgment in which there was no respect of persons, but every one had absolute justice done him, as the decision of the business was supposed to belong to God alone. It always signified an appeal to the immediate interposition of God, and was therefore called Judicium Dei , God’ s Judgment; and we may naturally suppose was never resorted to but in very important cases, where persons accused of great crimes protested their innocence, and there was no sufficient evidence by which they could be cleared from the accusation, or proved to be guilty of the crime laid to their charge. Such were the cases of jealousy referred to in this chapter

The rabbins who have commented on this text give us the following information: When any man, prompted by the spirit of jealousy, suspected his wife to have committed adultery, he brought her first before the judges, and accused her of the crime; but as she asserted her innocency, and refused to acknowledge herself guilty, and as he had no witnesses to produce, he required that she should be sentenced to drink the waters of bitterness which the law had appointed; that God, by this means, might discover what she wished to conceal. After the judges had heard the accusation and the denial, the man and his wife were both sent to Jerusalem, to appear before the Sanhedrin, who were the sole judges in such matters. The rabbins say that the judges of the Sanhedrin, at first endeavored with threatenings to confound the woman, and cause her to confess her crime; when she still persisted in her innocence, she was led to the eastern gate of the court of Israel, where she was stripped of the clothes she wore, and dressed in black before a number of persons of her own sex. The priest then told her that if she knew herself to be innocent she had no evil to apprehend; but if she were guilty, she might expect to suffer all that the law threatened: to which she answered, Amen, amen

The priest then wrote the words of the law upon a piece of vellum, with ink that had no vitriol in it, that it might be the more easily blotted out. The words written on the vellum were, according to the rabbins, the following: -

"If a strange man have not come near thee, and thou art not polluted by forsaking the bed of thy husband, these bitter waters which I have cursed will not hurt thee: but if thou have gone astray from thy husband, and have polluted thyself by coming near to another man, may thou be accursed of the Lord, and become an example for all his people; may thy thigh rot, and thy belly swell till it burst! may these cursed waters enter into thy belly, and, being swelled therewith, may thy thigh putrefy!

After this the priest took a new pitcher, filled it with water out of the brazen bason that was near the altar of burnt-offering, cast some dust into it taken from the pavement of the temple, mingled something bitter, as wormwood, with it, and having read the curses above mentioned to the woman, and received her answer of Amen, he scraped off the curses from the vellum into the pitcher of water. During this time another priest tore her clothes as low as her bosom, made her head bare, untied the tresses of her hair, fastened her torn clothes with a girdle below her breasts, and presented her with the tenth part of an ephah, or about three pints of barley-meal, which was in a frying pan, without oil or incense

The other priest, who had prepared the waters of jealousy, then gave them to be drank by the accused person, and as soon as she had swallowed them, he put the pan with the meal in it into her hand. This was waved before the Lord, and a part of it thrown into the fire of the altar. If the woman was innocent, she returned with her husband; and the waters, instead of incommoding her, made her more healthy and fruitful than ever: if on the contrary she were guilty, she was seen immediately to grow pale, her eyes started out of her head, and, lest the temple should be defiled with her death, she was carried out, and died instantly with all the ignominious circumstances related in the curses, which the rabbins say had the same effect on him with whom she had been criminal, though he were absent and at a distance. They add, however, that if the husband himself had been guilty with another woman, then the waters had no bad effect even on his criminal wife; as in that case the transgression on the one part was, in a certain sense, balanced by the transgression on the other

There is no instance in the Scriptures of this kind of ordeal having ever been resorted to; and probably it never was during the purer times of the Hebrew republic. God had rendered himself so terrible by his judgments, that no person would dare to appeal to this mode of trial who was conscious of her guilt; and in case of simple adultery, where the matter was either detected or confessed, the parties were ordered by the law to be put to death

But other ancient nations have also had their trials by ordeal

We learn from Ferdusi, a Persian poet, whose authority we have no reason to suspect, that the fire ordeal was in use at a very early period among the ancient Persians. In the famous epic poem called the Shah Nameh of this author, who is not improperly styled the Homer of Persia, under the title Dastan Seeavesh ve Soodabeh, The account of Seeavesh and Soodabeh, he gives a very remarkable and circumstantial account of a trial of this kind

It is very probable that the fire ordeal originated among the ancient Persians, for by them fire was not only held sacred, but considered as a god, or rather as the visible emblem of the supreme Deity; and indeed this kind of trial continues in extensive use among the Hindoos to the present day. In the code of Gentoo laws it is several times referred to under the title of Purrah Reh, but in the Shah Nameh, the word Soogend is used, which signifies literally an oath, as the persons were obliged to declare their innocence by an oath, and then put their veracity to test by passing through the kohi atesh , or fire pile; see the Shah Nameh in the title Dastan Seeavesh ve Soodabeh, and Halhed’ s code of Gentoo laws; Preliminary Discourse, p. lviii., and chap. v., sec. iii., pp. 117, etc

A circumstantial account of the different kinds of ordeal practiced among the Hindoos, communicated by Warren Hastings, Esq., who received it from Ali Ibrahim Khan, chief magistrate at Benares, may be found in the Asiatic Researches, vol. i., p. 389

This trial was conducted among this people nine different ways: first, by the balance; secondly, by fire; thirdly, by water; fourthly, by poison; fifthly, by the cosha, or water in which an idol has been washed; sixthly, by rice; seventhly, by boiling oil; eighthly, by red hot iron; ninthly, by images

There is, perhaps, no mode of judiciary decision that has been in more common use in ancient times, than that of ordeal, in some form or other. We find that it was also used by the ancient Greeks 500 years before the Christian era; for in the Antigone of Sophocles, a person suspected by Creon of a misdemeanor, declares himself ready "to handle hot iron, and to walk over fire,"in proof of his innocence, which the scholiast tells us was then a very usual purgation

Ημεν δ ’ ἑτοιμοι και μυδρους αιρειν χεροιν

Και πυρ διερπειν, και θεους ὁρκωμοτειν

Ver. 270

The scholiast on this line informs us that the custom in binding themselves by the most solemn oath, was this: they took red hot iron in their hands, and throwing it into the sea, swore that the oath should be inviolate till that iron made its appearance again. Virgil informs us that the priests of Apollo at Soracte were accustomed to walk over burning coals unhurt

- Et medium, freti pietate, per igne

Cultores multa premimus vestigia pruna

Aen. xi. 787

Grotius gives many instances of water ordeal in Bithynia, Sardinia, and other places. Different species of fire and water ordeal are said to have prevailed among the Indians on the coast of Malabar; the negroes of Loango, Mozambique, etc., etc., and the Calmuc Tartars

The first formal mention I find of this trial in Europe is in the laws of King Ina, composed about a. d. 700. See L. 77. entitled, Decision by hot iron and water. I find it also mentioned in the council of Mentz, a. d. 847; but Agobard, archbishop of Lyons, wrote against it sixty years before this time. It is afterwards mentioned in the council of Trevers, a. d. 895. It did not exist in Normandy till after the Conquest, and was probably first introduced into England in the time of Ina, in whose laws and those of Athelstan and Ethelred, it was afterwards inserted. The ordeal by fire was for noblemen and women, and such as were free born: the water ordeal was for husbandmen, and the meaner classes of the people, and was of two sorts; by cold water and by hot. See the proceedings in these trials declared particularly in the law of King Ina; Wilkins, Leges Anglo-Saxonae, p. 27

Several popes published edicts against this species of trial. Henry III. abolished trials by ordeal in the third year of his reign, 1219. See the act in Rymer, vol. i., p. 228; and see Dugdale’ s Origines Juridicales, fol. 87; Spelman’ s Glossary, Wilkins, Hickes, Lombard, Somner, and Du Cange, art. Ferrum

The ordeal or trial by battle or combat is supposed to have come to us from the Lombards, who, leaving Scandinavia, overran Europe: it is thought that this mode of trial was instituted by Frotha III., king of Denmark, about the time of the birth of Christ; for he ordained that every controversy should be determined by the sword. It continued in Holsatia till the time of Christian III., king of Denmark, who began his reign in 1535. From these northern nations the practice of duels was introduced into Great Britain. I need scarcely add, that this detestable form of trial was the foundation of the no less detestable crime of dueling, which so much disgraces our age and nation, a practice that is defended only by ignorance, false honor, and injustice: it is a relic of barbarous superstition, and was absolutely unknown to those brave and generous nations, the Greeks and Romans, whom it is so much the fashion to admire; and who, in this particular, so well merit our admiration

The general practice of dueling is supposed to have taken its rise in 1527, at the breaking up of a treaty between the Emperor Charles V. and Francis I. The former having sent a herald with an insulting message to Francis, the king of France sent back the herald with a cartel of defiance, in which he gave the emperor the lie, and challenged him to single combat: Charles accepted it; but after several messages concerning the arrangement of all the circumstances relative to the combat, the thoughts of it were entirely laid aside. The example of two personages so illustrious drew such general attention, and carried with it so much authority, that it had considerable influence in introducing an important change in manners all over Europe. It was so much the custom in the middle ages of Christianity to respect the cross, even to superstition, that it would have been indeed wonderful if the same ignorant bigotry had not converted it into an ordeal: accordingly we find it used for this purpose in so many different ways as almost to preclude description. Another trial of this kind was the Corsned, or the consecrated bread and cheese: this was the ordeal to which the clergy commonly appealed when they were accused of any crime. A few concluding observations from Dr. Henry may not be unacceptable to the reader: - "If we suppose that few or none escaped conviction who exposed themselves to these fiery trials, we shall be very much mistaken. For the histories of those times contain innumerable examples of persons plunging their naked arms into boiling water, handling red hot balls of iron, and walking upon burning ploughshares, without receiving the least injury. Many learned men have been much puzzled to account for this, and disposed to think that Providence graciously interposed in a miraculous manner for the preservation of injured innocence

"But if we examine every circumstance of these fiery ordeals with due attention, we shall see sufficient reason to suspect that the whole was a gross imposition on the credulity of mankind. The accused person was committed wholly to the priest who was to perform the ceremony three days before the trial, in which he had time enough to bargain with him for his deliverance, and give him instructions how to act his part. On the day of trial no person was permitted to enter the church but the priest and the accused till after the iron was heated, when twelve friends of the accuser, and twelve of the accused, and no more, were admitted and ranged along the wall on each side of the church, at a respectful distance. After the iron was taken out of the fire several prayers were said: the accused drank a cup of holy water, and sprinkled his hand with it, which might take a considerable time if the priest were indulgent. The space of nine feet was measured by the accused himself, with his own feet, and he would probably give but scanty measure. He was obliged only to touch one of the marks with the toe of his right foot, and allowed to stretch the other foot as far towards the other mark as he could, so that the conveyance was almost instantaneous. His hand was not immediately examined, but wrapped in a cloth prepared for that purpose three days. May we not then, from all these precautions, suspect that these priests were in possession of some secret that secured the hand from the impression of such a momentary touch of hot iron, or removed all appearances of these impressions in three days; and that they made use of this secret when they saw reason? Such readers as are curious in matters of this kind may find two different directions for making ointments that will have this effect, in the work here quoted. What greatly strengthens these suspicions is, that we meet with no example of any champion of the Church who suffered the least injury from the touch of hot iron in this ordeal: but where any one was so fool-hardy as to appeal to it, or to that of hot water, with a view to deprive the Church of any of her possessions, he never failed to burn his fingers, and lose his cause."I have made the scanty extract above from a very extensive history of the trial by ordeal, which I wrote several years ago, but never published. All the forms of adjuration for the various ordeals of hot water, cold water, red hot iron, bread and cheese, etc., may be seen in the Codex Legum Antiquarum , Lindenbrogii, fol. Franc. 1613, p. 1299, etc.

TSK: Num 5:29

the law : Lev 7:11, Lev 11:46, Lev 13:59, Lev 14:54-57, Lev 15:32, Lev 15:33

when a wife goeth : Num 5:12, Num 5:15, Num 5:19; Isa 5:7, Isa 5:8

TSK: Num 5:31

be guiltless : Psa 37:6

bear : Num 9:13; Lev 20:10, Lev 20:17-20; Eze 18:4; Rom 2:8, Rom 2:9

Commentary -- Word/Phrase Notes (per Verse)

Barnes: Num 5:11-31

The trial of jealousy. Since the crime of adultery is especially defiling and destructive of the very foundations of social order, the whole subject is dealt with at a length proportionate to its importance. The process prescribed has lately been strikingly illustrated from an Egyptian "romance,"which refers to the time of Rameses the Great, and may therefore well serve to illustrate the manners and customs of the Mosaic times. This mode of trial, like several other ordinances, was adopted by Moses from existing and probably very ancient and widely spread institutions.

Num 5:15

The offering was to be of the cheapest and coarsest kind, barley (compare 2Ki 7:1, 2Ki 7:16, 2Ki 7:18), representing the abused condition of the suspected woman. It was, like the sin-offering Lev 5:11, to be made without oil and frankincense, the symbols of grace and acceptableness. The woman herself stood with head uncovered Num 5:18, in token of her shame.

Num 5:17

The dust that is in the floor of the tabernacle - To set forth the fact that the water was endued with extraordinary power by Him who dwelt in the tabernacle. Dust is an emblem of a state of condemnation Gen 3:14; Mic 7:17.

Num 5:19

Gone aside ... - literally, "gone astray from"thy husband by uncleanness; compare Hos 4:12.

Num 5:23

Blot them out with the bitter water - In order to transfer the curses to the water. The action was symbolic. Travelers speak of the natives of Africa as still habitually seeking to obtain the full force of a written charm by drinking the water into which they have washed it.

Num 5:24

Shall cause the woman to drink - Thus was symbolised both her full acceptance of the hypothetical curse (compare Eze 3:1-3; Jer 15:16; Rev 10:9), and its actual operation upon her if she should be guilty (compare Psa 109:18).

Num 5:26

The memorial thereof - See the marginal reference. "Memorial"here is not the same as "memorial"in Num 5:15.

Num 5:27

Of itself, the drink was not noxious; and could only produce the effects here described by a special interposition of God. We do not read of any instance in which this ordeal was resorted to: a fact which may be explained either (with the Jews) as a proof of its efficacy, since the guilty could not be brought to face its terrors at all, and avoided them by confession; or more probably by the license of divorce tolerated by the law of Moses. Since a husband could put away his wife at pleasure, a jealous man would naturally prefer to take this course with a suspected wife rather than to call public attention to his own shame by having recourse to the trial of jealousy. The trial by red water, which bears a general resemblance to that here prescribed by Moses, is still in use among the tribes of Western Africa.

Poole: Num 5:31

Guiltless from iniquity which he should not have been, if he had either dissembled or indulged her in so great a wickedness, and not endeavoured to bring her either to repentance or punishment; see Mat 1:19 ; or cherished suspicions in his breast, and thereupon proceeded to hate her or cast her off. Whereas now, whatsoever the consequent is, the husband shall not be blamed or censured, either for bringing such curses and mischiefs upon her, or for defaming her, if she appear to be innocent. Her iniquity, i.e. the punishment of her iniquity, whether she was false to her husband, or by any light and foolish carriage gave him occasion to suspect her to be so.

Haydock: Num 5:31

Blameless. To act in conformity with God's injunctions could not be reprehensible. But it would have been certainly criminal to tempt God in this manner, in order to discover a secret offence, if he had not authorized it expressly. If the husband wished to avoid the displeasure of God, he was bound to banish from his heart all malice, rash judgments, &c. The permission here granted, was owing to the hardness of heart of this stiff-necked people, as well as the laws regarding divorces and retaliation. Women, being of a more fickle and suspicious temper, are not indulged with the privilege of divorcing their husbands, or of making them drink the waters of jealousy. But if a man were taken in the act of adultery, he was put to death, Leviticus xx. 10. The crime is equal in both parties. "The husband, says Lactantius, (de V. Cultu. xxiii.) ought, by the regularity of his conduct, to shew his wife what she owes him. For it is very unjust to exact from another, what you do not practise yourself. This injustice is the cause of the disorders, into which married women sometimes fall. They are vexed at being obliged to continue faithful to those, who will not be so to them." The Romans would not allow wives to bring an action against their husbands. "You would kill, with impunity, your wife taken in adultery, without any trial, said Cato, and she would not dare to touch you with her finger, if you fell into the same crime." (Gell. x. 23.) The authority which was given to husbands over their wives, was deemed a sufficient restraint; and men being obliged to be often from home, and in company, would have been exposed to continual alarms, from the suspicious temper of their wives, if they had been subjected to the like trials. (Calmet) ---

In latter ages, however, the Jewish ladies began to assume the right of divorcing their husbands, in imitation of Salome, sister of Herod the great, and of Herodias, his grand-daughter, Matthew xiv. 3. (Josephus, Antiquities xv. 11., and xviii. 7.) Grotius supposes that the Samaritan woman had divorced her five husbands, John iv. 18. But this being contrary to the law, her first marriage alone subsisted. (Haydock) ---

Her iniquity, in giving her husband any grounds of suspicion. The Rabbins observe, that he was bound first to admonish her, before witnesses, not to keep company with people of bad character; and if he could bring witnesses that she had been found afterwards with them for ever so short a time, he might have the remedy of the law. The pagans maintained, that several of their fountains and rivers had the power of disclosing and punishing perjury. Polemon mentions a fountain of this nature in Sicily; and Solinus (Chap. xi.) says, that one in Sardinia caused the perjured to go blind. The waters of the Styx were greatly feared on this account. (Hesiod, Theog. 783.) Tatitus (vii. 20,) mentions some other fountains, which had the same effects as the bitter waters. (Calmet) ---

The various ordeal trials which were formerly in use, were probably established in imitation of this law of Moses; but not having the same authority or sanction, they were in danger of being looked upon as superstitious. (Haydock)

Gill: Num 5:29

This is the law of jealousies,.... Which was appointed by God to deter wives from adultery, and preserve the people of Israel, the worshippers of him, from having a spurious brood among them; and to keep husbands from being cruel to their wives they might be jealous of, and to protect virtue and innocence, and to detect lewdness committed in the most secret manner; whereby God gave proof of his omniscience, that he had knowledge of the most private acts of uncleanness, and was the avenger of all such. The reasons why such a law was not made equally in favour of women, as of men, are supposed to be these: because of the greater authority of the man over the woman, which would seem to be lessened, if such a power was granted her; because marriage was not so much hurt, or so much damage came to families by the adultery of men, as of women; because women are more apt to be suspicious than men, and in those times more prone to adultery, through their eager desire of children, that they might not lie under reproach ^o:

when a wife goeth aside to another instead of her husband, and is defiled; is suspected of going aside to another man, and is supposed to be defiled by him.

Gill: Num 5:30

Or when the spirit of jealousy cometh upon him, and he be jealous over his wife,.... See Gill on Num 5:14,

and shall set the woman before the Lord; has carried the matter so far as to bring his wife to the priest or civil magistrate, and declare his suspicion, and the ground of it:

and the priest shall execute upon her all this law; he shall proceed according to the law, and perform every rite and ceremony required; nor could any stop be put to it, unless the woman owned she was defiled.

Gill: Num 5:31

Then shall the man be guiltless from iniquity,.... Which otherwise he would not, by conniving at her loose way of living, and not reproving her for it, and bringing her either to repentance or punishment; and retaining and encouraging jealousy in his mind, without declaring it, and his reasons for it: the sense of the passage seems to be, that when a man had any ground for his suspicion and jealousy, and he proceeded according as this law directs, whether his wife was guilty or not guilty, no sin was chargeable on him, or blame to be laid to him, or punishment inflicted on him:

and the woman shall bear her iniquity; the punishment of it, through the effects of the bitter waters upon her, if guilty; nor was her husband chargeable with her death, she justly brought it on herself: or if not guilty, yet as she had by some unbecoming behaviour raised such a suspicion in him, nor would she be reclaimed, though warned to the contrary, she for it justly bore the infamy of such a process; which was such, as Maimonides says ^p, that innocent women would give all that they had to escape it, and reckoned death itself more agreeable than that, as to be served as such a woman was; See Gill on Num 5:18.

Commentary -- Verse Notes / Footnotes

NET Notes: Num 5:29

¹ tn Heb “law of jealousies.”

NET Notes: Num 5:31

¹ sn The text does not say what the consequences are. Presumably the punishment would come from God, and not from those administering the test.

² tn The word “iniquity” can also mean the guilt for the iniquity as well as the punishment of consequences for the iniquity. These categories of meanings grew up through figurative usage (metonymies). Here the idea is that if she is guilty then she must “bear the consequences.”

Geneva Bible: Num 5:31

Then shall the man be ^{( o )} guiltless from iniquity, and this woman shall bear her iniquity.

^{( o )} The man might accuse his wife on suspicion and not be reproved.

Commentary -- Verse Range Notes

TSK Synopsis: Num 5:1-31

1 The unclean are removed out of camp.

5 Restitution is to be made in trespass.

11 The trial of jealousy.

MHCC: Num 5:11-31

This law would make the women of Israel watch against giving cause for suspicion. On the other hand, it would hinder the cruel treatment such suspicions might occasion. It would also hinder the guilty from escaping, and the innocent from coming under just suspicion. When no proof could be brought, the wife was called on to make this solemn appeal to a heart-searching God. No woman, if she were guilty, could say " Amen" to the adjuration, and drink the water after it, unless she disbelieved the truth of God, or defied his justice. The water is called the bitter water, because it caused the curse. Thus sin is called an evil and a bitter thing. Let all that meddle with forbidden pleasures, know that they will be bitterness in the latter end. From the whole learn, 1. Secret sins are known to God, and sometimes are strangely brought to light in this life; and that there is a day coming when God will, by Christ, judge the secrets of men according to the gospel, Rom 2:16. 2. In particular, whoremongers and adulterers God will surely judge. Though we have not now the waters of jealousy, yet we have God's word, which ought to be as great a terror. Sensual lusts will end in bitterness. 3. God will manifest the innocency of the innocent. The same providence is for good to some, and for hurt to others. And it will answer the purposes which God intends.

Matthew Henry: Num 5:11-31

We have here the law concerning the solemn trial of a wife whose husband was jealous of her. Observe,

I. What was the case supposed: That a man had some reason to suspect his wife to have committed adultery, Num 5:12-14. Here, 1. The sin of adultery is justly represented as an exceedingly sinful sin; it is going aside from God and virtue, and the good way, Pro 2:17. It is committing a trespass against the husband, robbing him of his honour, alienating his right, introducing a spurious breed into his family to share with his children in his estate, and violating her covenant with him. It is being defiled; for nothing pollutes the mind and conscience more than this sin does. 2. It is supposed to be a sin which great care is taken by the sinners to conceal, which there is no witness of. The eye of the adulterer waits for the twilight, Job 24:15. And the adulteress takes her opportunity when the good man is not at home, Pro 7:19. It would not covet to be secret if it were not shameful; and the devil who draws sinners to this sin teaches them how to cover it. 3. The spirit of jealousy is supposed to come upon the husband, of which Solomon says, It is the rage of a man (Pro 6:34), and that it is cruel as the grave, Son 8:6. 4. "Yet"(say the Jewish writers) "he must make it appear that he has some just cause for the suspicion."The rule they give is, "If the husband have said unto his wife before witnesses, 'Be not thou in secret with such a man;' and, notwithstanding that admonition, it is afterwards proved that she was in secret with that man, though her father or her brother, then he may compel her to drink the bitter water."But the law here does not tie him to that particular method of proving the just cause of his suspicion; it might be otherwise proved. In case it could be proved that she had committed adultery, she was to be put to death (Lev 20:10); but, if it was uncertain, then this law took place. Hence, (1.) Let all wives be admonished not to give any the least occasion for the suspicion of their chastity; it is not enough that they abstain from the evil of uncleanness, but they must abstain from all appearance of it, from every thing that looks like it, or leads to it, or may give the least umbrage to jealousy; for how great a matter may a little fire kindle! (2.) Let all husbands be admonished not to entertain any causeless or unjust suspicions of their wives. If charity in general, much more conjugal affection, teaches to think no evil, 1Co 13:5. It is the happiness of the virtuous woman that the heart of her husband does safely trust in her, Pro 31:11.

II. What was the course prescribed in this case, that, if the suspected wife was innocent, she might not continue under the reproach and uneasiness of her husband's jealousy, and, if guilty, her sin might find her out, and others might hear, and fear, and take warning.

1. The process of the trial must be thus: - (1.) Her husband must bring her to the priest, with the witnesses that could prove the ground of his suspicion, and desire that she might be put upon her trial. The Jews say that the priest was first to endeavour to persuade her to confess the truth, saying to this purport, "Dear daughter, perhaps thou wast overtaken by drinking wine, or wast carried away by the heat of youth or the examples of bad neighbours; come, confess the truth, for the sake of his great name which is described in the most sacred ceremony, and do not let it be blotted out with the bitter water."If she confessed, saying, "I am defiled,"she was not put to death, but was divorced and lost her dowry; if she said, "I am pure,"then they proceeded. (2.) He must bring a coarse offering of barley-meal, without oil or frankincense, agreeably to the present afflicted state of his family; for a great affliction it was either to have cause to be jealous or to be jealous without cause. It is an offering of memorial, to signify that what was to be done was intended as a religious appeal to the omniscience and justice of God. (3.) The priest was to prepare the water of jealousy, the holy water out of the laver at which the priests were to wash when they ministered; this must be brought in an earthen vessel, containing (they say) about a pint; and it must be an earthen vessel, because the coarser and plainer every thing was the more agreeable it was to the occasion. Dust must be put into the water, to signify the reproach she lay under, and the shame she ought to take to herself, putting her mouth in the dust; but dust from the floor of the tabernacle, to put an honour upon every thing that pertained to the place God had chosen to put his name there, and to keep up in the people a reverence for it; see Joh 8:6. (4.) The woman was to be set before the Lord, at the east gate of the temple-court (say the Jews), and her head was to be uncovered, in token of her sorrowful condition; and there she stood for a spectacle to the world, that other women might learn not to do after her lewdness, Eze 23:48. Only the Jews say, "Her own servants were not to be present, that she might not seem vile in their sight, who were to give honour to her; her husband also must be dismissed."(5.) The priest was to adjure her to tell the truth, and to denounce the curse of God against her if she were guilty, and to declare what would be the effect of her drinking the water of jealousy, Num 5:19-22. He must assure her that, if she were innocent, the water would do her no harm, Num 5:19. None need fear the curse of the law if they have not broken the commands of the law. But, if she were guilty, this water would be poison to her, it would make her belly to swell and her thigh to rot, and she should be a curse or abomination among her people, Num 5:21, Num 5:22. To this she must say, Amen, as Israel must do to the curses pronounced on mount Ebal, Deu 27:15-26. Some think the Amen, being doubled, respects both parts of the adjuration, both that which freed her if innocent and that which condemned her if guilty. No woman, if she were guilty, could say Amen to this adjuration, and drink the water upon it, unless she disbelieved the truth of God or defied his justice, and had come to such a pitch of impudence and hard-heartedness in sin as to challenge God Almighty to do his worst, and choose rather to venture upon his curse than to give him glory by making confession; thus has whoredom taken away the heart. (6.) The priest was to write this curse in a scrip or scroll o parchment, verbatim - word for word, as he had expressed it, and then to wipe or scrape out what he had written into the water (Num 5:23), to signify that it was that curse which impregnated the water, and gave it its strength to effect what was intended. It signified that, if she were innocent, the curse should be blotted out and never appear against her, as it is written, Isa 43:25, I am he that blotteth out thy transgression, and Psa 51:9, Blot out my iniquities; but that, if she were guilty, the curse, as it was written, being infused into the water, would enter into her bowels with the water, even like oil into her bones (Psa 109:18), as we read of a curse entering into a house, Zec 5:4. (7.) The woman must then drink the water (Num 5:24); it is called the bitter water, some think because they put wormwood in it to make it bitter, or rather because it caused the curse. Thus sin is called an evil thing and a bitter for the same reason, because it causeth the curse, Jer 2:19. If she had been guilty (and otherwise it did not cause the curse), she was made to know that though her stolen waters had been sweet, and her bread eaten in secret pleasant, yet the end was bitter as wormwood, Pro 9:17, and Pro 5:4. Let all that meddle with forbidden pleasures know that they will be bitterness in the latter end. The Jews say that if, upon denouncing the curse, the woman was so terrified that she durst not drink the water, but confessed she was defiled, the priest flung down the water, and cast her offering among the ashes, and she was divorced without dowry: if she confessed not, and yet would not drink, they forced her to it; and, if she was ready to throw it up again, they hastened her away, that she might not pollute the holy place. (8.) Before she drank the water, the jealousy-offering was waved and offered upon the altar (Num 5:25, Num 5:26); a handful of it was burnt for a memorial, and the remainder of it eaten by the priest, unless the husband was a priest, and then it was scattered among the ashes. This offering in the midst of the transaction signified that the whole was an appeal to God, as a God that knows all things, and from whom no secret is hid. (9.) All things being thus performed according to the law, they were to wait the issue. The water, with a little dust put into it, and the scrapings of a written parchment, had no natural tendency at all to do either good or hurt; but if God was thus appealed to in the way of an instituted ordinance, though otherwise the innocent might have continued under suspicion and the guilty undiscovered, yet God would so far own his own institution as that in a little time, by the miraculous operation of Providence, the innocency of the innocent should be cleared, and the sin of the guilty should find them out. [1.] If the suspected woman was really guilty, the water she drank would be poison to her (Num 5:27), her belly would swell and her thigh rot by a vile disease for vile deserts, and she would mourn at the last when her flesh and body were consumed, Pro 5:11. Bishop Patrick says, from some of the Jewish writers, that the effect of these waters appeared immediately, she grew pale, and her eyes ready to start out of her head. Dr. Lightfoot says that sometimes it appeared not for two or three years, but she bore no children, was sickly, languished, and rotted at last; it is probable that some indications appeared immediately. The rabbin say that the adulterer also died in the same day and hour that the adulteress did, and in the same manner too, that he belly swelled, and his secret parts rotted: a disease perhaps not much unlike that which in these latter ages the avenging hand of a righteous God has made the scourge of uncleanness, and with which whores and whoremongers infect, and plague, and ruin one another, since they escape punishment from men. The Jewish doctors add that the waters had this effect upon the adulteress only in case the husband had never offended in the same kind; but that, if he had at any time defiled the marriage-bed, God did not thus right him against his injurious wife; and that therefore in the latter and degenerate ages of the Jewish church, when uncleanness did abound, this way of trial was generally disused and laid aside; men, knowing their own crimes, were content not to know their wives' crimes. And to this perhaps may refer the threatening (Hos 4:14), I will not punish your spouses when they commit adultery, for you yourselves are separated with whores. [2.] If she were innocent, the water she drank would be physic to her: She shall be free, and shall conceive seed, Num 5:28. The Jewish writers magnify the good effects of this water to the innocent woman, that, to recompense her for the wrong done to her by the suspicion, she should, after the drinking of these waters, be stronger and look better than ever; if she was sickly, she should become healthful, should bear a man-child, and have easy labour.

2. From the whole we may learn, (1.) That secret sins are known to God, and sometimes are strangely brought to light in this life; however, there is a day coming when God will, by Jesus Christ, as here by the priest, judge the secrets of men according to the gospel, Rom 2:16. (2.) That, in particular, Whoremongers and adulterers God will judge. The violation of conjugal faith and chastity is highly provoking to the God of heaven, and sooner or later it will be reckoned for. Though we have not now the waters of jealousy to be a sensible terror to the unclean, yet we have a word from God which ought to be as great a terror, that if any man defile the temple of God, him shall God destroy, 1Co 3:17. (3.) That God will find out some way or other to clear the innocency of the innocent, and to bring forth their righteousness as the light. (4.) That to the pure all things are pure, but to the defiled nothing is so, Tit 1:15. The same word is to some a savour of life unto life, to others a savour of death unto death, like those waters of jealousy, according as they receive it; the same providence is for good to some and for hurt to others, Jer 24:5, Jer 24:8, Jer 24:9. And, whatsoever it is intended for, it shall not return void.

Keil-Delitzsch: Num 5:11-31

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

Num 5:12-15

If a man's wife went aside, and was guilty of unfaithfulness towards him (Num 5:13 is an explanatory clause), through a (another) man having lain with her with emissio seminis , and it was hidden from the eyes of her husband, on account of her having defiled herself secretly, and there being no witness against her, and her not having been taken (in the act); but if, for all that, a spirit of jealousy came upon him, and he was jealous of his wife, and she was defiled,...or she was not defiled: the man was to take his wife to the priest, and bring as her sacrificial gift, on her account, the tenth of an ephah of barley meal, without putting oil or incense, "for it is a meat-offering of jealousy, a meat-offering of memory, to bring iniquity to remembrance." As the woman's crime, of which her husband accused her, was naturally denied by herself, and was neither to be supported by witnesses nor proved by her being taken in the very act, the only way left to determine whether there was any foundation or not for the spirit of jealousy excited in her husband, and to prevent an unrighteous severance of the divinely appointed marriage, was to let the thing be decided by the verdict of God Himself. To this end the man was to bring his wife to the priest with a sacrificial gift, which is expressly called קרבּנהּ , her offering, brought עליה "on her account,"that is to say, with a meat-offering, the symbol of the fruit of her walk and conduct before God. Being the sacrificial gift of a wife who had gone aside and was suspected of adultery, this meat-offering could not possess the character of the ordinary meat-offerings, which shadowed forth the fruit of the sanctification of life in good works; could not consist, that is to say, of fine wheaten flour, but only of barley meal. Barley was worth only half as much as wheat (2Ki 7:1, 2Ki 7:16, 2Ki 7:18), so that only the poorer classes, or the people generally in times of great distress, used barley meal as their daily food (Jdg 7:13; 2Ki 4:42; Eze 4:12; Joh 6:9, Joh 6:13), whilst those who were better off used it for fodder (1Ki 5:8). Barley meal was prescribed for this sacrifice, neither as a sign that the adulteress had conducted herself like an irrational animal ( Philo, Jonathan, Talm., the Rabb., etc.), nor "because the persons presenting the offering were invoking the punishment of a crime, and not the favour of God"( Cler., Ros .): for the guilt of a woman was not yet established; nor even, taking a milder view of the matter, to indicate that the offerer might be innocent, and in that case no offering at all was required Knobel ), but to represent the questionable repute in which the woman stood, or the ambiguous, suspicious character of her conduct. Because such conduct as hers did not proceed from the Spirit of God, and was not carried out in prayer: oil and incense, the symbols of the Spirit of God and prayer, were not to be added to her offering. It was an offering of jealousy ( קנאת , an intensive plural), and the object was to bring the ground of that jealousy to light; and in this respect it is called the" meat-offering of remembrance, "sc., of the woman, before Jehovah (cf. Num 10:10; Num 31:54; Exo 28:12, Exo 28:29; Exo 30:16; Lev 23:24), namely, " the remembrance of iniquity, "bringing her crime to remembrance before the Lord, that it might be judged by Him.

Num 5:16-18

The priest was to bring her near to the altar at which he stood, and place her before Jehovah, who had declared Himself to be present at the altar, and then to take holy water, probably water out of the basin before the sanctuary, which served for holy purposes (Exo 30:18), in an earthen vessel, and put dust in it from the floor of the dwelling. He was then to loosen the hair of the woman who was standing before Jehovah, and place the jealousy-offering in her hands, and holding the water in his own hand, to pronounce a solemn oath of purification before her, which she had to appropriate to herself by a confirmatory Amen, Amen. The water, which the priest had prepared for the woman to drink, was taken from the sanctuary, and the dust to be put into it from the floor of the dwelling, to impregnate this drink with the power of the Holy Spirit that dwelt in the sanctuary. The dust was strewed upon the water, not to indicate that man was formed from dust and must return to dust again, but as an allusion to the fact, that dust was eaten by the serpent (Gen 3:14) as the curse of sin, and therefore as the symbol of a state deserving a curse, a state of the deepest humiliation and disgrace (Mic 7:17; Isa 49:23; Psa 72:9). On the very same ground, an earthen vessel was chosen; that is to say, one quite worthless in comparison with the copper one. The loosening of the hair of the head (see Lev 13:45), in other cases a sign of mourning, is to be regarded here as a removal or loosening of the female head-dress, and a symbol of the loss of the proper ornament of female morality and conjugal fidelity. During the administration of the oath, the offering was placed in her hands, that she might bring the fruit of her own conduct before God, and give it up to His holy judgment. The priest, as the representative of God, held the vessel in his hand, with the water in it, which was called the" water of bitterness, the curse-bringing, "inasmuch as, if the crime imputed to her was well-founded, it would bring upon the woman bitter suffering as the curse of God.

Num 5:19-22

The oath which the priest required her to take is called, in Num 5:21, האלה שׁבעת , " oath of cursing "(see Gen 26:28); but it first of all presupposes the possibility of the woman being innocent, and contains the assurance, that in that case the curse-water would do her no harm. " If no (other) man has lain with thee, and thou hast not gone aside to union ( טמאה , accus. of more precise definition, as in Lev 15:2, Lev 15:18), under thy husband, "i.e., as a wife subject to thy husband (Eze 23:5; Hos 4:12), " then remain free from the water of bitterness, this curse-bringing, "i.e., from the effects of this curse-water. The imperative is a sign of certain assurance (see Gen 12:2; Gen 20:7; cf. Ges. §130, 1). " But if thou hast gone aside under thy husband, if thou hast defiled thyself, and a man has given thee his seed beside thy husband, "...(the priest shall proceed to say; this is the meaning of the repetition of לאשּׁה ... והשׁבּיע , Num 5:21), "Jehovah shall make thee a curse and an oath among thy people, by making thy hip to fall and thy belly to swell; and this curse-bringing water shall come into thy bowels, to make the belly to vanish and the hip to fall." To this oath that was spoken before her the woman was to reply, " true, true, "or " truly, truly, "and thus confirm it as taken by herself (cf. Deu 27:15.; Neh 5:13). It cannot be determined with any certainty what was the nature of the disease threatened in this curse. Michaelis supposes it to be dropsy of the ovary ( hydrops ovarii ), in which a tumour is formed in the place of the ovarium , which may even swell so as to contain 100 lbs. of fluid, and with which the patient becomes dreadfully emaciated. Josephus says it is ordinary dropsy ( hydrops ascites: Ant . iii. 11, 6). At any rate, the idea of the curse is this: Δι ̓ ὧν γὰρ ἡ ἁμαρτία , διὰ τούτων ἡ τιμωρία ("the punishment shall come from the same source as the sin," Theodoret ). The punishment was to answer exactly to the crime, and to fall upon those bodily organs which had been the instruments of the woman's sin, viz., the organs of child-bearing.

Num 5:23-27

After the woman's Amen , the priest was to write " these curses, "those contained in the oath, in a book-roll, and wash them in the bitter water, i.e., wash the writing in the vessel with water, so that the words of the curse should pass into the water, and be imparted to it; a symbolical act, to set forth the truth, that God imparted to the water the power to act injuriously upon a guilty body, though it would do no harm to an innocent one. The remark in Num 5:24, the priest was to give her this water to drink is anticipatory; for according to Num 5:26 this did not take place till after the presentation of the sacrifice and the burning of the memorial of it upon the altar. The woman's offering, however, was not presented to God till after the oath of purification, because it was by the oath that she first of all purified herself from the suspicion of adultery, so that the fruit of her conduct could be given up to the fire of the holiness of God. As a known adulteress, she could not have offered a meat-offering at all. But as the suspicion which rested upon her was not entirely removed by her oath, since she might have taken a false oath, the priest was to give her the curse-water to drink after the offering, that her guilt or innocence might be brought to light in the effects produced by the drink. This is given in Num 5:27 as the design of the course prescribed: " When he hath made her to drink the water, then it shall come to pass, that if she be defiled, and have done trespass against her husband, the water that causeth the curse shall come (enter) into her as bitterness (i.e., producing bitter sufferings), namely, her belly shall swell and her hip vanish: and so the woman shall become a curse in the midst of her people ."

Num 5:28

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

Num 5:29-31

Num 5:29-31 bring the law of jealousy to a formal close, with the additional remark, that the man who adopted this course with a wife suspected of adultery was free from sin, but the woman would bear her guilt (see Lev 5:1), i.e., in case she were guilty, would bear the punishment threatened by God. Nothing is said about what was to be done in case the woman refused to take the oath prescribed, because that would amount to a confession of her guilt, when she would have to be put to death as an adulteress, according to the law in Lev 20:10; and not she alone, but the adulterer also. In the law just mentioned the man is placed on an equality with the woman with reference to the sin of adultery; and thus the apparent partiality, that a man could sue his wife for adultery, but not the wife her husband, is removed. But the law before us applied to the woman only, because the man was at liberty to marry more than one wife, or to take concubines to his own wife; so that he only violated the marriage tie, and was guilty of adultery, when he formed an illicit connection with another man's wife. In that case, the man whose marriage had been violated could proceed against his adulterous wife, and in most instances convict the adulterer also, in order that he might receive his punishment too. For a really guilty wife would not have made up her mind so easily to take the required oath of purification, as the curse of God under which she came was no easier to bear than the punishment of death. For this law prescribed no ordeal whose effects were uncertain, like the ordeals of other nations, but a judgment of God, from which the guilty could not escape, because it had been appointed by the living God.

Constable: Num 1:1--10:36

A. Preparations for entering the Promised Land from the south chs. 1-10

The first 10 chapters in Numbers describe Israel's preparation for entering the land.

". . . just as the way from Goshen to Sinai was a preparation of the chosen people for their reception into the covenant with God, so the way from Sinai to Canaan was also a preparation for the possession of the promised land."⁹

"The two censuses (chs. 1-4, 26) are key to understanding the structure of the book. The first census (chs. 1-4) concerns the first generation of the Exodus community; the second census (ch. 26) focuses on the experiences of the second generation, the people for whom this book is primarily directed. The first generation of the redeemed were prepared for triumph but ended in disaster. The second generation has an opportunity for greatness--if only they will learn from the failures of their fathers and mothers the absolute necessity for robust faithfulness to the Lord despite all obstacles."¹⁰

Constable: Num 5:1--9:23

2. Commands and rituals to observe in preparation for entering the land chs. 5-9

God gave the following laws to maintain holiness in the nation so He could continue to dwell among His people and bless them. This was particularly important since Israel would soon depart from Sinai to enter the Promised Land in which she would need to be holy to be victorious over her enemies. These were requirements for the whole nation, not just the priests.

"Between covenant promise and covenant possession lay a process of rigorous journey through hostile opposition of terrain and terror. Israel had to understand that occupation of the land could be achieved only through much travail, for Canaan, like creation itself, was under alien dominion and it had to be wrested away by force, by the strong arm of Yahweh, who would fight on behalf of His people."³⁴

Constable: Num 5:11-31

The law of jealousy 5:11-31

The point of this section is the importance of maintaining purity in the marriage relationship to preserve God's blessing on Israel.

In verses 11-15 the writer explained the first steps an Israelite man who suspected his wife of unfaithfulness should take. The offering (v. 15) was a special meal offering. Usually the grain used in the meal offering was wheat ground into fine flour, but in this instance the man presented barley flour. Barley cost only half as much as wheat (2 Kings 7:1, 16, 18). It was the food of the poor and the cattle in the ancient Near East (Judg. 7:13; 1 Kings 5:8; 2 Kings 4:42; Ezek. 4:12).

It may have represented, ". . . the questionable repute in which the woman stood, or the ambiguous, suspicious character of her conduct."³⁹

The meal offering was, of course, representative of the works that an individual presented to God. In this case it was also an offering that the man gave in "jealousy" as a "memorial" or remembrance. He presented it to bring his wife's crime to the Lord's remembrance that He might judge it.

The "earthenware vessel" into which the priest poured the water from the laver was of little value relative to the other utensils of the sanctuary. It was, therefore, a fit receptacle for this test. The "dust" he added to the water probably symbolized the curse of sin. It is what causes humans grief as we toil for a living because of sin's curse.

"Since this dust has been in God's presence, it is holy. As has been said before, one who is unclean is in great danger in the presence of the holy."⁴⁰

The release of the woman's hair, normally bound up, represented the temporary loss of her glory (i.e., her good reputation). Other possibilities are that it symbolized her openness,⁴¹ mourning,⁴² or uncleanness.⁴³

M. R. DeHaan offered a natural as opposed to a supernatural explanation of what happened in this trial by ordeal that has captured the imagination of some evangelicals. He believed that the treated water that the woman drank reacted to the chemical composition of the juices in her digestive system that had become abnormal because of her guilt. Science has established that certain emotions and nervous disturbances change the chemical composition of our body secretions. While this might be what produced the symptoms described in the text, DeHaan erred in interpreting the "dust" (v. 17) which the priest mixed with the water as a "bitter herb."

"We believe that, if we knew the identity of the bitter herb which Moses used, the same test would work today."⁴⁴

The physical symptoms of God's judgment on the woman if she was guilty (vv. 23, 27) point to a special affliction rather than one of the natural diseases that overtook the Israelites. Josephus said it was ordinary dropsy.⁴⁵ This seems unlikely in view of how Moses described her condition. Merrill believed her sense of guilt produced a psychosomatic reaction.⁴⁶ It is interesting, whatever the cause, that the punishment fell on the organs that had been the instruments of the woman's sin.

"The thigh is often used as a euphemism for the sexual organs."⁴⁷

"The most probable explanation for the phrase [and make your abdomen swell and your thigh waste away'] . . . is that the woman suffers a collapse of the sexual organs known as a prolapsed uterus. In this condition, which may occur after multiple pregnancies, the pelvis floor (weakened by the pregnancies) collapses, and the uterus literally falls down. It may lodge in the vagina, or it may actually fall out of the body through the vagina. If it does so, it becomes edematous and swells up like a balloon. Conception becomes impossible, and the woman's procreative life has effectively ended . . ."⁴⁸

Verses 23-28 explain additional acts that were to take place before the woman drank the water. They are not in chronological sequence with verses 16-22. Drinking the water was the last step in the ritual, which took place in the tabernacle courtyard.

"The ritual trial of the Sotah [suspected adulteress] ended with the drinking of the potion. Nothing further was done, and we can assume that the woman went home to await the results at some future time."⁴⁹

The man that Moses referred to in verse 31 is the man who accused his wife of unfaithfulness. He incurred no guilt before God for being jealous of his wife's fidelity.

This case raises some questions. Why was only the woman punished if she had been unfaithful? The answer seems to be that her male companion in sin was unknown. If she had been unfaithful and the adulterer was identifiable, both partners should have suffered death by stoning (Lev. 20:10).

What about a wife who suspected that her husband had been unfaithful to her? Did she not have the same recourse as the husband in this case? Evidently she did not. The Israelites were to observe God's revealed line of authority consistently. A man was responsible to God, but a woman was responsible to her father or her husband. A wife was responsible to her husband in a sense that the husband was not responsible to his wife. This does not mean that marital infidelity was a worse sin for a wife than it was for a husband. It simply explains how God wanted the Israelites to handle infidelity in the case of a wife. Perhaps God Himself judged a husband who was unfaithful to his wife (cf. Heb. 13:4).

Note that this procedure protected the wife of an extremely jealous husband who might continually accuse her. He would suffer embarrassment by her innocence since this was a public ceremony.

"This legislation forbids human punishment of a woman on the basis of suspicion alone, and, in fact, protects her from what could be a death sentence at the hands of the community."⁵⁰

"Marital deceit is a matter of such seriousness that the truth must be discovered. It is harmful to the sanctity of the community at large, and destructive of one of the bases of community life."⁵¹

". . . this particular case law is included here because it gives another illustration of God's personal involvement in the restitution for the sin of the nation. Within God's covenant with Israel, there could be no hidden sin among God's people nor any hidden suspicion of sin.

"The law of jealousy shows that through the role of the priest, God was actively at work in the nation and that no sin of any sort could be tolerated among God's holy people."⁵²

Guzik: Num 5:1-31

Numbers 5 - Separating from Sin

A. Separation from the effects of sin.

1. (1-2) The command to put out of the camp those who were unclean.

And the LORD spoke to Moses, saying: "Command the children of Israel that they put out of the camp every leper, everyone who has a discharge, and whoever becomes defiled by a corpse."

a. Command the children of Israel that they put out of the camp: As Israel prepared to march to the Promised Land, the leper (Leviticus 13), those with a discharge (Leviticus 15), and any priest who would touch a dead body, except that of a close relative (Leviticus 21:1) were commanded to be put out of the camp of Israel until ceremonially clean. Now God said that Israel must do what He had previously commanded.

i. "Probably this ordinance gave the first idea of a hospital, where all those who are afflicted with contagious disorders are put into particular wards, under medical treatment." (Clarke)

b. Put out of the camp: It wasn't that any of these things made a person, or proved them to be a notorious sinner (though that was often wrongly assumed); but leprosy, unclean discharges, and dead bodies were reminders of the effects of sin - from which Israel must separate as they prepare to march on the Promised Land.

i. Might this also be an analogy of our sin nature inherited from Adam? Even as a leper does not choose leprosy, but inherits it, so our sin nature is not chosen - but inherited from Adam. Of course, we choose individual acts of sin, but our sin nature was inherited.

ii. Clearly, at this stage in Israel's progression to the Promised Land, they have been organized and ordered by God - now, they will be challenged to purity. God is looking to make Israel a Promised Land people - and that means a purified people.

2. (3-4) The breadth and reason of the command.

"You shall put out both male and female; you shall put them outside the camp, that they may not defile their camps in the midst of which I dwell." And the children of Israel did so, and put them outside the camp; as the LORD spoke to Moses, so the children of Israel did.

a. You shall put out both male and female: You shall put out both male and female: Neither male nor female was to be excluded from this command. Neither perceived sympathy nor perceived superiority could spare someone the consequences of sin's ravages.

b. In the midst of which I dwell: The great reason for this commanded separation is because God lives in the camp of Israel, so sin and its effects must be separated from.

i. God is concerned with far more than our individual acts of sin; He demands our sin nature be addressed. Only in Jesus can our sin nature - the old man - be crucified, and the nature of Jesus - the new man - be granted to us as new creations. God can't abide with the old man, but can with the new man.

ii. You can't be a Promised Land person if the ravages of sin are openly evident in your life. Certainly, Promised Land people are not sinlessly perfect; but they are not openly, obviously, walking in the sin nature - well illustrated by those set outside the camp.

B. Separation from the damage our sin does.

1. (5-7) The command to make restitution.

Then the LORD spoke to Moses, saying, "Speak to the children of Israel: 'When a man or woman commits any sin that men commit in unfaithfulness against the LORD, and that person is guilty, then he shall confess the sin which he has committed. He shall make restitution for his trespass in full, plus one-fifth of it, and give it to the one he has wronged.'"

a. He shall make restitution for his trespass in full: Because restitution is commanded, this is obviously a case of sinning against another person (such as with theft, Leviticus 5:14-6:7) or withholding from God that which belongs to Him.

b. Plus one-fifth of it: The restitution previously commanded must now be made - repaying that which was taken or withheld, and adding a 20% penalty.

2. (8) How to make restitution to the dead.

But if the man has no relative to whom restitution may be made for the wrong, the restitution for the wrong must go to the LORD for the priest, in addition to the ram of the atonement with which atonement is made for him.

a. The restitution for the wrong must go to the LORD: If there is not a surviving kinsman to make restitution to, then the restitution payment must go to the LORD. The payment of restitution was just as important - if not more important - for the guilty one paying it as it was for the victim receiving it.

3. (9-10) The right of every Israelite to partake of the offerings he brought.

Every offering of all the holy things of the children of Israel, which they bring to the priest, shall be his. And every man's holy things shall be his; whatever any man gives the priest shall be his.

a. Every offering of all the holy things of the children of Israel, which they bring to the priest, shall be his: Certain offerings (such as the peace offering of Leviticus 3) were intended to have a portion of the offering (like a good piece of meat) returned, so they and their family could have a fellowship meal with the LORD.

b. And every man's holy things shall be his: This command reminds of the absolute right the offerer had to share in such offerings; it is essentially a way to preserve an open door for fellowship with the LORD - the priest couldn't take the offerer's portion away, a king couldn't tax it away.

i. In the midst of this chapter on the separation from sin, God therefore reminds Israel of the purpose of this separation - fellowship with God. This, ultimately, is the reason to pursue purity: Blessed are the pure in heart, for they shall see God (Matthew 5:8).

C. Separation from the suspicion of sin.

1. (11-14) The situation.

And the LORD spoke to Moses, saying, "Speak to the children of Israel, and say to them: 'If any man's wife goes astray and behaves unfaithfully toward him, and a man lies with her carnally, and it is hidden from the eyes of her husband, and it is concealed that she has defiled herself, and there was no witness against her, nor was she caught; if the spirit of jealousy comes upon him and he becomes jealous of his wife, who has defiled herself; or if the spirit of jealousy comes upon him and he becomes jealous of his wife, although she has not defiled herself;'"

a. If any man's wife goes astray and behaves unfaithfully toward him: This unique passage deals with the problem of a spirit of jealousy in a marriage. Obviously, unfounded jealousy has spoiled many a marriage, and justified jealousy has forced attention on confronting the sin of adultery - in this passage, God gives Israel a way to deal with it.

i. "This law was given partly to deter wives from adulterous practices, and partly to secure wives against the rage of their hard-hearted husbands, who otherwise might upon mere suspicions destroy them, or at least put them away." (Poole)

b. If the spirit of jealousy comes upon him and he becomes jealous of his wife: Sometimes jealousy in a marriage is revealed to be completely justified; other times it is found to be completely false. Either way, God knows it means something must be dealt with, and here He gives Israel a way to do it.

i. Often, our spouse knows if we have given our bodies - or our hearts - to another, no matter how desperately one tries to hide it. Other times, jealousy is just plain off the wall - and also needs to be resolved.

2. (15) The offering to resolve a spirit of jealousy.

Then the man shall bring his wife to the priest. He shall bring the offering required for her, one-tenth of an EPHAH of barley meal; he shall pour no oil on it and put no frankincense on it, because it is a grain offering of jealousy, an offering for remembering, for bringing iniquity to remembrance.

a. Then the man shall bring his wife to the priest: The jealous husband was to bring a certain amount of barley meal, and this grain only - not accompanied by any oil or frankincense, things which customarily accompanied a grain offering.

b. He shall pour no oil on it and put no frankincense on it: There was to be no oil or frankincense - which were thought to sweeten a typical grain offering; but there is nothing sweet about this offering for remembrance, for bringing iniquity to remembrance. This offering was truly bitter, not sweet, because either a wife would be found guilty of adultery, or a husband found guilty of unfounded suspicion.

c. For bringing iniquity to remembrance: It wasn't that perhaps the wife committed adultery and didn't "remember" it; it was not for the husband or wife to remember, but for the whole community to remember the terrible nature of either adultery or false accusation.

3. (16-28) The ceremony of the offering.

And the priest shall bring her near, and set her before the LORD. The priest shall take holy water in an earthen vessel, and take some of the dust that is on the floor of the tabernacle and put it into the water. Then the priest shall stand the woman before the LORD, uncover the woman's head, and put the offering for remembering in her hands, which is the grain offering of jealousy. And the priest shall have in his hand the bitter water that brings a curse. And the priest shall put her under oath, and say to the woman, "If no man has lain with you, and if you have not gone astray to uncleanness while under your husband's authority, be free from this bitter water that brings a curse. But if you have gone astray while under your husband's authority, and if you have defiled yourself and some man other than your husband has lain with you"; then the priest shall put the woman under the oath of the curse, and he shall say to the woman; "the LORD make you a curse and an oath among your people, when the LORD makes your thigh rot and your belly swell; and may this water that causes the curse go into your stomach, and make your belly swell and your thigh rot." Then the woman shall say, "Amen, so be it." Then the priest shall write these curses in a book, and he shall scrape them off into the bitter water. And he shall make the woman drink the bitter water that brings a curse, and the water that brings the curse shall enter her to become bitter. Then the priest shall take the grain offering of jealousy from the woman's hand, shall wave the offering before the LORD, and bring it to the altar; and the priest shall take a handful of the offering, as its memorial portion, burn it on the altar, and afterward make the woman drink the water. When he has made her drink the water, then it shall be, if she has defiled herself and behaved unfaithfully toward her husband, that the water that brings a curse will enter her and become bitter, and her belly will swell, her thigh will rot, and the woman will become a curse among her people. But if the woman has not defiled herself, and is clean, then she shall be free and may conceive children.

a. Take some of the dust that is on the floor of the tabernacle and put it into the water: This water was made bitter from the dust that is on the floor of the tabernacle; and while the woman held the grain offering in her hand (a reminder of fellowship with God), the priest pronounced an oath over the woman.

i. The idea of uncover the woman's head (Numbers 5:18) is to unbind and "let down" her hair. "The unbinding of the woman's hair is another hint that she was viewed as unclean. 'Lepers' had to let their hair hang loose as a mark of their uncleanness." (Wenham)

b. The priest shall put her under oath, and say to the woman: In his oath, the priest would solemnly announce that if the woman was innocent of the accusation of adultery, she would be free from this bitter water that brings a curse. But if she was in fact guilty of adultery, she would be under the curse.

i. The effect of the curse was to make your thigh (here, a euphemism for the womb) rot and your belly swell.

ii. After the priest said this, the woman had to respond: Amen, so be it. She had to agree that if she was innocent, she deserved vindication; but if guilty, she deserved the punishment of the curse. She was not allowed the option of saying, "well, I did it, but it was really all right in the sight of God. After all, we loved each other, or my husband neglected me, and . . ." At the very least, this ceremony demanded that sin be called sin - guilty or innocent!

c. The priest shall write these curses in a book, and he shall scrape them off into the bitter water: After reading the curse, and hearing the woman's agreement, the priest would write the oath on a scroll - and scrape the dried ink into the bitter water.

i. Think of what made the water bitter: Both the "holy dust" of the tabernacle floor, and the oath containing a curse to the sinner! The combination of seeing the holiness of God and the penalty to sinners truly is bitter!

d. The priest shall take the grain offering: After this, the priest would offer the grain offering - a picture of fellowship and thanks to God - and the accused woman would drink the bitter water.

e. The water that brings a curse will enter her and become bitter: Over time, the judgment of God would be evident. If she came down with some time of internal disease, especially affecting her womb, it would be seen as evidence of her guilt. But if she was free from disease, and continued to bear children, it would be seen as vindication.

i. "The rabbins say that the trial by the waters of jealousy was omitted after the Babylonish captivity, because adulteries were so frequent amongst them, that they were afraid of having the name of the Lord profaned by being so frequently appealed to!" (Clarke)

ii. The rabbis also said that if the woman was guilty, the same disease would come upon the man she had committed adultery with; but they also said that even if the wife had been guilty, but her husband had been guilty of adultery also, the bitter water would have no effect on her.

f. Observations.

i. Clearly, this is evidence that God does not want couples to live in an on-going state of jealousy. He gave a mechanism how jealous feelings could either be proved or disproved, and the relationship would deal with the truth from there.

ii. This ceremony only dealt with an adulterous wife and not a husband because for the most part, the Mosaic Law was "case law" - not meant to anticipate every potential situation, but to give examples that will set precedence for other cases. It is likely that the same ceremony would be practiced if a wife became suspicious of a husband's adultery.

iii. This ceremony could only work with some supernatural element involved; drinking dusty and inky water won't cause internal disease in only those guilty of adultery. But as well, the mental stress of knowing you are guilty and openly proclaiming the rightness of judgment upon the guilty, cannot be good for one's health!

iv. At the very least, this ceremony made the entire community (it was seemingly a public ceremony) aware of the evil of adultery - and the seriousness of trying to hide your sin. The existence of the ceremony itself was an incentive to faithfulness in marriage, and therefore good for the entire nation.

v. Surely, both the holiness of God and the perfection of His word testifies against us. We should be forced to drink a bitter cup that would destroy us. But Jesus drank it for us.

4. (29-31) Conclusion.

This is the law of jealousy, when a wife, while under her husband's authority, goes astray and defiles herself, or when the spirit of jealousy comes upon a man, and he becomes jealous of his wife; then he shall stand the woman before the LORD, and the priest shall execute all this law upon her. Then the man shall be free from iniquity, but that woman shall bear her guilt.

a. This was a ceremony meant to resolve things. Either the husband was right or wrong in his jealousy; if his wife had in fact been adulterous, he was right - if not, wrong. The issue had to be settled, and this was God's way to do it.

b. The last two matters of purity - in regard to restitution and resolving jealousy - look to make Israel a pure, Promised Land people in their personal relationships. You can't be a Promised Land person if your relationships with others stink! You must make restitution and get things resolved.

© 2004 David Guzik - No distribution beyond personal use without permission

Introduction / Outline

JFB: Numbers (Book Introduction)

NUMBERS. This book is so called because it contains an account of the enumeration and arrangement of the Israelites. The early part of it, from the first through the tenth chapters, appears to be a supplement to Leviticus, being occupied with relating the appointment of the Levites to the sacred offices. The journal of the march through the wilderness is then given as far as Num 21:20; after which the early incidents of the invasion are narrated. One direct quotation only from this book (Num 16:5) is made in the New Testament (2Ti 2:19); but indirect references to it by the later sacred writers are very numerous.

JFB: Numbers (Outline)

• MOSES NUMBERING THE MEN OF WAR. (Num. 1:1-54)
• THE ORDER OF THE TRIBES IN THEIR TENTS. (Num. 2:1-34)
• THE LEVITES' SERVICE. (Num. 3:1-51)
• OF THE LEVITES' SERVICE. (Num. 4:1-49)
• THE UNCLEAN TO BE REMOVED OUT OF THE CAMP. (Num 5:1-4)
• RESTITUTION ENJOINED. (Num 5:5-10)
• THE TRIAL OF JEALOUSY. (Num. 5:11-31)
• THE LAW OF THE NAZARITE IN HIS SEPARATION. (Num. 6:1-22)
• THE FORM OF BLESSING THE PEOPLE. (Num 6:23-27)
• THE PRINCES' OFFERINGS. (Num. 7:1-89)
• HOW THE LAMPS ARE TO BE LIGHTED. (Num 8:1-4)
• THE CONSECRATION OF THE LEVITES. (Num. 8:5-22)
• THE PASSOVER ENJOINED. (Num 9:1-5)
• A SECOND PASSOVER ALLOWED. (Num 9:6-14)
• A CLOUD GUIDES THE ISRAELITES. (Num 9:15-23)
• THE USE OF THE SILVER TRUMPETS. (Num. 10:1-36)
• MANNA LOATHED. (Num. 11:1-35)
• MIRIAM'S AND AARON'S SEDITION. (Num 12:1-9)
• MIRIAM'S LEPROSY. (Num 12:10-16)
• THE NAMES OF THE MEN WHO WERE SENT TO SEARCH THE LAND. (Num. 13:1-33)
• THE PEOPLE MURMUR AT THE SPIES' REPORT. (Num. 14:1-45)
• THE LAW OF SUNDRY OFFERINGS. (Num. 15:1-41)
• THE REBELLION OF KORAH. (Num. 16:1-30)
• AARON'S ROD FLOURISHES. (Num 17:1-13)
• THE CHARGE OF THE PRIESTS AND LEVITES. (Num 18:1-7)
• THE PRIESTS' PORTION. (Num 18:8-20)
• THE LEVITES' PORTION. (Num 18:21-32)
• THE WATER OF SEPARATION. (Num. 19:1-22)
• THE DEATH OF MIRIAM. (Num. 20:1-29)
• ISRAEL ATTACKED BY THE CANAANITES. (Num. 21:1-35)
• BALAK'S FIRST MESSAGE FOR BALAAM REFUSED. (Num. 22:1-20)
• THE JOURNEY. (Num. 22:21-41)
• BALAK'S SACRIFICES. (Num. 23:1-30)
• BALAAM FORETELLS ISRAEL'S HAPPINESS. (Num. 24:1-25)
• THE ISRAELITES' WHOREDOM AND IDOLATRY WITH MOAB. (Num. 25:1-18)
• ISRAEL NUMBERED. (Num. 26:1-51)
• THE DAUGHTERS OF ZELOPHEHAD ASK FOR AN INHERITANCE. (Num 27:1-11)
• MOSES BEING TOLD OF HIS APPROACHING DEATH, ASKS FOR A SUCCESSOR. (Num 27:12-17)
• JOSHUA APPOINTED TO SUCCEED HIM. (Num 27:18-23)
• OFFERINGS TO BE OBSERVED. (Num. 28:1-31)
• THE OFFERING AT THE FEAST OF TRUMPETS. (Num. 29:1-40)
• VOWS ARE NOT TO BE BROKEN. (Num. 30:1-16)
• THE MIDIANITES SPOILED AND BALAAM SLAIN. (Num. 31:1-54)
• THE REUBENITES AND GADITES ASK FOR AN INHERITANCE. (Num. 32:1-42)
• TWO AND FORTY JOURNEYS OF THE ISRAELITES--FROM EGYPT TO SINAI. (Num 33:1-15)
• THE BORDERS OF THE LAND OF CANAAN. (Num. 34:1-29)
• EIGHT AND FORTY CITIES GIVEN TO THE LEVITES. (Num 35:1-5)
• CITIES OF REFUGE. (Num 35:6-8)
• THE BLOOD AVENGER. (Num. 35:9-34)
• THE INCONVENIENCE OF THE INHERITANCE. (Num 36:1-13)

TSK: Numbers (Book Introduction)

The book of Numbers is a book containing a series of the most astonishing providences and events. Every where and in every circumstance God appears; and yet there is no circumstance or occasion which does not justify those signal displays of his grace and mercy; and in every relation we perceive the consistency of the divine intentions, and the propriety of those laws which he established.

TSK: Numbers 5 (Chapter Introduction)

Overview

Num 5:1, The unclean are removed out of camp; Num 5:5, Restitution is to be made in trespass; Num 5:11, The trial of jealousy.

Poole: Numbers (Book Introduction)

FOURTH BOOK OF MOSES, CALLED NUMBERS

THE ARGUMENT

This Book giveth us a history of almost forty years travel of the children of Israel through the wilderness, where we have an account of their journeys, and what happened to them therein, with their government, and how they were managed thereby; called Numbers by reason of the several numberings of the people, as at the offerings of the princes, and at their several journeys, &c. But especially two: one, Chapter 1, out of which the priests and Levites were excepted, but numbered by themselves, viz. in the second year after they were come out of Egypt, in the first month whereof the passover was instituted; with the order about the tabernacle, both of the Levites and people, and their several marches, encampings, and manner of pitching their tents, the priests’ maintenance and establishment, by the miraculous budding of Aaron’ s rod, with the several impediments in their marches, both among themselves by several murmurings, seditions, and conspiracies; and from their enemies, viz. the Edomites, Canaanites, over whom having obtained a victory, and afterwards murmuring, they were stung with fiery serpents, and cured by the brazen one; Amorites, whose kings, Sihon and Og, they overcame and slew; and Moabites, where by the allurements of Balaam, who was hired by Balak to curse Israel, they joined themselves to Baal-peor , and are plagued for it; that openly opposed them. The other chief numbering is in Chapter 26, where they are found almost as many as at the first, though among them were none of the first numbering, (according to what God had threatened, Chapter 14,) save Moses, Joshua, and Caleb, by reason of their desire to return back into Egypt upon the discouraging report often of those twelve that Moses sent to spy out the land; whereupon they were forced to wander above thirty-eight years in the wilderness; where he gave them several laws, civil, ecclesiastical, and military; as also particular directions about women’ s inheriting, occasioned by the case of Zelophehad’ s daughters, and concerning vows; and then brings them back to the borders of Canaan, where, after divers victories obtained against their enemies, they were directed how the land of Canaan was to be divided among the tribes, and what portion the Levites were to have among them, together with six cities of refuge set apart for the manslayer. At length Aaron being dead, and Eleazar placed in his stead, and Moses also having received the sentence of death, doth, by God’ s appointment, deliver up the people unto the charge and conduct of Joshua.

Poole: Numbers 5 (Chapter Introduction)

CHAPTER 5

God commands to put away all unclean persons from the camp; it is executed, Num 5:1-4 . Restitution commanded, and an offering, especially of hallowed things, which belong to the priest, Num 5:5-10 . Laws in case of jealousy, bitter water ordained, Num 5:11-31 .

MHCC: Numbers (Book Introduction)

This book is called NUMBERS from the several numberings of the people contained in it. It extends from the giving of the law at Sinai, till their arrival in the plains of Jordan. An account is given of their murmuring and unbelief, for which they were sentenced to wander in the wilderness nearly forty years; also some laws, both, moral and ceremonial. Their trials greatly tended to distinguish the wicked and hypocrites from the faithful and true servants of God, who served him with a pure heart.

MHCC: Numbers 5 (Chapter Introduction)

(Num 5:1-10) The unclean to be removed out of the camp, Restitution to be made for trespasses.

(v. 11-31) The trial of jealousy.

Matthew Henry: Numbers (Book Introduction)

An Exposition, with Practical Observations, of The Fourth Book of Moses, Called Numbers

The titles of the five books of Moses, which we use in our Bibles, are all borrowed from the Greek translation of the Seventy, the most ancient version of the Old Testament that we know of. But the title of this book only we turn into English; in all the rest we retain the Greek word itself, for which difference I know no reason but that the Latin translators have generally done the same. Otherwise this book might as well have been called Arithmoi , the Greek title, as the first Genesis, and the second Exodus; or these might as well have been translated, and called, the first the Generation, or Original, the second the Out-let, or Escape, as this Numbers. - This book was thus entitled because of the numbers of the children of Israel, so often mentioned in this book, and so well worthy to give a title to it, because it was the remarkable accomplishment of God's promise to Abraham that his seed should be as the stars of heaven for multitude. It also relates to two numberings of them, one at mount Sinai (ch. 1), the other in the plains of Moab, thirty-nine years after (ch. 26). And not three men the same in the last account that were in the first. The book is almost equally divided between histories and laws, intermixed.

We have here, I. The histories of the numbering and marshalling of the tribes (ch. 1-4), the dedication of the altar and Levites (ch. 7, 8), their march (ch. 9, 10), their murmuring and unbelief, for which they were sentenced to wander forty years in the wilderness (ch. 11-14), the rebellion of Korah (ch. 16, Num 17:1-13), the history of the last year of the forty (ch. 20-26), the conquest of Midian, and the settlement of the two tribes (ch. 31, 32), with an account of their journeys (ch. 33), II. Divers laws about the Nazarites, etc. (ch. 5, 6); and again about the priests' charge, etc. (ch. 18, 19), feasts (ch. 28, 29), and vows (ch. 30), and relating to their settlement in Canaan (ch. 27, 34, 35, Num 36:1-13). An abstract of much of this book we have in a few words in Psa 95:10, Forty years long was I grieved with this generation; and an application of it to ourselves in Heb 4:1, Let us fear lest we seem to come short. Many considerable nations there were now in being, that dwelt in cities and fortified towns, of which no notice is taken, no account kept, by the sacred history: but very exact records are kept of the affairs of a handful of people, that dwelt in tents, and wandered strangely in a wilderness, because they were the children of the covenant. For the Lord's portion is his people, Jacob is the lot of his inheritance.

Matthew Henry: Numbers 5 (Chapter Introduction)

In this chapter we have, I. An order, pursuant to the laws already made, for the removing of the unclean out of the camp (Num 5:1-4). II. A repetition of the laws concerning restitution, in case of wrong done to a neighbour (Num 5:5-8), and concerning the appropriating of the hallowed things to the priests (Num 5:9, Num 5:10). III. A new law made concerning the trial of a wife suspected of adultery, by the waters of jealousy (Num 5:11, etc.).

Constable: Numbers (Book Introduction)

Introduction

Title

The title the Jews used in their Hebrew Old Testament for this book comes from the fifth word in the book in the Hebrew text, bemidbar: "in the wilderness." This is, of course, appropriate since the Israelites spent most of the time covered in the narrative of Numbers wandering in the wilderness.

The English title "Numbers" is a translation of the Greek title Arithmoi. The Septuagint translators chose this title because of the two censuses of the Israelites that Moses recorded at the beginning (chs. 1-4) and toward the end (ch. 26) of the book. These numberings of the people took place at the beginning and end of the wilderness wanderings and frame the contents of Numbers.

Date and Writer

Moses wrote Numbers (cf. Num. 1:1; 33:2; Matt. 8:4; 19:7; Luke 24:44; John 1:45; et al.). He evidently did so late in his life on the plains of Moab.¹ Moses evidently died close to 1406 B.C. since the Exodus happened about 1446 B.C., and the Israelites were in the wilderness for 40 years.

Scope and purpose

When the book opens the Israelites were in the second month of the second year after they departed from Egypt (1:1). In chapters 7-10 we read things that happened in the nation before that. These things happened when Moses finishing setting up the tabernacle, which occurred on the first day of the first month of the second year (7:1; cf. Exod. 40:17). When Numbers closes the Israelites were in the tenth month of the fortieth year (cf. Deut. 1:3). Thus the time Numbers covers is about 39 years.

Geographically the Israelites travelled from Mt. Sinai to the plains of Moab, which lay to the east of Jericho and the Jordan River. However their journey was not at all direct. They proceeded from Sinai to Kadesh Barnea on Canaan's southern border but failed to go into the Promised Land from there because of unbelief. Their failure to trust God and obey Him resulted in a period of 38 years of wandering in the wilderness. God finally brought them back to Kadesh and led them from there to the plains of Moab that lay on Canaan's eastern border.

Even though the wilderness wanderings consumed the majority of the years Numbers records, Moses passed over the events of this period of Israel's history fairly quickly. God's emphasis in this book is on His preparation of the Israelites to enter the land from Kadesh (chs. 1-14), and their preparation to enter from the plains of Moab (chs. 20-36). This indicates that the purpose of the book was primarily to show how God dealt with the Israelites as they anticipated entrance into the Promised Land. It was not to record all the events, or even most events, that took place in Israel's history. This selection of content to teach spiritual lessons is in harmony with the other books of the Pentateuch. Their concern too was more theological than historical.

"The material in Numbers cannot be understood apart from what precedes it in Exodus and Leviticus. The middle books of the Pentateuch hang closely together, with Genesis forming a prologue, and Deuteronomy the epilogue to the collection."²

The content stresses events leading to the destruction of the older generation of Israelites in the wilderness and the preparation of the new generation for entrance into the land. The census at the beginning of the book (chs. 1-4) and the one at the end (ch. 26) provide, ". . . the overarching literary and theological structure of the book of Numbers."³

"We may also venture the purpose of the book in this manner: To compel obedience to Yahweh by members of the new community by reminding them of the wrath of God on their parents because of their breach of covenant; to encourage them to trust in the ongoing promises of their Lord as they follow him into their heritage in Canaan; and to provoke them to worship of God and to the enjoyment of their salvation."⁴

"The Book of Numbers seems to be an instruction manual to post-Sinai Israel. The manual' deals with three areas: (a) how the nation was to order itself in its journeyings, (b) how the priests and Levites were to function in the condition of mobility which lay ahead, and (c) how they were to prepare themselves for the conquest of Canaan and their settled lives there. The narrative sections, of which there are many, demonstrate the successes and failures of the Lord's people as they conformed and did not conform to the requirements in the legislative, cultic, and prescriptive parts of the book."⁵

Theme

I believe the theme of the book is obedience. However others have suggested different though related themes.

"The theme of the Book of Numbers is worship."⁶

"The major theological theme of Numbers is reciprocal in nature: God has brought a people to Himself by covenant grace, but He expects of them a wholehearted devotion. Having accepted the terms of the Sinai Covenant, Israel had placed herself under obligation to obey them, a process that was to begin at once and not in some distant place and time (Exod. 19:8; 24:3)."⁷

Message⁸

To formulate a statement that summarizes the teaching of this book it will be helpful to identify some of the major revelations in Numbers. These constitute the unique values of the book.

The first major value of Numbers is that it reveals the graciousness of God to an extent not previously revealed. We see God's graciousness in His dealings with Israel throughout this book.

In the first section of Numbers (chs. 1-10) God's provision for His people stands out. We see this in the order and purity God specified for the maintenance of the Israelite camp. We see it in the worship God provided for in the camp. We also see it in the movement God prescribed for the camp. God faithfully provided for the needs of His people in these many ways as they prepared to enter the Promised Land.

In the second section of the book (chs. 11-21) God's patience with His people stands out. When the Israelites failed to obey God He did not desert them, but He disciplined them in love. God's patience in dealing with the Israelites did not result from God's weakness, but it was an evidence of His strength. God did not manifest carelessness toward the Israelites by making them wander in the wilderness for 38 years. He manifested carefulness as He used those 38 years to prepare the next generation to obey Him. God disciplined the people for their disobedience, but He always directed them toward the realization of His purpose for them as He disciplined them. The years of wilderness wandering were years of education rather than abandonment. He had similarly prepared Moses for 40 years in the wilderness before the Exodus.

In the third section (chs. 22-36) God's persistence in bringing Israel to the threshold of the land is prominent. God protected Israel from her enemies and provided for her needs. Even though Israel had been unfaithful God persisted in demonstrating faithfulness to the nation He had chosen to bless.

A second major value of this book is the revelation it contains of the gravity of unbelief. This is a revelation of man whereas the first was a revelation of God. Numbers reveals the seriousness of the sin of unbelief that manifests itself in disobedience. The Israelites struggled with unbelief throughout the book, but the most serious instance of it took place at Kadesh Barnea (chs. 13-14).

Numbers reveals the roots of unbelief. These were two causes: a mixed multitude and mixed motives.

The congregation consisted of a combination of believing Israelites and others who had for various reasons joined themselves to the people of God, a mixed multitude. These foreigners joined Israel first at the Exodus (Exod. 12:38), but we find them mixed in with the Israelites throughout Israel's subsequent history (cf. Lev. 24:10-23). This "rabble" was first to complain against God, and their murmuring spread through the camp like a plague periodically (cf. 11:4).

The second cause of unbelief was the mixed motives of the Israelites. They wanted to enjoy God's blessings and obeyed Him to a degree to obtain these. However, they also wanted things that God in His love for them did not want them to have (cf. Gen. 3). The Israelites did not fully commit themselves to God (cf. Rom. 12:1-2). They did not fully allow God to shape them into a nation to fulfill His purpose for them in the world. This too resulted in murmuring. They longed for what they had experienced in Egypt and preferred a comfortable life to the adventurous life to which God had called them. Murmuring is the telltale evidence of selfishness. It arises from a lack of singleminded dedication to God.

The message of Numbers is that everything depends on our attitude toward God. Our attitude toward our opportunities and our circumstances reveals our attitude toward God. If we are not content with what God has brought into our lives, it indicates we may want something different for ourselves than what God wants for us.

When we face a challenge to our faith we must see the difficulty overshadowed by God's presence, power, and promises.

The alternative is to allow the difficulty to block our view of God. The influences of unbelievers and our own doublemindedness will seek to make us behave as the Israelites did. At these times of testing Israel's experiences in Numbers should help us understand what is going on and trust God and obey Him more consistently.

The message of Numbers is a message of comfort on the one hand.

Numbers teaches that the failures of God's people cannot frustrate His plans. In Exodus we saw that the opposition of God's enemies cannot defeat Him. In Numbers we see that the failure of His instruments cannot defeat Him either. God's chosen instruments can postpone God's purposes, but they cannot preclude them.

In Numbers we also see that God always deals with His chosen instruments righteously. He will bless the minority who are faithful to Him even though they live among a majority who are under His discipline for being unfaithful. We see this in God's dealings with Caleb and Joshua. God honors the faithful. He will also faithfully work with those He is disciplining because of unfaithfulness. He will encourage them to experience the greatest blessing they can within the sphere of their discipline. We see this in His dealings with the rebellious generation. Furthermore God will not overlook those who have disobeyed Him because they have established a record of past obedience. He will discipline them too. We see this in God's dealings with Moses. Whereas God honors the faithful He also disciplines the unfaithful.

Numbers further teaches us that God's provisions are always adequate for His people's needs (cf. 2 Cor. 12:9). He sustained the Israelites in the wilderness. Their failures were not a result of God's inadequate provision but their own dissatisfaction with His provision. God Himself is an adequate resource for His people as we go through life (cf. Exod. 14-17).

On the other hand Numbers is also a message of warning. Every believer and every group of believers (e.g., a local church) from time to time face the same challenge to faith that the Israelites faced in the wilderness and at Kadesh. The crisis comes when faith encounters obstacles that only God's supernatural power can overcome. The believer should then proceed against these obstacles in simple confidence in God. Our response will depend on whether we are willing to act on our belief that God's presence, power, and promises can overcome them.

We can fail to realize all that God wants for us if we fail to trust Him.

By way of review Genesis expounds faith. Exodus reveals that faith manifests itself in worship and obedience. Leviticus explains worship more fully. Numbers stresses the importance of obedience.

Numbers shows the importance of obedience by revealing the roots, process, and fruits of disobedience.

Constable: Numbers (Outline)

Outline

I. Experiences of the older generation in the wilderness chs. 1-25

A. Preparations for entering the Promised Land from the south chs. 1-10

1. The first census and the organization of the people chs. 1-4

2. Commands and rituals to observe in preparation for entering the land chs. 5-9

3. The departure from Sinai ch. 10

B. The rebellion and judgment of the unbelieving generation chs. 11-25

1. The cycle of rebellion, atonement, and death chs. 11-20

2. The climax of rebellion, hope, and the end of dying chs. 21-25

II. Prospects of the younger generation in the land chs. 26-36

A. Preparations for entering the Promised Land from the east chs. 26-32

1. The second census ch. 26

2. Provisions and commands to observe in preparation for entering the land chs. 27-30

3. Reprisal against Midian and the settlement of the Transjordanian tribes chs. 31-32

B. Warning and encouragement of the younger generation chs. 33-36

1. Review of the journey from Egypt 33:1-49

2. Anticipation of the Promised Land 33:50-36:13

Constable: Numbers

Numbers

Bibliography

Aharoni, Yohanan. The Land of the Bible. Philadelphia: Westminster Press, 1979.

Aharoni, Yohanan, and Michael Avi-Yonah. The Macmillan Bible Atlas. Revised ed. New York: Macmillan Publishing Co., 1977.

Albright, William Foxwell. The Archaeology of Palestine. 1949. Revised ed. Pelican Archaeology series. Harmondsworth, Middlesex, England: Penguin books, 1956.

Allegro, J. M. "The Meaning of nophel in Numbers xxiv. 4, 16." Expository Times 65 (July 1954):316-17.

Allen, Ronald B. "Numbers." In Genesis--Numbers. Vol. 2 of The Expositor's Bible Commentary. 12 vols. Edited by Frank E. Gaebelein and Richard P. Polcyn. Grand Rapids: Zondervan Publishing House, 1990.

_____. "The Theology of the Balaam Oracles." In Tradition and Testament: Essays in Honor of Charles Lee Feinberg. Edited by John S. and Paul D. Feinberg. Chicago: Moody Press, 1981.

Amiran, Ruth. Goethert, Rolf; and Ilan, Ornit. "The Well at Arad." Biblical Archaeology Review 13:2 (March-April 1987):40-44.

Arnold, Neil W. "The High Priestly Blessing." Exegesis and Exposition 2:1 (Summer 1987):45-50.

Ashley, Timothy R. The Book of Numbers. New International Commentary on the Old Testament series. Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., 1993.

Baly, Denis. "Elath, Ezion-geber, and the Red Sea." Biblical Illustrator 9:3 (Spring 1983):66-69.

Bartlett, John R. "The Conquest of Sihon's Kingdom: A Literary Re-examination." Journal of Biblical Literature 97:3 (September 1978):347-51.

Baskin, J. R. "Origen on Balaam: The Dilemma of the Unworthy Prophet." Vigiliae Christianae 37 (1983):22-35.

Beck, J. A. "Geography and the Narrative Shape of Numbers 13." Bibliotheca Sacra 157:627 (July-September 2000):271-80.

Brichto, Herbert Chanan. "The Case of the Sota and a Reconsideration of Biblical Law.'" Hebrew Union College Annual 46 (1975):55-70.

Brin, Gershon. "The Formulae From . . . and Onward/Upward' (m . . . whl'h/wmslh)." Journal of Biblical Literature 99:2 (1980):161-71.

Budd, Philip J. Numbers. Word Biblical Commentary series. Waco: Word Books, Publisher, 1984.

Chisholm, Robert B., Jr. "Does God Change His Mind'?" Bibliotheca Sacra 152:608 (October-December 1995):387-99.

_____. "Does God Deceive?" Bibliotheca Sacra 155:617 (January-March 1998):11-28.

Coats, George W. "Conquest Traditions in the Wilderness Theme." Journal of Biblical Literature 95:2 (1976):177-90.

Constable, Thomas L. Talking to God: What the Bible Teaches about Prayer. Grand Rapids: Baker Book House, 1995.

_____. "What Prayer Will and Will Not Change." In Essays in Honor of J. Dwight Pentecost, pp. 99-113. Edited by Stanley D. Toussaint and Charles H. Dyer. Chicago: Moody Press, 1986.

Cross, Frank Moore. Canaanite Myth and Hebrew Epic. Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1973.

Darby, John Nelson. Synopsis of the Books of the Bible. Revised ed. 5 vols. New York: Loizeaux Brothers Publishers, 1942.

de Boer, Pieter A. H. "Numbers vi 27." Vetus Testamentum 32:1 (January 1982):3-13.

De Haan, Martin Ralph. The Chemistry of the Blood and Other Stirring Messages. 2nd ed. Grand Rapids: Zondervan Publishing House, 1943.

Dyer, Charles H., and Eugene H. Merrill. The Old Testament Explorer. Nashville: Word Publishing, 2001.

Fawver, Jay D., and R. Larry Overstreet. "Moses and Preventive Medicine." Bibliotheca Sacra 147:587 (July-September):270-85.

Felder, Cain Hope. Troubling Biblical Waters: Race, Class, and Family. Maryknoll, N.Y.: Orbis, 1989.

Fishbane, Michael. "Accusations of Adultery: A Study of Law and Scribal Practice in Numbers 5:11-31." Hebrew Union College Annual 45 (1974):25-45.

_____. "Form and Reformulation of the Biblical Priestly Blessing." Journal of the American Oriental Society 103:1 (January-March 1983):115-21.

_____. "Through the Looking Glass: Reflections on Ezek 43:3, Num. 12:8 and 1 Cor. 13:8." Hebrew Annual Review 10 (1986):63-74.

Fouts, David M. "A Defense of the Hyperbolic Interpretation of Large Numbers in the Old Testament." Journal of the Evangelical Theological Society 40:3 (September 1997):377-87.

Frymer-Kensky, Tikva. "The Strange Case of the Suspected Sotah (Numbers V:11-31)." Vetus Testamentum 34:1 (1984):11-26.

_____. "The Trial Before God of an Accused Adulteress." Bible Review 2:3 (Fall 1986):46-49.

Gardner, Joseph L., ed. Reader's Digest Atlas of the Bible. Pleasantville, N.Y.: Reader's Digest Association, 1985.

Haran, Menahem. "Studies in the Account of the Levitical Cities." Journal of Biblical Literature 80:1 (March 1961):45-54, and 80:2 (June 1961):156-65.

Harrison, R. K. Introduction to the Old Testament. Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., 1969.

Hays, J. Daniel. "The Cushites: A Black Nation in the Bible." Bibliotheca Sacra 153:612 (October-December 1996):396-409.

Herzog, Ze'ev; Miriam Aharoni; and Anson F. Rainey. "Arad." Biblical Archaeology Review 13:2 (March-April 1987):16-35.

Hess, Richard S. Joshua: An Introduction and Commentary. Tyndale Old Testament Commentaries series. Leicester, England, and Downers Grove, Ill.: Inter-Varsity Press, 1996.

Hoffner, Harry A., Jr. "Ancient Views of Prophecy and Fulfillment: Mesopotamia and Asia Minor." Journal of the Evangelical Theological Society 30:3 (September 1987):257-65.

Hoftijzer, Jacob. "The Prophet Balaam in a 6th-Century Aramaic Inscription." Biblical Archaeologist 39:1 (March 1976):11-17.

Hoogsteen, T. "The Bronze Serpent History." Kerux 2:3 (December 1987):10-15.

Horn, Siegfried H. Biblical Archaeology: A Generation of Discovery. Washington: Biblical Archaeology Society, 1985.

Jagersma, H. "Some Remarks on the Jussive in Numbers 6:24-26." In Von Kanaan bis Kerala, pp. 131-36. Edited by W. C. Delsman, et al. Kevelaer, Germany: Verlag Butzer and Bercker, 1982.

Jastrow, Morris, Jr. Aspects of Religious Belief and Practice in Babylonia and Assyria. 1911. Reprint ed. New York: Benjamin Blom, Inc., 1971.

Jensen, Irving L. Numbers. Everyman's Bible Commentary series. Chicago: Moody Press, 1964.

Josephus, Flavius. The Works of Flavius Josephus. Translated by William Whiston. Antiquities of the Jews. London: T. Nelson and Sons, 1866.

Kallai, Zecharia. "The Southern Border of the Land of Israel--Pattern and Application." Vetus Testamentum 37:4 (October 1987):438-45.

_____. "The Wandering-Traditions from Kadesh-Barnea to Canaan: A Study in Biblical Historiography." Journal of Jewish Studies 33:1-2 (Spring-Autumn 1982):175-84.

Keil, C. F., and Franz Delitzsch. The Pentateuch. 3 vols. Translated by James Martin. Biblical Commentary on the Old Testament. N.p.; reprint ed., Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., n.d.

Kitchen, Kenneth A. Ancient Orient and Old Testament. Downers Grove, Ill.: InterVarsity Press, 1966.

_____. The Bible In Its World. Downers Grove, Ill.: InterVarsity Press, 1977.

_____. "The Old Testament in its Context: 2 From Egypt to the Jordan." Theological Students' Fellowship Bulletin 60 (1971):3-11.

Kselman, J. S. "A Note on Numbers xii 6-8." Vetus Testamentum 26:4 (October 1976):500-504.

Lange, John Peter, ed. Commentary on the Holy Scriptures. 12 vols. Reprint ed., Grand Rapids: Zondervan Publishing House, 1960. Vol. 2: Numbers-Ruth, by John Peter Lange, William J. Schroeder, F. R. Fay, and Paulus Cassel. Translated by Samuel T. Lowrie, A. Gosman, George R. Bliss, and P. H. Streenstra.

Lemaire, Andre. "Fragments from the Book of Balaam Found at Deir Alla." Biblical Archaeology Review 11:5 (September-October 1985):27-39.

Liebreich, Leon J. "The Songs of Ascents and the Priestly Blessings." Journal of Biblical Literature 74 (1955):33-36.

Livingston, G. Herbert. The Pentateuch in Its Cultural Environment. Grand Rapids: Baker Book House, 1974.

Maarsingh, B. Numbers: a practical commentary. Translated by John Vriend. Text and Interpretation series. Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., 1987.

Magonet, Jonathan. "The Korah Rebellion." Journal for the Study of the Old Testament 24 (1982):3-25.

Margalith (Windreich), M. "The Transgression of Moses and Aaron--Num. 20:1-13." Proceedings of the Fifth World Congress of Jewish Studies. Vol. I. Jerusalem: World Union of Jewish Studies, 1968.

Marshall, John. "The Prophet Balaam." The Banner of Truth 275-76 (August-September 1986):41-54.

Mattingly, Gerald L. "The Exodus-Conquest and the Archaeology of Transjordan: New Light on an Old Problem." Grace Theological Journal 4:2 (1983):245-62.

McKane, W. "Poison, Trial by Ordeal and the Cup of Wrath." Vetus Testamentum 30:4 (October 1980):474-92.

Merrill, Eugene H. Kingdom of Priests. Grand Rapids: Baker Book House, 1987.

_____. "Numbers." In The Bible Knowledge Commentary: Old Testament, pp. 215-58. Edited by John F. Walvoord and Roy B. Zuck. Wheaton: Scripture Press Publications, Victor Books, 1985.

_____. "A Theology of the Pentateuch." In A Biblical Theology of the Old Testament, pp. 7-87. Edited by Roy B. Zuck. Chicago: Moody Press, 1991.

Milgrom, Jacob. "The Cultic Use of grb/ngs." Proceedings of the Fifth World Congress of Jewish Studies. Vol. I. Jerusalem: World Union of Jewish Studies, 1969.

_____. "The Levitical Town: An Exercise in Realistic Planning." Journal of Jewish Studies 33:1-2 (Spring-Autumn 1982):185-88.

_____. "Of Hems and Tassels." Biblical Archaeology Review 9:3 (May-June 1983):61-65.

_____. "The Paradox of the Red Cow (Num. xix)." Vetus Testamentum 31:1 (1981):62-72.

Miller, J. Maxwell. "The Israelite Journey through (around) Moab and Moabite Toponymy." Journal of Biblical Literature 108:4 (1989):577-95.

Monson, James M. The Land Between. Jerusalem: By the Author, P.O. Box 1276, 1983.

Morgan, G. Campbell. Living Messages of the Books of the Bible. 2 vols. New York: Fleming H. Revell Co., 1912.

Na'aman, N. "Hebron Was Built Seven Years before Zoan in Egypt' (Numbers xiii 22)." Vetus Testamentum 31:4 (1981):488-92.

Noordtzij, A. Numbers. Translated by Ed van der Maas. Bible Student's Commentary series. Grand Rapids: Zondervan Publishing House, 1983.

Olson, Dennis T. The Death of the Old and the Birth of the New: The Framework of the Book of Numbers and the Pentateugh. Brown Judaic Studies series. Chico, Calif.: Scholars Press, 1985.

Ouzounellis, Theodore. "Prophecy of Balaam Found in Jordan." Bible and Spade 6:4 (Autumn 1977):121-24.

Philip, James. Numbers. The Communicator's Commentary series. Waco: Word Books, 1987.

"The Priestly Blessing." Buried History 18:2 (June 1982):27-30.

Riggans, Walter. Numbers. Daily Study Bible series. Philadelphia: Westminster Press, 1983.

Rogers, Cleon. "Moses: Meek or Miserable?" Journal of the Evangelical Theological Society 29:3 (September 1986):257-63.

Rooker, Mark F. Leviticus. The New American Commentary series. Nashville: Broadman & Holman Publishers, 2000.

Ruble, Richard L. "The Doctrine of Dreams." Bibliotheca Sacra 125:500 (October-December 1968):360-64.

Rushing, Ronald Lee. "Phinehas' Covenant of Peace." Th.D. dissertation, Dallas Theological Seminary, 1988.

Safren, Jonathan D. "Balaam and Abraham." Vetus Testamentum 38:1 (January 1988):105-13.

Sailhamer, John H. "The Mosaic Law and the Theology of the Pentateuch." Westminster Theological Journal 53 (Fall 1991):241-61.

_____. The Pentateuch as Narrative. Grand Rapids: Zondervan Publishing House, 1992.

Schulte, John Andres. "Vows." Exegesis and Exposition 3:1 (Fall 1988):48-51.

Schwantes, Seigfried J. A Short History of the Ancient Near East. Grand Rapids: Baker Book House, 1965.

"Some Notes on Quail Poisoning." Journal of the American Medical Association 211:7 (February 16, 1970):1186-87.

Smith, Ralph L. "Baal." Biblical Illustrator 10:2 (Winter 1984):12-16.

Spencer, John R. "The Tasks of the Levites: smr and sb'." Zeitschrift für die Alttestamentliche Wissenschaft 96:2 (1984):267-71.

Student Map Manual. Jerusalem: Pictorial Archive (Near Eastern History) Est., 1979.

Tosato, Angelo. "The Literary Structure of the First Two Poems of Balaam (Num. xxiii 7-10, 18-24)." Vetus Testamentum 29:1 (January 1979):98-106.

Ulrich, Dean R. "The Framing Function of the Narratives about Zelophehad's Daughters." Journal of the Evangelical Theological Society 41:4 (December 1998):529-38.

Unger's Bible Dictionary. 1957 ed. S.v. "Covenant of Salt."

Van Oosting, James. "Moses, Hezekiah, and Yale's gang of four." Reformed Journal 33:11 (November 1983):7-8.

Van Seters, John. "The Conquest of Sihon's Kingdom: A Literary Examination." Journal of Biblical Literature 91:2 (June 1972):182-97.

Weisman, Ze'ev. "The Personal Spirit as Inspiring Authority." Zeitschrift für die Alttestamentliche Wissenschaft 93:2 (1981):225-34.

Wenham, Gordon J. "Aaron's Rod (Numbers 17:16-28)." Zeitschrift für die Alttestamentliche Wissenschaft 93:2 (1981):280-81.

_____. Numbers. Tyndale Old Testament Commentaries series. Downers Grove, Ill.: InterVarsity Press, 1981.

Wenham, John W. The Goodness of God. Downers Grove, Ill.: InterVarsity Press, 1974.

_____. "The Large Numbers in the Old Testament." Tyndale Bulletin 18 (1967):19-53.

Whybray, R. Norman. Introduction to the Pentateuch. Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., 1995.

Wiersbe, Warren W. On Being a Servant of God. Nashville: T. Nelson, 1993; reprint ed., Grand Rapids: Baker Book House, 1999.

Wood, Leon. Distressing Days of the Judges. Grand Rapids: Zondervan Publishing House, 1975.

_____. Israel's United Monarchy. Grand Rapids: Baker Book House, 1979.

_____. A Survey of Israel's History. Grand Rapids: Zondervan Publishing House, 1970.

Wright, David P. "Purification from Corpse Contamination in Numbers XXI 19-24." Vetus Testamentum 35:2 (1985):213-23.

Young, Robert. Analytical Concordance to the Bible, 22nd American ed. S.v. "Arabia."

The Zondervan Pictorial Encyclopedia of the Bible. S.v. "Eschol, by R. C. Ridall."

Copyright 2003 by Thomas L. Constable

Haydock: Numbers (Book Introduction)

INTRODUCTION.

This fourth Book of Moses is called Numbers , because it begins with the numbering of the people. The Hebrews, from its first words, call it Vaydedabber . It contains the transactions of the Israelites, from the second month of the second year after their going out of Egypt, until the beginning of the eleventh month of the 40th year; that is, a history almost of thirty-nine years. (Challoner) --- In the nine first chapters various orders of people are described, and several laws are given or repeated. From the 10th to the 33d, the marches and history of God's people are related; (Haydock) from the 20th of the second month, in the second year after their departure out of Egypt, till the eleventh month of the 40th year, and the last of Moses: so that this Book contains the transactions of almost thirty-nine years; (Tirinus) whereas, the Book of Leviticus specified only some of the laws and occurrences of one month. Here we behold what opposition Moses experienced from Aaron and his sister, from Core, and from all the people; and yet God protected him, in the midst of all dangers, and confounded, not only their attempts, but those also of Balaam, and of all his external foes. (Haydock) --- Moses conquers the Madianites, and divides the conquered country between the tribes of Ruben, Gad, and half of the tribe of Manasses. In the three last chapters, he describes the land of Chanaan, orders all the inhabitants to be exterminated, assigns cities for the Levites, and for refuge; and forbids such marriages, as might cause any confusion in the distribution of the lands belonging to each tribe. Moses composed this part of the Pentateuch, as well as that of Deuteronomy, a little while before his death, out of the memoirs which he had carefully preserved. (Calmet) --- According to Usher, the people were numbered this second time, in the year of the world 2514, chap. i.; after which they leave the desert of Sinai, (chap. x. 11.) go to Cades-barne, and return thither again 2552. Soon after this, Mary and Aaron die; Moses lifts up the brazen serpent; and the Hebrews take possession of part of the promised land (2553) on the eastern banks of the Jordan. That on the western side, flowing with milk and honey, was conquered by Josue in the following years. (Haydock)

Gill: Numbers (Book Introduction)

INTRODUCTION TO NUMBERS

This book has its name from the account it gives of the "numbers" of the children of Israel, twice taken particularly; which name it has with this Greeks and Latins, and so with the Syriac and Arabic versions; but with the Jews it is called sometimes "Vajedabber", from the first word of it, "and the Lord spake"; and sometimes "Bemidbar", from the fifth word of the first verse, "in the wilderness", and sometimes "Sepher Pikkudim"; or, as with Origen ^a, "Ammesph‚kodim", the book of musters or surveys. That it was written by Moses is not to be doubted; and is indeed suggested by our Lord himself, Joh 5:46 compared with Num 3:14, and the references to it, in the New Testament, fully ascertain to us Christians the authenticity of it, as that of our Lord hinted at, and those of the apostle in 1Co 10:4. It contains an history of the affairs of the Israelites, and of their travel in the wilderness for the space of thirty eight years; though the principal facts it relates were done in the second year of their coming out of Egypt, and in the last of their being in the wilderness; and it is not merely historical, but gives a particular account of several laws, ceremonial and judicial, to be observed by the people of Israel, as well as has many things in it very instructive, both of a moral and evangelical nature.

Gill: Numbers 5 (Chapter Introduction)

INTRODUCTION TO NUMBERS 5

This chapter contains a repetition of some former laws, concerning putting unclean persons out of the camp, Num 5:1; making restitution in case of trespass against another, Num 5:5; and of giving the offering of all holy things and all hallowed things to the priests, Num 5:9; and a new law concerning jealousy, in a man, of his wife, Num 5:11; when she was to be brought to the priest, and various rites and ceremonies to be used, Num 5:15; who was to give her bitter water as a trial of her chastity, which, if guilty, would have a strange effect upon her, and make her accursed, but if not, would not affect her, and she would be free and happy, Num 5:24.