{"collection":"scripture-revelation","full_text_available":true,"graph_url":"https://unchartedknowledge.5gfusion.net/v2/api/page/gutenberg_42639/graph","html_url":"https://unchartedknowledge.5gfusion.net/v2/page/gutenberg_42639","id":"gutenberg_42639","license":"Public Domain (US)","rights_basis":"gutenberg_metadata_copyright_false","source":"gutenberg","source_url":"https://www.gutenberg.org/ebooks/42639","summary":null,"tags":["Bible. Numbers -- Commentaries","Category: Religion/Spirituality"],"text":"The\n Expositor's Bible\n\n Edited by\n W. Robertson Nicoll, D.D., LL.D.\n\n[Illustration]\n\n\n\n\n THE EXPOSITORS' BIBLE\n\n _Edited by_ W. ROBERTSON NICOLL, D.D., LL.D.\n\n _New and Cheaper Edition. Printed from original plates\n Complete in every detail. Uniform with this volume_\n\n Price 50 cents per volume. (If by mail add 10 cents postage)\n\n\n OLD TESTAMENT VOLUMES\n\n GENESIS. By Rev. Prof. Marcus Dods, D.D.\n\n EXODUS. By Very Rev. G. A. Chadwick, D.D., Dean of Armagh.\n\n LEVITICUS. By Rev. S. H. Kellogg, D.D.\n\n NUMBERS. By Rev. R. A. Watson, D.D.\n\n DEUTERONOMY. By. Rev. Prof. Andrew Harper, B.D.\n\n JOSHUA. By Rev. Prof. W. G. Blaikie, D.D., LL.D.\n\n JUDGES AND RUTH. By Rev. R. A. Watson, D.D.\n\n FIRST SAMUEL. By Rev. Prof. W. G. Blaikie, D.D., LL.D.\n\n SECOND SAMUEL. By same author.\n\n FIRST KINGS. By F. W. Farrar, D.D., Dean of Canterbury.\n\n SECOND KINGS. By same author.\n\n FIRST AND SECOND CHRONICLES. By Rev. Prof. W. H. Bennett.\n\n EZRA, NEHEMIAH, and ESTHER. By Rev. Prof. W. F. Adeney.\n\n JOB. By Rev. R. A. Watson, D.D.\n\n PSALMS. In 3 vols. Vol. I., Chapters I.-XXXVIII.; Vol. II.,\n Chapters XXXIX.-LXXXIX.; Vol. III., Chapters XC.-CL. By Rev.\n Alexander Maclaren, D.D.\n\n PROVERBS. By Rev. R. F. Horton, D.D.\n\n ECCLESIASTES. By Rev. Samuel Cox, D.D.\n\n SONG OF SOLOMON and LAMENTATIONS. By Rev. Prof. W. F. Adeney.\n\n ISAIAH. In 2 vols. Vol. I., Chapters I.-XXXIX.; Vol. II.,\n Chapters XL-LXVI. By Prof. George Adam Smith, D.D., LL.D.\n\n JEREMIAH. Chapters I.-XX. With a Sketch of his Life and Times. By\n Rev. C. J. Ball.\n\n JEREMIAH. Chapters XXI.-LII. By Rev. Prof. W. H. Bennett.\n\n EZEKIEL. By Rev. Prof. John Skinner.\n\n DANIEL. By F. W. Farrar, D.D., Dean of Canterbury.\n\n THE TWELVE (minor) PROPHETS. In 2 vols. By Rev. George Adam\n Smith, D.D., LL.D.\n\n\n NEW TESTAMENT VOLUMES\n\n ST. MATTHEW. By Rev. J. Monro Gibson, D.D.\n\n ST. MARK. By Very Rev. G. A. Chadwick, D.D., Dean of Armagh.\n\n ST. LUKE. By Rev. Henry Burton.\n\n GOSPEL OF ST. JOHN. In 2 vols. Vol. I., Chapters I.-XI.; Vol.\n II., Chapters XII.-XXI. By Rev. Prof. Marcus Dods, D.D.\n\n THE ACTS OF THE APOSTLES. In 2 vols. By Rev. Prof. G. T. Stokes,\n D.D.\n\n ROMANS. By Rev. Handley C. G. Moule, D.D.\n\n FIRST CORINTHIANS. By Rev. Prof. Marcus Dods, D.D.\n\n SECOND CORINTHIANS. By Rev. James Denney, D.D.\n\n GALATIANS. By Rev. Prof. G. G. Findlay, D.D.\n\n EPHESIANS. By same author.\n\n PHILIPPIANS. By Rev. Principal Robert Rainy, D.D.\n\n COLOSSIANS and PHILEMON. By Rev. Alexander Maclaren, D.D.\n\n THESSALONIANS. By Rev. James Denney, D.D.\n\n PASTORAL EPISTLES. By Rev. A. Plummer, D.D.\n\n HEBREWS. By Rev. Principal T. C. Edwards, D.D.\n\n ST. JAMES and ST. JUDE. By Rev. A. Plummer, D.D.\n\n ST. PETER. By Rev. Prof. J. Rawson Lumby, D.D.\n\n EPISTLES OF ST. JOHN. By Rt. Rev. W. Alexander, Lord Bishop of\n Derry.\n\n REVELATION. By Prof. W. Milligan, D.D.\n\n INDEX VOLUME TO ENTIRE SERIES.\n\n _New York_: HODDER & STOUGHTON, _Publishers_\n\n\n\n\n THE\n BOOK OF NUMBERS\n\n\n\n\n\n BY THE\n Rev. Robert A. Watson, M.A., D.D.\n AUTHOR OF\n \"GOSPELS OF YESTERDAY,\" \"JUDGES AND RUTH,\" \"THE BOOK OF\n JOB,\" \"IN THE APOSTOLIC AGE,\" ETC.\n\n\n\n\n\n HODDER & STOUGHTON\n NEW YORK\n GEORGE H. DORAN COMPANY\n\n\n\n\n CONTENTS\n\n\n I\n\n PAGE\n\n INTRODUCTORY 1\n\n II\n\n THE CENSUS AND THE CAMP 18\n 1. The Mustering: ch. i. 1-46\n 2. The Tribe of Levi: ch. i. 47-54\n 3. The Camp: ch. ii\n\n III\n\n PRIESTS AND LEVITES 29\n 1. The Priesthood: ch. iii. 1-10\n 2. The First-born: ch. iii. 11-13, 40-51\n 3. Levitical Service: chs. iii. 14-39, iv\n\n IV\n\n DEFILEMENT AND PURGATION 46\n 1. Exclusion from the Camp: ch. v. 1-4\n 2. Atonement for Trespass: ch. v. 5-10\n 3. The Water of Jealousy: ch. v. 11-31\n\n V\n\n NAZIRITISM: THE BLESSING OF AARON 59\n Ch. vi.\n\n VI\n\n SANCTUARY AND PASSOVER 73\n 1. The Offerings of the Princes: ch. vii\n 2. The Candelabrum: ch. viii. 1-4\n 3. The Passover: ch. ix. 1-14\n\n VII\n\n THE CLOUD AND THE MARCH 89\n 1. The Guiding Cloud: ch. ix. 15-23\n 2. The Silver Trumpets: ch. x. 1-10\n 3. The Order of March: ch. x. 11-28\n\n VIII\n\n HOBAB THE KENITE 104\n Ch. x. 29-36\n\n IX\n\n THE STRAIN OF THE DESERT JOURNEY 119\n Ch. xi\n\n X\n\n THE JEALOUSY OF MIRIAM AND AARON 136\n Ch. xii\n\n XI\n\n THE SPIES AND THEIR REPORT 151\n Chs. xiii., xiv. 1-10\n\n XII\n\n THE DOOM OF THE UNBELIEVING 167\n Ch. xiv\n\n XIII\n\n OFFERINGS: SABBATH-KEEPING: DRESS 179\n Ch. xv\n\n XIV\n\n KORAH, DATHAN, AND ABIRAM 195\n Chs. xvi, xvii\n\n XV\n\n TITHES AND CLEANSINGS 212\n Chs. xviii., xix\n 1. Duties and Support of the Ministry\n 2. Water of Purification\n 3. Defilement by the Dead\n\n XVI\n\n SORROW AND FAILURE AT KADESH 222\n Ch. xx\n\n XVII\n\n THE LAST MARCH AND THE FIRST CAMPAIGN 243\n Ch. xxi\n\n XVIII\n\n BALAAM INVOKED 260\n Ch. xxii. 1-19\n\n XIX\n\n BALAAM ON THE WAY 276\n Ch. xxii. 20-38\n\n XX\n\n BALAAM'S PARABLES 290\n Chs. xxii. 39-xxiv. 9\n\n XXI\n\n THE MATTER OF BAAL-PEOR 309\n Chs. xxiv. 10-xxv. 18\n\n XXII\n\n A NEW GENERATION 323\n Chs. xxvi., xxvii\n\n XXIII\n\n OFFERINGS AND VOWS 343\n 1. The Sacred Year: chs. xxviii., xxix\n 2. The Law of Vows: ch. xxx\n\n XXIV\n\n WAR AND SETTLEMENT 365\n 1. The War with Midian: ch. xxxi\n 2. Settlement: ch. xxxii\n\n XXV\n\n THE WAY AND THE LOT 382\n Chs. xxxiii., xxxiv\n\n XXVI\n\n THE CITIES OF REFUGE 396\n Chs. xxxv., xxxvi\n\n INDEX 409\n\n\n\n\n I\n\n _INTRODUCTORY_\n\n\nTo summon from the past and reproduce with any detail the story of\nIsrael's life in the desert is now impossible. The outlines alone\nremain, severe, careless of almost everything that does not bear on\nreligion. Neither from Exodus nor from Numbers can we gather those\ntouches that would enable us to reconstruct the incidents of a single\nday as it passed in the camp or on the march. The tribes move from\none \"wilderness\" to another. The hardship of the time of wandering\nappears unrelieved, for throughout the history the doings of God, not\nthe achievements or sufferings of the people, are the great theme.\nThe patriotism of the Book of Numbers is of a kind that reminds us\ncontinually of the prophecies. Resentment against the distrustful\nand rebellious, like that which Amos, Hosea, and Jeremiah express,\nis felt in almost every portion of the narrative. At the same time\nthe difference between Numbers and the books of the prophets is wide\nand striking. Here the style is simple, often stern, with little\nemotion, scarcely any rhetoric. The legislative purpose reacts on\nthe historical, and makes the spirit of the book severe. Seldom does\nthe writer allow himself respite from the grave task of presenting\nIsrael's duties and delinquencies, and exalting the majesty of God.\nWe are made continually to feel the burden with which the affairs\nof the people are charged; and yet the book is no poem: to excite\nsympathy or lead up to a great climax does not come within the design.\n\nNevertheless, so far as a book of incident and statute can resemble\npoetry, there is a parallel between Numbers and a form of literature\nproduced under other skies, other conditions--the Greek drama. The\nsame is true of Exodus and Deuteronomy; but Numbers will be found\nespecially to bear out the comparison. The likeness may be traced in\nthe presentation of a main idea, the relation of various groups of\npersons carrying out or opposing that main idea, and the Puritanism\nof form and situation. The Book of Numbers may be called eternal\nliterature more fitly than the _Iliad_ and _\u00c6neid_ have been called\neternal poems; and the keen ethical strain and high religious thought\nmake the movement tragical throughout. Moses the leader is seen\nwith his helpers and opponents, Aaron and Miriam, Joshua and Hobab,\nKorah, Dathan, and Abiram, Balak and Balaam. He is brought into\nextremity; he despairs and appeals passionately to Heaven; in an hour\nof pride he falls into sin which brings doom upon him. The people,\nmurmuring, craving, suffering, are always a vague multitude. The\ntent, the cloud, the incense, the wars, the strain of the wilderness\njourney, the hope of the land beyond--all have a dim solemnity. The\noccupying thought is of Jehovah's purpose and the revelation of His\ncharacter. Moses is the prophet of this Divine mystery, stands for it\nalmost alone, urges it upon Israel, is the means of impressing it by\njudgments and victories, by priestly law and ceremony, by the very\nexample of his own failure in sudden trial. With a graver and bolder\npurpose than any embodied in the dramatic masterpieces of Greece,\nthe story of Numbers finds its place not in literature only, but\nin the development of universal religion, and breathes that Divine\ninspiration which belongs to the Hebrew and to him alone among those\nwho speak of God and man.\n\nThe Divine discipline of human life is an element of the theme, but\nin contrast to the Greek dramas the books of the exodus are not\nindividualistic. Moses is great, but he is so as the teacher of\nreligion, the servant of Jehovah, the lawgiver of Israel. Jehovah,\nHis religion, His law, are above Moses. The personality of the leader\nstands clear; yet he is not the hero of the Book of Numbers. The\npurpose of the history leaves him, when he has done his work, to die\non Mount Abarim, and presses on, that Jehovah may be seen as a man of\nwar, that Israel may be brought to its inheritance and begin its new\ncareer. The voice of men in the Greek tragedy is, as Mr. Ruskin says,\n\"We trusted in the gods; we thought that wisdom and courage would\nsave us. Our wisdom and courage deceive us to our death.\" When Moses\ndespairs, that is not his cry. There is no Fate stronger than God;\nand He looks far into the future in the discipline He appoints to\nmen, to His people Israel. The remote, the unfulfilled, gleams along\nthe desert. There is a light from the pillar of fire even when the\npestilence is abroad, and the graves of the lustful are dug, and the\ncamp is dissolved in tears because Aaron is dead, because Moses has\nclimbed the last mountain and shall never again be seen.\n\nIn respect of content, one point shows likeness between the Greek\ndrama and our book--the vague conception of death. It is not an\nextinction of life, but the human being goes on into an existence\nof which there is no definite idea. What remains has no reckoning,\nno object. The recoil of the Hebrew is not indeed piteous, and\nfraught with horror, like that of the Greek, although death is the\nlast punishment of men who transgress. For Aaron and Moses, and all\nwho have served their generation, it is a high and venerated Power\nthat claims them when the hour of departure comes. The God they have\nobeyed in life calls them, and they are gathered to their people. No\nnote of despair is heard like that in the _Iphigenia in Aulis_,--\n\n \"He raves who prays\n To die. 'Tis better to live on in woe\n Than to die nobly.\"\n\nDying as well as living men are with God; and this God is the Lord of\nall. Immense is the difference between the Greek who trusts or dreads\nmany powers above, beneath, and the Hebrew realising himself, however\ndimly, as the servant of Jehovah the holy, the eternal. This great\nidea, seized by Moses, introduced by him into the faith of his people,\nremained it may be indefinite, yet always present to the thought of\nIsrael with many implications till the time of full revelation came\nwith Christ, and He said: \"Now that the dead are raised, even Moses\nshowed, in the bush, when he called the Lord the God of Abraham, and\nthe God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob. For He is not the God of the\ndead, but of the living.\" The wide interval between a people whose\nreligion contained this thought, in whose history it is interwoven,\nand a people whose religion was polytheistic and natural is seen in\nthe whole strain of their literature and life. Even Plato the luminous\nfinds it impossible to overpass the shadows of pagan interpretations.\n\"In regard to the facts of a future life, a man,\" said Ph\u00e6do, \"must\neither learn or find out their nature; or, if he cannot do this, take\nat any rate the best and least assailable of human words, and, borne\non this as on a raft, perform in peril the voyage of life, unless he\nshould be able to accomplish the journey with less risk and danger on a\nsurer vessel--some word Divine.\" Now Israel had a Divine word; and life\nwas not perilous.\n\n * * * * *\n\nThe problem which appears again and again in Moses' relation with\nthe people is that of the theocratic idea as against the grasping\nat immediate success. At various points, from the start in Egypt\nonwards, the opportunity of assuming a regal position comes to Moses.\nHe is virtually dictator, and he might be king. But a rare singleness\nof mind keeps him true to Jehovah's lordship, which he endeavours\nto stamp on the conscience of the people and the course of their\ndevelopment. He has often to do so at the greatest risk to himself.\nHe holds back the people in what seems the hour of advance, and it\nis the will of Jehovah by which they are detained. The Unseen King\nis their Helper and equally their Rhadamanthine Judge; and on Moses\nfalls the burden of forcing that fact upon their minds.\n\nIsrael could never, according to Moses' idea, become a great people in\nthe sense in which the nations of the world were great. Amongst them\ngreatness was sought in despite of morality, in defiance of all that\nJehovah commanded. Israel might never be great in wealth, territory,\ninfluence, but she was to be true. She existed for Jehovah, while the\ngods of other nations existed for them, had no part to play without\nthem. Jehovah was not to be overborne either by the will or the\nneeds of His people. He was the self-existent Lord. The Name did not\nrepresent a supernatural assistance which could be secured on terms, or\nby any authorised person. Moses himself, though he entreated Jehovah,\ndid not change Him. His own desire was sometimes thwarted; and he had\noften to give the oracle with sorrow and disappointment.\n\nMoses is not the priest of the people: the priesthood comes in as\na ministering body, necessary for religious ends and ideas, but\nnever governing, never even interpreting. It is singular from this\npoint of view that the so-called Priests' Code should be attributed\nconfidently to a caste ambitious of ruling or practically enthroned.\nWellhausen ridicules the \"fine\" distinction between hierocracy and\ntheocracy. He affirms that government of God is the same thing as\nrule of priest; and he may affirm this because he thinks so. The\nBook of Numbers, as it stands, might have been written to prove that\nthey are not equivalent; and Wellhausen himself shows that they are\nnot by more than one of his conclusions. The theocracy, he says, is\nin its nature intimately allied to the Roman Catholic Church, which\nis, in fact, its child; and on the whole he prefers to speak of the\nJewish Church rather than the theocracy. But if any modern religious\nbody is to be named as a child of the Hebrew _theocracy_, it must\nnot be one in which the priest intervenes continually between faith\nand God. Wellhausen says again that \"the sacred constitution of\nJudaism was an artificial product\" as contrasted with the broadly\nhuman indigenous element, the real idea of man's relation to God; and\nwhen a priesthood, as in later Judaism, becomes the governing body,\nGod is, so far, dethroned. Now Moses did not give to Aaron greater\npower than he himself possessed, and his own power is constantly\nrepresented as exercised in submission to Jehovah. A theocracy might\nbe established without a priesthood; in fact, the mediation of the\nprophet approaches the ideal far more than that of the priest. But\nin the beginnings of Israel the priesthood was required, received\na subordinate place of its own, to which it was throughout rigidly\nconfined. As for priestly government, that, we may say, has no\nsupport anywhere in the Pentateuch.\n\n * * * * *\n\nThe Book of Numbers, called also \"In the wilderness,\" opens with\nthe second month of the second year after the exodus, and goes\non to the arrival of the tribes in the plains of Moab by the\nJordan. As a whole it may be said to carry out the historical and\nreligious ideas of Exodus and Leviticus: and both the history\nand the legislation flow into three main channels. They go to\nestablish the separateness of Israel as a people, the separateness\nof the tribe of Levi and the priesthood, and the separateness and\nauthority of Jehovah. The first of these objects is served by the\naccounts of the census, of the redemption of the first-born, the\nlaws of national atonement and distinctive dress, and generally the\nDivine discipline of Israel recorded in the course of the book. The\nsecond line of purpose may be traced in the careful enumeration of\nthe Levites; the minute allocation of duties connected with the\ntabernacle to the Gershonites, the Kohathites, and the Merarites;\nthe special consecration of the Aaronic priesthood; the elaboration\nof ceremonials requiring priestly service; and various striking\nincidents, such as the judgment of Korah and his company, and the\nbudding of Aaron's almond twig. Lastly, the institution of some\ncleansing rites, the sin offering of chap. xix. for example, the\ndetails of punishment that fell upon offenders against the law,\nthe precautions enjoined with regard to the ark and the sanctuary,\ntogether with the multiplication of sacrifices, went to emphasise\nthe sanctity of worship and the holiness of the unseen King. The\nbook is sacerdotal; it is marked even more by a physical and moral\nPuritanism, exceedingly stringent at many points.\n\nThe whole system of religious observance and priestly ministration\nset forth in the Mosaic books may seem difficult to account for,\nnot indeed as a national development, but as a moral and religious\ngain. We are ready to ask how God could in any sense have been the\nauthor of a code of laws imposing so many intricate ceremonies, which\nrequired a whole tribe of Levites and priests to perform them. Where\nwas the spiritual use that justified the system, as necessary, as\nwise, as Divine? Inquiries like these will arise in the minds of\nbelieving men, and sufficient answer must be sought for.\n\nIn the following way the religious worth and therefore the inspiration\nof the ceremonial law may be found. The primitive notion that Jehovah\nwas the exclusive property of Israel, the pledged patron of the nation,\ntended to impair the sense of His moral purity. An ignorant people\ninclined to many forms of immorality could not have a right conception\nof the Divine holiness; and the more it was accepted as a commonplace\nof faith that Jehovah knew them alone of all the families of the\nearth, the more was right belief towards Him imperilled. A psalmist\nwho in the name of God reproves \"the wicked\" indicates the danger:\n\"Thou thoughtest that I was altogether such an one as thyself.\"\nNow the priesthood, the sacrifices, all provisions for maintaining\nthe sanctity of the ark and the altar, and all rules of ceremonial\ncleansing, were means of preventing that fatal error. The Israelites\nbegan without the solemn temples and impressive mysteries that made\nthe religion of Egypt venerable. In the desert and in Canaan, till\nthe time of Solomon, the rude arrangements of semi-civilised life\nkept religion at an everyday level. The domestic makeshifts and\nconfusion of the early period, the frequent alarms and changes which\nfor centuries the nation had to endure, must have made culture of\nany kind, even religious culture, almost impossible to the mass of\nthe people. The law in its very complexity and stringency provided a\nneedful safeguard and means of education. Moses had been acquainted\nwith a great sacerdotal system. Not only would it appear to him natural\nto originate something of a like kind, but he would see no other means\nof creating in rude times the idea of the Divine holiness. For himself\nhe found inspiration and prophetic power in laying the foundation of\nthe system; and once initiated, its development necessarily followed.\nWith the progress of civilisation the law had to keep pace, meeting the\nnew circumstances and needs of each succeeding period. Certainly the\ngenius of the Pentateuch, and in particular of the Book of Numbers,\nis not liberating. The tone is that of theocratic rigour. But the\nreason is quite clear; the development of the law was determined by the\nnecessities and dangers of Israel in the exodus, in the wilderness, and\nin idolatrous, seductive Canaan.\n\nOpening with an account of the census, the Book of Numbers evidently\nstood, from the first, quite distinct from the previous books as\na composition or compilation. The mustering of the tribes gave an\nopportunity of passing from one group of documents to another, from\none stage of the history to another. But the memoranda brought\ntogether in Numbers are of various character. Administrative,\nlegislative, and historical sources are laid under contribution. The\nrecords have been arranged as far as possible in chronological order;\nand there are traces, as for instance in the second account of the\nstriking of the rock by Moses, of a careful gathering up of materials\nnot previously used, at least in the precise form they now have. The\ncompilers collected and transcribed with the most reverent care, and\ndid not venture in any case to reject. The historical notices are\nfor some reason anything but consecutive, and the greater part of\nthe time covered by the book is virtually passed over. On the other\nhand some passages repeat details in a way that has no parallel in\nthe rest of the Mosaic books. The effect generally is that of a\ncompilation made under difficulties by a scribe or scribes who were\nscrupulous to preserve everything relating to the great lawgiver and\nthe dealings of God with Israel.\n\nRecent criticism is positive in its assertion that the book contains\nseveral strata of narrative; and there are certain passages, the\naccounts of Korah's revolt and of Dathan and Abiram, for instance,\nwhere without such a clew the history must seem not a little\nconfused. In a sense this is disconcerting. The ordinary reader finds\nit difficult to understand why an inspired book should appear at any\npoint incomplete or incoherent. The hostile critic again is ready to\ndeny the credibility of the whole. But the honesty of the writing\nis proved by the very characteristics that make some statements\nhard to interpret and some of the records difficult to receive.\nThe theory that a journal of the wanderings was kept by Moses or\nunder his direction is quite untenable. Dismissing that, we fall\nback on the belief that contemporary records of some incidents, and\ntraditions early committed to writing formed the basis of the book.\nThe documents were undoubtedly ancient at the time of their final\nrecension, whensoever and by whomsoever it was made.\n\nBy far the greater part of Numbers refers to the second year after\nthe exodus from Egypt, and to what took place in the fortieth year,\nafter the departure from Kadesh. Regarding the intermediate time\nwe are told little but that the camp was shifted from one place to\nanother in the wilderness. Why the missing details have not survived\nin any form cannot now be made out. It is no sufficient explanation\nto say that those events alone are preserved which struck the popular\nimagination. On the other hand, to ascribe what we have to unscrupulous\nor pious fabrication is at once unpardonable and absurd. Some may be\ninclined to think that the book consists entirely of accidental scraps\nof tradition, and that inspiration would have come better to its end\nif the religious feelings of the people had received more attention,\nand we had been shown the gradual use of Israel out of ignorance and\nsemi-barbarism. Yet even for the modern historical sense the book has\nits own claim, by no means slight, to high estimation and close study.\nThese are venerable records, reaching back to the time they profess\nto describe, and presenting, though with some traditional haze, the\nimportant incidents of the desert journey.\n\nTurning from the history to the legislation, we have to inquire\nwhether the laws regarding priests and Levites, sacrifices and\ncleansings, bear uniformly the colour of the wilderness. The\norigins are certainly of the Mosaic time, and some of the statutes\nelaborated here must be founded on customs and beliefs older even\nthan the exodus. Yet in form many enactments are apparently later\nthan the time of Moses; and it does not seem well to maintain that\nlaws requiring what was next to impossible in the wilderness were,\nduring the journey, given and enforced as they now stand by a wise\nlegislator. Did Moses require, for instance, that five shekels, \"of\nthe shekel of the sanctuary,\" should be paid for the ransom of the\nfirst-born son of a household, at a time when many families must have\nhad no silver and no means of obtaining it? Does not this statute,\nlike another which is spoken of as deferred till the settlement in\nCanaan, imply a fixed order and medium of exchange? For the sake of\na theory which is intended to honour Moses as the only legislator of\nIsrael, is it well to maintain that he imposed conditions which could\nnot be carried out, and that he actually prepared the way for neglect\nof his own code?\n\nIt is beyond our range to discuss the date of the compilation of\nNumbers as compared with the other Pentateuchal books, or the age\nof the \"Jehovistic\" documents as compared with the \"Priests' Code.\"\nThis, however, is of less moment, since it is now becoming clear that\nattempts to settle these dates can only darken the main question--the\nantiquity of the original records and enactments. The assertion that\nExodus, Leviticus, and Numbers belong to an age later than Ezekiel\nis of course meant to apply to the present form of the books. But\neven in this sense it is misleading. Those who make it themselves\nassume that many things in the law and the history are of far older\ndate, based indeed on what at the time of Ezekiel must have been\nimmemorial usage. The main legislation of the Pentateuch must have\nexisted in the time of Josiah, and even then possessed the authority\nof ancient observance. The priesthood, the ark, sacrifice and feast,\nthe shewbread, the ephod, can be traced back beyond the time of\nDavid to that of Samuel and Eli, quite apart from the testimony of\nthe Books of Moses. Moreover, it is impossible to believe that the\nformula \"The Lord said unto Moses\" was invented at a late date as\nthe authority for statutes. It was the invariable accompaniment of\nthe ancient rule, the mark of an origin already recognised. The\nvarious legislative provisions we shall have to consider had their\nsanction under the great ordinance of the law and the inspired\nprophetism which directed its use and maintained its adaptation to\nthe circumstances of the people. The religious and moral code as a\nwhole, designed to secure profound reverence towards God and the\npurity of national faith, continued the legislation of Moses, and at\nevery point was the task of men who guarded as sacred the ideas of\nthe founder and were themselves taught of God. The entire law was\nacknowledged by Christ in this sense as possessing the authority of\nthe great lawgiver's own commission.\n\nIt has been said that \"the inspired condition would seem to be one\nwhich produces a generous indifference to pedantic accuracy in\nmatters of fact, and a supreme absorbing concern about the moral\nand religious significance of facts.\" If the former part of this\nstatement were true, the historical books of the Bible, and, we may\nsay, in particular the Book of Numbers, would deserve no attention\nas history. But nothing is more striking in a survey of our book\nthan the clear unhesitating way in which incidents are set forth,\neven where moral and religious ends could not be much served by the\ndetail that is freely used. The account of the muster-roll is a case\nin point. There we find what may be called \"pedantic accuracy.\" The\nenumeration of each tribe is given separately, and the formula is\nrepeated, \"by their families, by their fathers' houses, according\nto the number of the names from twenty years old and upward, all\nthat were able to go forth to war.\" Again, the whole of the seventh\nchapter, the longest in the book, is taken up with an account of the\nofferings of the tribes, made at the dedication of the altar. These\noblations are presented day after day by the heads of the twelve\ntribes in order, and each tribe brings precisely the same gifts--\"one\nsilver charger, the weight thereof was an hundred and thirty shekels,\none silver bowl of seventy shekels after the shekel of the sanctuary,\nboth of them full of fine flour mingled with oil for a meal offering;\none golden spoon of ten shekels full of incense; one young bullock,\none ram, one he-lamb of the first year for a burnt offering; one\nmale of the goats for a sin offering; and for the sacrifice of\npeace offerings, two oxen, five rams, five he-goats, five he-lambs\nof the first year.\" Now the difficulty at once occurs that in the\nwilderness, according to Exod. xvi., there was no bread, no flour,\nthat manna was the food of the people. In Numb. xi. 6 the complaint\nof the children of Israel is recorded: \"Now our soul is dried away;\nthere is nothing at all: we have nought save this manna to look\nto.\" In Josh. v. 10 ff. it is stated that, after the passage of the\nJordan, \"they kept the passover on the fourteenth day of the month\nat even in the plains of Jericho. And they did eat of the old corn\nof the land on the morrow after the passover, unleavened cakes and\nparched corn in the self-same day. And the manna ceased on the morrow\nafter they had eaten of the old corn of the land.\" To the compilers\nof the Book of Numbers the statement that tribe after tribe brought\nofferings of fine flour mingled with oil, which could only have\nbeen obtained from Egypt or from some Arabian valley at a distance,\nmust have been as hard to receive as it is to us. Nevertheless,\nthe assertion is repeated no less than twelve times. What then? Do\nwe impugn the sincerity of the historians? Are we to suppose them\ncareless of the fact? Do we not rather perceive that in the face\nof what seemed insuperable difficulties they held to what they had\nbefore them as authentic records? No writer could be inspired and at\nthe same time indifferent to accuracy. If there is one thing more\nthan another on which we may rely, it is that the authors of these\nbooks of Scripture have done their very utmost by careful inquiry and\nrecension to make their account of what took place in the wilderness\nfull and precise. Absolute sincerity and scrupulous carefulness\nare essential conditions for dealing successfully with moral and\nreligious themes; and we have all evidence that the compilers had\nthese qualities. But in order to reach historical fact they had\nto use the same kind of means as we employ; and this qualifying\nstatement, with all that it involves, applies to the whole contents\nof the book we are to consider. Our dependence with regard to the\nevents recorded is on the truthfulness but not the omniscience of the\nmen, whoever they were, who from traditions, records, scrolls of law,\nand venerable memoranda compiled this Scripture as we have it. They\nwrought under the sense of sacred duty, and found through that the\ninspiration which gives perennial value to their work. With this in\nview we shall take up the various matters of history and legislation.\n\n * * * * *\n\nRecurring now, for a little, to the spirit of the Book of Numbers,\nwe find in the ethical passages its highest note and power as an\ninspired writing. The standard of judgment is not by any means that\nof Christianity. It belongs to an age when moral ideas had often to\nbe enforced with indifference to human life; when, conversely, the\nplagues and disasters that befell men were always connected with moral\noffences. It belongs to an age when the malediction of one who claimed\nsupernatural insight was generally believed to carry power with it, and\nthe blessing of God meant earthly prosperity. And the notable fact is\nthat, side by side with these beliefs, righteousness of an exalted kind\nis strenuously taught. For example, the reverence for Moses and Aaron,\nusually so characteristic of the Book of Numbers, is seen falling into\nthe background when the Divine judgment of their fault is recorded; and\nthe earnestness shown is nothing less than sublime. In the course of\nthe legislation Aaron is invested with extraordinary official dignity;\nand Moses appears at his best in the matter of Eldad and Medad when he\nsays, \"Enviest thou for my sake? Would God that all the Lord's people\nwere prophets, and that the Lord would put His Spirit upon them.\" Yet\nNumbers records the sentence pronounced upon the brothers: \"Because ye\nbelieved Me not, to sanctify Me in the eyes of the children of Israel,\ntherefore ye shall not bring this congregation into the land which I\nhave given them.\" And more severe is the form of the condemnation\nrecorded in chap. xxvii. 14: \"Because ye rebelled against My word in\nthe wilderness of Zin, in the strife of the congregation, to sanctify\nMe at the waters before their eyes.\" The moral strain of the book\nis keen in the punishment inflicted on a Sabbath-breaker, in the\ndestination to death of the whole congregation for murmuring against\nGod--a judgment which, at the entreaty of Moses, was not revoked, but\nonly deferred--and again in the condemnation to death of every soul\nthat sins presumptuously. On the other hand, the provision of refuge\ncities for the unwitting man-slayer shows the Divine righteousness at\none with mercy.\n\nIt must be confessed the book has another note. In order that Israel\nmight reach and conquer Canaan there had to be war; and the warlike\nspirit is frankly breathed. There is no thought of converting enemies\nlike the Midianites into friends; every man of them must be put to\nthe sword. The census enumerates the men fit for war. The primitive\nmilitarism is consecrated by Israel's necessity and destiny. When the\ndesert march is over, Reuben, Gad, and the half-tribe of Manasseh\nmust not turn peacefully to their sheep and cattle on the east side\nof Jordan; they must send their men of war across the river to\nmaintain the unity of the nation by running the hazard of battle\nwith the rest. Experience of this inevitable discipline brought\nmoral gain. Religion could use even war to lift the people into the\npossibility of higher life.\n\n\n\n\n II\n\n _THE CENSUS AND THE CAMP_\n\n\n 1. THE MUSTERING\n\n NUMBERS i. 1-46\n\nFrom the place of high spiritual knowledge, where through the\nrevelation of God in covenant and law Israel has been constituted His\nnation and His Church, the tribes must now march with due order and\ndignity. The sense of a Divine calling and of responsibility to the\nHighest will react on the whole arrangements made for the ordinary\ntasks and activities of men. Social aims may unite those who have\nthem in common, and the emergencies of a nation will lay constraint\non patriotic souls. But nothing so binds men together as a common\nvocation to do God's will and maintain His faith. These ideas are to\nbe traced in the whole account of the mustering of the warriors and\nthe organisation of the camp. We review it feeling that the dominating\nthought of a Divine call to spiritual duty and progress is far from\nhaving control of modern Christendom. Under the New Covenant there is\na distribution of grace to every one, an endowment of each according\nto his faith with priestly and even kingly powers. No chief men swear\nfealty to Christ on behalf of the tribes that gather to His standard;\nbut each believer devotes himself to the service and receives his own\ncommission. Yet, while the first thought is that of personal honour and\nliberty, there should follow at once the desire, the determination, to\nfind one's fit place in the camp, in the march, in the war. The unity\nis imperative, for there is one body and one spirit, even as we are\ncalled in one hope of our calling. The commission each receives is not\nto be a free-lance in the Divine warfare, but to take his right place\nin the ranks; and that place he must find.\n\nThe enumeration, as recorded in chap. i., was not to be of all\nIsraelites, but of men from twenty years old and upward, all that\nwere able to go forth to war. From Sinai to Canaan was no long\njourney, and fighting might soon be required. The muster was by way\nof preparation for conflicts in the wilderness and for the final\nstruggle. It is significant that Aaron is shown associated with Moses\nin gathering the results. We see not only a preparation for war, but\nalso for the poll tax or tithe to be levied in support of the priests\nand Levites. A sequel to the enumeration is to be found in chap.\nxviii. 21: \"And unto the children of Levi, behold, I have given all\nthe tithe in Israel for an inheritance, in return for their service\nwhich they serve, even the service of the tent of meeting.\" The\nLevites again were to give, out of what they received, a tenth part\nfor the maintenance of the priests. The enactment when carried into\neffect would make the support of those who ministered in holy things\na term of the national constitution.\n\nNow taking the census as intended to impress the personal duties of\nservice in war and contribution for religious ends, we find in it a\nvaluable lesson for all who acknowledge the Divine authority. Not\nremotely may the command be interpreted thus. Take the sum of them,\nthat they may realise that God takes the sum of them and expects of\nevery man service commensurate with his powers. The claim of Jehovah\nwent side by side with the claim on behalf of the nation, for He was\nHead of the nation. But God is equally the Head of all who have their\nlife from Him; and this numbering of the Hebrews points to a census\nwhich is accurately registered and never falls short of the sum of a\npeople by a single unit. Whoever can fight the battle of righteousness,\nserve the truth by witness-bearing, aid in relieving one weak, or help\nreligion by personal example and willing gift--every possible servant\nof God, who is also by the very possession of life and privilege a\ndebtor of God, is numbered in the daily census of His providence.\nThe measure of the ability of each is known. \"To whomsoever much is\ngiven, of him shall much be required.\" The Divine regard of our lives\nand estimate of our powers, and the accompanying claim made upon us,\nare indeed far from being understood; even members of the Church are\nstrangely ignorant of their duty. But is it thought that because no\nSinai shrouded in awful smoke towers above us, and now we are encamped\nat the foot of Calvary, where one great offering was made for our\nredemption, therefore we are free in any sense from the service Israel\nwas expected to render? Do any hold themselves relieved from the tithe\nbecause they are Christ's freemen, and shirk the warfare because they\nalready enjoy the privileges of the victors? These are the ignorant,\nwhose complacent excuses show that they do not understand the law of\nDivine religion.\n\nTrue, the position of the Church among us is not of the kind\nwhich the Mosaic law gave to the priesthood in Israel. Tithes are\ngathered, not from those only who are numbered within the Church and\nacknowledge obligation, but also from those outside, and always by\nanother authority than that of Divine commandment. In this way the\nwhole matter of the support of religion is confused in these lands\nboth for members of the national Churches and for those beyond their\nborders. Successfully as the old Hebrew scheme may once have wrought,\nit is now hopelessly out of line with the development of society.\nThe census does not in any way determine what a national Church can\nclaim. Aaron does not stand beside Moses to watch the enrolment of\nthe tribes, families, and households as they come to be numbered.\nYet, by the highest law of all, which neither Church nor State\ncan alter, the demand for service is enforced. There is a warlike\nduty from which none are exempt, from which there is no discharge.\nAlthough the ideal of an organised humanity appears as yet far off\nin our schemes of government and social melioration, providentially\nit is being carried into effect. Laws are at work that need no human\nadministration. By the Divine ordinance generous effort for the\ncommon good and the ends of religion is made imperative. Obedience\nbrings its reward: \"The liberal deviseth liberal things, and by\nliberal things shall he stand.\" Neglect is also punished: the sure\nresult of selfishness is an impoverished life.\n\nThe census is described as having been thoroughly organised. Keil and\nDelitzsch think that the registering may have taken place \"according\nto the classification adopted at Jethro's suggestion for the\nadministration of justice--viz., in thousands, hundreds, fifties, and\ntens.\" They also defend the total of six hundred and three thousand\nfive hundred and fifty, which is precisely the same as that reached\napparently nine months before. It is an obvious explanation of\nwhat appears a perplexing agreement, that the enumeration may have\noccupied nine months. But the number is certainly large, much larger\nthan the muster-rolls of the Book of Judges would lead us to expect,\nif we reckon back from them. Nor can any explanation be given that\nis satisfactory in all respects. We may shrink from interfering with\nthese numerical statements carefully set down thousands of years ago.\nYet we feel that the haze of remoteness hangs over this roll of the\ntribes and all after-reckonings based upon it.\n\nOf the twelve princes named in chap. i. 5-15, as overseers of the\ncensus, Nahshon, son of Amminadab, of the tribe of Judah, has\npeculiar distinction. His name is found in the genealogy of David\ngiven in the Book of Ruth (chap. iv. 20). It also appears in the\n\"book of the generation of Jesus Christ\" (Matt. i.) and the roll of\nJoseph's ancestry recorded by St. Luke. One after another in that\nhonourable line which gave the Hebrews their Psalmist and the world\nits Saviour is but a name to us. Yet the life represented by the name\nNahshon, spent mainly in the wilderness, had its part in far-off\nresults; and so had many a life, not even named--the hard lives of\nbrave fathers and burdened mothers in Israel, who, on the weary march\nthrough the desert, had their sorrow and pain, their scanty joy and\nhope. Far away is the endurance of those Hebrew men and women, yet it\nis related to our own religion, our salvation. The discipline of the\nwilderness made men of courage, women great in faith. Beneath their\nfeet the Arabian sand burned, above them the sun flamed; they heard\nalarms of war, and followed the pillar of smoke for their appointed\ntime, looking, even when they knew they looked in vain, for the\nland beyond of which Jehovah had spoken. Unaware of their nation's\ndestiny, they toiled and suffered to serve a great Divine plan which\nin the course of the ages came to ripeness. And the thought brings\nhelp to ourselves. We too have our desert journey, our duty and\nhardship, with an outlook not merely personal. It is our privilege,\nif we will take it so, to aid the Divine plan for the humanity that\nis to be, the great brotherhood in which Christ shall see of the\ntravail of His soul and be satisfied. Like a prince of Judah, or a\nhumble nameless mother in Israel, each may find abiding dignity of\nlife in doing well some allotted part in the great enterprise.\n\nThe age of service fixed for the men of the tribes may yield\nsuggestions for our time. It is not of warlike service we have\nto think, but of that which depends on spiritual influence and\nintellectual power. And we may ask whether the limits on one side\nand the other have any parallel for us. Young men and women, having\nreached the age of bodily and mental vigour, are to hold themselves\nenrolled in the ranks of the army of God. There is a time of\nlearning and preparation, when knowledge is to be acquired, when\nthe principles of life are to be grasped, and the soul is to find\nits inspiration through personal faith. Then there should come that\nself-consecration by which response is made to the claim of God.\nNeither should that be premature, nor should it be deferred. When an\naimless, irresolute adolescence is followed by years of drifting and\nexperimenting without clear religious purpose, the best opportunity\nof life is thrown away. And this far too frequently occurs among\nthose on whom parental influence and the finest Christian teaching\nhave been expended. The time arrives when such young men and\nwomen should begin to serve the Church and the world; but they\nare still unprepared because they have not considered the great\nquestions of duty, and seen that they have a part to play on the\nfield of endeavour. It is true, no time can be fixed. The public\nservice of Christ has been begun by some in very early youth; and\nthe results have justified their adventure. From the humble tasks\nthey first undertook they have gone on steadily to places of high\nresponsibility, never once looking back, learning while they taught,\ngaining faith while they imparted it to others. Each for himself or\nherself, in this matter of supreme importance, must seek the guidance\nand realise the vocation of God. But delay is often indulged, and the\ntwentieth, even the thirtieth year, passes without a single effort in\nthe holy service. One could wish for a Divine conscription, a command\nlaid on every one in youth to be ready at a certain day and hour to\ntake the sword of the Spirit.\n\nOn the other side also many need to reconsider. No time was fixed for\nthe end of the services to which the Israelites were summoned. As long\nas a man could carry arms he was to hold himself ready for the field.\nNot the increasing cares of his family, not the disinclination which\ncomes with years, was to weigh against the ordinance of Jehovah. But\nservice now, however cheerfully it may be rendered in early manhood\nand womanhood, is often renounced altogether when knowledge and power\nare coming to ripeness with the experience of life. Doubtless there\nare many excuses to be made for heads of households who are leaving\ntheir young folk to represent them in religion, and pretty much in\neverything outside the mere maintaining of existence or the enjoyment\nof it. The demands of public service all round are sometimes quite out\nof proportion to the available time and strength. Yet the Christian\nduty never lapses; and it is a great evil when the balance is wanting\nbetween old and young, tried and untried.\n\n\n 2. THE TRIBE OF LEVI\n\n NUMBERS i. 47-54\n\nThe tribe of Levi is not numbered with the rest. No warlike service,\nno half-shekel for the sanctuary, is to be exacted from the Levite.\nHis contribution to the general good is to be of another kind.\nPitching their tents about the tabernacle, the men of this tribe are\nto guard the sanctuary from careless or rude intrusion, and minister\nunto it, taking charge of its parts and furniture, dismantling it\nwhen it is to be removed, setting it up again when another stage of\nthe march is over.\n\nIn this order it is implied that, although according to the ideal of\nthe Mosaic law Israel was to be a holy nation, yet the reality fell\nvery far short of it. \"The Lord spake unto Moses, saying, Speak unto\nall the congregation of the children of Israel, and say unto them,\nYe shall be holy: for I the Lord your God am holy\" (Lev. xix. 1, 2).\nAgain and again this command of consecration is given. But neither in\nthe wilderness, nor throughout the pre-exilic history, nor after the\nBabylonian affliction had purged the nation of idolatry, was Israel so\nholy that access to the sanctuary could be allowed to the men of the\ntribes. Rather, as time went by, did the need for special consecration\nof those about the temple become more evident. Although by statute the\ntribe of Levi was well provided for, it cannot be said that the life\nof the Levite was at any time enviable from a worldly point of view;\nat the best it was a kind of honourable poverty. Something else than\nmere priest-craft upheld the system which separated the whole tribe;\nsomething else made the Levites content with their position. There\nwas a real and imperative sense of need to guard the sanctities of\nreligion, a jealousy for the honour of God, which, originating with\nMoses and the priesthood, was felt throughout the whole nation.\n\nAs we have seen, the scheme of Israel's religion required this array\nof servants of the sanctuary. Under Christianity the ideal of the\nlife of faith and the manner of worship are entirely different.\nA way into the holy place of the Divine presence is now open to\nevery believer, and each may have boldness to enter it. But even\nunder Christianity there is a general failure from holiness, from\nthe spiritual worship of God. And as among the Hebrews, so among\nChristians, the need for a body of guardians of sacred truth and\npure religion has been widely acknowledged. Throughout the Church\ngenerally down to the Reformation, and still in countries like Russia\nand Spain, we may even say in England, the condition of things is\nlike that in Israel. A people conscious of ignorance and secularity,\nfeeling nevertheless the need of religion, willingly supports the\n\"priests,\" sometimes a great army, who conduct the worship of God.\nThere is nothing to wonder at here, in a sense; much, indeed, for\nwhich to be thankful. Yet the system is not the New Testament one;\nand those who endeavour to realise the ideal are not to be branded\nand scorned as schismatics. They should be honoured for their noble\neffort to reach and use the holy consecration of the Christian.\n\n\n 3. THE CAMP\n\n NUMBERS ii\n\nThe second chapter is devoted to the arrangement of the camp and the\nposition of the various tribes on the march. The front is eastward,\nand Judah has the post of honour in the van; at its head Nahshon son\nof Amminadab. Issachar and Zebulun, closely associated with Judah in\nthe genealogy as descended from Leah, are the others in front of the\ntabernacle. The right wing, to the south of the tabernacle, is composed\nof Reuben, Simeon, and Gad, again connected by the hereditary tie,\nGad by descent from the \"handmaid of Leah.\" The seniority of Reuben\nis apparently acknowledged by the position of the tribe at the head\nof the right wing, which would sustain the first attack of the desert\nclans; for dignity and onerous duty go together. The rear is formed by\nEphraim, Manasseh, and Benjamin, connected with one another by descent\nfrom Rachel. Northward, on the left of the advance, Dan, Asher, and\nNaphtali have their position. Standards of divisions and ensigns of\nfamilies are not forgotten in the description of the camp; and Jewish\ntradition has ventured to state what some of these were. Judah is said\nto have been a lion (compare \"the lion that is of the tribe of Judah,\"\nRev. v. 5); Reuben, the image of a human head; Ephraim, an ox; and Dan\nan eagle. If this tradition is accepted, it will connect the four main\nensigns of Israel with the vision of Ezekiel in which the same four\nfigures were united in each of the four living creatures that issued\nfrom the fiery cloud.\n\nThe picture of the great organised camp and orderly march of Israel\nis interesting; but it presents a contrast to the disorganised,\ndisorderly condition of human society in every land and every age.\nWhile it may be said that there are nations leagued in creed, allied\nby descent, which form the van; that others, similarly connected more\nor less, constitute the right and left wings of the advancing host;\nand the rest, straggling far behind, bring up the rear--this is but\na very imaginative representation of the fact. No people advances as\nwith one mind and one heart; no group of nations can be said to have a\nsingle standard. Time and destiny urge on the host, and all is to be\nwon by steady resolute endeavour. Yet some are encamped, while others\nare moving about restlessly or engaged in petty conflicts that have\nnothing to do with moral gain. There should be unity; but one division\nis embroiled with another, tribe crosses swords with tribe. The truth\nis that as Israel came far short of real spiritual organisation and due\ndisposition of its forces to serve a common end, so it is still with\nthe human race. Nor do the schemes that are occasionally tried to some\nextent promise a remedy for our disorder. For the symbol of our most\nholy faith is not set in the midst by most of those who aim at social\norganisation, nor do they dream of seeking a better country, that is, a\nheavenly. The description of the camp of Israel has something to teach\nus still. Without the Divine law there is no progress, without a Divine\nrallying-point there is no unity. Faith must control, the standard of\nChristianity must show the way; otherwise the nations will only wander\naimlessly, and fight and die in the desert.\n\n\n\n\n III\n\n _PRIESTS AND LEVITES_\n\n\n 1. THE PRIESTHOOD\n\n NUMBERS iii. 1-10\n\nIn the opening verse of this chapter, which relates to the designation\nof the priesthood, Moses is named, for once, after his brother.\nAccording to the genealogy of Exod. vi., Aaron was the elder; and this\nmay have led to the selection of his as the priestly house--which\nagain would give him priority in a passage relating to the hierarchy.\nIf Moses had chosen, his undoubted claims would have secured the\npriestly office for his family. But he did not desire this; and indeed\nthe duties of administrative head of the people were sufficiently\nheavy. Aaron was apparently fitted for the sacerdotal office, and\nwithout peculiar qualifications for any other. He seems to have had no\noriginating power, but to have been ready to fall in with and direct\nthe routine of ceremonial worship. And we may assume that Moses knew\nthe surviving sons of Aaron to be of the stamp of their father, likely\nto inaugurate a race of steady, devoted servants of the altar.\n\nYet all Aaron's sons had not been of this quiet disposition. Nadab\nand Abihu, the two eldest, had sinned presumptuously, and brought on\nthemselves the doom of death. No fewer than five times is their fall\nreferred to in the books of Leviticus and Numbers. Whatever that\nstrange fire was which they put in their censers and used before the\nLord, the judgment that befell them was signal and impressive. And\nhere reference is made to the fact that they died without issue, as\nif to mark the barrenness of the sacrilegious. Did it not appear that\ninherent disqualification for the priesthood, the moral blindness or\nself-will which was shown in their presumptuous act, had been foreseen\nby God, who wrote them childless in His book? This race must not be\ncontinued. Israel must not begin with priests who desecrate the altar.\n\nWhether the death of those two sons of Aaron came by an unexpected\nstroke, or was a doom inflicted after judgment in which their\nfather had to acquiesce, the terrible event left a most effectual\nwarning. The order appointed for the incense offering, and all\nother sacred duties, would thenceforth be rigidly observed. And the\nincident--revived continually for the priests when they studied the\nLaw--must have had especial significance through their knowledge of\nthe use and meaning of fire in idolatrous worship. The temptation\nwas often felt, against which the fate of Nadab and Abihu set every\npriest on his guard, to mingle the supposed virtue of other religious\nsymbols with the sanctities of Jehovah. Who can doubt that priests\nof Israel, secretly tempted by the rites of sun-worship, might have\ngone the length of carrying the fire of Baal into Jehovah's temple,\nif the memory of this doom had not held back the hand? Here also the\ndegradation of the burnt offering by taking flame from a common fire\nwas by implication forbidden. The source of that which is the symbol\nof Divine purity must be sacredly pure.\n\nThose who minister in holy things have still a corresponding danger,\nand may find here a needed warning. The fervour shown in sacred\nworship and work must have an origin that is purely religious. He who\npleads earnestly with God on behalf of men, or rises to impassioned\nappeal in beseeching men to repent, appearing as an ambassador of\nChrist urged by the love of souls, has to do not with symbols, but\nwith truths, ideas, Divine mysteries infinitely more sacred than the\nincense and fire of Old Testament worship. For the Hebrew priest\noutward and formal consecration sufficed. For the minister of the\nNew Testament, the purity must be of the heart and soul. Yet it is\npossible for the heat of alien zeal, of mere self-love or official\nambition, to be carried into duties the most solemn that fall to the\nlot of man; and if it is not in the Spirit of God a preacher speaks\nor offers the sacrifice of thanksgiving, if some other inspiration\nmakes him eloquent and gives his voice its tremulous notes, sin like\nthat of Nadab and Abihu is committed, or rather a sin greater than\ntheirs. With profound sorrow it must be confessed that the \"strange\nfire\" from idolatrous altars too often desecrates the service of\nGod. Excitement is sought by those who minister in order that the\ntemperament may be raised to the degree necessary for free and ardent\nspeech; and it is not always of a purely religious kind. Those who\nhear may for a time be deceived by the pretence of unction, by\ndramatic tones, by alien fire. But the difference is felt when it\ncannot be defined; and on the spiritual life of the ministrant the\neffect is simply fatal.\n\nThe surviving sons of Aaron, Eleazar and Ithamar, were anointed\nand \"consecrated to minister in the priest's office.\" The form of\ndesignation is indicated by the expression, \"whose hand he filled\nto exercise priesthood.\" This has been explained as referring to a\nportion of the ceremony described in Lev. viii. 26 f. \"And out of\nthe basket of unleavened bread, that was before the Lord, he took\none unleavened cake, and one cake of oiled bread, and one wafer, and\nplaced them on the fat, and upon the right thigh: and he put the\nwhole upon the hands of Aaron, and upon the hands of his sons, and\nwaved them for a wave offering before the Lord.\" The explanation is\nscarcely satisfactory. In the long ceremony of consecration this\nincident was not the only one to which the expression \"filling\nthe hand\" was applied; and something simpler must be found as the\nsource of an idiomatic phrase. To fill the hand would naturally\nmean to pay or hire, and we seem to be pointed to the time when\nfor the patriarchal priesthood there was substituted one that was\nofficial, supported by the community. In Exod. xxviii. 41 and in\nLev. viii. 33, the expression in question is used in a general sense\nincompatible with its reference to any particular portion of the\nceremony of consecration. It is also used in Judges xvii., where to\nall appearance the consecration of Micah's Levite implied little else\nthan the first payment on account of a stipulated hire. The phrase,\nthen, appears to be a mark of history, and carries the mind back to\nthe simple origin of the priestly office.\n\nEleazar and Ithamar \"ministered in the priest's office in the\npresence of Aaron their father.\" So far as the narrative of the\nPentateuch gives information, there were originally, and during\nthe whole of the wilderness journey, no other priests than Aaron\nand his sons. Nadab and Abihu having died, there remained but the\ntwo besides their father. Phinehas the son of Eleazar appears in\nthe history, but is not called a priest, nor has he any priestly\nfunctions. What he does is indeed quite apart from the holy office.\nAnd this early restriction of the number is not only in favour of\nthe Pentateuchal history, but partly explains the fact that in\nDeuteronomy the priests and Levites are apparently identified. Taking\nat their very heaviest the duties specially laid on the priests, much\nmust have fallen to the share of their assistants, who had their\nown consecration as ministers of the sanctuary. It is certain that\nmembers of the Levitical families were in course of time admitted to\nthe full status of priests.\n\nThe direction is given in ver. 10, \"Thou shalt appoint Aaron and his\nsons, and they shall keep their priesthood; and the stranger that\ncometh nigh shall be put to death.\" This is rigorously exclusive, and\nseems to contrast with the statements of Deuteronomy, \"At that time\nthe Lord separated the tribe of Levi to bear the ark of the covenant\nof the Lord, to stand before the Lord to minister unto Him and to\n_bless in His name_ unto this day\" (x. 8); and again, \"The priests\nthe Levites, even all the tribe of Levi, shall have no portion nor\ninheritance with Israel; they shall eat the offerings of the Lord made\nby fire, and His inheritance\" (xviii. 1); and once more, \"Moses wrote\nthe law and delivered it unto the priests, the sons of Levi, which\nbore the ark of the covenant of the Lord, and unto all the elders of\nIsrael\" (xxxi. 9). Throughout Deuteronomy the priests are never called\nsons of Aaron, nor is Aaron called a priest. Whether the cause of this\napparent discrepancy is that Deuteronomy regarded the arrangements for\nthe priestly service in a different light, or that the distinction of\npriests from Levites fell into abeyance and was afterwards revived,\nthe variation cannot be ignored. In the book of Joshua \"the children\nof Aaron the priest\" appear on a few occasions, and certain of the\nduties of high priest are ascribed to Eleazar. Yet even in Joshua the\nimportance attached to the Aaronic house is far less than in Exodus,\nLeviticus, and Numbers; and the expression \"the priests the Levites\"\noccurs twice. If we regard the origin of the Aaronic priesthood as\nbelonging to the Mosaic period, then the wars and disturbances of\nthe settlement in Canaan must have entirely disorganised the system\noriginally instituted. In the days of the judges there seems to have\nbeen no orderly observance of those laws which gave the priesthood\nimportance. Scattered Levites had to do as they best could what was\npossible in the way of sacrifice and purification. And this confusion\nmay have begun in the plain of Moab. The death of Aaron, the personal\ninsignificance of his sons, and still more the death of Moses himself,\nwould place the administration of religious as well as secular affairs\non an entirely different footing. Memoranda preserved in Leviticus\nand Numbers may therefore be more ancient than those of Deuteronomy;\nand Deuteronomy, describing the state of things before the passage of\nJordan, may in regard to the priesthood reflect the conditions of a new\ndevelopment, the course of which did not blend with the original design\ntill after the captivity.\n\nThe tribe of Levi is, according to ver. 6 ff., appointed to minister\nto Aaron, and to keep his charge and that of the congregation before\nthe \"tent of meeting,\" to do the service of the tabernacle. For all\nthe necessary work connected with the sanctuary the Levites are\n\"wholly given unto Aaron on behalf of the children of Israel.\" It\nwas of course in accordance with the patriarchal idea that each clan\nshould have a hereditary chief. Here, however, an arbitrary rule\nbreaks in. For Aaron was not by primogeniture head of the tribe of\nLevi. He belonged to a younger family of the tribe. The arrangements\nmade by Moses as the representative of God superseded the succession\nby birthright. And this is by no means the only case in which a law\nusually adhered to was broken through. According to the history the\nhigh-priesthood did not invariably follow the line of Eleazar. At a\ncertain point a descendant of Ithamar was for some reason raised to\nthe dignity. Samuel, too, became virtually a priest, and rose higher\nthan any high-priest before the captivity, although he was not even\nof the tribe of Levi. The law of spiritual endowment in his case set\nthe other aside. And is it not often so? The course of providence\nbrings forward the man who can guide affairs. While his work lasts he\nis practically supreme. It is useless to question or rebel. Neither\nin religion nor in government can the appeal to Divine right or to\nconstitutional order alter the fact. Korah need not revolt against\nMoses; nor may Aaron imagine that he can push himself into the\nfront. And Aaron, as head of the tribe of Levi, and of the religious\nadministration, is safe in his own position so long only as his\noffice is well served. It is to responsibility he is called, rather\nthan to honour. Let him do his duty, otherwise he will surely become\nmerely a name or a figure.\n\n\n 2. THE FIRST-BORN\n\n NUMBERS iii. 11-13, 40-51\n\nThese two passages supplement each other and may be taken together.\nJehovah claims the first-born in Israel. He hallowed them unto\nHimself on the day when He smote all the first-born in the land of\nEgypt. They are now numbered from a month old and upward. But instead\nof their being appointed personally to holy service, the Levites are\nsubstituted for them. The whole account supplies a scheme of the\norigin of the sacerdotal tribe.\n\nIt has been questioned whether the number of the first-born, which\nis 22,273, can in any way be made to agree with the total number\nof the male Israelites, previously stated at 603,550. Wellhausen\nis specially contemptuous of a tradition or calculation which, he\nsays, would give an average of forty children to each woman. But\nthe difficulty partly yields if it is kept in view that the Levites\nwere separated for the service of the sanctuary. Naturally it would\nbe the heir-apparent alone of each family group whose liability to\nthis kind of duty fell to be considered. The head of a household was,\naccording to the ancient reckoning, its priest. In Abraham's family\nno one counted as a first-born but Isaac. Now that a generation of\nIsraelites is growing up sanctified by the covenant, it appears fit\nthat the presumptive priest should either be devoted to sacerdotal\nduty, or relieved of it by a Levite as his substitute. Suppose each\nfamily had five tents, and suppose further that the children born\nbefore the exodus are not reckoned, the number will not be found at\nall disproportionate. The absolute number remains a difficulty.\n\nDr. Robertson Smith argues from his own premises about the sanctity\nof the first-born. He repudiates the notion that at one time the\nHebrews actually sacrificed all their first-born sons; yet he affirms\nthat \"there must have been some point of attachment in ancient custom\nfor the belief that the Deity asked for such a sacrifice.\"[1] \"I\napprehend,\" he proceeds, \"that all the prerogatives of the first-born\namong Semitic peoples are originally prerogatives of sanctity; the\nsacred blood of the kin flows purest and strongest in him (Gen. xlix.\n3). Neither in the case of children nor in that of cattle did the\ncongenital holiness of the first-born originally imply that they must\nbe sacrificed or given to the Deity on the altar, but only that if\nsacrifice was to be made, they were the best and fittest because the\nholiest victims.\" The passage in Numbers may be confidently declared\nto be far from any such conception. The special fitness for sacrifice\nof the first-born of an animal is assumed: the fitness of the heir\nof a family, again, is plainly not to _become_ a sacrifice, but to\noffer sacrifice. The first-born of the Egyptians died. But it is\nthe life, the holy activity of His own people, not their death, God\ndesires. And this holy activity, rising to its highest function in\nthe first-born, is according to our passage laid on the Levites to a\ncertain extent. Not entirely indeed. The whole congregation is still\nconsecrated and must be holy. All are bound by the covenant. The head\nof each family group will still have to officiate as a priest in\ncelebrating the passover. Certain duties, however, are transferred\nfor the better protection of the sanctities of worship.\n\nThe first-born are found to exceed the number of the Levites by two\nhundred and seventy-three; and for their redemption Moses takes \"five\nshekels apiece by the poll; after the shekel of the sanctuary.\" The\nmoney thus collected is given unto Aaron and his sons.\n\nThe method of redemption here presented, purely arbitrary in respect of\nthe sum appointed for the ransom of each life, is fitly contrasted by\nthe Apostle Peter with that of the Christian dispensation. He adopts\nthe word _redeem_, taking it over from the old economy, but says,\n\"Ye were redeemed not with corruptible things, with silver or gold,\nfrom your vain manner of life handed down from your fathers.\" And the\ndifference is not only that the Christian is redeemed with the precious\nblood of Christ, but this also, that, while the first-born Israelite\nwas relieved of certain parts of the holy service which might have been\nclaimed of him by Jehovah, it is for sacred service, \"to be a holy\npriesthood to offer up spiritual sacrifices,\" Christians are redeemed.\nIn the one case exemption, in the other case consecration is the end.\nThe difference is indeed great, and shows how much the two covenants\nare in contrast with each other. It is not to enable us to escape any\nof the duties or obligations of life Christ has given Himself for us.\nIt is to make us fit for those duties, to bring us fully under those\nobligations, to purify us that we may serve God with our bodies and\nspirits which are His.\n\nA passage in Exodus (xiii. 11 f.) must not be overlooked in\nconnection with that presently under consideration. The enactment\nthere is to the effect that when Israel is brought into the land of\nthe Canaanites every first-born of beasts shall be set apart unto\nthe Lord, the firstling of an ass shall be redeemed with a lamb\nor killed, and all first-born children shall be redeemed. Here the\nsingular point is that the law is deferred, and does not come into\noperation till the settlement in Canaan. Either this was set aside\nfor the provisions made in Numbers, or these are to be interpreted\nby it. The difficulties of the former view are greatly increased by\nthe mention of the \"shekel of the sanctuary,\" which seems to imply a\nsettled medium of exchange, hardly possible in the wilderness.\n\nIn Numb. viii. 18, 19, the subject of redemption is again touched,\nand the additions are significant. Now the service of the Levites\n\"in the tent of meeting\" is by way of atonement for the children of\nIsrael, \"that there be no plague among the children of Israel when\nthe children of Israel come nigh unto the sanctuary.\" Atonement\nis not with blood in this case, but by the service of the living\nsubstitute. While the general scope of the Mosaic law requires the\nshedding of blood in order that the claim of God may be met, this\nexception must not be forgotten. And in a sense it is the chief\ninstance of atonement, far transcending in expressiveness those\nin which animals were slaughtered for propitiation. The whole\ncongregation, threatened with plagues and disasters in approaching\nGod, has protection through the holy service of the Levitical tribe.\nHere is substitution of a kind which makes a striking point in the\nsymbolism of the Old Testament in its relation to the New. The\nprinciple may be seen in patriarchal history. The ten in Sodom, if\nten righteous men could have been found, would have saved it, would\nhave been its atonement in a sense, not by their death on its behalf\nbut by their life. And Moses himself, standing alone between God\nand Israel, prevails by his pleading and saves the nation from its\ndoom. So our Lord says of His disciples, \"Ye are the salt of the\nearth.\" Their holy devotion preserves the mass from moral corruption\nand spiritual death. Again, \"for the elect's sake,\" the days of\ntribulation shall be shortened (Matt. xxiv. 22).\n\nThe ceremonies appointed for the cleansing and consecration of the\nLevites, described in viii. 5-26, may be noticed here. They differed\nconsiderably from those enjoined for the consecration of priests.\nNeither were the Levites anointed with sacred oil, for instance,\nnor were they sprinkled with the blood of sacrifices; nor, again,\ndo they seem to have worn any special dress, even in the tabernacle\ncourt. There was, however, an impressive ritual which would produce\nin their minds a consciousness of separation and devotion to God. The\nwater of expiation, literally of _sin_, was first to be sprinkled\nupon them, a baptism not signifying anything like regeneration, but\nhaving reference to possible defilements of the flesh. A razor was\nthen to be made to pass over the whole body, and the clothes were\nto be washed, also to remove actual as well as legal impurity. This\ncleansing completed, the sacrifices followed. One bullock for a\nburnt offering, with its accompanying meal offering, and one for a\nsin offering were provided. The people being assembled towards the\ndoor of the tent of meeting, the Levites were placed in front of\nthem to be presented to Jehovah. The princes probably laid their\nhands on the Levites, so declaring them the representatives of all\nfor their special office. Then Aaron had to offer the sacrifices\nfor the Levites, and the Levites themselves as living sacrifices to\nJehovah. The Levites laid their hands on the bullocks, making them\ntheir substitutes for the symbolic purpose. Aaron and his sons slew\nthe animals and offered them in the appointed way, burning the one\nbullock upon the altar, around which its blood had been sprinkled,\nof the other burning only certain portions called the fat. Then\nthe ceremony of waving was performed, or what was possible in the\ncircumstances, each Levite being passed through the hands of Aaron\nor one of his sons. So set apart, they were, according to viii. 24,\nrequired to wait upon the work of the tent of meeting, each from his\ntwenty-fifth to his fiftieth year. The service had been previously\nordered to begin at the thirtieth year (iv. 3). Afterwards the time\nof ministry was still further extended (1 Chron. xxiii. 24-27).\n\nSuch is the account of the symbolic cleansing and the representative\nministry of the Levites; and we see both a parallel and a contrast to\nwhat is demanded now for the Christian life of obedience and devotion\nto God. Purification there must be from all defilement of flesh\nand spirit. With the change which takes place when by repentance\nand faith in Christ we enter into the free service of God there\nmust be a definite and earnest purging of the whole nature. \"As ye\npresented your members as servants to uncleanness and to iniquity\nunto iniquity, even so now present your members as servants to\nrighteousness unto sanctification\" (Rom. vi. 19). \"Mortify therefore\nyour members which are upon the earth; fornication, uncleanness,\npassion, evil desire, and covetousness, the which is idolatry, ...\nput ye also away all these: anger, wrath, malice, railing, shameful\nspeaking out of your mouth: lie not one to another; seeing that\nye have put off the old man with his doings, and have put on the\nnew man\" (Col. iii. 5, 8, 9). Thus the purity of heart and soul so\nimperfectly represented by the cleansings of the Levites is set\nforth as the indispensable preparation of the Christian. And the\ncontrast lies in this, that the purification required by the New\nTestament law is for all, and is the same for each. Whether one is\nto serve in the ministry of the Gospel or sweep a room as for God's\ncause, the same profound purity is needful. All in the Kingdom of God\nare to be holy, for He is holy.\n\n\n 3. LEVITICAL SERVICE\n\n NUMBERS iii. 14-39; iv\n\nThe sacred service of the Levites is described in detail. There are\nthree divisions, the Gershonites, the Kohathites, the Merarites.\nThe Gershonites, from a month old and upward, number 7,500; the\nKohathites, 8,600; the Merarites, 6,200. Eleazar, son of Aaron, is\nprince of the princes of the Levites.\n\nThe office of the Kohathites is of peculiar sanctity, next to that\nof Aaron and his sons. They are not \"cut off\" or specially separated\nfrom among the Levites (iv. 18); but they have duties that require\ngreat care, and they must not venture to approach the most holy\nthings till preparation has been made by the priests. The manner of\nthat preparation is fully described. When order has been given for\nthe setting forward of the camp, Aaron and his sons cover the ark of\nthe covenant first with the veil of the screen, then with a covering\nof sealskin, and lastly with a cloth of blue; they also insert in the\nrings the long staves with which the ark is to be carried. Next the\ntable of shewbread is covered with a blue cloth; the dishes, spoons,\nbowls, and cups are placed on the top, over them a scarlet cloth,\nand above that a sealskin covering; the staves of the table are\nalso placed in readiness. The candlestick and its lamps and other\nappurtenances are wrapped up in like manner and put on a frame. Then\nthe golden altar by itself, and the vessels used in the service of\nthe sanctuary by themselves are covered with blue cloth and sealskin\nand made ready for carriage. Finally, the great altar is cleansed of\nashes, covered up with purple cloth and sealskin, and its staves set\nin their rings. When all this is done the sons of Kohath may advance\nto bear the holy things, never touching them lest they die.\n\nThe question arises, why so great care is considered necessary that\nnone but the priests should handle the furniture of the sanctuary.\nWe have learned to think that a real religion should avoid secrecy,\nthat everything connected with it should be done in the open light of\nday. Why, then, is the shrine of Jehovah guarded with such elaborate\nprecaution? And the answer is that the idea of mystery appears here\nas absolutely needful, in order to maintain the solemn feelings of\nthe people and their sense of the holiness of God. Not only because\nthe Israelites were rude and earthly, but also because the whole\nsystem was symbolic, the holy things were kept from common sight. In\nthis respect the worship described in these books of Moses resembled\nthat of other nations of antiquity. The Egyptian temple had its\ninnermost shrine where the arks of the gods were placed; and into\nthat most holy place with its silver soil the priests alone went. But\neven Egyptian worship, with all its mystery, did not always conceal\nthe arks and statues of the gods. When those gods were believed to\nbe favourable, the arks were carried in procession, the images so\nfar unveiled that they could be seen by the people. It was entirely\ndifferent in the case of the sacred symbols and instruments of\nHebrew worship, according to the ideal of the law. And the elaborate\nprecautions are to be regarded as indicating the highest tide-mark\nof symbolised sanctity. Jehovah was not like Egyptian or Assyrian\nor Ph\u0153nician gods. These might be represented by statues which the\npeople could see. But everything used in His worship must be kept\napart. The worship must be of faith; and the ark which was the great\nsymbol must remain always invisible. The effect of this on the\npopular mind was complex, varying with the changing circumstances of\nthe nation; and to trace it would be an interesting piece of study.\nIt may be remembered that in the time of most ardent Judaism the want\nof the ark made no difference to the veneration in which the temple\nwas held and the intense devotion of the people to their religion.\nThe ark was used as a talisman in Eli's time; in the temple erected\nafter the captivity there was no ark; its place in the holy of holies\nwas occupied by a stone.\n\nThe Gershonites had as their charge the screens and curtains of the\ntabernacle, or most holy place, and the tent of meeting or holy\nplace, also the curtains of the court of the tabernacle. The boards,\nbars, pillars, and sockets of the tabernacle and of the court were to\nbe entrusted to the Merarites.\n\nIn the whole careful ordering of the duties to be discharged by\nthese Levites we see a figure of the service to be rendered to God\nand men in one aspect of it. Organisation, attention to details,\nand subordination of those who carry out schemes to the appointed\nofficials, and of all, both inferior and superior, to law--these\nideas are here fully represented. Assuming the incapacity of many for\nspontaneous effort, the principle that God is not a God of confusion\nbut of order in the churches of the saints may be held to point to\nsubordination of a similar kind even under Christianity. But the idea\ncarried to its full limit, implies an inequality between men which\nthe free spirit of Christianity will not admit. It is an honour for\nmen to be connected with any spiritual enterprise, even as bearers of\nburdens. Those who take such a place may be spiritual men, thoughtful\nmen, as intelligent and earnest as their official superiors. But the\nLevites, according to the law, were to be bearers of burdens, menials\nof the sanctuary from generation to generation. Here the parallel\nabsolutely fails. No Christian, however cordially he may fill such a\nplace for a time, is bound to it in perpetuity. His way is open to\nthe highest duties and honours of a redeemed son of God. In a sense\nJudaism even did not prevent the spiritual advancement of any Levite,\nor any man. The priesthood was practically closed, but the office of\nthe prophet, really higher than that of the priest, was not. From the\nroutine work of the priesthood men like Jeremiah and Ezekiel were\ncalled by the Spirit of God to speak in the name of the Highest.\nThe word of the Lord was put into their mouths. Elijah, who was\napparently of the tribe of Manasseh, Amos and Daniel, who belonged to\nJudah, became prophets. The open door for the men of the tribes was\ninto this calling. Neither in Israel nor in Christendom is priesthood\nthe highest religious function. The great servants of God might well\nrefuse it or throw aside its shackles.\n\nFOOTNOTE:\n\n[1] \"Religion of the Semites,\" p. 445.\n\n\n\n\n IV\n\n _DEFILEMENT AND PURGATION_\n\n NUMBERS v\n\n\nThe separation of Israel as a people belonging to Jehovah proceeded\non ideas of holiness which excluded from privilege many of the\nHebrews themselves. The law did not ordain that in cases of\ndefilement there might be immediate purification by washing or\nsacrifice. So far as ceremonial uncleanness was concerned, we may\nthink this might have been provided for, and moral offences alone\nmight have involved the offender in continued defilement. But just\nas idolatry, blasphemy, and murder caused pollution which could\nnot be removed by sacrifice, but only by the capital punishment of\nthe guilty, so certain bodily conditions and defects, and certain\ndiseases, chiefly leprosy and those akin to it, were held to cause\na defilement which could not be purged by any ceremony. A high\nstandard of bodily health and purity was required for the priesthood;\na lower standard was to be applied to the people. And the system\ndeclaring the uncleanness of many animals, and of the person under\nvarious conditions, touched at countless points the life of society.\nAn Israelite who was unclean for one or other of a hundred reasons\ncould not approach the sanctuary. He had his portion in God after a\nsense; yet for a time, it might be for life, the peculiar blessings\nof holy fellowship were denied him. He could celebrate no feast. He\nhad no share in the great atonement. The precautions and terms to be\nobserved were of such a nature that if the law had been at any time\nstringently enforced a very large percentage of the people would have\nbeen denied access to the altar.\n\nIt may appear a strange thing that the precept, \"Ye shall be holy;\nfor I am holy,\" was affixed not only to moral duties but with almost\nthe same force to ceremonial duties. We can understand this, however,\nwhen we trace the result of the priestly ordinances. They created\nreligious care and feeling; and the end was gained not so much by\ndirecting attention, as we now do, to faults of conduct, defects\nof will, sins of injustice, impurity, intemperance, and the like,\nbut by keeping up a scrupulous attention to matters not, properly\nspeaking, either moral or immoral, not ethical as we say, which were\nyet declared to be of moment in religion. The moral law did its part.\nBut to make the enforcement of moral statutes, many of which bore\non desire and will, the only means of urging the fear of God, would\nhave resulted practically in a very bare and desultory cultus. Among\na comparatively rude people like the Israelites it would have been\nabsurd to institute a religion consisting of \"morality touched by\nemotion.\" For the mass of people still it is equally hopeless. There\nmust be ordinances of prayer, praise, sacrament, and the duties which\nreach Godward through the Church. The value of the whole ceremonial\nsystem of the Mosaic law is clear from this point of view; and we\nneed not wonder in the least at the nature of many provisions which,\nwithout grasp of the principle, we might reckon irksome and useless.\nThe origin of some of the statutes is apparently hygienic; others\nagain reach back to customs and beliefs of a very primitive world.\nBut they are made part of the sacred law in order to enforce the\nconviction that the judgment of God enters into the whole of life,\nfollows men wherever they go, decides as to their state with relation\nto Him hour by hour, almost moment by moment. The ceremonial law was\na constant and strenuous lesson in regard to the omnipresence of God,\nand the oversight of human affairs by Him. It created a conscience of\nGod's existence, His control, His superintendence of each life. And\nfor a certain stage of the education of Israel this could be achieved\nin no other way. The moral and spiritual progress of a people,\ndepending on the recognition of the authority of One who is of purer\neyes than to behold iniquity, depends also, of necessity, on the\nsense of His oversight of human life at every point.\n\n\n 1. EXCLUSION FROM THE CAMP\n\n NUMBERS v. 1-4\n\nThe rigidness of the law which excluded lepers from the camp and\nafterwards from the cities had its necessity in the presumed nature\nof their disease. Leprosy was regarded as contagious, and practically\nincurable by any medical appliances, requiring to be kept in check by\nstrenuous measures. Care for the general health meant hardship to the\nlepers; but this could not be avoided. From friends and home they were\nsent forth to live together as best they might, and spend what remained\nof life in almost hopeless separation. The authority of Moses is\nattached to the statute of exclusion, and there can be no doubt of its\ngreat antiquity. In Leviticus there are detailed enactments regarding\nthe disease, some of which contemplate its decay and provide for the\nrestoration to privilege of those who had been cured. The ceremonies\nwere complicated, and among them were sacrifices to be offered by way\nof \"atonement.\" The leper was alienated from God, severed from the\ncongregation as one guilty in the eye of the law (Lev. xiv. 12); and\nthere can be no wonder that with this among other facts before him the\nwriter of the Epistle to the Hebrews speaks of the law as having a mere\n\"shadow of the good things to come.\"\n\nAnd yet, in view of the malignant nature of the disease and the\nperil it caused to the general health, we must admit the wisdom of\nsegregating those afflicted with leprosy. That Israel might be a\nrobust people capable of its destiny, a rule like this was needful.\nIt anticipated our modern laws made in harmony with advanced medical\nscience, which require segregation or isolation in cases of virulent\ndisease.\n\nIt has been affirmed that leprosy was from the first regarded as\nsymbolic of moral disease, and that the legislation was from this\npoint of view. There is, however, no evidence to support the theory.\nIndeed the conception of moral evil would have been confused rather\nthan helped by any such idea. For although evil habits taint the mind\nand vice ruins it as leprosy taints and destroys the body; although\nthe infectious nature of sin is fitly indicated by the insidious\nspread of this disease--one point in which there is no resemblance\nwould make the symbol dangerously misleading. A few here and there\nwere attacked by leprosy, and these with their blotched disfigured\nbodies were easily distinguished from the healthy. But this was in\ncontrast with the secret moral malady by which all were tainted. The\nteaching that leprosy is a type of sin would make, not for morality,\nbut for hypocrisy. The symptoms of a bad nature, like the signs of\nleprosy, would be looked for and found by every man in his neighbour,\nnot in his own heart. The hypocrite would be encouraged in his\nself-satisfaction because he escaped the judgment of his fellow men.\nBut the disease of sin is endemic, universal. The whole congregation\nwas by reason of that excluded from the sanctuary of God.\n\nAccording to the idea which underlies the priest law, leprosy did\nnot typify sin; it meant sin. In no single place, indeed, is this\ndirectly affirmed. Yet the belief connecting bodily afflictions and\ncalamities with transgressions implied it, and the fact that guilt\nofferings had to be made for the leper when he was cleansed. Again,\nin the cases of Miriam, of Gehazi, and of Uzziah, the punishment\nof sin was leprosy. Under the conditions of climate which often\nprevailed, the germs of this disease might rapidly be developed by\nexcitement, especially by the excitement of immoral rashness. Here\nwe may find the connection which the law assumes between leprosy and\nguilt, and the origin of the statute which made the intervention\nof the priests necessary. In their poor dwellings beyond camp and\ncity wall the lepers lay under a double reproach. They were not only\ntainted in body but appeared as sinners above others, men on whom\nsome divine judgment had fallen, as the very name of their disease\nimplied. And not till One came who did not fear to lay His hand on\nthe leprous flesh, whose touch brought healing and life, was the\npressure of the moral condemnation taken away. Of many cases of\nleprosy He would have said, as of the blindness He cured: \"Neither\ndid this man sin, nor his parents.\"\n\nNow is the law to be charged with creating a class of social pariahs?\nIs there any reason for saying that in some way the legislation\nshould have expressed pity rather than the rigour which appears\nin the passage before us and other enactments regarding leprosy?\nIt would be easy to bring arguments which would seem to prove the\nlaw defective here. But in matters of this kind civilization and\nChristian culture could not be forestalled. What was possible,\nwhat in the conditions that existed could be carried into effect,\nthis only was commanded. These old enactments sprang out of the\nbest wisdom and religion of the age. But they do not represent\nthe whole of the Divine will, the Divine mercy, even as they were\ncontemporaneously revealed. Add to the statutes regarding leprosy the\nother, \"Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself,\" and those that\nenjoined kindness to the poor and provision for their needs, and the\ntrue tenor of the legislation will be understood. According to these\nlaws there were to be no pariahs in Israel. It was a sad necessity\nif any were excluded from the congregation of God's people. The laws\nof brotherhood would insure for the wretched colony outside the camp\nevery possible consideration. Denied access to God in festival and\nsacrifice, the lepers appealed to the humane feelings of the people.\nWith their pathetic cry, \"Unclean, unclean!\" their loose hair and\nrent clothes, they confessed a miserable state that touched every\nheart. As time went on, the law of segregation was interpreted\nliberally. Even in the synagogues a place was set apart for the\nlepers. The kindly disposition promoted by the Mosaic institutions\nwas shown thus, and in many other ways.\n\nThe lepers banished outside the camp remind us of those who have for\nno wrong-doing of their own to endure social reproach. Were sometimes\ngood men and women among the Hebrews, men with kind hearts, good\nmothers and daughters, attacked by this disease and compelled to\nbetake themselves to the squalid tents of the lepers? That decree\nof rigorous precaution is outdone by the strange fact that under\nthe providence of God, in His world, the best have often had to\nundergo opprobrium and cruelty; that Jesus Himself was crucified as\na malefactor, bore the curse of him that \"hangeth upon a tree.\" We\nsee great suffering which is not due to moral delinquency; and we\nsee the sting of it taken quite away. The stern ordinances of nature\nhave light thrown upon them from a higher world. \"Himself took our\ninfirmities and bare our sicknesses.\" For our sakes He was the object\nof brutal mockery, the sufferer, the sacrifice.\n\nBesides the lepers and those who had an issue, every one who was\nunclean by reason of touching a dead body was to be excluded from\nthe camp. This provision appears to rest on the idea that death\nwas no \"debt of nature,\" but unnatural, the result of the curse of\nGod. Associated, however, in the statute before us with leprosy,\ndefilement from the dead may have been decreed to prevent the spread\nof disease. Many maladies too well known to us have an infectious\ncharacter; and those who were present at a death would be most\nexposed to their influence. Pathological explanations do not by\nany means account for all the kinds and causes of defilement; but\nexclusion from the camp is the special point here; and the cases\nmay be classed together as having a common origin. The notion that\nsome demon or fallen spirit was at work both in producing leprosy\nand in causing death, was involved in the customs of some barbarous\ntribes and entered into the beliefs of the Egyptians and Assyrians.\nThis explanation, however, is too remote and alien from Judaism to\nbe applied to these statutes regarding uncleanness, at least in the\nform they have in the Mosaic books. The few hints surviving in them,\nas where a bird was to be allowed to fly away when the leper was\npronounced clean, cannot be permitted to fix a charge of superstition\non the whole code.\n\nA singular point in the statute regarding uncleanness \"by the dead\"\nis that the word \u05e0\u05b6\u05e4\u05b6\u05e9\u05c1 (_nephesh_) stands apparently for the\ndead body. Of this some other explanation is needed than the free\ntransference of meanings in Hebrew. Here and elsewhere in the Book\nof Numbers (vi. 11; ix. 6, 7, 10; xix. 13), as well as in various\npassages in Leviticus, defilement is attributed to the _nephesh_.\nCommonly the word means _soul_ or animal life-principle. When\nconnected with death it corresponds to our word \"ghost,\" as in Job\nxi. 20; Jer. xv. 9. Now the law was that not only those who touched\na dead body, but all present in a house when death took place in it,\nwere unclean. The question occurs whether the _nephesh_, or soul\nescaping at death, was believed to defile. As if in doubt here a\nrabbi said, \"The body and the soul may plead successfully not guilty\nby charging their sinful life each upon the other. The body may\nsay: 'Since that guilty soul parted with me, I have been lying in\nthe grave as harmless as a stone.' The soul may plead: 'Since that\ndepraved body separated from me, I flutter about in the air like an\ninnocent bird.'\" Is it not possible that the _nephesh_ meant the\neffluvium of the dead body, the active element which, springing from\ncorruption, diffused uncleanness through the whole house of death? It\nseems quite in harmony with other uses of the word, and with the idea\nof defilement, to interpret \"was unclean by the _nephesh_,\" \"sinned\nby the _nephesh_,\" as technical expressions carrying this meaning.\nThe passage Numb. xix. 13 is peculiarly instructive--\u05d0\u05b2\u05e9\u05b6\u05c1\u05e8\u05be\u05d9\u05b8\u05de\u05d5\u05bc\u05ea\n\u05d4\u05b8\u05d0\u05b8\u05d3\u05b8\u05dd \u05d1\u05b0\u05bc\u05e0\u05b6\u05e4\u05b6\u05e9\u05c1 \u05d1\u05b0\u05bc\u05de\u05b5\u05ea \u05db\u05b8\u05bc\u05dc\u05be\u05d4\u05b7\u05e0\u05b9\u05bc\u05d2\u05b5\u05e2\u05b7--\"Every one coming in\ncontact with the dead, with the _nephesh_ of a man who has died.\" To\ntranslate, \"with the corpse of a man who has died,\" would fix on the\nlanguage the fault of tautology. In Psalm xvii. 9 _nephesh_ has the\nmeaning of _deadly_, that is to say _breathing death_; and the idea\nhere points to the meaning suggested.\n\nThe reason given for the banishment of the unclean is the presence\nof God in the congregation--\"That they defile not their camp, in\nthe midst whereof I dwell.\" All that are unhealthy, and those who\nhave been in contact with death, which is the result of irremediable\ndisease or accident, must be withdrawn from the precincts that belong\nto the Holy God. Human maladies are in contrast with the Divine\nhealth, death is in contrast to the Divine life. Here the whole\nscope of the legislation regarding defilement has its highest range\nof suggestion. It was a part of moral education to realise that God\nwas separate from all distortion, wasting, and decay. In glad and\ndeathless power He reigned in the midst of Israel. From the living\nGod man received life which had to be kept pure and disciplined.\nAmong the Egyptians it was held to be sacrilege when the operator,\nin the process preparatory to embalming, opened a human body. He who\nmade the incision was driven out of the room by his assistants with\nabuse and violence. Quite different is the idea of the Mosaic law\nwhich makes the holiness belong entirely to God, and requires of\nmen the preservation of the clean life He has given. Every statute\nsuggests that there is a tendency in the creature to fall away from\npurity and become unfit for fellowship with the Most Holy.\n\n\n 2. ATONEMENT FOR TRESPASS\n\n NUMBERS v. 5-10\n\nThe enactment of this passage refers to the sin of theft or any other\nbreach of the eighth commandment which involved trespass not only\nagainst man, but also against God--\"When a man or woman shall commit\nany sin that men commit to do a trespass against the Lord, and that\nsoul be guilty; then shall they confess their sin which they have\ndone.\" The statute supplements one given in Lev. vi. 1-4, omitting\nsome details, but adding the provision that if the person defrauded\nhas died, restitution shall be made to the _go\u00ebl_, and if there is no\nsurviving relation, to the priest. The cases specified in Leviticus\nare those of false dealing in regard to a deposit or a bargain,\nrobbery, oppression,--probably in the way of withholding hire from a\nlabourer,--finding what was lost and denying it; but in each instance\nfalse swearing is added to the offence and constitutes it a trespass\nagainst the Lord. Restitution to man must be made by returning the\namount and one-fifth in addition; to God by bringing a ram without\nblemish, with which the priest makes atonement.\n\nIn this statute the punishment does not seem severe. But the penalty\nis imposed after confession when the offence has been for some time\nundetected. The ordinary law required for the theft of an ox, if the\nanimal had not been slaughtered, double restitution; and if it had\nbeen slaughtered or sold, fivefold restitution. In the case of a sheep\nslaughtered or sold the restitution was to be fourfold. Confession of\nthe theft, according to the present statute, diminishes the penalty.\n\nNoticeable particularly is the provision for atonement, which is\nnowhere else admitted in connection with a serious breach of the\nmoral law. Any offence against the first four commandments was to be\npunished with death; so also were murder, adultery, and certain other\ncrimes. It might have been expected that false swearing by any one in\nregard to theft or valuables intrusted to him would add to his guilt.\nHere, however, by means of the ram of atonement even that offence is\napparently expiated. Possibly the confession is held to mitigate the\ncrime. Still the nature of the statute is surprising and exceptional.\n\n\n 3. THE WATER OF JEALOUSY\n\n NUMBERS v. 11-31\n\nThe long and remarkable statute regarding the water of jealousy seems\nto have been interposed to prevent, by means of an ordeal, that cruel\npractice of peremptory divorce which had been in vogue at some period\namong the Hebrews. The position given to woman by the old customs\nmust have been exceedingly low. Under polygamy a wife was in constant\ndanger of suspicions and accusations she had no means of removing.\nThe whole scope of this enactment and the means used for deciding\nbetween the husband and a suspected wife point to the frequency and\ngeneral groundlessness of charges made by men in the \"hardness of\ntheir hearts,\" or by other women in the hardness of theirs.\n\nThe ordeal to which the wife was to be subjected was twofold. One\npoint was the imprecation of the Divine curse upon herself if she had\nbeen guilty. This oath was administered in terms and with ceremonies\nfitted to produce the most profound impression. She is set \"before the\nLord\"--probably in the court of the sanctuary. Her hair is loose. She\nhas the offering of jealousy in her hand--the tenth part of an ephah\nof barley-meal. The priest holds a basin of the \"water of jealousy.\"\nThe terms of the curse with its frightful consequences are not only\nrepeated in her hearing, but written on a scroll which is dropped into\nthe water. The second thing is her drinking of the \"water of jealousy,\"\n\"holy water\" mingled with dust from the floor of the sanctuary, and\nwith the terms of the curse. The nature of the ordeal was such that\nfew guilty persons would have braved it. The only thing which appears\nwanting is a provision for the punishment of the man whose wife had\npassed the terrible test. Since the punishment of this crime was death,\nand he made the accusation without cause, his own judgment should\nhave followed. Here, however, deference had to be paid to the notions\nof the time, as our Lord clearly indicates. The absolute right, the\njust equality between husband and wife, could not be established. Nor\nindeed, with all our progress, is it yet secured.\n\nThe ordeal of the water of jealousy must have saved many an innocent\nlife from wreck. In one sense it was part of a system designed to\nmaintain a high standard of morality, and in that system it had a\nplace which at the time could not be filled in any other way. The\nmain stress lies on the oath of purgation; and to the present day\nin certain ecclesiastical courts this is in use for the purpose of\nbringing to an end processes not otherwise capable of solution.\nIt must be noted that our marriage laws, lax as they are thought\nto be, do not give to a husband anything like the power or allow\ndivorce with anything like the facility admitted by the Mosaic law\nas some of the Rabbis interpreted it. And this ordeal was of such a\nnature that if those in use throughout Europe only a century ago or\nthereby, in the trial of witches for instance, be compared with it,\nwe can at once see its superiority. Those barbarous tests, not used\nby the vulgar alone, but by religious men and Church authorities,\nmade escape from false accusation next to impossible. Here there\nis absolutely nothing required which could in any sense injure or\nimperil an innocent woman. She might take her oath, see it written,\nand drink the water without the least fear or hesitation. The\nbeneficence of the law is strongly marked along with its wisdom. It\nwas a wonderful provision for the time.\n\n\n\n\n V\n\n _NAZIRITISM: THE BLESSING OF AARON_\n\n NUMBERS vi\n\n\n1. The custom of Naziritism, which tended to form a semi-religious\ncaste, is obscure in its origin. The cases of Samson and Samuel imply\nthat before birth some were bound in terms of this vow by their\nparents. In the passage before us nothing whatever is said as to the\nreasons which the law recognised for the practice of Naziritism. We\nmay believe, however, that it was from the first, like many votive\ncustoms, distinctly religious. One who had been delivered from some\ndanger or restored to health might adopt this method of showing his\nthankfulness to God. It is impossible to connect Naziritism with any\nsacerdotal duty. A man under the vow had no function, no privilege,\nthat in the least approached that of the priest. Nor can we trace any\nparallel between the Nazirite rule and that of the fakirs of India\nor the dervishes of Egypt and Arabia, whose poverty is their mark of\nconsecration. There is, however, some resemblance to the vow of the\nArab pilgrim, who, on his way to the holy place, must not cut or dress\nhis hair, and must abstain from bloodshed. The prophet Amos (ii. 11)\nclaims that God had raised up young men to be Nazirites, and he places\ntheir influence almost on a level with that of the prophets as a means\nof blessing to the people. We may believe, therefore, that they helped\nboth morality and religion; and the conditions of their vow seem to\nhave given them fine bodily health and personal appearance.\n\nWhen the Nazirite vow was undertaken for a term, say thirty, sixty, or\na hundred days, the law assumed its religious character, prescribed the\nconditions to be observed, the means of removing accidental defilement,\nand the ceremonies to be performed when the period of separation\nclosed. Any man might devote himself without appealing to the priest or\ngoing through any religious rite; and in general his own conscience was\ndepended on to make him rigidly attentive to his vow. There was to be\nno monastic association of Nazirites, no formal watch kept over their\nconduct. They mingled with others in ordinary life, and went about\ntheir business as at other times. But the unshorn hair distinguished\nthem; they felt that the eye of God as well as the eyes of men were\nupon them, and walked warily under the sense of their pledge. The\ndischarge which had to be given by the priest was a further check; it\nwould have been withheld if any charge of laxity had been made against\nthe Nazirite. The ceremonies of release were of a kind fitted to\nattract general attention.\n\nThe modern pledge of abstinence bears in various points resemblance\nto the Nazirite vow. We can easily believe that indulgence in strong\ndrink was one of the principal sins against which Naziritism testified.\nAnd as in ancient Israel that body of abstainers from the fruit of the\nvine, honourably known as a caste, acknowledged by the Divine law,\nformed a constant check on intemperance, so the existence of a large\nclass among ourselves, bound to abstinence, aids most effectually\nin restraining the drinking customs of the present age. When we add\nto the approval of Naziritism which is before us here the fact that\npriests in the discharge of their ministry were required to forego\nthe use of wine, the sanction of Hebrew legislation on its moral side\nmay certainly be claimed for the total abstinence pledge. No doubt\nthe circumstances differ greatly. Wine was the common beverage in\nPalestine. It was in general so slightly intoxicating that the use of\nit brought little temptation. But our distilled liquors and fermented\ndrinks are so strongly alcoholic, so dangerous to health and morals,\nthat the argument for abstinence is now immensely greater than it was\namong the Hebrews. Not only as an example of self-restraint, but as a\nsafeguard against constant peril, the pledge of abstinence deservedly\nenjoys the sanction of the Churches of Christ.\n\nOn the other hand, the pledge of the total abstainer, like the vow\nof the Nazirite, carries with it a certain moral danger. One who,\nhaving come voluntarily under such a pledge, allows himself to break\nit, suffers a serious loss of spiritual power. The abstainer, like\nthe Nazirite, is his own witness, his own judge. But if his pledge\nhas been sacredly undertaken, solemnly made, any breach of it is an\noffence to conscience, a denial of obligation to God which must react\non the will and life. It was not by using strong drink that Samson\nbroke his vow of Naziritism, but in a far less serious manner--by\nallowing his hair to be cut off. Still his case is an instructive\nparable. The Spirit of the Lord passed from him; he became weak as\nother men, the prey of his enemies. The man who has come under the\nbond of total abstinence, especially in a religious way, and breaks\nit, becomes weaker than others. To confess his fault and resume his\nresolution may not lift him up again. The will is less capable, the\nsense of sacredness less imperative and potent.\n\nIt is hard to say why the peculiar defilement caused by touching a\ndead body or being present at a death is that alone on which special\nattention is fixed in the Nazirite law (vi. 9 ff.). One would have\nexpected the other offence of using wine to be dealt with rather than\nmere accidents, so to speak. We can see that the law as it stands is\none of many that must have preceded the prophetic period. If Amos,\nfor example, had influenced the nature of the legislation regarding\nNaziritism, it would have been in the direction of making drunkenness\nrather than ceremonial uncleanness a special point in the statutes.\nFrom beginning to end of his prophecy he makes no distinct reference\nto ceremonial defilement. But injustice, intemperance, disaffection to\nJehovah, are constantly and vehemently denounced. Hosea, again, does\nrefer to unclean food, the necessity of eating which would be part\nof Israel's punishment in exile. But he too, unless in this casual\nreference, is a moralist--cares nothing, so far as his language goes,\nfor the contact with dead bodies or any other ceremonial defilement.\nJudging a Nazirite, he would certainly have regarded sobriety and\npurity of life as the tests of consecration--drunkenness and neglect\nof God as the sins that deserved punishment. Hosea's condemnation of\nIsrael is: \"They have left off to take heed to Jehovah. Whoredom and\nwine and new wine take away the understanding.\" In Ezekiel, whose\nschemes of worship and of priestly work are declared to have been the\norigin of the Priests' Code, the same tendency is to be found. He\nhas a passage regarding unclean foods, which assumes the existence of\nstatutes on the subject. But as a legislator he is not concerned with\nceremonial transgressions, the defilement caused by dead bodies, and\nthe like. Take into account the whole of his prophecy, and it will be\nseen that the new heart and the right spirit are for Ezekiel the main\nthings, and the worship of the temple he describes is to be that of a\npeople not ceremonially consecrated, but spiritually pure, and so in\nmoral unity with God. He adopts the old forms of worship along with the\npriesthood, but his desire is to give the ritual an ethical basis and\naim.\n\nThe statute which applies to the discharge of the Nazirite from his\nrule (vi. 13-21) is exceedingly detailed, and contains provisions\nwhich on the whole seem fitted to deter rather than encourage the\nvow. The Nazirite could not escape from obligation as he had entered\nupon it, without priestly intervention and mediation. He had to offer\nan oblation,--one he-lamb of the first year for a burnt offering;\none ewe-lamb of the first year for a sin offering; and for peace\nofferings a ram, with a basket of unleavened bread, cakes of fine\nflour mingled with oil, unleavened wafers anointed with oil; and\nmeal offerings and drink offerings. These had to be presented by the\npriest in the prescribed manner. In addition to the possible cost\nof repeated cleansings which might be needful during the period of\nseparation, the expense of those offerings must have been to many in\na humble station almost prohibitory. We cannot help concluding that\nunder this law, at whatever time it prevailed, Naziritism became\nthe privilege of the more wealthy. Those who took the vow under the\nappointed conditions must have formed a kind of puritan aristocracy.\n\nThe final ceremonies included burning of the hair, which was\ncarefully removed at the door of the tent of meeting. It was to\nbe consumed in the fire under the peace offering, the idea being\nthat the obligation of the vow and perhaps its sanctity had been\nidentified with the flowing locks. The last rite of all was similar\nto that used in the consecration of priests. The sodden shoulder\nof the ram, an unleavened cake, and an unleavened wafer were to be\nplaced on the hands of the Nazirite, and waved for a wave offering\nbefore the Lord--thereafter, with other parts of the sacrifice,\nfalling to the priest. After that the man might drink wine, perhaps\nin a formal way at the close of the ceremonies.\n\nTo explain this elaborate ritual of discharge it has been affirmed\nthat the idea of the vow \"culminated in the sacrificial festival\nwhich terminated the consecration, and in this attained to its\nfullest manifestation.\" If this were so, ritualism was indeed\npredominant. To make such the underlying thought is to declare that\nthe abstinence of the Nazirite from strong drink and dainties, to\nwhich a moralist would attach most importance, was in the eye of\nthe law nothing compared to the symbolic feasting with God and the\nsacerdotal functions of the final ceremony. Far more readily would we\nassume that the ritual of the discharge was superfluously added to\nthe ancient law at a time when the hierarchy was in the zenith of its\npower. But, as we have already seen, the final rites were of a kind\nfitted to direct public attention to the vow, and may have had their\nuse chiefly in preventing any careless profession of Naziritism,\ntending to bring it into contempt.\n\nOne other question still demands consideration: What was meant by the\n\"sin offering\" which had to be presented by the Nazirite when he had\nunintentionally incurred uncleanness, and the sin offering which had to\nbe offered at the time of his discharge--what, in short, was the idea\nof sin to which this oblation corresponded? The case of the Nazirite\nis peculiarly instructive, for the point to be considered is seen here\nentirely free from complications. The Nazirite does not undertake\nthe obligation of his vow as an acknowledgment of wrong he has done,\nnor does he place himself under any moral disadvantage by assuming\nit. There is no reason why in becoming a Nazirite or ceasing to be a\nNazirite he should appear as a transgressor; rather is he honouring\nGod by what he does. Suppose he has been present at a death which has\nunexpectedly taken place--that involves no moral fault by which a man's\nconscience should be burdened. Deliberately to touch a dead body might,\nunder the law, have brought the sense of wrongdoing; but to be casually\nin a defiled house could not. Yet an atonement was necessary (vi. 11).\nIt is expressly said that a sin offering and a burnt offering must be\npresented to \"make atonement for him, for that he sinned by reason of\nthe dead.\" And again, when he has kept the terms of his vow to the\nlast, honouring Jehovah by his devotion, commending morality by his\nabstinence, maintaining more rigidly than other Israelites the idea\nof consecration to Jehovah, he cannot be released from his obligation\ntill a sin offering is made for him. There is no moral offence to be\nexpiated. Rather, to judge in an ordinary human way, he has carried\nobedience farther than his fellow-Israelites.\n\nThe whole circumstances show that the sin offering has no reference\nto moral pollution. The idea is not that of removing a shadow from\nthe conscience, but taking away a taint of the flesh, or, in certain\ncases, of the mind which has become aware of some occult injury. A\nclear division was made between the moral and the immoral; and it was\nassumed that all Israelites were keeping the moral commandments of\nthe law. Then moral persons were divided into those who were clean\nand those who were unclean; and the ceremonial law alone determined\nthe conditions of undefiled and acceptable life. If the law declared\nthat a sin offering was necessary, it meant not that there had been\nimmorality, but that some specified or unspecified taint lay upon a\nman. No doubt there were principles according to which the law was\nframed. But they might not be apparent; and no man could claim to\nhave them explained. Now with regard to Naziritism, the idea was that\nof a vivid and pure form of life to which a man might attain if he\nwould discipline himself. And it seems to have been understood that\nin returning from this to the common life of the race an apology, so\nto speak, had to be made to Jehovah and to religion. The higher range\nof life during the term of separation was peculiarly sensitive to\ninvasions of earthly circumstance, and especially of the defilement\ncaused by death; and for anything of this sort there was needed\nmore than apology, more than trespass-offering. The Nazirite going\nback to ordinary life was regarded in more senses than one as a\nsinner. The conditions of his vow had been difficult to keep, and,\npresumably, had been broken. He was all the more under the suspicion\nof defilement that he had undertaken special obligations of purity.\nA peculiar form of mysticism is involved here, an effort of humanity\nto reach transcendental holiness. And the law seemed to give up\neach experiment with a sigh. In the story of Samson we have only the\npopular pictorial elements of Naziritism. The statutes convey hints\nof deeper thought and feeling.\n\nGenerally speaking the whole system of purification enjoined by\nthe ceremonial law, the constant succession of cleansings and\nsacrifices, must have appeared to be arbitrary. But it would be a\nmistake to suppose that there was no esoteric meaning, no purpose\nbeyond that of keeping up the sense of religious duty and the\nneed of mediation. Some intangible defilement seems to have been\nassociated with everything mundane, everything human. The aim was to\nrepresent sanctity of a transcendent kind, the nature of which no\nwords could express, for which the shedding of blood alone supplied a\nsufficiently impressive symbol.\n\n\n2. The blessing which the priests were commissioned to pronounce on\nthe people (vi. 24-26) was in the following terms:--\n\n \"Jehovah bless thee, and keep thee:\n Jehovah make His face to shine upon thee, and be gracious unto\n thee:\n Jehovah lift up His countenance upon thee, and give thee peace.\"\n\nBy means of this threefold benediction the name of Jehovah was to be\nput upon the children of Israel--that is to say, their consecration\nto Him as His accepted flock and their enjoyment of His covenant\ngrace were to be signified. In a sense the invocation of this\nblessing was the highest function of the priest: he became the\nchannel of spiritual endowment in which the whole nation shared.\n\nIt is a striking fact that the distinctive ideas conveyed in the three\nportions of the blessing--Preservation, Enlightenment, Peace--bear a\nrelation, by no means fanciful, to the work of the Father, the Son, and\nthe Holy Spirit. First are invoked the providential care and favour of\nGod, as Ruler of the universe, Arbiter among the nations, Source of\ncreaturely life, Upholder of human existence. Israel as a whole, and\neach individual Israelite as a member of the sacred community, should\nin terms of the covenant enjoy the guardianship of the Almighty. The\nidea is expanded in Psalm cxxi.:--\n\n \"Jehovah is thy keeper:\n Jehovah is thy shade upon thy right hand.\n The sun shall not smite thee by day,\n Nor the moon by night.\n Jehovah shall keep thee from all evil;\n He shall keep thy soul.\n Jehovah shall keep thy going out and thy coming in,\n From this time forth and for evermore.\"\n\nAnd in almost every Psalm the theme of Divine preservation is touched\non either in thanksgiving, prayer, or exultant hope.\n\n \"For God will save Zion, and build the cities of Judah;\n And they shall abide there, and have it in possession.\n The seed also of His servants shall inherit it;\n And they that love His name shall dwell therein.\"\n\nOften sorely pressed by the nations around, their land made the\nbattle-field of empires, the Hebrews could comfort themselves with\nthe assurance that Jehovah of Hosts was with them, that the God of\nJacob was their refuge. And each son of Abraham had his own portion\nin the blessing.\n\n \"I will say of Jehovah, He is my refuge and my fortress,\n My God in whom I trust.\"\n\nThe keynote of joyful confidence in the unseen King was struck in the\nbenediction which, pronounced by Aaron and by the high-priests after\nhim, associated Israel's safety with obedience to all the laws and\nforms of religion.\n\nThe second member of the blessing indicates under the figure of the\nshining of Jehovah's face the revelation of enlightening truth. Here\nare implied the unfolding of God's character, the kindly disclosure\nof His will in promise and prophecy, the opening to the minds of men\nof those high and abiding laws that govern their destiny. There is a\nforth-shining of the Divine countenance which troubles and dismays\nthe human heart: \"The face of the Lord is against them that do evil.\"\nBut here is denoted that gracious radiance which came to its fulness\nin Christ. And of this Divine shining Jacob Boehme writes: \"As the\nsun in the visible world ruleth over evil and good, and with its\nlight and power and all whatsoever itself is, is present everywhere,\nand penetrates every being, and yet in its image-like [symbolic] form\ndoth not withdraw again to itself with its efflux, but wholly giveth\nitself into every being, and yet ever remaineth whole, and nothing\nof its being goeth away therewith: thus also it is to be understood\nconcerning Christ's power and office which ruleth in the inward\nspiritual world visibly, and in the outward world invisibly, and\nthroughly penetrateth the faithful man's soul, spirit, and heart....\nAnd as the sun worketh through and through an herb so that the herb\nbecometh solar (or filled with the virtue of the sun, and as it were\nso converted by the sun that it becometh wholly of the nature of the\nsun): so Christ ruleth in the resigned will in soul and body over all\nevil inclinations, over Satan's introduced lust, and generateth the\nman to be a new heavenly creature and wholly floweth into him.\"[2]\n\nFor the Hebrew people that shining of the face of God became\nspiritual and potent for salvation less through the law, the\npriesthood, and the ritual, than through psalm and prophecy. Of the\nrevelation of the law Paul says, \"The ministration of death written\nand engraven on stones came with glory, so that the children of\nIsrael could not look steadfastly upon the face of Moses, for the\nglory of his face.\" With such holy and awful brightness did God\nappear in the law, that Moses had to cover his face from which the\nsplendour was reflected. But the psalmist, pressing towards the\nlight with fine spiritual boldness and humility, could say, \"When\nThou saidst, Seek ye My face; my heart said unto Thee, Thy face,\nLord, will I seek\" (Psalm xxvii. 8); and again, \"Turn us again, O\nGod of hosts, and cause Thy face to shine; and we shall be saved\"\n(Psalm lxxx. 7). And in an oracle of Isaiah (liv. 8), Jehovah says,\n\"In overflowing wrath I hid My face from thee for a moment; but with\neverlasting kindness shall I have mercy on thee.\"\n\nIn the third clause of the benediction the peace of God, that calm of\nmind, conscience, and life which accompanies salvation, is invoked.\nFrom the trouble and sorrow and tumult of existence, from the fear\nof hostile power, from evil influences seen and unseen, the Divine\nhand will give salvation. It seems indeed to be the meaning that the\ngracious regard of God is enough. Are His people in affliction and\nanxiety? Jehovah's look will deliver them. They will feel calmly safe\nas if a shield were interposed between them and the keen arrows\nof jealousy and hatred. \"In covert of Thy presence shalt Thou hide\nthem from the plottings of man: Thou shalt keep them secretly in a\npavilion from the strife of tongues.\" Their tranquillity is described\nby Isaiah: \"In righteousness shalt thou be established: thou shalt\nbe far from oppression, for thou shalt not fear; and from terror,\nfor it shall not come near thee ... no weapon that is formed against\nthee shall prosper; and every tongue that shall rise against thee in\njudgment thou shalt condemn. This is the heritage of the servants of\nthe Lord, and their righteousness which is of Me, saith the Lord.\"\n\nThe peace of the human soul is not, however, entirely provided for by\nthe assurance of Divine protection from hostile force. A man is not\nin perfect tranquillity because he belongs to a nation or a church\ndefended by omnipotence. His own troubles and fears are the main\ncauses of unrest. And the Spirit of God, who cleanses and renews the\nsoul, is the true Peace-giver. \"To win true peace a man needs to\nfeel himself directed, pardoned, and sustained by a supreme power,\nto feel himself in the right road, at the point where God would have\nhim to be--in order with God and the universe.\" In his heart the note\nof harmony must be struck deep and true, in profound reconciliation\nand unity with God. With this in view the oracles of Ezekiel connect\nrenewal and peace. \"I will put My Spirit in you, and ye shall live\n... I will make a covenant of peace with them; it shall be an\neverlasting covenant with them ... and I will set My sanctuary in the\nmidst of them for evermore.\"\n\nThe protection of God the Father, the grace and truth of the Son,\nthe comfort and peace of the Spirit--were these, then, implied\nin Israel's religion and included in this blessing of Aaron?\nGerminally, at least, they were. The strain of unity running through\nthe Old and New Testaments is heard here and in the innumerable\npassages that may be grouped along with the threefold benediction.\nThe work of Christ, as Revealer and Saviour, did not begin when He\nappeared in the flesh. As the Divine Word He spoke by every prophet\nand through the priest to the silent congregations age after age.\nNor did the dispensation of the Spirit arise on the world like a new\nlight on that day of Pentecost when the disciples of Christ were\ngathered in their upper chamber and the tongues of fire were seen.\nThere were those even in the old Hebrew days on whom the Spirit was\npoured from on high, with whom \"judgment dwelt in the wilderness, and\nrighteousness in the fruitful field: and the work of righteousness\nwas peace, and the effect of righteousness quietness and assurance\nfor ever.\" He who is our peace came in the appointed time to fill\nwith eternal meaning the old benedictions, and set our assurance on\nthe immovable rock of His own sacrifice and power.\n\nFOOTNOTE:\n\n[2] \"Concerning the Holy Baptism,\" chap. i.\n\n\n\n\n VI\n\n _SANCTUARY AND PASSOVER_\n\n\n 1. THE OFFERINGS OF THE PRINCES\n\n NUMBERS vii\n\nThe opening verses of the chapter seem to imply that immediately after\nthe erection of the tabernacle the gifts of the princes were brought\nby way of thank offering. The note of time, \"on the day that Moses had\nmade an end of setting up the tabernacle,\" appears very precise. It\nhas been made a difficulty that, according to the narrative of Exodus,\na considerable time had elapsed since the work was finished. But this\naccount of the oblations of the princes, like a good many other ancient\nrecords incorporated in the present book, has a place given it from the\ndesire to include everything that seemed to belong to the time of the\nwilderness. All incidents could not be arranged in consecutive order,\nbecause, let us suppose, the Book of Exodus to which this and others\nproperly belonged was already complete. Numbers is the more fragmentary\nbook. The expression, \"on the day,\" must apparently be taken in a\ngeneral sense as in Gen. ii. 4: \"These are the generations of the\nheavens and of the earth in the day that the Lord God made earth and\nheaven.\" In Numb. ix. 15 the same note of time, \"on the day that the\ntabernacle was reared up,\" marks the beginning of another reminiscence\nor tradition. The setting up of the tabernacle and consecration of the\naltar gave occasion presumably for this manifestation of generosity.\nBut the offerings described could not be provided immediately; they\nmust have taken time to prepare. Golden spoons of ten shekels' weight\nwere not to be found ready-made in the camp; nor were the oil and fine\nflour to be had at a day's notice. Of course the gifts might have been\nprepared in anticipation.\n\nThe account of the bringing of the offerings by the princes on twelve\nsuccessive days, one Sabbath at least included, gives the impression\nof a festival display. The narrator dwells with some pride on the\nexhibition of religious zeal and liberality, a fine example set to the\npeople by men in high position. The gifts had not been asked by Moses;\nthey were purely voluntary. Considering the value of precious metals\nat the time, and the poverty of the Israelites, they were handsome,\nthough not extravagant. It is estimated that the gold and silver of\neach prince would equal in value about seven hundred and thirty of our\nshillings, and so the whole amount contributed, without regarding the\nchanged value of the metals, would be equivalent to some four hundred\nand thirty-eight pounds sterling. In addition there were the fine flour\nand oil, and the bullocks, rams, lambs, and kids for sacrifice.\n\nIt is an obvious remark here that spontaneous liberality has in the\nvery form of the narrative the very highest commendation. Nothing\ncould be more fitted to create in the minds of the people respect for\nthe sanctuary and the worship associated with it than this hearty\ndedication of their wealth by the heads of the tribes. As the people\nsaw the slow processions moving day by day from the different parts of\nthe camp, and joined in raising their hallelujahs of joy and praise, a\nspirit of generous devotion would be kindled in many hearts. It appears\na singular agreement that each prince of a tribe gave precisely the\nsame as his neighbour. But by this arrangement one was not put to shame\nby the greater liberality of another. Often, as we know, there is in\ngiving, quite as much of human rivalry as of holy generosity. One must\nnot be outdone by his neighbour, would rather surpass his neighbour.\nHere all appears to be done in the brotherly spirit.\n\nDoes the author of Numbers present an ideal for us to keep in view\nin our dedication of riches to the service of the Gospel? It was in\nfull accord with the symbolic nature of Hebrew religion that believers\nshould enrich the tabernacle and give its services an air of splendour.\nAlmost the only way for the Israelites to honour God in harmony\nwith their separation from others as His people, was that of making\nglorious the house in which He set His name, the whole arrangements\nfor sacrifice and festival and priestly ministration. In the temple of\nSolomon that idea culminated which on this occasion fixed the value and\nuse of the princes' gifts. But under Christianity the service of God is\nthe service of mankind. When the thought and labour of the disciples\nof Christ are devoted to the needs of men there is a tribute to the\nglory of God. \"It has been said--it is true--that a better and more\nhonourable offering is made to our Master in ministry to the poor, in\nextending the knowledge of His name, in the practice of the virtues\nby which that name is hallowed, than in material gifts to His temple.\nAssuredly it is so: woe to all who think that any other kind or manner\nof offering may in any way take the place of these.\"[3] The decoration\nof the house used for worship, its stateliness and charm, are secondary\nto the upbuilding of that temple of which believing men and women are\nthe eternal stones, for basement, pillar, and wall. In the development\nof Judaism the temple with its costly sacrifices and ministries\nswallowed up the means and enthusiasm of the people. Israel recognised\nno duty to the outside world. Even its prophets, because they were not\nidentified with the temple worship, were in the main neglected and left\nto penury. It is a mistaken use of the teaching of the Old Testament\nto take across its love of splendour in sanctuary and worship, while\nthe spread of Christian truth abroad and among the poor is scantily\nprovided for.\n\nBut the liberality of the leaders of the tribes, and of all who in\nthe times of the old covenant gave freely to the support of religion,\nstands before us to-day as a noble example. In greater gratitude for\na purer faith, a larger hope, we should be more generous. Devoting\nourselves first as living sacrifices, holy and acceptable to God, we\nshould count it an honour to give in proportion to our ability. One\nafter another, every prince, every father of a family, every servant\nof the Lord, to the poorest widow, should bring a becoming gift.\n\n * * * * *\n\nThe chapter closes with a verse apparently quite detached from\nthe narrative as well as from what follows, which, however, has a\nsingular importance as embodying the law of the oracle. \"And when\nMoses went into the tent of meeting to speak with Him, then he heard\nthe Voice speaking unto him from above the mercy-seat that was upon\nthe ark of the testimony, from between the two cherubim: and he\nspake unto Him.\" At first this may seem exceedingly anthropomorphic.\nIt is a human voice that is heard by Moses speaking in response to\nhis inquiries. One is there, in the darkness behind the veil, who\nconverses with the prophet as friend communicates with friend. Yet,\non reflection, it will be felt that the statement is marked by a\ngrave idealism and has an air of mystery befitting the circumstances.\nThere is no form or visible manifestation, no angel or being in human\nlikeness, representing God. It is only a Voice that is heard. And\nthat Voice, as proceeding from above the mercy-seat which covered the\nlaw, is a revelation of what is in harmony with the righteousness and\ntruth, as well as the compassion, of the Unseen God. The separateness\nof Jehovah is very strikingly suggested. Here only, in this tent\nof meeting, apart from the common life of humanity, can the one\nprophet-mediator receive the sacred oracles. And the veil still\nseparates even Moses from the mystic Voice. Yet God is so akin to men\nthat He can use their words, make His message intelligible through\nMoses to those who are not holy enough to hear for themselves, but\nare capable of responding in obedient faith.\n\nWhatever is elsewhere said in regard to the Divine communications\nthat were given through Moses must be interpreted by this general\nstatement. The revelations to Israel came in the silence and mystery\nof this place of audience, when the leader of the people had\nwithdrawn from the bustle and strain of his common tasks. He must\nbe in the exalted mood this highest of all offices requires. With\npatient, earnest soul he must wait for the Word of God. There is\nnothing sudden, no violent flash of light on the ecstatic mind. All\nis calm and grave.\n\n\n 2. THE CANDELABRUM\n\n NUMBERS viii. 1-4\n\nThe seven-branched candlestick with its lamps stood in the outer\nchamber of the tabernacle into which the priests had frequently to\ngo. When the curtain at the entrance of the tent was drawn aside\nduring the day there was abundance of light in the Holy Place, and\nthen the lamps were not required. It may indeed appear from Exod.\nxxvii. 20, that one lamp of the seven fixed on the candelabrum was to\nbe kept burning by day as well as by night. Doubt, however, is thrown\non this by the command, repeated in Lev. xxiv. 1-4, that Aaron shall\norder it \"from evening to morning;\" and Rabbi Kimchi's statement that\nthe \"western lamp\" was always found burning cannot be accepted as\nconclusive. In the wilderness, at all events, no lamp could be kept\nalways alight; and from 1 Sam. iii. 3 we learn that the Divine voice\nwas heard by the child-prophet when Eli was laid down in his place,\n\"and the lamp of God was not yet gone out\" in the temple where the\nark of God was. The candelabrum therefore seems to have been designed\nnot specially as a symbol, but for use. And here direction is given,\n\"When thou lightest the lamps, the seven lamps shall give light in\nfront of the candlestick.\" All were to be so placed upon the supports\nthat they might shine across the Holy Place, and illuminate the altar\nof incense and the table of shewbread.\n\nThe text goes on to state that the candlestick was all of beaten work\nof gold; \"unto the base thereof and unto the flowers thereof, it\nwas beaten work,\" and the pattern was that which Jehovah had showed\nMoses. The material, the workmanship, and the form, not particularly\nimportant in themselves, are anew referred to because of the special\nsacredness belonging to all the furniture of the tabernacle.\n\nThe attempt to fasten typical meanings to the seven lights of the\ncandelabrum, to the ornaments and position, and especially to project\nthose meanings into the Christian Church, has little warrant even\nfrom the Book of Revelation, where Christ speaks as \"He that walketh\nin the midst of the seven golden candlesticks.\" There can be no\ndoubt, however, that symbolic references may be found, illustrating\nin various ways the subjects of revelation and the Christian life.\n\nThe \"tent of meeting\" may represent to us that chamber or temple of\nreverent inquiry where the voice of the Eternal is heard, and His\nglory and holiness are realised by the seeker after God. It is a\nchamber silent, solemn, and dark, curtained in such gloom, indeed,\nthat some have maintained there is no revelation to be had, no\nglimpse of Divine life or love. But as the morning sunshine flowed\ninto the Holy Place when the hangings were drawn aside, so from the\nnatural world light may enter the chamber in which fellowship with\nGod is sought. \"The invisible things of Him since the creation of\nthe world are clearly seen, being perceived through the things that\nare made, even His everlasting power and divinity.\" The world is not\nGod, its forces are not in the true sense elemental--do not belong to\nthe being of the Supreme. But it bears witness to the infinite mind,\nthe omnipotent will it cannot fitly represent. In the silence of the\ntent of meeting, when the light of nature shines through the door\nthat opens to the sunrise, we realise that the inner mystery must\nbe in profound accord with the outer revelation--that He who makes\nthe light of the natural world must be in Himself the light of the\nspiritual world; that He who maintains order in the great movements\nand cycles of the material universe, maintains a like order in the\nchanges and evolutions of the immaterial creation.\n\nYet the light of the natural world shining thus into the sacred\nchamber, while it aids the seeker after God in no small degree,\nfails at a certain point. It is too hard and glaring for the hour\nof most intimate communion. By night, as it were, when the world is\nveiled and silent, when the soul is shut alone in earnest desire and\nthought, then it is that the highest possibilities of intercourse\nwith the unseen life are realised. And then, as the seven-branched\ncandlestick with its lamps illuminated the Holy Place, a radiance\nwhich belongs to the sanctuary of life must supply the soul's need.\nOn the curtained walls, on the altar, on the veil whose heavy folds\nguard the most holy mysteries, this light must shine. Nature does not\nreveal the life of the Ever-Living, the love of the All-Loving, the\nwill of the All-Holy. In the conscious life and love of the soul,\ncreated anew after the plan and likeness of God in Christ,--here is\nthe light. The unseen God is the Father of our spirits. The lamps of\npurified reason, Christ-born faith and love, holy aspiration, are\nthose which dispel the darkness on our side the veil. The Word and\nthe Spirit give the oil by which those lamps are fed.\n\nMust we say that with the Father, Christ also, who once lived on\nearth, is in the inner chamber which our gaze cannot penetrate?\nEven so. A thick curtain is interposed between the earthly and the\nheavenly. Yet while by the light which shines in his own soul the\nseeker after God regards the outer chamber--its altar, its shewbread,\nits walls, and canopy--his thought passes beyond the veil. The altar\nis fashioned according to a pattern and used according to a law\nwhich God has given. It points to prayer, thanksgiving, devotion,\nthat have their place in human life because facts exist out of which\nthey arise--the beneficence, the care, the claims of God. The table\nof shewbread represents the spiritual provision made for the soul\nwhich cannot live but by every word that cometh out of the mouth of\nGod. The continuity of the outer chamber with the inner suggests the\nclose union there is between the living soul and the living God--and\nthe veil itself, though it separates, is no jealous and impenetrable\nwall of division. Every sound on this side can be heard within; and\nthe Voice from the mercy seat, declaring the will of the Father\nthrough the enthroned Word, easily reaches the waiting worshipper\nto guide, comfort, and instruct. By the light of the lamps kindled\nin our spiritual nature the things of God are seen; and the lamps\nthemselves are witnesses to God. They burn and shine by laws He\nhas ordained, in virtue of powers that are not fortuitous nor of\nthe earth. The illumination they give on this side the veil proves\nclearly that within it the Parent Light, glorious, never-fading,\nshines--transcendent reason, pure and almighty will, unchanging\nlove--the life which animates the universe.\n\nAgain, the symbolism of the candlestick has an application suggested\nby Rev. i. 20. Now, the outer chamber of the tabernacle in which the\nlamps shine represents the whole world of human life. The temple\nis vast; it is the temple of the universe. Still the veil exists;\nit separates the life of men on earth from the life in heaven, with\nGod. Isaiah in his oracles of redemption spoke of a coming revolution\nwhich should open the world to Divine light. \"He will destroy in\nthis mountain the face of the covering that is cast over all people,\nand the veil that is spread over all nations.\" And the light itself,\nstill as proceeding from a Hebrew centre, is described in the\nsecond book of the Isaian prophecies: \"For Zion's sake will I not\nhold my peace, and for Jerusalem's sake I will not rest, until her\nrighteousness go forth as brightness and her salvation as a lamp that\nburneth. And the nations shall see thy righteousness and all kings\nthy glory.\" But the prediction was not fulfilled until the Hebrew\nmerged in the human and He came who, as the Son of Man, is the true\nlight which lighteth every man coming into the world.\n\nDark was the outer chamber of the great temple when the Light of life\nfirst shone, and the darkness comprehended it not. When the Church\nwas organised, and the apostles of our Lord, bearing the gospel of\nDivine grace, went through the lands, they addressed a world still\nunder the veil of which Isaiah spoke. But the spiritual enlightenment\nof mankind proceeded; the lamps of the candlestick, set in their\nplaces, showed the new altar, the new table of heavenly bread, a\nfeast spread for all nations, and made the ignorant and earthly\naware that they stood within a temple consecrated by the offering of\nChrist. St. John saw in Asia, amid the gross darkness of its seven\ngreat cities, seven lamp-stands with their lights, some increasing,\nsome waning in brightness. The sacred flame was carried from country\nto country, and in every centre of population a lamp was kindled.\nThere was no seven-branched candelabrum merely, but one of a hundred,\nof a thousand arms. And all drew their oil from the one sacred\nsource, cast more or less bravely the same Divine illumination on the\ndark eye of earth.\n\nTrue, the world had its philosophy and poetry, using, often with no\nlittle power, the themes of natural religion. In the outer chamber\nof the temple the light of nature gleamed on the altar, on the\nshewbread, on the veil. But interpretation failed, faith in the\nunseen was mixed with dreams, no real knowledge was gained of what\nthe folds of the curtain hid--the mercy-seat, the holy law that\ncalled for pure worship and love of one Living and True God. And\nthen the darkness that fell when the Saviour hung on the cross, the\ndarkness of universal sin and condemnation, was made so deeply felt\nthat in the shadow of it the true light might be seen, and the lamp\nof every church might glow, a beacon of Divine mercy shining across\nthe troubled life of man. And the world has responded, will respond,\nwith greater comprehension and joy, as the Gospel is proclaimed with\nfiner spirit, embodied with greater zeal in lives of faith and love.\nChrist in the truth, Christ in the sacraments, Christ in the words\nand deeds of those who compose His Church--this is the light. The\ncandlestick of every life, of every body of believers, should be as\nof beaten gold, no base metal mixed with that which is precious. He\nwho fashions his character as a Christian is to have the Divine idea\nbefore him and re-think it; those who build the Church are to seek\nits purity, strength, and grace. But still the light must come from\nGod, not from man, the light that burned on the altar of the Divine\nsacrifice and shines from the glorious personality of the risen Lord.\n\n\n 3. THE PASSOVER\n\n NUMBERS ix. 1-14[4]\n\nThe day fixed by statute for the feast which commemorated the\ndeliverance from Egypt was the fourteenth of the first month--the year\nbeginning with the month of the exodus. Chap. ix. opens by reiterating\nthis statute, already recorded in Exod. xii. and Lev. xxiii., and\nproceeds to narrate the observance of the Passover in the second year.\nA supplementary provision follows which met the case of those excluded\nfrom the feast through ceremonial uncleanness. In one passage it is\nassumed that the statutes and ordinances of the celebration are already\nknown. The feast proper, ordered to be kept between the two evenings of\nthe fourteenth day, is, however, alone spoken of; there is no mention\nof the week of unleavened bread (Exod. xii. 15; Lev. xxiii. 6), nor\nof the holy convocations with which that week was to open and close.\nIt is almost impossible to avoid the conclusion that the Passover in\nthe wilderness was a simple family festival at which every head of a\nhousehold officiated in a priestly capacity. The supplementary Passover\nof this chapter was, according to the rabbis, distinguished from the\ngreat feast by the rites lasting only one day instead of seven, and\nby other variations. There is, however, no trace of such a difference\nbetween the one observance and the other. What was done by the\ncongregation on the fourteenth of Abib was apparently to be done at the\n\"Little Passover\" of the following month.\n\nOn every male Israelite old enough to understand the meaning of the\nPassover, the observance of it was imperative. Lest the supplementary\nfeast should be made an excuse for failure to keep the fourteenth\nday of the first month, it is enacted (ix. 13) that he who wilfully\nneglects shall be \"cut off from his people.\" For strangers who\nsojourn among the Israelites provision is made that if they wish\nto keep the feast they may do so under the regulations applied to\nthe Hebrews; these, of course, including the indispensable rite of\ncircumcision, which had to precede any observance of a feast in\nhonour of God. Noticeable are the terms with which this statute\nconcludes: \"Ye shall have one statute, both for the stranger and for\nhim that is born in the land.\" The settlement in Canaan is assumed.\n\nRegarding the Passover in the wilderness, difficulties have been\nraised on the ground that a sufficient number of lambs, males of\nthe first year, could scarcely have been provided, and that the\nsacrificing of the lambs by Aaron and his two sons within the\nprescribed time would have been impossible. The second point of\ndifficulty disappears if this Passover was, as we have seen reason\nto believe, a family festival like that observed on the occasion\nof the exodus. Again, the number of yearling male lambs required\nwould depend on the number who partook of the feast. Calculations\nmade on the basis that one lamb sufficed for about fifteen, and that\nmen alone ate the Passover, leave the matter in apparent doubt.\nSome fifty thousand lambs would still be needed. Keeping by the\nenumeration of the Israelites given in the muster-roll of Numbers,\nsome writers explain that the desert tribes might supply large\nnumbers of lambs, and that kids also were available. The difficulty,\nhowever, remains, and it is one of those which point to the\nconclusion that the numbers given have somehow been increased in the\ntranscription of the ancient records century after century.\n\nThe case of certain men who could not partake of the Passover in\nthe first month, because they were unclean through the dead, was\nbrought before Moses and Aaron. The men felt it to be a great loss\nof privilege, especially as the march was about to begin, and they\nmight not have another opportunity of observing the feast. Who indeed\ncould tell whether in the first conflict it might not be his lot\nto fall by the sword? \"We are unclean by the _nephesh_ of a man,\"\nthey said: \"wherefore are we kept back, that we may not offer the\noblation of the Lord in its appointed season among the children of\nIsrael?\" The result of the appeal was the new law providing that two\ndisabilities, and two only, should be acknowledged. The supplementary\nPassover of the second month was appointed for those unclean by the\ndead, and those on a journey who found themselves too far off to\nreach in time the precincts of the sanctuary. Those unclean would be\nin a month presumably free from defilement; those on a journey would\nprobably have returned. The concession is a note of the gracious\nreasonableness that in many ways distinguished the Hebrew religion;\nand the Passover observances of Jews at the present day are based on\nthe conviction that what is practicable is accepted by God, though\nstatute and form cannot be kept.\n\nThe question presents itself, why keeping of the Passover should be\nnecessary to covenant union with Jehovah. And the reply bears on\nChristian duty with regard to the analogous sacrament of the Lord's\nSupper, for it rests on the historical sanction and continuity of\nfaith. If God was to be trusted as a Saviour by the Hebrew, certain\nfacts in the nation's history had to be known, believed, and kept\nin clear remembrance; otherwise no reality could be found in the\ncovenant. And under the new covenant the same holds good. The\nhistorical fact of Christ's crucifixion must be kept in view, and\nconstantly revived by the Lord's Supper. In either case redemption is\nthe main idea presented by the commemorative ordinance. The Hebrew\nfestival is not to be held on the anniversary of the giving of the\nlaw; it recalls the great deliverance connected with the death of\nthe first-born in Egypt. So the Christian festival points to the\ndeliverance of humanity through the death of Christ.\n\nRemarkable is the congruity between the view of the law presented by\nPaul and the fact that the great commemorative feast of Hebraism is\nattached, not to the legislation of Sinai, but to the rescue from\nEgyptian bondage. The law kept the Hebrew nation in ward (Gal. iii.\n23); \"it was added because of transgressions, till the seed should\ncome to whom the promise had been made\" (Gal. iii. 19); it \"came in\nbeside, that the trespass might abound\" (Rom. v. 20). The Hebrews were\nnot required to commemorate that ordinance which laid on them a heavy\nburden and was found, as time went on, to be \"unto death\" (Rom. vii.\n10). And, in like manner, the feast of Christianity does not recall\nthe nativity of our Lord, nor that agony in the garden which showed\nHim in the depths of human sorrow, but that triumphant act of His soul\nwhich carried Him, and humanity with Him, through the shadow of death\ninto the free life of spiritual energy and peace. The Sacrament of\nthe Lord's Supper is the commemoration of a victory by which we are\nenfranchised. Partaking of it in faith, we realise our rescue from the\nEgypt of slavery and fear, our unity with Christ and with one another\nas \"an elect race, a royal priesthood, a holy nation, a people for\nGod's own possession.\" The wilderness journey lies before us still; but\nin liberty we press on as the ransomed of the Lord.\n\nMr. Morley has said, not without reason, that \"the modern argument in\nfavour of the supernatural origin of the Christian religion, drawn\nfrom its suitableness to our needs and its Divine response to our\naspirations,\" is insufficient to prove it the absolute religion. \"The\nargument,\" he says, \"can never carry us beyond the relativity of\nreligious truth.\"[5] Christians may not assume that \"their aspirations\nare the absolute measure of those of humanity in every stage.\" To\ndispense with faith in the historical facts of the life of Christ, His\nclaims, and the significance of His cross, to leave these in the haze\nof the past as doubtful, incapable of satisfactory proof, and to rest\nall on the subjective experience which any one may reckon sufficient,\nis to obliterate the covenant and destroy the unity of the Church.\nHence, as the Hebrews had their Passover, and the observance of it\ngave them coherence as a people and as a religious body, so we have\nthe Supper. No local centre, indeed, is appointed at which alone our\nsymbolic feast can be observed. Wherever a few renew their covenant\nwith God in proclaiming the Lord's death till He come, there the souls\nof the faithful are nourished and inspired through fellowship with Him\nwho brought spiritual life and liberty to our world.\n\nFOOTNOTES:\n\n[3] Ruskin, \"Seven Lamps of Architecture.\"\n\n[4] For chap. viii. 5-26 see p. 39.\n\n[5] \"Voltaire,\" by John Morley, ed. 1891, pp. 254, 255.\n\n\n\n\n VII\n\n _THE CLOUD AND THE MARCH_\n\n\n 1. THE GUIDING CLOUD\n\n NUMBERS ix. 15-23\n\nThe pillar of cloud, the ensign of Jehovah's royalty among the\nHebrews, and for us one of the most ancient symbols of His grace,\nis first mentioned in the account of the departure from Egypt.\n\"Jehovah went before them by day in a pillar of cloud, to lead them\nthe way; and by night in a pillar of fire, to give them light.\" At\nthe passage of the Red Sea this murky cloud removed and came between\nthe host of Israel and their pursuers. In the morning watch \"Jehovah\nlooked unto the host of the Egyptians through the pillar of fire\nand of the cloud, and troubled the host of the Egyptians.\" On that\noccasion it followed or represented \"the angel of God.\" There is\nnowhere any attempt to give a complete account of the symbol. We read\nof its glory filling the inner shrine and even the holy place. At\nother times it only hovers above the western end of the tabernacle,\nmarking the situation of the ark. Now and again it moves from that\nposition, and covers the door of the tent of meeting into which Moses\nhas entered. The targums use the term _Shechinah_ to indicate what\nit was conceived to be--a luminous cloud, the visible manifestation\nof the Divine presence; and Philo speaks of the fiery appearance of\nthe Deity shining forth from a cloud. But these are glosses on the\noriginal descriptions and cannot be altogether harmonised. In one\npassage only (Isa. iv. 5) do we find a reference which appears to\nthrow any light on the real nature of the symbol. Evidently recalling\nit, the prophet says, \"Jehovah will create over the whole habitation\nof Mount Zion, and over her assemblies, a cloud and smoke by day,\nand the shining of a flaming fire by night.\" To him the cloud is\none of smoke rising from a fire which at night sends up tongues of\nflame; and the reflection of the bright fire on the overhanging cloud\nresembles a canopy of glory.\n\nEwald's view is that the smoke of the altar which went up in a thick\ncolumn, visible at a great distance by day, ruddy with flame by\nnight, was the origin of the conception. There are various objections\nto this theory, which the author of it himself finds difficult to\nreconcile with many of the statements. At the same time the pillar\nof cloud does not need to be thought of as in any respect a more\nDivine symbol than others which were associated with the tabernacle.\nCertainly the ark of the covenant which Bezaleel made according to\nthe instructions of Moses was, far beyond anything else, the sacred\ncentre around which the whole of the worship gathered, the mysterious\nemblem of Jehovah's character, the guarantee of His presence with\nIsrael. It was from the space above the mercy-seat, as we have seen,\nthat the Voice proceeded, not from the pillar of cloud. The sanctity\nof the ark was so great that it was never exposed to the view of the\npeople, nor even of the Levites who were set apart to carry it. The\ncloud, on the other hand, was seen by all, and had its principal\nfunction in showing where the ark was in the camp or on the march.\n\nNow assuming, in harmony with the reference in Isaiah, that the cloud\nwas one of smoke, some may be disposed to think that, like the ark of\nthe covenant, the holiest symbol of all, this was produced by human\nintervention, yet in a way not incompatible with its sacredness,\nits mystery, and value as a sign of Jehovah's presence. Where Moses\nwas as leader, lawgiver, prophet, mediator, there God was for this\npeople: what Moses did in the spirit of Divine zeal and wisdom was\ndone for Israel by God. Through his inspiration the ritual and its\nelaborate symbolism had their origin. And is it not possible that after\nthe manner of the emblem of Jehovah which appeared in the desert of\nHoreb the fire and cloud were now realised? While some may adopt this\nexplanation, others again will steadily believe that the appearance and\nmovements of the cloud were quite apart from human device or agency.\n\nScarcely any difficulty greater than that connected with the pillar of\ncloud presents itself to thoughtful modern readers of the Pentateuch.\nThe traditional view, apparently involved in the narrative, is that\nin this cloud and in this alone Jehovah revealed Himself in the\ninterval between His appearance to Jacob and, long afterwards, to\nJoshua in angelic form. Many will maintain that unless the cloud was\nof supernatural origin the whole relation of the Israelites to their\nDivine King must fall into shadow. Was not this one of the miracles\nwhich made Hebrew history different in kind from that of every other\nnation? Is it not one of the revelations of the Unseen God on which we\nmust build if we are to have sure faith in the Old Testament economy,\nand indeed in Christianity itself, as of superhuman revelation? If\nwe are not to interpret literally what is said in Exodus--\"The Lord\nwent before them by day in a pillar of cloud, to lead them the way;\nand by night in a pillar of fire, to give them light\"--shall we not\npractically abandon the whole Divine element in the history of Israel's\ndeliverance and education? Thus the difficulty stands.\n\nYet, it may be argued, since we have now the revelation of God in the\nhuman life of Christ and the gospel of salvation through the ministry\nof men, what need is there to doubt that, for the guidance of a\npeople from place to place in the wilderness, the wisdom, foresight,\nand faithfulness of an inspired man were the appointed means? It is\nadmitted that in many things Moses acted for Jehovah, that his mind\nreceived in idea, and his intellectual skill expressed in verbal\nform, the laws and statutes which were to maintain Israel's relation\nto God as a covenant people. We follow our Lord Himself in saying\nthat Moses gave Israel the law. But the legislation of the Decalogue\nwas far more of the nature of a disclosure of God, and had far higher\naims and issues than could be involved in the guidance through the\ndesert. The law was for the spiritual nature of the Hebrews. It\nbrought them into relation with God as just, pure, true, the sole\nsource of moral life and progress. As the nucleus of the covenant it\nwas symbolic in a sense that fire could never be. It may be asked,\nthen, What need is there to doubt that Moses had his part in this\nsymbol which has so long appeared, more than the other, important as\na nexus between heaven and earth? To interpret the words \"whenever\nthe cloud was taken up from over the tent,\" as meaning that it was\nself-moved, would imply that Moses, though he is called the leader,\ndid not lead but was led like the rest. And this would reduce his\noffice to a point to which no prophet's work is reduced throughout\nthe entire Old Testament. Was he unable to direct the march from\nMoseroth to Bene-jaakan? An inspired man, on whom, according to the\nwill of God, lay the whole responsibility for Israel's national\ndevelopment, was he unable to determine when the pastures in one\nregion were exhausted and others had to be sought? Then indeed the\nmediation of his genius would be so minimised that our whole idea\nof him must be changed. Especially would we have to set aside that\nprediction applied to Christ: \"A prophet shall the Lord raise up unto\nyou, from your brethren, like unto me.\"\n\nAnd further, it may be said, the pillar of cloud and fire retains\nthe whole of its value as a symbol when the intervention of Moses is\nadmitted; and this may be proved by the analogy of other emblems.\nAlmost parallel to the cloud, for instance, is the serpent of brass,\nwhich became a sign of Jehovah's healing power, and conveyed new\nlife to those who looked towards it in faith. The fact that this\nrude image of a serpent was made by human hands did not in the least\nimpair its value as an instrument of deliverance, and the efficacy of\nthat particular symbol was selected by Christ as an illustration of\nHis own redeeming energy which was to be gained through the cross:\n\"As Moses lifted up the serpent in the wilderness, even so must the\nSon of man be lifted up.\" For certain occasions and needs of a people\none symbol avails; in other circumstances there must be other signs.\nThe smoke-cloud was not enough when the serpents terrified the host.\nElijah in this same desert saw a flashing fire; but Jehovah was not\nin the fire. Natural symbols, however impressive, do not avail by\nthemselves; and when God by His prophet says, \"This cloud, this fire,\nsymbolise My presence,\" and the people believe, is it not sufficient?\nThe Divine Friend is assuredly there. The symbol is not God; it\nrepresents a fact, impresses a fact which altogether apart from the\nsymbol would still hold good.\n\nIn the course of the passage (ix. 17-23) the manner of the guidance\ngiven by means of the cloud is carefully detailed. Sometimes the\ntribes remained encamped for many days, sometimes only from evening\nto morning. \"Whether it were two days, or a month, or a year, that\nthe cloud tarried on the tabernacle, abiding thereon, the children of\nIsrael remained encamped, and journeyed not: but when it was taken up,\nthey journeyed.\" Here is emphasised the authority which lay in \"the\ncommandment of the Lord _by the hand of Moses_\" (ver. 23). For Israel,\nas for every nation that is not lost in the desert of the centuries,\nand every society that is not on the way to confusion, there must be\nwise guidance and cordial submission thereto. We are not, however,\nsaved now, as the Israelites were, by a great movement of society,\nor even of the Church. Individually we must see the signal of the\nDivine will, and march where it points the way. And in a sense there\nare no rests of many days. Each morning the cloud moves forward; each\nmorning we must strike our tents. Our march is in the way of thought,\nof moral and spiritual progress; and if we live in any real sense, we\nshall press on along that way. The indication of duty, the guidance\nin thought which we are to follow, impose a Divine obligation none\nthe less that they are communicated through the instrumentality of\nmen. For every group of travellers, associated in worship, duty,\nand aim, there is some spiritual authority pointing the direction\nto be followed. As individuals we have our separate calling, our\nresponsibility to Christ, with which nothing is to interfere. But the\nunity of Christians in the faith and work of the kingdom of God must be\nkept; and for this one like Moses is needed, or at least a consensus of\njudgment, a clear expression of the corporate wisdom. The standard must\nbe carried forward, and where it moves on to quiet pasturage or grim\nconflict the faithful are to advance.\n\n \"Ye armies of the living God,\n His sacramental host,\n Where hallowed footsteps never trod\n Take your appointed post.\n\n \"Follow the cross; the ark of peace\n Accompany your path.\"\n\nThus, we may say, the general direction runs; and in the changing\ncircumstances of the Church submission is given by its members to\nthose who hold command at once from the Lord Himself and from His\npeople. But in the details of duty each must follow the guidance of a\ncloud that marks his own path to his own eye.\n\n\n 2. THE SILVER TRUMPETS\n\n NUMBERS x. 1-10\n\nAn air of antique simplicity is felt in the legislation regarding\nthe two trumpets of silver, yet we are not in any way hindered from\nconnecting the statute with the idea of claiming human art for\nDivine service. Instrumental music was of course rudimentary in the\nwilderness; but, such as it was, Jehovah was to control the use\nof it through the priests; and the developed idea is found in the\naccount of the dedication of the temple of Solomon, as recorded in\n2 Chron. v., where we are told that besides the Levites, who had\ncymbals, psalteries, and harps, a hundred and twenty priests sounding\nwith trumpets took part in the music.\n\nThere is no need to question the early use of these instruments;\nnevertheless, the legislation in our passage assumes the settlement\nin Canaan, and times when defensive war became necessary and the\nobservance of the sacred feasts fell into a fixed order. The statute\nis instructive as to the meaning of the formula \"The Lord spake unto\nMoses,\" and not less as to the gradual accretion of particulars\naround an ancient nucleus. We cannot set aside the sincere record,\nthough it may seem to make Jehovah speak on matters of small\nimportance. But interpretation must spring from a right understanding\nof the purpose suggested to the mind of Moses. Uses found for the\ntrumpets in the course of years are simply extensions of the germinal\nidea of reserving for sacred use those instruments and the art\nthey represented. It was well that whatever fear or exhilaration\nthe sounding of them caused should be controlled by those who were\nresponsible to God for the moral inspiration of the people.\n\nAccording to the statute, the two trumpets, which were of very simple\nmake, and capable of only a few notes, had their use first in calling\nassemblies. A long peal blown on one trumpet summoned the princes\nwho were the heads of the thousands of Israel: a long peal on both\ntrumpets called the whole congregation to the \"tent of meeting.\"\nThere were occasions when these assemblies were required not for\ndeliberation, but to hear in detail the instructions and orders\nof the leader. At other times the convocations were for prayer or\nthanksgiving; or, again, the people had to hear solemn reproofs and\nsentences of punishment. We may imagine that with varying sound,\njoyful or mournful, the trumpets were made to convey some indication\nof the purpose for which the assembly was called.\n\nA sacred obligation lay on the Israelites to obey the summons, whether\nfor joy or sorrow. They heard in the trumpet-blast the very voice of\nGod. And upon us, bound to His service by a more solemn and gracious\ncovenant, rests an obligation even more commanding. The unity of the\ntribes of Israel, and their fellowship in the obedience and worship\nof Jehovah, could never be of half so much importance as the unity of\nChristians in declaring their faith and fulfilling their vocation. To\ncome together at the call of recurring opportunity, that we may confess\nChrist and hear His word anew, is essential to our spiritual life.\nThose who hear the call should know its urgency and promptly respond,\nlest in the midst of the holiest light there come to be a shadow of\ndeep darkness, the midnight gloom of paganism and death.\n\nAgain, in the wilderness, the trumpets gave the signal for striking\nthe camp and setting out on a new stage of the journey. Blown sharply\nby way of alarm, the peals conveyed now to one, now to another part of\nthe host the order to advance. The movement of the pillar of cloud, we\nmay assume, could not be seen everywhere, and this was another means of\ndirection, not only of a general kind, but with some detail.\n\nTaking vv. 5, 6, along with the passage beginning at ver. 14, we have\nan ideal picture of the order of movement. One peal, sharply rung out\nfrom the trumpets, would signify that the eastern camp, embracing\nthe tribes of Judah, Issachar, and Zebulun, should advance. Then the\ntabernacle was to be taken down, and the Levites of the families of\nGershon and Merari were to set forward with the various parts of\nthe tent and its enclosure. Next two alarms gave the signal to the\nsouthern camp, that of Reuben, Simeon, and Gad. The Levites of the\nfamily of Kohath followed, bearing the ark, the altar of incense,\nthe great altar, the table of shewbread, and other furniture of the\nsanctuary. The third and fourth camps, of which Ephraim and Benjamin\nwere the heads, brought up the rear. In these movements the trumpets\nwould be of much use. But it is quite clear that the real difficulty\nwas not to set the divisions in motion each at a fit time. The camps\nwere not composed only of men under military discipline. The women\nand children, the old and feeble, had to be cared for. The flocks and\nherds also had to be kept in hand. We cannot suppose that there was\nany orderly procession; rather was each camp a straggling multitude,\nwith its own delays and interruptions.\n\nAnd so it is in the case of every social and religious movement.\nClear enough may be the command to advance, the trumpet of\nProvidence, the clarion of the Gospel. But men and women are\nundisciplined in obedience and faith. They have many burdens of a\npersonal kind to bear, many private differences and quarrels. How\nvery seldom can the great Leader find prompt response to His will,\nthough the terms of it are distinctly conveyed and the demand is\nurgent! God makes a plan for us, opens our way, shows us our need,\nproclaims the fit hours; but our unbelief and fear and incapacity\nimpede the march. Nevertheless, through the grace of His providence,\nas Israel slowly made its way across the desert and reached Canaan at\nlast, the Church moves, and will continue to move, towards the holy\nfuture, the millennial age.\n\nTurning now to the uses of the silver trumpets after the settlement\nin Canaan, there is first that connected with war. The people\nare presumed to be living peaceably in their country; but some\nneighbouring power has attacked them. The sounding of the trumpets\nthen is to be of the nature of a prayer to the Divine Protector of\nthe nation. The cry of the dependent tribes will be gathered up, as\nit were, into the shrill blast which carries the alarm to the throne\nof the Lord of Hosts. To the army and to the nation assurance is\ngiven that the old promise of Jehovah's favour remains in force, and\nthat the promise, claimed by the priests according to the covenant,\nwill be fulfilled. And this will make the trumpet-blast exhilarating,\na presage of victory. The claim and hope of the nation rise\nheavenward. The men of war stand together in faith, and put to flight\nthe armies of the aliens.\n\nFor the battles we have to fight, the conflicts of faith with\nunbelief, and righteousness with aggressive iniquity, an inspiration\nis needed like that conveyed to Israel in the peal of the silver\ntrumpets. Have we any means of assurance resembling that which was\nto animate the Hebrews when the enemy came upon them? Even the need\nis often unrecognised. Many take for granted that religion is safe,\nthat the truth requires no valour of theirs in maintaining it, and\nthe Gospel of Christ no spirited defence. The trumpet is not heard\nbecause the duty to which all Christians are called as helpers of the\nGospel is never considered. Messages are accepted as oracles of God\nonly when they tell the trustful of safety and confirm them in easy\nenjoyment of spiritual privilege and hope. One kind of trumpet peal\nalone is liked--that which sounds an alarm to the unconverted, and\nbids them prepare for the coming of the Judge.\n\nBut there are for all Christians frequent calls to a service in\nwhich they need the courage of faith and every hope the covenant\ncan give. At the present time no greater mistake is possible than\nto sit in comfort under the shadow of ancient forms and creeds.\nWe cannot realise the value of the promise given to genuine faith\nunless we abandon the crumbling walls and meet our assailants in\nthe open ground, where we can see them face to face, and know the\nspirit with which they fight, the ensigns of their war. There is no\nbrave thinking now in those old shelters, no room to use the armour\nof light. Christianity is one of the free forces of human life. Its\ntrue inspiration is found only when those who stand by it are bent on\nsecuring and extending the liberties of men. The trumpets that lift\nto heaven the prayers of the faithful and fill the soldiers of the\nCross with the hope of victory can never be in the hands of those who\nclaim exclusive spiritual authority, nor will they ever again sound\nthe old Hebrew note. They inspire those who are generous, who feel\nthat the more they give the more they are blessed, who would impart\nto others their own life that God's love to the world may be known.\nThey call us not to defend our own privileges, but to keep the way\nof salvation open to all, to prevent the Pharisee and the unbeliever\nfrom closing against men the door of heavenly grace.\n\nOnce more; in the days of gladness and solemn feasting the trumpets\nwere to be blown over the burnt offerings and peace offerings. The\njoy of the Passover, the hope of the new-moon festival, especially\nin the beginning of the seventh month, were to be sent up to heaven\nwith the sound of these instruments, not as if Jehovah had forgotten\nHis people and His covenant, but for the assurance and comfort of the\nworshippers. He was a Friend before whom they could rejoice, a King\nwhose forgiveness was abundant, who showed mercy unto the thousands\nwho loved Him and kept His commandments. The music, loud, and clear,\nand bold, was to carry to all who heard it the conviction that God\nhad been sought in the way of His holy law, and would cause blessing\nto descend upon Israel.\n\nWe claim with gentler sounds, those of lowly prayer and pleading,\nthe help of the Most High. Even in the secret chamber when the door\nis shut we can address our Father, knowing that our claim will be\nanswered for the sake of Christ. Yet there are times when the loud\nand clear hallelujahs, borne heavenward by human voices and pealing\norgan, seem alone to express our exultation. Then the instruments and\nmethods of modern art may be said to bind the old Hebrew times, the\nancient faith of the wilderness and of Zion, to our own. We carry out\nideas that lie at the heart of the race; we realise that human skill,\nhuman discovery, find their highest use and delight when they make\nbeautiful and inspiring the service of God.\n\n\n 3. THE ORDER OF MARCH\n\n NUMBERS x. 11-28\n\nThe difficulties connected with the order of march prescribed in\nthis passage have been often and fully rehearsed. According to the\nenumeration given in chap. ii., the van of the host formed by the\ndivision of Judah, men, women, and children, must have reached some\nsix hundred thousand at least. The second division, headed by Reuben,\nwould number five hundred thousand. The Levites, with their wives\nand children, according to the same computation would be altogether\nabout seventy thousand. Then came the two remaining camps, about nine\nhundred thousand souls. At the first signal six hundred thousand\nwould have to get into marching order and move off across the desert.\nThere could be no absolute separation of the fighting men from their\nfamilies and flocks, and even if there were no narrow passes to\nconfine the vast multitude, it would occupy miles of road. We must\nnot put a day's journey at more than ten miles. The foremost groups\nwould therefore have reached the camping ground, let us say, when\nthe last ranks of the second division were only beginning to move;\nand the rear would still be on its way when night had long fallen\nupon the desert. Whatever obstacles were removed for the Israelites,\nthe actual distance to be traversed could not be made less; and the\njourney is always represented as a stern and serious discipline.\nWhen we take into account the innumerable hindrances which so vast\na company would certainly have to contend with, it seems impossible\nthat the order of march as detailed in this passage could have been\nfollowed for two days together.\n\nSuppose we receive the explanation that the numbers have been\naccidentally increased in the transcription of records. This would\nrelieve the narrative, not only here but at many points, of a burden\nit can hardly carry. And we remember that according to the Book of\nNehemiah less than fifty thousand Jews, returning from Babylon at the\nclose of the captivity, reconstructed the nation, so that it soon\nshowed considerable spirit and energy. If the numbers as they stand\nin the Pentateuch were reduced, divided by ten, as some propose, the\ndesert journey would appear less of a mere marvel. It would remain\none of the most striking and important migrations known to history;\nit would lose none of its religious significance. No religious\nidea is affected by the numbers who receive it; nor do the great\npurposes of God depend on multitudes for their fulfilment. We can\nview with composure the criticism which touches the record on its\nnumerical side, because we know the prophetic work of Moses and the\nprovidential education of Israel to be incontrovertible facts.\n\nIt has been suggested that the order of march as described did not\ncontinue to be kept throughout the whole of the wilderness journey;\nthat in point of fact it may have been followed only so far as Kadesh.\nWhether this was so or not it must be taken into account that for the\ngreater part of the forty years there was absolutely no travelling;\nthe tribes were settled in the wilderness of Paran. The proofs are\nincidental but conclusive. From a central point, where the cloud rested\n(Numb. x. 12), the people spread themselves, we may suppose, in various\ndirections, seeking grass for their cattle, and living for the most\npart like the other inhabitants of the district. Even if there were but\nthree years of travelling in all, before and after the sojourn in the\nneighbourhood of Kadesh, there would be ample time for the movement\nfrom one place to another mentioned in the records.\n\n\n\n\n VIII\n\n _HOBAB THE KENITE_\n\n NUMBERS x. 29-36\n\n\nThe Kenites, an Arab tribe belonging to the region of Midian, and\nsometimes called Midianites, sometimes Amalekites, were already in\nclose and friendly relation with Israel. Moses, when he went first\nto Midian, had married a daughter of their chief Jethro, and, as we\nlearn from Exod. xviii., this patriarch, with his daughter Zipporah\nand the two sons she had borne to Moses, came to the camp of Israel\nat the mount of God. The meeting was an occasion of great rejoicing;\nand Jethro, as priest of his tribe, having congratulated the Hebrews\non the deliverance Jehovah had wrought for them, \"took a burnt\noffering and sacrifices for God,\" and was joined by Moses, Aaron, and\nall the elders of Israel in the sacrificial feast. A union was thus\nestablished between Kenites and Israelites of the most solemn and\nbinding kind. The peoples were sworn to continual friendship.\n\nWhile Jethro remained in the camp his counsel was given in regard to\nthe manner of administering justice. In accordance with it rulers\nof thousands, hundreds, fifties, and tens were chosen, \"able men,\nsuch as feared God, men of truth, hating covetousness\"; and to them\nmatters of minor importance were referred for judgment, the hard\ncauses only being brought before Moses. The sagacity of one long\nexperienced in the details of government came in to supplement the\nintellectual power and the inspiration of the Hebrew leader.\n\nIt does not appear that any attempt was made to attach Jethro and the\nwhole of his tribe to the fortunes of Israel. The small company of the\nKenites could travel far more swiftly than a great host, and, if they\ndesired, could easily overtake the march. Moses, we are told, let his\nfather-in-law depart, and he went to his own place. But now that the\nlong stay of the Israelites at Sinai is over and they are about to\nadvance to Canaan, the visit of a portion of the Kenite tribe is made\nthe occasion of an appeal to their leader to cast in his lot with the\npeople of God. There is some confusion in regard to the relationship of\nHobab with Jethro or Raguel. Whether Hobab was a son or grandson of the\nchief cannot be made out. The word translated father-in-law (Numb. x.\n29), means a relation by marriage. Whatever was the tie between Hobab\nand Moses, it was at all events so close, and the Kenite had so much\nsympathy with Israel, that it was natural to make the appeal to him:\n\"Come thou with us, and we will do thee good.\" Himself assured of the\nresult of the enterprise, anticipating with enthusiasm the high destiny\nof the tribes of Israel, Moses endeavours to persuade these children of\nthe desert to take the way to Canaan.\n\nThere was a fascination in the movement of that people who, rescued\nfrom bondage by their Heavenly Friend, were on their journey to the\nland of His promise. This fascination Hobab and his followers appear\nto have felt; and Moses counted upon it. The Kenites, used to the\nwandering life, accustomed to strike their tents any day as occasion\nrequired, no doubt recoiled from the thought of settling even in a\nfertile country, still more from dwelling in any walled town. But the\nsouth of Canaan was practically a wilderness, and there, keeping to a\ngreat extent their ancestral habits, they might have had the liberty\nthey loved, yet kept in touch with their friends of Israel. Some\naversion from the Hebrews, who still bore certain marks of slavery,\nwould have to be overcome. Yet, with the bond already established,\nthere needed only some understanding of the law of Jehovah, and some\nhope in His promise to bring the company of Hobab to decision.\n\nAnd Moses had right in saying, \"Come with us, and we will do thee\ngood; for Jehovah hath spoken good concerning Israel.\" The outlook\nto a future was something which the Kenites as a people had not,\nnever could have in their desultory life. Unprogressive, out of\nthe way of the great movements of humanity, gaining nothing as\ngenerations went by, but simply reproducing the habits and treasuring\nthe beliefs of their fathers, the Arab tribe might maintain itself,\nmight occasionally strike for righteousness in some conflict, but\notherwise had no prospect, could have no enthusiasm. They would live\ntheir hard life, they would enjoy freedom, they would die--such would\nbe their history. Compared with that poor outlook, how good it would\nbe to share the noble task of establishing on the soil of Canaan a\nnation devoted to truth and righteousness, in league with the living\nGod, destined to extend His kingdom and make His faith the means\nof blessing to all. It was the great opportunity of these nomads.\nAs yet, indeed, there was no courage of religion, no brightness\nof enthusiasm among the Israelites. But there was the ark of the\ncovenant, there were the sacrifices, the law; and Jehovah Himself,\nalways present with His people, was revealing His will and His glory\nby oracle, by discipline and deliverance.\n\nNow these Kenites may be taken as representing a class, in the\npresent day to a certain extent attracted, even fascinated, by the\nChurch, who standing irresolute are appealed to in terms like those\naddressed by Moses to Hobab. They feel a certain charm, for in the\nwide organisation and vast activity of the Christian Church, quite\napart from the creed on which it is based, there are signs of vigour\nand purpose which contrast favourably with endeavours directed to\nmere material gain. In idea and in much of its effort the Church is\nsplendidly humane, and it provides interests, enjoyments, both of an\nintellectual and artistic kind, in which all can share. Not so much\nits universality nor its mission of converting the world, nor its\nspiritual worship, but rather the social advantages and the culture\nit offers draw towards it those minds and lives. And to them it\nextends, too often without avail, the invitation to join its march.\n\nIs it asked why many, partly fascinated, remain proof against its\nappeals? why an increasing number prefer, like Hobab, the liberty of\nthe desert, their own unattached, desultory, hopeless way of life?\nThe answer must partly be that, as it is, the Church does not fully\ncommend itself by its temper, its enthusiasm, its sincerity and\nChristianity. It attracts but is unable to command, because with all\nits culture of art it does not appear beautiful, with all its claims\nof spirituality it is not unworldly; because, professing to exist for\nthe redemption of society, its methods and standards are too often\nhuman rather than Divine. It is not that the outsider shrinks from the\nreligiousness of the Church as overdone; rather does he detect a lack\nof that very quality. He could believe in the Divine calling and join\nthe enterprise of the Church if he saw it journeying steadily towards\na better country, that is a heavenly. Its earnestness would then\ncommand him; faith would compel faith. But social status and temporal\naims are not subordinated by the members of the Church, nor even by\nits leaders. And whatever is done in the way of providing attractions\nfor the pleasure-loving, and schemes of a social kind, these, so far\nfrom gaining the undecided, rather make them less disposed to believe.\nMore exciting enjoyments can be found elsewhere. The Church offering\npleasures and social reconstruction is attempting to catch those\noutside by what, from their point of view, must appear to be chaff.\n\nIt is a question which every body of Christians has need to ask\nitself--Can we honestly say to those without, Come with us, and we\nwill do you good? In order that there may be certainty on this point,\nshould not every member of the Church be able to testify that the\nfaith he has gives joy and peace, that his fellowship with God is\nmaking life pure and strong and free? Should there not be a clear\nmovement of the whole body, year by year, towards finer spirituality,\nbroader and more generous love? The gates of membership are in some\ncases opened to such only as make very clear and ample profession.\nIt does not, however, appear that those already within have always\nthe Christian spirit corresponding to that high profession. And\nyet as Moses could invite Hobab and his company without misgiving\nbecause Jehovah was the Friend and Guide of Israel and had spoken\ngood concerning her, so because Christ is the Head of the Church,\nand Captain of her salvation, those outside may well be urged to\njoin her fellowship. If all depended on the earnestness of our faith\nand the steadfastness of our virtue we should not dare to invite\nothers to join the march. But it is with Christ we ask them to unite.\nImperfect in many ways, the Church is His, exists to show His death,\nto proclaim His Gospel and extend His power. In the whole range of\nhuman knowledge and experience there is but one life that is free,\npure, hopeful, energetic in every noble sense, and at the same time\ncalm. In the whole range of human existence there is but one region\nin which the mind and the soul find satisfaction and enlargement, in\nwhich men of all sorts and conditions find true harmony. That life\nand that region of existence are revealed by Christ; into them He\nonly is the Way. The Church, maintaining this, demonstrating this, is\nto invite all who stand aloof. They who join Christ and follow Him\nwill come to a good land, a heavenly heritage.\n\nThe first invitation given to Hobab was set aside. \"Nay,\" he said,\n\"I will not go; but I will depart to my own land and to my kindred.\"\nThe old ties of country and people were strong for him. The true\nArab loves his country passionately. The desert is his home, the\nmountains are his friends. His hard life is a life of liberty. He\nis strongly attached to his tribe, which has its own traditions,\nits own glories. There have been feuds, the memory of which must be\ncherished. There are heirlooms that give dignity to those who possess\nthem. The people of the clan are brothers and sisters. Very little\nof the commercial mingles with the life of the desert; so perhaps\nfamily feeling has the more power. These influences Hobab felt, and\nthis besides deterred him, that if he joined the Israelites he would\nbe under the command of Moses. Hobab was prospective head of his\ntribe, already in partial authority at least. To obey the word of\ncommand instead of giving it was a thing he could not brook. No doubt\nthe leader of Israel had proved himself brave, resolute, wise. He was\na man of ardent soul and fitted for royal power. But Hobab preferred\nthe chieftainship of his own small clan to service under Moses; and,\nbrought to the point of deciding, he would not agree.\n\nFreedom, habit, the hopes that have become part of life--these in\nlike manner interpose between many and a call which is known to be\nfrom God. There is restraint within the circle of faith; old ideas,\ntraditional conceptions of life, and many personal ambitions have to\nbe relinquished by those who enter it. Accustomed to that Midian where\nevery man does according to the bent of his own will, where life is\nhard but uncontrolled, where all they have learned to care for and\ndesire may be found, many are unwilling to choose the way of religion,\nsubjection to the law of Christ, the life of spiritual conflict and\ntrial, however much may be gained at once and in the eternal future.\nYet the liberty of their Midian is illusory. It is simply freedom to\nspend strength in vain, to roam from place to place where all alike\nare barren, to climb mountains lightning-riven, swept by interminable\nstorms. And the true liberty is with Christ, who opens the prospect\nof the soul, and redeems the life from evil, vanity, and fear. The\nheavenward march appears to involve privation and conflict, which\nmen do not care to face. But is the worldly life free from enemies,\nhardships, disappointments? The choice is, for many, between a bare\nlife over which death triumphs, and a life moving on over obstacles,\nthrough tribulations, to victory and glory. The attractions of land\nand people, set against those of Christian hope, have no claim. \"Every\none,\" says the Lord, \"that hath left houses, or brethren, or sisters,\nor father, or mother, or children, or lands, for My sake, shall receive\na hundredfold, and shall inherit eternal life.\"\n\nPassing on, the narrative informs us that Moses used another plea:\n\"Leave us not, I pray thee; forasmuch as thou knowest how we are to\nencamp in the wilderness, and thou shalt be to us instead of eyes.\"\nHobab did not respond to the promise of advantage to himself; he might\nbe moved by the hope of being useful. Knowing that he had to deal with\na man who was proud, and in his way magnanimous, Moses wisely used this\nappeal. And he used it frankly, without pretence. Hobab might do real\nand valuable service to the tribes on their march to Canaan. Accustomed\nto the desert, over which he had often travelled, acquainted with the\nbest methods of disposing a camp in any given position, with the quick\neye and habit of observation which the Arab life gives, Hobab would be\nthe very adjutant to whom Moses might commit many details. If he joins\nthe tribes on this footing it will be without pretence. He professes no\ngreater faith either in Israel's destiny or in Jehovah's sole Godhead\nthan he really feels. Wishing Israel well, interested in the great\nexperiment, yet not bound up in it, he may give his counsel and service\nheartily so far as they avail.\n\nWe are here introduced to another phase of the relation between\nthe Church and those who do not altogether accept its creed, or\nacknowledge its mission to be supernatural, Divine. Confessing\nunwillingness to receive the Christian system as a whole, perhaps\nopenly expressing doubts of the miraculous, for example, many in\nour day have still so much sympathy with the ethics and culture of\nChristianity that they would willingly associate themselves with the\nChurch, and render it all the service in their power. Their tastes\nhave led them to subjects of study and modes of self-development\nnot in the proper sense religious. Some are scientific, some have\nliterary talent, some artistic, some financial. The question may\nbe, whether the Church should invite these to join her ranks in\nany capacity, whether room may be made for them, tasks assigned to\nthem. On the one hand, would it be dangerous to Christian faith? on\nthe other hand, would it involve them in self-deception? Let it be\nassumed that they are men of honour and integrity, men who aim at a\nhigh moral standard and have some belief in the spiritual dignity man\nmay attain. On this footing may their help be sought and cordially\naccepted by the Church?\n\nWe cannot say that the example of Moses should be taken as a rule\nfor Christians. It was one thing to invite the co-operation with\nIsrael for a certain specified purpose of an Arab chief who differed\nsomewhat in respect of faith; it would be quite another thing to\ninvite one whose faith, if he has any, is only a vague theism, to\ngive his support to Christianity. Yet the cases are so far parallel\nthat the one illustrates the other. And one point appears to be this,\nthat the Church may show itself at least as sympathetic as Israel. Is\nthere but a single note of unison between a soul and Christianity?\nLet that be recognised, struck again and again till it is clearly\nheard. Our Lord rewarded the faith of a Syroph\u0153nician woman, of\na Roman centurion. His religion cannot be injured by generosity.\nAttachment to Himself personally, disposition to hear His words\nand accept His morality, should be hailed as the possible dawn of\nfaith, not frowned upon as a splendid sin. Every one who helps sound\nknowledge helps the Church. The enthusiast for true liberty has a\npoint of contact with Him whose truth gives freedom. The Church\nis a spiritual city with gates that stand wide open day and night\ntowards every region and condition of human life, towards the north\nand south, the east and west. If the wealthy are disposed to help,\nlet them bring their treasures; if the learned devote themselves\nreverently and patiently to her literature, let their toil be\nacknowledged. Science has a tribute that should be highly valued, for\nit is gathered from the works of God; and art of every kind--of the\npoet, the musician, the sculptor, the painter--may assist the cause\nof Divine religion. The powers men have are given by Him who claims\nall as His own. The vision of Isaiah in which he saw Tarshish and the\nisles, Sheba and Seba offering gifts to the temple of God, did not\nassume that the tribute was in all cases that of covenant love. And\nthe Church of Christ has broader human sympathy and better right to\nthe service of the world than Isaiah knew. For the Church's good, and\nfor the good of those who may be willing in any way to aid her work\nand development, all gifts should be gladly received, and those who\nstand hesitating should be invited to serve.\n\nBut the analogy of the invitation to Hobab involves another point\nwhich must always be kept in view. It is this, that the Church is\nnot to slacken her march not divert her march in any degree because\nmen not fully in sympathy with her join the company and contribute\ntheir service. The Kenite may cast in his lot with the Israelites\nand aid them with his experience. But Moses will not cease to lead\nthe tribes towards Canaan, will not delay their progress a single\nday for Hobab's sake. Nor will he less earnestly claim sole Godhead\nfor Jehovah, and insist that every sacrifice shall be made to Him\nand every life kept holy in His way, for His service. Perhaps the\nKenite faith differed little in its elements from that which the\nIsraelites inherited. It may have been monotheistic; and we know that\npart of the worship was by way of sacrifice not unlike that appointed\nby the Mosaic law. But it had neither the wide ethical basis nor\nthe spiritual aim and intensity which Moses had been the means of\nimparting to Israel's religion. And from the ideas revealed to him\nand embodied in the moral and ceremonial law he could not for the\nsake of Hobab resile in the least. There should be no adjustment of\ncreed or ritual to meet the views of the new ally. Onward to Canaan,\nonward also along the lines of religious duty and development, the\ntribes would hold their way as before.\n\nIn modern alliances with the Church a danger is involved,\nsufficiently apparent to all who regard the state of religion.\nHistory is full of instances in which, to one company of helpers\nand another, too much has been conceded; and the march of spiritual\nChristianity is still greatly impeded by the same thing. Money\ncontributed, by whomsoever, is held to give the donors a right to\ntake their place in councils of the Church, or at least to sway\ndecision now in one direction, now in another. Prestige is offered\nwith the tacit understanding that it shall be repaid with deference.\nThe artist uses his skill, but not in subordination to the ideas of\nspiritual religion. He assumes the right to give them his own colour,\nand may even, while professing to serve Christianity, sensualise\nits teaching. Scholarship offers help, but is not content to submit\nto Christ. Having been allowed to join itself with the Church, it\nproceeds, not infrequently, to play the traitor's part, assailing\nthe faith it was invoked to serve. Those who care more for pleasure\nthan for religion may within a certain range find gratification in\nChristian worship; they are apt to claim more and still more of the\nelement that meets their taste. And those who are bent on social\nreconstruction would often, without any thought of doing wrong,\ndivert the Church entirely from its spiritual mission. When all these\ninfluences are taken into account, it will be seen that Christianity\nhas to go its way amid perils. It must not be unsympathetic. But\nthose to whom its camp is opened, instead of helping the advance, may\nneutralise the whole enterprise.\n\nEvery Church has great need at present to consider whether that clear\nspiritual aim which ought to be the constant guide is not forgotten,\nat least occasionally, for the sake of this or that alliance supposed\nto be advantageous. It is difficult to find the mean, difficult to\nsay who serve the Church, who hinder its success. More difficult\nstill is it to distinguish those who are heartily with Christianity\nfrom those who are only so in appearance, having some nostrum of\ntheir own to promote. Hobab may decide to go with Israel; but the\ninvitation he accepts, perhaps with an air of superiority, of one\nconferring a favour, is really extended to him for his good, for the\nsaving of his life. Let there be no blowing of the silver trumpets\nto announce that a prince of the Kenites henceforth journeys with\nIsrael; they were not made for that! Let there be no flaunting of\na gay ensign over his tent. We shall find that a day comes when\nthe men who stand by true religion have--perhaps through Kenite\ninfluence--the whole congregation to face. So it is in Churches.\nOn the other hand, Pharisaism is a great danger, equally tending\nto destroy the value of religion; and Providence ever mingles the\nelements that enter into the counsels of Christianity, challenging\nthe highest wisdom, courage, and charity of the faithful.\n\n * * * * *\n\nThe closing verses of chap. x. (33-6), belonging, like the passage just\nconsidered, to the prophetic narrative, affirm that the ark was borne\nfrom Sinai three days' journey before the host to find a halting-place.\nThe reconciliation between this statement and the order which places\nthe ark in the centre of the march, may be that the ideal plan was\nat the outset not observed, for some sufficient reason. The absolute\nsincerity of the compilers of the Book of Numbers is shown in their\nplacing almost side by side the two statements without any attempt to\nharmonise. Both were found in the ancient documents, and both were set\ndown in good faith. The scribes into whose hands the old records came\ndid not assume the _r\u00f4le_ of critics.\n\nAt the beginning of every march Moses is reported to have used the\nchant: \"Rise up, O Jehovah, and let Thine enemies be scattered; and\nlet them that hate Thee flee before Thee.\" When the ark rested he\nsaid: \"Return, O Jehovah, unto the ten thousands of the thousands\nof Israel.\" The former is the opening strain of Psalm lxviii., and\nits magnificent strophes move towards the idea of that rest which\nIsrael finds in the protection of her God. Part of the ode returns\nupon the desert journey, adding some features and incidents omitted\nin the narrations of the Pentateuch--such as the plentiful rain\nwhich refreshed the weary tribes, the publishing by women of some\nDivine oracle. But on the whole the psalm agrees with the history,\nmaking Sinai the scene of the great revelation of God, and indicating\nthe guidance He gave through the wilderness by means of the cloudy\npillar. The chants of Moses would be echoed by the people, and would\nhelp to maintain the sense of constant relation between the tribes\nand their unseen Defender.\n\nThrough the wilderness Israel went, not knowing from what quarter the\nsudden raid of a desert people might be made. Swiftly, silently, as if\nspringing out of the very sand, the Arab raiders might bear down upon\nthe travellers. They were assured of the guardianship of Him whose eye\nnever slumbered, when they kept His way and held themselves at His\ncommand. Here the resemblance to our case in the journey of life is\nclear; and we are reminded of our need of defence and the only terms\non which we may expect it. We may look for protection against those\nwho are the enemies of God. But we have no warrant for assuming that\non whatever errand we are bound we have but to invoke the Divine arm\nin order to be secure. The dreams of those who think their personal\nclaim on God may always be urged have no countenance in the prayer,\n\"Rise up, O Jehovah, and let Thine enemies be scattered.\" And as Israel\nsettling to rest after some weary march could enjoy the sense of\nJehovah's presence only if the duties of the day had been patiently\ndone, and the thought of God's will had made peace in every tribe, and\nHis promise had given courage and hope--so for us, each day will close\nwith the Divine benediction when we have \"fought a good fight and kept\nthe faith.\" Fidelity there must be; or, if it has failed, the deep\nrepentance that subdues wandering desire and rebellious will, bringing\nthe whole of life anew into the way of lowly service.\n\n\n\n\n IX\n\n _THE STRAIN OF THE DESERT JOURNEY_\n\n NUMBERS xi\n\n\nThe narrative has accompanied the march of Israel but a short way from\nthe mount of God to some spot marked for an encampment by the ark\nof the covenant, and already complaining has to be told of, and the\nswift judgment of those who complained. The Israelites have made a\nreservation in their covenant with God, that though obedience and trust\nare solemnly promised, yet leave shall be taken to murmur against His\nprovidence. They will have God for their Protector, they will worship\nHim; but let Him make their life smooth. Much has had to be borne which\nthey did not anticipate; and they grumble and speak evil.\n\nGenerally men do not realise that their murmuring is against God.\nThey have no intention to accuse His providence. It is of other men\nthey complain, who come in their way; of accidents, so called, for\nwhich no one seems to be responsible; of regulations, well enough\nmeant, which at some point prove vexatious; the obtuseness and\ncarelessness of those who undertake but do not perform. And there\ndoes seem to be a great difference between displeasure with human\nagents whose follies and failures provoke us, and discontent with our\nown lot and its trials. At the same time, this has to be kept in\nview, that while we carefully refrain from criticising Providence,\nthere may be, underlying our complaints, a tacit opinion that the\nworld is not well made nor well ordered. To a certain extent the\npersons who irritate us are responsible for their mistakes; but just\namong those who are prone to err our discipline has been appointed.\nTo gird at them is as much a revolt against the Creator as to\ncomplain of the heat of summer or the winter cold. With our knowledge\nof what the world is, of what our fellow-creatures are, should go the\nperception that God rules everywhere and stands against us when we\nresent what, in His world, we have to do or to suffer. He is against\nthose who fail in duty also. Yet it is not for us to be angry. Our\ndue will not be withheld. Even when we suffer most it is still\noffered, still given. While we endeavour to remedy the evils we feel,\nit must be without a thought that the order appointed by the Great\nKing fails us at any point.\n\nThe punishment of those who complained is spoken of as swift and\nterrible. \"The fire of the Lord burnt among them, and devoured in the\nuttermost part of the camp.\" This judgment falls under a principle\nassumed throughout the whole book, that disaster must overtake\ntransgressors, and conversely that death by pestilence, earthquake,\nor lightning is invariably a result of sin. For the Israelites this\nwas one of the convictions that maintained a sense of moral duty and\nof the danger of offending God. Again and again in the wilderness,\nwhere thunderstorms were common and plagues spread rapidly, the\nimpression was strongly confirmed that the Most High observed\neverything that was done against His will. The journey to Canaan\nbrought in this way a new experience of God to those who had been\naccustomed to the equable conditions of climate and the comparative\nhealth enjoyed in Egypt. The moral education of the people advanced\nby the quickening of conscience in regard to all that befell Israel.\n\nFrom the disaster at Taberah the narrative passes to another phase of\ncomplaint in which the whole camp was involved. The dissatisfaction\nbegan amongst the \"mixed multitude\"--that somewhat lawless crowd of\nlow-caste Egyptians and people of the Delta and the wilderness who\nattached themselves to the host. Among them first, because they had\nabsolutely no interest in Israel's hope, a disposition to quarrel\nwith their circumstances would naturally arise. But the spirit of\ndissatisfaction grew apace, and the burden of the new complaint was:\n\"We have nought but this manna to look to.\" The part of the desert\ninto which the travellers had now penetrated was even more sterile\nthan Midian. Hitherto the food had been varied somewhat by occasional\nfruits and the abundant milk of kine and goats. But pasturage for the\ncattle was scanty in the wilderness of Paran, and there were no trees\nof any kind. Appetite found nothing that was refreshing. Their soul\nwas dried away.\n\nIt was a common belief in our Lord's time that the manna, falling\nfrom heaven, very food of the angels, had been so satisfying, so\ndelicious, that no people could have been more favoured than those\nwho ate of it. When Christ spoke of the meat which endureth unto\neternal life, the thought of His hearers immediately turned to the\nmanna as the special gift of God to their fathers, and they conceived\nan expectation that Jesus would give them that bread of heaven, and\nso prove Himself worthy of their faith. But He replied, \"Moses gave\nyou not that bread out of heaven, but My Father giveth you the true\nbread out of heaven. I am the Bread of Life.\"\n\nIn the course of time the manna had been, so to speak, glorified.\nIt appeared to the later generations one of the most wonderful and\nimpressive things recorded in the whole history of their nation,\nthis provision made for the wandering host. There was the water from\nthe rock, and there was the manna. What a benignant Providence had\nwatched over the tribes! How bountiful God had been to the people in\nthe old days! They longed for a sign of the same kind. To enjoy it\nwould restore their faith and put them again in the high position\nwhich had been denied for ages.\n\nBut these notions are not borne out by the history as we have it in\nthe passage under notice. Nothing is said about angels' food--that is\na poetical expression which a psalmist used in his fervour. Here we\nread, as to the coming of the manna, that when the dew fell upon the\ncamp at night the manna fell upon it, or with it. And so far from the\npeople being satisfied, they complained that instead of the fish and\nonions, cucumbers and melons of Egypt, they had nothing but manna to\neat. The taste of it is described as like that of fresh oil. In Exodus\nit is said to have resembled wafers mixed with honey. It was not the\nprivilege of the Israelites in the wilderness but their necessity\nto live on this somewhat cloying food. In no sense can it be called\nideal. Nevertheless, complaining about it, they were in serious fault,\nbetraying the foolish expectation that on the way to liberty they\nshould have no privations. And their discontent with the manna soon\nbecame alarming to Moses. A sort of hysteria spread through the camp.\nNot the women only, but the men at the doors of their tents bewailed\ntheir hard lot. There was a tempest of tears and cries.\n\nGod, through His providence, determining for men, carrying out His\nown designs for their good, does not allow them to keep in the region\nof the usual and of mere comfort. Something is brought into their\nlife which stirs the soul. In new hope they begin an enterprise\nthe course and end of which they cannot foresee. The conventional,\nthe pleasant, the peace and abundance of Egypt, can be no longer\nenjoyed if the soul is to have its own. By Moses Jehovah summoned\nthe Israelites from the land of plenty to fulfil a high mission; and\nwhen they responded, it was so far a proof that there was in them\nspirit enough for an uncommon destiny. But for the accomplishment\nof it they had to be nerved and braced by trial. Their ordeal was\nthat mortifying of the flesh and of sensuous desire which must be\nundergone if the hopes through which the mind becomes conscious of\nthe will of God are to be fulfilled.\n\nIn our personal history God, reaching us by His word, enlightening us\nwith regard to the true ends of our being, calls us to begin a journey\nwhich has no earthly terminus and promises no earthly reward. We may\nbe quite sure that we have not yet responded to His call if there is\nnothing of the wilderness in our life, no hardship, no adventure, no\ngiving up of what is good in a temporal sense for what is good in a\nspiritual sense. The very essence of the design of God concerning a man\nis that he leave the lower and seek the higher, that he deny himself\nthat which according to the popular view is his life, in order to seek\na remote and lofty goal. There will be duty that calls for faith, that\nneeds hope and courage. In doing it he will have recurring trials\nof his spirit, necessities of self-discipline, stern difficulties of\nchoice and action. Every one of these he must face.\n\nWhat is wrong with many lives is that they have no strain in them\nas of a desert journey towards a heavenly Canaan, the realisation\nof spiritual life. Adventure, when it is undertaken, is often for\nthe sake of getting fish and melons and cucumbers by-and-by in\ngreater abundance and of better kinds. Many live hardly just now,\nnot because they are on the way to spiritual freedom and the high\ndestiny of life in God, but because they believe themselves to be on\nthe way to better social position, to wealth or honour. But take the\nlife that has begun its high enterprise at the urgency of a Divine\nvocation, and that life will find hardness, deprivations, perils, of\nits own. It is not given to us to be absolutely certain in decision\nand endeavour. Out in the wilderness, even when manna is provided,\nand the pillar of cloud seems to show the way, the people of God\nare in danger of doubting whether they have done wisely, whether\nthey have not taken too much upon themselves or laid too much upon\nthe Lord. The Israelites might have said, We have obeyed God: why,\nthen, should the sun smite us with burning heat, and the dust-storms\nsweep down upon our march, and the night fall with so bitter a\nchill? Interminable toil, in travelling, in attending to cattle and\ndomestic duties, in pitching tents and striking them, gathering\nfuel, searching far and wide through the camp for food, helping the\nchildren, carrying the sick and aged, toil that did not cease till\nfar into the night and had to be resumed with early morning--such,\nno doubt, were the things that made life in the wilderness irksome.\nAnd although many now have a lighter burden, yet our social life,\nadding new difficulties with every improvement, our domestic affairs,\nthe continual struggle necessary in labour and business, furnish not\na few causes of irritation and of bitterness. God does not remove\nannoyances out of the way even of His devoted servants. We remember\nhow Paul was vexed and burdened while carrying the world's thought\non into a new day. We remember what a weight the infirmities and\ntreacheries of men laid upon the heart of Christ.\n\nLet us thank God if we feel sometimes across the wilderness a breeze\nfrom the hills of the heavenly Canaan, and now and then catch\nglimpses of them far away. But the manna may seem flat and tasteless,\nnevertheless; the road may seem long; the sun may scorch. Tempted to\ndespond, we need afresh to assure ourselves that God is faithful who\nhas given us His promise. And although we seem to be led not towards\nthe heavenly frontier, but often aside through close defiles into\nsome region more barren and dismal than we have yet crossed, doubt is\nnot for us. He knoweth the way that we take; when He has tried us, we\nshall come forth where He appoints.\n\nFrom the people we turn to Moses and the strain he had to bear as\nleader. Partly it was due to his sense of the wrath of God against\nIsrael. To a certain extent he was responsible for those he led, for\nnothing he had done was apart from his own will. The enterprise was\nlaid on him as a duty certainly; yet he undertook it freely. Such as\nthe Israelites were, with that mixed multitude among them, a dangerous\nelement enough, Moses had personally accepted the leadership of them.\nAnd now the murmuring, the lusting, the childish weeping, fall upon\nhim. He feels that he must stand between the people and Jehovah. The\nbehaviour of the multitude vexes him to the soul; yet he must take\ntheir part, and avert, if possible, their condemnation.\n\nThe position is one in which a leader of men often finds himself.\nThings are done which affront him personally, yet he cannot turn\nagainst the wayward and unbelieving, for, if he did, the cause would\nbe lost. The Divine judgment of the transgressors falls on him all\nthe more because they themselves are unaware of it. The burden such\nan one has to sustain points directly to the sin-bearing of Christ.\nWounded to the soul by the wrong-doing of men, He had to interpose\nbetween them and the stroke of the law, the judgment of God. And\nmay not Moses be said to be a type of Christ? The parallel may well\nbe drawn; yet the imperfect mediation of Moses fell far short of\nthe perfect mediation of our Lord. The narrative here reflects that\npartial knowledge of the Divine character which made the mediation of\nMoses human and erring for all its greatness.\n\nFor one thing Moses exaggerated his own responsibility. He asked\nof God: \"Why hast Thou evil entreated Thy servant? Why dost Thou\nlay the burden of all this people upon me? Am I their father? Am I\nto carry the whole multitude as a father carries his young child\nin his bosom?\" These are ignorant words, foolish words. Moses is\nresponsible, but not to that extent. It is fit that he should be\ngrieved when the Israelites do wrong, but not proper that he should\ncharge God with laying on him the duty of keeping and carrying them\nlike children. He speaks unadvisedly with his lips.\n\nResponsibility of those who endeavour to lead others has its limits;\nand the range of duty is bounded in two ways--on the one hand by\nthe responsibility of men for themselves, on the other hand by God's\nresponsibility for them, God's care of them. Moses should see that no\nlaw or ordinance makes him chargeable with the childish lamentations\nof those who know they should not complain, who ought to be manly\nand endure with stout hearts. If persons who can go on their own\nfeet want to be carried, no one is responsible for carrying them.\nIt is their own fault when they are left behind. If those who can\nthink and discover duty for themselves, desire constantly to have\nit pointed out to them, crave daily encouragement in doing their\nduty, and complain because they are not sufficiently considered, the\nleader, like Moses, is not responsible. Every man must bear his own\nburden--that is, must bear the burden of duty, of thought, of effort,\nso far as his ability goes.\n\nThen, on the other side, the power of God is beneath all, His care\nextends over all. Moses ought not for a moment to doubt Jehovah's\nmindfulness of His people. Men who hold office in society or the\nChurch are never to think that their effort is commensurate with\nGod's. Proud indeed he would be who said: \"The care of all these\nsouls lies on me: if they are to be saved, I must save them; if they\nperish, I shall be chargeable with their blood.\" Speaking ignorantly\nand in haste, Moses went almost that length; but his error is not to\nbe repeated. The charge of the Church and of the world is God's; and\nHe never fails to do for all and for each what is right. The teacher\nof men, the leader of affairs, with full sympathy and indefatigable\nlove, is to do all he can, yet never trench on the responsibility of\nmen for their own life, or assume to himself the part of Providence.\n\nMoses made one mistake and went on to another. He was on the whole\na man of rare patience and meekness; yet on this occasion he spoke\nto Jehovah in terms of daring resentment. His cry was to get rid of\nthe whole enterprise: \"If Thou deal thus with me, kill me, I pray\nThee, out of hand, and let me not see my wretchedness.\" He seemed to\nhimself to have this work to do and no other, apparently imagining\nthat if he was not competent for this, he could be of no use in the\nworld. But even if he had failed as a leader, highest in office,\nhe might have been fit enough for a secondary place, under Joshua\nor some other whom God might inspire: this he failed to see. And\nalthough he was bound up in Israel's well-being, so that if the\nexpedition did not prosper he had no wish to live, and was so far\nsincerely patriotic, yet what good end could his death serve? The\ndesire to die shows wounded pride. Better live on and turn shepherd\nagain. No man is to despise his life, whatever it is, however it may\nseem to come short of the high ambition he has cherished as a servant\nof God and men. Discovering that in one line of endeavour he cannot\ndo all he would, let him make trial of others, not pray for death.\n\nThe narrative represents God as dealing graciously with his erring\nservant. Help was provided for him by the appointment of seventy\nelders, who were to share the task of guiding and controlling\nthe tribes. These seventy were to have a portion of the leader's\nspirit--zeal and enthusiasm like his own. Their influence in the\ncamp would prevent the faithlessness and dejection which threatened\nto wreck the Hebrew enterprise. Further, the murmuring of the people\nwas to be effectually silenced. Flesh was to be given them till\nthey loathed it. They should learn that the satisfaction of ignorant\ndesire meant punishment rather than pleasure.\n\nThe promise of flesh was speedily fulfilled by an extraordinary\nflight of quails, brought up, according to the seventy-eighth Psalm,\nby a wind which blew from the south and east--that is, from the\nElanitic Gulf. These quails cannot sustain themselves long on the\nwing, and after crossing the desert some thirty or forty miles they\nwould scarcely be able to fly. The enormous numbers of them which\nfluttered around the camp are not beyond ordinary possibility. Fowls\nof this kind migrate at certain seasons in such enormous multitudes\nthat in the small island of Capri, near Naples, one hundred and sixty\nthousand have been netted in one season. When exhausted, they would\neasily be taken as they flew at a height of about two cubits above\nthe ground. The whole camp was engaged in capturing quails from one\nmorning to the evening of the following day; and the quantity was\nso great that he who gathered least had ten homers, probably a heap\nestimated to be of that measure. To keep them for further use the\nbirds were prepared and spread on the ground to dry in the sun.\n\nWhen the epidemic of weeping broke out through the camp, the doubt\noccurred to Moses whether there was any spiritual quality in the\npeople, any fitness for duty or destiny of a religious kind. They\nseemed to be all unbelievers on whom the goodness of God and the\nsacred instruction had been wasted. They were earthly and sensual.\nHow could they ever trust God enough to reach Canaan?--or if they\nreached it, how would their occupation of it be justified? They would\nbut form another heathen nation, all the worse that they had once\nknown the true God and had abandoned Him. But a different view of\nthings was presented to Moses when the chosen elders, men of worth,\nwere gathered at the tent of meeting, and on a sudden impulse of the\nSpirit began to prophesy. As these men in loud and ecstatic language\nproclaimed their faith, Moses found his confidence in Jehovah's power\nand in the destiny of Israel re-established. His mind was relieved at\nonce of the burden of responsibility and the dread of an extinction\nof the heavenly light he had been the means of kindling among the\ntribes. If there were seventy men capable of receiving the Spirit\nof God, there might be hundreds, even thousands. A spring of new\nenthusiasm is opened, and Israel's future is again possible.\n\nNow there were two men, Eldad and Medad, who were of the seventy,\nbut had not come to the tent of meeting, where the prophetic spirit\nfell upon the rest. They had not heard the summons, we may suppose.\nUnaware of what was taking place at the tabernacle, yet realising the\nhonour conferred upon them, they were perhaps engaged in ordinary\nduties, or, having found some need for their interference, they may\nhave been rebuking murmurers and endeavouring to restore order among\nthe unruly. And suddenly they also, under the same influence as the\nother sixty-eight, began to prophesy. The spirit of earnestness\ncaught them. With the same ecstasy they declared their faith and\npraised the God of Israel.\n\nThere was in one sense a limitation of the spirit of prophecy,\nwhatever it was. Of all the host only the seventy received it. Other\ngood men and true in Israel that day might have seemed as capable of\nthe heavenly endowment as those who prophesied. It was, however, in\nharmony with a known principle that the men designated to special\noffice alone received the gift. The sense of a choice felt to be that\nof God does unquestionably exalt the mind and spirit of those chosen.\nThey realise that they stand higher and must do more for God and men\nthan others, that they are inspired to say what otherwise they could\nnot dare to say. The limitation of the Spirit in this sense is not\ninvariable, is not strict. At no time in the world's history has the\ncall to office been indispensable to prophetic fervour and courage.\nYet the sequence is sufficiently common to be called a law.\n\nBut while in a sense there is restriction of the spiritual influence,\nin another sense there is no restraint. The Divine afflatus is not\nconfined to those who have gathered at the tabernacle. It is not\nplace or occasion that makes the prophets; it is the Spirit, the\npower from on high entering into life; and out in the camp the two\nhave their portion of the new energy and zeal. Spiritual influence,\nthen, is not confined to any particular place. Neither was the\nneighbourhood of the tabernacle so holy that there alone the elders\ncould receive their gift; nor is any place of meeting, any church,\ncapable of such consecration and singular identification with the\nservice of God that there alone the power of the Divine Spirit can be\nmanifested or received. Let there be a man chosen of God, ready for\nthe duties of a holy calling, and on that man the Spirit will come,\nwherever he is, in whatever he is engaged. He may be employed in\ncommon work, but in doing it he will be moved to earnest service and\ntestimony. He may be labouring, under great difficulties, to restore\nthe justice that has been impaired by social errors and political\nchicanery--and his words will be prophetic; he will be a witness for\nGod to those who are without faith, without holy fear.\n\nWhile Eldad and Medad prophesied in the camp, a young man who\nheard them ran officiously to inform Moses. To this young man as\nto others--for no doubt there were many who loved and revered the\nUsual--the two elders were presumptuous fools. The camp was, as we\nsay, secular: was it not? People in the camp looked after ordinary\naffairs, tended their cattle, chaffered and bargained, quarrelled\nabout trifles, murmured against Moses and against God. Was it right\nto prophesy there, carrying religious words and ideas into the midst\nof common life? If Eldad and Medad could prophesy, let them go to the\ntabernacle. And besides, what right had they to speak for Jehovah, in\nJehovah's name? Was not Moses the prophet, the only prophet? Israel\nwas accustomed to think him so, would keep to that opinion. It would\nbe confusing if at any one's tent door a prophet might begin to\nspeak without warning. So the young man thought it his duty to run\nand tell Moses what was taking place. And Joshua, when he heard, was\nalarmed, and desired Moses to put an end to the irregular ministry.\n\"My lord Moses, forbid them,\" he said. He was jealous not for himself\nand the other elders, but for Moses' sake. So far the leader alone\nheld communication with Jehovah and spoke in His name; and there was\nperhaps some reason for the alarm of Joshua, more than was apparent\nat the time. To have one central authority was better and safer than\nto have many persons using the right to speak in any sense for God.\nWho could be sure that these new voices would agree with Moses in\nevery respect? Even if they did, might there not be divisions in the\ncamp, new priesthoods as well as new oracles? Prophets might not be\nalways wise, always truly inspired. And there might be false prophets\nby-and-by, even if Eldad and Medad were not false.\n\nIn like manner it might be argued now that there is danger when one\nhere and another there assume authority as revealers of the truth of\nthings. Some, full of their own wisdom, take high ground as critics\nand teachers of religion. Others imagine that with the right to\nwear a certain dress there has come to them the full equipment of\nthe prophet. And others still, remembering how Elijah and John the\nBaptist arrayed themselves in coarse cloth and leathern girdle,\nassume that garb, or what corresponds to it, and claim to have the\nprophetic gift because they express the voice of the people. So in\nour days there is a question whether Eldad or Medad, prophesying in\nthe camp, ought to be trusted or even allowed to speak. But who is to\ndecide? Who is to take upon him to silence the voices? The old way\nwas rough and ready. All who were in office in a certain Church were\ncommissioned to interpret Divine mysteries; the rest were ordered to\nbe silent on pain of imprisonment. Those who did not teach as the\nChurch taught, under her direction, were made offenders against the\npublic well-being. That way, however, has been found wanting, and\n\"liberty of prophesying\" is fully allowed. With the freedom there\nhave come difficulties and dangers enough. Yet to \"try the spirits\nwhether they are of God\" is our discipline on the way to life.\n\nThe reply of Moses to Joshua's request anticipates, in no small\ndegree, the doctrine of liberty. \"Art thou jealous for my sake? Would\nGod that all the Lord's people were prophets, and that the Lord\nwould put His Spirit upon them.\" His answer is that of a broad and\nmagnanimous toleration. Moses cannot indeed have believed that great\nreligious truths were in the reach of every man, and that any earnest\nsoul might receive and communicate those truths. But his conception\nof a people of God is like that in the prophecy of Joel, where he\nspeaks of all flesh being endued with the Spirit, the old men and\nyoung men, the sons and daughters, alike made able to testify of what\nthey have seen and heard. The truly great man entertains no jealousy\nof others. He delights to see in other eyes the flash of heavenly\nintelligence, to find other souls made channels of Divine revelation.\nHe would have no monopoly in knowledge and sacred prophecy. Moses had\ninstituted an exclusive priesthood; but here he sets the gate of the\nprophetical office wide open. All whom God endows are declared free\nin Israel to use that office.\n\nWe can only wonder that still any order of men should try in the name\nof the Church to shut the mouths of those who approve themselves\nreverent students of the Divine Word. At the same time let it not be\nforgotten that the power of prophesying is no chance gift, no easy\nfaculty. He who is to speak on God's behalf must indeed know the mind\nof God. How can one claim the right to instruct others who has never\nopened his mind to the Divine voice, who has not reverently compared\nScripture with Providence and all the phases of revelation that are\nunfolded in conscience and human life? Men who draw a narrow circle\nand keep their thoughts within it can never become prophets.\n\nThe closing verses of the chapter tell of the plague that fell on\nthe lustful, and the burial of those who died of it, in a place\nthence called Kibroth-hattaavah. The people had their desire, and\nit brought judgment upon them. Here in Israel's history a needful\nwarning is written; but how many read without understanding! And so,\nevery day the same plague is claiming its victims, and \"graves of\nlust\" are dug. The preacher still finds in this portion of Scripture\na subject that never ceases to claim treatment, let social conditions\nbe what they may.\n\n\n\n\n X\n\n _THE JEALOUSY OF MIRIAM AND AARON_\n\n NUMBERS xii\n\n\nIt may be confidently said that no representative writer of the\npost-exilic age would have invented or even cared to revive the\nepisode of this chapter. From the point of view of Ezra and his\nfellow-reformers, it would certainly appear a blot on the character\nof Moses that he passed by the women of his own people and took a\nCushite or Ethiopian wife. The idea of the \"holy seed,\" on which\nthe zealous leaders of new Judaism insisted after the return from\nBabylon, was exclusive. It appeared an abomination for Israelites\nto intermarry either with the original inhabitants of Canaan, or\neven with Moabites, Ammonites, and Egyptians. At an earlier date\nany disposition to seek alliance with Egypt or hold intercourse\nwith it was denounced as profane. Isaiah and Jeremiah alike declare\nthat Israel, whom Jehovah led forth from Egypt, should never think\nof returning to drink of its waters or trust in its shadow. As the\nnecessity of separateness from other peoples became strongly felt,\nrevulsion from Ethiopia would be greater than from Egypt itself.\nJeremiah's inquiry, \"Can the Ethiopian change his skin?\" made the\ndark colour of that race a symbol of moral taint.\n\nTo be sure, the prophets did not all adopt this view. Amos,\nespecially, in one of his striking passages, claims for the\nEthiopians the same relation to God as Israel had: \"Are ye not as\nthe children of the Ethiopians unto Me, O children of Israel, saith\nthe Lord?\" No reproach to the Israelites is intended; they are only\nreminded that all nations have the same origin and are under the same\nDivine providence. And the Psalms in their evangelical anticipations\nlook once and again to that dark land in the remote south: \"Princes\nshall come out of Egypt; Ethiopia shall soon stretch out her hands\nunto God\"; \"I will make mention of Rahab and Babylon to them that\nknow Me: behold Philistia, and Tyre, with Ethiopia; this man was\nborn there.\" The zeal of the period immediately after the captivity\ncarried separateness far beyond that of any earlier time, surpassing\nthe letter of the statute in Exod. xxxiv. 11 and Deut. vii. 2. And we\nmay safely assert that if the Pentateuch did not come into existence\ntill after the new ideas of exclusion were established, and if it\nwas written then for the purpose of exalting Moses and his law, the\nreference to his Cushite wife would certainly have been suppressed.\n\nAll the more may this be maintained when we take into account the\nlikelihood that it was not entirely without reason Aaron and Miriam\nfelt some jealousy of the woman. The story is usually taken to mean\nthat there was no cause whatever for the feeling entertained; and if\nMiriam alone had been involved, we might have regarded the matter as\nwithout significance. But Aaron had hitherto acted cordially with\nthe brother to whom he owed his high position. Not a single disloyal\nword or deed had as yet separated him in the least, personally, from\nMoses. They wrought together in the promulgation of law, they were\ntogether in transgression and judgment. Aaron had every reason for\nremaining faithful; and if he was now moved to a feeling that the\ncharacter and reputation of the lawgiver were imperilled, it must\nhave been because he saw reason. He could approach Moses quietly\non this subject without any thought of challenging his authority\nas leader. We see that while he accompanied Miriam he kept in the\nbackground, unwilling, himself, to appear as an accuser, though\npersuaded that the unpleasant duty must be done.\n\nSo far as Moses is concerned these thoughts, which naturally arise,\ngo to support the genuineness of the history. And in like manner the\ncondemnation of Aaron bears out the view that the episode is not\nof legendary growth. If priestly influence had determined to any\nextent the form of the narrative, the fault of Aaron would have been\nsuppressed. He agrees with Miriam in making a claim the rejection\nof which involves him and the priesthood in shame. And yet, again,\nthe theory that here we have prophetic narrative, critical of the\npriesthood, will not stand; for Miriam is a prophetess, and language\nis used which seems to deny to all but Moses a clear and intimate\nknowledge of the Divine will.\n\nMiriam was the spokeswoman. She it was, as the Hebrew implies,\nwho \"spake against Moses because of the Cushite woman whom he had\nmarried.\" It would seem that hitherto in right of her prophetical\ngift she was to some extent an adviser of her brother, or had\notherwise a measure of influence. It appeared to her not only a bad\nthing for Moses himself but absolutely wrong that a woman of alien\nrace, who probably came out of Egypt with the tribes, one among the\nmixed multitude, should have anything to say to him in private, or\nshould be in his confidence. Miriam maintained, apparently, that her\nbrother had committed a serious mistake in marrying this wife, and\nstill more in denying to Aaron and to herself that right of advising\nwhich they had hitherto used. Was not Moses forgetting that Miriam\nhad her share in the zeal and inspiration which had made the guidance\nof the tribes so far successful? If Moses stands aloof, consults only\nwith his alien wife, will he not forfeit position and authority and\nbe deprived of help with which he has no right to dispense?\n\nMiriam's is an instance, the first instance we may say, of the\nwoman's claim to take her place side by side with the man in the\ndirection of affairs. It would be absurd to say that the modern\ndesire has its origin in a spirit of jealousy like that which Miriam\nshowed; yet, parallel to her demand, \"Hath the Lord indeed spoken\nonly by Moses? Hath he not also spoken by us?\" is the recent cry,\n\"Has man a monopoly either of wisdom or of the moral qualities? Are\nnot women at least equally endowed with ethical insight and sagacity\nin counsel?\" Long excluded from affairs by custom and law, women have\nbecome weary of using their influence in an unrecognised, indirect\nway, and many would now claim an absolute parity with men, convinced\nthat if in any respect they are weak as yet they will soon become\ncapable. The claim is to a certain extent based on the Christian\ndoctrine of equality between male and female, but also on the\nacknowledged success of women who, engaging in public duties side by\nside with men, have proved their aptitude and won high distinction.\n\nAt the same time, those who have had experience of the world and\nthe many phases of human life must always have a position which the\ninexperienced may not claim; and women, as compared with men, must\ncontinue to be at a certain disadvantage for this reason. It may be\nsupposed that intuition can be placed against experience, that the\nwoman's quick insight may serve her better than the man's slowly\nacquired knowledge. And most will allow this, but only to a certain\npoint. The woman's intuition is a fact of her nature--to be trusted\noften and along many ways. It is, indeed, her experience, gained\nhalf unconsciously. But the modern claim is assuming far more than\nthis. We are told that the moral sense of the race comes down through\nwomen. They conserve the moral sense. This is no Christian claim,\nor Christian only in outdoing Romanism and setting Mary far above\nher Son. Seriously put forward by women, this will throw back their\nwhole claim into the middle ages again. That a finer moral sense\noften forms part of their intuition is admitted: that as a sex they\nlead the race must be proved where, as yet, they do not prove it.\nNevertheless, the world is advancing by the advance of women. There\nis no need any longer for that jealous intriguing which has often\nwrecked governments and homes. Christianity, ruling the questions\nof sex, means a very stable form of society, a continuous and calm\ndevelopment, the principle of charity and mutual service.\n\nMiriam claimed the position of a prophet or _nabi_ for herself, and\nendeavoured to make her gift and Aaron's as revealers of truth appear\nequal to that of Moses. At the Red Sea she led the chorus \"Sing ye to\nthe Lord, for He hath triumphed gloriously. The horse and his rider\nhath He thrown into the sea.\" That, so far as we know, was her title\nto count herself a prophetess. As for Aaron, we often find his name\nassociated with his brother's in the formula, \"The Lord spake unto\nMoses and Aaron.\" He had also been the _nabi_ of Moses when the two\nwent to Pharaoh with their demand on behalf of Israel. But the claim\nof equality with Moses was vain. Poor Miriam had her one flash of\nhigh enthusiasm, and may have now and again risen to some courage\nand zeal in professing her faith. But she does not seem to have had\nthe ability to distinguish between her fitful glimpses of truth and\nMoses' Divine intelligence. Aaron, again, must have been half ashamed\nwhen he was placed beside his brother. He had no genius, none of the\nelevation of soul that betokens an inspired man. He obeyed well,\nserved the sanctuary well; he was a good priest, but no prophet.\n\nThe little knowledge, the small gifts, appear great to those who have\nthem, so great as often to eclipse those of nobler men. We magnify what\nwe have,--our power of vision, though we cannot see far; our spiritual\nintelligence, though we have learned the first principles only of\nDivine faith. In the religious controversies of to-day, as in those\nof the past, men whose claims are of the slightest have pushed to the\nfront with the demand, Hath not the Lord spoken by us? But there is\nno Moses to be challenged. The age of the revealers is gone. He who\nseems to be a great prophet may be taken for one because he stands on\nthe past and invokes voluminous authority for all he says and does. In\ntruth, our disputations are between the modern Eliphaz, Bildad, and\nJob--all of them to-day men of limited view and meagre inspiration,\nwho repeat old hearsays with wearisome pertinacity, or inveigh against\nthe old interpretations with infinite assurance. Jehovah speaks from\nthe storm; but there is no heed paid to His voice. By some the Word is\ndeclared unintelligible; others deny it to be His.\n\nWhile Moses kept silence, ruling his spirit in the meekness of a man of\nGod, suddenly the command was given, \"Come out, ye three, unto the tent\nof meeting.\" Possibly the interview had been at Moses' own tent in the\nnear portion of the camp. Now judgment was to be solemnly given; and\nthe circumstances were made the more impressive by the removal of the\ncloud-pillar from above the tabernacle to the door of the tent, where\nit seems to have intervened between Moses on the one side and Miriam\nand Aaron on the other; then the Voice spoke, requiring these two to\napproach, and the oracle was heard. The subject of it was the position\nof Moses as the interpreter of Jehovah's will. He was distinguished\nfrom any other prophet of the time.\n\nWe are here at a point where more knowledge is needful to a full\nunderstanding of the revelation: we can only conjecture. Not long\nis it since the seventy elders belonging to different tribes were\nendowed with the spirit of prophecy. Already there may have been some\nabuse of their new power; for though God bestows His gifts on men,\nthey have practical liberty, and may not always be wise or humble in\nexercising the gifts. So the need of a distinction between Moses and\nthe others would be clear. As to Miriam and Aaron, their jealousy\nmay have been not only of Moses, but also of the seventy. Miriam\nand Aaron were prophets of older standing, and would be disposed to\nclaim that the Lord spoke by them rather in the way He spoke by Moses\nthan after the manner of His communications through the seventy.\nWere members of the sacred family to be on a level henceforth with\nany persons who spoke ecstatically in praise of Jehovah? Thus claim\nasserted itself over claim. The seventy had to be informed as to the\nlimits of their office, prevented from taking a place higher than\nthey had been assigned: Miriam and Aaron also had to be instructed\nthat their position differed entirely from their brother's, that they\nmust be content so far as prophecy was concerned to stand with the\nrest whose inspiration they may have despised. With this view the\ngeneral terms of the deliverance appear to correspond.\n\nThe Voice from the tent of meeting was heard through the cloud; and\non the one hand the function of the prophet or _nabi_ was defined, on\nthe other the high honour and prerogative of Moses were announced.\nThe prophet, said the Voice, shall have Jehovah made known to him\n\"in vision, or in dream,\"--in his waking hours, when the mind is on\nthe alert, receiving impressions from nature and the events of life;\nwhen memory is occupied with the past and hope with the future, the\nvision shall be given. Or again, in sleep, when the mind is withdrawn\nfrom external objects and appears entirely passive, a dream shall\nopen glimpses of the great work of Providence, the purposes of\njudgment or of grace. In these ways the prophet shall receive his\nknowledge; and of necessity the revelation will be to some extent\nshadowed, difficult to interpret. Now the name prophet, _nabi_, is\ncontinually applied throughout the Old Testament, not only to the\nseventy and others who like them spoke in ecstatic language, and\nthose who afterwards used musical instruments to help the rapture\nwith which the Divine utterance came, but also to men like Amos and\nIsaiah. And it has been made a question whether the inspiration of\nthese prophets is to come under the general law of the oracle we\nare considering. The answer in one sense is clear. So far as the\nword _nabi_ designates all, they are all of one order. But it is\nequally certain, as Kuenen has pointed out, that the later prophets\nwere not always in a state of ecstasy when they gave their oracles,\nnor simply reproducing thoughts of which they first became conscious\nin that state. They had an exalting consciousness of the presence\nand enlightening Spirit of Jehovah bestowed on them, or the burden\nof Jehovah laid on them. The visions were often flashes of thought;\nat other times the prophet seemed to look on a new earth and heaven\nfilled with moving symbols and powers. But the whole development of\nnational faith and knowledge affected their flashes of thought and\nvisions, lifting prophetic energy into a higher range.\n\nNow, returning to the oracle, we find that Moses is not a prophet\nor _nabi_ in this sense. The words that relate to him carefully\ndistinguish between his illumination and that of the _nabi_. \"My\nservant Moses is not so; he is faithful in all Mine house: with him\nwill I speak mouth to mouth, even manifestly, and not in dark speeches;\nand the form of Jehovah shall he behold.\" Every word here is chosen\nto exclude the idea of ecstasy, the idea, of vision or dream, which\nleaves some shadow of uncertainty upon the mind, and the idea of\nany intermediate influence between the human intelligence and the\ndisclosure of God's will. And when we try to interpret this in terms of\nour own mental operations, and our consciousness of the way in which\ntruth reaches our minds, we recognise for one thing an impression\nmade distinctly word by word of the message to be conveyed. There is\ngiven to Moses not only a general idea of the truth or principle to\nbe embodied in his words, but he receives the very terms. They come\nto him in concrete form. He has but to repeat or write what Jehovah\ncommunicates. Along with this there is given to Moses a power of\napprehending the form or similitude of God. His mind is made capable of\nsingular precision in receiving and transmitting the oracle or statute.\nThere is complete calmness and what we may call self-possession when he\nis in the tent of meeting face to face with the Eternal. And yet he has\nthis spiritual, transcendent symbol of the Divine Majesty before him.\nHe is no poet, but he enjoys some revelation higher and more exalting\nto mind and soul than poet ever had.\n\nThe paradox is not inconceivable. There is a way to this converse\nwith God \"mouth to mouth\" along which the patient, earnest soul can\npartly travel. Without rhapsody, with full effort of the mind that\nhas gathered from every source and is ready for the Divine synthesis\nof ideas, the Divine illumination, the Divine dictation, if we may so\nspeak, the humble intelligence may arrive where, for the guidance of\nthe personal life at least, the very words of God are to be heard.\nBeyond, along the same way, lies the chamber of audience which Moses\nknew. We think it an amazing thing to be sure of God and of His\nwill to the very words. Our state is so often that of doubt, or of\nself-absorption, or of entanglement with the affairs of others, that\nwe are generally incapable of receiving the direct message. Yet of\nwhom should we be sure if not of God? Of what words should we be more\ncertain than those pure, clear words that come from His mouth? Moses\nheard on great themes, national and moral--he heard for the ages, for\nthe world: there lay his unique dignity. We may hear only for our\nown guidance in the next duty that is to be done. But the Spirit of\nGod directs those who trust Him. It is ours to seek and to receive\nthe very truth.\n\nWith regard to the _similitude_ of Jehovah which Moses saw, we notice\nthat there is no suggestion of human form; rather would this seem\nto be carefully avoided. The statement does not take us back to the\nappearance of the angel Jehovah to Abraham, nor does it point to any\nmanifestation like that of which we read in the history of Joshua or\nof Gideon. Nothing is here said of an angel. We are led to think of\nan exaltation of the spiritual perception of Moses, so that he knew\nthe reality of the Divine life, and was made sure of an originative\nwisdom, a transcendent source of ideas and moral energy. He with\nwhom Moses holds communion is One whose might and holiness and glory\nare seen with the spiritual eye, whose will is made known by a voice\nentering into the soul. And the distinction intended between Moses\nand all other prophets corresponds to a fact which the history of\nIsrael's religion brings to light. The account of the way in which\nJehovah communicated with Moses remains subject to the condition\nthat the expressions used, such as \"mouth to mouth,\" are still only\nsymbols of the truth. They mean that in the very highest sense\npossible to man Moses entered into the purposes of God regarding\nHis people. Now Isaiah certainly approached this intimate knowledge\nof the Divine counsel when long afterwards he said in Jehovah's\nname: \"Behold My Servant, whom I uphold; Mine Elect, in whom My soul\ndelighteth; I have put My Spirit upon Him: He shall bring forth\njudgment unto the Gentiles. He shall not cry, nor lift up, nor cause\nHis voice to be heard in the street.\" Yet between Moses and Isaiah\nthere is a difference. For Moses is the means of giving to Israel\npure morality and true religion. By the inspiration of God he brings\ninto existence that which is not. Isaiah foresees; Moses, in a sense,\ncreates. And the one parallel with Moses, according to Scripture, is\nto be found in Christ, who is the creator of the new humanity.\n\nWhen the oracle had spoken, there was a movement of the cloud from the\ndoor of the tent of meeting, and apparently from the tabernacle--a\nsign of the displeasure of God. Following the idea that the cloud was\nconnected with the altar, this withdrawal has been interpreted by\nLange as a rebuke to Aaron. \"He was inwardly crushed; the fire on his\naltar went out; the pillar of smoke no longer mounted up as a token of\ngrace; the cultus was for a moment at a standstill, and it was as if\nan interdict of Jehovah lay on the cultus of the sanctuary.\" But the\ncloud-pillar is not, as this interpretation would imply, associated\nwith Aaron personally; it is always the symbol of the Divine will \"by\nthe hand of Moses.\" We must suppose therefore that the movement of the\ncloud conveyed in some new and unexpected way a sense of the Divine\nsupport which Moses enjoyed. He was justified in all he had done:\ncondemnation was brought home to his accusers.\n\nAnd Miriam, who had offended most, was punished with more than a\nrebuke. Suddenly she was found to be covered with leprosy. Aaron,\nlooking upon her, saw that morbid pallor which was regarded as the\ninvariable sign of the disease. It was seen as a proof of her sin\nand of the anger of Jehovah. Himself trembling as one who had barely\nescaped, Aaron could not but confess his share in the transgression.\nAddressing Moses with the deepest reverence, he said, \"Oh my lord,\nlay not, I pray thee, sin upon us, for that we have done foolishly,\nand for that we have sinned.\" The leprosy is the mark of sin. Let it\nnot be stamped on her indelibly, nor on me. Let not the disease run\nits course to the horrible end. With no small presumption the two had\nventured to challenge their brother's conduct and position. They knew\nindeed, yet from their intimacy with him did not rightly apprehend,\nthe \"divinity that hedged\" him. Now for the first time its terror\nis disclosed to themselves; and they shrink before the man of God,\npleading with him as if he were omnipotent.\n\nMoses needs no second appeal to his compassion. He is a truly\ninspired man, and can forgive. He has seen the great God merciful\nand gracious, longsuffering, slow to anger, and he has caught\nsomething of the Divine magnanimity. This temper was not always\nshown throughout Israel's history by those who had the position\nof prophets. And we find that men who claim to be religious, even\nto be interpreters of the Divine will, are not invariably above\nretaliation. They are seen to hate those who criticise them, who\nthrow doubt upon their arguments. A man's claim to fellowship with\nGod, his professed knowledge of the Divine truth and religion, may be\ntested by his conduct when he is under challenge. If he cannot plead\nwith God on behalf of those who have assailed him, he has not the\nSpirit; he is as \"sounding brass, or a clanging cymbal.\"\n\nEven in response to the prayer of Moses, Miriam could not be cured at\nonce. She must go aside bearing her reproach. Shame for her offence,\napart from the taint of leprosy, would make it fitting that she should\nwithdraw seven days from camp and sanctuary. A personal indignity,\nnot affecting her character in the least, would have been felt to\nthat extent. Her transgression is to be realised and brooded over for\nher spiritual good. The law is one that needs to be kept in mind. To\nescape detection and leave adverse judgment behind is all that some\noffenders against moral law seem to desire. They dread the shame and\nnothing besides. Let that be avoided, or, after continuing for a time,\nlet the sense of it pass, and they feel themselves free. But true shame\nis towards God; and from the mind sincerely penitent that does not\nquickly pass away. Those only who are ignorant of the nature of sin can\nsoon overcome the consciousness of God's displeasure. As for men, no\ndoubt they should forgive; but their forgiveness is often too lightly\ngranted, too complacently assumed, and we see the easy self-recovery\nof one who should be sitting in sackcloth and ashes. God forgives\nwith infinite depth of tenderness and grace of pardon. But His very\ngenerosity will affect the truly contrite with poignant sorrow when His\nname has by their act been brought into dishonour.\n\nThe offence of Miriam was only jealousy and presumption. She may\nscarcely seem so great a sinner that an attack of leprosy should\nhave been her punishment, though it lasted for no more than seven\ndays. We make so much of bodily maladies, so little of diseases of\nthe soul, that we would think it strange if any one for his pride\nshould be struck with paralysis, or for envy should be laid down with\nfever. Yet beside the spiritual disorder that of the body is of small\nmoment. Why do we think so little of the moral taint, the falsehood,\nmalice, impurity, and so much of the ills our flesh is heir to? The\nbad heart is the great disease.\n\nMiriam's exclusion from the camp becomes a lesson to all the people.\nThey do not journey while she is separated as unclean. There may have\nbeen other lepers in the outlying tents; but her sin has been of such\na kind that the public conscience is especially directed to it. And\nthe lesson had particular point with reference to those who had the\nprophetic gift.\n\nModern society, making much of sanitation and all kinds of\nimprovements and precautions intended to prevent the spread of\nepidemics and mitigate their effects, has also some thought of moral\ndisease. Persons guilty of certain crimes are confined in prisons\nor \"cut off from the people.\" But of the greater number of moral\nmaladies no account is taken. And there is no widespread gloom over\nthe nation, no arrest of affairs, when some hideous case of social\nimmorality or business depravity has come to light. It is but a few\nwho pray for those who have the evil heart, and wait sympathetically\nfor their cleansing. Ought not the reorganisation of society to be\non a moral rather than an economic basis? We should be nearer the\ngeneral well-being if it were reckoned a disaster when any employer\noppressed those under him, or workmen were found indifferent to their\nbrothers, or a grave crime disclosed a low state of morality in some\nclass or circle. It is the defeat of armies and navies, the overthrow\nof measures and governments, that occupy our attention as a people,\nand seem often to obscure every moral and religious thought. Or if\ninjustice is the topic, we find the point of it in this: that one\nclass is rich while another is poor; that money, not character, is\nlost in shameful contention.\n\n\n\n\n XI\n\n _THE SPIES AND THEIR REPORT_\n\n NUMBERS xiii.; xiv. 1-10\n\n\nTwo narratives at least appear to be united in the thirteenth and\nfourteenth chapters. From xiii. 17, 22, 23, we learn that the spies\nwere despatched by way of the south, and that they went to Hebron and\na little beyond, as far as the valley of Eshcol. But ver. 21 states\nthat they spied out the land from the wilderness of Zin, south of the\nDead Sea, to the entering in of Hamath. The latter statement implies\nthat they traversed what were afterwards called Jud\u00e6a, Samaria, and\nGalilee, and penetrated as far as the valley of the Leontes, between\nthe southern ranges of Libanus and Antilibanus. The one account taken\nby itself would make the journey of the spies northward about a\nhundred miles; the other, three times as long.\n\nA further difference is this: According to one of the narratives\nCaleb alone encourages the people (xiii. 30; xiv. 24). But according\nto the other (xiii. 8, 16; xiv. 6, 7), Joshua, as well as Caleb, is\namong the twelve, and reports favourably as to the possibility of\nconquering and possessing Canaan.\n\nWithout deciding on the critical points involved, we may find a way\nof harmonising the apparent differences. It is quite possible, for\ninstance, that while some of the twelve were instructed to keep in\nthe south of Canaan, others were sent to the middle district and a\nthird company to the north. Caleb might be among those who explored\nthe south; while Joshua, having gone to the far north, might return\nsomewhat later and join his testimony to that which Caleb had given.\nThere is no inconsistency between the portions ascribed to the one\nnarrative and those referred to the other; and the account, as we\nhave it, may give what was the gist of several co-ordinate documents.\nAs to any variance in the reports of the spies, we can easily\nunderstand how those who looked for smiling valleys and fruitful\nfields would find them, while others saw only the difficulties and\ndangers that would have to be faced.\n\nThe questions occur, why and at whose instance the survey was\nundertaken. From Deuteronomy we learn that a demand for it arose\namong the people. Moses says (i. 22): \"Ye came near unto me every one\nof you, and said, Let us send men before us, that they may search\nthe land for us, and bring us word again of the way by which we must\ngo up, and the cities unto which we shall come.\" In Numbers the\nexpedition is undertaken at the order of Jehovah conveyed through\nMoses. The opposition here is only on the surface. The people might\ndesire, but decision did not lie with them. It was quite natural when\nthe tribes had at length approached the frontier of Canaan that they\nshould seek information as to the state of the country. And the wish\nwas one which could be sanctioned, which had even been anticipated.\nThe land of Canaan was already known to the children of Abraham,\nIsaac, and Jacob, and the praise of it as a land flowing with milk\nand honey mingled with their traditions. In one sense there was no\nneed to send spies, either to report on the fertility of the land\nor on the peoples dwelling in it. Yet Divine Providence, on which\nmen are to rely, does not supersede their prudence and the duty that\nrests with them of considering the way they go. The destiny of a life\nor of a nation is to be wrought out in faith; still we are to use\nall available means in order to ensure success. So personality grows\nthrough providence, and God raises men for Himself.\n\nTo the band of pioneers each tribe contributes a man, and all the\ntwelve are headmen, whose intelligence and good faith may presumably be\ntrusted. They know the strength of Israel; they should also be able to\ncount upon the great source of courage and power--the unseen Friend of\nthe nation. Remembering what Egypt is, they know also the ways of the\ndesert; and they have seen war. If they possess enthusiasm and hope,\nthey will not be dismayed by the sight of a few walled towns or even of\nsome Anakim. They will say, \"The Lord of hosts is with us, the God of\nJacob is our refuge.\" Yet there is danger that old doubts and new fears\nmay colour their report. God appoints men to duty; but their personal\ncharacter and tendencies remain. And the very best men Israel can\nchoose for a task like this will need all their faithfulness and more\nthan all their faith to do it well.\n\nThe spies were to climb the heights visible in the north, and look\nforth towards the Great Sea and away to Moriah and Carmel. They were\nalso to make their way cautiously into the land itself and examine\nit. Moses anticipates that all he has said in praise of Canaan will\nbe made good by the report, and the people will be encouraged to\nenter at once on the final struggle. When the desert was around them,\nunfruitful, seemingly interminable, the Israelites might have been\ndisposed to fear that journeying from Egypt they were leaving the\nfertility of the world farther and farther behind. Some may have\nthought that the Divine promise had misled and deceived them, and\nthat Canaan was a dream. Even although they had now overpassed that\ndreary region covered with coarse gravel, black flints, and drifting\nsand, \"the great and terrible wilderness,\" what hope was there that\nnorthward they should reach a land of olives, vineyards, and flowing\nstreams? The report of the spies would answer this question.\n\nNow in like manner the future state of existence may seem dim and\nunreal, scarcely credible, to many. Our life is like a series\nof marches hither and thither through the desert. Neither as\nindividuals nor as communities do we seem to approach any state\nof blessedness and rest. Rather, as years go by, does the region\nbecome more inhospitable. Hopes once cherished are one after another\ndisappointed. The stern mountains that overhung the track by which\nour forefathers went still frown upon us. It seems impossible to get\nbeyond their shadow. And in a kind of despair some may be ready to\nsay: There is no promised land. This waste, with its sere grass, its\nburning sand, its rugged hills, makes the whole of life. We shall\ndie here in the wilderness like those who have been before us; and\nwhen our graves are dug and our bodies laid in them, our existence\nwill have an end. But it is a thoughtless habit to doubt that of\nwhich we have no full experience. Here we have but begun to learn the\npossibilities of life and find a clue to its Divine mysteries. And\neven as to the Israelites in the wilderness there were not wanting\nsigns that pointed to the fruitful and pleasant country beyond, so\nfor us, even now, there are previsions of the higher world. Some\nshrubs and straggling vines grew in sheltered hollows among the\nhills. Here and there a scanty crop of maize was reared, and in the\nrainy season streams flowed down the wastes. From what was known the\nIsraelites might reason hopefully to that which as yet was beyond\ntheir sight. And are there not fore-signs for the soul, springs\nopened to the seekers after God in the desert, some verdure of\nrighteousness, some strength and peace in believing?\n\nScience and business and the cares of life absorb many and bewilder\nthem. Immersed in the work of their world, men are apt to forget\nthat deeper draughts of life may be drunk than they obtain in\nthe laboratory or the counting-house. But he who knows what love\nand worship are, who finds in all things the food of religious\nthought and devotion, makes no such mistake. To him a future in the\nspiritual world is far more within the range of hopeful anticipation\nthan Canaan was to one who remembered Egypt and had bathed in the\nwaters of the Nile. Is the heavenly future real? It is: as thought\nand faith and love are real, as the fellowship of souls and the\njoy of communion with God are realities. Those who are in doubt\nas to immortality may find the cause of that doubt in their own\nearthliness. Let them be less occupied with the material, care more\nfor the spiritual possessions, truth, righteousness, religion, and\nthey will begin to feel an end of doubt. Heaven is no fable. Even now\nwe have our foretaste of its refreshing waters and the fruits that\nare for the healing of the nations.\n\nThe spies were to climb the hills which commanded a view of the\npromised land. And there are heights which must be scaled if we are\nto have previsions of the heavenly life. Men undertake to forecast\nthe future of the human race who have never sought those heights.\nThey may have gone out from camp a few miles or even some days'\njourney, but they have kept in the plain. One is devoted to science,\nand he sees as the land of promise a region in which science shall\nachieve triumphs hitherto only dreamt of, when the ultimate atoms\nshall disclose their secrets and the subtle principle of life shall\nbe no longer a mystery. The social reformer sees his own schemes in\noperation, some new adjustment of human relations, some new economy\nor system of government, the establishment of an order that shall\nmake the affairs of the world run smoothly, and banish want and care\nand possibly disease from the earth. But these and similar previsions\nare not from the heights. We have to climb quite above the earthly\nand temporal, above economics and scientific theories. Where the way\nof faith rises, where the love of men becomes perfect in the love of\nGod, not in theory but in the practical endeavour of earnest life,\nthere we ascend, we advance. We shall see the coming kingdom of God\nonly if we are heartily with God in the ardour of the redeemed soul,\nif we follow in the footsteps of Christ to the summits of Sacrifice.\n\nThe spies went forth from among tribes which had so far made a good\njourney under the Divine guidance. So well had the expedition sped that\na few days' march would have brought the travellers into Canaan. But\nIsrael was not a hopeful people nor a united people. The thoughts of\nmany turned back; all were not faithful to God nor loyal to Moses. And\nas the people were, so were the spies. Some may have professed to be\nenthusiastic who had their doubts regarding Canaan and the possibility\nof conquering it. Others may have even wished to find difficulties\nthat would furnish an excuse for returning even to Egypt. Most were\nready to be disenchanted at least and to find cause for alarm. In the\nsouth of Canaan a pastoral district, rocky and uninviting towards the\nshore of the Dead Sea, was found to be sparsely occupied by wandering\ncompanies of Amalekites, Bedawin of the time, probably with a look\nof poverty and hardship that gave little promise for any who should\nattempt to settle where they roamed. Towards Hebron the aspect of\nthe country improved; but the ancient city, or at all events its\nstronghold, was in the hands of a class of bandits whose names inspired\nterror throughout the district--Ahiman, Sheshai, and Talmai, sons of\nAnak. The great stature of these men, exaggerated by common report,\ntogether with stories of their ferocity, seem to have impressed the\ntimid Hebrews beyond measure. And round Hebron the Amorites, a hardy\nhighland race, were found in occupation. The report agreed on was that\nthe people were men of great stature; that the land was one which ate\nup its inhabitants--that is to say, yielded but a precarious existence.\nJust beyond Hebron vineyards and olive-groves were found; and from the\nvalley of Eshcol one fine cluster of grapes was brought, hung upon a\nrod to preserve the fruit from injury, an evidence of capabilities that\nmight be developed. Still the report was an evil one on the whole.\n\nThose who went farther north had to tell of strong peoples--the\nJebusites and Amorites of the central region, the Hittites of the\nnorth, the Canaanites of the seaboard, where afterwards Sisera had\nhis headquarters. The cities, too, were great and walled. These\nspies had nothing to say of the fruitful plains of Esdraelon and\nJezreel, nothing to tell of the flowery meadows, the \"murmuring of\ninnumerable bees,\" the terraced vineyards, the herds of cattle and\nflocks of sheep and goats. They had seen the strong, resolute holders\nof the soil, the fortresses, the difficulties; and of these they\nbrought back an account which caused abundant alarm. Joshua and Caleb\nalone had the confidence of faith, and were assured that Jehovah, if\nHe delighted in His people, would give them Canaan as an inheritance.\n\nThe report of the majority of the spies was one of exaggeration and\na certain untruthfulness. They must have spoken altogether without\nknowledge, or else allowed themselves to magnify what they saw, when\nthey said of the children of Anak, \"We were in our own sight as\ngrasshoppers, and so we were in their sight.\" Possibly the Hebrews\nwere at this time somewhat ill-developed as a race, bearing the mark\nof their slavery. But we can hardly suppose that the Amorites, much\nless the Hittites, were of overpassing stature. Nor could many cities\nhave been so large and strongly fortified as was represented, though\nLachish, Hebron, Shalim, and a few others were formidable. On the\nother hand, the picture had none of the attractiveness it should\nhave borne. These exaggerations and defects, however, are the common\nfaults of misbelieving and therefore ignorant representation. Are\nany disposed to leave the wilderness of the world and possess the\nbetter country? A hundred voices of the baser kind will be heard\ngiving warning and presage. Nothing is said about its spiritual\nfruit, its joy, hope, and peace. But its hardships are detailed, the\nrenunciations, the obligations, the conflicts necessary before it can\nbe possessed. Who would enter on the hopeless task of trying to cast\nout the strong man armed, who sits entrenched--of holding at bay the\nthousand forces that oppose the Christian life? Each position must\nbe taken after a sore struggle and kept by constant watchfulness.\nLittle know they who think of becoming religious how hard it is to be\nChristians. It is a life of gloom, of constant penitence for failures\nthat cannot be helped, a life of continual trembling and terror. So\nthe reports go that profess to be those of experience and knowledge,\nof men and women who understand life.\n\nObserve also that the account given by those who reconnoitred the\nland of promise sprang from an error which has its parallel now. The\nspies went supposing that the Israelites were to conquer Canaan and\ndwell there purely for their own sake, for their own happiness and\ncomfort. Had not the wilderness journey been undertaken for that\nend? It did not enter into the consideration either of the people as\na whole or of their representatives that they were bound for Canaan\nin order to fulfil the Divine purpose of making Israel a means of\nblessing to the world. Here, indeed, a spirituality of view was\nneedful which the spies could not be expected to have. Breadth of\nforesight, too, would have been required which in the circumstances\nscarcely lay within human power. If any of them had taken account of\nIsrael's spiritual destiny as a witness for Jehovah in the midst of\nthe heathen, could they have told whether this land of Syria or some\nother would be a fit theatre for the fulfilment of that high destiny?\n\nAnd in ignorance like theirs lies the source of mistakes often made\nin judging the circumstances of life, in deciding what will be wisest\nand best to undertake. We, too, look at things from the point of view\nof our own happiness and comfort, and, in a higher range, of our\nreligious enjoyment. If we see that these are to be had in a certain\nsphere, by a certain movement or change, we decide on that change, we\nchoose that sphere. But if neither temporal well-being nor enjoyment\nof religious privilege appears to be certain, our common practice is\nto turn in another direction. Yet the truth is that we are not here,\nand we shall never be anywhere, either in this world or another,\nsimply to enjoy, to have the milk and honey of a smiling land, to\nfulfil our own desires and live to ourselves. The question regarding\nthe fit place or state for us depends for its answer on what God\nmeans to do through us for our fellow-men, for the truth, for His\nkingdom and glory. The future which we with greater or less success\nattempt to conquer and secure will, as the Divine hand leads us on,\nprove different from our dream in proportion as our lives are capable\nof high endeavour and spiritual service. We shall have our hope, but\nnot as we painted it.\n\nWho are the Calebs and Joshuas of our time? Not those who, forecasting\nthe movements of society, see what they think shall be for their\npeople a region of comfort and earthly prosperity, to be maintained by\nshutting out as far as possible the agitation of other lands; but those\nwho realise that a nation, especially a Christian nation, has a duty\nunder God to the whole human race. Those are our true guides and come\nwith inspiration who bid us not be afraid in undertaking the world-wide\ntask of commending truth, establishing righteousness, seeking the\nenfranchisement and Christianisation of all lands.\n\nNotwithstanding the efforts of Caleb and afterwards of Joshua to\ncontrovert the disheartening reports spread by their companions, the\npeople were filled with dismay; and night fell upon a weeping camp.\nThe pictures of those Anakim and of the tall Amorites, rendered\nmore terrible by imagination, appear to have had most to do with the\npanic. But it was the general impression also that Canaan offered no\nattractions as a home. There was murmuring against Moses and Aaron.\nDisaffection spread rapidly, and issued in the proposal to take\nanother leader and return to Egypt. Why had Jehovah brought them\nacross the desert to put them under the sword at last? The tumult\nincreased, and the danger of a revolt became so great that Moses and\nAaron fell on their faces before the assembly.\n\nAlways and everywhere _faithless_ means foolish, _faithless_ means\ncowardly. By this is explained the dejection and panic into which the\nIsraelites fell, into which men often fall. Our life and history are\nnot confided to the Divine care; our hope is not in God. Nothing can\nsave a man or a nation from vacillation, despondency, and defeat but\nthe conviction that Providence opens the way and never fails those\nwho press on. No doubt there are considerations which might have made\nIsrael doubtful whether the conquest of Canaan lay in the way of duty.\nSome modern moralists would call it a great crime--would say that\nthe tribes could look for no success in endeavouring to dispossess\nthe inhabitants of Canaan, or even to find a place among them. But\nthis thought did not enter into the question. Panic fell on the host,\nbecause doubt of Jehovah and His purpose overcame the partial faith\nwhich had as yet been maintained with no small difficulty.\n\nNow it was by the mouth of Moses Israel had been assured of the\npromise of God. Broadly speaking, faith in Jehovah was faith in\nMoses, who was their moralist, their prophet, their guide. Men\nhere and there, the seventy who prophesied for instance, had their\npersonal consciousness of the Divine power; but the great mass of\nthe people had the covenant, and trusted it through the mediation\nof Moses. Had Moses then, as the Israelites could judge, a right\nto command, unquestionable authority as a revealer of the will of\nthe unseen God? Take away from the history every incident, every\nfeature, that may appear doubtful, and there remains a personality, a\nman of distinguished unselfishness, of admirable patience, of great\nsagacity, who certainly was a patriot, and as certainly had greater\nconceptions, higher enthusiasms, than any other man of Israel. It\nwas perhaps difficult for those who were gross in nature and very\nignorant to realise that Moses was indeed in communication with an\nunseen, omnipotent Friend of the people. Some might even have been\ndisposed to say: What if he is? What can God do for us? If we are\nto get anything, we must seek and obtain it for ourselves. Yet the\nIsraelites as a whole held the almost universal belief of those\ntimes, the conviction that a Power above the visible world does rule\nthe affairs of earth. And there was evidence enough that Moses was\nguided and sustained by the Divine hand. The sagacious mind, the\nbrave, noble personality of Moses, made for Israel, at least for\nevery one in Israel capable of appreciating character and wisdom, a\nbridge between the seen and the unseen, between man and God.\n\nWe must not indeed deny that this conviction was liable to challenge\nand revision. It must always be so when a man speaks for God,\nrepresents God. Doubt of the wisdom of any command meant doubt whether\nGod had really given it by Moses. And when it seemed that the tribes\nhad been unwisely brought to Canaan, the reflection might be that Moses\nhad failed as an interpreter. Yet this was not the common conclusion.\nRather, from all we learn, was it the conclusion that Jehovah Himself\nhad failed the people or deceived them. And there lay the error of\nunbelief which is constantly being committed still.\n\nFor us, whatever may be said as to the composition of the Bible, it\nis supremely, and as no other sacred book can be, the Word of God. As\nMoses was the one man in Israel who had a right to speak in Jehovah's\nname, so the Bible is the one book which can claim to instruct us in\nfaith, duty, and hope. Speaking to us in human language, it may of\ncourse be challenged. At one point and another, some even of those\nwho believe in Divine communication to men may question whether the\nBible writers have always caught aright the sound of the heavenly\nWord. And some go so far as to say: There is no Divine Voice; men\nhave given as the Word of God, in good faith, what arose in their\nown mind, their own exalted imagination. Nevertheless, our faith, if\nfaith we are to have at all, must rest on this Book. We cannot get\naway from human words. We must rely on spoken or written language\nif we are to know anything higher than our own thought. And what is\nwritten in the Bible has the highest marks of inspiration--wisdom,\npurity, truth, power to convince and convert and to build up a life\nin holiness and in hope.\n\nIt remains true accordingly that doubt of the Bible means for us,\nmust mean, not simply doubt of the men who have been instrumental\nin giving us the Book, but doubt of God Himself. If the Bible did\nnot speak in harmony with nature and reason and the widest human\nexperience when it lays down moral law, prescribes the true rules and\nunfolds the great principles of life, the affirmation just made would\nbe absurd. But it is a book of breadth, full of wisdom which every\nage is verifying. It stands an absolute, the manifest embodiment\nof knowledge drawn from the highest sources available to men--from\nsources not earthly nor temporary, but sublime and eternal. Faith,\ntherefore, must have its foundation on the teaching of this Book as\nto \"what man is to believe concerning God and what duty God requires\nof man.\" And on the other hand infidelity is and must be the result\nof rejecting the revelation of the Bible, denying that here God\nspeaks with supreme wisdom and authority to our souls.\n\nThe Israelites doubting Jehovah who had spoken through Moses, that\nis to say, doubting the highest, most inspiring word it was possible\nfor them to hear, turning away from the Divine reason that spoke,\nthe heavenly purpose revealed to them, had nothing to rely upon.\nConfused inadequate counsels, chaotic fears, waited immediately upon\ntheir revolt. They sank at once to despondency and the most fatuous\nand impossible projects. The men who stood against their despair were\nmade offenders, almost sacrificed to their fear. Joshua and Caleb,\nfacing the tumult, called for confidence. \"Fear not ye the people of\nthe land,\" they said, \"for they are bread for us: their defence is\nremoved from over them, and Jehovah is with us: fear them not.\" But\nall the congregation bade stone them with stones; and it was only\nthe bright glow of the pillar of fire shining out at the moment that\nprevented a dreadful catastrophe.\n\nSo the faithless generations fall back still into panic, fatuity,\nand crime. Trusting in their resources, men say, \"No change need\ntrouble us; we have courage, wisdom, power, sufficient for our\nneeds.\" But have they unity, have they any scheme of life for which\nit is worth while to be courageous? The hope of bare continuance,\nof ignoble safety and comfort will not animate, will not inspire.\nOnly some great vision of Duty seen along the track of the eternally\nright will kindle the heart of a people; the faith that goes with\nthat vision will alone sustain courage. Without it, armies and\nbattle-ships are but a temporary and flimsy defence, the pretext of a\nself-confidence, while the heart is clouded with despair. Whether men\nsay, We will return to Egypt, refusing the call of Providence which\nbids us fulfil a high destiny, or, still refusing to fulfil it, We\nwill maintain ourselves in the wilderness--they have in secret the\nconviction that they are failures, that their national organisation\nis a hollow pretence. And the end, though it may linger for a time,\nwill be dismemberment and disaster.\n\nModern nations, nominally Christian, are finding it difficult to\nsuppress disorder, and occasionally we are almost thrown into a state\nof panic by the activity of revolutionists. Does the cause not lie\nin this, that the _en avant_ of Providence and Christianity is not\nobeyed either in the politics or social economy of the people? Like\nIsrael, a nation has been led so far through the wilderness, but\nadvance can only be into a new order which faith perceives, to which\nthe voice of God calls. If it is becoming a general conclusion that\nthere is no such country, or that the conquest of it is impossible,\nif many are saying, Let us settle in the wilderness, and others, Let\nus return to Egypt, what can the issue be but confusion? This is to\nencourage the anarchist, the dynamiter. The enterprise of humanity,\naccording to such counsels, is so far a failure, and for the future\nthere is no inspiring hope. And to make economic self-seeking the\ngoverning idea of a nation's movement is simply to abandon the true\nleader and to choose another of some ignominious order. Would it\nhave been possible to persuade Moses to hold the command of the\ntribes, and yet remain in the desert or return to Egypt? Neither is\nit possible to retain Christ as our captain and also to make this\nworld our home, or return to a practical heathenism, relieved by\nabundance of food, the Hellenic worship of beauty, the organisation\nof pleasure. For the great enterprise of spiritual redemption alone\nwill Christ be our leader. We lose Him if we turn to the hopes of\nthis world and cease to press the journey towards the city of God.\n\n\n\n\n XII\n\n _THE DOOM OF THE UNBELIEVING_\n\n NUMBERS xiv\n\n\nThe spirit of revolt which came to a head in the proposal to put\nJoshua and Caleb to death was quelled by the fiery splendour that\nflashed out at the tent of meeting; but disaffection continued, and\nMoses realised with horror that immediate destruction threatened the\ntribes. Jehovah would smite them with pestilence, disinherit them,\nand raise up a new nation greater and mightier than they. Moses\nhimself should be the father of the destined race.\n\nThe thought was one at which an ambitious man would have grasped; and\nto entertain it might well seem a good man's duty. In what better way\ncould one of earnest and courageous spirit serve the world and the\nDivine purpose of grace? Moses stood as a representative of Abraham,\nto whom the promise had been first given, and of Jacob, to whom it\nhad been renewed. If the will of Heaven was that a fresh beginning\nin the old succession should be made, the honour was not lightly to\nbe put aside. Moses now saw, as Abraham saw, a great possibility.\nThe Divine purpose did not fail, though Israel proved unfit to serve\nit; in the field of a more instructed age that magnificent hope\nwhich made Abraham great would blossom more generously and yield\nits fruit of blessing. With the sense of this possible honour to\nhimself, there came, however, to Moses other and arresting thoughts.\nFor Abraham had become great by sacrifice, and only one spiritually\ngreater even than he could found a worthier race. Did Moses not think\nof that scene on Moriah, when the son of the promise lay stretched\non the altar, and feel himself inspired for a sacrifice of his own?\nYet what could it be? Nothing but the silent inward refusal of that\ngreat honour which was being put in his power, the honour of becoming\neven higher than Abraham in the line of originators. True, it seemed\nthat necessity was laid on him. Yet might not Jehovah intervene on\nIsrael's behalf as once before on Isaac's, when the moment of his\ndeath had almost come? Not to sacrifice Israel was the call Moses\nheard when he listened in the silence, but to sacrifice his own hope,\nthough it seemed to be pressed on him by Providence. And this began\nto prove itself the necessity. On the one hand he could not hide\nthe fear that even if the Israelites were settled in Canaan a long\nperiod of education would be required to fit them for national life\nand power; after many generations they would be still incapable of\nany high spiritual task. But if Israel perished, what would happen?\nThe faith of Jehovah, already established as an influence in the\nworld, would fall into abeyance. When doom fell on Israel, the\nEgyptians would hear of it, Canaan would hear of it. The desert, the\nvalley of the Nile, the hills of the Promised Land, would ring with\nthe exultant cry that Jehovah had failed. And then--how long would\nthe world have to wait till this seeming defeat could be retrieved?\nCentury after century had passed since Abraham left his own land\nto fulfil the vocation of God. Century after century would have to\npass before the sons of Moses could attain to any greatness, any\npower to move the world. The instrument Jehovah had meanwhile to use\nwas imperfect; the tribes were not like a strong two-edged sword\nin the hand of the King. Yet they existed; they could be used, and\nDivine might, Divine grace, could overcome their imperfection. Ere\nthe world grew older in ignorance and idolatry, Moses would have the\nheavenly purpose wrought. For this he will renounce, for this he must\nrenounce, the honour possible to himself. Let Jehovah do all.\n\nHis choice made, Moses intercedes with God. The prayer has an air of\nsimple anthropomorphism. He appears to plead that Jehovah should not\nimperil His own fame. The underlying thought is partly concealed by\nthe form of expression; but the meaning is clear. It is the dawning\npower of the religion of God for which Moses is concerned. He would\nnot have that lost to men which by the events of the exodus and the\nwilderness journey has been so far secured. Egypt is half persuaded;\nCanaan is beginning to see that Jehovah is greater than Anubis and\nThoth, than Moloch and Baal. Was that impression to fade and to be\nsucceeded by doubt, possibly contempt of Jehovah as Israel's God.\nHe had brought His people into the wilderness, but He could not\nestablish them in Canaan; therefore He slew them: if that were said,\nwould not the loss to mankind be incalculable? \"Thou, Jehovah, art\nseen face to face, and Thy cloud standeth over them, and Thou goest\nbefore them in a pillar of cloud by day, and in a pillar of fire by\nnight.\" The astonished lands have seen this; let them not return with\ngreater trust than ever to their own poor idols.\n\nIn the report of Moses' intercession words are quoted which were part\nof the revelation of the Divine character at Sinai: \"Jehovah slow to\nanger, and plenteous in mercy, forgiving iniquity and transgression,\nand that will by no means clear the guilty; visiting the iniquity of\nthe fathers upon the children, upon the third and fourth generation.\"\nThe prayer quoting these latter clauses is abundantly sincere; and\nit proceeds on the belief that mercy rather than judgment is the\ndelight of God. The greatness of the Divine compassion already shown\ntime after time since the people left Egypt is still relied upon. And\nthe desire of Moses is granted so far as it is in harmony with the\ncharacter and purpose of God. \"Thou wast a God that forgavest them,\nthough Thou tookest vengeance of their doings\" (Psalm xcix. 8).\n\nJehovah says, \"I have pardoned according to My word.\" The national sin\nis not to be visited with destruction of the nation. No pestilence\nshall exterminate the murmurers, nor shall they be left without the\nguidance of Moses and of the cloud to melt away in the plagues of\nthe wilderness. But yet the power of Jehovah shall be shown in their\npunishment; the manner of it shall be such that the earth shall be\nfilled with the glory of the Lord. The men who came out of Egypt and\nhave tempted Jehovah ten times shall never see Canaan. Their carcases\nshall fall in the desert. For forty years shall the Israelites wander\nas shepherds till the evil generation shall have disappeared.\n\nDivine Providence judges the pusillanimity of men. Their fear\ndeprives them of that which is offered and actually put within their\ngrasp. They prove themselves incapable when the time of decisive\nendeavour comes, and a new generation must arise before the ripeness\nof circumstance again opens the way. The case of the Israelites\nshows that rebuke and disappointment are necessary in the Divine\ndiscipline of human life. Defects of character, of faith, are not\noverborne by a _tour de force_ in order that the development of\na heavenly purpose may be hastened. It would indeed cease to be\na heavenly purpose, if with easy forgiveness God gave miraculous\nsuccess. The result would be no gain in the long-run to any good\ncause. If men fail, God can wait for others who shall not fail. We\nare apt to forget this; we think that we show proper trust in the\nfulness of Divine pardon when we insist that men who have erred and\nbeen forgiven, who have faithlessly missed their opportunity and\npassed through penitence into new zeal, shall be hurried on to the\nduties they refused to face. But now, as in the times of Israel, the\nlaw of adequate discipline forbids, the law of punishment forbids.\nHumanity is not to be cheated of its Divine instruction, nor shall\nany pretext of generosity or necessity be urged in order that certain\nmen may enter a Canaan they once refused to possess. We see a term\nset to a probation.\n\nDoes it appear an inordinate punishment, this denial of Canaan to the\nunbelieving? There is no need to think so. For the men and women who\nheld back in doubt of God, the wilderness, quite as well as Canaan,\nwould serve the main end, to teach them trust. Life went on still\nunder the protection of the Almighty. The desert was His, as well as\nthe land flowing with milk and honey. Yea, in the desert they had,\nbeing such as they were, fewer temptations to question the power of\nGod and their own need of Him than they would have found in the land\nof promise. May we not say that men who had been so ready to receive\nan evil report of the land would have been confirmed in their doubt\nof Jehovah if they had been allowed to cross the frontier? Better for\nthem to remain in the desert that made no pretence to be anything\nelse, than to enter Canaan and find excuses for calling it a desert.\nNo individual was prevented from learning to know God and trust Him;\nof that we may be sure. The way of instruction was that of penitence\nand sorrow and continued hardships. But there would have been no\nother way for those unbelievers even if they had entered on the\npromised inheritance. In Canaan, as well as in the desert, they would\nhave had to learn contrition, to advance in moral life by means of\ntemporal hardships and defeat.\n\nAnd there was a limitation of the judgment. Only those from twenty\nyears old and upward were included. The young men and young women,\npresumably because they had not bewailed their lot and cried against\nMoses and God, having too much of the hopeful spirit of youth, were\nnot condemned to die in the wilderness. A difference was there, and\nby the terms of the deliverance was made clear, which often comes\nto light in human history. The old, who should know most of the\ngoodness of God and His unfailing power, draw back; the young and\ninexperienced are ready to advance. Men who are occupied with affairs\ntend to think that their wise management brings success, and they\nplace Divine Providence secondary to their own wisdom. Shall we be\nable for this? they ask. Does this approve itself to us as men of\nthe world, responsible men? If not, they think it would be folly to\ngo forward even at the call of God. But the young are not so wise in\ntheir own experience; they are in the mood to dare: the young and the\ntrustful--men like Joshua and Caleb, who have learned that power and\nsuccess are of God, and that His way is always safe. To calculate\nand act on the basis of expediency is not the failing of the young.\nLet us pray for men who have faith in the future of humanity and\nof the Church to stand forth and rally about them the youths, not\nspoiled by overwise theories of life, who have still in their souls\nthe heavenly instinct of hope.\n\nCaleb has here and elsewhere in the history peculiar honour, all\nthe more remarkable that he was, properly speaking, no Israelite.\nThe narrative at this point associates his family with the tribe of\nJudah. But Caleb was a Kenizzite (Numb. xxxii. 12); and Kenaz appears\nin Gen. xxxvi. 11, 15, as an Edomite or descendant of Esau. At what\ntime this particular Kenizzite family joined the expedition of Israel\nwe have no hint. As yet, however, there was no inter-marriage; and\nit should be noticed that the district which in consideration of his\nfidelity Caleb has for his inheritance in Canaan is the same as was\noccupied by Kenizzites before the conquest. There is, of course, no\nimprobability in this; it may rather appear to give proof of the\ngenuineness of the narrative. Caleb joins the Israelites, attaches\nhimself to Judah in the camp and on the march, proves himself a\nfaithful servant of God and of the host, and has the promise of his\nforefathers' inheritance when the distribution of Canaan shall be\nmade. He reported favourably of the region about Hebron; and Hebron\nbecame his city, as we learn from Josh. xiv.\n\nIn contrast to the special promise made to Joshua and Caleb is the\nfate of the other ten whose report brought \"a slander upon the\nland.\" These \"died by the plague before Jehovah.\" It would seem that\nbefore Moses appealed to God on behalf of the people, the pestilence\nwas spreading which might have swept the Israelites down like\nSennacherib's army in after-times. And the ten false spies had been\namong the first to die. Little indeed know men how soon Providence\nwill convict them of their faithlessness and rebellion. Let us\nsave our lives, they say, by holding back from duties that involve\ndifficulty and danger. Why advance where we are sure to fall by the\nsword? But the sword finds them nevertheless, or the plague lays hold\nof them; and where then is the life they were so careful to preserve?\nThe men of Israel who said, \"Let us not go to Canaan, but return to\nEgypt,\" neither see Canaan nor Egypt. They gain nothing they desire;\nthey lose all they were so careful to keep.\n\nSuddenly at ver. 40 we are brought to a new development. The people\nno sooner hear their doom than they resolve to take the future into\ntheir own hands. They acknowledge that they have sinned, meaning,\nhowever, only that they have fallen into a mistake the consequence\nof which they had not foreseen; and with this inadequate confession\nof fault they decide to make the advance into Canaan forthwith. They\ndo not see that instead of recovering their hope in God by any such\nattempt they will really deepen the alienation between themselves and\nHim. Submission is indeed hard, but it is their one grace, their one\nduty. If they press on into Canaan, they must go without the Lord, as\nMoses warns them, and they shall not prosper.\n\nIt is not enough when men have discovered an evil heart of unbelief,\nand turned again in repentance, that they take up the thread of life\nwhich has become ravelled. Perverse faithlessness cannot be cured by\na sudden decision to resume the duty which was abandoned in fear. The\nrefusal was no superficial thing, but had its source in the springs\nof will, the character and habits of life. We are apt to judge\notherwise, and to suppose that we can alter the whole current of our\nnature by a single act of choice. To-day the trend is strongly in one\ndirection, along a channel which has been forming for many years;\nto-morrow we think it possible to become other men, strong where we\nwere weak, determined upon that which we abhorred. But something must\nintervene; some change must take place deeper than our impulse. We\nmust have the new heart and the right spirit; and in proportion to\nthe gravity of the situation and the importance of the duty to be\ndone must the time of discipline be long. The wilderness wandering\nhad to be for many years because the temper of a whole people was to\nbe altered. For a single person a far shorter ordeal may suffice.\nHe may pass through the stages of conviction, repentance, and new\ncreation in a few weeks or even days. Nay, sometimes the regenerating\nSpirit brings about the change apparently in a moment. Yet the rule\nis that stability in faith must come slowly, that the way of trial\ncannot be hastened. A great task, therefore, the right doing of which\nis necessary to the open vindication of religion, may not be gone\nabout in a sudden change of mind. We are not to take lightly, into\nuntried hands, the massive plough of the kingdom of God.\n\nIn Canaan, the Amalekites and Canaanites, Moses said, would dispute\nthe advance of Israel,--Amalekites skilled in desultory war,\nCanaanites long trained in military art. These would fight without\nany sense of the support of the true God. But how would the Hebrews\nspeed, meeting them on the same footing? The contest would be then\nbetween human skill and daring on either side; and there could be\nno doubt as to the issue. Bands of men acquainted with the country,\ndisciplined in war as the tribes of Israel were not, fighting for\ntheir fields and homes with a defence of walled cities to fall back\nupon, would certainly win. If the Hebrews went up, it would be\nwithout the sign of Jehovah's presence; the ark of the covenant could\nnot be borne with the army on such an expedition. Their attempt,\nbeing presumptuous, must end in disaster.\n\nToo often the conflicts in which the Church is involved are of this\nvery kind. There is profession of high moral design and Christian\nprinciple. Ostensibly it is for the sake of true religion that\nsomething is undertaken. But in reality the affair is not one\nthat belongs to the essence of faith. It is perhaps a question of\nprestige, of exclusive claim to certain rights or moneys, the very\nlast thing a Christian church should insist upon. Then the contest is\nbetween human diplomacy and resolution, whether on the one side or\nthe other. It is idle to call a campaign like this a holy war. The\nark of the covenant does not accompany the army that calls itself\nJehovah's. As Israel found that even Amalekites and Canaanites were\ntoo strong for her, so has the Church often found that men whom she\ntermed unbelievers were superior to her in the arms she chose to\nuse. Again and again have her forces had to retire smitten even unto\nHormah. For those who are called unbelievers and atheists have their\nrights; and they will always be able to maintain their rights against\na presumptuous church which \"goes up into the mountain\" without the\nsanction of its living Head.\n\nIt was no general advance of the tribes that on this occasion\nended in defeat. The solid, resolute march of the whole people was\na very different thing from the half-hearted sally of some hundreds\nof fighting men. When the host of the Israelites, men, women, and\nchildren, moved together, the men of war had support in the sympathy\nof those they defended, in the prayers of the priest and of the\npeople. They were nerved to play the part of heroes by the thought\nthat all depended upon them, that if they failed their wives and\nchildren would be put to the sword. And again there is a parallel in\nthe advance of the Church against her adversaries. If the officials\nonly go out to fight, if it is their affair, their expedition, if\nthere is no strong onward movement of the whole host, what is there\nto give support to the enterprise? The fighting men may seem to\nhave heart enough for their battle; but the underlying feeling that\nthey are not engaged in the defence of the Gospel itself, or in\nguarding any position on which the power and success of the Gospel\ndepend, must always, and properly, weaken their arms. There is all\nthe difference in the world between an ecclesiastical battle and the\ncontest for vital faith. And it is a matter of regret that so much\nof the strength and ardour of good men should be wasted in downright\nearthly fighting, when the feeling of the Church as a whole is not\nwith those who claim to be her army. Let all the tribes, that is\nto say all the churches of Christ that are of one mind as to vital\ntruth, advance together, without jealousy, without mutual contempt,\nand the opposition to Christianity will practically melt away.\n\nFrom the twenty-first chapter, which appears to open with a\nreminiscence of the first attack on Canaan, we gather that one of\nthose who opposed the expedition was the Canaanite King of Arad.\nThe advance appears therefore to have been made by way of Hezron\nand Beersheba. The mountains visible from the camp were likely the\nchalk hills beyond the \"Ascent of Akrabbim.\" These passed, probably\nnear Hezron, a valley opened, stretching away towards Hebron. The\nAmalekites gathering from every wady, and the Canaanites from the\nridge to the right, where Arad lay, seem to have fallen upon the\nHebrews with a sudden onset. While many escaped others were slain or\ntaken captive. A keen memory of the defeat survived; but it was not\ntill long afterwards, in the days of the judges, that the strongholds\nof the region were reduced.\n\n\n\n\n XIII\n\n _OFFERINGS: SABBATH-KEEPING: DRESS_\n\n NUMBERS xv\n\n\nThe enactments of this chapter regarding meal offerings and drink\nofferings, the heave offerings of the first dough, and the atonement\nfor unwitting errors belong to the cultus of Canaan. Nothing generic\ndistinguishes the first and third of these statutes from some that\nwere presumably to be observed in the desert; but the note is\nexplicit, \"When ye be come into the land of your habitations which\nI give unto you,\" \"When ye be come into the land whither I bring\nyou.\" The whole chapter, with its instance of presumptuous sin\nintroduced by the clause, \"And while the children of Israel were in\nthe wilderness,\" marking a return to that time, and its commandment\nregarding the fringes or tassels of blue to be attached to the dress\nas remembrancers of obligations, may appear at first sight without\nany reference either to what has preceded or what follows. The\ncompilers, however, have a definite purpose in view. The presumption\nof Korah and his company, and of Dathan and Abiram, is in contrast\nto the unwitting faults for which atonement is provided, and it\ncomes under the category of what is \"done with a high hand\"--a form\nof blasphemy which is to be punished with death. The case of the\nSabbath-breaker is an instance of this unpardonable sin, and sends\nits light on to the incidents that follow. Even the memorial fringes\nor tassels, and the prophetic sentences that accompany the command to\nwear them, seem to be forewarnings of the doom of sacrilegious men.\n\n\n1. MEAL AND DRINK OFFERINGS.--The statute regarding offerings \"to make\na sweet savour unto Jehovah\" is specially occupied with prescribing the\nproportion of flour and oil and wine to be presented along with the\nanimal brought for a burnt offering or sacrifice. Any one separating\nhimself in terms of a vow, or desiring to express gratitude for some\nDivine favour, or again on the occasion of a sacred festival when he\nhad special cause of rejoicing before God, might bring a lamb, a ram,\nor an ox as his oblation; and the meal and drink offerings were to vary\nwith the value of the animal brought for sacrifice. The law does not\ndemand the same offering of every person under similar circumstances.\nAccording to his means or his gratitude he may give. But deciding first\nas to his burnt or slain offering, he must add to it, for a lamb, the\ntenth of an ephah of fine flour mixed with a quarter of a hin of oil,\nand also a quarter of a hin of wine. For a bullock, the quantities were\nto be three-tenths of an ephah of fine flour, with half a hin of oil,\nand, as a drink offering, half a hin of wine.\n\nThe provision is a singular one, based on some sense of what was\nbecoming which we cannot pretend to revive. But it points to a rule\nwhich the Apostle Paul may have recognised in this and other Jewish\nstatutes as belonging to universal morality: \"Take thought for things\nhonourable in the sight of all men.\" To make a show of generosity\nby giving a bullock, while the flour and oil and wine were withheld,\nwas not seemly. Neither is it seemly for a Christian to be lavish in\nhis gifts to the Church, but withhold the meal offering and drink\noffering he owes to the poor. Throughout the whole range of use\nand expenditure, personal and of the family, a proportion is to be\nfound which it is one of the Christian arts to determine, one of\nthe Christian duties to observe. And nothing is right unless all is\nright. The penny saved here takes away the sweet savour of the pound\ngiven there. No man is in this to be a law to himself. Public justice\nand Divine are to be satisfied.\n\nThe presence or absence of oil in an oblation marked its character.\nThe sin offering and the jealousy offering were without oil. The\n\"oil of joy\" (Isa. lxi. 3) accompanied festal and peace offerings.\nAll ordinances prescribing the oblation of wine and oil necessarily\nbelonged to the cultus of Canaan, for in the wilderness neither\nof these elements of the sacrifice could be always had. The idea\nunderlying the peace offerings, with their accompanying meal and\ndrink offerings, was unquestionably that of feasting with Jehovah,\nenjoying His bounty at His table. Acknowledgment was made that the\ncattle on the hills were His, that it was He who gave the harvest,\nthe vintage, and the fruit of the olive-grove. Confession of man's\nindebtedness to Jehovah as Lord of nature was interwoven with the\nwhole sacrificial system.\n\nIn connection with this ordinance of meal and drink offerings, and\nthat of atonement for unintentional failures in duty (ver. 22 ff.),\nit is very carefully enacted that the law shall be the same for the\n\"homeborn\" and the \"stranger.\" \"For the assembly there shall be\none statute for you and for the stranger that sojourneth with you,\na statute for ever throughout your generations: as ye are, so shall\nthe stranger be before the Lord.\" The design is to secure religious\nunity, and by means of it gradually to incorporate with Israel all\ndwellers in the land. While certain ordinances were intended to make\nIsrael a holy nation separated and consecrated to Jehovah, this\nadmission of strangers to the privileges of the covenant has another\ndesign. In the Book of Deuteronomy (vii. 2) a statute occurs that\nentirely excludes from citizenship and incorporation all Canaanites,\nHittites, Jebusites, Amorites, Hivites, Girgashites, and Perizzites.\nThere was to be no intermarriage with them, no toleration of them,\nlest they led Israel away into idolatry. The statute is enforced by\nthe words, \"For thou art an holy people unto the Lord thy God: the\nLord thy God hath chosen thee to be a peculiar people unto Himself,\nabove all peoples that are upon the face of the earth.\" With this\nemphatic assertion of the severance of the Hebrews from other races\nthe strain of Numbers, as well as Exodus and Leviticus, generally\nagrees. When we endeavour to harmonise with it the admission of\nstrangers to the right and joy of sacrificial festivals, we at\nonce meet the difficulty that no other races were fitter to be\nreceived into religious confraternity than those of Canaan. Neither\nBabylonians, Syrians, Ph\u0153nicians, nor Philistines were free from the\ntaint of idolatry; and however degrading the rites of the Canaanites\nwere, some of the other nations followed practices quite as revolting.\n\nWe know that for a long period of Israel's history strangers were,\naccording to the statute presently under consideration, admitted to the\nfellowship of religion, as well as to high office in the state. \"We\nhave only to study the Book of Joshua to discover that the Israelites,\nlike the Saxons in Britain, destroyed the cities and not the population\nof the country, and that the number of cities actually overthrown was\nnot very large. We have only to turn to the list of the 'mighty men' of\nDavid to learn how many of them were foreigners, Hittites, Ammonites,\nZobahites, and even Philistines of Gath (2 Sam. xv. 18, 19; vi. 10).\nNor must it be forgotten that David himself was partly a Moabite by\ndescent.\"[6] In accordance with this large tolerance we might be\ndisposed to include among the \"strangers\" admitted to privilege men\nbelonging to races that inhabited Canaan before the conquest. Even\nDeuteronomy seems in one passage to exclude none but Ammonites and\nMoabites; and the covenant law of Exod. xxiii. commands generous\ntreatment of the stranger. In contrast to the \"homeborn,\" strangers\nmay appear to mean those only who had come from other countries and\nchosen to identify themselves with the faith and fortunes of Israel;\nstill this passage attempts no such definition, and on the whole\nwe must allow that the Mosaic law in regulating the political and\nsocial position of resident non-Israelites showed \"a spirit of great\nliberality.\" They had, of course, to conform to many laws--those, for\ninstance, of marriage, and those which forbade the eating of blood and\nthe flesh of animals not properly slaughtered. If uncircumcised, they\ncould not keep the Passover; but being circumcised, they had equal\nrights with the Hebrews. The purpose evidently was to make an open way\nto the benefits of Israel's government and religion.\n\nThe heave offering of the first dough is placed (ver. 20) side by\nside with the heave offering of the threshing-floor of the first\nsheaves. In Leviticus (xxiii. 17) a harvest oblation is ordered--two\nwave-loaves of fine flour baken with leaven. Here the heave offering\nof a cake made from the first dough is not accompanied with\nsacrifices of animals, but is of a simple kind, mainly a tribute to\nthe priests. The Deuteronomic statute regarding firstfruits, which\nwere to be put in a basket and set down before the altar, prescribed\na formula of dedication beginning, \"An Aramean ready to perish was\nmy father, and he went down into Egypt\": and the offering of these\nfirstfruits was to be an occasion of joy--\"Thou shalt rejoice in\nall the good which the Lord thy God hath given unto thee and unto\nthine house, thou and the Levite, and the stranger that is in the\nmidst of thee.\" There can be no question that the most developed\nstatute regarding these harvest offerings is that given in Leviticus,\nwhere the exact time for the presentation of the loaves is fixed,\nthe fiftieth day after the Sabbath, from the day when the sheaf was\nbrought. The feast accompanying the offering of the loaves came to be\nknown as that of Pentecost.\n\nPassing now to the law of atonement for unintentional omissions of\nduty, we notice that the introductory sentences (vv. 22, 23) have a\npeculiar retrospective cast. They seem to point back to the time when\nthe Lord gave commandment by the hand of Moses. It would appear that\nin course of years discovery was made that portions of the law were\nneglected, and the provisions of this statute were to relieve the\nnation and individuals of accumulating defilement. \"When ye shall err,\nand not observe all these commandments, which the Lord hath spoken unto\nMoses, even all that the Lord hath commanded you by the hand of Moses,\nfrom the day that the Lord gave commandment, and onward throughout\nyour generations; then it shall be, if it be done unwittingly, without\nthe knowledge of the congregation\"--so runs the preamble. A series\nof statutes in Lev. iv. contemplates offences of a like kind, when\nsomething has been done which the Lord commanded not to be done. The\nenactment of Numbers appears to point to a \"complete falling away of\nthe congregation from the whole of the law,\" an unconscious apostasy.\nMaimonides understands the provision as relating to guilt incurred by\nthe people in adopting customs and usages of the heathen that seemed\nto be reconcilable with the law of Jehovah, though they really led to\ncontempt and neglect of His commandments.[7]\n\nFor the nation as a whole, under these circumstances, atonement was\nto be made by the burnt offering of a young bullock with its meal\noffering and drink offering, and the sin offering of a he-goat. In\nthis purgation all strangers resident with Israel are specially\nincluded. When any person discovered that he had neglected a precept,\nhe was to offer a she-goat of the first year for a sin offering.\nThe Israelite and the stranger alike had in this way access to the\nsanctuary. But in contrast to unintentional omission of duty was set\ndeliberate neglect of it. For this there was no atonement. Whether\nthe high-handed transgressor was homeborn or a stranger, he was to be\nutterly cut off as a blasphemer; his iniquity rested upon him. The\ndistinction is morally sound; and the punishment of the rebel against\nauthority--apparently nothing less than death, or perhaps, if he has\nfled the land, outlawry--is such as the theocratic idea obviously\nrequired. It was Jehovah Himself who was defied. A man who, as it\nwere, shook his fist in rebellion against God had no right to live in\nHis world, under the protection of His beneficent laws.\n\nThe distinction between unwitting neglect and open rejection runs\nthrough the whole range of duty, natural, Hebrew, Christian. What\na man knows to be right he has before him as a Divine law of moral\nconduct. By the highest obligations, under which he lies to the\nLord of conscience, to his fellow-men, and to himself, he is bound\nto obey. Judaism added the authority of revelation--the Mosaic law,\nthe prophetic word. Christianity still further adds the authority\nof the word spoken by the Son of God, and the obligation imposed by\nHis death as the manifestation of eternal love. In proportion as the\nDivine will is made clear, and the law enforced by revelation and\ngrace, the sin of rejection becomes greater and more blasphemous.\nBut, on the other hand, the unwitting transgressor, be he heathen\nor imperfectly instructed Christian, has under the new covenant, in\nwhich mercy and justice go hand in hand, no less consideration than\nthe Hebrew who unintentionally erred. There is no law that cuts him\noff from his people. Wide as this principle may reach, it must be\nthat according to which men are judged. Many, knowing the invisible\nthings of God \"through the things that are made,\" are without excuse.\nThey \"hold down the truth in unrighteousness\"; they are high-handed\ntransgressors. But others who have no knowledge of the Divine law,\nand break it unwittingly, have their atonement: God provides it. Nor\nare we to impeach Divine Providence by judging before the time.\n\nIt may be asked, Why, since defiant rejection of Christian law is\nmore blasphemous than high-handed breach of the old Hebrew law, the\nprovidence of God does not punish it? If any one with Christ and His\ncross in view is guilty of injustice, or of hatred which is murder,\ndoes he not prove himself unworthy to live in God's world? And why,\nthen, does he not suffer at once the doom of his rebellion? The\ntheory of some stern moralists has been that human government should\nadminister the justice of Heaven and cut off the unbeliever. In\nmany a notable case this has been done, and has caused a righteous\nhorror which continues to be felt. But although men cannot safely\nundertake the punishment of such offenders, why does not God?\nChrist boldly stated that here and now this is not the method of\nthe Divine government, but that men enjoy the Father's mercy even\nwhen they are unjust, unthankful, and evil. Yet He spoke of judgment\nuniversal--judgment and retribution that shall not miss a single\nsinner, a single secret sin. And His view of the theocracy clearly\nis that meanwhile God by mercy to the defiant desires to train men\nin mercy, by forbearance towards the unthankful and evil commends\nto us like patience and endurance. Transgressors are to have their\nfull opportunity of repentance, to which the very goodness of God\ncalls them. But justice which delays is not unobservant. Though He\nwho reigns moves slowly to His end, He will not fail to reach it.\n\"He hath appointed a day in the which He will judge the world in\nrighteousness.\" As for human law, its sphere is fixed. Society must\nprotect itself against crime, and is to do so in the name of God, in\nconformity with the eternal principles of righteousness. The Hebrew\ntemper may seem to have carried this principle into a range that was\nperilous to enter, as in the instance immediately to be considered;\nyet the protection of society was even then the immediate motive, not\nvain jealousy for the honour of God. For ourselves, we have a duty\nwhich must be done without assumption or hypocrisy.\n\nThe various subjects of thought suggested here should be followed\nout. For us, they are complicated on the social as well as the\nreligious side by certain theories that are in vogue. The duty of\ncivil government, for example, is on one side extended beyond its\nproper range by the attempt to give it authority in the domain\nof religious truth; on the other hand it is unduly restricted\nby toleration of what is against the well-being of society. The\nChristian moralist has much to ponder in relation to popular opinions\nand the trend of modern legislation.\n\n\n2. THE SABBATH-BREAKER.--If the actual sequence of events is followed\nin the narrative of Numbers, it must have been after the condemnation\nof the adult Israelites that judgment of the man who was found\ninfringing the Sabbath law had to be executed; and some who were\nthemselves under reprobation took part in convicting and punishing this\noffender. There is a difficulty here which on high moral grounds it\nis impossible to explain away. Disaffection and revolt had brought on\nthe mass of the people the sentence of destruction; and this had only\nbeen exchanged on Moses' intercession for the forty years of wandering.\nShould not sins that were visited with this penalty have excluded all\nwho were guilty of them from any judicial act? But the same objection\nwould, if admitted, prevent all of us from taking part in the execution\nof law. Neither the judge nor the jury, neither those who legislate nor\nthose who administer law, are free from moral fault. The whole system\ndealing with crime has this defect; and Israel in the wilderness was\nas much entitled as modern society to take in hand the correction of\noffenders, the maintenance of public well-being.\n\nThe law which had been broken was one specially connected with duty\nto God. Sabbath-keeping might indeed seem to belong to worship rather\nthan to social morality. The seventh day was the Sabbath of Jehovah.\nIt was to be kept holy to Him, made a delight for His sake. The\nstatute regarding it belonged to the first table of the Decalogue.\nStill, the commandment had a social as well as a religious side. In\ngoodwill to men Jehovah required the day to be kept holy to Him. Had\none and another like this offender been allowed to set aside the\nfourth commandment, the interests of the whole congregation would\nsoon have suffered. It was for the good of the race, physically as\nwell as intellectually and spiritually, the Sabbath was to be kept.\nThose who guarded the sanctity of the Sabbath were guarding not the\nhonour of God alone, though they may have thought that the chief\nmerit of their watchfulness, but the interests of the people, a\nprecious heritage of the nation.\n\nIt is not necessary to maintain that judgment was given by Moses\nsolely on the ground that the man who gathered sticks on the Sabbath\nwas an offender against the public well-being. The thought of\nJehovah's \"jealousy\" was constantly kept before the mind of Israel,\nfor by that idea, better than any other, beneficent legislation\nwas supported in a rude age; and judgment no doubt rested mainly\non this. Yet the interference of the people and their share in the\nexecution of punishment are to be justified by the undoubted fact\nthat Israel could not afford to let the Sabbath be lost. Even those\nwho were to a great extent earthly could perceive this. And if the\npunishment seems disproportionate, we must remember that it was the\npresumptuous temper of the man rather than his actual fault that was\njudged criminal. St. James said, no doubt from this point of view,\n\"Whosoever shall keep the whole law, and yet offend in one point, he\nis become guilty of all.\" The criminal act was that of breaking down,\nwith daring hand, the safeguard of social and religious prosperity.\n\nAnd there is a sense in which without Pharisaism those who are\nconcerned for the public well-being may still insist on the strict\nenforcement of the laws that guard the day of rest. Though all days\nare alike sacred to spiritually minded persons, yet bodily health\nand mental soundness are bound up more than men in general know with\nthe Sabbatic interval between labour and labour. The Puritanism\noften scoffed at is far more philanthropic than the humanitarianism,\nso-called, which derides it. And when any one enforces the duty of\nSabbath-keeping by insisting on God's claim to the seventh day, his\nbelief is no superstition. Convict him first of advocating what is\nagainst the good of men, irrational, absurd, before venturing to\ncall him superstitious. If what is advanced as a claim of God can be\nproved to be really for the good of men, it is a virtue to insist\nthat for God's sake as well as the sake of men it should be rendered.\nThere were persons in our Lord's time who made Sabbath-keeping a\nsuperstition. Against them He testified. But it is in His name who\nwas the great Friend of men the Sabbath law is now insisted on; and\nthe day of rest has all the higher sanction that it commemorates His\nresurrection from the dead, His promise of that new life which relief\nfrom labour enables us to pursue.\n\nThe institution of the Sabbath and the scrupulous observance of it\nwere, for Israel, and are still for all believers in Divine religion,\nmost important means of maintaining unity in the faith. Now that many\ncauses interfere with the simultaneous exhibition of regard for other\nsymbols of Christian belief, the day of rest and worship gives a\nuniversal opportunity which it would be fatal to neglect. It has the\nadvantage of beginning to claim men on the ground where religion first\nappeals to them, that of God's care for their temporal well-being.\nThose with whom religious feeling is quite elementary must see that a\nboon of incalculable value is offered in this recurring refreshment\nto the wearied body and strained mind. And with progress in religious\nculture the benefit of the day of rest is found to advance. The\nopportunities of worship, of religious meditation and service, which\nit brings will be esteemed as the value of Christian fellowship, the\nimportance of Christian knowledge, and the duty of Christian endeavour\nare successively understood. On all these grounds the Sabbath, or\nLord's Day, is for modern religion, as for that of the old covenant, a\ngreat declaration, a means of unity and development which the spiritual\nwill earnestly uphold. Let it fail, and distinction between religious\nand non-religious will be without a sign. No doubt the reality is more\nby far than the symbol. Yet fellowship, for which in many cases the\nSabbath alone gives opportunity, is far more than a symbol; and unity\nrequires an outward manifestation. Nothing could be more perilous to\nthe religious life of our people than the tendency, shown by many\nwho profess Christianity and sanctioned by some of its teachers, to\nmake the Sabbath a day of self-pleasing, of mere individualism, and\nincoherent secularity.\n\n\n3. THE MEMORIAL TASSELS.--The unique sumptuary law with which the\nchapter closes may be regarded as a sequence of the Sabbath-breaker's\nconviction. That Israelites might never be without a reminder of\ntheir duty, and of the Divine laws they were scrupulously to observe,\nthese tassels with a band of blue were to be constantly worn. It\nappears to us singular that men should be expected to pay heed to\nsuch mementoes as these. We are apt to say, If the laws of God were\nnot in their hearts, the _zizith_ would scarcely make them more\nattentive; and if they had the laws in their hearts, they would need\nno memorials of obligation. But the ornament was something more than\na reminder of duty. It was a badge of honour, and became more so as\nthe Israelites understood their high position among the peoples. The\n_zizith_ would be like an order, a mark of rank; or like the uniform\nof his regiment which to the good soldier recalls its history. The\nHebrew would have to live up to his duty as signified by these\nattachments of his dress.\n\nAnd Israelites were to be distinguished by the _zizith_ from those\nwho were of other races, not under law to Jehovah. Every man who wore\nthis badge would be able to count on the sympathy of every other\nIsraelite. The symbol became a means of rousing the _esprit_ of the\nnation, and binding it together in a zealous fraternity. The nature\nof the badge appears to us peculiar; but the value of it cannot be\ndenied. The modern peoples, far as they have travelled from the old\nways of the Hebrews, retain the use of symbolic dress, the liking for\nornaments, by which a man's life may be known.\n\nThe name _zizith_ is derived from a word meaning blossom. The tassel\nwas formed of twisted threads bound by a cord or ribbon of blue to\nthe garment. It was the blossom of the robe, so to speak, hanging by\na blue stem. The ornament is again mentioned in Deut. xxii. 12, where\nit has another name, _gedilim_, enlargements. With extraordinary\npride the Jews of our own time still wear the _talith_, which is a\nfantastical development of the _zizith_ of Numbers. \"The rabbins\nobserve that each string consisted of eight threads, which, with\nthe number of knots and the numerical value of the letters in the\nword, make 613, which, according to them, is the exact number of the\nprecepts in the law.\" The Pharisees in Christ's time enlarged their\nphylacteries, displaying superfluously the proofs of their Hebrew\northodoxy and zeal. It is the danger of all symbols. In the youth of\na people they have meaning; they express fact, they give honour. The\nIsraelite wearing his felt himself reminded, put on his honour, not\nto go about \"according to his own heart and his own eyes by which he\nused to go a-whoring.\" But afterwards the zeal became that of pride,\nthe symbol a mere amulet or a token of self-sufficiency. The Jew of\nto-day is partly kept separate by his talith, and because he wears\nit, feels himself in touch with the fathers and heroes and prophets\nof his people. But he also feels, what is not always good, his\nremoteness from heathen and Christian \"dogs.\"\n\nAnd Christian symbols, the few sanctioned by Scripture, the others\nthat have crept into use in the course of history, bring with their\nuse a similar danger. In many cases they are signs of privilege\nrather than memorials of duty. They minister to pride, rather than\nstimulate zeal in the service of God and men. The crucifix itself,\nwith consummate superstition, is worn and kissed as a talisman.\n\nFOOTNOTES:\n\n[6] Sayce, \"The Higher Criticism and the Verdict of the Monuments,\"\np. 359.\n\n[7] See Keil and Delitzsch _in loco_.\n\n\n\n\n XIV\n\n _KORAH, DATHAN, AND ABIRAM_\n\n NUMBERS xvi., xvii\n\n\nBehind what appears in the history, there must have been many\nmovements of thought and causes of discontent which gradually led\nto the events we now consider. Of the revolts against Moses which\noccurred in the wilderness, this was the most widely organised and\ninvolved the most serious danger. But we can only conjecture in\nwhat way it arose, how it was related to previous incidents and\ntendencies of popular feeling. It is difficult to understand the\nreport, in which Korah appears at one time closely associated with\nDathan and Abiram, at other times quite apart from them as a leader\nof disaffection. According to Wellhausen and others, three narratives\nare combined in the text. But without going so far in the way of\nanalysis we clearly trace two lines of revolt: one against Moses as\nleader; the other against the Aaronic priesthood. The two risings may\nhave been distinct; we shall however deal with them as simultaneous\nand more or less combined. A great deal is left unexplained, and we\nmust be guided by the belief that the narrative of the whole book has\na certain coherency, and that facts previously recorded must have had\ntheir bearing on those now to be examined.\n\nThe principal leader of revolt was Korah, son of Izhar, a Levite\nof the family of Kohath; and with him were associated two hundred\nand fifty \"princes of the congregation, called to the assembly,\nmen of renown,\" some of them presumably belonging to each of the\ntribes as is shown incidentally in xxvii. 3. The complaint of this\ncompany--evidently representing an opinion widely held, was that\nMoses and Aaron took too much upon them in reserving to themselves\nthe whole arrangement and control of the ritual. The two hundred and\nfifty, who according to the law had no right to use censers, were so\nfar in opposition to the Aaronic priesthood that they were provided\nwith the means of offering incense. They claimed for themselves on\nbehalf of the whole congregation, whom they declared to be holy, the\nhighest function of priests. With Korah were specially identified a\nnumber of Levites who, not content with being separated to do the\nservice of the tabernacle, demanded the higher sacerdotal office.\nIt might seem from vv. 10, 11, that all the two hundred and fifty\nwere Levites; but this is precluded by the earlier statement that\nthey were princes of the congregation, called to the assembly. So\nfar as we can gather, the tribe of Levi did not supply princes, \"men\nof renown,\" in this sense. While Moses deals with Korah and his\ncompany, Dathan, Abiram, and On, who belong to the tribe of Reuben,\nstand in the background with their grievance. Invited to state it,\nthey complain that Moses has not only brought the congregation\nout of a land \"flowing with milk and honey,\" to kill them in the\nwilderness, failing to give them the inheritance he promised; but\nhe has made himself a prince over the host, determining everything\nwithout consulting the heads of the tribes. They ask if he means\n\"to put out the eyes of these men,\"--that is, to blind them to the\nreal purpose he has in view, whatever it is, or to make them his\nslaves after the Babylonian fashion, by actually boring out the eyes\nof each tenth man, perhaps. The two hundred and fifty are called\nby Moses to bring their censers and the incense and fire they have\nbeen using, that Jehovah may signify whether He chooses to be served\nby them as priests, or by Aaron. The offering of incense over, the\ndecree against the whole host as concerned in this revolt is made\nknown, and Moses intercedes for the people. Then the Voice commands\nthat all the people shall separate themselves from the \"tabernacle\"\nof Korah, Dathan, and Abiram, apparently as if some tent of worship\nhad been erected in rivalry of the true tabernacle. Dathan and Abiram\nare not at the \"tabernacle,\" but at some little distance, in tents of\ntheir own. The people remove from the \"tabernacle of Korah, Dathan,\nand Abiram,\" and on the terrible invocation of judgment pronounced\nby Moses, the ground cleaves asunder and all the men that appertain\nunto Korah go down alive into the pit. Afterwards, it is said, \"fire\ncame forth from the Lord and devoured the two hundred and fifty men\nthat offered the incense.\" \"The men that appertained unto Korah\" may\nbe the presumptuous Levites, most closely identified with his revolt.\nBut the two hundred and fifty consumed by the fire are not said to\nhave been swallowed by the cleaving earth; their censers are taken up\n\"out of the burning,\" as devoted or sacred, and beaten into plates\nfor a covering of the altar.\n\nOn the morrow the whole congregation, even more disaffected than\nbefore, is in a state of tumult. The cry is raised that Moses and\nAaron \"have killed the people of Jehovah.\" Forthwith a plague,\nthe sign of Divine anger, breaks out. Atonement is made by Aaron,\nwho runs quickly with his burning censer \"into the midst of the\nassembly,\" and \"stands between the dead and the living.\" But fourteen\nthousand seven hundred die before the plague is stayed. And the\nposition of Aaron as the acknowledged priest of Jehovah is still\nfurther confirmed. Rods or twigs are taken, one for each tribe, all\nthe tribes having been implicated in the revolt; and these rods are\nlaid up in the tent of meeting. When a day has passed, the rod of\nAaron for the tribe of Levi is found to have put forth buds and borne\nalmonds. The close of the whole series of events is an exclamation of\namazed anxiety by all the people: \"Behold, we perish, we are undone,\nwe are all undone. Every one that cometh near unto the tabernacle of\nJehovah dieth: shall we perish all of us?\"\n\nNow throughout the narrative, although other issues are involved,\nthere can be no question that the main design is the confirmation\nof the Aaronic priesthood. What happened conveyed a warning of\nmost extraordinary severity against any attempt to interfere with\nthe sacerdotal order as established. And this we can understand.\nBut it becomes a question why a revolt of Reubenites against Moses\nwas connected with that of Korah against the sole priesthood of\nthe Aaronic house. We have also to consider how it came about that\nprinces out of all the tribes were to be found provided with censers,\nwhich they were apparently in the habit of using to burn incense to\nJehovah. There is a Levitical revolt; there is an assumption by men\nin each tribe of priestly dignity; and there is a protest by men\nrepresenting the tribe of Reuben against the dictatorship of Moses.\nIn what way might these different movements arise and combine in a\ncrisis that almost wrecked the fortunes of Israel?\n\nThe explanation supplied by Wellhausen on the basis of his main\ntheory is exceedingly laboured, at some points improbable, at others\ndefective. According to the Jehovistic tradition, he says,[8] the\nrebellion proceeds from the Reubenites, and is directed against Moses\nas leader and judge of the people. The historical basis of this is\ndimly discerned to be the fall of Reuben from its old place at the\nhead of the brother tribes. Out of this story, says Wellhausen,\nat some time or other not specified, \"when the people of the\ncongregation, _i.e._, of the Church, have once come on the scene,\"\nthere arises a second version. The author of the agitation is now\nKorah, a prince of the tribe of Judah, and he rebels not only against\nMoses but against Moses and Aaron as representing the priesthood.\n\"The jealousy of the secular grandees is now directed against the\nclass of hereditary priests instead of against the extraordinary\ninfluence on the community of a heaven-sent hero.\" Then there is a\nthird addition which \"belongs likewise to the Priestly Code, but\nnot to its original contents.\" In this, Korah the prince of the\ntribe of Judah is replaced by another Korah, head of a \"post-exilic\nLevitical family\"; and \"the contest between clergy and aristocracy is\ntransformed into a domestic strife between the higher and inferior\nclergy which was no doubt raging in the time of the narrator.\" All\nthis is supposed to be a natural and easy explanation of what would\notherwise be an \"insoluble enigma.\" We ask, however, at what period\nany family of Judah would be likely to claim the priesthood, and at\nwhat post-exilic period there was \"no doubt\" a strife between the\nhigher and inferior clergy. Nor is there any account here of the two\nhundred and fifty princes of the congregation, with their partially\ndeveloped ritual antagonistic to that of the tabernacle.\n\nWe have seen that according to the narrative of Numbers seventy\nelders of the tribes were appointed to aid Moses in bearing the\nheavy burden of administration, and were endowed with the gift of\nprophecy that they might the more impressively wield authority in\nthe host. In the first instance, these men might be zealous helpers\nof Moses, but they proved, like the rest, angry critics of his\nleadership when the spies returned with their evil report. They were\nincluded with the other men of the tribes in the doom of the forty\nyears' wandering, and might easily become movers of sedition. When\nthe ark was stationed permanently at Kadesh, and the tribes spread\nthemselves after the manner of shepherds over a wide range of the\nsurrounding district, we can easily see that the authority of the\nseventy would increase in proportion to the need for direction felt\nin the different groups to which they belonged. Many of the scattered\ncompanies too were so far from the tabernacle that they might desire\na worship of their own, and the original priestly function of the\nheads of tribes, if it had lapsed, might in this way be revived.\nAlthough there were no altars, yet with censers and incense one of\nthe highest rites of worship might be observed.\n\nAgain, the period of inaction must have been galling to many who\nconceived themselves quite capable of making a successful assault on\nthe inhabitants of Canaan, or otherwise securing a settled place of\nabode for Israel. And the tribe of Reuben, first by birthright, and\napparently one of the strongest, would take the lead in a movement to\nset aside the authority of Moses. We have also to keep in mind that\nthough Moses had pressed the Kenizzites to join the march and relied\non their fidelity, the presence in the camp of one like Hobab, who was\nan equal not a vassal of Moses, must have been a continual incentive\nto disaffection. He and his troops had their own notions, we may\nbelieve, as to the delay of forty years, and would very likely deny its\nnecessity. They would also have their own cultus, and religiously, as\nwell as in other ways, show an independence which encouraged revolt.\n\nOnce more, as to the Levites, it might seem unfair to them that Aaron\nand his two sons should have a position so much higher than theirs.\nThey had to do many offices in connection with sacrifice, and other\nparts of the holy service. On them, indeed, fell the burden of the\nduties, and the ambitious might expect to force their way into the\nhigher office of the priesthood, at a time when rebellion against\nauthority was coming to a head. We may suppose that Korah and his\ncompany of Levites, acting partly for themselves, partly in concert\nwith the two hundred and fifty who had already assumed the right to\nburn incense, agreed to make their demand in the first instance, that\nas Levites they should be admitted priests. This would prepare the way\nfor the princes of the tribes to claim sacerdotal rights according\nto the old clan idea. And at the same time, the priority of Reuben\nwould be another point, insistence upon which would strike at the\npower of Moses. If the princes of Reuben had gone so far as to erect a\n\"tabernacle\" or _mishcan_ for their worship, that may have been, for\nthe occasion, made the headquarters of revolt, perhaps because Reuben\nhappened at the time to be nearest the encampment of the Levites.\n\nA widespread rebellion, an organised rebellion, not homogeneous, but\nwith many elements in it tending to utter confusion, is what we see.\nSuppose it to have succeeded, the unity of worship would have been\ndestroyed completely. Each tribe with its own cultus would have gone\nits own way so far as religion was concerned. In a very short time\nthere would have been as many debased cults as there were wandering\ncompanies. Then the claim of autonomy, if not of right to lead the\ntribes, made on behalf of Reuben, involved a further danger. Moses had\nnot only the sagacity but the inspiration which ought to have commanded\nobedience. The princes of Reuben had neither. Whether all under the\nlead of Reuben or each tribe led by its own princes, the Israelites\nwould have travelled to disaster. Futile attempts at conquest, strife\nor alliance with neighbouring peoples, internal dissension, would have\nworn the tribes piecemeal away. The dictatorship of Moses, the Aaronic\npriesthood, and the unity of worship stood or fell together. One of the\nthree removed, the others would have given way. But the revolutionary\nspirit, springing out of ambition and a disaffection for which there\nwas no excuse, was blind to consequences. And the stern suppression of\nthis revolt, at whatever cost, was absolutely needful if there was to\nbe any future for Israel.\n\nIt has been supposed that we have in this rebellion of Korah the\nfirst example of ecclesiastical dissension, and that the punishment\nis a warning to all who presumptuously intrude into the priestly\noffice. Laymen take the censer; and the fire of the Lord burns them\nup. So, let not laymen, at any time in the Church's history, venture\nto touch the sacred mysteries. If ritual and sacramentarian miracle\nwere the heart of religion; if there could be no worship of God and\nno salvation for men now unless through a consecrated priesthood,\nthis might be said. But the old covenant, with its symbols and\nshadows, has been superseded. We have another centre now, another\ntabernacle, another way which has been consecrated for ever by the\nsacrifice of Christ, a way into the holiest of all open to every\nbeliever. Our unity does not depend on the priesthood of men, but on\nthe universal and eternal priesthood of Christ. The co-operation of\nAaron as priest was needful to Moses, not that his power might be\nmaintained for his own sake, but that he might have authority over\nthe host for Israel's sake. It was not the dignity of an order or of\na man that was at stake, but the very existence of religion and of\nthe nation. This bond snapped at any point, the tribes would have\nbeen scattered and lost.\n\nA leader of men standing above them for their temporal interests\ncan rarely take upon him to be the instrument of administering the\npenalty of their sins. What king, for instance, ever invoked an\ninterdict on his own people, or in his own right of judging for God\ncondemned them to pay a tax to the Church, because they had done what\nwas morally wrong? Rulers generally have regarded disobedience to\nthemselves as the only crime it was worth their while to punish. When\nMoses stood against the faithless spirit of the Israelites and issued\norders by way of punishing that bad spirit, he certainly put his\nauthority to a tremendous test. Without a sure ground of confidence\nin Divine support, he would have been foolhardy in the extreme.\nAnd we are not surprised that the coalition against him represented\nmany causes of discontent. Under his administration the long sojourn\nin the desert had been decreed, and a whole generation deprived of\nwhat they held their right--a settlement in Canaan. He appeared to\nbe tyrannising over the tribes; and proud Reubenites sought to put\nan end to his rule. The priesthood was his creation, and seemed to\nbe made exclusive simply that through Aaron he might have a firmer\nhold of the people's liberties. Why was the old prerogative of the\nheadmen in religious matters taken from them? They would reclaim\ntheir rights. Neither Levi nor Reuben should be denied its priestly\nautonomy any longer. In the whole rebellion there was one spirit,\nbut there were also divided counsels; and Moses showed his wisdom by\ntaking the revolt not as a single movement, but part by part.\n\nFirst he met the Levites, with Korah at their head, professing great\nzeal for the principle that all the congregation were holy, every\none of them. A claim made on that ground could not be disproved by\nargument, perhaps, although the holiness of the congregation was\nevidently an ideal, not a fact. Jehovah Himself would have to decide.\nYet Moses remonstrated in a way that was fitted to move the Levites,\nand perhaps did touch some of them. They had been honoured by God in\nhaving a certain holy office assigned to them. Were they to renounce\nit in joining a revolt which would make the very priesthood they\ndesired common to all the tribes? From Jehovah Himself the Levites\nhad their commission. It was against Jehovah they were fighting;\nand how could they speed? They spoke of Aaron and his dignity. But\nwhat was Aaron? Only a servant of God and of the people, a man who\npersonally assumed no great airs. By this appeal some would seem\nto have been detached from the rebellion, for in xxvi. 9-11, when\nthe judgment of Korah and his company is referred to, it is added,\n\"Notwithstanding the children of Korah died not.\" From 1 Chron. vi.\nwe learn that in the line of Korah's descendants appeared certain\nmakers and leaders of sacred song, Heman among them, one of David's\nsingers, to whom Psalm lxxxviii. is ascribed.\n\nWith the Reubenites Moses deals in the next place, taking their\ncause of discontent by itself. Already one of the three Reubenite\nchiefs had withdrawn, and Dathan and Abiram stood by themselves.\nRefusing to obey the call of Moses to a conference, they stated their\ngrievance roughly by the mouth of a messenger; and Moses could only\nwith indignation express before God his blamelessness in regard to\nthem: \"I have not taken one ass from them, neither have I hurt one\nof them.\" Neither for his own enrichment, nor in personal ambition\nhad he acted. Could they maintain, did the people think, that the\npresent revolt was equally disinterested? Under cover of opposition\nto tyranny, are they not desiring to play the part of tyrants and\naggrandise themselves at the expense of the people?\n\nIt is singular that not a word is said in special condemnation of\nthe two hundred and fifty because they were in possession of censers\nand incense. May it be the case that the complete reservation of\nthe high-priestly duties to the house of Aaron had not as yet taken\neffect, that it was a purpose rather than a fact? May it not further\nbe the case that the rebellion partly took form and ripened because\nan order had been given withdrawing the use of censers from the\nheadmen of the tribes? If there had as yet been a certain temporary\nallowance of the tribal priesthood and ritual, we should not have to\nask how incense and censers were in the hands of the two hundred and\nfifty, and why the brass of their vessels was held to be sacred and\nput to holy use.\n\nThe prayer of Moses in which he interceded for the people, ver. 22,\nis marked by an expression of singular breadth, \"O God, the God of\nthe spirits of all flesh.\" The men, misled on the fleshly side by\nappetite (ver. 13), and shrinking from pain, were against God. But\ntheir spirits were in His hand. Would He not move their spirits,\nredeem and save them? Would He not look on the hearts of all and\ndistinguish the guilty from the innocent, the more rebellious from\nthe less? One man had sinned, but would God burst out on the whole\ncongregation? The form of the intercession is abrupt, crude. Even\nMoses with all his justice and all his pity could not be more just,\nmore compassionate, than Jehovah. The purpose of destruction was not\nas the leader thought it to be.\n\nRegarding the judgments, that of the earthquake and that of the fire,\nwe are too remote in time to form any proper conception of what they\nwere, how they were inflicted. \"Moses,\" says Lange, \"appears as a man\nwhose wonderful presentiment becomes a miraculous prophecy by the\nSpirit of revelation.\" But this is not sufficient. There was more than\na presentiment. Moses knew what was coming, knew that where the rebels\nstood the earth would open, the consuming fire burn. The plague, on the\nother hand, which next day spread rapidly among the excited people and\nthreatened to destroy them, was not foreseen. It came as if straight\nfrom the hand of Divine wrath. But it afforded an opportunity for Aaron\nto prove his power with God and his courage. Carrying the sacred fire\ninto the midst of the infected people he became the means of their\ndeliverance. As he waved his censer, and its fumes went up to heaven,\nfaith in Jehovah and in Aaron as the true priest of Jehovah was revived\nin the hearts of men. Their spirits came again under the healing power\nof that symbolism which had lost its virtue in common use, and was\nnow associated in a grave crisis with an appeal to Him who smites and\nheals, who kills and makes alive.\n\nIt has been maintained by some that the closing sentences of chap.\nxvii. should follow chap. xvi. with which they appear to be closely\nconnected, the incident of the budding of Aaron's rod seeming to call\nrather for a festal celebration than a lament. The theory of the\nBook of Numbers we have seen reason to adopt would account for the\nintroduction of the fresh episode, simply because it relates to the\npriesthood and tends to confirm the Aaronites in exclusive dignity. The\nsymbolic test of the claim raised by the tribes corresponds closely to\nthe signs that were used by some of the prophets, such as the girdle\nlaid up by the river Euphrates, and the basket of summer fruits. The\nrod on which Aaron's name was written was of almond, a tree for which\nSyria was famous. Like the sloe it sends forth blossoms before the\nleaves; and the unique way in which this twig showed its living vigour\nas compared with the others was a token of the choice of Levi to serve\nand Aaron to minister in the holiest office before Jehovah.\n\nThe whole circumstances, and the closing cry of the people, leave the\nimpression of a grave difficulty found in establishing the hierarchy\nand centralising the worship. It was a necessity--shall we call it\na sad necessity?--that the men of the tribes should be deprived of\ndirect access to the sanctuary and the oracle. Earthly, disobedient,\nand far from trustful in God, they could not be allowed, even the\nhereditary chiefs among them, to offer sacrifices. The ideas of the\nDivine holiness embodied in the Mosaic law were so far in advance of\nthe common thought of Israel, that the old order had to be superseded\nby one fitted to promote the spiritual education of the people, and\nprepare them for a time when there shall be \"on the bells of the\nhorses, HOLY UNTO THE LORD; and every pot in Judah shall be holy unto\nthe Lord of hosts, and all they that sacrifice shall come and take of\nthem and seethe therein.\" The institution of the Aaronic priesthood\nwas a step of progress indispensable to the security of religion and\nthe brotherhood of the tribes in that high sense for which they were\nmade a nation. But it was at the same time a confession that Israel\nwas not spiritual, was not the holy congregation Korah declared\nit to be. The greater was the pity that afterwards in the day of\nIsrael's opportunity, when Christ came to lead the whole people into\nthe spiritual liberty and grace for which prophets had longed, the\npriestly system was held tenaciously as the pride of the nation.\nWhen the law of ritual and sacrifice and priestly mediation should\nhave been left behind as no longer necessary because the Messiah had\ncome, the way of higher life was opened in vain. Sacerdotalism held\nits place with full consent of those who guided affairs. Israel as a\nnation was blinded, and its day shone in vain.\n\nOf all priesthoods as corporate bodies, however estimable, zealous,\nand spiritually-minded individual members of them may be, must it\nnot be said that their existence is a sad necessity? They may be\neducative. A sacerdotal system now may, like that of the Mosaic law,\nbe a tutor to bring men to Christ. Realising that, those who hold\noffice under it may bring help to men not yet fit for liberty. But\npriestly dominance is no perpetual rule in any church, certainly not\nin the Kingdom of God. The freedom with which Christ makes men free\nis the goal. The highest duty a priest can fulfil is to prepare men\nfor that liberty; and as soon as he can he should discharge them for\nthe enjoyment of it. To find in episodes like those of Korah's revolt\nand its suppression a rule applicable to modern religious affairs is\ntoo great an anachronism. For whatever right sacerdotalism now has is\npurely of the Church's tolerance, in the measure not of Divine right,\nbut of the need of uninstructed men. To the spiritual, to those who\nknow, the priestly system with its symbols and authoritative claim is\nbut an interference with privilege and duty.\n\nCan any Aaron now make an atonement for a mass of people, or even\nin virtue of his office apply to them the atonement made by Christ?\nHow does his absolution help a soul that knows Christ the Redeemer\nas every Christian soul ought to know Him? The great fault of\npriesthoods always is, that having once gained power, they endeavour\nto retain it and extend it, making greater claims the longer they\nexist. Affirming that they speak for the Church, they endeavour\nto control the voice of the Church. Affirming that they speak for\nChrist, they deny or minimise His great gift of liberty. Freedom of\nthought and reason was to Cardinal Newman, for example, the cause\nof all deplorable heresies and infidelities, of a divided Church and\na ruined world. The candid priest of our day is found making his\nclaim as largely as ever, and then virtually explaining it away.\nShould not the vain attempt to hold by Judaic institutions cease? And\nalthough the Church of Christ early made the mistake of harking back\nto Mosaism, should not confession now be made that priesthood of the\nexclusive kind is out of date, that every believer may perform the\nhighest functions of the consecrated life?\n\nThe Divine choice of Aaron, his confirmation in high religious office\nby the budding of the almond twig as well as by the acceptance of\nhis intercession, have their parallels now. The realities of one\nage become symbols for another. Like the whole ritual of Israel,\nthese particular incidents may be turned to Christian use by way\nof illustration. But not with regard to the prerogative of any\narch-hierarch. The availing intercession is that of Christ, the sole\nheadship over the tribes of men is that which He has gained by Divine\ncourage, love, and sacrifice. Among those who believe there is equal\ndependence on the work of Christ. When we come to intercession which\nthey make for each other, it is of value in consideration not of\noffice but of faith. \"The effectual fervent prayer of a righteous man\navaileth much.\" It is as \"righteous\" men, humble men, not as priests\nthey prevail. The sacraments are efficacious, \"not from any virtue\nin them or in him that administers them,\" but through faith, by the\nenergy of the omnipresent Spirit.\n\nYet there are men chosen to special duty, whose almond twigs bud and\nblossom and become their sceptres. Appointment and ordination are our\nexpedients; grace is given by God in a higher line of calling and\nendowment. While there are blessings pronounced that fall upon the\near or gratify the sensibility, theirs reach the soul. For them the\nworld has need to thank God. They keep religion alive, and make it\nbourgeon and yield the new fruits for which the generations hunger.\nThey are new branches of the Living Vine. Of them it has often to be\nsaid, as of the Lord Himself, \"The stone which the builders rejected\nthe same has become head of the corner; this is the Lord's doing, and\nit is marvellous in our eyes.\"\n\nFOOTNOTE:\n\n[8] Prolegomena to the \"History of Israel,\" p. 354.\n\n\n\n\n XV\n\n _TITHES AND CLEANSINGS_\n\n NUMBERS xviii., xix\n\n\n1. DUTIES AND SUPPORT OF THE MINISTRY.--The statutes of chap. xviii.\nare related to the rebellion of Korah by a clause in ver. 9, \"Ye shall\nkeep the charge of the sanctuary and the charge of the altar: that\nthere be wrath no more upon the children of Israel.\" The enactments\nare directed anew against any intrusion into the sacred service by\nthose who are not Levites, and into the priesthood by those who are not\nAaronites. It is clearly implied that the ministry of the tabernacle is\nheld under a grave responsibility. The \"iniquity of the sanctuary\" and\nthe \"iniquity of the priesthood\" have to be borne; and the Aaronites\nalone are commissioned to bear that iniquity. The Levites, though they\nserve, are not to touch the holy vessels lest they die. The priesthood,\n\"for everything of the altar, and for that within the veil,\" is given\nto the Aaronites as a service of gift.\n\nA certain \"iniquity,\" corresponding to the holiness of the tabernacle\nand its vessels, attends the service which is to be done by the\npriests. Their entrance into the sacred tent is an approach to\nJehovah, and from His purity there is thrown a defilement on human\nlife. The idea thus represented is capable of fine spiritual\nrealisation. With this embodied in the law and worship, there is no\nneed to look in any other direction for that evangelical poverty\nof spirit which the better Israelites of an after time knew. Here\nprophecy found in the law a germ of deep religious feeling which,\nrising above tabernacle and altar, became the holy fear of Him who\ninhabits eternity. The creation throughout its whole range, in\nthe very act of receiving existence, comes into contrast with the\ncreative Will and is on a lower moral plane, to which the Divine\npurity does not accompany it. The seraphim of Isaiah's vision feel\nthis severance to a certain extent. They are so far apart from God\nthat His holiness is not enjoyed unconsciously, as the element of\nlife. It shines above them and determines their attitude and the\nterms of their praise. With their wings they cover their faces, and\nthey cry to each other, \"Holy, holy, holy is Jehovah of hosts: the\nwhole earth is full of His glory.\" Even they \"bear the iniquity\" of\nthe great temple of the world in which they minister. On fallen man\nthat iniquity lies with almost crushing weight. \"Woe is me!\" says\nthe prophet, \"for I am undone; because I am a man of unclean lips,\nand I dwell in the midst of a people of unclean lips: for mine eyes\nhave seen the King, Jehovah of hosts.\" Thus the soul is brought into\nthat profound consciousness of defect and pollution which is the\npreparation for reverent service of the Highest. The attribute of\nholiness remains with God always, and His mercy in forgiving sin in\nno way detracts from it. The eternity of God sets Him so far above\ntransitory men that He can extend compassion to them. \"Art Thou not\nfrom everlasting, O Jehovah my God, mine Holy One? We shall not\ndie.\" But His touch is, to the sinful earth, almost destruction.\nWhen the Lord the God of hosts toucheth the land it melteth, and all\nthat dwell therein mourn (Amos ix. 12). When a people falls from\nrighteousness the Divine holiness burns against it like a consuming\nfire. \"We are all become as one that is unclean, and all our\nrighteousnesses are as a polluted garment: and we all do fade as a\nleaf; and our iniquities like the wind take us away.... Thou hast hid\nThy face from us, and hast consumed us by means of our iniquities\"\n(Isa. lxiv. 6, 7).\n\nThe idea of the identification with the Holy God of the sanctuary\ndedicated to Him, so that from the porch of it falls the shadow of\niniquity, is still further carried out in Numb. xviii. 1, where it is\ndeclared that Aaron and his sons shall \"bear the iniquity\" of their\npriesthood. The meaning is that the priesthood as an abstract thing,\nan office held from Jehovah and for Him, has a holiness like the\nsanctuary, and that the entrance into it of a man like Aaron brings\nto light his human imperfection and taint. And this corresponds to\na consciousness which every one who deals with sacred truth and\nundertakes the conduct of Divine worship in the right spirit is bound\nto have. Entering on those exalted duties he \"bears his iniquity.\"\nThe sense of daring intrusion may almost keep back a man who knows\nthat he has received a Divine call.\n\nTo the heavenly muse the poet can but reply:--\n\n \"I am not worthy even to speak\n Of Thy prevailing mysteries;\n For I am but an earthly muse ...\n And darken sanctities with song.\"\n\nWith regard to the Levites whom Aaron is to bring near \"that they\nmay be joined unto him,\" it is singular that their duties and the\nrestrictions put on them are detailed here as if now for the first\ntime this branch of the sacred ministry was being organised. In the\nactual development of things this may be true. Difficulties had to\nbe overcome, the nature of the statutes and ordinances had to be\nexplained. Now the time of practical initiation may have arrived. On\nthe other hand, the attempt of Korah to press into the priesthood may\nhave made necessary a recapitulation of the law of Levitical service.\n\nFor the support of the Aaronites the heave offerings, \"even all the\nhallowed things of the children of Israel\" were to be given \"by\nreason of the anointing.\" The meal offerings, sin offerings, and\nguilt offerings, as most holy, were to be for the male Aaronites\nalone: heave offerings of sacrifice, again, \"all the wave offerings,\"\nwere to be used by the Aaronites and their families, the reservation\nbeing made that only those without ceremonial defilement should\neat of them. The first-fruits of the oil and vintage and the first\nripe of all fruits in the land were other perquisites. Further, the\nfirst-born of man and of beast were to be nominally devoted; but\nfirst-born children were to be redeemed for five shekels, and the\nfirstlings of unclean beasts were also to be redeemed. The children\nof Aaron were to have no inheritance in the land. In these ways\nhowever, and by the payment to the priests of the tenth part of the\ntithes collected by the Levites, ample provision was made for them.\n\nFor the Levites, nine-tenths of all tithes of produce would appear to\nhave been not only sufficient, but far more than their proportion.\nAccording to the numbers reported in this book, twenty-two thousand\nLevites--about twelve thousand of them adult men--were to receive\ntithes from six hundred thousand. This would make the provision for\nthe Levite as much as for any five men of the tribes. An explanation\nis suggested that the regular payment of tithes could not be reckoned\nupon. There would always be Israelites who resented an obligation like\nthis; and as the duty of paying tithes, though enjoined in the law,\nwas a moral one, not enforced by penalty, the Levites were really in\nmany periods of the history of Israel in a state of poverty. It was\na complaint of Malachi even after the captivity, when the law was in\nforce, that the tithes were not brought to the temple storehouses.\nThe Deuteronomic laws of tithing, moreover, are different from those\ngiven in Numbers. While here we read of a single tithe which is to be\nfor the Levites, which, if paid, would be more than sufficient for\nthem, Deuteronomy speaks of an annual tithe of produce to be eaten by\nthe people at the central sanctuary by way of a festival, to which\nchildren, servants, and Levites were to be invited. Each third year\na special tithe was to be used in feasting, not necessarily at the\nsanctuary, and again the Levites were to have their share. It is\nsupposed by some that there were two annual tithings and in the third\nyear three tithings of the produce of the land. But this seems far more\nthan even a specially fertile country could bear. There was no rent to\nbe paid, of course; and if the tithes were used in a festival no great\ndifficulty might be found. But it is clear at all events that more\ndependence was placed on the free will of the people than on the law;\nand the Levites and priests must have suffered when religion fell into\nneglect. Israel was not ideally generous.\n\n\n2. WATER OF PURIFICATION.--The statute of xix. 1-22 is peculiar,\nand the rites it enjoins are full of symbolism. It is implied that\nwater alone was unable to remove the defilement caused by touching a\ndead body; but at the same time the taint was so common and might be\nincurred so far from the sanctuary that sacrifice could not always\nbe exacted. In order to meet the case an animal was to be offered,\nand the residue of its burning was to be kept for use whenever the\ndefilement of death had to be taken away.\n\nA red heifer was to be chosen, the colour of the animal pointing to\nthe hue of blood. The heifer was to be free from blemish, a type of\nvigorous and prolific life. The charge of the sacrifice was to be given\nto Eleazar the priest, for the high-priest himself might not undertake\na duty the performance of which caused uncleanness. The ceremonies must\ntake place not only outside the tabernacle court, but outside the camp,\nthat the intensity of the uncleanness to be transferred to the animal\nand purged by the sacrifice may be clearly understood. The heifer\nbeing slain, the priest takes of its blood and sprinkles it towards\nthe tent of meeting seven times, in lieu of the ordinary sprinkling on\nthe altar. The whole animal is then burnt, and while the flame ascends\nthe virtue of the residuent ashes is symbolically increased by certain\nother elements. These are cedar wood, which was believed to have\nspecial medicinal qualities, and also may have been chosen on account\nof the long life of the tree; some threads of scarlet wool which would\nrepresent the arterial blood, instinct with vital power; and hyssop\nwhich was employed in purification.\n\nThe priest, having presided at the sacrifice, was to wash his clothes\nin water and bathe his flesh and hold himself unclean till the even.\nThe assistant who fed the fire was in like manner unclean. These\nwere both to withdraw; and one who was clean was to gather the ashes\nof the burning and, having provided some clean vessel within the\ncamp, he was to store up the purifying ashes for future use by the\npeople. Finally, the person who did this last duty, having become\ntainted like the others, was to wash his clothes and be unclean for\nthe day. The ashes were to be used by mixing them with water to make\n\"water for pollution\"; that is, water to take away pollution. Special\ncare was to be exercised that only living water, or water from a\nflowing stream, should be used for this purpose. It was to be applied\nto the defiled person, vessel, or tent, by means of hyssop. But,\nagain, the man who used the water of purification in this way was to\nwash his clothes and be unclean until even.\n\nHere we have an extra-sacerdotal rite, not of worship--for as\nordinarily used there was no prayer to God, nor perhaps even the\nthought of appeal to God. It was religious, for the sense of defilement\nbelonged to religion; but when under the necessity of the occasion any\none applied the water of purification, his sense of acting the priestly\npart was reduced to the lowest point. The efficacy came through the\naction of the accredited priest when the heifer was sacrificed, it\nmight be a year previously. So, although provision was made for needs\noccurring far from the sanctuary, no opening was left for any one\nto claim the power belonging to the sacerdotal office. And in order\nto make this still more sure it was enacted (ver. 21), that though\nthe sprinkled water of purification cleansed the unclean, any one\nwho touched it being himself clean should _de facto_ be defiled. The\nwater was declared so sacred that unless in cases where it was really\nrequired no one would be disposed to meddle with it. The sanctity of\nthe tabernacle and the priesthood was symbolically carried forth to the\nmost distant parts of the land. All were to be on their guard lest they\nshould incur the judgment of God by abusing that which had ceremonial\nholiness and power.\n\nThe idea here is in a sense directly opposite to that which we\nassociate with the sacred word, by which Divine will is communicated\nand souls are begotten anew. To use that word, to make it known abroad\nis the duty of every one who has heard and believed. He diffuses\nblessing and is himself blessed. There is no strict law hedging about\nwith precautions the happy privilege of conveying to the sin-defiled\nthe message of forgiveness and life. And yet may we not call to\nrecollection here the words of Paul, \"I buffet my body, and bring it\ninto bondage; lest by any means, after that I have preached to others,\nI myself should be rejected.\" In a spiritual sense they should be clean\nwho bear the vessels of the Lord; and every deed done, every word\nspoken in the sacred Name, if not with purity of purpose and singleness\nof heart, involves in guilt him who acts and speaks. The privilege has\nits accompanying danger; and the more widely it is used in the thousand\norganisations within and without the Church, the more carefully do all\nwho use it need to guard the sanctity of the message and the Name. \"In\na great house there are not only vessels of gold and silver, but also\nof wood and of earth; and some unto honour, and some unto dishonour.\nIf a man therefore purge himself from these\"--the profane babblings of\nthose who do not handle the word of God aright--\"he shall be a vessel\nunto honour, sanctified, meet for the Master's use, prepared unto every\ngood work.\"\n\n\n3. DEFILEMENT BY THE DEAD.--The statute of the water of purification\nstands closely related to one form of uncleanness, that occasioned\nby death. When death took place in a tent, every one who came into\nthe tent and every one who was in the tent, every open vessel that\nhad no covering bound upon it, and the tent itself (ver. 18) were\ndefiled; and the taint could not be removed in less than seven days.\nWhoever in the open field touched one who had been slain with a\nsword, or had otherwise died, or touched the bone of a man, or a\ngrave--contracted like defilement. For purification the sacred water\nhad to be sprinkled on the defiled person, on the third day and again\non the seventh day. Not only the aspersion with sacred water, but,\nin addition, cleansing of clothes and of the body was necessary, in\norder to complete the removal of the taint. And further, while any\none was unclean from this cause, if he touched another, his touch\ncarried defilement that continued to the close of the day. To neglect\nthe statute of purification was to defile the tabernacle of Jehovah:\nhe who did so was to be cut off from his people.\n\nThe law was made stringent, as we have already seen, partly no doubt\nfor the purpose of preventing the spread of disease. And to that\nextent the preservation of health was presented as a religious duty;\nfor only in that sense can we understand the statement that he who\ndid not purify himself defiled the tabernacle of Jehovah. Yet the\nstringency cannot be altogether due to this, for a bone or a grave\nwould not often communicate infection. The general principle must be\nreceived by way of explanation, that death is peculiarly repugnant to\nthe life of God, and therefore contact with it, in any form, takes\naway the right of approach to the sanctuary. That this idea goes\nback to the fall and the death penalty then pronounced might seem a\nreasonable conclusion. But the same thought does not apply to the\ndefilement connected with birth. If the statute regarding uncleanness\nby death rested on the connection of death with sin, making \"death\nand mortal corruption an embodiment of sin,\" the thought was obscured\nby many other laws regarding uncleanness. The aim we must believe was\nto make the theocratic oversight of the people penetrate as many as\npossible of the incidents and contingencies of their existence.\n\n\n\n\n XVI\n\n _SORROW AND FAILURE AT KADESH_\n\n NUMBERS xx\n\n\nThere is a mustering at Kadesh of the scattered tribes, for now the\nend of the period of wandering approaches, and the generation that has\nbeen disciplined in the wilderness must prepare for a new advance.\nThe spies who searched Canaan were sent from Kadesh (xiii. 26), to\nwhich, in the second year from the exodus, the tribes had penetrated.\nNow, in the first month of the fortieth year it would seem, Kadesh is\nagain the headquarters. The adjacent district is called the desert of\nZin. Eastward, across the great plain of the Arabah, reaching from the\nDead Sea to the Elanitic Gulf, are the mountains of Seir, the natural\nrampart of Edom. To the head of the Gulf at Elath the distance is some\neighty miles in a straight line southward; to the southern end of the\nDead Sea it is about fifty miles. Kadesh is almost upon the southern\nborder of Canaan; but the way of the Negeb is barred by defeat, and\nIsrael must enter the Promised Land by another route. In preparation\nfor the advance the tribes gather from the wadies and plateaus in\nwhich they have been wandering, and at Kadesh or near it the earlier\nincidents of this chapter occur.\n\nFirst among them is the death of Miriam. She has survived the\nhardships of the desert and reached a very great age. Her time of\ninfluence and vigour past, all the joys of life now in the dim\nmemories of a century, she is glad, no doubt, when the call comes.\nIt was her happiness once to share the enthusiasm of Moses and to\nsustain the faith of the people in their leader and in God. But any\nservice of this kind she could render has been left behind. For some\ntime she has been able only now and then with feeble steps to move to\nthe tent of meeting that she might assure herself of the welfare of\nMoses. The tribes will press on to Canaan, but she shall never see it.\n\nHow is a life like this of Miriam's to be reckoned? Take into\naccount her faith and her faithfulness; but remember that both were\nmaintained with some intermixture of poor egotism; that while she\nhelped Moses she also claimed to rival and rebuke him; that while\nshe served Jehovah it was with some of the pride of a prophetess.\nHer devotion, her endurance, the long interest in her brother's\nwork, which indeed led to the great error of her life--these were\nher virtues, the old great virtues of a woman. So far as opportunity\nwent she doubtless did her utmost, with some independence of thought\nand decision of character. Even though she gave way to jealousy and\npassed beyond her right, we must believe that, on the whole, she\nserved her generation in loyalty to the best she knew, and in the\nfear of the Most High. But into what a strange disturbed current of\nlife was her effort thrown! Downcast, sorely burdened women, counting\nfor very little when they were cheerful or when they complained,\nheard Miriam's words and took them into their narrow thoughts, to\nresent her enthusiasm, perhaps, when she was enthusiastic, to grudge\nher the power she enjoyed, which to herself seemed so slight. In\nthe camp generally she had respect, and perhaps, once and again,\nshe was able to reconcile to Moses and to one another those whose\nquarrels threatened the common peace. When she was put forth from\nthe camp in the shame of her leprosy, all were affected, and the\nmarch was stayed till her time of separation was over. Was she one of\nthose women whose lot it is to serve others all their lives and to\nhave little for their service? Still, like many another, she helped\nto make Israel. Of good and evil, of Divine elements and some that\nare anything but Divine, lives are made up. And although we cannot\ngather the results of any one and tell its worth, the stream of being\nretains and the unerring judgment of God accepts whatever is sincere\nand good. Miriam from first to last fills but a few lines of sacred\nhistory; yet of her life, as of others, more has to be told; the end\ndid not come when she died at Kadesh and was buried outside Canaan.\n\n * * * * *\n\nSpread through a diversified and not altogether barren region, over\nmany square miles, the tribes have been able during the thirty-seven\nyears to provide themselves with water. Gathered more closely now,\nwhen the dry season begins they are in want. And at once complaints\nare renewed. Nor can we wonder much. In flaming sunshine, in the\nparched air of the heights and the stifling heat of the narrow valleys,\nthe cattle gasping and many of them dying, the children crying in\nvain for water, the little that is to be had, hot and almost putrid,\ncarefully divided, yet insufficient to give each family a little,--the\npeople might well lament their apparently inevitable fate. It may be\nsaid, \"They should have confided in God.\" But while that might apply\nin ordinary circumstances, would not be out of place if the whole\nhistory were ideal, the reality, once understood, forbids so easy a\ncondemnation of unbelief. Nothing is more terrible to endure, nothing\nmore fitted to make strong men weep or turn them into savage critics of\na leader and of Providence, than to see their children in the extremity\nof want which they cannot relieve. And a leader like Moses, patient as\nhe may have been of other complaints, should have been most patient of\nthis. When the people chode with him and said, \"Would God that we had\ndied when our brethren died before the Lord! And why have ye brought\nthe assembly of the Lord into this wilderness, that we should die,\nwe and our cattle?\" they ought surely to have been met with pity and\nsoothing words.\n\nIt is indeed a tragedy we are to witness when we come to the rock;\nand one element of it is the old age and the weary spirit of the\nleader. Who can tell what vexed his soul that day? how many cares\nand anxieties burdened the mind that was clear yet, but not so\ntolerant, perhaps, as once it had been? The years of Moses, his\nlong and arduous service of the people, are not remembered as they\nought to be. Even in their extremity the men of the tribes ought\nto have appealed to their great chief with all respect, instead of\nbreaking in upon him with reproaches. Was no experience sufficient\nfor these people? After the discipline of the wilderness, was the new\ngeneration, like that which had died, still a mere horde, ungrateful,\nrebellious? From the leader's point of view this thought could not\nfail to arise, and the old magnanimity did not drive it away.\n\nAnother point is the forbearance of Jehovah, who has no anger with\nthe people. The Divine Voice commands Moses to take his rod and go\nforth to the rock and speak to it before the assembly. This does not\nfall in with Moses' mood. Why is God not indignant with the men of\nthis new generation who seize the first opportunity to begin their\nmurmuring? Relapsing from his high inspiration to a poor human level,\nMoses begins to think that Jehovah, whose forgiveness he has often\nimplored on Israel's behalf, is too ready now to forgive. It is a\nfailing of the best men thus to stand for the prerogative of God\nmore than God Himself; that is, to mistake the real point of the\ncircumstances they judge and the Divine will they should interpret.\nThe story of Jonah shows the prophet anxious that Nineveh, the\ninveterate foe of Israel, the centre of proud, God-defying idolatry,\nshould be destroyed. Does God wish it to be spared, to repent and\nobtain forgiveness? So does not Jonah. His creed is one of doom\nfor wickedness. He resents the Divine mercy and, in effect, exalts\nhimself above the Most High. In like temper is Moses when he goes out\nfollowed by the crowd. There is the rock from which water shall be\nmade to flow. But with the thought in his mind that the people do not\ndeserve God's help, Moses takes the affair upon himself. The tragedy\nis fulfilled when his own feelings guide him more than the Divine\npatience, his own displeasure more than the Divine compassion; and\nwith the words on his lips, \"Hear now, ye rebels; shall we bring you\nforth water out of this rock?\" he smites it twice with his rod.\n\nFor the moment, forgetting Jehovah the merciful, Moses will himself\nact God; and he misrepresents God, dishonours God, as every one\nwho forgets Him is sure to do. Is he confident in the power of his\nwonder-working rod? Does he wish to show that its old virtue remains?\nHe will use it as if he were smiting the people as well as the rock.\nIs he willing that this thirsting multitude should drink? Yet he is\ndetermined to make them feel that they offend by the urgency with which\nthey press upon him for help. There have been crises in the lives of\nleaders of men when, with all the teaching of the past to inspire them,\nthey should have risen to a faith in God far greater than they ever\nexercised before; and more or less they have failed. This is not the\nwill of Providence, they have thought, though they should have known\nthat it was. They have said, \"Advance: but God goes not with you,\" when\nthey should have seen the heavenly light moving on. So Moses failed. He\ntouched his limit; and it was far short of that breadth of compassion\nwhich belongs to the Most Merciful. He stood as God, with the rod in\nhis hand to give the water, but with the condemnation upon his lips\nwhich Jehovah did not speak.\n\nIn this mood of assumed majesty, of moral indignation which has a\npersonal source, with an air of superiority not the simplicity of\ninspiration, a man may do what he will for ever regret, may betray a\nhabit of self-esteem which has been growing upon him and will be his\nruin if it is not checked. In the strong mind of Moses there had lain\nthe germs of hauteur. The early upbringing in an Egyptian court could\nnot fail to leave its mark, and the dignity of a dictator could not be\nsustained, after the anxieties of the first two years in the desert,\nwithout some slight growth of a tendency or disposition to look down\non people so spiritless, and play among them the part of Providence,\nthe decrees of which Moses had so often interpreted. But pride, even\nbeginning to show itself towards men, is an aping of God. Unconsciously\nthe mind that looks down on the crowd falls into the trick of a\nsuperhuman claim. Moses, great as he is, without personal ambition, the\nfriend of every Israelite, reaches unaware the hour when a habit long\nsuppressed lifts itself into power. He feels himself the guardian of\njustice, a critic not only of the lives of men but of the attitude of\nJehovah towards them. It is but for an hour; yet the evil is done. What\nappears to the uplifted mind justice, is arrogance. What is meant for a\ndefence of Jehovah's right, is desecration of the highest office a man\ncan hold under the Supreme. The words are spoken, the rock is struck in\npride; and Moses has fallen.\n\nThink of the realisation of this which comes when the flush of hasty\nresentment dies, and the true self which had been suppressed revives\nin humble thought. \"What have I done?\" is the reflection--\"What have\nI said? My rod, my hand, my will, what are they? My indignation!\nWho gave me the right to be indignant? A king against whom they\nhave revolted! A guardian of the Divine honour! Alas! I have denied\nJehovah. I, who stood for Him in my pride, have defamed Him in my\nvanity. The people who murmured, whom I rebuked, have sinned less\nthan I. They distrusted God, I have declared Him unmerciful, and\nthereby sown the seeds of distrust. Now I, too, am barred from\nIsrael's inheritance. Unworthy of the promise, I shall never cross\nthe border of God's land. Aaron my brother, we are the transgressors.\nBecause we have not honoured God to sanctify Him in the eyes of the\nchildren of Israel, therefore we shall not bring this assembly unto\nthe land He gives them.\" By the lips of Moses himself the oracle was\ngiven. It was tragical indeed.\n\nBut how could the brothers who had yielded to this dictatorial\nhierarchical temper be men of God again, fit for another stroke of\nwork for Him, unless, coming forth into action, their pride had\ndisclosed itself, and with whatever bad result shown its real nature?\nWe deplore the pride; we almost weep to see its manifestation; we\nhear with sorrow the judgment of Moses and Aaron. But well is it\nthat the worst should come to light, that the evil thing should be\nseen, God-dishonoring, sacrilegious; should be judged, repented of,\npunished. Moses must \"feel himself and find the blessedness of being\nlittle.\" \"By that sin fell the angels,\" that sin unconfessed. Here in\nopen sight of all, in hearing of all, Moses lays down the godhead he\nhad assumed, acknowledges unworthiness, takes his place humbly among\nthose who shall not inherit the promise. The worst of all happens\nto a man when his pride remains unrevealed, uncondemned; grows to\nmore and more, and he never discovers that he is attempting to carry\nhimself with the air of Providence, of Divinity.\n\nThe error of Moses was great, yet only showed him to be a man of like\npassions with ourselves. Who can realise the mercy and lovingkindness\nthat are in the heart of God, the danger of limiting the Holy One of\nIsrael? The murmuring of the Israelites against Jehovah had often\nbeen rebuked, had often brought them into condemnation. Moses had\nonce and again intervened as their mediator and saved them from\ndeath. Remembering the times when he had to speak of Jehovah's\nanger, he feels himself justified in his own resentment. He thought\nthe murmuring was over; it is resumed unexpectedly, the same old\ncomplaints are made and he is carried away by what appears zeal for\nJehovah. Yet there is in him even, the man, much more in God, a\nbetter than the seeming best. Pathetic indeed is it to find Moses\njudged as one who has failed from the high place he could have\nreached by a final effort of self-mastery, one more generous thought.\nAnd we see him fail at a point where we often fail. Sternly to judge\nour own right of condemning before we speak sternly in the name of\nGod; neither to do nor say anything which implies the assumption of\nknowledge, justice, charity we do not possess--how few of us are\nin these respects blameless for a day! Far back in sacred history\nthis high duty is presented so as to evoke the best endeavour of the\nChristian soul and warn it from the place of failure.\n\n * * * * *\n\nThere is preserved in the Book of Exodus (xxxvi.) a list of the Kings\nof Edom reaching down apparently to about the establishment of the\nmonarchy of Israel. Recent arch\u00e6ology sees no reason to question the\ngenuineness of this historical notice or the names of the Dukes of\nEdom given in the same passage. With varying boundaries the region\nover which they ruled extended southward from Moab and the Dead Sea\nas far as the Elanitic Gulf. Kadesh, considerably west of the Arabah,\nis described as being on its uttermost border. But the district\ninhabited by the Edomites proper was a narrow strip of rugged country\neastward of the range of Mount Seir. One pass giving entrance to the\nheart of Edom led by the base of Mount Hor towards Selah, afterwards\ncalled Petra, which occupied a fine but narrow valley in the heart of\nbroken mountains. To reach the south of Moab the Israelites desired\nprobably to take a road a good deal farther north. But this would\nhave led them by Bozrah the capital, and the king who reigned at the\ntime refused them the route. The message sent him in Moses' name\nwas friendly, even appealing. The brotherhood of Edom and Israel was\nclaimed; the sore travail of the tribes in Egypt and the deliverance\nwrought by Jehovah were given as reasons; promise was made that no\nharm should be done to field or vineyard: Israel would journey by\nthe king's way turning neither to the right nor the left. When the\nfirst request was refused Moses added that if his people drank of the\nwater while passing through Edom they would pay for it. The appeal,\nhowever, was made in vain. An attempt to advance without permission\nwas repelled. An armed force barred the way, and most reluctantly the\ndesert road was again taken.\n\nWe can easily understand the objection of the King of Edom. Many of\nthe defiles through which the main road wound were not adapted for\nthe march of a great multitude. The Israelites could scarcely have\ngone through Edom without injuring the fields and vineyards; and\nthough the undertaking was given in good faith by Moses, how could\nhe answer for the whole of that undisciplined host he was leading\ntowards Canaan? The safety of Edom lay in denying to other peoples\naccess to its strongholds. The difficulty of approaching them was\ntheir main security. Israel might go quietly through the land now;\nbut its armies might soon return with hostile intent. Water, too,\nwas very precious in some parts of Edom. Enough was stored in the\nrainy season to supply the wants of the inhabitants; beyond that\nthere was none to spare, and for this necessary of life money was\nno equivalent. A multitude travelling with cattle would have made\nscarcity, or famine,--might have left the region almost desolate.\nWith the information they had, Moses and Joshua may have believed\nthat there were no insuperable difficulties. Yet the best generalship\nmight have been unequal to the task of controlling Israel in the\npasses and among the cultivated fields of that singular country.\n\nThere is no need to go back on the history of Jacob and Esau in order\nto account for the apparent incivility of the King of Edom to the\nIsraelites and Moses. That quarrel had surely been long forgotten! But\nwe need not wonder if the kinship of the two peoples was no availing\nargument in the case. Those were not times when covenants like that\nproposed could be easily trusted, nor was Israel on an expedition the\nnature of which could reassure the Idum\u00e6ans. And we have parallels\nenough in modern life to show that from the only point of view the king\ncould take he was amply justified. There are demands men make on others\nwithout perceiving how difficult it will be to grant them, demands on\ntime, on means, on goodwill, demands that would involve moral as well\nas material sacrifice. The foolish intrusions of well-meaning people\nmay be borne for a time, but there is a limit beyond which they cannot\nbe suffered. Our whole life cannot be exposed to the derangements of\nevery scheme-maker, every claimant. If we are to do our own work well,\nit is absolutely necessary that a certain space shall be jealously\nguarded, where the gains of thought may be kept safely and the ideas\nrevealed to us may be developed. That any one's life should be open so\nthat travellers, even with some right of close fraternity, may pass\nthrough the midst of it, drink of the wells, and trample down the\nfields of growing purpose or ripening thought, this is not required.\nGood-will makes an open gate; Christian feeling makes one still wider\nand bids many welcome. But he who would keep his heart in fruitfulness\nmust be careful to whom he grants admission. There is beginning to be\na sort of jealousy of any one's right to his own reserve. It is not\na single Israel approaching from the West, but a score, with their\ndifferent schemes, who come from every side demanding right of way and\neven of abode. Each presses a Christian claim on whatever is wanted\nof our hospitality. But if all had what they desire there would be no\npersonal life left.\n\nOn the other hand, some whose highways are broad, whose wells and\nstreams are overflowing, whose lives are not fully engaged, show\nthemselves exclusive and inhospitable--like those proprietors of vast\nmoors who refuse a path to the waterfall or the mountain-top. Without\nEdom's excuse, some modern Idum\u00e6ans warn every enterprise off their\nbounds. Neither brotherhood nor any other claim is acknowledged. They\nwould find advantage, not injury, in the visit of those who bring\nnew enthusiasms and ideas to bear on existence. They would learn of\nother aims than occupy them, a better hope than they possess. Their\nsympathy would be enlisted in heavenly or humane endeavours, and\nnew alliances would quicken as well as broaden their life. But they\nwill not listen; they continue selfish to the end. Against all such\nChristianity has to urge the law of brotherhood and of sacrifice.\n\n * * * * *\n\nWe have assumed that Kadesh was on the western side of the Arabah,\nand it is necessary to take ver. 20 as referring to an incident that\noccurred after the Israelites had crossed the valley. Not otherwise\ncan we explain how they came to encamp among the mountains on the\neastern side. The repulse must have been sustained by the tribes\nafter they had left Kadesh and penetrated some distance into the\nnorthern defiles of Idum\u00e6a. Bozrah, the capital, appears to have been\nsituated about half way between Petra and the southern extremity of\nthe Dead Sea, and a force issuing from that stronghold would divert\nthe march southward so that the Israelites could safely encamp only\nwhen they reached the open plain near Mount Hor. Hither therefore\nthey retreated: and here it was that Moses and Aaron were parted. The\ntime had come for the high priest to be gathered to his people.\n\nScarcely any locality in the whole track of the wandering is better\nidentified than this. From the plain of the Arabah the mountains rise\nin a range parallel to the valley, in ridges of sandstone, limestone,\nand chalk, with cliffs and peaks of granite. The defile that leads by\nMount Hor to Petra is peculiarly grand, for here the range attains\nits greatest height. \"Through a narrow ravine,\" says one traveller,\n\"we ascended a steep mountain side, amid a splendour of colour from\nbare rock or clothing verdure, and a solemnity of light on the broad\nsummits, of shade in the profound depths--a memory for ever....\nIt was the same narrow path through which in old times had passed\nother trains of camels laden with the merchandise of India, Arabia,\nand Egypt. And thus having ascended, we had next a long descent\nto the foot of Mount Hor, which stands isolated.\" The mountain\nrises about four thousand feet above the Arabah and has a peculiar\ndouble crest. On its green pastures there graze flocks of sheep and\ngoats; and inhabited caves--used perhaps since the days of the old\nHorites--are to be seen here and there. The ascent of the mountain\nis aided by steps cut in the rock, \"indeed a tolerably complete\nwinding staircase,\" for the chapel or mosque on the summit, said to\ncover the grave of Aaron, is a notable Arab sanctuary, resorted to\nby many pilgrims. \"From the roof of the tomb--now only an ordinary\nsquare building with a dome--northward and southward, a hilly desert;\neastward, the mountains of Edom, within which Petra lies hid;\nwestward, the desert of the Arabah, or wilderness of Zin; beyond\nthat, the desert of Et-T\u00eeh; beyond that again, in the far horizon,\nthe blue-tinted hills of the Land of Promise.\"\n\nSuch is the mountain at the foot of which Israel lay encamped when\nthe Lord said unto Moses, \"Take Aaron and Eleazar his son, and bring\nthem up unto Mount Hor; and strip Aaron of his garments, and put them\nupon Eleazar his son: and Aaron shall be gathered unto his people\nand shall die there.\" We imagine the sorrowful gaze of the multitude\nfollowing the three climbers, the aged brothers who had borne so long\nthe burden and heat of the day, and Eleazar, already well advanced in\nlife, who was to be invested with his father's office. Coming soon\nafter the death of Miriam, this departure of Aaron broke sharply one\nother link that still bound Israel with its past. The old times were\nreceding, the new had not yet come into sight.\n\nThe life of a good man may close mournfully. While some in leaving\nthe world cross cheerfully the river beyond which the smiling fields\nof the heavenly land are full in view, others there are who, even\nwith the faith of the Conqueror of death to sustain them, have no\ngladdening prospect at the last. Only from a distance Aaron saw\nthe Land of Promise; from so great a distance that its beauty and\nfruitfulness could not be realised. The sullen gleam of the Lake of\nSodom, lying in its grim hollow, was visible away to the north.\nBesides that the dim eyes could make out little. But Edom lay below;\nand the tribes would have a great circuit round that inhospitable\nland, would have to traverse another desert beyond the horizon to\nthe east, ere they could reach Moab and draw near to Canaan. A true\npatriot, Aaron would think more of the people than of himself. And\nthe confidence he had in the friendliness of God and the wisdom of\nhis brother would scarcely dispel the shadow that settled on him as\nhe forecast the journey of the tribes and saw the difficulties they\nwere yet to meet. So not a few are called away from the world when\nthe great ends for which they have toiled are still remote. The cause\nof liberty or of reformation with which life has been identified may\neven appear farther from success than years before. Or again, the\nclose of life may be darkened by family troubles more pressing than\nany that were experienced earlier. A man may be heavily burdened\nwithout distrusting God on his own account, or doubting that in the\nlong run all shall be well. He may be troubled because the immediate\nprospect shows no escape from painful endurance for those he loves.\nHe does not sorrow perhaps that he has found the promises of life to\nbe illusory; but he is grieved for dear friends who must yet make\nthat discovery, who shall travel many a league and never win the\nbattle or pass beyond the wilderness.\n\nThe mind of Aaron as he went to his death was darkened by the\nconsciousness of a great failure. Kadesh lay westward across the\nvalley, and the thought of what took place there was with the\nbrothers as they climbed Mount Hor and stood upon its summit. They\nhad repented, but they had not yet forgiven themselves. How could\nthey, when they saw in the temper of the people too plain proofs\nthat their lese-majesty had borne evil fruit? It needs much faith\nto be sure that God will remedy the evil we have done; and so long\nas the means cannot be seen, the shadow of self-reproach must\nremain. Many a good man, climbing the last slope, feels the burden\nof transgressions committed long before. He has done his utmost to\nrestore the defences of truth and rebuild the altars of witness which\nin thoughtless youth or proud manhood he cast down. But circumstances\nhave hindered the work of reparation; and many who saw his sin have\npassed far beyond the reach of his repentance. The thought of past\nfaults may sadly obscure the close of a Christian life. The end would\nindeed be hopeless often were it not for trust in the omnipotent\ngrace which brings again that which was driven away and binds up that\nwhich was broken. Yet since the very work of God and the victory of\nChrist are made more difficult by things a believer has done, is it\npossible that he should always have happy recollections of the past\nas life draws near its end?\n\nIt was no doubt honourable to Aaron that his death was appointed to\nbe on that mountain in Seir. Old as he was, he would never think of\ncomplaining that he was ordained to climb it. Yet to the tired limbs\nit was a steep, difficult path, a way of sorrow. Here, also, we find\nresemblance to the close of many a worthy life. High office in the\nChurch has been well served, overflowing wealth has been used in\nbeneficence; but at the last reverses have come. The man who was always\nprosperous is now stripped of his possessions. Darkened in mind by\nsuccessive losses, bereaved of friends and of power, he has to climb\na dreary mountain-path to the sharp end. It may be really honourable\nto such a man that God has thus appointed his death to be not in the\nmidst of luxury, but on the rugged peak of loss. Understanding things\naright, he should say: \"The Lord gave, and the Lord hath taken away;\nblessed be the name of the Lord.\" But if dependence is felt as shame,\nif he who gave freely to others feels it a sore thing to receive from\nothers, who can have the heart to blame the good man because he does\nnot triumph here? And if he has to climb alone, no Eleazar with him,\nscarcely one human aid, what shall we say? Now life must gird itself\nand go whither it would not. Sad is the journey, but not into night.\nThe Christian does not impeach Divine providence nor grieve that\nearthly good is finally taken away. Though his life has been in his\ngenerosity, not in his possessions, yet he will confess that the last\nbitter trial is needful to the perfecting of faith.\n\nShould the believer triumph over death through Christ? It is\nhis privilege; but some display unwarranted complacency. They\nhave confidence in the work of Christ; they boast that they rest\neverything on Him. But is it well with them if they have no sorrow\nbecause of days and years that ran to waste? Is it well with them if\nthey deplore no failure in Christian effort when the reason is that\nthey never gave heart and strength to any difficult task? Who can be\nsatisfied with the apparent victory of faith at the last of one who\nnever had high hopes for himself and others, and therefore was never\ndisappointed? Better the sorrowful ending to a life that has dared\ngreat things and been defeated, that has cherished a pure ideal and\ncome painfully short of it, than the exultation of those who even as\nChristians have lived to themselves.\n\nPerhaps the circumstances that attended the death of Aaron were\nto him the finest discipline of life. Climbing the steep slope at\nthe command of God, would he not feel himself brought into a closer\nrelation with the Eternal Will? Would he not feel himself separated\nfrom the world and gathered up into the quiet massiveness of life\nwith Him who is from everlasting to everlasting? The years of a high\npriest, dealing constantly with sacred things and symbols, might\neasily fall into a routine not more helpful to generous thought and\nspiritual exaltation than the habits of secular life. One might exist\namong sacrifices and purifications till the mind became aware of\nnothing beyond ritual and its orderly performance. True, this had not\nbeen the case with Aaron during a considerable portion of the time\nsince he began his duties. There had been many events by means of\nwhich Jehovah broke in upon the priests with His great demands. But\nthirty-seven years had been comparatively uneventful. And now the\nlittle world of camp and tabernacle court, the sacred shrine with its\nark, the symbolic dwelling-place of God, must have their contrast\nin the broad spaces filled with gleaming light, the blue vault, the\nwidespread hills and valleys, the heavens which are Jehovah's throne,\nthe earth which is His footstool. The bustle of Israel's little life\nis left behind for the calm of the mountain land. The high priest\nfinds another vestibule of the dwelling of Jehovah than that which\nhe has been accustomed to enter with sprinkled blood and the pungent\nfumes of the incense.\n\nIs it not good thus to be called away from the business of the world,\nimmersed in which every day men have lost the due proportions of\nthings, both of what is earthly and what is spiritual? They have\nto leave the computations recorded in their books, and what bulks\nlargely in the gossip of the way and the news of the town; they are\nto climb where greater spaces can be seen, and human life, both as\nbrief and as immortal, shall be understood in its relations to God.\nOften those who have this call addressed to them are most unwilling\nto obey. It is painful to lose the old standards of proportion, to\nhear no longer the familiar noise of wheels, to see no machinery,\nno desks, no ledgers, to read no newspapers, to have the quiet, the\nslow-moving days, the moonless or moonlit nights. But if reflection\nfollows, as it should, and brings wisdom, the change has saved a\nman who was near to being lost. The things he toiled for once, as\nwell as the things he dreaded,--that success, this breath of adverse\nopinion,--seem little in the new light, scarcely disturb the new\natmosphere. One thus called apart with God, learning what are the\nreal elements of life, may look with pity on his former self, yet\ngather out of the experience that had small value, for the most part,\nhere and there a jewel of price. And the wise, becoming wiser, will\nfeel preparation made for the greater existence that lies beyond.\n\nMoses accompanied his brother to the mountain top. By his hands,\nwith all considerateness, the priestly robes were taken from Aaron's\nshoulders and put on Eleazar. The true friend he had all along relied\nupon was with the dying man at the last, and closed his eyes. In this\nthere was a palliation of the decree under which it would have been\nterrible to suffer alone; yet in the end the loneliness of death had\nto be felt. We know a Friend who passed through death for us, and\nmade a way into the higher life, but still we have our dread of the\nsolitude. How much heavier must it have weighed when no clear hope of\nimmortality shone upon the hill. The vastness of nature was around\nthe dying priest of Israel, his face was turned to the skies. But\nthe thrill of Divine love we find in the touch of Christ did not\nreassure him. \"These all ... received not the promise, God having\nprovided some better thing concerning us, that apart from us they\nshould not be made perfect.\"\n\nEleazar followed Aaron and took up the work of the priesthood,\nnot less ably, let us believe, yet not precisely with the same\nspirit, the same endowments. And indeed to have one in all respects\nlike Aaron would not have served. The new generation, in new\ncircumstances, needs a new minister. Office remains; but, as history\nmoves on, it means always something different. When the hour comes\nthat requires a clear step to be taken away from old notions and\ntraditions of duty, neither he who holds the office nor those to whom\nhe has ministered should complain or doubt. It is not good that one\nshould cling to work merely because he has served well and may still\nseem able to serve; often it is the case that before death commands a\nchange the time for one has come. Even the men who are most useful to\nthe world, Paul, Apollos, Luther, do not die too soon. It may appear\nto us that a man who has done noble work has no successor. When,\nfor instance, England loses its Dr. Arnold, Stanley, Lightfoot, and\nwe look in vain for one to whom the robes are becoming, we have to\ntrust that by some education they did not foresee the Church has to\nbe perfected. The same theory, nominally, is not the same when others\nundertake to apply it. The same ceremonies have another meaning\nwhen performed by other hands. There are ways to the full fruition\nof Christ's government which go as far about as Israel's to Canaan\nround the land of Moab, for a time as truly retrogressive. But the\ngreat Leader the one High Priest of the new covenant, never fails\nHis Church or His world, and the way that does not hasten, as well as\nthat which makes straight for the goal, is within His purpose, leads\nto the fulfilment among men of His mediatorial design.\n\n\n\n\n XVII\n\n _THE LAST MARCH AND THE FIRST CAMPAIGN_\n\n NUMBERS xxi\n\n\nIt has been suggested in a previous chapter that the repulse of the\nIsraelites by the King of Arad took place on the occasion when, after\nthe return of the spies, a portion of the army endeavoured to force its\nway into Canaan. If that explanation of the passage with which chap.\nxxi. opens cannot be accepted, then the movements of the tribes after\nthey were driven back from Edom must have been singularly vacillating.\nInstead of turning southward along the Arabah they appear to have moved\nnorthward from Mount Hor and made an attempt to enter Canaan at the\nsouthern end of the Dead Sea. Arad was in the Negeb or South Country,\nand the Canaanites there, keeping guard, must have descended from the\nhills and inflicted a defeat which finally closed that way.\n\nFrom the time of the departure from Kadesh onward no mention is made\nof the pillar of cloud. It may have still moved as the standard of\nthe host; yet the unsuccessful attempt to pass through Edom, followed\npossibly by a northward march, and then by a southward journey to the\nElanitic Gulf when they \"compassed Mount Seir many days\" (Deut. ii.\n1), would appear to prove that the authoritative guidance had in some\nway failed. It is a suggestion, which, however, can only be advanced\nwith diffidence, that after the day at Kadesh when the words fell from\nMoses' lips, \"Hear now, ye rebels,\" his power as a leader declined, and\nthat the guidance of the march fell mainly into the hands of Joshua,--a\nbrave soldier indeed, but no acknowledged representative of Jehovah.\nIt is at all events clear that attempts had now to be made in one\ndirection and another to find a feasible route. Moses may have retired\nfrom the command, partly on account of age, but even more because he\nfelt that he had in part lost his authority. Israel, moreover, had to\nbecome a military nation: and Moses, though nominally the head of the\ntribes, had to stand aside to a great extent that the new development\nmight proceed. In a short time Joshua would be sole leader; already he\nappears to hold the military command.\n\nThe journey from Mount Hor to the borders of Moab by way of the Red\nSea, or Y\u00e2m-Suph, is very briefly noticed in the narrative. Oboth,\nIye-abarim, Zared, are the only three names mentioned in chap. xxi.\nbefore the border of Moab is reached. Chap. xxxiii. gives Zalmonah,\nPunon, Oboth, and lastly Iye-abarim, which is said to be in the\nborder of Moab. The mention of these names suggests nothing as to the\nextremely trying nature of the journey; that is only indicated by\nthe statement, \"the soul of the people was much discouraged because\nof the way.\" The truth is, that of all the stages of the wandering,\nthese along the Arabah, and from the Elanitic Gulf eastward and\nnorthward to the valley of Zared, were perhaps the most difficult\nand perilous. The Wady Arabah is \"an expanse of shifting sands,\nbroken by innumerable undulations, and counter-sected by a hundred\nwatercourses.\" Along this plain the route lay for fifty miles, in\nthe track of the furious sirocco and amidst terrible desolation.\nTurning eastward from the palm-groves of Elath and the beautiful\nshores of the Gulf, the way next entered a tract of the Arabian\nwilderness outside the border of Edom. Oboth lay, perhaps, east from\nMaan, still an inhabited city, and the point of departure for one\nwho journeys from Palestine into central Arabia. Out from Maan this\ndesert lies, and is thus described:--\"Before and around us extended\na wide and level plain, blackened over with countless pebbles of\nbasalt and flint, except when the moonbeams gleamed white on little\nintervening patches of clear sand, or on yellowish streaks of\nwithered grass, the scanty produce of the winter rains, and now dried\ninto hay. Over all a deep silence which even our Arab companions\nseemed fearful of breaking; when they spoke it was in a half whisper\nand in few words, while the noiseless tread of our camels sped\nstealthily but rapidly through the gloom without disturbing its\nstillness.\"[9] For one hundred miles the route for Israel lay through\nthis wilderness; and it is hardly possible to escape the conviction\nthat although little is said of the experiences of the way the tribes\nmust have suffered enormously and been greatly reduced in number. As\nfor cattle, we must conclude that hardly any survived. Where camels\nsustain themselves with the greatest difficulty, oxen and sheep would\ncertainly perish. There had come the necessity for a rapid advance,\nto be made at whatever hazard. All that would retard the progress\nof the people had to be sacrificed. There is indeed some ground for\nthe supposition that part of the tribes remained near Kadesh while\nthe main body made the long and perilous detour. The army entering\nCanaan by way of Jericho would as soon as possible open communication\nwith those who had been left behind.\n\nThe only recorded episode belonging to the period of this march is\nthat of the fiery serpents. In the Arabah and the whole North Arabian\nregion the cobra, or _naja haie_, is common, and is superstitiously\ndreaded. Other serpents are so innocuous by comparison that this\nchiefly receives the attention of travellers. One incident is\nrecorded thus by Mr. Stuart-Glennie:--\"Two cobras have been caught,\nand one, which has been dexterously pinned by the neck in the slit\nend of a stick, its captor comes up triumphantly to exhibit.... After\na time the fellow let it go, refusing to kill it, and permitting it\nto glide away unharmed. This I understood to be from fear--fear of\nthe vengeance after death of what, in life, had been incapable of\ndefending itself. At Petra ... the snakes which Hamilton, a fearless\nhunter of them, killed, the Arabs would not allow to lie within the\nencampment, asserting that we should thus bring the whole snake-tribe\nto which the individual belonged to avenge the death of their\nkinsman.\" Whether all the serpents that attacked the Israelites were\ncobras is doubtful; but the description \"fiery\" seems to point to\nthe effects of the cobra-poison, which produces an intense burning\nsensation in the whole body. Another explanation of the adjective is\nfound in the metallic sparkle of the reptiles.\n\n\"Much people of Israel died\" of the bites of these serpents, which,\ndisturbed by the travellers as they went sullenly and carelessly\nalong, issued from crevices of the ground and from the low shrubs\nin which they lurked, and at once fastened on feet and hands. The\npeculiar character of the new enemy caused universal alarm. As one\nand another fell writhing to the ground, and after a few convulsive\nmovements died in agony, a feeling of terrified revulsion spread\nthrough the ranks. Pestilence was natural, familiar, as compared with\nthis new punishment which their murmuring about the light food and\nthe thirst of the desert had brought on them. The serpent, lithe and\nsubtle, scarcely seen in the twilight, creeping into the tents at\nnight, quick at any moment, without provocation, to use its poisoned\nfangs, has appeared the hereditary enemy of man. As the instrument\nof the Tempter it was connected with the origin of human misery; it\nappeared the embodied evil which from the very dust sprang forth to\nseek the evil-doer. Many ways had Jehovah of reaching men who showed\ndistrust and resented His will. This was in a sense the most dreadful.\n\nThe serpents that lurked in the Israelites' way and darted suddenly\nupon them are always felt to be analogues of the subtle sins that\nspring on man and poison his life. What traveller knows the moment\nwhen he may feel in his soul the sharp sting of evil desire that\nwill burn in him to a deadly fever? Men who have been wounded can,\nfor a time, hide from fellow-travellers their mortal hurt. They keep\non the march and make shift to look like others. Then the madness\nreveals itself. Words are spoken, deeds are done, that show the vile\ninoculation taking effect. By-and-by there is another moral death.\nHumanity may well fear the power of evil thoughts, of lusts, of\nenvious feelings, that serpent-like attack and madden the soul; may\nwell look up and cry aloud to God for a sufficient remedy. No herb\nnor balm to be found in the gardens or fields of earth is an antidote\nto this poison; nor can the surgeon excise the tainted flesh, or\ndestroy the virus by any brand of penance.\n\nResuming his generous part as intercessor for the people, Moses\nsought and found the means to help them. He was to make a serpent\nof brass, an image of the foe, and erect it on a standard full in\nsight of the camp, and to it the eyes of the stricken people were\nto be turned. If they realised the Divine purpose of grace and\ntrusted Jehovah while they looked, the power of the poison would be\ndestroyed. The serpent of brass was nothing in itself, was, as long\nafterwards Hezekiah declared it to be, _nehushtan_; but as a symbol\nof the help and salvation of God it served the end. The stricken\nrevived: the camp, almost in a panic through superstitious fear, was\ncalmed. Once more it was known that He who smote the sinful, in wrath\nremembered mercy. It must be assumed that there was repentance and\nfaith on the part of those who looked. The serpents appear as the\nmeans of punishment, and the poison loses its effect with the growth\nof the new spirit of submission. It has rightly been pointed out that\nthe heathen view of the serpent as a healing power has no countenance\nhere. That singular belief must have had its origin in the worship\nof the serpent which arose from dread of it as an embodiment of\ndemoniacal energy. Our passage treats it as a creature of God, ready,\nlike the lightning and the pestilence, or like the frogs and insects\nof the Egyptian plagues, to be used as an instrument in bringing home\nto men their sins.\n\nAnd when our Lord recalled the episode of the healing of Israel by\nmeans of the brazen serpent, He certainly did not mean that the\nimage in itself was in any sense a type or even symbol of Him. It\nwas lifted up; He was to be lifted up: it was to be looked upon\nwith the gaze of repentance and faith; He is to be regarded, as He\nhangs on the cross, with the contrite, believing look: it signified\nthe gracious interposition of God, who was Himself the True Healer;\nChrist is lifted up and gives Himself on the cross in accordance\nwith the Father's will, to reveal and convey His love--these are\nthe points of similarity. \"As Moses lifted up the serpent in the\nwilderness, even so must the Son of Man be lifted up.\" The uplifting,\nthe healing, are symbolic. The serpent-image fades out of sight.\nChrist is seen giving Himself in generous love, showing us the way of\nlife when He dies, the just for the unjust. He is the power of God\nunto salvation. With Him we die that He may live in us. He judges us,\ncondemns us as sinners, and at the same time turns our judgment into\nacquittal, our condemnation into liberty. Israel's past and the grace\nof Jehovah to the stricken tribes are connected by our Lord's words\nwith the redemption provided through His own sacrifice. The Divine\nHealer of humanity is there and here; but here in spiritual life, in\nquickening grace, not in an empirical symbol. Christ on the cross is\nno mere sign of a higher energy; the very energy is with Him, most\npotent when He dies.\n\nLike the serpent poison, that of sin creates a burning fever, a\nmortal disease. But into all the springs and channels of infected\nlife the renovating grace of God enters through the long deep look\nof faith. We see the Man, our brother, full of sympathy, the Son of\nGod our sin-bearer. The pity is profound as our need; the strong\nspiritual might, sin-conquering, life-giving, is enough for each,\nmore than sufficient for all. We look--to wonder, to hope, to trust,\nto love, to rejoice with joy unspeakable and full of glory. We see\nour condemnation, the handwriting of ordinances that is against\nus--and we see it cancelled through the sacrifice of our Divine\nRedeemer. Is it the death that moves us first? Then we perceive love\nstronger than death, love that can never die. Our souls go forth to\nfind that love, they are bound by it for ever to the Infinite Truth,\nthe Eternal Purity, the Immortal Life. We find ourselves at length\nwhole and strong, fit for the enterprises of God. The trumpet call is\nheard; we respond with joy. We will fight the good fight of faith,\nsuffering and achieving all through Christ.\n\n * * * * *\n\nAt Iye-abarim, the Heaps of the Outlands, \"which is toward the\nsunrising,\" the worst of the desert march was over. That the long and\ndreary wilderness did not swallow up the host is, humanly speaking,\nmatter of astonishment. Yet singular light is thrown on the journey\nby an incident recorded by Mr. Palmer. In the midst of the broken\ncountry extending from the neighbourhood of the ancient Kadesh to the\nArabah, he and his companions encamped at the head of the Wady Abu\nTaraimeh, which slopes to the south-east. Here in the midst of the\ndesolate mountains a quite young girl, small, solitary traveller, was\nfound. She was on her way to Abdeh, some twenty miles behind, and had\ncome from a place called Hesmeh, six days' journey beyond Akabah, a\ndistance of some hundred and fifty miles. \"She had been without bread\nor water, and had only eaten a few herbs to support herself by the\nway.\" The simple trust of the child could achieve what strong men\nmight have pronounced impossible. And the Israelites, knowing little\nof the road, trusted and hoped and pressed on till the green hills of\nMoab were at last in sight. The march was eastward of the present\nhighway, which keeps within the border of Edom and passes through\nEl Buseireh, the ancient Bozrah. We may suppose that the Israelites\nfollowed a track afterwards chosen for a Roman road and still\ntraceable. The valley of Zared, perhaps the modern Feranjy, would be\nreached about fifteen miles east from the southern gulf of the Dead\nSea. Thence, striking on a watercourse and keeping to the desert side\nof Ar, the modern Rabba, the Hebrews would have a march of about\ntwenty miles to the Arnon, which at that time formed the boundary\nbetween Moab and the Amorites.\n\nAt this point the history incorporates, why we cannot tell, part of\nan old song from the \"Book of the Wars of Jehovah.\"\n\n \"Vaheb in Suphah,\n And the valleys of Arnon,\n And the slope of the valleys\n That inclineth toward the dwelling of Ar,\n And leaneth upon the border of Moab.\"\n\nThe picturesque topography of this chant, the meaning of which as a\nwhole is obscured for us by the first line, may be the sole reason of\nits quotation. If we read \"Vaheb in storm\" we have a word-picture of\nthe scene under impressive conditions; and if the storm is that of\nwar the relique may belong to the time of the contest described in\nver. 26 when the Amorite chief, crossing Jordan, gained the northern\nheights and drove the Moabites in confusion across the Arnon toward\nthe stronghold of Ar, some twelve or fifteen miles to the south. Yet\nanother ancient song is connected with a station called Beer, or the\nWell, some spot in the wilderness north of the Arnon valley. Moses\npoints out the place where water may be found, and as the digging\ngoes on the chant is heard:\n\n \"Spring up, O well; sing ye unto it:\n The well which the princes digged,\n Which the nobles of the people delved,\n With the sceptre, and with their staves.\"\n\nThe seeking of the precious water by rude art in a thirsty valley\nkindles the mind of some poet of the people. And his song is\nspirited, with ample recognition of the zeal of the princes who\nthemselves take part in the labour. While they dig he chants, and the\npeople join in the song till the words are fixed in their memory, so\nas to become part of the traditions of Israel.\n\nThe finding of a spring, the discovery that by their own effort they\ncan reach the living water laid up for them beneath the sand, is\nan event to the Israelites, worth preserving in a national ballad.\nWhat does this imply? That the resources of nature and the means of\nunlocking them were still only beginning to be understood? We are\nalmost compelled to think so, whatever conclusions this may involve.\nAnd Israel, slowly finding out the Divine provision lying beneath the\nsurface of things, is a type of those who very gradually discover\nthe possibilities that are concealed beneath the seemingly ordinary\nand unpromising. By the beaten tracks of life, in its arid valleys,\nthere are, for those who dig, wells of comfort, springs of truth and\nsalvation. Men are athirst for inspiration, for power. They think of\nthese as endowments for which they must wait. In point of fact they\nhave but to open the fountains of conscience and of generous feeling\nin order to find what they desire. Multitudes faint by the way because\nthey will not seek for themselves the water of Divine truth that would\nreinvigorate their being. When we trust to wells opened by others we\ncannot obtain the supply suited to our special need. Each for himself\nmust discover Divine providence, duty, conviction, the springs of\nrepentance and of love. The many wait, and never get beyond spiritual\ndependence. The few, some with sceptre, some with staff, dig for\nthemselves and for the rest wells of new ardour and sustaining thought.\nThe whole of human life, we may say, has beneath its surface veins and\nrills of heavenly water. In heart and conscience we can find the will\nof our Maker, the springs of His promises, revelations of His power\nand love. More than we know of the living water that flows through the\nworld of humanity like a river has its source in springs that have been\ndug in waste places by those who reflected, who saw in man's world and\nman's soul the work of the \"faithful Creator.\"\n\n * * * * *\n\nFrom Beer in the wilderness the march skirted the green fields and\nvalleys of the country once held by the Moabites, now under Sihon the\nAmorite. When they had gone but a few stages along this route the\nleaders of the host found it necessary to enter into negotiations.\nThey were now some twenty miles only by road from the fords of\nJordan, but Heshbon, a strong fortress, confronted them. The Amorites\nmust be either conciliated or attacked. This time there was no\ncircuitous way that could be taken; a critical hour had come.\n\nThe presence of the Amorites on the eastern side of Jordan is accounted\nfor in a passage extending from vv. 26-30. Moab had apparently, as\nat a later time referred to by one of the prophets, been at ease,\nresting securely behind her mountain rampart. Suddenly the Amorite\nwarriors, crossing the ford of Jordan and pressing up the defile, had\nattacked and taken Heshbon; and with the loss of that fortress Moab was\npractically defenceless. Field by field the old inhabitants had been\ndriven back, out into the desert, southward beyond the Arnon. Even as\nfar as Ar itself the victors had carried fire and sword. Retiring, they\nleft all south of the Arnon to the Moabites, and themselves occupied\nthe country from Arnon to Jabbok, a stretch of sixty miles. The song of\nvv. 27-30 commemorates this ancient war:--\n\n \"Come ye to Heshbon,\n Let the city of Sihon be built and established;\n For a fire is gone out of Heshbon,\n A flame from the city of Sihon:\n It hath devoured Ar of Moab,\n The Lords of the High Places of Arnon.\n Woe to thee, Moab!\n Thou art undone, O people of Chemosh.\"\n\nThe chant rejoicing over the defeated goes on to tell how the sons\nof Moab fled, and her daughters were taken captive; how the arms of\nthe Amorite were victorious from Heshbon to Dibon, over Nophah and\nMedeba. The Israelites arriving soon after this sanguinary conflict,\nfound the conquered region immediately beyond the Arnon open to their\nadvance. The Amorites had not yet occupied the whole of the land;\ntheir power was concentrated about Heshbon, which according to the\nsong had been rebuilt.\n\nThe request made of Sihon to allow the passage of a people on\nits way to Jordan and the country beyond came possibly at a time\nwhen the Amorites were scarcely prepared for resistance. They had\nbeen successful, but their forces were insufficient for the large\ndistrict they had taken, larger considerably than that on the other\nside of Jordan from which they had migrated. In the circumstances\nSihon would not grant the request. These Israelites were bent on\nestablishing themselves as rivals: the answer accordingly was a\nrefusal, and war began. Refreshed by the spoil of the fields of\nArnon, and now almost within sight of Canaan, the Hebrew fighting\nmen were full of ardour. The conflict was sharp and decisive.\nApparently in a single battle the power of Sihon was broken. Leaving\nhis fortress the Amorite chief had gone out against Israel \"into the\nwilderness\"; and at Jahaz the fight went against him. From Arnon to\nJabbok his land lay open to the conquerors.\n\nAnd having once tasted success the warriors of Israel did not sheathe\ntheir swords. The fortress of Amman guarded the land of the Ammonites\nso strongly that it seemed for the time perilous to strike in that\ndirection. Crossing the valley of the Jabbok, however, and leaving\nthe fierce Ammonites unattacked, the Israelites had Bashan before\nthem; a fertile region of innumerable streams, populous, and with\nmany strongholds and cities. There was hesitation for a time, but the\noracle of Jehovah reassured the army. Og the king of Bashan waited\nthe attack at Edrei in the north of his kingdom, about forty miles\neast from the Sea of Galilee. Israel was again victorious. The king\nof Bashan, his sons, and his army were cut to pieces.\n\nSuch was the rapid success the Israelites had in their first\ncampaign, amazing enough, though partly explained by the strifes and\nwars which had reduced the strength of the peoples they attacked.\nWe must not suppose, however, that though the Amorites and the\npeople of Bashan were defeated, their lands were occupied or could\nbe occupied at once. What had been done was rather in the way of\ndefending the passage of the Jordan than providing a settlement for\nany of the tribes. When the Reubenites, Gadites, and Manassites came\nto dwell in those districts east of the Jordan, they had to make good\ntheir ground against the old inhabitants who remained.\n\nThe army had passed into the north, but the main body of the people\ndescended from the neighbourhood of Heshbon by a pass leading to the\nJordan Valley. The return of the victorious troops after a few months\ngave them the assurance that at last they could safely prepare for\nthe long expected entrance into the Land of Promise.\n\nSuffering and the discipline of the wilderness had educated the\nIsraelites for the day of action. By what a long and tedious journey\nthey reached their success! Behind them, yet with them still, was\nSinai, whose lightnings and awful voices made them aware of the power\nof Jehovah into covenant with whom they entered, whose law they\nreceived. As a people bound solemnly to the unseen Almighty God they\nleft that mountain and journeyed towards Kadesh. But the covenant had\nneither been thoroughly accepted nor thoroughly understood. They began\ntheir march from the mountain of the Lord as the people of Jehovah,\nyet expecting that He was to do all for them, require little at their\nhands. The other side of privilege, the duty they owed to God, had\nto be impressed by many a painful chastisement, by the sorrows and\ndisasters of the way. Wonderfully, all things considered, had they\nsped, though their murmurings were the sign of an ignorant rebellious\ntemper which was incompatible with any moral progress. By the long\ndelay in the wilderness of Kadesh that disposition had to be cured. In\na region not fertile like Canaan itself, yet capable of supporting the\ntribes, they had to forget Egypt, realise that forward not backward was\ntheir only way, that while desert after desert intervened now between\nthem and Goshen, they were within a day's march of the Promised Land.\nBut even this was not enough. Perhaps they might have crept gradually\nnorthward; shifting their headquarters a few miles at a time till\nthey had taken possession of the Negeb and made a settlement of some\nkind in Canaan. But if they had done so, as a nation of shepherds,\nadvancing timorously, not boldly, they would have had no strength at\nthe opening of their career. And it was decreed that by another door,\nin another spirit, they should enter. Edom refused them access to\nthe east country. They had again to gird up their loins for a long\njourney. And that last terrible march was the discipline they required.\nResolutely kept to it by their leader, on through the Arabah, across\nthe desert, to the \"Heaps of the Outlands towards the sunrising\" they\nwent, with new need for courage, a new call to endure hardness every\nday. Did they faint once, and turn murmurers again? The serpents stung\nthem in judgment, and the cure was provided in grace. They learned\nonce more that it was One they could not elude with whom they had to\ndo, One who could be severe and also kind, who could strike and also\nsave. Decimated, but knit together as they had never been, the tribes\nreached the Arnon. And then, the first trial of their arms made, they\nknew themselves a conquering people, a people with power, a people with\na destiny.\n\nIt is so in the making of manhood, in the discipline of the soul.\nSinai, and the awful declarations of duty and of the Divine claim\nthere, must enter into our life; it would be light, frivolous, and\nincapable otherwise. But the revelation of power and righteousness\ndoes not insure our submission to the power, our conformity to the\nrighteousness. Divine words have to be followed by Divine deeds; we\nhave to learn that in God's kingdom there is to be no murmuring,\nno shrinking even from death, no turning back. It is a lesson that\ntries the generations. How many will not learn it! In society, in\nthe Church, the rebellious spirit is shown and has to be corrected.\nAt the \"Graves of Lust,\" at the \"Place of Burning,\" murmurers are\njudged, those who refuse God's way fall and are left behind. And\nwhen the Land of Promise is in sight possession of it shall not be\neasily obtained by those who are still half-wedded to the old life,\ndistrustful of the righteousness of God and His demand on the whole\nlove and service of the soul. There is indeed no heaven for those\nwho look back, who even if angels were to hurry them on would still\nlament the losses of this life as irremediable. There must be the\ncourage of the daring soul that adventures all on faith, on the\nDivine promise, on the eternity of the spiritual.\n\nWherefore, that the earthly temper may be taken out of us, we have\nto cross desert after desert, to make long circuits through the hot\nand thirsty wilderness even when we think our faith complete and our\nhope nigh its fulfilment. It is as those who overcome we are to enter\nthe kingdom. Not as \"the world's poor routed leavings,\" not obtaining\npermission from Edomites or Amorites to slip ingloriously through their\nland, but as those who with the sword of the Spirit can hew our own\nway through falsehoods and bring down the lusts of the flesh and of the\nmind, as warriors of God we are to reach and cross the border. How many\nsurvive, having gone through discipline like this? How many overcome\nand have the right to pass through the gate into the city?\n\nFOOTNOTE:\n\n[9] Palgrave, \"Central and Eastern Arabia,\" p. 2.\n\n\n\n\n XVIII\n\n _BALAAM INVOKED_\n\n NUMBERS xxii. 1-19\n\n\nWhile a part of the army of Israel was engaged in the campaign\nagainst Bashan, the tribes remained \"in the plains of Moab beyond\nthe Jordan at Jericho.\" The topography is given here, as elsewhere,\nfrom the point of view of one dwelling in Canaan; and the locality\nindicated is a level stretch of land, some five or six miles broad,\nbetween the river and the hills. In this plain there was ample room\nfor the encampment, while along the Jordan and on the slopes to the\neast all the produce of field and garden, the spoil of conquest, was\nat the disposal of the Israelites. They rested therefore, after their\nlong journey, in sight of Canaan, waiting first for the return of\nthe troops, then for the command to advance; and the delay may very\nlikely have extended to several months.\n\nNow the march of Israel had kept to the desert side of Moab, so that\nthe king and people of that land had no reason to complain. But the\ncampaign against the Amorites, ending so quickly and decisively\nfor the invaders, showed what might have taken place if they had\nattacked Moab, what might yet come to pass if they turned southward\ninstead of crossing the Jordan. And there was great dismay. \"Moab\nwas sore afraid of the people, because they were many: and Moab was\ndistressed because of the children of Israel.\" Manifestly it would\nhave been unwise for Balak the king of the Moabites to attack Israel\nsingle-handed. But others might be enlisted against this new and\nvigorous enemy, among them the Midianites. And to these Balak turned\nto consult in the emergency.\n\nBy the \"Midianites\" we must understand the Bedawin of the time, the\ndesert tribes which possibly had their origin in Midian, east of the\nElanitic Gulf, but were now spread far and wide. On the borders of\nMoab a large and important clan of this people fed their flocks; and\nto their elders Balak appealed. \"Now,\" he said, \"shall this multitude\nlick up all that is round about us, as the ox licketh up the grass\nof the field.\" The result of the consultation was not an expedition\nof war but one of a quite different kind. Even the wild Bedawin had\nbeen dismayed by the firm resolute tread of the Israelites, a people\nmarching on, as no people had ever been seen to march, from faraway\nEgypt to find a new home. The elders of Moab and of Midian cannot\ndecide on war; but superstition points to another means of attack.\nMay they not obtain a curse against Israel, under the influence of\nwhich its strength shall decay? Is there not in Pethor one who knows\nthe God of this people and has the power of dreadful malediction?\nThey will send for him; Balaam shall invoke disaster on the invaders,\nthen peradventure Balak will prevail, and smite them, and drive them\nout of the land.\n\nThere can be no doubt in what direction we are to look for Pethor,\nthe dwelling-place of the great diviner. It is \"by the River,\" that\nis to say, by the River Euphrates. It is in Aram, for thence Balaam\nsays Balak has brought him. It is in \"the land of the children of\nAmmo\" (xxii. 5), for such is the preferable translation of the words\nrendered \"children of his people.\" The situation of Pethor has been\nmade out. \"At an early period in Assyrian research,\" says Mr. A.\nH. Sayce,[10] \"Pethor was identified by Dr. Hincks with the Pitru\nof the cuneiform inscriptions. Pitru stood on the western bank of\nthe Euphrates, close to its junction with the Sajur, and a little\nto the north of the latter. It was consequently only a few miles to\nthe south of the Hittite capital Carchemish. Indeed, Shalmaneser\nII. tells us explicitly that the city was called Pethor by 'the\nHittites.' It lay on the main road from east to west, and so occupied\na position of military and commercial importance.\" Originally an\nAram\u00e6an town, Pethor had received, on its conquest by the Hittites, a\nnew element of population from that race, and the two peoples lived\nin it side by side. The Aram\u00e6ans of Pethor called themselves \"the\nsons of (the god) Ammo\"; and, according to Mr. Sayce, Dr. Neubauer\nis right in explaining the name of Balaam as a compound of Baal with\nAmmi, which occurs as a prefix in the Hebrew names Ammiel, Amminadab,\nand others. It is also worthy of mention that the name of Balak's\nfather--Zippor, or \"Bird\"--occurs in the notice, still extant, of a\ndespatch sent by the Egyptian government to Palestine in the third\nyear of Menephtah II.\n\nIt may be further said with regard to Mr. Sayce's valuable work,\nthat he does not attempt to deal particularly with the prophecies\nof Balaam. \"They must,\" he says, \"be explained by Hebrew philology\nbefore the records of the monuments can be called upon to illustrate\nthem. It may be that the text is corrupt; it may be that passages\nhave been added at various times to the original prophecy of the\nAram\u00e6an seer; these are questions which must be settled before the\nAssyriologist can determine when it was that the Kenite was carried\naway captive, or when Asshur himself was 'afflicted.'\"\n\nThe divination of which so great things were expected by Balak is\namply illustrated in the Babylonian remains. Among the Chaldeans\nthe art of divination rested \"on the old belief in every object of\ninanimate nature being possessed or inhabited by a spirit, and the\nlater belief in a higher power, ruling the world and human affairs\nto the smallest detail, and constantly manifesting itself through\nall things in nature as through secondary agents, so that nothing\nwhatever could occur without some deeper significance which might\nbe discovered and expounded by specially trained and favoured\nindividuals.\" The Chaldeo-Babylonians \"not only carefully noted and\nexplained dreams, drew lots in doubtful cases by means of inscribed\narrows, interpreted the rustle of trees, the plashing of fountains\nand murmur of streams, the direction and form of lightnings, not only\nfancied that they could see things in bowls of water, and in the\nshifting forms assumed by the flame which consumed sacrifices and the\nsmoke which rose therefrom, and that they could raise and question\nthe spirits of the dead, but drew presages and omens, for good or\nevil, from the flight of birds, the appearance of the liver, lungs,\nheart, and bowels of the animals offered in sacrifice and opened for\ninspection, from the natural defects or monstrosities of babies or\nthe young of animals--in short, from any and everything that they\ncould possibly subject to observation.\" There were three classes\nof wise men, astrologers, sorcerers, and soothsayers; all were in\nconstant demand, and all used rules and principles settled for them\nby the so-called science which was their study.\n\nWe cannot of course affirm that Balaam was one of these Chaldeans, or\nthat his art was precisely of the kind described. He is declared by\nthe narrative to have received communications from God. There can,\nhowever, be no doubt that his wide reputation rested on the mystical\nrites by which he sought his oracles, for these, and not his natural\nsagacity, would impress the common mind. When the elders of Moab and\nMidian went to seek him they carried the \"rewards of divination\"\nin their hands. It was believed that he might obtain from Jehovah\nthe God of the Israelites some knowledge concerning them on which a\npowerful curse might be based. If then, in right of his office, he\npronounced the malediction, the power of Israel would be taken away.\nThe journey to Pethor was by the oasis of Tadmor and the fords at\nCarchemish. A considerable time, perhaps a month, would be occupied\nin going and returning. But there was no other man on whose insight\nand power dependence could be placed. Those who carried the message\nwere men of rank, who might have gone as ambassadors to a king. It\nwas confidently expected that the soothsayer would at once undertake\nthe important commission.\n\nArriving at Pethor they find Balaam and convey the message, which\nends with the flattering words, \"I know that he whom thou blessest\nis blessed, and he whom thou cursest is cursed.\" But they have to\ntreat with no vulgar thaumaturgist, no mere weaver of spells and\nincantations. This is a man of intellectual power, a diplomatist,\nwhose words and proceedings have a tone of high purpose and\nauthority. He hears attentively, but gives no immediate answer. From\nthe first he takes a position fitted to make the ambassadors feel\nthat if he intervenes it will be from higher motives than desire to\nearn the rewards with which they presume to tempt him. He is indeed\na prince of his tribe, and will be moved by nothing less than the\noracle of that unseen Being whom the chiefs of Moab and Midian cannot\napproach. Let the messengers wait, that in the shadow and silence\nof night Balaam may inquire of Jehovah. His answer shall be in\naccordance with the solemn, secret word that comes to him from above.\n\nThree of the New Testament writers, the Apostles Peter, John, and\nJude, refer to Balaam in terms of reprobation. He is \"Balaam the\nson of Beor who loved the hire of wrongdoing\"; he \"taught Balak to\ncast a stumbling-block before the children of Israel, to eat things\nsacrificed to idols, and to commit fornication\"; he is the type of\nthose who run riotously in the way of error for hire. Gathering\nup the impressions of his whole life, these passages declare him\navaricious and cunningly malignant, a prophet who perverting his\ngifts brought on himself a special judgment. At the outset, however,\nBalaam does not appear in this light. The pictorial narrative shows a\nman of imposing personality, who claims the \"vision and the faculty\nDivine.\" He seems resolute to keep by the truth rather than gratify\nany dreams of ambition or win great pecuniary rewards. It is worth\nwhile to study a character so mingled, in circumstances that may be\ncalled typical of the old world.\n\nDid Balaam enjoy communications with God? Had he real prophetic\ninsight? Or must we hold with some that he only professed to consult\nJehovah, and found the answer to his inquiries in the conclusions of\nhis own mind?\n\nIt would appear at first sight that Balaam, as a heathen, was separated\nby a great gulf from the Hebrews. But at the time to which the\nnarrative of Numbers refers, if not at the period of its composition,\nthe boundary line implied by the word \"gentile\" did not exist. Moses\nhad clearly taught to the Hebrews ethical and religious truths which\nneighbouring nations saw very indistinctly; and the Israelites were\nbeginning to know themselves a chosen race. Yet Abraham was their\nfather, and other peoples could claim descent from him. Edom, for\nexample, is in Numbers xx. acknowledged as Israel's brother.\n\nAt the stage of history, then, to which our passage belongs, the\nstrongly marked differences between nation and nation afterwards\ninsisted upon were not realised. And this is so far true in respect\nof religion, that though the Kenites, a Midianite tribe, did not\nfollow the way of Jehovah, Moses, as we have seen, had no difficulty\nin joining with them in a sacrificial feast in honour of the Lord\nof Heaven. If beyond the circle of the tribes any one, impressed\nby their history, attributing their rescue from Egypt and their\nsuccessful march towards Canaan to Jehovah, acknowledged His\ngreatness and began to approach Him with sacred rites, no doubt would\nhave existed among the Hebrews generally that by such a man their God\ncould be found and His favour won. The narrative before us, stating\nthat Jehovah called Balaam and communicated with him, simply declares\nwhat the more patriotic and religious Israelites would have had no\ndifficulty whatever in receiving. This diviner of Pethor had heard\nof Israel's deliverance at the Red Sea, had followed with keen\ninterest the progress of the tribes, had made himself acquainted with\nthe law of Jehovah given at Sinai. Why, then, should he not worship\nJehovah? And why should not Jehovah speak to him, make revelations to\nhim of things still in the future?\n\nSo far, however, we touch only the beliefs, or possible beliefs,\nof the Israelites. The facts may be quite different. We are in the\nway of considering revelations of the Divine will to have been so\nuncommon and sacred that a man of very high character alone could\nhave enjoyed them. If indeed God spoke to Balaam, it must have been\nin another way than to Abraham, Moses, Elijah. Especially since his\nhistory shows him to have been a man bad at heart, we are inclined\nto pronounce his consultation of God mere pretence; and as for his\nprophecies, did he not simply hear of Israel's greatness and forecast\nthe future with the prescience of a clear calculator, who used his\neyes and reason to good purpose? But with this the gist of the Bible\nnarrative cannot be said to agree. It seems to be certainly implied\nthat God did speak to Balaam, open his eyes, unfold to him things\nfar off in the future. Although many cases might be adduced which go\nto prove that an acute man of the world, weighing causes and tracing\nthe drift of things, may show wonderful foresight, yet the language\nhere used points to more than that. It seems to mean that Divine\nillumination was given to one beyond the circle of the chosen people,\nto one who from the first was no friend of God and at the last showed\nhimself a malicious enemy of Israel. And the doctrine must be that\nany one who, looking beneath the surface of things, studying the\ncharacter of men and peoples, connects the past and the present and\nanticipates events which are still far off, has his illumination\nfrom God. Further it is taught that in a real sense the man who has\nsome conception of Providence, though he is false at heart, may\nyet, in the sincerity of an hour, in the serious thought roused at\nsome crisis, have a word of counsel, a clear indication of duty, a\nrevelation of things to come which others do not receive. Still we\nmust interpret the words, \"God said to Balaam,\" in a way which will\nnot lift him into the ranks of the heaven-directed who are in any\nsense mediators, prophets of the age and the world. This man has his\nknowledge so far from above, has his insight as a true gift, receives\nthe word of prohibition, of warning, veritably from a Divine source.\nYet he does not stand in a high position, lifted above other men.\nThe whole history is of value for our instruction, because as surely\nas Balaam received directions from God, we also receive them through\nconscience; because as he opposed God so we also may oppose Him in\nself-will or the evil mind. When we are urged to do what is right the\nurgency is Divine, as certainly as if a voice from heaven fell on our\nears. Only when we realise this do we feel aright the solemnity of\nobligation. If we fail to ascribe our knowledge and our sense of duty\nto God, it will seem a light thing to neglect the eternal laws by\nwhich we should be ruled.\n\nReaching Pethor the messengers of Balak state their request. Instead\nof going with them at once, as a false man might be expected to do,\nBalaam declares that he must consult Jehovah; and the result of his\nconsultation is that he declines. In the morning he says to the princes\nof Moab, \"Get you into your land, for Jehovah refuseth to give me\nleave to go with you.\" The question whether Israel was a fit subject\nfor blessing or for cursing has been practically settled in his mind.\nWhen he lays the matter before Jehovah, as he knows Him through\nHis law and the history of Israel, it is made unmistakable that no\nmalediction is to be pronounced. But what, then, was the secret of\nBalaam's delay, of his consultation of the oracle? If it had been an\nabsolute determination to serve the interests of righteousness, he\ncould now frame his reply to the princes in such a way that they would\nunderstand it to be final. He would not say demurely, \"Jehovah refuseth\nto give me leave,\" for these words allow the belief that somehow the\npower to curse may yet be obtained. Balaam permits himself to hope\nthat he will find some flaw in Israel's relation to Jehovah which will\nleave room for a malediction. He delays, and professes to consult\nGod, diplomatically, that even by the refusal his fame as a diviner\nacquainted with the Unseen Power may be established. And the answer\nhe returns means that his own reputation is not to be hazarded by any\ndivination which Jehovah will discredit.\n\nHad not the future proceedings of Balaam cast their shadow back on\nhis career and words, he might have been pronounced at the outset a\nman of integrity. The rewards offered him were probably large. We\nmay believe that whatever reputation Balaam had previously enjoyed\nthis embassy was the most important ever sent to him, the greatest\ntribute to his fame. And we would have been inclined to say, Here is\nan example of conscientiousness. Balaam might go with the princes\nat least, though he can pronounce no curse on Israel; but he does\nnot; he is too honourable even to profess the desire to gratify his\npatrons. This favourable judgment, however, is forbidden. It was\nof himself, of his fame and position, he was thinking. He would not\nhave gone in any case unless it had precisely suited his purpose.\nUnderstanding that Israel is not to be cursed, he manages so that his\nrefusal shall enhance his own reputation.\n\nStill, the small amount of sincerity there is in Balaam, superimposed\non his self-love and diplomacy, is in contrast to the utter want of\nit which men often show. They are of a party, and at the first call\nthey will make shift to denounce whatever their leaders bid them\ndenounce. There is no pretence even of waiting for a night to have\ntime for quiet reflection; much less any anxious thought regarding\nDivine providence, righteousness, mercy, by means of which duty may\nbe discovered. It is possible for men to appear earnest defenders\nof religion who never go even as far as Balaam went in seeking the\nguidance of truth and principle. They pass judgments with a haste\nthat shows the shallow heart. Tempted by some envious Balak within,\neven when no appeal is made, they set up as soothsayers and take on\nthem to prophesy evil.\n\nThe messengers of Balak returned with the report of their\ndisappointment; but what they had to say caused, as Balaam no doubt\nintended, greater anxiety than ever to secure his services. One who\nwas so lofty, and at the same time so much in the secrets of the God\nIsrael worshipped, was indeed a most valuable ally, and his help must\nbe obtained at any price. Did he say that Jehovah refused to give him\nleave? Balak will assure him of rewards which no God of Israel can\ngive, very great recompense, tangible, immediate. Other messengers\nare sent, more, and more honourable than the former, and they carry\nvery flattering offers. If he will curse Israel, Balak the son of\nZippor will do for him whatever he desires. Nothing is to hinder him\nfrom coming; neither the prohibition of Jehovah nor anything else.\n\nThe conduct of Balaam when he is appealed to the second time\nconfirms the judgment it has been found necessary to pronounce on\nhis character. He behaves like a man who has been expecting, and\nyet, with what conscience he has, dreading, the renewed invitation.\nHe appears indeed to be emphatic in declaring his superiority to the\noffer of reward: \"If Balak would give me his house full of silver\nand gold, I cannot go beyond the word of the Lord my God, to do less\nor more.\" The air of incorruptible virtue is kept. The Moabites and\nMidianites are to understand that they have to do with a man whose\nwhole soul is set on truth. And the protestation would deceive\nus--only Balaam does not dismiss the men. Giving him all credit for\nan intention still to keep right with the Almighty, or, shall we say?\nallowing that he was too clever a man to imperil his reputation by\nintending a curse which would not be followed by any ill effects, we\nfind immediately that he is unwilling to let the opportunity pass.\nHe asks the messengers to tarry for the night, that he may again\nconsult Jehovah in the matter. He has already seen the truth as to\nIsrael, the promise of its splendid career. Yet he will repeat the\ninquiry, ask once more regarding the prospect he has distinctly seen.\nIt is ambition that moves him, and perhaps, along with that, avarice.\nMay he not be able to say something that will sound like a curse,\nsomething on which Balak shall fasten in the belief that it gives him\npower against Israel? It would, at all events, be a gratification to\ntravel in state across the desert, to appear amongst the princes of\nMidian and Moab as the man after whom kings had to run. And there was\nthe possibility that without absolutely forfeiting his reputation as\na seer of things to come he might obtain at least a portion of the\nreward. He will at all events do the messengers the honour of seeking\nanother oracle for their sakes, though he dishonours the name of God\nfrom whom he seeks it.\n\nIt was possible for Balaam during the interval of the two embassies\nto recover himself. He was one who could understand integrity,\nwho knew enough of the conditions of success to see that absolute\nconsistency is the only strength. There was a straight way which he\nmight have followed. But temptation pressed on him. Tired of the\nnarrow field within which he had as yet exercised his powers, he saw\none wider and more splendid open to him. The wealth was no small\ninducement. He was in the way of divining for reward; this was the\ngreatest ever in his reach. And Balaam, knowing well how base and\nvain his pretext was, resigned his integrity, even the pretence of\nit, when he bade the messengers wait.\n\nYet was his fault a singular one? We cannot say that he showed\nextraordinary covetousness in desiring Balak's silver and gold. For\nthe time, in the circumstances, scarcely anything else could be\nexpected of a man like him. To judge Balaam by modern Christian rules\nis an anachronism. The remarkable thing is to find one of his class\nat all scrupulous about the means he employs to promote himself. We\nsay that he was guilty of perverting conscience; and so he was. But\nhis conscience did not see or speak so clearly as ours. And are not\nChristian men liable to have their heads turned by the countenance\nof those in a higher rank than their own, and to succumb to the\nenticement of great wealth? When they are asked to reconsider a\ndecision they know to be right, do they never tamper with conscience?\nIt is one of the commonest things to find persons nominally religious\nindulging in the same desires and acting in the same way as Balaam.\nBut the earthly craving that makes any one go back to God a second\ntime about a matter which ought to have been settled once for all,\ninvolves the greatest moral hazard. No human being, in any situation,\nhas spiritual strength to spare. There is a point where he who\nhesitates casts the whole of his life into the balance. For young\npersons, especially, a great warning, often needed, lies here.\n\nThe fault of Balaam, a fault of which he could not fail to be\nconscious, was that of tampering with his inspiration. The insight\nhe possessed--and which he valued--had come through his sincere\nestimate of things and men apart from any pressure brought to bear\non him to take a side either for money or for fame. His mind using\nperfect freedom, travelling in a way of sincere judgment, had reached\na height from which he enjoyed wide prospects. As a man and a prophet\nhe had his standing through this superiority to the motives that\nswayed vulgar minds. The admission of sordid influences, whether it\nbegan with the visit of Balak's messengers or had been previously\nallowed, was perhaps the first great error of his life. And it is so\nin the case of every man who has found the strength of integrity and\nreached the vision of the true. The Christian who has held himself\nfree from the entanglements of the world, refusing to touch its\nquestionable rewards, or to be influenced by its jealousy and envy,\nhas what may be called his inspiration, though it lifts him to no\nprophetic height. He has a clear mind, a clear eye. His own way is\nplain, and he can also see the crookedness of paths which others\nfollow and reckon straight enough. He can go with a firm step and say\nfearlessly, \"Be ye followers of me.\" But if the base considerations\nof gain and loss, of ease or discomfort, of the applause or enmity\nof other men, intrude, if even in a small way he becomes a man of\nthe world, at once there is declension. He may not be ambitious nor\ncovetous. Yet the withdrawal of his mind from its sole allegiance to\nGod and the righteousness of God tells at once on his moral vision.\nIt is clouded. The oracle becomes ambiguous. He hears two voices,\nmany voices; and the counsels of his mind are confused. Like others,\nhe now takes a crooked course, he feels that he has lost the old\nfirmness of speech and action.\n\nIt is a sad thing when one who has felt himself \"born to the good, to\nthe perfect,\" who has gained the power that comes through reverence,\nand sees greater power before him, yields to that which is not\nvenerable, not pure. The beginnings of the fatal surrender may be\nsmall. Only a throb of self-consciousness and satisfaction when some\none speaks a word of flattery or with show of much deference prefers\nan astute request. Only a disposition to listen when in seeming\nfriendship counsel of a plausible kind is offered, and milder ways\nof judging are recommended to lessen friction and put an end to\ndiscord. Even the strong are so weak, and those who see are so easily\nblinded, that no one can count himself safe. And indeed it is not the\ngreat temptations, like that which came to Balaam, we have chiefly\nto dread. The very greatness of a bribe and magnificence of an\nopportunity put conscience on its guard. Peril comes rather when the\nappeal for charity, or the casuistry of protesting virtue, sends one\nto reconsider judgment that has been solemnly pronounced by a voice\nwe cannot mistake; when we forget that the matter is only rightly\ndetermined for men when it is clearly and irrevocably decided by the\nlaw of God, whatever men may think, however they may deplore or rebel.\n\n \"Thou and God exist--\n So think!--for certain; think the mass--mankind--\n Disparts, disperses, leaves thyself alone!\n Ask thy lone soul what laws are plain to thee--\n Thee and no other,--stand or fall by them!\n That is the part for thee: regard all else\n For what it may be--Time's illusion.\"\n\nMen in their need, in their sorrow, their self-esteem, would have\nthe true man revoke his judgment, yield a point at least to their\nentreaties. He will do them kindness, he will show himself human,\nreasonable, judicious. But on the other side are those to whom, in\nshowing this consideration, he will be unjust, declaring their honour\nworthless, their sore struggle a useless waste of strength; and he\nhimself stands before the Judge. The one sure way is that which keeps\nthe life in the line of the statutes of God, and every judgment in\nfull accord with His righteousness.\n\nFOOTNOTE:\n\n[10] \"The Higher Criticism and the Monuments,\" p. 274.\n\n\n\n\n XIX\n\n _BALAAM ON THE WAY_\n\n NUMBERS xxii. 20-38\n\n\nThe history is moving towards a great vindication of Israel and\nprediction of its coming power, all the more impressive that they are\nto be wrung from an unwilling witness, a man who would pronounce a\ncurse rather than a blessing; all the more impressive, too, because the\nenemies of Israel will themselves arrange on a mountain pinnacle the\nscene of the revelation, with smoking altars and princely spectators.\nThe great Actor in the drama is unseen; but His voice is heard. However\ntractable the omens may have been under other circumstances in the\nhands of the soothsayer, he now finds a Master. As the story unfolds,\nBalaam is seen attempting the impossible, endeavouring to force the\nhands of Providence, held as in a chain at every stage. There is\na Power that treats him as if he were a child. Finally, with most\nunwilling eloquence, he is compelled to fling far and wide a challenge\nto Israel's enemies, the praises of her rising star.\n\nIn harmony with this general movement is the result of Balaam's\nsecond appeal for permission to take the journey to Moab. He receives\nit, but with a reservation. Fear of the great God whom he invokes\nholds him to the conviction that whatever he may do no word must\npass his lips other than Jehovah gives him to speak. In repeating his\ninquiry he has assumed that the God of Israel is amenable to human\nurgency; and as he will have Jehovah to be, so within limits he seems\nto find Him. Yet there is more to reckon with than a dubious oracle,\ndiscovered through signs and portents of the sky or whisperings of\nthe breeze at night. Jehovah has brought His people from Egypt, fed\nthem in the desert, given them victory. Balaam finds that this God\ncan send angels upon His errands, that there is no escape from His\npresence nor evasion of His will.\n\nIt was in a kind of madness the diviner set out from Pethor by the\nway of the Euphrates' ford. Excited by the hope of gaining the\nrewards and enjoying the fame awaiting him in Moab, he was at the\nsame time conscious of being in opposition to the God of Israel, and\ncommitted to an adventure that might end disastrously. He went in a\nmood of wilfulness, hoping and yet half doubting that his way would\nbecome clear, irritable therefore, ready to resent every hindrance.\nA diviner of repute, credited with powers of blessing and cursing,\nhe perhaps felt himself safe on ordinary occasions, especially among\nhis own people, even when he went against those who consulted him.\nBut could he count on the forbearance of the king of Moab into whose\ncountry he was venturing? Jehovah might be opening his way only to\ndestruction. Such fears could hardly be avoided.\n\nAnd men who have gone back to conscience endeavouring to extort\nfrom it a sanction or permission previously denied, who, with some\nhalf assurance that the way is open, set out on a desired course,\nare practically in the same mad mood, have equal reason to dread\nthe issue. Is this understood? It may be safely asserted that half\nthe wrong things men do--taking an average of human action, half at\nleast--are done not in despite of conscience, but with its dubious\nconsent, when the first clear decision has been set aside. No doubt\nthe urgency is often very great, as it was in Balaam's case, and\nfrequently of a less questionable kind. Not the desire of envious\npersons to have others cursed or evil intreated, but possibly the\ndesire of some to have the shadow of adverse judgment taken away,\nmay be the plea, and be supported by the promise of large reward.\nThe first word of conscience is distinct--Have nothing whatever to\ndo with the matter: the shadow has fallen on the wrongdoer; he has\nnot repented; let him suffer still. But his agents come with gold\nand silver, with plausible words, with seeming Christian arguments.\nThen the appeal to conscience is renewed, and he who should be firm\nin judgment finds a false permission. Or the case may be of one in\nbusiness, tempted to some practice, common enough, but dishonest,\nvile. His first feeling has been that of disgust. He could not for\na moment contemplate a thing so base. But under the pressure of\nwhat appears to be necessity, plausible arguments and pretexts gain\nground. The fact that reputable men find no difficulty about the\nmatter, the notion that a custom is excusable because it is followed\nby most if not by all, along with other considerations of a personal\nkind, are allowed to have some weight, and then to overbalance\nthe sense of duty. And the result is that the moral atmosphere is\nconfused. The man sets out on a way which appears to be opened for\nhim; but he goes under the shadow of a haunting fear.\n\nLike Balaam, one who thus extorts from conscience, that is from God,\npermission to go where he himself desires, knowing it to be a wrong\nway, is quite aware, may indeed be eager to acknowledge to himself,\nthat he is still held by a Divine command extending over a part of his\nconduct. He will not speak a word that shall be against truth. He will\nresume friendship with the rich transgressor; but he will not in words\nexcuse or palliate his crime. He will adulterate certain commodities in\nwhich he deals, but he will never assert that they are genuine. This\nis the tribute to religion and to conscience that sustains decaying\nself-respect. By this the man who passes for a Christian endeavours to\nkeep himself separate from those who have no conscience. The most is\nmade of the difference. As compared with those who unblushingly defend\nthe wrong, this man may think himself a saint. He would on no account\nspeak a falsehood. Does he not fear God? Is he a dog that he should do\nthis thing? Nevertheless, the way leads into a bottomless quagmire. For\na time the waning light of religion may shine. It may even burst before\nit dies into a bright flame of indignation against sin--the crimes\nothers commit--or of loud protestation against what are called false\ncharges. But the man dies a Balaam, with a perverted conscience, and\nmust face the dreadful result.\n\nWell has it been said that no virtue is safe without enthusiasm. A\nman cannot be true to the highest law unless he has the motive within\nhim of pure devotion to God as his personal Redeemer, unless he\nrecognises that his joy in God and his salvation are bound up with\nfidelity to the moral ideal which is presented to him. Faith, hope,\nlove must inspire and keep the soul in fervour of desire to reach the\nheights to which it is called by the Divine voice. But the most of\nmen come far short of this enthusiasm. It is rather with reluctance,\nafter a kind of struggle with themselves, that they look duty in the\nface. And even when they do they find no pleasure in resolving to\npress on where the absolutely right is seen. Their pleasure lies in\ndoing less than that. They seek accordingly some way of observing the\nletter of duty while they avoid its spirit. But the sense of having\ncome short in a matter that involves their highest wellbeing, their\nstanding before God, their very right to hope and to live, remains\nwith them. Marriage, for example, is often entered upon after a\nstruggle with conscience in which a clear mandate has been set aside.\nThe desire to please self is allowed to overcome the conviction\nthat the new bond will keep life on the low worldly ground, or drag\nit back from spirituality. The merely expedient is chosen rather\nthan the ideal of moral independence and power. And of this come\nfretfulness, dissatisfaction with self, with others, with Providence.\nAll the sophistries that can be used fail to set the mind at rest.\nEvents continually occur which throw flashes of light on the past and\nreveal the lost hope, the forfeited vision.\n\nGod does not make the wrong way smooth for one who has extorted\npermission to follow it. A man desiring to enter on a course which\nhe sees to be dishonourable or at least dubious may be absolutely\nprevented at first. His appeal is to Providence. If circumstances\nallowed his plan he would reckon the Divine will favourable to it.\nBut they do not. Every door he tries in the direction he wishes to\ntake is barred against him. Afterwards one yields to pressure, or is\nthrown wide because he knocks at it persistently. Then he advances,\ntaking for granted that he has obtained permission from God. But he\ndoes not go far till he is undeceived. So, Balaam sets out on his\nadventure, riding on his ass and attended by his two servants. Yet\nhe does not get clear of the vineyards of Pethor without hindrance.\nObstacles to his journey which do not appear in the narrative may\nhave at first stood in his way, certain political complications, we\nmay suppose. Now they are removed. But he is met by others. The angel\nof the Lord opposes him, one who stands with a drawn sword in hand in\na hollow way between the vineyards, a path closely fenced on the one\nside and the other. Balaam fails to see the adversary; he is absorbed\nin his own thoughts. But the ass sees, and will not go forward, and\nas Balaam becomes aware of resistance his anger is kindled.\n\nThe narrative here is confessedly difficult. One of the most reverent\ncommentators on the passage declares that he feels too deeply the\nessential veracity of the story to be troubled with minute questions\nabout its details. \"I would not,\" he says, \"force them upon any one's\nbelief merely by uttering the coarse sentence, that they are in\nthe Bible and therefore must be received. One is afraid of leading\npeople to fancy that they do believe what they do not believe, and\nso of propagating hypocrisy under the name of faith.\" To some the\nnarrative may present no serious difficulty. They accept it literally\nat every point. Others again are not so easily satisfied that the\noccasion called for miracles like those which appear on the face\nof the history. It seems to them of no great moment whether Balaam\nwent or did not go to Moab, whether he cursed Israel or blessed it.\nNeither the curse nor the blessing of a man of Balaam's sort could\nmake the least difference to Israel. These readers accordingly would\nfind a parabolical or pictorial explanation of the incidents. Literal\nbelief, in any case, need not be made a test of reverence; the spirit\nis surely more than the letter. The point of greatest importance\nis to believe that God dealt with this man, opposed his perverse\nwill by gracious influences and unexpected protests. To Balaam, no\ndoubt, the angel's appearance and the ass's rebuke were real, as\nreal and impressive as any experiences he ever had. He was humbled;\nhe acknowledged his sin and offered to return. When he reached the\nland of Moab, the recollection of what befell him by the way had a\nsalutary influence on all he said and did.\n\nIn many unforeseen, singular, and often homely ways, men are checked\nin the endeavour to carry out the schemes which ambition and avarice\nprompt. The angel of the Lord who opposes one bent on a bad enterprise\noften appears in familiar guise. To some men their wives stand in\nthe way, some are challenged by their children. What in voluntary\nblindness they have declined to see--the madness of the wrong course,\nthe intrinsic baseness of the thing undertaken--those who look with\npure eyes perceive clearly and are brave enough to condemn. At other\ntimes obstacles are placed in the way by the simple ordinary duties\nwhich claim attention, occupy thought and time, and tend to bring back\nthe mind to humility and saneness. Yet covetousness can make men very\nblind. Under the influence of it they suppose themselves to be acting\ncleverly, while all the time those whom they think they are outwitting\nsee them posting on the way to bankruptcy and shame.\n\nEven a good man may lose his spiritual discrimination occasionally\nwhen he fancies himself called to curse not Israel but Moab, and\nsets out in heat upon the errand. He fails to see that the case\nof Balaam is so far parallel to his own that he ought to expect\nan angel to oppose him. The critical Balaam who feels it his high\nduty to pronounce maledictions on some theological opponent, not\nfor silver and gold, but for the cause of God, is resisted by many\nan angel bearing the sharp sword of the Word, set to declare the\ngreat tolerance of Christ, and to vindicate the liberty that is in\nHim. That men fail to see these angels, or else ride past them,\nis abundantly evident, for the altars smoke on many a height, and\nscrolls of futile condemnation are flung upon the breeze.\n\nBalaam smites the ass even when she falls down under him in her\nabject terror. He endeavours to force her on till at last he is put\nto shame by her rebuke. We are pointed to the irrational way in which\nthose act whose moral judgment is blinded. Their course being wrong,\nthey do not turn against themselves, but rise in passion against\nevery person or thing that hinders. The husband who is resolved to\ntake a wrong path thrusts away his faithful wife; the son bent on\nwhat will be his ruin pushes off his weeping mother when she pleads\nbefore him. Often an apparently inexplicable fit of temper in public\nor in private means that a man is in the wrong and is aware of a\nmistake, from the consequences of which he would fain escape. One's\nheart bleeds for none more than for those victims of selfish anger\nwho suffer under the abuse of the Balaams of society. They have seen\nthe angel in the way. They have sought by a gesture or a warning word\nto arrest the friend who would go on to evil. Then the cruel strokes\nfall on them, curses, foul abuse, taunts often directed against their\nreligion. They are charged with setting themselves up as holier and\nbetter than other people. They are denounced as meddlers and fools.\nThey protest without effect often, and suffer apparently to no\npurpose. Yet shall we suppose their endeavours altogether lost? Good\nis surely stronger than evil. Every right act and word is germinal.\nAfter long years it bears fruit.\n\nIn Balaam's case there was a happier issue than is often seen. The\nprotest against his cruelty opened his eyes to the truth that a\nmessenger of God stood in his way. The rebuke came home to him. So\nmight a hard, self-willed man who rode rough-shod over the feelings\nand rights of others be brought suddenly to a sense of his cruelty by\nthe look on the face of a dog. Bad as men and women may be, violent\nand abusive as they may become in times of anger and impatience,\nthere are ways of softening their hearts. They go on for years\nattempting to justify themselves in a rough and selfish course. But\nwho shall say that even the seeming worst are beyond recovery? When\nthere appears to be no redeeming feature left in the character, the\ncrisis may be at hand, the transgressor may be so taught by the\npiteous look of a dumb animal that his infatuation will come to an\nend. Recoiling from himself he will acknowledge his perversity and\nturn to better thoughts.\n\nHow far did Balaam's repentance go? There can be little doubt the\nmotive of it was the sudden discovery that the God of Israel was\nmightier and more observant than he had imagined; in short, that\nJehovah was his master. Balaam yields, changes his mind, not because\nhe is in the least degree more disposed to do what is right, but\nbecause he finds the antagonism of God falling suddenly upon his\nlife. To the angel he says: \"I have sinned: for I knew not that thou\nstoodest in the way against me: now therefore, if it displease thee,\nI will get me back again.\" This is an acknowledgment of authority,\nbut not of an obligation into which any sense of God's goodness\nenters. It is the sullen acquiescence of a foiled adventurer, who at\nthe very outset is made to understand the terms and narrow limits\nof his power. He has his knowledge, his vision. When he set out he\nintended to use them, if possible, under such conditions as would\nsecure his own liberty. He is now made to understand that he is not\nfree. The angel with the drawn sword will be in Moab before him,\nready to cut him down if he should do or say anything opposed to the\nmind of the God of Israel. He is cowed, not converted.\n\nAnd so it often is with men who find their schemes counteracted, and\nare made to feel their weakness in presence of the forces of human\ngovernment, or of the natural world. Their confession of sin is really\na sullen acknowledgment of impotence. Sift their feelings and you\ndiscover no sense of guilt. They miscalculated, and they regret having\ndone so, because it is to their shame. They will go back to make\nother plans, to lay the foundations deeper with greater subtlety, and\nby-and-by, if they can, to carry out their ideas and gratify their\ncovetousness and ambition in other ways. Sometimes indeed it may become\nclear to a man that his efforts to advance himself, such as he is,\ncannot prosper because Omnipotence is against him. Then acknowledgment\nof defeat is confession of despair. Of this we see an example in the\nfirst Napoleon after his final capture when he was on the voyage to\nSt. Helena. He had forced his way over obstacles enough, leaving\nblood and ruin behind him. But at length the stronger power came down\nto meet him, and he knew that the game was lost. Beneath the seeming\nacquiescence there lurked rebellion. He often spoke as a believer in\nGod; but the God he knew was one he could have wished to foil. In the\nisland to which he was confined he schemed desperately to regain his\nfreedom that he might renew the vain conflict with Providence for his\nown glory and the glory of France. \"I have sinned: I will get me back\nagain.\" Yes. But will it be to lay other and more cunning plots for\nself-aggrandisement, and recover the lost ground by some daring stroke?\nThen it will be also to meet other angels, and at the last the minister\nwho bears the sword of doom.\n\nBalaam will return, confessing himself defeated for the time. But\nhe learns that he may not. He has come so far with designs of his\nown; he must now go on to Moab to serve the purposes of God. The\npermission he wrested, so to speak, from Providence, was not wrested\nafter all. There are deeper schemes than Balaam can form, the great\nfar-reaching plans of the God of Israel, and by these, however\nunwillingly, the soothsayer of Pethor is now bound. This journey has\nbeen of his own perverse choosing; now he must finish it, feeling\nhimself at every point a servant, an instrument; and if danger and\neven death await him, still he must proceed. Easy it is to begin in\nthe craftiness of human purpose and the foolishness of earthly hope;\nbut the end is not under the control of him who begins. There is One\nwho orders all things so that the gifts of men and their perversity\nand their wrath shall all praise Him, shall all be woven into the web\nof His evolving purpose, universal, holy, sure.\n\nIt is a startling thought that in a sense whatever we begin in pride\nor self-will, playing, as it were, the first act of the drama on some\nstage we ourselves select, the movement cannot be arrested when we\nchoose. In one way or another, act after act must proceed to the very\nend which God foreordains. Many human purposes appear to be sharply\nand completely broken off. In the midst of his days man hears the call\nhe cannot disobey. His tools, his hopes, his declared intentions must\nbe laid aside. But the end is not yet. The curtain has fallen here.\nIt will be raised again. And in many unfoldings of Divine purpose we\nwitness scene after scene, in scene after scene have to play our part.\nOne who has begun ill may sincerely repent, and then the development\ntakes a direction which will be to the glory of Divine grace. That act\nof repentance over, another comes, in which the humble thought of the\npenitent reveals itself. He is seen a new man, timorous where he was\nbold, bold where he was timorous. Beyond there are other scenes, in\nwhich he shall be found endeavouring to repair the evil he has done,\nto gather the poisoned arrows he has strewed about the world. And the\nconsummation shall be reached when the task at which he has vainly\nlaboured is completed for him by Christ, and his recovery and the\nrestitution he toiled for shall be complete.\n\nBut if there is no penitence, still the drama must go on to its finish.\nThe man resenting, yet unable to resist, shall do what God requires,\nwhat God permits. He shall attempt to curse, yet be constrained to\nbless. He shall in bitterness of anger frame new devices and carry\nthem out. Then, when the cup of his iniquity is full, and all is done\nProvidence allows, retribution shall overtake him. In the thick of\nbattle the sword of the angel shall smite him to the ground. For each\nman, under God's rule, in the midst of the forces He upholds, there\nis a destiny, some stages of which we can trace. Entering on life we\nof necessity become subject to great laws which our revolt cannot in\nthe least affect. And these are moral laws. The seeming success of the\nimmoral who are intellectually or brutally strong is within the narrow\nlimits of time and space. In the breadths of eternity and infinity\nthere is no strength for any but the good.\n\nThere is a purpose of God which Balaam is unwilling to subserve; and\nof that the man becomes gradually aware. When he is met by Balak and\nhis train and upbraided with his reluctance to come where honours\nand rewards are to be had, the soothsayer realises his peril and\nbegins at once to prepare the Moabite king for disappointment. \"Lo,\nI am come unto thee,\" he says: \"have I now any power at all to speak\nanything? The word that God putteth in my mouth, that shall I speak.\"\nWhat we see now is a contest between the influence of Balak, with\nhis power to reward and also to punish, and the consciousness of a\nconstraint which had entered deeply into Balaam's mind. The sense of\nJehovah's authority over him on this occasion was indeed supported\nby another strong motive which the diviner never allowed to fall\ninto the background. He had his reputation to maintain. At whatever\nhazard, he must show himself to Moabites, Midianites, Aram\u00e6ans, a man\nwho knew the knowledge of the Most High. The ignorance of Balak is\nseen in his absurd hope that for the sake of some bribe of his the\nprophet of Pethor will be induced to fling away his fame.\n\nThere are things which even money cannot buy. There is a limit\nbeyond which even a false and avaricious man cannot venture for the\nsake of honours and rewards. It is a vulgar judgment that every man\nhas his price. One who is not particularly conscientious on most\noccasions will sometimes touch the bounds of concession and take\nhis stand for what is left, all the self he has in any true sense.\nNeither will money buy nor threats compel his further acquiescence\nin what he deems wrong. Again, as in Balaam's case, the limit of the\npower of gold or of threats may be fixed by pride. There are gifts,\nqualities, distinctions possessed by some, in virtue of which they\nseem to themselves to occupy a place which all might covet. The\nveteran has his decoration, once attached to his uniform by some\nhonoured commander under whom he served. No money could buy that. He\nwould die rather than part with it. Another is proud of his name. To\ndishonour that would be treachery to his ancestors. Balaam has his\nunique power of vision, and for a while at least he preserves it. A\nman like Balak, measuring others by himself, regards a diviner as one\nof a lower order who may be moved by menaces and promises. He finds\nthat Balaam has pride enough to lift him above them. Thus vanity\ncounteracts vanity; the comparatively base keeps the base in check.\n\n\n\n\n XX\n\n _BALAAM'S PARABLES_\n\n NUMBERS xxii. 39-xxiv. 9\n\n\nThe scene is now on some mountain of Moab from which the encampment\nof the Hebrew tribes in the plain of the Jordan is fully visible.\nAt Kiriath-huzoth, possibly the modern Shihan, about ten miles east\nof the Dead Sea, and to the south of the Arnon valley, preparation\nfor the attempt against Israel's destiny has been made by a great\nsacrifice of oxen and sheep intended to secure the good-will of\nChemosh, the Baal or Lord of Moab. On the range overhanging the\nDead Sea, somewhat to the north of the Arnon, perhaps, are the\nBamoth-Baal, or high places of Baal, and the \"bare height\" where\nBalaam is to seek his auguries and will be met by God.\n\nThe evening of Balaam's arrival has been spent in the sacrificial\nfestival, and in the morning Balak and his princes escort the diviner\nto the Bamoth-Baal that he may begin his experiment. After his usual\nmanner, Balaam pompously requires that great arrangements be made\nfor the trial of auguries by means of which his oracle is to be\nfound. Balak has offered sacrifices to Chemosh; now Jehovah must be\npropitiated, and seven altars have to be built, and on each of them a\nbullock and a ram offered by fire. The altars erected, the carcases\nof the animals prepared, Balaam does not remain beside them to take\nactual part in the sacrifice. It is, in fact, to be Balak's, not his;\nand if the God of Israel should refuse His sanction to the curse,\nthat will be because the offering of the king of Moab has not secured\nHis favour. Accordingly, while the seven wreaths of smoke ascend from\nthe altars, and the invocations of the Divine power which usually\naccompany sacrifice are chanted by the king and his princes, the\nsoothsayer withdraws to a peak at some distance that he may read the\nomens. \"Peradventure,\" he says, \"Jehovah will come to meet me.\"\n\nIt was now a critical hour for the ambitious prophet. He had indeed\nalready found distinction, for who in Moab or Midian could have\ncommanded with so royal an air and received attention so obsequious?\nBut the reward remained to be won. Yet may we not assume that when\nBalaam reached Moab and saw the pitiable state of what had been\nonce a strong kingdom, the cities half ruined, filled with poor and\ndejected inhabitants, he conceived a kind of contempt for Balak and\nperceived that his offers must be set aside as worthless? God met\nBalaam, we are told. And this may have been the sense in which God\nmet him and put a word into his mouth. What was Moab compared with\nIsrael? A glance at Kiriath-huzoth, a little experience of Balak's\nempty boastfulness and the entreaties and anxiety which betrayed his\nweakness, would show Balaam the vanity of proposing to reinvigorate\nMoab at the expense of Israel. His way led clearly enough where the\nfinger of the God of Israel pointed, and his mind almost anticipated\nwhat the Voice he heard as Jehovah's declared. He saw the smoke\nstreaming south-eastward, and casting a black shadow between him and\nMoab; but the sun shone on the tents of Israel, right away to the\nutmost part of the camp (xxii. 41). The mind of Balaam was made up.\nIt would be better for him in a worldly sense to win some credit with\nIsrael than to have the greatest honour Moab could offer. Chemosh\nwas in decline, Jehovah in the ascendant. Perhaps the Hebrews might\nneed a diviner when their great Moses was dead, and he, Balaam,\nmight succeed to that exalted office. We never can tell what dreams\nwill enter the mind of the ambitious man, or rather, we do not know\non what slender foundations he builds the most extravagant hopes.\nThere was nothing more unlikely, the thing indeed was absolutely\nimpossible, yet Balaam may have imagined that his oracle would come\nto the ears of the Israelites, and that they would send for him to\ngive favourable auguries before they crossed the Jordan.\n\nRapidly the diviner had to form his decision. That done, the words\nof the oracle could be trusted to the inspiration of the moment,\ninspiration from Jehovah, whose superiority to all the gods of Syria\nBalaam now heartily acknowledged. He accordingly left his place of\nvision and returned to the Bamoth where the altars still smoked. Then\nhe took up his parable and spoke.\n\n \"From Aram Balak brought me,\n Moab's king from the mountains of the east;\n 'Come, curse for me Jacob,\n And come, menace Israel.'\n How can I curse whom God hath not cursed?\n And how can I menace whom God hath not menaced?\n For from the head of the rocks I see him,\n And from the hills I behold him.\n\n Lo, a people apart he dwells,\n And among the nations he is not counted.\n Who can reckon the dust of Jacob,\n And in number the fourth of Israel?\n Let my soul die the death of the righteous;\n And be my last end like his!\"\n\nIn this parable, or _mashal_, along with some elements of egotism and\nself-defence, there are others that have the ring of inspiration.\nThe opening is a vaunt, and the expression, \"How can I curse whom\nGod hath not cursed?\" is a form of self-vindication which savours\nof vanity. We see more of the cowed and half-resentful man than of\nthe prophet. Yet the vision of a people dwelling apart, not to be\nreckoned among the others, is a real revelation, boldly flung out.\nSomething of the difference already established between Israel and\nthe _goim_, or peoples of the Syrian district, had been caught by the\nseer in his survey of past events, and now came to clear expression.\nFor a moment, at least, his soul rose almost into spiritual desire in\nthe cry that his last end should be of the kind an Israelite might\nhave; one who with calm confidence laid himself down in the arms of\nthe great God, the Lord of providence, of death as well as life.\n\nA man has learned one lesson of great value for the conduct of life\nwhen he sees that he cannot curse whom God has not cursed, that he\nwould be foolish to menace whom God has not menaced. Reaching this\npoint of sight, Balaam stands superior for the time to the vulgar\nideas of men like the king of Moab, who have no conception of a\nstrong and dominant will to which human desires are all subjected.\nHowever reluctantly this confession is made, it prevents many futile\nendeavours and much empty vapouring. There are some indeed whose\nbelief that fate must be on their side is simply immovable. Those\nwhom they choose to reckon enemies are established in the protection\nof heaven; but they think it possible to wrest their revenge even\nfrom the Divine hand. Not till the blow they strike recoils with\ncrushing force on themselves do they know the fatuity of their hope.\nIn his \"Instans Tyrannus\" Mr. Browning pictures one whose persecution\nof an obscure foe ends in defeat.\n\n \"I soberly laid my last plan\n To extinguish the man.\n Round his creep-hole, with never a break,\n Ran my fires for his sake;\n Overhead, did my thunder combine\n With my underground mine:\n Till I looked from my labour, content\n To enjoy the event.\n\n When sudden ... how think ye, the end?\n Did I say, 'Without friend'?\n Say rather from marge to blue marge\n The whole sky grew his targe,\n With the sun's self for visible boss,\n While an Arm ran across,\n Which the earth heaved beneath, like a breast\n Where the wretch was safe prest!\n Do you see? Just my vengeance complete,\n The man sprang to his feet,\n Stood erect, caught at God's skirts and prayed!\n --So, I was afraid!\"\n\nIn smaller matters, the attempts at impudent detraction which are\ncommon, when the base, girding at the good, think it possible to\nbring them to contempt, or at least stir them to unseemly anger, or\nprick them to humiliating self-defence, the law is often well enough\nunderstood, yet neither the assailants nor those attacked may be\nwise enough to recognise it. A man who stands upon his faithfulness\nto God does not need to be vexed by the menaces of the base; he\nshould despise them. Yet he often allows himself to be harassed,\nand so yields all the victory hoped for by his detractor. Calm\nindifference, if one has a right to use it, is the true shield\nagainst the arrows of envy and malice.\n\nBalaam's vision of Israel as a separated people, a people dwelling\nalone, had singular penetration. The others he knew--Amorites,\nMoabites, Ammonites, Midianites, Hittites, Aram\u00e6ans--went together,\nscarcely distinguishable in many respects, with their national Baals\nall of the same kind. Was Ammon or Chemosh, Melcarth or Sutekh,\nthe name of the Baal? The rites might differ somewhat, there might\nbe more or less ferocity ascribed to the deities; but on the whole\ntheir likeness was too close for any real distinction. And the\npeoples, differing in race, in culture, in habit, no doubt, were yet\nalike in this, that their morality and their mental outlook passed\nno boundary, were for the most part of the beaten, crooked road.\nStrifes and petty ambitions here and there, temporary combinations\nfor ignoble ends, the rise of one above another for a time under\nsome chief who held his ground by force of arms, then fell and\ndisappeared--such were the common events of their histories. But\nIsrael came into Balaam's sight as a people of an entirely different\nkind, generically distinct. Their God was no Baal ferocious by\nreport, really impotent, a mere reflection of human passion and\nlust. Jehovah's law was a creation, like nothing in human history\nascribed to a God. His worship meant solemn obligation, imposed,\nacknowledged, not simply to honour Him, but to be pure and true and\nhonest in honouring Him. Israel had no part in the orgies that were\nheld in professed worship of the Baals, really to the disgrace of\ntheir devotees. The lines of the national development had been laid\ndown, and Balaam saw to some extent how widely they diverged from\nthose along which other peoples sought power and glory. Amorites and\nHittites and Canaanites might keep their place, but Israel had the\nsecret of a progress of which they never dreamed. Wherever the tribes\nsettled, when they advanced to fulfil their destiny, they would prove\na new force in the world.\n\nFor the time Israel might be called the one spiritual people. It\nwas this Balaam partly saw, and made the basis of his striking\npredictions. The modern nations are not to be distinguished by the\nsame testing idea. The thoughts and hopes of Christianity have\nentered more or less into all that are civilised, and have touched\nothers that can scarcely be called so. Yet if there is any oracle\nfor the peoples of our century it is one that turns on the very\npoint which Balaam seems to have had in view. But it is, that not\none of them, as a nation, is distinctly moved and separated from\nothers by spirituality of aim. Of not one can it be said that it\nis confessedly, eagerly, on the way to a Canaan where the Living\nand True God shall be worshipped, that its popular movements, its\nlegislation, its main endeavours look to such a heavenly result. If\nwe saw a people dwelling apart, with a high spiritual aim, resolutely\nexcluding those ideas of materialism which dominate the rest, of them\nit would not be presumptuous to prophesy in the high terms to which\nthe oracles of Balaam gradually rose.\n\nRegarding the wish with which the diviner closed his first\n_mashal_, hard things have been said, as for example, that \"even\nin his sublimest visions his egotism breaks out; in the sight of\nGod's Israel he cries, 'Let me die the death of the righteous.'\"\nHere, however, there may be personal sorrow and regret, a pathetic\nconfession of human fear by one who has been brought to serious\nthought, rather than any mere egoistic craving. Why should he speak\nof death? That is not the theme of the egotist. We hear a sudden\nejaculation that seems to open a glimpse of his heart. For this\nman, like every son of Adam, has his burden, his secret trouble,\nfrom which all the hopes and plans of his ambition cannot relieve\nhis mind. Now for the first time he speaks in a genuinely religious\nstrain. \"There are the righteous whom the Great Jehovah regards with\nfavour, and gathers to Himself. When their end comes they rest. Alas!\nI, Balaam, am not one of them; and the shadows of my end are not far\naway! Would that by some mighty effort I could throw aside my life\nas it has been and is, revoke my destiny, and enter the ranks of\nJehovah's people--were it only to die among them.\"\n\nWistfully, men whose life has been on the low ground of mere earthly\ntoil and pleasure may, in like manner, when the end draws near,\nenvy the confidence and hope of the good. For the old age of the\nsensualist, and even of the successful man of the world, is under a\ndull wintry sky, with no prospect of another morning, or even of a\nquiet night of dreamless sleep.\n\n \"The weariest and most loathed worldly life,\n That age, ache, penury, and imprisonment\n Can lay on nature, is a paradise\n To what we fear of death.\"\n\nCourage and peace at the last belong to those alone who have kept in\nthe way of righteousness. To them and no others light shall arise in\nthe darkness. The faithfulness of God is their refuge even when the\nlast shadows fall. He whom they trust goes before them in the pillar\nof fire when night is on the world, as well as in the pillar of cloud\nby day. To the man of this earth even the falling asleep of the good\nis enviable, though they may not anticipate a blessed immortality.\nTheir very grave is a bed of peaceful rest, for living or dying they\nbelong to the great God.\n\n * * * * *\n\nIt was with growing dissatisfaction, rising to anxiety, Balak heard\nthe first oracle that fell from the diviner's lips. Despite the\nwarning he had received that only the words which Jehovah gave should\nbe spoken, he hoped for some kind of a curse. His altars had been\nbuilt, his oxen and rams sacrificed, and surely, he thought, all\nwould not be in vain! Balaam had not travelled from Pethor to mock\nhim. But the prophecy carried not a single word of heartening to the\nenemies of Israel. The camp lay in the full sunshine of fortune,\nunobscured by the least cloud. It was the first blow to Balak's\nmalignant jealousy, and might well have put him to confusion. But men\nof his sort are rich in conjectures and expedients. He had set his\nmind on this as the means of finding advantage in a struggle that\nwas sure to come; and he clung to his hope. Although the curse would\nnot light on the whole camp of Israel, yet it might fall on a part,\nthe remote outlying portion of the tribes. In superstition men are\nfor ever catching at straws. If the anger of some heavenly power,\nwhat power mattered little to Balak, could be once enlisted against\nthe tribes, even partially, the influence of it might spread. And\nit would at least be something if pestilence or lightning smote the\nutmost part of that threatening encampment.\n\nOne must be sorry for men whose impotent anger has to fall on\nexpedients so miserably inadequate. Moab defeated by the Amorites\nsees them in turn vanquished and scattered by this host which has\nsuddenly appeared, and to all ordinary reckoning has no place nor\nright in the region. Sad as was the defeat which deprived Balak\nof half his land and left his people in poverty, this incursion\nand its success foreboded greater trouble. The king was bound to\ndo something, and, feeling himself unable to fight, this was his\nscheme. The utter uselessness of it from every point of view gives\nthe story a singular pathos. But the world under Divine providence\ncannot be left in a region where superstition reigns and progress is\nimpossible--simply that a people like the Moabites may settle again\non their lees, and that others may continue to enjoy what seem to\nthem to be their rights. There must be a stirring of human existence,\na new force and new ideas introduced among the peoples, even at the\nexpense of war and bloodshed. And our sympathy with Balak fails when\nwe recollect that Israel had refrained from attacking Moab in its day\nof weakness, had even refrained from asking leave to pass through\nits impoverished territory. The feelings of the vanquished had been\nrespected. Perhaps Balak, with the perversity of a weak man and an\nincompetent prince, resented this as much as anything.\n\nBalaam was now brought into the field of Zophim, or the Watchers, to\nthe \"top of Pisgah,\" whence he could see only a part of the camp of\nIsrael. The Hebrew here as well as in xxii. 41 is ambiguous. It has\neven been interpreted as meaning that on the first occasion part of the\nencampment only was in view, and on the second occasion the whole of it\n(so Keil _in loco_). But the tenor of the narrative corresponds better\nwith the translation given in the English Version. The precise spot\nhere called the top of Pisgah has not been identified. In the opinion\nof some the name Pisgah survives in the modern Siaghah; but even if\nit does we are not helped in the least. Others take Pisgah as meaning\nsimply \"hill,\" and read \"the field of Zophim on the top of the hill.\"\nThe latter translation would obviate the difficulty that in Deut.\nxxxiv. 1 it is said that Moses, when the time of his death approached,\n\"went up from the plains of Moab unto Mount Nebo, to the top of Pisgah\nthat is over against Jericho.\" Pisgah may have been the name of the\nrange; yet again in Numb. xxvii. 12, and Deut. xxxii. 49, Abarim is\ngiven as the name of the range of which Nebo is a peak. We are led to\nthe conclusion that Pisgah was the name in general use for a hill-top\nof some peculiar form. The root meaning of the word is difficult to\nmake out. It may at all events be taken as certain that this top of\nPisgah is not the same as that to which Moses ascended to die. Balak\nand his princes had not as yet ventured so far beyond the Arnon.\n\nAt Balaam's request the same arrangements were made as at Bamoth-Baal.\nSeven altars were built, and seven bullocks and seven rams were\noffered; and again the diviner withdrew to some distance to seek omens.\nThis time his meeting with Jehovah gave him a more emphatic message. It\nwould seem that with the passing of the day's incidents the vatic fire\nin his mind burned more brightly. Instead of endeavouring to conciliate\nBalak he appears to take delight in the oracle that dashes the hopes\nof Moab to the ground. He has looked from the new point of vision and\nseen the great future that awaits Israel. It is vain to expect that the\ndecree of the Almighty One can be revoked. Balak must hear all that the\nspirit of Elohim has given to the seer.\n\n \"Up, Balak, and hear;\n Hearken to me, son of Zippor:\n No man is God, that He should lie;\n And no son of man, that He should repent,\n Hath He said, and shall He not do it?\n And spoken, and shall He not make good?\n Behold to bless I have received;\n And He hath blessed and I cannot undo.\n He hath not beheld iniquity in Jacob,\n Nor seen perverseness in Israel.\n Jehovah his God is with him;\n And the shout of a King is with him.\n God brings them forth from Egypt:\n Like the horns of the wild ox are his.\n Surely no snake-craft is in Jacob,\n And no enchantment with Israel.\n At the time it shall be said of Jacob and Israel,\n What hath God wrought!\n Behold the people as a lioness arises,\n And as a lion lifts himself up;\n He shall not lie down till he eat the prey,\n And drink the blood of the slain.\"\n\nThe confirmation of the first oracle by what Balaam has realised on\nhis second approach to Jehovah compels the question which rebukes the\nking's vain desire. \"Hath He said, and shall He not do it?\" Balak did\nnot know Jehovah as Balaam knew Him. This God never went back from His\ndecision, nor recalled His promises. And He is able to do whatever He\nwills. Not only does He refuse to curse Israel, but He has given a\nblessing which Balaam even, powerful as he is, cannot possibly hinder.\nIt has become manifest that the judgment of God on His people's conduct\nis in no respect adverse. Reviewing their past, the diviner may have\nfound such failure from the covenant as would give cause for a decision\nagainst them, partial at least, if not general. But there is no excuse\nfor supposing that Jehovah has turned against the tribes. Their recent\nsuccesses and present position are proofs of His favour unrevoked, and,\nit would seem, irrevocable. There is a King with this people, and when\nthey advance it is with a shout in His honour. The King is Jehovah\ntheir God; mightier far than Balak or any ruler of the nations. When\nthe loud Hallelujah rose from the multitude at some sacred feast, it\nwas indeed the shout of a monarch.\n\nSingular is it to find a diviner like Balaam noting as one of the\ngreat distinctions of Israel that the nation used neither augury nor\ndivination. The hollowness of his own arts in presence of the God\nof Israel who could not be moved by them, who gave His people hope\nwithout them, would seem to have impressed Balaam profoundly. He\nspeaks almost as if in contempt of the devices he himself employs.\nIndeed, he sees that his art is not art at all, as regards Israel.\nThe Hebrews trust no omens; and either for or against them omens give\nno sign. It was another mark of the separateness of Israel. Jehovah\nhad fenced His people from the spells of the magician. True to Him,\nthey could defy all the sorcery of the East. And when the time for\nfurther endeavour came, the nations around should have to hear of the\nGod who had brought the Hebrew tribes out of Egypt. With a lion-like\nvigour they would rise from their lair by the Jordan. The Canaanites\nand Amorites beyond should be their prey. Already perhaps tidings had\ncome of the defeat of Bashan: the cities on the other side Jordan\nshould fall in their turn.\n\nAs yet there is nothing in the predictions of Balaam that can be said\nto point distinctly to any future event in Israel's history. The\noracles are of that general kind which might be expected from a man\nof the world who has given attention to the signs of the times and\nperceived the value to a people of strong and original faith. But\ntaking them in this sense they may well rebuke that modern disbelief\nwhich denies the inspiring power of religion and the striking facts\nwhich come to light not only in the history of nations like Israel\nbut in the lives of men whose vigour springs from religious zeal.\nBalaam saw what any whose eyes are open will also see, that when\nthe shout of the Heavenly King is among a people, when they serve a\nDivine Master, holy, just, and true, they have a standing ground and\nan outlook not otherwise to be reached. The critics of religion who\ntake it to be a mere heat of the blood, a transient emotion, forget\nthat the grasp of great and generous principles, and the thought of\nan Eternal Will to be served, give a sense of right and freedom which\nexpediency and self-pleasing cannot supply. However man comes to be\nwhat he is, this is certain, that for him strength depends not so\nmuch on bodily physique as on the soul, and for the soul on religious\ninspiration. The enthusiasm of pleasure-seeking has never yet made a\nband of men indomitable, nor need it be expected to give greatness;\nwe cannot persuade ourselves that apart from God our blessedness is a\nmatter of surpassing importance. We are a multitude whose individual\nlives are very small, very short, very insignificant, unless they are\nknown to serve some Divine end.\n\nIt has been seen by one philosopher that if the religious sanction\nbe taken away from morality some other must be provided to fill up\nthe vacuum. Further, it may be said that if the religious support and\nstimulus of human energy be withdrawn there will be a greater vacuum\nmore difficult to fill. The would-be benefactors of our race, who\nthink that the superstition of a personal God is effete and should\nbe swept away as soon as possible, so that man may return to nature,\nmight do well to return to Balaam. He had a penetration which they\ndo not possess. And singularly, the very apostle of that impersonal\n\"stream of tendency making for righteousness,\" which was once to be\nput in the place of God, did on one occasion unwittingly remind us\nof this prophet. Mr. Matthew Arnold had a difficult thing to do when\nhe tried to encourage a toiling population to go on toiling without\nhope, to plod on in the underground while a select few above enjoyed\nthe sunlight. The part was that of a diviner finding auguries for the\ninevitable. But he spoke as one who had to pity a poor blind Israel,\nno longer inspired by the shout of a king or the hope of a promised\nland, an Israel that had lost its faith and its way and seemed about\nto perish in the desert. Well did he know how difficult it is for men\nunder this dread to endure patiently when those above have abolished\nGod and the future life; men, who are disposed to say, yet must be told\nthat they say vainly, \"If there is nothing but this life, we must have\nit. Let us help ourselves, whenever we can, to all we desire.\" Was that\nIsrael to be blessed or cursed? There was no oracle. Yet the cultured\nBalak, hoping for a spell at least against the revolutionaries, had a\nrebuke. The prophet did not curse; he had no power to bless. But Moab\nwas shown to be in peril, was warned to be generous.\n\nBalaams enough there are, after a sort, with more or less penetration\nand sincerity. But what the peoples need is a Moses to revive their\nfaith. The hollow maledictions and blessings that are now launched\nincessantly from valley to hill, from hill to valley, would be\nsilenced if we found the leader who can re-awaken faith. It would be\nsuperfluous, then, for the race in its fresh hope to bless itself,\nand vain for the pessimists to curse it. With the ensign of Divine\nlove leading the way, and the new heavens and earth in view, all men\nwould be assured and hopeful, patient in suffering, fearless in death.\n\n * * * * *\n\nThe second oracle produced in the mind of Balak an effect of\nbewilderment, not of complete discomfiture. He appears to be caught\nso far in the afflatus that he must hear all the prophet has to tell.\nHe desires Balaam neither to curse nor bless; neutrality would be\nsomething. Yet, with all he has already heard giving clear indication\nwhat more is to be expected, he proposes another place, another trial\nof the auguries. This time the whole of Israel shall again be seen.\nThe top of Peor that looketh down upon Jeshimon, or the desert, is\nchosen. On this occasion when the altars and sacrifices are prepared\nthe order is not the same as before. The diviner does not retire\nto a distance to seek for omens. He makes no profession of mystery\nnow. The temperature of thought and feeling is high, for the spot on\nwhich the company gathers is almost within range of the sentinels\nof Israel. The adventure is surely one of the strangest which the\nEast ever witnessed. In the dramatic unfolding of it the actors and\nspectators are alike absorbed.\n\n * * * * *\n\nThe third prophetic chant repeats several of the expressions contained\nin the second, and adds little; but it is more poetical in form. The\nprophet standing on the height saw \"immediately below him the vast\nencampment of Israel amongst the acacia groves of Abel Shittim--like\nthe water-courses of the mountains, like the hanging gardens beside\nhis own river Euphrates, with their aromatic shrubs and their\nwide-spreading cedars. Beyond them on the western side of Jordan rose\nthe hills of Palestine, with glimpses through their valleys of ancient\ncities towering on their crested heights. And beyond all, though he\ncould not see it with his bodily vision, he knew well that there rolled\nthe deep waters of the great sea, with the Isles of Greece, the Isle\nof Chittim--a world of which the first beginnings of life were just\nstirring, of which the very name here first breaks upon our ears.\"\nFrom the deep meditation which passed into a trance the diviner awoke\nto gaze for a little upon that scene, to look fixedly once more on the\ncamp of the Hebrew tribes, and then he began:--\n\n \"Balaam the son of Beor saith,\n And the man whose eye was closed saith:\n He saith who heareth the words of El,\n Who seeth the vision of Shaddai,\n Falling down and having his eyes opened.\"\n\nThus in the consciousness of an exalted state of mind which has\ncome with unusual symptoms, the ecstasy that overpowers and brings\nvisions before the inward eye, he vaunts his inspiration. There is\nno small resemblance to the manner in which the afflatus came to\nseers of Israel in after-times; yet the description points more\ndistinctly to the rapture of one like King Saul, who has been swept\nby some temporary enthusiasm into a strain of thought, an emotional\natmosphere, beyond ordinary experience. The far-reaching encampment\nis first poetically described, with images that point to perennial\nvitality and strength. Then as a settled nation Israel is described,\nirrigating broad fields and sowing them to reap an abundant harvest.\nWhy comparison is made between the power of Israel and Agag one can\nonly guess. Perhaps the reigning chief of the Amalekites was at this\ntime distinguished by the splendour of his court, so that his name\nwas a type of regal magnificence. The images of the wild ox and the\nlion are repeated with additional emphasis; and the strain rises to\nits climax in the closing apostrophe:--\n\n \"Blessed be every one that blesseth thee\n And cursed be every one that curseth thee.\"\n\nSo strongly is Israel established in the favour of Shaddai, the\nAlmighty One, that attempts to injure her will surely recoil on the\nhead of the aggressor. And on the other hand, to help Israel, to bid\nher God-speed, will be a way to blessedness. Jehovah will make the\noverflowing of His grace descend like rain on those who take Israel's\npart and cheer her on her way.\n\nIn the light of what afterwards took place, it is clear that Balaam\nwas in this last ejaculation carried far beyond himself. He may\nhave seen for a moment, in the flash of a heavenly light, the high\ndistinction to which Israel was advancing. He certainly felt that\nto curse her would be perilous, to bless her meritorious. But the\nthought, like others of a more spiritual nature, did not enter\ndeeply into his mind. Balaam could utter it with a kind of strenuous\ncordiality, and then do his utmost to falsify his own prediction.\nWhat matter fine emotions and noble protestations if they are only\nmomentary and superficial? Balak's open jealousy and hatred of Israel\nwere, after all, more complimentary to her than the high-sounding\npraises of Balaam, who spoke as enjoying the elation of the prophet,\nnot as delighting in the tenor of his message. Israel was nothing to\nhim. Soon the prosperity to which she was destined became like gall\nand wormwood to his soul. The encampment roused his admiration at the\ntime, but afterwards, when it became clear that the Israelites would\nhave none of him, his mood changed towards them. Ambition ruled him\nto the end; and if the Hebrews did not offer in any way to minister\nto it, a man like Balaam would by-and-by set himself to bring down\ntheir pride. Weak humanity gives many examples of this. The man who\nhas been an expectant flatterer of one greater than himself, but is\ndenied the notice and honour he looks for, becomes, when his hopes\nhave finally to be renounced, the most savage assailant, the most\nbitter detractor of his former hero. And so strong often are the\nminds which fall in this manner, that we look sometimes with anxiety\neven to the highest.\n\n\n\n\n XXI\n\n _THE MATTER OF BAAL-PEOR_\n\n NUMBERS xxiv. 10-xxv. 18\n\n\nThe last oracle of Balaam, as we have it, ventures into far more\nexplicit predictions than the others, and passes beyond the range of\nHebrew history. Its chief value for the Israelites lay in what was\ntaken to be a Messianic prophecy contained in it, and various bold\ndenunciations of their enemies. Whether the language can bear the\nimportant meanings thus found in it is a matter of considerable doubt.\nOn the whole, it appears best not to make over-much of the prescience\nof this _mashal_, especially as we cannot be sure that we have it in\nthe original form. One fact may be given to prove this. In Jeremiah\nxlviii. 45, an oracle regarding Moab embodies various fragments of the\nBook of Numbers, and one clause seems to be a quotation from chap.\nxxiv. 17. In Numbers the reading is, \"and break down \u05d5\u05b0\u05e7\u05b7\u05bc\u05e8\u05b0\u05e7\u05b7\u05e8, all\nthe sons of tumult \u05e9\u05b5\u05c1\u05ea;\" in Jeremiah it is, \"and the crown of the\nhead \u05d5\u05b0\u05e7\u05b8\u05d3\u05b0\u05e7\u05b9\u05bd\u05d3 of the sons of tumult \u05e9\u05b8\u05c1\u05d0\u05d5\u05b9\u05df.\" The resemblance leaves\nlittle doubt of the derivation of the one expression from the other,\nand at the same time shows diversity in the text.\n\nThe earlier deliverances of Balaam had disappointed the king of Moab;\nthe third kindled his anger. It was intolerable that one called to\ncurse his enemies should bless them again and again. Balaam would\ndo well to get him back to his own place. That Jehovah of whom he\nspake had kept him from honour. If he delayed he might find himself\nin peril. But the diviner did not retire. The word that had come to\nhim should be spoken. He reminded Balak of the terms on which he had\nbegun his auguries, and, perhaps to embitter Moab against Israel,\npersisted in advertising Balak \"what this people should do to his\npeople in the latter days.\"\n\nThe opening was again a vaunt of his high authority as a seer, one who\nknew the knowledge of Shaddai. Then, with ambiguous forms of speech\ncovering the indistinctness of his outlook, he spoke of one whom he saw\nfar away, in imagination, not reality, a personage bright and powerful,\nwho should rise star-like out of Jacob, bearing the sceptre of Israel,\nwho should smite through the corners of Moab and break down the sons\nof tumult. Over Edom and Seir he should triumph, and his dominion\nshould extend to the city which had become the last refuge of a hostile\npeople. Of spiritual power and right there is not a trace in this\nprediction. It is unquestionably the military vigour of Israel gathered\nup into the headship of some powerful king Balaam sees on the horizon\nof his field of view. But he anticipates with no uncertainty that Moab\nshall be attacked and broken, and that the victorious leader shall even\npenetrate to the fastnesses of Edom and reduce them. A people like\nIsrael, with so great vitality, would not be content to have jealous\nenemies upon its very borders, and Balak is urged to regard them with\nmore hatred and fear than he has yet shown.\n\nThe view that this prophecy \"finds its preliminary fulfilment in\nDavid, in whom the kingdom was established, and by whose victories\nthe power of Moab and Edom was broken, but its final and complete\nfulfilment only in Christ,\" is supported by the unanimous belief of\nthe Jews, and has been adopted by the Christian Church. Yet it must\nbe allowed that the victories of David did not break the power of\nMoab and Edom, for these peoples are found again and again, after his\ntime, in hostile attitude to Israel. And it is not to the purpose to\nsay that in Christ the kingdom reaches perfection, that He destroys\nthe enemies of Israel. Nor is there an argument for the Messianic\nreference worth considering in the fact that the pseudo-Messiah in\nthe reign of Hadrian styled himself Bar-cochba, son of the star.\nA pretender to Messiahship might snatch at any title likely to\nsecure for him popular support; his choice of a name proves only\nthe common belief of the Jews, and that was very ignorant, very far\nfrom spiritual. There is indeed more force in the notion that the\nstar by which the wise men of the East were guided to Bethlehem is\nsomehow related to this prophecy. Yet that also is too imaginative.\nThe oracle of Balaam refers to the virility and prospective dominance\nof Israel, as a nation favoured by the Almighty and destined to be\nstrong in battle. The range of the prediction is not nearly wide\nenough for any true anticipation of a Messiah gaining universal sway\nby virtue of redeeming love. It is becoming more and more necessary\nto set aside those interpretations which identify the Saviour of the\nworld with one who smites and breaks down and destroys, who wields a\nsceptre after the manner of oriental despots.\n\nIn Balaam's vision small nations with which he happens to be\nacquainted bulk largely--the Kenites, Amalek, Moab, and Edom. To\nhim the Amalekites appear as having once been \"the first of the\nnations.\" We may explain, as before, that he had been impressed on\nsome occasion by what he had seen of their force and the royal state\nof their king. The Kenites, dwelling either among the cliffs of\nEngedi or the mountains of Galilee, were a very small tribe; and the\nAmalekites, as well as the people of Moab and Edom, were of little\naccount in the development of human history. At the same time the\nprophecy looks in one direction to a power destined to become very\ngreat, when it speaks of the ships of Chittim. The course of empire\nis seen to be westward. Asshur, or Assyria, and Eber--the whole\nAbrahamic race, perhaps, including Israel--are threatened by this\nrising power, the nearest point of which is Cyprus in the Great Sea.\nBalaam is, we may say, a political prophet: to class him among those\nwho testified of Christ is to exalt far too much his inspiration and\nread more into his oracles than they naturally contain. There is no\ndeep problem in the narrative regarding him--as, for instance, how\na man false at heart could in any sense enter into those gracious\npurposes of God for the human race which were fulfilled by Christ.\n\n * * * * *\n\nBalaam, we are told, \"rose up and returned to his own place\";\nand from this it would seem that with bitterness in his heart he\nbetook himself to Pethor. If he did so, vainly hoping still that\nIsrael would appeal to him, he soon returned to give Balak and the\nMidianites advice of the most nefarious kind. We learn from xxxi. 16,\nthat through his counsel the Midianite women caused the children of\nIsrael to commit trespass against Jehovah in the matter of Peor. The\nstatement is a link between chaps. xxiv. and xxv. Vainly had Balaam\nas a diviner matched himself against the God of Israel. Resenting his\ndefeat, he sought and found another way which the customs of his own\npeople in their obscure idolatrous rites too readily suggested. The\nmoral law of Jehovah and the comparative purity of the Israelites\nas His people kept them separate from the other nations, gave them\ndignity and vigour. To break down this defence would make them like\nthe rest, would withdraw them from the favour of their God and even\ndefeat His purposes. The scheme was one which only the vilest craft\ncould have conceived; and it shows us too plainly the real character\nof Balaam. He must have known the power of the allurements which he\nnow advised as the means of attack on those he could not touch with\nhis maledictions nor gain by his soothsaying. In the shadow of this\nscheme of his we see the diviner and all his tribe, and indeed the\nwhole morality of the region, at their very worst.\n\nThe tribes were still in the plain of Jordan; and we may suppose\nthat the victorious troops had returned from the campaign against\nBashan, when a band of Midianites, professing the utmost friendliness,\ngradually introduced themselves into the camp. Then began the\ntemptation to which the Midianitish women, some of them of high rank,\nwillingly devoted themselves. It was to impurity and idolatry, to\ndegradation of manhood in body and soul, to abjuration at once of\nfaith and of all that makes individual and social life. The orgies\nwith which the Midianites were familiar belonged to the dark side of\na nature-cultus which carried the distinction between male and female\ninto religious symbolism, and made abject prostration of life before\nthe Divinity a crowning act of worship. Surviving still, the same\npractices are in India and elsewhere the most dreadful and inveterate\nbarriers which the Gospel and Christian civilisation encounter. The\nIsraelites were assailed unexpectedly, it would appear, and in a time\nof comparative inaction. Possibly, also, the camp was composed to some\nextent of men whose families were still in Kadesh waiting the conquest\nof the land of Canaan to cross the border. But the fact need not be\nconcealed that the polygamy which prevailed among the Hebrews was an\nelement in their danger. That had not been forbidden by the law; it\nwas even countenanced by the example of Moses. The custom, indeed, was\none which at the stage of development Israel had reached implied some\nprogress; for there are conditions even worse than polygamy against\nwhich it was a protest and safeguard. But like every other custom\nfalling short of the ideal of the family, it was one of great peril;\nand now disaster came. The Midianites brought their sacrifices and slew\nthem; the festival of Baal-peor was proclaimed. \"The people did eat and\nbowed down to their gods.\" It was a transgression which demanded swift\nand terrible judgment. The chief men of the tribes who had joined in\nthe abominable rites were taken and \"hanged up before the Lord against\nthe sun\"; the \"judges of Israel\" were commanded to slay \"every one his\nmen that were joined unto Baal-peor.\"\n\nThe narrative of the \"Priests' Code,\" beginning at ver. 6, and\ngoing on to the close of the chapter, adds details of the sin and\nits punishment. Assuming that the row of stakes with their ghastly\nburden is in full view, and the dead bodies of those slain by the\nexecutioners are lying about the camp, this narrative shows the\npeople gathered at the tent of meeting, many of them in tears. There\nis a plague, too, which is rapidly spreading and carrying off the\ntransgressors. In the midst of the sorrow and wailing, when the chief\nmen should have been bowed down in repentance, one of the princes\nof Simeon is seen leading by the hand his Midianitish paramour,\nherself a chief's daughter. In the very sight of Moses and the people\nthe guilty persons enter a tent. Then Phinehas, son of Eleazar the\npriest, following them, inflicts with a javelin the punishment of\ndeath. It is a daring but a true deed; and for it Phinehas and\nhis seed after him are promised the \"covenant of peace,\" even the\n\"covenant of an everlasting priesthood.\" His swift stroke has\nvindicated the honour of God, and \"made an atonement for the children\nof Israel.\" An act like this, when the elemental laws of morality are\nimperilled and a whole people needs a swift and impressive lesson,\nis a tribute to God which He will reward and remember. True, one of\nthe priestly house should keep aloof from death. But the emergency\ndemands immediate action, and he who is bold enough to strike at once\nis the true friend of men and of God.\n\nThe question may be put, whether this is not justice of too rude\nand ready a kind to be praised in the name of religion. To some it\nmay seem that the honour of God could not be served by the deed\nattributed to Phinehas; that he acted in passion rather than in the\ncalm deliberation without which justice cannot be dealt out by man\nto man. Would not this excuse the passionate action of a crowd,\nimpatient of the forms of law, that hurries an offender to the\nnearest tree or lamp-post? And the answer cannot be that Israel\nwas so peculiarly under covenant to God that its necessity would\nexonerate a deed otherwise illegal. We must face the whole problem\nalike of personal and of united action for the vindication of\nrighteousness in times of widespread license.\n\nIt is not necessary now to slay an offender in order clearly\nand emphatically to condemn his crime. In that respect modern\ncircumstances differ from those we are discussing. Upon Israel, as\nit was at the time of this tragedy, no impression could have been\nmade deep and swift enough for the occasion otherwise than by the\nact of Phinehas. But for an offender of the same rank now, there is\na punishment as stern as death, and on the popular mind it produces\na far greater effect--publicity, and the reprobation of all who love\ntheir fellowmen and God. The act of Phinehas was not assassination;\na similar act now would be, and it would have to be dealt with as\na crime. The stroke now is inflicted by public accusation, which\nresults in public trial and public condemnation. From the time to\nwhich the narrative refers, on to our own day, social conditions\nhave been passing through many phases. Occasionally there have been\ncircumstances in which the swift judgment of righteous indignation\nwas justifiable, though it did seem like assassination. And in no\ncase has such action been more excusable than when the purity of\nfamily life has been invaded, while the law of the land would not\ninterfere. We do not greatly wonder that in France the avenging of\ninfidelity is condoned when the sufferer snatches a justice otherwise\nunattainable. That is not indeed to be praised, but the imperfection\nof law is a partial apology. The higher the standard of public\nmorality the less needful is this venture on the Divine right to\nkill. And certainly it is not private revenge that is ever to be\nsought, but the vindication of the elemental righteousness on which\nthe well-being of humanity depends. Phinehas had no private revenge\nto seek. It was the public good.\n\n * * * * *\n\nIt is confidently affirmed by Wellhausen that the \"Priestly Code\"\nmakes the cultus the principal thing, and this, he says, implies\nretrogression from the earlier idea. The passage we are considering,\nlike many others ascribed to the \"Priests' Code,\" makes something else\nthan the cultus the principal thing. We are told that in the teaching\nof this code \"the bond between cultus and sensuality is severed; no\ndanger can arise of an admixture of impure, immoral elements, a danger\nwhich was always present in Hebrew antiquity.\" But here the danger\nis admitted, the cultus is entirely out of sight, and the sin of\nsensuality is conspicuous. When Phinehas intervenes, moreover, it is\nnot in harmony with any statute or principle laid down in the \"Priests'\nCode\"--rather, indeed, against its general spirit, which would prohibit\nan Aaronite from a deed of blood. According to the whole tenor of the\nlaw the priesthood had its duties, carefully prescribed, by doing which\nfaithfulness was to be shown. Here an act of spontaneous zeal, done not\n\"on the positive command of a will outside,\" but on the impulse arising\nout of a fresh occasion,[11] receives the approval of Jehovah, and\nthe \"covenant of an everlasting priesthood\" is confirmed for the sake\nof it. Was Phinehas in any sense carrying out statutory instructions\nfor atonement on behalf of Israel when he inflicted the punishment\nof death on Zimri and his paramour? To identify the \"Priestly Code\"\nwith \"cultus legislation,\" and that with theocracy, and then declare\nthe cultus to have become a \"pedagogic instrument of discipline,\"\n\"estranged from the heart,\" is to make large demands on our inattention.\n\n * * * * *\n\nIn the closing verses of the chapter another question of a moral\nnature is involved. It is recorded that after the events we have\nconsidered Jehovah spake unto Moses, saying, \"Vex the Midianites,\nand smite them; for they vex you with their wiles, wherewith they\nhave beguiled you in the matter of Peor, and in the matter of Cozbi,\nthe daughter of the prince of Midian, their sister, which was slain\non the day of the plague in the matter of Peor.\" Now is it for the\nsake of themselves and their own safety the Israelites are to smite\nMidian? Is retaliation commanded? Does God set enmity between the one\npeople and the other, and so doing make confession that Israel has no\nduty of forgiveness, no mission to convert and save?\n\nThere is difficulty in pronouncing judgment as to the point of view\ntaken by the narrator. Some will maintain that the historian here,\nwhoever he was, had no higher conception of the command than that it\nwas one which sanctioned revenge. And there is nothing on the face of\nthe narrative which can be brought forward to disprove the charge.\nYet it must be remembered that the history proceeds on the theocratic\nconception of Israel's place and destiny. To the writer Israel is of\nless account in itself than as a people rescued from Egypt and called\nto nationality in order to serve Jehovah. The whole tenor of the\n\"Priests' Code\" narrative as well as of the other bears this out.\nThere is no patriotic zeal in the narrow sense,--\"My country right or\nwrong.\" Scarcely a passage can be pointed to implying such a sentiment,\nsuch a drift of thought. The underlying idea in the whole story is\nthe sacredness of morality, not of Israel; and the suppression or\nextinction of this tribe of Midianites with their obscene idolatry is\nGod's will, not Israel's. Too plain, indeed, is it that the Israelites\nwould have preferred to leave Midian and other tribes of the same low\nmoral cast unmolested, free to pursue their own ends.\n\nAnd Jehovah is not revengeful, but just. The vindication of morality\nat the time the Book of Numbers deals with, and long afterwards,\ncould only be through the suppression of those who were identified\nwith dangerous forms of vice. The forces at command in Israel were\nnot equal to the task of converting; and what could be achieved was\ncommanded--opposition, enmity; if need were, exterminating war.\nThe better people has a certain spiritual capacity, but not enough\nto make it fit for what may be called moral missionary work. It\nwould suffer more than it would gain if it entered on any kind of\nintercourse with Midian with the view of raising the standard of\nthought and life. All that can be expected meanwhile is that the\nIsraelites shall be at issue with a people so degraded; they are to\nbe against the Midianites, keep them from power in the world, subject\nthem by the sword.\n\nOur judgment, then, is that the narrative sustains a true theocracy\nin this sense, exhibits Israel as a unique phenomenon in human\nhistory, not impossible,--there lies the clear veracity of the Bible\naccounts,--but playing a part such as the times allowed, such as the\nworld required. From a passage like that now before us, and the\nsequel, the war with Midian, which some have regarded as a blot on the\npages of Scripture, an argument for its inspiration may be drawn. We\nfind here no ethical anachronisms, no impracticable ideas of charity\nand pardon. There is a sane and strenuous moral aim, not out of keeping\nwith the state of things in the world of that time, yet showing the\nrule and presenting the will of a God who makes Israel a protesting\npeople. The Hebrews are men, not angels; men of the old world, not\nChristians--true! Who could have received this history if it had\nrepresented them as Christians, and shown us God giving them commands\nfit for the Church of to-day? They are called to a higher morality\nthan that of Egypt, for theirs is to be spiritual; higher than that\nof Chaldea or of Canaan, for Chaldea is shrouded in superstition,\nCanaan in obscene idolatry. They can do something; and what they\ncan do Jehovah commands them to do. And He is not an imperfect God\nbecause His prophet does not give from the first a perfect Christian\nlaw, a redeeming gospel. He is the \"I Am.\" Let the whole course of\nOld Testament development be traced, and the sanity and coherency of\nthe theocratic idea as it is presented in law and prophecy, psalm and\nparable, cannot fail to convince any just and frank inquirer.\n\n * * * * *\n\nThe end of Balaam's life may be glanced at before the pages close\nthat refer to his career. In xxxi. 8, it is stated that in the battle\nwhich went against the Midianites Balaam was slain. We do not know\nwhether he was so maddened by his disappointment as to take the\nsword against Jehovah and Israel, or whether he only joined the army\nof Midian in his capacity of augur. F. W. Robertson imagines \"the\ninsane frenzy with which he would rush into the field, and finding\nall go against him, and that lost for which he had bartered heaven,\nafter having died a thousand worse than deaths, find death at last\nupon the spears of the Israelites.\" It is of course possible to\nimagine that he became the victim of his own insane passion. But\nBalaam never had a profound nature, was never more than within sight\nof the spiritual world. He appears as the calculating, ambitious man,\nwho would reckon his chances to the last, and with coolness, and what\nhe believed to be sagacity, decide on the next thing to attempt. But\nhis penetration failed him, as at a certain point it fails all men of\nhis kind. He ventured too far, and could not draw back to safety.\n\nThe death he died was almost too honourable for this false prophet,\nunless, indeed, he fell fleeing like a coward from the battle. One\nwho had recognised the power of a higher faith than his countrymen\nprofessed, and saw a nation on the way to the vigour that faith\ninspired, who in personal spleen and envy set in operation a scheme\nof the very worst sort to ruin Israel, was not an enemy worth the\nedge of the sword. Let us suppose that a Hebrew soldier found him in\nflight, and with a passing stroke brought him to the ground. There is\nno tragedy in such a death; it is too ignominious. Whatever Balaam was\nin his boyhood, whatever he might have been when the cry escaped him,\n\"Let me die the death of the righteous,\" selfish craft had brought him\nbelow the level of the manhood of the time. Balak with his pathetic\nfaith in cursing and incantation now seems a prince beside the augur.\nFor Balaam, though he knew Jehovah after a manner, had no religion,\nhad only the envy of the religion of others. He came on the stage with\nan air that almost deceived Balak and has deceived many. He leaves it\nwithout one to lament him. Or shall we rather suppose that even for\nhim, in Pethor beyond the Euphrates, a wife or child waited and prayed\nto Sutekh and, when the tidings of his death were brought, fell into\ninconsolable weeping? Over the worst they think and do men draw the\nveil to hide it from some eyes. And Balaam, a poor, mean tool of the\nbasest cravings, may have had one to believe in him, one to love him.\nHe reminds us of Absalom in his character and actions--Absalom, a man\nvoid of religion and morals; and for him the father he had dethroned\nand dishonoured wept bitterly in the chamber over the gate of Mahanaim,\n\"My son Absalom! would God I had died for thee, O Absalom, my son, my\nson!\" So may some woman in Pethor have wailed for Balaam fallen under\nthe spear of a Hebrew warrior.\n\nFOOTNOTE:\n\n[11] Wellhausen, \"Prolegomena,\" p. 424.\n\n\n\n\n XXII\n\n _A NEW GENERATION_\n\n NUMBERS xxvi., xxvii\n\n\nThe numbering at Sinai before the sojourn in the Desert of Paran has\nits counterpart in the numbering now recorded. In either case those\nreckoned are the men able to go forth to war, from twenty years old and\nupward. Once, an easy entrance into the land of promise may have been\nexpected; but that dream has long passed away. Now the Israelites are\nmade clearly to understand that the last effort will require the whole\nwarlike energy they can summon, the best courage of every one who can\nhandle sword or spear. There has been hitherto comparatively little\nfighting. The Amalekites at an early stage, afterwards the Amorites\nand the Bashanites, have had to be attacked. Now, however, the serious\nstrife is to begin. Peoples long established in Canaan have to be\nassailed and dispossessed. Let the number of capable men be reckoned\nthat there may be confidence for the advance.\n\nNothing is to be won without energy, courage, unity, wise preparation\nand adjustment of means to ends. True, the battle is the Lord's, and\nHe can give victory to the few over the many, to the feeble over the\nstrong. But not even in the case of Israel are the ordinary laws\nsuspended. This people has an advantage in its faith. That is enough\nto support the army in the coming struggle; and the Israelites must\nmake Canaan theirs by force of arms. For, surely, in a sense, there\nis right on the other side, the right of prior possession at least.\nThe Canaanites, Hittites, Jebusites, Hivites have tilled the land,\nplanted vineyards, built cities, and fulfilled, so far, their mission\nin the world. They, indeed, never feel themselves secure. Often one\ntribe falls on the territory of another, and takes possession. The\nright to the soil has to be continually guarded by military power\nand courage. It is not wonderful to Amorites that another race\nshould attempt the conquest of their land. But it would be strange,\nhumanly speaking impossible, that a weaker, less capable people\nshould master those who are presently in occupation. By the great\nlaws that govern human development, the dominant laws of God we may\ncall them, this could not be. Israel must show itself powerful, must\nprove the right of might, otherwise it shall not even yet obtain the\ninheritance it has long been desiring. The might of some nations is\npurely that of animal physique and dogged determination. Others rise\nhigher in virtue of their intellectual vigour, splendid discipline,\nand ingenious appliances. Man for man, Israelites should be a match\nfor any people, because there is trust in Jehovah, and hope in His\npromise. Now the trial of battle is to be made; the Hebrews are to\nrealise that they will need all their strength.\n\nDo we ever imagine that the law of endeavour shall be relaxed for us,\neither in the physical or in the spiritual region? Is it supposed\nthat at some point, when after struggling through the wilderness we\nhave but a narrow stream between us and the coveted inheritance, the\nobject of our desire shall be bestowed in harmony with some other\nlaw, having been procured by other efforts than our own? Thinking so,\nwe only dream. What we gain by our endeavour--physical, intellectual,\nspiritual--can alone become a real possession. The future discipline\nof humanity is misunderstood, the forecast is altogether wrong, when\nthis is not comprehended. In this world we have that for which we\nlabour; nothing more. So-called properties and domains do not belong\nto their nominal owners, who have merely \"inherited.\" The literature\nof a country does not belong to those who possess books in which it\nis contained; it is the domain of men and women who have toiled for\nevery ell and inch of ground. And spiritually, while all is the gift\nof God, all has to be won by efforts of the soul. Before humanity\nlies a Canaan, a Paradise. But no easy way of acquisition shall ever\nbe found, no other way indeed than has all along been followed. The\nmen of God able to go forth to war need to be numbered and brought\nunder discipline for the conquests that remain. And what is yet to\nbe won by moral courage and devotion to the highest shall have to be\nkept in like manner.\n\nThe second numbering of the people showed that a new generation\nfilled the ranks. Plagues that swept away thousands, or the slow,\nsure election of death, had taken all who left Egypt excepting a few.\nIt was the same Israel, yet another. Is, then, the nation of account,\nand not the individuals who compose it? Perhaps the two numberings\nmay be intended to guard us against this error; at all events, we\nmay take them so. Man by man, the host was reckoned at Sinai; man\nby man it is reckoned again in the plains of Moab. There were six\nhundred and three thousand five hundred and fifty: there are six\nhundred and one thousand seven hundred and thirty. The numberings\nby the command of Jehovah could not but mean that His eye was upon\neach. And when the new race looked back along the wilderness way,\neach group remembering its own graves over which the sand of the\ndesert was blown, there might at least be the thought that God also\nremembered, and that the mouldering dust of those who, despite their\ntransgression, had been brave and loving and honest, was in His\nkeeping. Israel was experiencing a singular break in its history. It\nwould begin its new career in Canaan without memorials, except that\ncave at Machpelah where, centuries before, Abraham and Sarah, Isaac\nand Jacob, had been buried, and the field at Shechem where the body\nof Joseph was laid. No graves but these would be the monuments of\nIsrael. In Jehovah, the Ancient of Days, lay the history, with Him\nthe career of the tribes.\n\nThe past receding, the future advancing, and God the sole abiding link\nbetween them. For us, as for Israel, notwithstanding all our care of\nthe monuments and gains of the past, that is the one sustaining faith;\nand it is adequate, inspiring. The swift decay of life, the constant\nflux of humanity, would be our despair if we had not God.\n\n \"Thou carriest them away as with a flood; they are as a sleep:\n In the morning they are like grass which groweth up.\n In the morning it flourisheth and groweth up;\n In the evening it is cut down and withereth.\"\n\nSo the \"Prayer of Moses the man of God,\" under the saddening thought\nof mortality. But God is \"from everlasting to everlasting,\" \"the\ndwelling place of His people in all generations.\" The life that\nbegins in the Divine will, and enjoys its day under the Divine care,\nblends with the current, yet is not absorbed. A generation or a\npeople lives only as the men and women that compose it live. Such is\nthe final judgment, Christ's judgment, by which all providence is to\nbe interpreted. An Israelite might enter much into the national hope,\nand to some extent forget himself for the sake of it. But his proper\nlife was never in that forgetfulness: it was always in personal\nenergy of will and soul that contributed to the nation's strength\nand progress. The tribes, Reuben, Simeon, Judah, and the rest, are\nmustered. But the men make the tribes, give them quality, value; or\nrather, of the men, those who are brave, faithful, and true.\n\nThat each life is a fact in the Eternal overflowing Life, conscious\nof all--in this there is comfort for us who are numbered among the\nmillions, with no particular claim to reminiscence, and aware, at\nany rate, that when a few years pass the world will forget us. In\nvain the most of us seek a niche in the Valhalla of the race, or\nthe record of a single line in the history of our time. Whatever\nour suffering or achieving, are we not doomed to oblivion? The\ngrave-yard will keep our dust, the memorial stone will preserve our\nnames--but for how long? Until in the evolutions that are to come\nthe ploughshare of a covetous age tears up the soil we imagine to be\nconsecrated for ever. But there is a memory that does not grow old,\nin which for good or evil we are enshrined. \"We all live unto God.\"\nThe Divine consciousness of us is our strength and hope. It alone\nkeeps the soul from despair--or, if the life has not been in faith,\nstings with a desperate reassurance. Does God remember us with the\nlove He beareth to His own? In any case each human life is held in an\nabiding consciousness, a purpose which is eternal.\n\nThe page of Israel's history we are reading preserves many names. It\nis in outline a genealogy of the tribes. Reuben's sons are Hanoch,\nPallu, Hezron, Carmi. The son of Pallu is Eliab. The sons of Eliab\nare Nemuel, Dathan, and Abiram. And of Dathan and Abiram we are\nreminded that they strove against Moses and Aaron in the company of\nKorah; and the earth opened her mouth and swallowed them up. The\njudgment of evildoers is commemorated. The rest have their praise in\nthis alone, that they held aloof from the sin. Turn to other tribes,\nZebulun, Asher, Naphtali, for instance, and in the case of each the\nnames of those who were heads of families are given. In the First\nBook of Chronicles the genealogy is extended, with various details\nof settlement and history. In what are we to find the explanation of\nthis attempt to preserve the lineage of families, and the ancestral\nnames? If the progenitors were great men, distinguished by heroism,\nor by faith, the pride of the descendants might have a show of\nreason. Or again, if the families had kept the pure Hebrew descent\nwe should be able to understand. But no greatness is assigned to the\nheads of families, not a single mark of achievement or distinction.\nAnd the Israelites did not preserve their purity of race. In\nCanaan, as we learn from the Book of Judges, they \"dwelt among the\nCanaanites, the Hittite, and the Amorite, and the Perizzite, and the\nHivite, and the Jebusite: and they took their daughters to be their\nwives, and gave their own daughters to their sons, and served their\ngods\" (iii. 5, 6).\n\nThe sole reason we can find for these records is the consciousness of\na duty which the Israelites felt, but did not always perform--to keep\nthemselves separate as Jehovah's people. In the more energetic minds,\nthrough all national defection and error, that consciousness survived.\nAnd it served its end. The Bene-Israel, tracing their descent through\nthe heads of families and tribes to Jacob, Isaac, Abraham, realised\ntheir distinctness from other races and entered upon a unique destiny\nwhich is not yet fulfilled. It is a singular testimony to what on the\nhuman side appears as an idea, a sentiment; to what on the Divine side\nis a purpose running through the ages. Because of this human sentiment\nand this Divine purpose, the former maintained apparently by the pride\nof race, by genealogies, by traditions often singularly unspiritual,\nbut really by the over-ruling providence of God, Israel became unique,\nand filled an extraordinary place among the nations. Many things\nco-operated to make her a people regarding whom it could be said:\n\"Israel never stood quietly by to see the world badly governed, under\nthe authority of a God reputed to be just. Her sages burned with anger\nover the abuses of the world. A bad man, dying old, rich, and at ease,\nkindled their fury; and the prophets in the ninth century B.C. elevated\nthis idea to the height of a dogma.... The childhood of the elect is\nfull of signs and prognostics, which are only recognised afterwards.\"\nA race may treasure its ancient records and venerated names to little\npurpose, may preserve them with no other result than to mark its own\ndegeneracy and failure. Israel did not. The Unseen King of this people\nso ordered their history that greater and still greater names were\nadded to the rolls of their leaders, heroes, and prophets, until the\nShiloh came.\n\nBy the computations that survive, a diminished yet not greatly\ndiminished number of fighting men was reckoned in the plains of Moab.\nSome tribes had fallen away considerably, others had increased,\nSimeon notably among the former, Judah and Manasseh among the latter.\nThe causes of diminution and increase alike are purely conjectural.\nSimeon may have been involved in the sin of Baal-peor more than the\nothers and suffered proportionately. Yet we cannot suppose that,\non the whole, character had much to do with numerical strength.\nAssuming the transgressions of which the history informs us and the\npunishments that followed them, we must believe that the tribes were\non much the same moral plane. In the natural course of things there\nwould have been a considerable increase in the numbers of men. The\nhardships and judgments of the desert and the defection of some by\nthe way are general causes of diminution. We have also seen reason\nto believe that a proportion, not perhaps very great, remained at\nKadesh, and did not take the journey round Edom. It is certainly\nworthy of notice with regard to Simeon that the final allocation\nof territory gave to this tribe the district in which Kadesh was\nsituated. The small increase of the tribe of Levi is another fact\nshown by the second census; and we remember that Simeon and Levi were\nbrethren (Gen. xlix. 5).\n\nThe numbering in the plains of Moab is connected in vv. 52-6 with\nthe division of the land among the tribes. \"To the more thou shalt\ngive the more inheritance, and to the fewer thou shalt give the less\ninheritance: to every one according to those that were numbered of\nhim shall his inheritance be given.\" The principle of allocation is\nobvious and just. No doubt the comparative value of different parts\nof Canaan was to be taken into account. There were fertile plains on\nthe one hand, barren highlands on the other. These reckoned for, the\ngreater the tribe the larger was to be the district assigned to it.\nAn elementary rule; but how has it been set aside! Vast districts of\nGreat Britain are almost without inhabitants; others are overcrowded.\nAn even distribution of people over the land capable of tillage is\nnecessary to the national health. In no sense can it be maintained\nthat good comes of concentrating population in immense cities. But\nthe policy of proprietors is not more at fault than the ignorant rush\nof those who desire the comforts and opportunities of town life.\n\n * * * * *\n\nThe twenty-seventh chapter is partly occupied with the details of a\ncase which raised a question of inheritance. Five daughters of one\nZelophehad of the tribe of Manasseh appealed to Moses on the ground\nthat they were the representatives of the household, having no\nbrother. Were they to have no possession because they were women? Was\nthe name of their father to be taken away because he had no son? It\nwas not to be supposed that the want of male descendants had been a\njudgment on their father. He had died in the wilderness, but not as a\nrebel against Jehovah, like those who were in the company of Korah.\nHe had \"died in his own sins.\" They petitioned for an inheritance\namong the brethren of their father.\n\nThe claim of these women appears natural if the right of heirship\nis acknowledged in any sense, with this reservation, however, that\nwomen might not be able properly to cultivate the land, and could not\ndo much in the way of defending it. And these, for the time, were\nconsiderations of no small account. The five sisters may of course have\nbeen ready to undertake all that was necessary as occupiers of a farm,\nand no doubt they reckoned on marriage. But the original qualification\nthat justified heirship of land was ability to use the resources of\nthe inheritance and take part in all national duties. The decision\nin this case marks the beginning of another conception--that of the\npersonal development of women. The claim of the daughters of Zelophehad\nwas allowed, with the result that they found themselves called to the\ncultivation of mind and life in a manner which would not otherwise have\nbeen open to them. They received by the judgment here recorded a new\nposition of responsibility as well as privilege. The law founded on\ntheir case must have helped to make the women of Israel intellectually\nand morally vigorous.\n\nThe rules of inheritance among an agricultural people, exposed to\nhostile incursions, must, like that of ver. 8, assume the right of\nsons in preference to daughters; but under modern social conditions\nthere are no reasons for any such preference, except indeed the\nsentiment of family, and the maintenance of titles of rank. But the\ntruth is that inheritance, so-called, is every year becoming of\nless moral account as compared with the acquisitions that are made\nby personal industry and endeavour. Property is only of value as\nit is a means to the enlargement and fortifying of the individual\nlife. The decision on behalf of the daughters of Zelophehad was of\nimportance for what it implied rather than for what it actually gave.\nIt made possible that dignity and power which we see illustrated\nin the career of Deborah, whose position as a \"mother in Israel\"\ndoes not seem to have depended much, if at all, on any accident of\ninheritance; it was reached by the strength of her character and the\nardour of her faith.\n\n * * * * *\n\nThe generation that came from Egypt has passed away, and now (xxvii.\n12) Moses himself receives his call. He is to ascend the mountain of\nAbarim and look forth over the land Israel is to inhabit; then he\nis to be gathered to his people. He is reminded of the sin by which\nAaron and he dishonoured God when they failed to sanctify Him at the\nwaters of Meribah. The burden of the Book of Numbers is revealed.\nThe brooding sadness which lies on the whole narrative is not cast\nby human mortality but by moral transgression and defect. There is\njudgment for revolt, as of those who followed Korah. There are men who\nlike Zelophehad die \"in their own sins,\" filling up the time allowed\nto imperfect obedience and faith, the limit of existence that falls\nshort of the glory of God. And Moses, whose life is lengthened that his\nhonourable task may be fully done, must all the more conspicuously pay\nthe penalty of his high misdemeanour. With the goal of Israel's great\ndestiny in view the narrative moves from shadow to shadow. Here and\nthroughout, this is a characteristic of Old Testament history. And the\nshadows deepen as they rest on lives more capable of noble service,\nmore guilty in their disbelief and defiance of Jehovah.\n\nThe rebuke which darkens over Moses at the close and lies on his\ngrave does not obscure the greatness of the man; nor have all\nthe criticisms of the history in which he plays so great a part\noverclouded his personality. The opening of Israel's career may not\nnow seem so marvellous in a sense as once it seemed, nor so remote\nfrom the ordinary course of Providence. Development is found where\npreviously the complete law, institution, or system appeared to burst\nat once into maturity. But the features of a man look clearly forth\non us from the Pentateuchal narrative; and the story of the life is\nso coherent as to compel a belief in its veracity, which at the same\ntime is demanded by the circumstances of Israel. A beginning there\nmust have been, in the line which the earliest prophets continued,\nand that beginning in a single mind, a single will. The Moses of\nthese books of the exodus is one who could have unfolded the ideas\nfrom which the nationality of Israel sprang: a man of smaller mind\nwould have made a people of more ordinary frame. Institutions that\ngrow in the course of centuries may reflect their perfected form on\nthe story of their origin; it is, however, certain this cannot be\ntrue of a faith. That does not develop. What it is at its birth it\ncontinues to be; or if a change takes place it will be to the loss\nof definiteness and power. Kuenen himself makes the three universal\nreligions to be Judaism, Mohammedanism and Christianity. The analogy\nof the two latter is conclusive with regard to the first--that Moses\nwas the author of Israel's faith in Jehovah.\n\nAnd this involves much, both with regard to the human characteristics\nand the Divine inspiration of the founder, much that an after-age\nwould have been utterly incapable of imagining. When we find a life\ndepicted in these Pentateuchal narratives, corresponding in all its\nfeatures with the place that has to be filled, revealing one who,\nunder the conditions of Israel's nativity, might have made a way for\nit into sustaining faith, it is not difficult to accept the details\nin their substance. The records are certainly not Moses' own. They\nare exoteric, now from the people's point of view, now from that of\nthe priests. But they present with wonderful fidelity and power what\nin the life of the founder went to stamp his faith on the national\nmind. And the marvellous thing is that the shadows as well as the\nlights in the biography serve this great end. The gloom that falls\nat Meribah and rests on Nebo tells of the character of Jehovah,\nbears witness to the Supreme Royalty which Moses lived and laboured\nto exalt. A living God, righteous and faithful, gracious to them\nthat trusted and served Him, who also visited iniquity--such was the\nJehovah between whom and Israel Moses stood as mediator, such the\nJehovah by whose command he was to ascend the height of Abarim to die.\n\nTo die, to be gathered to his people--and what then? It is at death\nwe reckon up the account and estimate the value and power of faith.\nHas it made a man ready for his change, ripened his character,\nestablished his work on a foundation as of rock? The command which\nat Horeb Moses received long ago, and the revelation of God he there\nenjoyed, have had their opportunity; to what have they come?\n\nThe supreme human desire is to know the nature, to understand the\ndistinctive glory of the Most High. At the bush Moses had been made\naware of the presence with him of the God of his fathers, the Fear\nof Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob. His duty also had been made clear.\nBut the mystery of being was still unsolved. With sublime daring,\ntherefore, he pursued the inquiry: \"Behold when I come unto the\nchildren of Israel, and shall say unto them, The God of your fathers\nhath sent me unto you; and they shall say to me, What is His name?\nwhat shall I say unto them?\" The answer came in apocalypse, in a\nform of simple words:--\"I AM THAT I AM.\" The solemn Name expressed\nan intensity of life, a depth and power of personal being, far\ntranscending that of which man is conscious. It belongs to One who\nhas no beginning, whose life is apart from time, above the forces of\nnature, independent of them. Jehovah says, \"I am not what you see,\nnot what nature is, standing forth into the range of your sight;\nI Am in eternal separation, self-existent, with underived fulness\nof power and life.\" The remoteness and incomprehensibility of God\nremain, although much is revealed. Whatever experience of life each\nman sums up for himself in saying \"I am,\" aids him in realising the\nlife of God. Have we aspired? have we loved? have we undertaken and\naccomplished? have we thought deeply? Does any one in saying \"I am\"\ninclude the consciousness of long and varied life?--the \"I AM\" of God\ncomprehends all that. And yet He changes not. Beneath our experience\nof life which changes there is this great Living Essence. \"I AM THAT\nI AM,\" profoundly, eternally true, self-consistent, with whom is no\nbeginning of experience or purpose, yet controlling, harmonising,\nyea, originating all in the unfathomable depths of an eternal Will.\n\nIdeas like these, we must believe, shaped themselves, if not clearly,\nat least in dim outline before the mind of Moses, and made the\nfaith by which he lived. And how had it proved itself as the stay\nof endeavour, the support of a soul under heavy burdens of duty,\ntrial, and sorrowful consciousness? The reliance it gave had never\nfailed. In Egypt, before Pharaoh, Moses had been sustained by it as\none who had a sanction for his demands and actions which no king or\npriest could claim. At Sinai it had given spiritual strength and\ndefinite authority to the law. It was the spirit of every oracle,\nthe underlying force in every judgment. Faith in Jehovah, more than\nnatural endowments, made Moses great. His moral vision was wide and\nclear because of it, his power among the people as a prophet and\nleader rested upon it. And the fruit of it, which began to be seen\nwhen Israel learned to trust Jehovah as the one living God and girt\nitself for His service, has not even yet been all gathered in. We\npass by the theories of philosophy regarding the unseen to rest in\nthe revelation of God which embodies Moses' faith. His inspiration,\nonce for all, carried the world beyond polytheism to monotheism\nunchallengeably true, inspiring, sublime.\n\nThere can be no doubt that death tested the faith of Moses as a\npersonal reliance on the Almighty. How he found sufficient help\nin the thought of Jehovah when Aaron died, and when his own call\ncame, we can only surmise. For him it was a familiar certainty that\nthe Judge of all the earth did right. His own decision went with\nthat of Jehovah in every great moral question; and even when death\nwas involved, however great a punishment it appeared, however sad\na necessity, he must have said, Good is the will of the Lord. But\nthere was more than acquiescence. One who had lived so long with God,\nfinding all the springs and aims of life in Him, must have known that\nirresistible power would carry on what had been begun, would complete\nto its highest tower that building of which the foundation had been\nlaid. Moses had wrought not for self but for God; he could leave his\nwork in the Divine hand with absolute assurance that it would be\nperfected. And as for his own destiny, his personal life, what shall\nwe say? Moses had been what he was through the grace of Him whose\nname is \"I AM THAT I AM.\" He could at least look into the dim region\nbeyond and say, \"It is God's will that I pass through the gate. I am\nspiritually His, and am strong in mind for His service. I have been\nwhat He has willed, excepting in my transgression. I shall be what He\nwills; and that cannot be ill for me; that will be best for me.\" God\nwas gracious and forgave sin, though He could not suffer it to pass\nunjudged. Even in appointing death the Merciful One could not fail to\nbe merciful to His servant. The thought of Moses might not carry him\ninto the future of his own existence, into what should be after he\nhad breathed his last. But God was His; and he was God's.\n\nSo the personal drama of many acts and scenes draws to a close with\nforebodings of the end, and yet a little respite ere the curtain\nfalls. The music is solemn as befits the night-fall, yet has a ring\nof strong purpose and inexhaustible sufficiency. It is not the \"still\nsad music of humanity\" we hear with the words, \"Get thee up into this\nmountain of Abarim, and behold the land which I have given unto the\nchildren of Israel. And when thou hast seen it, thou also shalt be\ngathered unto thy people, as Aaron thy brother was gathered.\" It is\nthe music of the Voice that awakens life, commands and inspires it,\ncheers the strong in endeavour and soothes the tired to rest. He who\nspeaks is not weary of Moses, nor does He mean Moses to be weary of\nhis task. But this change lies in the way of God's strong purpose,\nand it is assumed that Moses will neither rebel nor repine. Far away,\nin an evolution unforeseen by man, will come the glorification of\nOne who is the Life indeed; and in His revelation as the Son of the\nEternal Father Moses will share. With Christ he will speak of the\nchange of death and that faith which overcomes all change.\n\n * * * * *\n\nThe designation of Joshua, who had long been the minister of Moses,\nand perhaps for some time administrator of affairs, is recorded in\nthe close of the chapter. The prayer of Moses assumes that by direct\ncommission the fitness of Joshua must be signified to the people.\nIt might be Jehovah's will that, even yet, another should take the\nheadship of the tribes. Moses spake unto the Lord, saying, \"Let\nJehovah, the God of the spirits of all flesh, appoint a man over the\ncongregation which may go out before them, and which may come in\nbefore them, and which may lead them out and which may bring them\nin; that the congregation of Jehovah be not as sheep which have no\nshepherd.\" One who has so long endeavoured to lead, and found it so\ndifficult, whose heart and soul and strength have been devoted to\nmake Israel Jehovah's people, can relax his hold of things without\ndismay only if he is sure that God will Himself choose and endow the\nsuccessor. What aimless wandering there would be if the new leader\nproved incompetent, wanting wisdom or grace! How far about might\nIsrael's way yet be, in another sense than the compassing of Edom!\nBefore the Friend of Israel Moses pours out his prayer for a shepherd\nfit to lead the flock.\n\nAnd the oracle confirms the choice to which Providence has already\npointed. Joshua the son of Nun, \"a man in whom is the spirit,\" is to\nhave the call and receive the charge. His investiture with official\nright and dignity is to be in the sight of Eleazar the priest and\nall the congregation. Moses shall put of his own honour upon Joshua\nand declare his commission. Joshua shall not have the whole burden\nof decision resting upon him, for Jehovah will guide him. Yet he\nshall not have direct access to God in the tent of meeting as Moses\nhad. In the time of special need Eleazar \"shall inquire for him by\nthe judgment of the Urim before Jehovah.\" Thus instructed, he shall\nexercise high authority.\n\n\"A man in whom is the spirit\"--such is the one outstanding personal\nqualification. \"The God of the spirits of all flesh\" finds in Joshua\nthe sincere will, the faithful heart. The work that is to be done is\nnot of a spiritual kind, but grim fighting, control of an army and of\na people not yet amenable to law, under circumstances that will try a\nleader's firmness, sagacity, and courage. Yet, even for such a task,\nallegiance to Jehovah and His purpose regarding Israel, the enthusiasm\nof faith, high spirit, not experience--these are the commendations\nof the chief. Qualified thus, Joshua may occasionally make mistakes.\nHis calculations may not always be perfect, nor the means he employs\nexactly fitted to the end. But his faith will enable him to recover\nwhat is momentarily lost; his courage will not fail. Above all, he will\nbe no opportunist guided by the turn of events, yielding to pressure\nor what may appear necessity. The one principle of faithfulness to\nJehovah will keep him and Israel in a path which must be followed even\nif success in a worldly sense be not immediately found.\n\nThe priest who inquires of the Lord by Urim has a higher place under\nJoshua's administration than under that of Moses. The theocracy will\nhenceforth have a twofold manifestation, less of unity than before.\nAnd here the change is of a kind which may involve the gravest\nconsequences. The simple statement of ver. 12 denotes a very great\nlimitation of Joshua's authority as leader. It means that though\non many occasions he can both originate and execute, all matters\nof moment shall have to be referred to the oracle. There will be a\npossibility of conflict between him and the priest with regard to\nthe occasions that require such a reference to Jehovah. In addition\nthere may be the uncertainty of responses through the Urim, as\ninterpreted by the priest. It is easy also to see that by this method\nof appealing to Jehovah the door was opened to abuses which, if not\nin Joshua's time, certainly in the time of the judges, began to arise.\n\nIt may appear to some absolutely necessary to refer the Urim to a\nfar later date. The explanation given by Ewald, that the inquiry\nwas always by some definite question, and that the answer was\nfound by means of the lot, obviates this difficulty.[12] The Urim\nand Thummim, which mean \"clearness and correctness,\" or as in our\npassage the Urim alone, may have been pebbles of different colours,\nthe one representing an affirmative, the other a negative reply.\nBut inquiry appears to have been made by these means after certain\nrites, and with forms which the priest alone could use. It is\nevident that absolute sincerity on his part, and unswerving loyalty\nto Jehovah, were an important element in the whole administration\nof affairs. A priest who became dissatisfied with the leader might\neasily frustrate his plans. On the other hand, a leader dissatisfied\nwith the responses would be tempted to suspect and perhaps set aside\nthe priest. There can be no doubt that here a serious possibility\nof divided counsels entered into the history of Israel, and we are\nreminded of many after events. Yet the circumstances were such that\nthe whole power could not be committed to one man. With whatever\nelement of danger, the new order had to begin.\n\nMoses laid his hands on Joshua and gave him his charge. As one\nwho knew his own infirmities, he could warn the new chief of the\ntemptations he would have to resist, the patience he would have to\nexercise. It was not necessary to inform Joshua of the duties of his\noffice. With these he had become familiar. But the need for calm and\nsober judgment required to be impressed upon him. It was here he was\ndefective, and here that his \"honour\" and the maintenance of his\nauthority would have to be secured. Deuteronomy mentions only the\nexhortation Moses gave to be strong and of a good courage, and the\nassurance that Jehovah would go before Joshua, would neither fail\nhim nor forsake him. But though much is recorded, much also remains\nuntold. An education of forty years had prepared Joshua for the hour\nof his investiture. Yet the words of the chief he was so soon to lose\nmust have had no small part in preparing him for the burden and duty\nwhich he was now called by Jehovah to sustain as leader of Israel.\n\nFOOTNOTE:\n\n[12] \"Antiquities of Israel:\" \"The Priesthood.\"\n\n\n\n\n XXIII\n\n _OFFERINGS AND VOWS_\n\n NUMBERS xxviii.-xxx\n\n\nThe legislation of chapters xxviii.-xxx. appears to belong to a\ntime of developed ritual and organised society. Parallel passages\nin Exodus and Leviticus treating of the feasts and offerings are by\nno means so full in their details, nor do they even mention some of\nthe sacrifices here made statutory. The observances of New Moon are\nenjoined in the Book of Numbers alone. In chapter xv. they are simply\nnoticed; here the order is fixed. The purpose of chapters xxviii.,\nxxix. is especially to prescribe the number of animals that are to be\noffered throughout the year at a central altar, and the quantities\nof other oblations which are to accompany them. But the rotation of\nfeasts is also given in a more connected way than elsewhere; we have,\nin fact, a legislative description of Israel's Sacred Year. Daily,\nweekly, monthly, and at the two great festal seasons, Jehovah is to\nbe acknowledged by the people as the Redeemer of life, the Giver of\nwealth and blessedness. Of their cattle and sheep, and the produce\nof the land, they are to bring continual oblations, which are to be\ntheir memorial before Him. By their homage and by their gladness, by\nafflicting themselves and by praising God, they shall realise their\ncalling as His people.\n\nThe section regarding vows (ch. xxx.) completes the legislation\non that subject, supplementing Lev. xxvii. and Numb. vi. It is\nespecially interesting for the light it throws on the nature of\nfamily life, the position of women and the limitations of their\nfreedom. The link between the law of offerings and the law of vows\nis hard to find; but we can easily understand the need for rules\nconcerning women's vows. The peace of families might often be\ndisturbed by lavish promises which a husband or a father might find\nit impossible or inconvenient to fulfil.\n\n\n 1. THE SACRED YEAR\n\n NUMBERS xxviii.-xxix\n\nThroughout the year, each day, each sabbath, and each month is to\nbe consecrated by oblations of varying value, forming a routine of\nsacrifice. First the Day, bringing duty and privilege, is to have its\nmorning burnt offering of a yearling lamb, by which the Divine blessing\nis invoked on the labour and life of the whole people. A meal offering\nof flour and oil and a drink offering of \"strong drink\"--that is, not\nof water or milk, but wine--are to accompany the sacrifice. Again\nin the evening, as a token of gratitude for the mercies of the day,\nsimilar oblations are to be presented. Of this offering the note is\nmade: \"It is a continual burnt offering, which was ordained in Sinai\nfor a sweet savour, a sacrifice made by fire unto the Lord.\"\n\nIn these sacrifices the whole of time, measured out by the\nalternation of light and darkness, was acknowledged to be God's;\nthrough the priesthood the nation declared His right to each day,\nconfessed obligation to Him for the gift of it. The burnt offering\nimplied complete renunciation of what was represented. No part of\nthe animal was kept for use, either by the worshipper or the priest.\nThe smoke ascending to heaven dissipated the entire substance of\nthe oblation, signifying that the whole use or enjoyment of it was\nconsecrated to God. In the way of impressing the idea of obligation\nto Jehovah for the gifts of time and life the daily sacrifices\nwere valuable; yet they were suggestive rather than sufficient.\nThe Israelites throughout the land knew that these oblations were\nmade at the altar, and those who were pious might at the times\nappointed offer each his own thanksgivings to God. But the individual\nexpression of gratitude was left to the religious sense, and that\nmust often have failed. At a distance from the sanctuary, where\nthe ascending smoke could not be seen, men might forget; or again,\nknowing that the priests would not forget, they might imagine their\nown part to be done when offering was made for the whole people. The\nduty was, however, represented and kept before the minds of all.\n\nIn the Psalms and elsewhere we find traces of a worship which had\nits source in the daily sacrifice. The author of Psalm cxli., for\nexample, addresses Jehovah:\n\n \"Give ear unto my voice when I cry unto Thee.\n Let my prayer be set forth as incense before Thee;\n The lifting up of my hands as the evening sacrifice.\"\n\nLess clearly in the fifth, the fifty-ninth, and the eighty-eighth\npsalms, the morning prayer appears to be connected with the morning\nsacrifice:\n\n \"O Lord, in the morning shalt Thou hear my voice;\n In the morning will I order my prayer unto Thee, and will keep\n watch\" (Psalm v. 3).\n\nThe pious Hebrew might naturally choose the morning and the evening\nas his times of special approach to the throne of Divine grace, as\nevery believer still feels it his duty and privilege to begin and\nclose the day with prayer. The appropriateness of dawn and sunset\nmight determine both the hour of sacrifice and the hour of private\nworship. Yet the ordinance of the daily oblations set an example to\nthose who would otherwise have been careless in expressing gratitude.\nAnd earnestly religious persons learned to find more frequent\nopportunities. Daniel in Babylon is seen at the window open towards\nJerusalem, kneeling upon his knees three times a day, praying and\ngiving thanks to God. The author of Psalm cxix. says:\n\n \"Seven times a day do I praise Thee,\n Because of Thy righteous judgments.\"\n\nThe grateful remembrance of God and confession of His right to the\nwhole of life were thus made a rule with which no other engagements\nwere allowed to interfere. It is by facts like these the power of\nreligion over the Hebrews in their best time is explained.\n\n * * * * *\n\nWe pass now to the Sabbath and the sacrifices by which it was\ndistinguished. Here the number seven which recurs so frequently\nin the statutes of the sacred year appears for the first time.\nConnection has been found between the ordinances of Israel and of\nChaldea in the observance of the seventh day as well as at many other\npoints. According to Mr. Sayce, the origin of the Sabbath went back\nto pre-Semitic days, and the very name was of Babylonian origin.\n\"In the cuneiform tablets the _sabbatu_ is described as a 'day of\nrest for the soul.'... The Sabbath was also known, at all events in\nAccadian times, as a _dies nefastus_, a day on which certain work\nwas forbidden to be done; and an old list of Babylonian festivals\nand fast-days tells us that on the seventh, fourteenth, nineteenth,\ntwenty-first, and twenty-eighth days of each month the Sabbath rest\nhad to be observed. The king himself, it is stated, 'must not eat\nflesh that has been cooked over the coals or in the smoke, he must\nnot change the garments of his body, white robes he must not wear,\nsacrifices he may not offer, in a chariot he must not ride.'\" The\nsoothsayer was forbidden on that day \"to mutter in a secret place.\"\nIn this observance of a seventh day of rest, specially sacred, for\nthe good of the soul, ancient Accadians and Babylonians prepared the\nway for the Sabbath of the Mosaic law.\n\nBut while the days of the Chaldean week were devoted each to a\nseparate divinity, and the seventh day had its meaning in relation\nto polytheism, the whole of time, every day alike, and the Sabbaths\nwith greater strictness than the others, were, in Israel's law,\nconsecrated to Jehovah. This difference also deserves to be noticed,\nthat, while the Chaldean seventh days were counted from each new\nmoon, in the Hebrew year there was no such astronomical date for\nreckoning them. Throughout the year, as with us, each seventh day\nwas a day of rest. While we find traces of old religious custom\nand observance that mingled with those of Judaism and cannot but\nrecognise the highly humane, almost spiritual character those old\ninstitutions often had, the superiority of the religion of the One\nLiving and True God clearly proves itself to us. Moses, and those\nwho followed him, felt no need of rejecting an idea they met with in\nthe ancient beliefs of Chaldea, for they had the Divine light and\nwisdom by which the earthly and evil could be separated from the\nkernel of good. And may we not say that it was well to maintain the\ncontinuity of observance so far as thoughts and customs of the far\npast could be woven into the worship of Jehovah's flock? Neither was\nIsrael nor is any people to pretend to entire separation from the\npast. No act of choice or process of development can effect it. Nor\nwould the severance, if it were made, be for the good of men. Beyond\nthe errors and absurdities of human belief, beyond the perversions of\ntruth due to sin, there lie historical and constitutional origins.\nThe Sabbaths, the sacrifices, and the prayers of ancient Chaldea had\ntheir source in demands of God and needs of the human soul, which\nnot only entered into Judaism, but survive still, proving themselves\ninseparable from our thought and life.\n\nThe special oblations to be presented on the Sabbath were added to\nthose of the other days of the week. Two lambs of the first year in\nthe morning and two in the evening were to be offered with their\nappropriate meal and drink offerings. It may be noted that in Ezekiel\nwhere the Sabbath ordinances are detailed the sacrifices are more\nnumerous. After declaring that the eastern gate of the inner court\nof the temple, which is to be shut on the six working days, shall be\nopened on the Sabbath and in the day of the new moon, the prophet\ngoes on to say that the prince, as representing the people, shall\noffer unto the Lord in the Sabbath day six lambs without blemish and\na ram without blemish. In the legislation of Numbers, however, the\nhigher consecration of the Sabbath as compared with the other days\nof the week did not require so great a difference as Ezekiel saw it\nneedful to make. And, indeed, the law of Sabbath observance assumes\nin Ezekiel an importance on various grounds which passes beyond the\nhigh distinction given it in the Pentateuch. Again and again in\nchapter xx. the prophet declares that one of the great sins of which\nthe Israelites were guilty in the wilderness was that of polluting\nthe Sabbath which God had given to be a sign between Himself and\nthem. The keeping holy of the seventh day had become one of the chief\nsafeguards of religion, and for this reason Ezekiel was moved to\nprescribe additional sacrifices for that day.\n\nWe find as we go on that the week of seven days, ended by the recurring\nday of rest, is an element in the regulations for all the great feasts.\nUnleavened bread was to be eaten for seven days. Seven weeks were then\nto be counted to the day of the firstfruits and the feast of weeks.\nThe feast of tabernacles, again, ran for seven days and ended on the\neighth with a solemn assembly. The whole ritual was in this way made to\nemphasise the division of time based on the fourth commandment.\n\n * * * * *\n\nThe New Moon ritual consecrating the months was more elaborate. On\nthe day when the new moon was first seen, or should by computation\nbe seen, besides the continual burnt offering two young bullocks,\none ram, and seven lambs of the first year, with meal and drink\nofferings, were to be presented. These animals were to be wholly\noffered by fire. In addition, a sin offering was to be made, a kid\nof the goats. Why this guilt sacrifice was introduced at the new\nmoon service is not clear. Keil explains that \"in consideration of\nthe sins which had been committed in the course of the past month,\nand had remained without expiation,\" the sin offering was needed.\nBut this might be said of the week in its degree, as well as of\nthe month. It is certain that the opening of each month was kept in\nother ways than the legislation of the Pentateuch seems to require.\nIn Numbers it is prescribed that the silver trumpets shall be blown\nover the new moon sacrifices for a memorial before God, and this\nmust have given the observances a festival air. Then we learn from\n1 Sam. xx. that when Saul was king a family feast was observed in\nhis house on the first day of the month, and that this day also,\nin some particular month, was generally chosen by a family for the\nyearly sacrifice to which all were expected to gather (1 Sam. xx. 5,\n6). These facts and the festal opening of Psalm lxxxi., in which the\ntimbrel, harp, and psaltery, and joyful singing in praise of God, are\nassociated with the new moon trumpet, imply that for some reason the\noccasion was held to be important. Amos (viii. 5) implies further\nthat on the day of new moon trade was suspended; and in the time of\nElisha it seems to have been common for those who wished to consult\na prophet to choose either the Sabbath or the day of new moon for\nenquiring of him (2 Kings iv. 23). There can be little doubt that the\nday was one of religious activity and joy, and possibly the offering\nof the kid for expiation was intended to counteract the freedom the\nmore thoughtless might permit themselves.\n\nThere are good reasons for believing that in pre-Mosaic times the day\nof new moon was celebrated by the Israelites and all kindred peoples,\nas it is still among certain heathen races. Originally a nature\nfestival, it was consecrated to Jehovah by the legislation before\nus, and gradually became of account as the occasion of domestic\ngatherings and rejoicings. But its religious significance lay chiefly\nin the dedication to God of the month that had begun and expiation\nof guilt contracted during that which had closed.\n\n * * * * *\n\nWe come now to the great annual festivals. These were arranged in two\ngroups, which may be classed as vernal and autumnal, the one group\nbelonging to the first and third months, the other to the seventh.\nThey divided the year into two portions, the intervals between them\nbeing the time of great heat and the time of rain and storm. The\nmonth Abib, with which the year began, corresponded generally to our\nApril; but its opening, depending on the new moon, might be earlier\nor later. One of the ceremonies of the festival season of this month\nwas the presentation, on the sixteenth day, of the first sheaf of\nharvest; and seven weeks afterwards, at Pentecost, cakes made from\nthe first dough were offered. The explanation of what may appear to\nbe autumnal offerings in spring is to be found in the early ripening\nof corn throughout Palestine. The cereals were all reaped during\nthe interval between Passover and Pentecost. The autumnal festival\ncelebrated the gathering in of the vintage and fruits.\n\nThe Passover, the first great feast, a sacrament rather, is merely\nmentioned in this portion of Numbers. It was chiefly a domestic\ncelebration--not priestly--and had a most impressive significance,\nof which the eating of the lamb with bitter herbs was the symbol.\nThe day after it, the \"feast of unleavened bread\" began. For a whole\nweek leaven was to be abjured. On the first day of the feast there\nwas to be a holy convocation, and no servile work was to be done. The\nclosing day likewise was to be one of holy convocation. On each of\nthe seven days the offerings were to be two young bullocks, one ram,\nand seven yearling he-lambs, with their meal and drink offerings,\nand for sin one he-goat to make atonement.\n\nThe week of this festival, commencing with the paschal sacrament, was\nmade to bear peculiarly on the national life, first by the command\nthat all leaven should be rigidly kept out of the houses. As the\nceremonial law assumed more importance with the growth of Pharisaism,\nthis cleansing was sought quite fanatically. Any crumb of common bread\nwas reckoned an accursed thing which might deprive the observance of\nthe feast of its good effect. But even in the time of less scrupulous\nlegalism the effort to extirpate leaven from the houses had its\nsingular effect on the people. It was one of the many causes which\nmade Jewish religion intense. Then the daily sacrificial routine, and\nespecially the holy convocations of the first and seventh days, were\nprofoundly solemnising. We may picture thus the ceremonies and worship\nof these great days of the feast. The people, gathered from all parts\nof the land, crowded the outer court of the sanctuary. The priests and\nLevites stood ready around the altar. With solemn chanting the animals\nwere brought from some place behind the temple where they had been\ncarefully examined so that no blemish might impair the sacrifice. Then\nthey were slain one by one, and prepared, the fire on the great altar\nblazing more and more brightly in readiness for the holocaust, while\nthe blood flowed away in a red stream, staining the hands and garments\nof those who officiated. First the two bullocks, then the ram, then the\nlambs were one after another placed on the flames, each with incense\nand part of the meal offering. The sin offering followed. Some of the\nblood of the he-goat was taken by the priest and sprinkled on the inner\naltar, on the veil of the Holy of Holies, and on the horns of the\ngreat altar, around which the rest was poured. The fat of the animal,\nincluding certain of the internal parts, was thrown on the fire; and\nthis portion of the observances ended with the pouring out of the last\ndrink offering before the Lord. Then a chorus of praise was lifted up,\nthe people throwing themselves on the ground and praying in a low,\nearnest monotone.\n\nTo this followed in the later times singing of chants and psalms, led\nby the chorus of Levites, addresses to the people, and shorter or\nlonger prayers to which the worshippers responded. The officiating\npriest, standing beside the great altar in view of all, now pronounced\nthe appointed blessing on the people. But his task was still not\ncomplete. He went into the sanctuary, and, having by his entrance and\nsafe return from the holy place shown that the sacrifice had been\naccepted, he spoke to the assembly a few words of simple and sublime\nimport. Finally, with repeated blessing, he gave the dismissal. On one\nor both of these occasions the form of benediction used was that which\nwe have found preserved in the sixth chapter of this book.[13]\n\nIt is evident that celebrations like these, into which, as time went\non, the mass of worshippers entered with increased fervour, gave\nthe feast of unleavened bread an extraordinary importance in the\nnational life. The young Hebrew looked forward to it with the keenest\nexpectancy, and was not disappointed. So long as faith remained, and\nespecially in crises of the history of Israel, the earnestness that\nwas developed carried every soul along. And now that the Israelites\nbewail the loss of temple and country, reckoning themselves a martyred\npeople, this feast and the more solemn day of atonement nerve them to\nendurance and reassure them of their hope. They are separate still.\nThey are Jehovah's people still. The covenant remains. The Messiah will\ncome and bring them new life and power. So they vehemently cling to the\npast and dream of a future that shall never be.\n\n * * * * *\n\n\"The day of the firstfruits\" was, according to Lev. xxiii. 15, the\nfiftieth day from the morrow after the passover sabbath. The special\nharvest offering of this \"feast of weeks\" is thus enjoined: \"Ye shall\nbring out of your habitations two wave loaves of two tenth parts\nof an ephah; they shall be of fine flour, they shall be baken with\nleaven, for firstfruits unto the Lord\" (Lev. xxiii. 17). According\nto Leviticus one bullock, two rams, and seven lambs; according to\nNumbers two bullocks, one ram, and seven lambs, were to be sacrificed\nas whole offerings; the difference being apparently that of varying\nusage at an earlier and later time. The sin offering of the he-goat\nfollowed the burnt offerings. The day of the feast was one of holy\nconvocation; and it has peculiar interest for us as the day on which\nthe pentecostal effusion of the Spirit came on the gathering of\nChristians in the upper room at Jerusalem. The joyous character of\nthis festival was signified by the use of leaven in the cakes or\nloaves that were presented as firstfruits. The people rejoiced in the\nblessing of another harvest, the fulfilment once more by Jehovah of\nHis promise to supply the needs of His flock. It will be seen that\nin every case the sin offering prescribed is a single he-goat. This\nparticular sacrifice was distinguished from the whole offerings, the\nthank offerings, and the peace offerings, which were not limited in\nnumber. \"It must stand,\" says Ewald, \"in perfect isolation, as though\nin the midst of sad solitude and desolation, with nothing similar or\ncomparable by its side.\" Why a he-goat was invariably ordered for this\nexpiatory sacrifice it is difficult to say. And the question is not\nmade more easy by the peculiar rite of the great day of atonement, when\nbesides the goat of the sin offering for Jehovah another was devoted to\n\"Azazel.\" Perhaps the choice of this animal implied its fitness in some\nway to represent transgression, wilfulness, and rebellion. The he-goat,\nmore wild and rough than any other of the flock, seemed to belong to\nthe desert and to the spirit of evil.\n\n * * * * *\n\nFrom the festivals of spring we now pass to those of autumn, the first\nof which coincided with the New Moon of the seventh month. This was to\nbe a day of holy convocation, on which no servile work should be done,\nand it was marked by a special blowing of trumpets over the sacrifices.\nFrom other passages it would appear that the trumpets were used on\nthe occasion of every new moon; and there must have been a longer and\nmore elaborate service of festival music to distinguish the seventh.\nThe offerings prescribed for it were numerous. Those enjoined for the\nopening of the other months were two bullocks, one ram, seven he-lambs\nand the he-goat of the sin offering. To these were now added one\nbullock, one ram, and seven he-lambs. Altogether, including the daily\nsacrifices which were never omitted, twenty-two animals were offered;\nand with each sacrifice, except the he-goat, fine flour mingled with\noil and a drink offering of wine had to be presented.\n\nThere seems no reason to doubt that the seventh month was opened in\nthis impressive way because of the great festivals ordained to be\nheld in the course of it. The labour of the year was practically\nover, and more than any other the month was given up to festivity\nassociated with religion. It was the seventh or sabbath month,\nforming the \"exalted summit of the year, for which all preceding\nfestivals prepared the way, and after which everything quietly came\ndown to the ordinary course of life.\" The trumpets blown in joyful\npeals over the sacrifices, the offering of which must have gone on\nfor many hours, inspired the assembly with gladness, and signified\nthe gratitude and hope of the nation.\n\nBut the joy of the seventh month thus begun did not go on without\ninterruption. The tenth day was one of special solemnity and serious\nthought. It was the great day of confession, for on it, in the\nholy convocation, the people were to \"afflict their souls.\" The\ntransgressions and failures of the year were to be acknowledged with\nsorrow. From the evening of the ninth day to the evening of the tenth\nthere was to be a rigid fast--the one fast which the law ordained.\nBefore the full gladness of Jehovah's favour can be realised by\nIsrael all those sins of neglect and forgetfulness which have been\naccumulating for twelve months must be confessed, bewailed, and taken\naway. There are those who have become unclean without being aware\nof their defilement; those who have unwittingly broken the Sabbath\nlaw; those who have for some reason been unable to keep the passover,\nor who have kept it imperfectly; others again have failed to render\ntithes of all the produce of their land according to the law; and\npriests and Levites called to a high consecration have come short\nof their duty. With such defects and sins of error the nation is to\ncharge itself, each individual acknowledging his own faults. Unless\nthis is done a shadow must lie on the life of the people; they cannot\nenjoy the light of the countenance of God.\n\nFor this day the whole offerings are, one young bullock, one ram,\nseven he-lambs; and there is this peculiarity, that, besides a\nhe-goat for a sin offering, there is to be provided another he-goat,\n\"for atonement.\" Maimonides says that the second he-goat is not that\n\"for Azazel,\" but the fellow of it, the one on which the lot had\nfallen \"for Jehovah.\" Leviticus again informs us that Aaron was to\nsacrifice a bullock as a sin offering for himself and his house. And\nit was the blood of this bullock and of the second he-goat he was\nto take and sprinkle on the ark and before the mercy-seat. Further,\nit is prescribed that the bodies of these animals are to be carried\nforth without the camp and wholly burned--as if the sin clinging to\nthem had made them unfit for use in any way.\n\nThe great atonement thus made, the reaction of joy set in. Nothing in\nJewish worship exceeded the solemnity of the fast, and in contrast\nwith that the gladness of the forgiven multitude. Another crisis\nwas past, another year of Jehovah's favour had begun. Those who had\nbeen prostrate in sorrow and fear rose up to sing their hallelujahs.\n\"The deep seriousness of the Day of Atonement,\" says Delitzsch, \"was\ntransformed on the evening of the same day into lighthearted merriment.\nThe observance in the temple was accomplished in a significant drama\nwhich was fascinating from beginning to end. When the high priest came\nforth from the Most Holy Place, after the performance of his functions\nthere, this was for the people a consolatory, gladsome sight, for\nwhich poetry can find no adequate words: 'Like the peace-proclaiming\narch in painted clouds; like the morning star, when he arises from the\neastern twilight; like the sun, when opening his bud, he unfolds in\nroseate hue.' When the solemnity was over, the high priest was escorted\nwith a guard of honour to his dwelling in the city, where a banquet\nawaited his more immediate friends.\" The young people repaired to the\nvineyards, the maidens arrayed in simple white, and the day was closed\nwith song and dancing.[14]\n\nThis description reminds us of the mingling of elements in the old\nScottish fast-days, closing as they did with a simple entertainment\nin the manse.\n\n * * * * *\n\nThe feast of tabernacles continued the gladness of the ransomed\npeople. It began on the fifteenth day of the seventh month, with\na holy convocation and a holocaust of no fewer than twenty-nine\nanimals, in addition to the daily sacrifice, and a he-goat for a sin\noffering. The number of bullocks, which was thirteen on this opening\nday of the feast, was reduced by one each day till on the seventh day\nseven bullocks were sacrificed. But two rams and fourteen he-lambs\nwere offered each day of the feast, and the he-goat for expiation,\nbesides the continual burnt offering. The celebration ended, so far\nas sacrifices were concerned, on the eighth day with a special burnt\noffering of one bullock, one ram, and seven he-lambs, returning thus\nto the number appointed for New Moon.\n\nIt will be noticed that on the closing day there was to be a \"solemn\nassembly.\" It was \"the great day of the feast\" (John vii. 37). The\npeople who during the week had lived in the booths or arbours which\nthey had made, now dismantled them and went on pilgrimage to the\nsanctuary. The opening of the festival came to be of a striking\nkind. \"One could see,\" says Professor Franz Delitzsch, \"even before\nthe dawn of the first day of the feast, if this was not a Sabbath,\na joyous throng pouring forth from the Jaffa Gate at Jerusalem. The\nverdure of the orchards, refreshed with the first showers of the early\nrain, is hailed by the people with shouts of joy as they scatter on\neither side of the bridge which crosses the brook fringed with tall\npoplar-osiers, some in order with their own hands to pluck branches for\nthe festal display, others to look at the men who have been honoured\nwith the commission to fetch from Kolonia the festal leafy adornment\nof the altar. They seek out right long and goodly branches of these\npoplar-osiers, and cut them off, and then the reunited host returns in\nprocession, with exultant shouts and singing and jesting, to Jerusalem,\nas far as the Temple hill, where the great branches of poplar-osier are\nreceived by the priests and set upright around the sides of the altar,\nso that they bend over it with their tips. Priestly trumpet-clang\nresounded during this decoration of the altar with foliage, and they\nwent on that feast day once, on the seventh day seven times, around\nthe altar with willow branches, or the festive posy entwined of a palm\nbranch and branches of myrtles and willows, amidst the usual festive\nshouts of Hosanna; exclaiming after the completed encircling, 'Beauty\nbecomes thee, O Altar! Beauty becomes thee, O Altar!'\" So, in later\ntimes, the festival began and was sustained, each worshipper carrying\nboughs and fruit of the citron and other trees. But the eighth day\nbrought all this to a close. The huts were taken down, the worshippers\nsought the house of God for prayer and thanksgiving. The reading of the\nLaw which had been going on day by day concluded; and the sin offering\nfitly ended the season of joy with expiation of the guilt of the people\nin their holy things.\n\n * * * * *\n\nThe series of sacrifices appointed for days and weeks and months and\nyears required a large number of animals and no small liberality.\nThey did not, however, represent more than a small proportion of\nthe offerings which were brought to the central sanctuary. Besides,\nthere were those connected with vows, the free-will offerings, meal\nofferings, drink offerings, and peace offerings (xxix. 39). And\ntaking all together it will be seen that the pastoral wealth of the\npeople was largely claimed. The explanation lies partly in this, that\namong the Israelites, as among all races, \"the things sacrificed were\nof the same kind as those the worshippers desired to obtain from\nGod.\" The sin offering, however, had quite a different significance.\nIn this the sprinkling of the warm blood, representing the life blood\nof the worshipper, carried thought into a range of sacred mystery\nin which the awful claim of God on men was darkly realised. Here\nsacrifice became a sacrament binding the worshippers by the most\nsolemn symbol imaginable--a vital symbol--to fidelity in the service\nof Jehovah. Their faith and devotion expressed in the sacrifice\nsecured for them the Divine grace on which their well-being depended,\nthe blood-bought pardon that redeemed the soul. Among the Israelites\nalone was expiation by blood made fully significant as the centre of\nthe whole system of worship.[15]\n\n\n 2. THE LAW OF VOWS\n\n NUMBERS xxx\n\nThe general command regarding vows is that whosoever binds himself by\none, or takes an oath in regard to any promise, must at all hazards\nkeep his word. A man is allowed to judge for himself in vowing and\nundertaking by oath, but he is to have the consequences in view, and\nespecially keep in mind that God is his witness. The matter scarcely\nadmitted of any other legislation, and neither here nor elsewhere is\nany attempt made to lay penalties on those who broke their vows. To\nuse the Divine Name in an oath which was afterwards falsified brought\na man under the condemnation of the third commandment, a spiritual\ndoom. But the authorities could not give it effect. The transgressor\nwas left to the judgment of God.\n\nWith regard to vows and oaths the sophistry of the Jews and their\nrabbis led them so far astray that our Lord had to lay down new\nrules for the guidance of His followers. No doubt cases arose in\nwhich it was exceedingly difficult to decide. One might vow with\ngood intention and find himself utterly unable to keep his promise,\nor might find that to keep it would involve unforeseen injury to\nothers. But apart from circumstances of this sort there came to be\nsuch a net-work of half-legalised evasions, and so many unseemly\ndiscussions, that the purpose of the law was destroyed. Absolution\nfrom vows was claimed as a prerogative by some rabbis; against this,\nothers protested. One would say that if a man vowed by Jerusalem or\nby the Law he had said nothing; but if he vowed by what is written\nin the Law, his words stood. The \"wise men\" declared four kinds of\nvows not binding--incentive vows, as when a buyer vows that he will\nnot give more than a certain price in order to induce the seller to\ntake less; meaningless vows; thoughtless and compulsory vows. In such\nways the practice was reduced to ignominy. It even came to this,\nthat if a man wished to neutralise all the vows he might make in the\ncourse of a year he had only to say at the beginning of it, on the\neve of the Day of Atonement, \"Let every vow which I shall make be of\nnone effect,\" and he would be absolved. This immoral tangle was cut\nthrough by the clear judgment of Christ: \"Ye have heard that it was\nsaid to them of old time, Thou shalt not forswear thyself, but shalt\nperform unto the Lord thine oaths: but I say unto you, Swear not at\nall; neither by the heaven, for it is the throne of God; nor by the\nearth, for it is the footstool of His feet; nor by Jerusalem, for it\nis the city of the great King. Neither shalt thou swear by thy head,\nfor thou canst not make one hair white or black. But let your speech\nbe, Yea, yea; Nay, nay: and whatsoever is more than these is of the\nevil one.\" In ordinary conversation and dealings Christ will have no\nvows and oaths. Let men promise and perform, declare and stand to\ntheir word. He lifts even ordinary life to a higher plane.\n\nWith regard to women's vows, four cases are made the subject of\nenactment. First, there is the case of a young woman living in her\nfather's house, under his authority. If she vow unto the Lord, and bind\nherself by a bond in the hearing of her father and he do not forbid,\nher vow shall stand. It may involve expense to the father, or put him\nand the family to inconvenience, but by silence he has allowed himself\nto be bound. On the other hand, if he interpose and forbid the vow, the\ndaughter is released. The second case is that of a woman who at the\ntime of marriage is under a vow; and this is decided in the same way.\nHer betrothed husband's silence, if he hears the promise, sanctions it;\nhis refusal to allow it gives discharge. The third instance is that\nof a widow or a divorced woman, who must perform all she has solemnly\nengaged to do. The last case is that of the married woman in her\nhusband's house, concerning whom it is decreed: \"Every vow and every\nbinding oath to afflict the soul, her husband may establish it, or her\nhusband may make it void.... If he shall make them null and void after\nhe hath heard them, then he shall bear her iniquity.\"\n\nThese regulations establish the headship of the father and the\nhusband in regard to matters which belong to religion. And the\nsignificance of them lies in this, that no intrusion of the priest\nis permitted. If the \"Priests' Code\" had been intended to set\nup a hierocracy, these vows would have given the opportunity of\nintroducing priestly influence into family life. The provisions\nappear to be designed for the very purpose of disallowing this. It\nwas seen that in the ardour of religious zeal women were disposed\nto make large promises, dedicating their means, their children, or\nperhaps their own lives to special service in connection with the\nsanctuary. But the father or husband was the family head and the\njudge. No countenance whatever is given to any official interference.\n\nIt would have been well if the wisdom of this law had ruled the\nChurch, preventing ecclesiastical dominance in family affairs.\nThe promises, the threats of a domineering Church have in many\ncases introduced discord between daughters and parents, wives and\nhusbands. The amenability of women to religious motives has been\ntaken advantage of, always indeed with a plausible reason,--the\ndesire to save them from the world,--but far too often, really,\nfor political-ecclesiastical ends, or even from the base motive of\nrevenge. Ecclesiastics have found the opportunity of enriching the\nChurch or themselves, or, under cover of confession, have become\naware of secrets that placed families at their mercy. No practice\nfollowed under the shield of religion and in its name deserves\nstronger reprobation. The Church should, by every means in its\npower, purify and uphold family life. To undermine the unity of\nfamilies by laying obligations on women, or obtaining promises apart\nfrom the knowledge of those to whom they are bound in the closest\nrelationship, is an abuse of privilege. And the whole custom of\nauricular confession comes under the charge. It may occasionally or\nfrequently be used with good intention, and lonely women without\ntrusted advisers among their kindred may see no other resource in\ntimes of peculiar difficulty and trial. But the submission that forms\npart of it is debasing, and the secrecy gives priesthood a power that\nshould belong to no body of men in dealing with the souls of their\nfellow-creatures, and fellow-sinners. At the very best, confession to\na priest is a weak expedient.\n\nFOOTNOTES:\n\n[13] See Ewald's \"Antiquities,\" p. 131, Solly's translation.\n\n[14] _Expositor_, 3rd Series, vol. iv., p. 88.\n\n[15] Ewald's \"Antiquities,\" p. 40.\n\n\n\n\n XXIV\n\n _WAR AND SETTLEMENT_\n\n\n 1. THE WAR WITH MIDIAN\n\n NUMBERS xxxi\n\nThe command to vex and smite the Midianites (xxv. 16) has already\nbeen considered. Israel had not the spiritual power which would have\njustified any attempt to convert that people. Degrading idolatry was to\nbe held in abhorrence, and those who clung to it suppressed. Now the\ntime comes for an exterminating war. While hordes of Bedawin occupy\nthe hills and the neighbouring desert, there can be no security either\nfor morals, property, or life. Balaam is among them plotting against\nIsrael; and his restless energy, we may suppose, precipitates the\nconflict. Moses conveys the command of God that the attack on Midian\nshall be immediately made, and himself directs the campaign.\n\nThe details of the enterprise are given somewhat fully. A thousand\nfighting men are called from each tribe. The religious purpose of\nthe war is signified by the presence in the host of Phinehas, whose\nzeal has given him a name among the warriors. He is allowed to carry\nwith him the \"vessels of the sanctuary\"; and the silver trumpets are\nto be sounded on the march and in the attack. The Midianitish clan\napparently gives way at once before the Hebrews, and either makes no\nstand or is totally defeated in a single battle. All the men are\nput to the sword, including Balaam and five chiefs, whose names are\npreserved. The women and children are taken; the whole of the cattle\nand goods become the prey of the victors; the cities and encampments\nare burned with fire. On the return of the army with the large band\nof captives, Moses is greatly displeased. He demands of the officers\nwhy the women have been spared,--the very women who caused the\nchildren of Israel to trespass against the Lord. Then he orders all\nabove a certain age, and the male children, to be put to death. The\nyoung girls alone are to be kept alive.\n\nThe purification of those who have been engaged in the war is next\ncommanded. For seven days the army must remain outside the camp.\nThose who have touched any dead body and all the captives are to be\nceremonially cleansed on the third and seventh days. Every article of\nraiment, everything made of skins and goats' hair, and all woollen\narticles, are to be purified by means of the water of expiation.\nWhatever is made of metal is to be passed through the fire.\n\nDetails of the quantity and division of the prey, and the voluntary\noblations made as an \"atonement for their souls\" by the officers\nand soldiers out of their booty, occupy the rest of the chapter.\nThe numbers of oxen, sheep, and asses are great--six hundred and\nseventy-five thousand sheep, seventy-two thousand beeves, sixty-one\nthousand asses. No mention is made of horses or camels. The girls saved\nalive are thirty-two thousand. The army takes one half, and those who\nremained in the camp receive the other. But of the soldiers' portion,\none in five hundred both of the persons and of the animals is given to\nthe priests, and of the people's portion one in fifty to the Levites.\nThe jewels of gold, ankle-chains, bracelets, signet-rings, earrings\nand armlets offered by the men of war as their \"atonement,\" not one of\nthem having fallen in the battle, amount in weight to sixteen thousand\nseven hundred and fifty shekels, the value of which may be estimated at\nsome thirty thousand of our pounds. The gold is brought into the tent\nof meeting for a memorial before the Lord.\n\nNow here we have to deal with an accumulation of statements, every\none of which raises some question or other. The war of national and\nmoral antipathy is itself easily understood. But the slaughter of so\nmany in battle and so many others in cold blood, the statement that\nnot a single Israelite fell, the number and kinds of the animals\ncaptured, the order given by Moses to put all the women to death, the\nquantity of gold taken, of which the offering appears only to have\nbeen a part--all of these points have been criticised in a more or\nless incredulous spirit. In apology it has been said, with regard\nto the slaughter of the women, that when brought as captives by the\nsoldiers they could not be received into the camp, and there was\nonly this way of dealing with them, unless indeed they had been sent\nback to their ruined encampments, where they would have slowly died.\nAgain, it has been explained that the Midianites were so debased and\nenfeebled as to have no power to withstand the onset of the Hebrews.\nThe droves of oxen, sheep, and asses are held to be not greater than\na wealthy nomadic clan, numbering perhaps two hundred thousand, would\nbe likely to own; and the quantity of gold is likewise accounted for\nby the well-known fact that among Orientals the wealth represented by\nprecious metals is fashioned into ornaments for the women.\n\nIn detail the difficulties may thus be partly overcome; yet the\nwhole account remains so singular, both in its spirit and incidents,\nthat Wellhausen has roundly declared it to be fictitious, and others\nhave had no resource but to fall back, even for the slaughter of the\nwomen, on the Divine command. It is true there were other peoples,\nthe Moabites, for instance, as idolatrous, and almost as degraded.\nBut a terror of Jehovah's name had to be created for the moral good\nof the whole region, and the Midianites, it is said, who had so\ngrossly assailed the purity of Israel, were fitly selected for Divine\nchastisement. The opinion that the whole account is an invention of\nthe \"Priests' Code\" may be at once dismissed. The ideas of national\npurity that prevailed after the exile and are insisted upon in the\nbooks of Ezra and Nehemiah would not have countenanced the dedication\nof any spared from the slaughter, even young girls, as a tribute to\nJehovah. The attack and the issue of it were, no doubt, recorded in\nthe ancient documents of which the compilers of the Book of Numbers\nmade use. And the fact must be held to stand, that there was a\ngrim slaughter relentlessly carried out at the command of Moses in\naccordance with the moral and theocratic ideas that ruled his mind.\n\nBut it remains doubtful whether the numbers can be trusted, even\nalthough they appear to be in the substance of the narrative. The\ndisproportion is enormous between the twelve thousand Israelites sent\nagainst Midian and the number of men who, if we accept the figures\ngiven, must have fallen without striking one effective blow for\ntheir lives. Of these there would have been some forty thousand at\nleast. Assuming that somehow the numbers are exaggerated, we find\nthe story a good deal cleared. It was entirely in harmony with the\nspirit of the age that a war _\u00e0 outrance_ should have been commanded\nin the circumstances. If, then, an adequate force of Hebrews marched\nagainst the Midianites and took them at unawares, perhaps by night,\nor when they were engaged in some idolatrous orgy, their defeat and\nslaughter would be comparatively easy. The Hebrews with Phinehas\namong them were, we may believe, filled with patriotic and religious\nardour, assured that they were commissioned to execute Divine justice\nand must not shrink from any work that lay in their way, however\ndreadful. Does the thing they did still seem incredible? Perhaps the\nrecollection of what took place after the Indian Mutiny, when Great\nBritain was in the same temper, may throw light upon the question.\nThe soldiers then, bent on punishing the cruelty and lust of the\nrebels, partly in patriotism, partly in revenge, set mercy altogether\naside. If we had the whole history of the war with Midian, instead\nof the mere outlines preserved in Numbers, we might find that, apart\nfrom figures, the statements are by no means over-coloured. Moses had\nthe entire responsibility of ordering the women to be put to death.\nWhen he saw the train of female captives, some of them possibly\nusing their arts of blandishment not without success, he might well\nbe afraid that the very end for which the war had been undertaken\nwas to be frustrated. He was a man who did not scruple to shed blood\nwhen the law of God and the purity of morals and religion seemed to\nbe endangered. He knew Jehovah to be gracious--gracious to those who\nloved Him and kept His commandments. But was He not also a jealous\nGod, visiting the iniquity of the fathers upon the children unto the\nthird and fourth generations of them that hated Him? It was this God\nMoses sought to serve when in the heat of his indignation, and not\nwithout reason, he gave the terrible order.\n\nThe appropriation of some of the captive girls to the priests and\nLevites as \"Jehovah's tribute,\" the offering by the soldiers of\npart of their booty as an \"atonement\" for their souls, the presence\nof Phinehas with the \"vessels of the sanctuary,\" and the sacred\ntrumpets in the ranks--these manifestly belong to the time to which\nthe history refers. And it may be said in closing that circumstances\nmight be well known to Moses on account of which the attack had to\nbe made promptly and the dispersion of the Midianites had to be\ncomplete. We cannot tell what Balaam may have been plotting; but\nwe may be pretty sure there was nothing too base for him to scheme\nand the Midianites to carry into effect. They knew themselves to be\nunder suspicion, perhaps in danger. With what craft and vehemence the\nBedawin can act we are well aware. Life even yet is of no account\namong them. Another day, perhaps, and the ark might have been carried\noff or Moses put to death in his tent. But the nature of the wrong\ndone to Israel is a sufficient explanation of the war. And we can\nalso see that the Hebrews themselves had a lesson in moral severity\nwhen their soldiers went forth to the massacre and returned red with\nblood. They learned that the sin of Midian was abominable in the\nsight of God and should be abominable in theirs. They were taught,\nwhether they received the teaching or not, that they were to be\nenemies for ever of those who practised idolatry so vile. A deep gulf\nwas made between them and all who sympathised with the worship and\ncustoms of the tribe they destroyed.\n\nAnd the whole circumstances, remote as they are from our own time,\nmay bring home even to Christians the duty of moral decision and\nrelentless war against the vices and lusts with which too many are\ninclined to make terms. We wrestle not against flesh and blood,\nbut against the \"wiles of error,\" the \"lusts of deceit,\" against\n\"fornication, uncleanness, lasciviousness, enmities, strife,\njealousies, wraths, factions, divisions, heresies, envyings,\ndrunkenness, revellings and such like,\"--the works of the flesh.\nThese Midianites are with us, would draw our hearts away from\nreligion and destroy our souls. Not only are we to assail the grosser\nforms of sin and exterminate them, but we are with equal severity to\nstrike down the fair-seeming vices that come with blandishment and\ninsidious appeal. This is our holy war. The old form of it required\nthe suppression or extermination of those identified with vice, men\nand women, all in whom the impurity was rooted. Young girls alone\ncould be spared, whose character might still be shaped by a higher\nmorality. Even yet, to a certain extent, that way of dealing with\nevil has to be followed. We imprison felons and put murderers to\ndeath; but the new power that has come with Christianity enables us\nto deal with many transgressors as capable of reformation and a new\nlife. And this power is far as yet from being fully developed.\n\nIt is the fault of our age to be on one side too lenient, on another\nwanting in patience, charity, and hope. Excuses are found for sin\non the ground that it is useless to fight against nature, that we\nmust not be hypocritical nor puritanical. Temptations that come with\nmincing gait, cajolery and smiles, are allowed to disport themselves\nuntouched. Why, it is asked, should life be made sombre? A stern\nreligion that would banish gaiety is declared to be no friend of the\nrace. Under cover of art--pictorial, dramatic, literary--the customs\nof Midian are not only admitted but allowed to have authority. And\nreligion even is invoked. Are not all things pure to the pure? Should\nnot life be as free and joyous as the Maker clearly intends in giving\nus the capacity for those gratifications to which art of every kind\nministers? Is not full freedom indispensable to the highest religion?\nOught not genius, in every department, to have complete liberty in\nguiding and developing the race?\n\nWithout hypocrisy, without banishing the sunshine of life or denying\nthe freedom which is necessary to progress and vigour, we are to be\njealous for morality, severe against all that threatens it. And here\nour age is impatient of direction. The tendency is to a civilisation\nwithout morality, that is, a new barbarism. The strenuous mind of\nthe old theocratic leaders is required anew, with a difference. Life\nand thought have so far advanced under Christianity that liberty is\ngood in things which once had to be sternly reprobated; but only the\nsame guidance will carry us higher. To those who lead in arts and\nliterature the appeal has to be made in the name of God and men to\nregard the fitness of things. The old ideas of Puritanism are not\nto be the standard? True. Neither are the tastes of Greece nor the\nmanners of Pompeii. Every artist must, it appears, be his own censor.\nLet each, then, use his right under a sense of responsibility to\nthe God who would have all to be pure and free. There are pictures\nexhibited, and poems sent out from the press, and novels published,\nwhich, for all the skill and charm that are in them, ought to have\nbeen cast into the fire. In private life, too, the Midianitish talk,\nthe jest, the anecdote, the innuendo, all but indecent, the hint, the\nlaugh that breaks down the barriers of integrity and sobriety, show\nthe license of a barbarism which is bent on conquest. Every Christian\nis called to wage against these immoralities an exterminating war.\n\nOn the other hand, charity and patience are needed. It is difficult\nto forbear with those who seem to find their pleasure in what is\nevil, more difficult to continue the efforts necessary to win them to\nreligion, purity, and honour. We feel it a hard task to track our own\nunholy desires to their retreats and slay them there. Proteus-like\nthey elude us; when we think they have been destroyed, a passing word\nor thought revives them. And if in the task of our own purification\nwe need long patience, it is not wonderful that even more should be\nrequired in the attempt to set others free from their besetting sins.\nMuch of our philanthropy, again, is useless because we try to cover\ntoo large a field. Few are engaged in comparison with the enormous\nregion over which effort has to extend, and we treat the hurt\nslightly, with too much haste. Then we grow despondent. Impatience,\nhopelessness, should never be known among those who undertake the\nDivine work of saving men and women from their sins. But to cure\nthis, new ideas on the whole subject of Christian endeavour and new\nmethods of work are required. The evil forces, a host arrayed against\ntrue life, must be followed into the desert places where they lurk,\nand there, with the sword of the Spirit, which is the bright strong\nword of God, attacked and slain. When Christians are brave and loving\nenough, when they have patience enough, the gospel of purity will\nbegin to have its power.\n\n\n 2. SETTLEMENT\n\n NUMBERS xxxii\n\nThe request of the men of Reuben and Gad that they should be allowed\nto settle on the eastern side of Jordan in the land of Jazer and the\nland of Gilead was at first refused by Moses with warm displeasure.\nThey appeared to wish exemption from further military duty, if indeed\nthey had not almost formed the intention of parting altogether with\nthe rest of the tribes. Moses asked of them, \"Shall your brethren go\nto the war and shall ye sit here? And wherefore discourage ye the\nheart of the children of Israel from going over into the land which\nthe Lord hath given them?\" He recalled the spies and the evil report\nthey brought, by which a former generation had been disheartened\nand made to murmur against the Lord. The forty years of wandering\nhad intervened since that error--a long period of suffering and\npunishment. And now with this request the men of Reuben and Gad were\nplaying the same dangerous part. \"Behold, ye are risen up in your\nfathers' stead, an increase of sinful men, to augment yet the fierce\nanger of the Lord toward Israel.\"\n\nIt is somewhat surprising to find the proposal met in this way.\nBut Moses had doubtless good cause for his condemnation of the\ntwo tribes. For some time, we can believe, the notion had been\nentertained, and already the cattle were driven northwards and\nscattered over the pastures of Gilead. The people felt that the\nconfraternity which had survived the test of the wilderness journey\nwas now about to break up. And as the two clans that proposed to\nsettle in Eastern Palestine were strong and could send a large\nnumber of warriors into the field, there was reason to fear that\nthe want of them would make the conquest of the great tribes beyond\nJordan too heavy a task.\n\nThe circumstances were of a kind resembling those of a Church when\nthe enjoyment of privilege and of the gains of the past is chosen\nby many of its members, and the rest, discouraged by this moral\nunbrotherliness, have to maintain the aggressive work which ought to\nbe shared by all. The force of unity lost, the Christian energy of\nlarge numbers lying unemployed, the rest overburdened, Churches often\ncome far short of the success they might attain. When Reubenites and\nGadites devote themselves to building houses, cultivating fields,\nand rearing cattle, neglecting altogether the command of God to\nconquer the territory still in the hands of His enemies, the spirit\nof religion cannot but decay. The selfishness of worldly Christians\nreacts on those who are not worldly, so that they feel its subtle\ninfluence, even although they scorn to yield. And when there is\nsome great task to be done which requires the personal service and\ncontributions of all, withdrawal of the less zealous may in this way\nmake victory impossible. True, we have on the other side the case\nof Gideon and his rejection of the great bulk of his army, that he\nmight take the field with a few who were brave and ready. Numbers of\nhalf-hearted people do not help an enterprise. Still, the duties of\nthe Church of Christ are so great that all are required for them. It\nis no apology to say that men are apathetic, and therefore useless.\nThey ought to be eager for the Divine war.\n\nIt was not at all wonderful that the men of Reuben and Gad proposed\nto settle on the east of Jordan. The soil of that region, extending\nfrom the Jabbok Valley northwards, and including the whole district\nwatered by the Yarmuk and its tributaries, was exceedingly fertile,\nwith fine forests of oak, and stretches of meadow and arable land.\nWhat could be seen of Jud\u00e6a from the heights of Moab appeared poor\nand barren in comparison with that green and fertile country. There\nwas abundance of room there, not only for the two tribes, but for\nmore; and besides the half of Manasseh which finally joined Reuben\nand Gad, other clans may have begun to think that they might rest\ncontent without venturing across Jordan. But Moses had good reasons\nfor resisting as far as possible this desire. There was no natural\nboundary on the east of Gilead and Bashan. Moab, in a similar\nsituation, was exposed to the attacks and perhaps corrupted by the\ninfluence of the Midianites. If Israel had taken up its abode in this\nregion which joined on to the desert, it too would have become half a\ndesert people. The Jordan came, as no doubt Moses foresaw, to be the\nreal boundary of the nation which maintained the faith of Jehovah and\ncarried on His purposes.\n\nIn danger of losing all because they had been too selfish, the men of\nReuben and Gad made a new proposal. They would go with the rest to\nthe conquest of Canaan; yea, they would form the van of the army. If\nMoses would only allow them to provide sheep-folds for their flocks\nand cities for their families, they would take the field and never\nthink of returning till the other tribes had all found settlement.\nThe offer was one which Moses saw fit to accept; but with a caution\nto the Reubenites. If they fulfilled the promise, he said, they\nshould be guiltless before the Lord; but if they did not, their sin\nwould be written against them. Foreseeing the result of a division\nbetween the east and west which any such faithless conduct would\ncertainly cause, he added the warning, \"Be sure your sin will find\nyou out.\" The time would come when, if they refused to do their part\nin helping the rest, they should find themselves, in some day of\nextreme peril, without the sympathy of their brethren, the prey of\nenemies who came from the east and north.\n\nEarthly comfort and the means of material prosperity can never\nbe enjoyed without spiritual disadvantage, or at least the risk\nof spiritual loss. The whole region of ease and wealth lies\ntowards the desert in which the adversaries of the soul have their\nlurking-places, from which they come stealthily or even boldly in\nopen day to make their assaults. A man who has large means is exposed\nto the envy of others; his life may be embittered by their designs\nupon him; his nature may be seriously injured by the flattery of\nthose who have no power but only the base cunning to which narrow\nself-love may descend. These, however, are not the assailants that\nare most to be dreaded. Rather should the man who is rich fear the\ndanger to his religion and his soul which draws near in other ways.\nThe wealthy who have no religion court his friendship and propose\nto him schemes for increasing his wealth. Alliances are urged upon\nhim which stir and partly gratify his ambition. He is pointed to\nhonours that can only be had through abandoning the great ideas of\nlife by which he should be ruled. He is served obsequiously, and is\ntempted to think that the world goes very well because he enjoys all\nhe desires, or is in the way to obtain the fulfilment of his highest\nearthly hopes. The curse of egotism hangs over him, and to escape it\nhe needs a double portion of the spirit of humility. Yet how is that\nto come to him?\n\nIt is well for a man when, before enjoying the good things of this\nlife in abundance, he has taken the field with those who have to\nfight a hard battle, and has done his share of common work. But even\nthat is not enough to guard him against pride and self-sufficiency\nfor the whole term of his existence. Better is it when by his own\nchoice the hardness is retained in his experience, when he never\ndischarges himself from the duty of fighting side by side with\nothers, that he may help them to their inheritance. That and that\nalone will save his life. He is called as a soldier of God to\nmaintain the holy war for human rights, for the social well-being\nand spiritual good of mankind. Every rich man should be a friend of\nthe people, a reformer, taking the part of the multitude against\nhis own tendency and the tendency of his class to exclusiveness\nand self-indulgence. The warning given by Moses to Reuben and Gad\nin accepting their proposals should linger with those who are rich\nand in high station. If they fail to do their duty to the general\nmass of their fellow-men, if they leave the rest to fight, at\ndisadvantage, for their human inheritance, they sin against God's\nlaw, which calls for brotherhood, and that sin will surely find\nthem out. In the end no sin is more sure to come home in judgment.\nAnd it is not by some miserable gifts to religious objects or some\npatronage of philanthropic schemes the prosperous can discharge the\ngreat debt laid upon them. In whatever way the inequalities of life,\nthe disabilities of privilege and wealth, hinder the realisation\nof brotherhood, there lie opportunity and need for men's personal\neffort. Would this imply sacrifice of what are called rights, of\nperhaps no small amount of substance? That is precisely the saving\nof a rich man's life. To that Christ pointed the rich young ruler who\ncame to Him seeking salvation--from that the inquirer turned away.\n\nAnd how does the sin of those who neglect such high duties find them\nout? Perhaps in the loss of the possessions they have selfishly\nguarded, and their reduction to the level of those whom they kept at\narm's-length and treated as inferiors or as enemies. Perhaps in the\nharshness of temper and bitterness of spirit the proud, friendless rich\nman may find growing upon him in old age, the horrible feeling that\nhe has not one brother where he should have had thousands, no one to\ncare--except selfishly--whether he lives or dies. To come to that, so\nfar as a man is concerned with his fellow-men, is to be indeed lost.\nBut these retributions may be artfully escaped. What then? Is not\nOne to be reckoned with who is the Guardian of the human family and\ngives men power and wealth only as His stewards, to be used in His\nservice? The future life does not obliterate society, but it destroys\nthe class separations, the factitious distinctions, that exist now.\nIt brings a man face to face with the fact that he is but a man, like\nothers, responsible to God. Is not the result indicated by our Lord\nwhen He says to exclusive Pharisaical men, \"They shall come from the\neast and west, and from the north and south, and shall sit down in the\nkingdom--ye yourselves cast forth without\"? Brotherhood here, not in\nname, but in deed and truth, means brotherhood above. Denial of it here\nmeans unfitness for the society of heaven.\n\nWe learn from ver. 19 that the Reubenites and Gadites confidently\naffirmed, even when they made their request to Moses, that their\ninheritance had fallen to them on the east side of Jordan. It may\nbe asked how they knew, since the division was not yet made. And\nthe answer appears to be that they had made up their minds on the\nsubject. Without waiting for the lot, they seem to have said, This is\nnobody's land now that the Amorites and Midianites are dispossessed.\nWe will have it. And there was no sufficient reason for refusing them\ntheir choice when they accepted the conditions. At the same time,\nthese tribes did not act fairly and honourably. And the result was\nthat, although they gained the fat land and the good pastures, they\nlost the close fellowship with the other tribes which was of greater\nvalue. Reuben, the premier tribe, could no longer keep its position.\nIt was by-and-by succeeded by Judah. Neither Reuben nor Gad made any\ngreat figure in the subsequent history. The half-tribe of Manasseh,\nwhich was settled, not on its own request, but by authority, in the\nnorthern part of Gilead towards the Argob, had greater distinction.\nGad has some notice. We read of eleven valiant men of this tribe who\nswam the Jordan at its highest to join David in his trouble. \"But\nno person, no incident is recorded to place Reuben before us in any\ndistincter form than as a member of the community (if community it\ncan be called) of the Reubenites, the Gadites, and the half-tribe\nof Manasseh. The very towns of his inheritance--Heshbon, Aroer,\nKiriathaim, Dibon, Baal-meon, Sibmah, Jazer--are familiar to us as\nMoabite, not as Israelite, towns.\" The Reubenites, in fact, under the\ninfluence of their wild neighbours, gradually lost touch with their\nbrethren and fell away from the religion of Jehovah.\n\nIt is a parable of the degeneration of life.--Earthly choice rules\nand heavenly faith is hazarded for the sake of a temporal advantage.\nMen have their will because they insist upon it. They do not consult\nthe prophet, but make terms with him, that they may gain their end.\nBut as they place themselves, so they have to live, not on the soil\nof the promised land, no integral part of Israel.\n\n\n\n\n XXV\n\n _THE WAY AND THE LOT_\n\n NUMBERS xxxiii., xxxiv\n\n\n1. The itinerary of xxxiii. 1-49 is one of the passages definitely\nascribed to Moses. It opens with the departure from Rameses in Egypt\non the morrow after the passover, when the children of Israel \"went\nout with an high hand in the sight of all the Egyptians.\" The exodus\nis made singularly impressive in this narrative by the addition that\nit took place \"while the Egyptians were burying all their firstborn,\nwhich the Lord had smitten among them.\" The Divine salvation of\nIsrael begins when the dark shadow of loss and judgment rests on\ntheir oppressors. The gods of Egypt are discredited by the triumph\nof Jehovah's people. They can neither save their own worshippers nor\nprevent the servants of another from obtaining liberty.\n\nFrom Rameses, the place of departure, to Abel-shittim, in the plains\nof Moab, forty-two stations in all are given at which the Israelites\npitched. Of these about twenty-four are named either in Exodus, in\nother parts of the Book of Numbers, or in Deuteronomy. Some eighteen,\ntherefore, are mentioned in this passage and nowhere else. Of the whole\nnumber, comparatively few have as yet been identified. The Egyptian\nlocalities, at least Rameses and Succoth, are known. With the exit\nfrom Egypt, at the crossing of the Red Sea difficulty begins. Our\npassage says that the Israelites went three days' journey into the\nwilderness of Etham; Exodus calls it the wilderness of Shur. Then Marah\nand Elim bring the travellers, according to chap. xxxiii., to the Red\nSea, the _Y\u00e2m Suph_. Ordinarily, this is supposed to be the Gulf of\nSuez, alongside which the route would have lain from the day it was\ncrossed. There are, however, the best reasons for believing that this\n\"Red Sea\" is the eastern gulf, The Elanitic, as it must be in xiv.\n25, where, after the evil report of the spies, the Divine command is\ngiven: \"To-morrow turn ye, and get you into the wilderness by the way\nto the Red Sea.\" From this identification of the Y\u00e2m Suph many things\nfollow. And one is the rejection of the ordinary opinion regarding the\nposition of Sinai. The mountain of the law-giving is always described\nas situated in Midian. Now, Midian is beyond Elath, on the eastern\nside of the Y\u00e2m Suph, not in the peninsula between the Gulfs of Suez\nand Akabah. Elim and Elath, or Eloth, appear to be names for the same\nplace, at the head of the Gulf of Akabah. We have therefore to look\nfor Sinai either among the southern hills of Seir or those lying more\nsouthward still, towards the desert. In Deborah's song (Judg. v. 4, 5)\noccur the following verses:--\n\n \"Lord, when Thou wentest out of Seir,\n When Thou marchedst out of the field of Edom,\n The earth trembled, the heavens also dropped,\n Yea, the clouds dropped water;\n The mountains flowed down at the presence of the Lord,\n Even yon Sinai at the presence of the Lord, the God of Israel.\"\n\nIn the same direction the \"Prayer of Habbakuk\" points (iii. 3, 7):\n\n \"God came from Teman,\n And the Holy One from Mount Paran.\n His glory covered the heavens,\n And the earth was full of His light....\n I saw the tents of Cushan in affliction,\n The curtains of the land of Midian did tremble.\"\n\nThe tradition which places Sinai in the south of the peninsula\nbetween the two gulfs \"is of later origin than the lifetime of St.\nPaul, and can claim no higher authority than the interested fancies\nof ignorant c\u0153nobites. It throws into confusion both the geography\nand the history of the Pentateuch, and contradicts the definite\nstatements of the Old Testament.\" So the most recent inquiry.\n\nIf Mount Sinai was somewhere to the south of Edom, the journey thence\nto Kadesh by way of Kibroth-hattaavah and Hazeroth, localities\nmentioned both in Numb. xi. and xxxiii., may have had other stations;\nand these may be named in ver. 19 of our passage and onward. But\nidentification of the places is exceedingly doubtful till we come\nto Ezion-geber, in the Arabah, and Mount Hor. Deut. x. places the\nscene of Aaron's death at Mosera, which seems to be the same as\nMoseroth, and is there given along with other stations named in the\nitinerary---Bene-jaakan, Gudgodah (= Hor-haggidgad), Jotbathah. And\nthis seems to prove that these localities were in or near the Arabah,\nMoseroth being in the region of Mount Hor. But where Kadesh is to\nbe found between Rithmah and Moseroth, and under what name, it is\nimpossible to say. Keil argues for Rithmah itself. Palmer reckons\ntwenty stations to the first arrival at Kadesh. His map, however,\nshows a Mount Sheraif, which may be the same as Shepher, not far from\nGadis, which he identifies with Kadesh. For the rest we are left in\ngreat ignorance, relieved only by this, that at the most there are\nbut eighteen stations given, more probably thirteen, for the whole\nthirty-seven years between the first arrival at Kadesh and the death of\nAaron at Mount Hor; and five or six of these were on the Arabah. During\nthe whole of that long period there were only a few removals of the\ntabernacle, and those apparently within a limited area near Kadesh.\n\nA list of names with only three historical notes appears a singular\nmemorial of the forty years. Time was, no doubt, when the places\nnamed were all well known, and any Israelite desiring to satisfy\nhimself as to the route by which his forefathers went could make it\nout by help of this passage. To us the interest of the subject is\npartly the same as that which might have been found by a Hebrew,\nsay, of the time of Hezekiah, for whom the verification of the\nwilderness journey might be a help to faith. But the impossibility\nof identifying the localities shows that there are matters in the\nhistory of Israel which are of no particular importance now. There\nis more danger in seeking to gratify mere curiosity, than profit\nin any possible discoveries. Why should not the mountain of the\nlaw-giving be hid in the shadows as well as the grave in which Moses\nwas laid? Why should not the places at which Israel encamped be to\nus mere names, since, if we could identify them, it might only be to\nadd fresh difficulties instead of clearing away those that exist?\nThe Israelites who entered Canaan had not seen all the way by which\nJehovah led His people. When they crossed the Jordan, present duty\nwas to engage them, not the mere names that belonged to the past.\nThey were to forget the things behind, and stretch forward to the\nthings which were before. And duty is the same still. Our backward\nglance, especially on the actual path from one spot of earth to\nanother by which men have gone in trial and anticipation, must not\nhinder the efforts called for by the circumstances of our own time.\nThe way of the desert, especially, may well lie half obliterated in\nthe distance, since we know the spiritual fruit of the dealings of\nGod with Israel, and can bear it with us as we follow our own road.\n\nThe ideas of change and urgency are in our passage. The wilderness\njourney was taken by a people on whom Divine influences had laid\nhold, who of themselves would have remained content in Egypt, but\nwere not suffered, because God had some greater thing in store\nfor them. The urgency throughout was His. And so is that which we\nourselves feel hurrying us from change to change, from place to\nplace. We may not be in the wilderness, but in a spot of shelter and\ncomfort; and it may be no house of bondage, but a vantage-ground\nfor generous effort. Even when we are thus happily settled, as we\nimagine, the call comes, and we must strike our tents. At other times\nour own anxiety anticipates the command. But we know that always,\nwhether we pass into sterner conditions of life or escape to more\npleasant circumstances, the times and changes that happen to us are\nof God's appointing, that His providence urges us toward a goal. And\nthis means that our reaching the goal must be by His way, although\nproperly we endeavour to find it for ourselves.\n\nThe number of the stations at which Israel encamped in the course\nof forty years can scarcely be taken as representing the number of\nchanges from dwelling to dwelling any pilgrim through this world\nshall have to make. But if we think of halting-places and movements\nof thought, we shall have a fruitful parallel. From the twentieth to\nthe sixtieth year--may we not say?--is the time of journeying that\ntakes the mind from its first freedom to comparative rest. Not far\non the Divine law-giving impresses itself on the conscience; and\nhence a direct road may appear to lead into the peace of obedience.\nBut the stations successively reached, Kibroth-hattaavah, Hazeroth,\nRithmah, and the rest, represent each a peculiar difficulty\nencountered, a barrier to our steady progress towards the settled\nmind. St. Paul indicates one he found when he says: \"I had not known\ncoveting, except the law had said, Thou shalt not covet.\" Another\nhalt is imposed when it is found that the law appears to forbid\nwhat is according to nature; still another when obedience requires\nseparation from those who have been valued friends and pleasant\ncompanions. These hindrances left behind as the soul, still confiding\nand hopeful, is urged on towards the goal, a great trial like that\nof Kadesh follows. We are not far from the frontier of promise; and\nanticipations are formed of many delights for heart and life. Is\nnot obedience to bring felicity, an easy salvation from doubt and\nfear? But it becomes plain that there are enemies to faith and peace\nbeyond the border as well as in the region already crossed. Complete\nconformity to the Divine will has not been achieved. Will it ever\nbe achieved? We begin to doubt the result of law-keeping. There is\nperhaps a backward look to Sinai, implying a question whether God\nspoke there, or beyond Sinai, to the old traditional way of life. And\nso another term of difficult inquiry begins.\n\nIn this way many find themselves held for a long period of middle\nlife. Their minds move from one point to another without seeming\nto make any progress. But neither does rest come. It is seen that\npartial obedience, a measure of nearness to the perfection once\ndreamed of, will not suffice. Then arises the question whether\nobedience can ever save. There is return almost to Sinai itself,\nat least to a place from which its peak is seen and the mind is\nconfirmed as to the inexorability of law. So the urgency of the\nDivine will is felt, and the way is fixed. If the soul would make\nits own way into peace, it is driven back. For, perhaps, it would\nhave the difficulty solved by taking the way of a Church, accepting\na creed--as Israel would have passed through the territory of Edom.\nThis also is forbidden. Trusted helpers fall by the way, as Aaron\ndied at Hor, and there is sorrowful delay. But movement is enforced;\nand, finally, it is by a road that reveals Sinai and the law in\nquite another aspect, showing vital faith, not mere obedience, to\nbe the means of salvation, our progress is made. Round the borders\nof Edom, not by trust in creed or Church, but by confidence in\nGod Himself, the soul must advance. Then strength comes. Point\nafter point is reached and passed. Self-righteousness, pride, and\nPharisaism--Amorites of the mountain land--are overcome. At length\nthrough the faith of Christ peace is found, the peace that is\npossible on this side the river.\n\nIt is our high privilege to be urged and led on thus by Him who knows\nthe way we should take, who tries us that we may come forth purified\nas gold. Without Divine pressure we should content ourselves in the\ndesert and never see the real good of life. So many lose themselves\nbecause they will not admit that to be of the truth is necessary to\nsalvation. There is a way of thinking, or rather refusing to think,\nof spiritual verities which keeps the soul unaware of the purpose\nGod would carry into effect, or indifferent to it. The mind refuses\nits duty; and in the midway of life the spiritual goal fades from\nview. To guard against this taking place in the case of any one is\nthe office of the Gospel ministry. If evangelical preaching does not\nkeep thought awake and attentive to Divine inspirations, if it does\nnot speak to those who are in every stage of perplexity, at every\npossible camping-ground, it fails of its high purpose.\n\n\n2. Commandment is given that when the Israelites pass over Jordan\nthey shall use effectual means for establishing themselves as the\npeople of Jehovah in Canaan. They are, for one thing, to drive out\nbefore them all the inhabitants of the land. Nothing is here said\nof putting them all to the sword; only they are not to be left even\nin partial occupation. The plan of Israel's settlement in its new\nterritory requires that it shall be subject to no alien influence,\nand shall have the field entirely to itself for the development of\ncustoms, civilisation, and religion. And in this there is nothing\neither impossible or, as the ideas of the time went, strange and\ncruel. We do not need to take refuge in the command of God and\ndefend it by saying that He had absolute right over the lives of\nthe Canaanites. The tides of war and population were continually\nflowing and receding. When the Israelites reached Canaan, they had\nthe same right as others to occupy it, provided they could make their\nright good at the point of the sword. Yet for their own special\nconsciousness the command given by Moses in Jehovah's name was most\nimportant. It was only as His people they were to advance, and as His\npeople they were to dwell separate in Canaan.\n\nTo drive out all the inhabitants of the land was, however, a\ndifficult task; and even Moses might not intend the order to\nbe literally obeyed. We have seen that he did not require the\ndestruction of the Midianites to be absolute. In the wars of conquest\nin Canaan cases of a similar kind would necessarily arise. When\na tribe was driven out of its cities many would be left behind,\nsome of whom would conceal themselves and gradually venture from\ntheir hiding-places. The command was general, and could scarcely\nbe supposed to require the putting to death of all children. And\nagain, as we know, there were fortresses which for a long time defied\nattempts to reduce them. The Israelites were not so faithful to God\nthat Moses could expect their success to be insured by supernatural\naid. It is the constant purpose they are to have in view, to sweep\nthe land clear of those presently in occupation. As they establish\nthemselves, this will be carried out; and if they fail, allowing any\nof the tribes to remain, these will be as pricks in their eyes and as\nthorns in their sides.\n\nThe will of God that Israel, called to special duty in the world,\nwas to keep itself separate, is here strongly emphasised. It was\nthe only way by which faith could be preserved and made fruitful.\nFor the Canaanites, already civilised and in many of the arts\nsuperior to the Hebrews, had gross polytheistic beliefs imbedded in\ntheir customs, and a somewhat elaborate cultus which was observed\nthroughout the whole land. \"Figured stones,\" which by their shape or\nincised emblems conveyed religious ideas; molten images, probably\nof bronze, like those found at Tel el Hesy, which were for household\nuse, or of a larger size for tribal adoration; \"high places\" crowned\nby altars and sacrificial stones, were specially to be destroyed.\nThe tendency to polytheism required to be carefully guarded against,\nfor the gods of Canaan represented the powers of nature, and their\nrites celebrated the fruitfulness of earth under the lordship of Baal\nor Bel, and the mysterious processes of life associated with the\ninfluence of Astarte, the moon. The divinities of Egypt also appear\nto have had their worshippers; and, indeed, the mixed population of\nthe land had drawn from every neighbouring region symbols, rites, and\npractices supposed to propitiate the unseen powers on whose favour\nhuman life must depend. Israel could prosper only by rejecting and\nextirpating this idolatry. Allowed to survive in any degree, it would\nbe the cause of physical suffering and spiritual decay.\n\nThe command thus ascribed to Moses was again one which he must have\nknown the Israelites would find difficult to carry out, even if they\nwere cordially disposed to obey it. The sacred places of a country\nlike Canaan tend to retain their reputation even when the rites\nfall into disuse; and however expeditiously the work of sweeping\naway the original inhabitants might be done, there was no small\ndanger that knowledge of the cult as well as veneration for the high\nplaces would be learned by the Hebrews. The command was made clear\nand uncompromising so that every Israelite might know his duty; but\nthe difficulty and the peril remained. And as we know from the Book\nof Judges and subsequent history, the law, especially in regard to\nthe demolition of high places, became practically a dead letter.\nJehovah was worshipped at the ancient places of sacrifice; and so far\nwere even pious Israelites of the next few centuries from thinking\nthey did wrong in using those old altars, that Samuel fell in with\nthe custom. It was true in regard to this commandment as it is with\nregard to many others,--the high mark of duty is presented, but few\naim at it. Expediency rules, the possible is made to suffice instead\nof the ideal. There is reason to believe, not only that the images\nand stone symbols of Canaan were venerated, but that Jehovah Himself\nwas worshipped by many of the Hebrews under the form of some animal.\nAnd the Canaanites became to those who fraternised with them as\npricks in their eyes. Spiritual vision failed; faith fell back on\nthe coarse emblems used by the old inhabitants of the land. Then the\nvigour of the tribes decayed and they were judged and punished.\n\n\n3. The boundaries of the land in which the Israelites were to dwell\nare laid down in ch. xxxiv.; but, as elsewhere, there is difficulty\nin following the geography and identifying the old names. The south\nquarter is to be \"from the wilderness of Zin along by the side of\nEdom\"--that is to say, it is to include the region of Zin near Kadesh\nand extend to the mountains of Seir. The \"ascent of Akrabbim\" is\napparently the Ghor rising southwards from the Dead Sea. The line\nthen runs along the Arabah for some distance, say fifty miles, across\nby the south of the Azazimeh hills and of Kadesh Barnea towards the\nstream called the river or brook of Egypt, which it followed to\nits debouchment in the Mediterranean. The western boundary was the\nMediterranean or Great Sea for a distance of perhaps one hundred and\nsixty miles. The northern boundary is exceedingly obscure. They were\nto keep in view a \"mount Hor\" as a landmark; but no two geographers\ncan be said to agree where it was. The \"entering in of Hamath\" is also\na locality greatly disputed. Most likely it was some well-known part\nof the road leading along the Leontes valley to that of the Orontes.\nIf we take the mount Hor here indicated to be Hermon, a line running\nwest and striking the Mediterranean somewhere north of Tyre would be a\nnatural boundary, and would correspond fairly with the actual partition\nand occupation of the country. It is certain, however, that both the\nPhilistines and Ph\u0153nicians, especially the latter, were so strongly\nestablished in the southern and northern parts of the seaboard that\nany attempt to dispossess them was soon discovered to be futile. And\neven in the limited central range from Kedesh Naphtali to Beersheba the\nsettlement was only effected gradually.\n\nThe Canaan of the Divine promise marked out, yet never fully\npossessed, is a symbol of the region of this life which those who\nbelieve in God have assigned to them, but never entirely enjoy.\nThere are boundaries within which there is abundant room for the\ndevelopment of the life of faith. It is not, as the world reckons, a\ndistrict of great resources. As Canaan had neither gold nor silver,\nneither coal nor iron mines, as its seaboard was not well supplied\nwith harbours, nor its rivers and lakes of great use for inland\nnavigation, so we may say the life open to the Christian has its\nlimitations and disabilities. It does not invite those who seek\npleasure, wealth, or dazzling exploits. Within it, discipline is to\nbe found rather than enjoyment of earthly good. The \"milk and honey\"\nof this land are spiritual symbols, Divine sacraments. There is room\nfor the development of life in every branch of study and culture,\nbut in subordination to the glory of God, and for the testimony that\nshould be borne to His majesty and truth.\n\nMany of us affect to despise so narrow a range of thought and\nendeavour, and persist in believing that something more than\ndiscipline may be looked for in this world. Is there not a proper\nkingdom of humanity better than any kingdom of God? May not the race\nof men, apart from any service paid to an Unseen God, attain dignity\nof its own, power, gladness, magnificence? It is supposed that by\nrejecting all the limitations of religion and refusing the outlook\nto another life the united labour of men will make this life free\nand this earth a paradise. But it remains true that men must limit\ntheir hopes with regard to their own future here as individuals and\nthe future of the race. We must accept the boundaries God has fixed,\non one side the swift Jordan, on the other the Great Sea. There are\nseemingly rich fields beyond, wide regions that invite the tastes and\nsenses, but these are no part of the soul's inheritance; to explore\nand reduce them would bring no real gain.\n\nThe range that lies open to us as servants of God, and affords ample\nspace for the discipline of life, is often not used and therefore\nnot enjoyed. When people will not accept the inevitable fixed limits\nwithin which their time and vigour can be occupied to the best\nadvantage, when they look covetously to districts of experience not\nmeant for them, as Israel did at certain periods of her history,\ntheir life is spoiled. Discontent begins, envy follows. Where in\nseeking and reaching moral gains, purity, courage, love, there would\nhave been a continual sense of adequate result and encouraging\nprospect, there is now no gain, no pleasure. The appointed lot is\ndespised, and all it can yield held in contempt. How many there are\nwho, with a full river of Divine bounty on one side their life, and\nthe great ocean of the Divine faithfulness ebbing and flowing on\nthe other, with the pastures and olive-groves of the Word of God to\nnourish their soul, with access to His city and sanctuary, and an\noutlook from summits like Tabor and Hermon to a transfigured life\nin the new heavens and earth, speak nevertheless with scorn and\nbitterness of their heritage! They might be reaching \"the measure\nof the stature of the fulness of Christ,\" but they remain graceless\nand discontented to the end. Israel, understanding its destiny and\nusing its opportunities aright, might well say--and so may every one\nwho knows the truth as it is in Jesus Christ--\"the lines are fallen\nunto me in pleasant places; yea, I have a goodly heritage.\" But this\ngladness of heart has its root in believing content. The restricted\nland is full of God's promise: \"Thou maintainest my lot.\" The\nsecurity of Jehovah's word encompasses the man of faith.\n\n\n\n\n XXVI\n\n _THE CITIES OF REFUGE_\n\n NUMBERS xxxv., xxxvi\n\n1. THE INHERITANCE OF THE LEVITES. The order relating to the\nLevitical cities may be said to describe an ideal settlement. We\nhave, at all events, no evidence that the command was ever fully\ncarried out. It was to the effect that in forty-eight cities,\nscattered throughout the whole of the tribes in proportion to their\npopulation, dwellings were to be allotted to the Levites, who were\nalso to have the suburbs of those cities; that is to say, the fields\nlying immediately about them, \"for their cattle, and for their\nsubstance, and for all their beasts.\" It is assumed that closely\nsurrounding each of the cities there shall be pasturage, and that a\nregular or fairly regular boundary can be made at the distance of one\nthousand cubits from the city. Singularly, nothing whatever is said\nas to the duties of the Levites thus distributed throughout the land\non both sides Jordan, from Kedesh Naphtali in the north, to Debir in\nthe south, according to Josh. xxi. It is not said that they were to\nperform any ecclesiastical functions or instruct the people in the\nDivine Law. Yet something of the kind must have been intended, since\nmany of them were at a great and inconvenient distance from Shiloh\nand other places at which the ark was stationed.\n\nAccording to this statute, there is, for one thing, to be no\nseclusion of the Levites from the rest of the people. If clergy and\nlaity, as we say, are distinguished, the distinction is made as small\nas possible. From the terms of the present order (xxxv. 2, ff.) it\nmight appear that the towns given to the Levites were to be occupied\nby them exclusively. In parallel passages, however, it is clear that\nthe Levites dwelt along with others in the cities; and in this way,\nas well as by engaging in pastoral work, they were kept closely in\ntouch with the men of the tribes. The land allotted to them was not\nsufficient for farms; but the tithes and offerings were to a large\nextent for their support. And the arrangement thus sketched is held\nwith some reason to be an ideal for every order of men called to\nsimilar duty. The Levites, indeed, were not at first spiritual.\nNeither the nature of their work at the sanctuary, nor the conditions\nof their life, implied any special consecration of heart. But the\ngeneral tone of a religious ministry advances; and even in David's\ntime there were Levites who served God in no mere routine, but with\nearnest mind, with a measure of inspiration. The ordinance here is in\nbehalf of a consecrated order devoted to the service of God.\n\nThe suburbs, or pasture lands about the cities, are measured a\nthousand cubits broad, and are to be two thousand cubits along\neach of the four boundaries. If the figures given are correct it\nwould seem that, although the wall of the city is spoken of, the\nmeasurement must really have begun in the centre of the city;\notherwise there could never have been a square of land, cities not\ntaking that form; nor could a boundary of two thousand cubits on each\naspect, north, south, east, and west, be made out. The cities must\noften have been small, a cluster of poor huts built of clay or rude\nbrick, with a wall of similar material. We need imagine no stately\ndwellings or fine pleasure grounds when we read here of the provision\nfor the Levites. Within the wall they had their bare, mean cottages;\noutside, there might be a breadth of perhaps four hundred yards of\npoor enough ground which they could claim. But as the tithes were\nnot always paid, so the dwellings and the pasturage may not always\nhave been allotted. There is not much reason to wonder that in a\nshort time after the settlement in Canaan the Levites, finding no\nspecial work at the sanctuary, and obtaining little support from the\nofferings, gradually became part of the tribes in which they happened\nto have their abode. Hence we read in Judges (xvii. 7) of \"a young\nman out of Bethlehem-judah, of the family of Judah, who was a Levite.\"\n\nThe main purpose of the present statute, so far as it refers to the\ndwellings of the Levites, would appear to have been economic, not\nreligious. It was that all the tribes might have their share of\nmaintaining the servants of the sanctuary. But it seems likely that a\nclass half priestly would, in lack of other duty, attach itself to the\nhigh places, and set up a worship not contemplated by the law. And if\nthis is to be regarded as a misfortune, the choice of the Levitical\ncities is in some cases difficult to account for. Kedesh in Naphtali\nhad been a famous holy place of the Canaanites; so probably were\nothers, as Gibeon, Shechem, Gath-rimmon. The special symbol of Jehovah\nwas the ark; and where the ark was the principal national rites were\nalways performed. But in a time of pioneer work and constant alarms the\ncentral sanctuary could not always be visited, and the Levites appear\nto have lent themselves to worship of a local kind.\n\nAn ecclesiastical order needs great faithfulness if it is not to\nbecome irreligious through poverty, or proud and domineering through\nassumption of power with God. To live poorly as those Levites were\nexpected to live, without the opportunity of earthly gain, while\noften the share of national support which was due fell to a very low\nand wholly inadequate amount, would try the fidelity of the best\nof them. No large claim need be made in behalf of men specially\nengaged in the work of the Christian Church; and great wealth seems\ninappropriate to those who represent Christ. But what is their due\nshould at least be paid cheerfully, and the more so if they give\nearnest minds to the service of God and man. With all faults that\nhave at various periods of the Church's history stained the character\nof the clergy, they have maintained a testimony on behalf of the\nhigher life, and the sacredness of duty to God. A materialistic age\nwill make light of that service, and point to ecclesiastical pride\nand covetousness as more than counterbalancing any good that is done.\nBut a broad and fair survey of the course of events will show that\nthe witness-bearing of a special class to religious ideas has kept\nalive that reverence on which morality depends. True, the ideal of\na theocracy would dispense with an order set apart to teach the law\nof God and to enforce His claims on men. But for the times that now\nare, even in the most Christian country, the witness-bearing of a\ngospel ministry is absolutely needful. And we may take the statute\nbefore us as anticipating a general necessity, that necessity which\nthe apostles of our Lord met when they ordained presbyters in every\nChurch, and gave them commission to feed the flock of God.\n\n\n2. THE CITIES OF REFUGE. Among the forty-eight cities that provide\ndwellings for the Levites, six are to be cities of refuge, \"that the\nman-slayer which killeth any person unwittingly may flee thither.\"\nThree of these cities are to be on the east and three on the west\nside of Jordan. According to other enactments they are to be\ndistributed so as to be reached quite easily from all parts of the\ncountry. They were sanctuaries for any one fleeing from the \"avenger\nof blood\"; but the protection found in them was not by any means\nabsolute. Only if there appeared to be good cause for admitting\na fugitive was he afforded refuge even for a time, and his trial\nfollowed as soon as possible. The laws of protection and judgment are\nhere laid down not fully, though with some detail.\n\nWe notice first that the statutes regarding the man-slayer are frankly\nbased on the primitive practice of blood revenge. It was the duty of\nthe nearest male relation of one who had been slain to seek the blood\nof the man who slew him. The duty was held to be one which he owed\nto his brother, to the community, and to God; and the principle of\nretribution in such cases was embodied in the saying, \"Whoso sheddeth\nman's blood, by man shall his blood be shed.\" The go\u00ebl, or redeemer,\nwhose part it was to recover for a family land that had been alienated,\nor a member of the family who had fallen into slavery, had it also laid\non him to seek justice on behalf of the family when one belonging to\nit had been killed. The evils of this method of punishing crime are\nvery evident. All the heat of personal affection for the man put to\ndeath, the keen desire to maintain the honour of family or clan, and\nthe bitter hatred of the tribe to which the homicide belonged, made the\npursuit of the criminal swift and the stroke fierce and unrelenting. A\ngo\u00ebl put on a false track might easily strike to the ground an innocent\nperson; and he would feel himself bound to incur all risks in avenging\nhis kinsman. Often whole tribes of Arabs are involved in the blood feud\nbeginning in a single stroke, and wherever the custom prevails there is\nthe gravest danger of wide and sanguinary strife. The enactments of our\npassage are intended to counteract in part these abuses and dangers.\n\nWe may wonder that the Hebrew law, enlightened on many points, did\nnot wholly abolish the practice of blood revenge. Justice is not\nthe private affair of any man, even the nearest kinsman of one who\nhas been injured. We have learned that the administration of law,\nespecially in cases of murder or supposed murder, is best taken\nout of the hands of a private avenger, whose aim is to strike as\nsoon and as effectually as possible. It remains of course for those\nwhose friend has died by violence to institute inquiries and do\ntheir utmost to bring the criminal to justice. But even when a man's\nguilt seems clear his trial is before an impartial judge by whom all\nrelevant facts are elicited. In Hebrew law there was no complete\nprovision for such an administration of justice. The ancient custom\ncould not be easily set aside, for one thing; the passionate oriental\nnature would cling to it. And for another, there was no organisation\nfor repressing disorder and dealing with crime. A certain risk had\nto be run, in order that the sanctity of human life might be clearly\nkept before a people too ready to strike as well as to curse. But if\nthe man-slayer was able to reach a city of refuge he had his trial.\nThe old custom was checked by the right of the fugitive to claim\nsanctuary and to have his case investigated.\n\nAs for the sanctuary cities, there may also have been some imperfect\ncustom which anticipated them. In Egypt there certainly was; and\nthe Canaanites, who had learned not a little from Egypt, may have\nhad sacred places that afforded protection to the fugitive. But\nthe Mosaic law prevented abuse of the means of evading justice.\nHe who had killed another was a criminal before God. The blood of\nthe brother he had slain defiled the land and cried to Heaven. No\nsanctuary must protect a man who had with homicidal purpose struck\nanother. There was to be neither priestly protection, nor sanctuary,\nnor ransom for him. The Divine principle of justice took up the cause.\n\nIn vv. 16 ff. there are examples of cases which are adjudged to be\nmurder. To smite one with an instrument of iron, or with a stone\ngrasped in the hand presumably large enough to kill, or with a weapon\nof wood, a heavy club or bar, is adjudged to be deliberate homicide.\nThen if hatred can be proved, and one known to have cherished enmity\ntowards another is shown to have thrust him down, or hurled at him,\nlying in wait, or to have smitten him with the hand, such a one is to\nbe allowed no sanctuary. On the other hand, the cases of inadvertent\nhomicide are defined: \"if he thrust him suddenly without enmity, or\nhurled upon him anything without lying in wait, or with any stone,\nwhereby a man may die, seeing him not.\" These, of course, are simply\ninstances, not exhaustive categories.\n\nIt is not here stated, but in Josh. xx. 4 the statute runs that\nthe man-slayer who fled to a sanctuary city was to state his cause\nbefore the elders, no doubt at the gate. Their preliminary decision\nhad to be given in his favour before he could be admitted. But\nthe real trial was by the \"congregation,\" Numb. xxxv. 24, some\nassembly representing the tribe within whose territory the crime\nhas been committed, or more likely a gathering of headmen of the\nwhole nation. Further, at ver. 30 it is enacted that the charge\nof the avenger of blood against any one must be substantiated by\ntwo witnesses at least. These provisions form the basis of a sound\njudicial method. The rights of refuge and of revenge stand opposed\nto each other, and between the two a large and authoritative court\ngives judgment. It will be observed, moreover, that the judiciary was\nnot ecclesiastical. Where power was to be exercised in the name of\nGod, the priests were not to wield it, but the people. The form of\ngovernment is far nearer a democracy than a hierocracy.\n\nA singular point in the law is the term during which the unwitting\nman-slayer who had been acquitted by the court of justice must remain\nin sanctuary. He is in danger of being put to death by the avenger of\nblood until the acting high priest dies. Till that event he must keep\nwithin the border of his city of refuge. And here the idea seems to be\nthat the official memory of the crime which had ceremonially defiled\nthe land rested with the high priest. He was supposed to keep in mind,\non God's behalf, the bloodshed which even though unintentional was\nstill polluting. His death accordingly obliterated the recollection\nthat kept the man-slayer under peril of the go\u00ebl's revenge. The high\npriest had no power to acquit or condemn a criminal, nor to enforce\nagainst him the punishment of his fault. But he was the guardian of the\nsacredness of the land in the midst of which Jehovah dwelt.\n\nWith regard to the symbolical meaning of the cities of refuge, it\nis needful to exercise great care at every point. The man-slayer,\nfor instance, fleeing from the avenger of blood, is not a type of\nthe sinner fleeing for his life from the justice of God. If guilty\nof murder, a man could find no safety even in the city of refuge. It\nwas only if he was not guilty of premeditated crime that he found\nsanctuary. The refuge cities, however, represented Divine justice\nas in contrast to the justice or rather the vengeance of man--that\nDivine justice which Christ came to reveal, giving Himself for\nus upon the cross. Human righteousness errs sometimes by excess,\nsometimes by defect. Certain offences it would never condemn, others\nit would passionately and remorselessly punish. The sanctuary cities\nshow a higher idea of justice. But all men are guilty before God. And\nthere is mercy with Him not only for the unwitting transgressor, but\nfor the man who has to confess deliberate sin, the forfeiture of his\nlife to Divine law.\n\nThe singular opinion has been expressed that the death of the high\npriest was expiatory. This is said to be \"unmistakably evident\" from\nthe addition of the clause, \"who has been anointed with the holy\noil\" (ver. 25). The argument is that as the high priest's life and\nwork \"acquired a representative signification through this anointing\nwith the Holy Ghost, his death might also be regarded as a death for\nthe sins of the people by virtue of the Holy Ghost imparted to him,\nthrough which the unintentional man-slayer received the benefits of\nthe propitiation for his sins before God, so that he could return\ncleansed to his native town without further exposure to the vengeance\nof the avenger of blood.\" And thus, it is said, \"The death of the\nearthly high priest became a type of that of the heavenly One, who\nthrough the eternal Spirit offered Himself without spot to God, that\nwe might be redeemed from our transgressions.\" But although many of\nthe Rabbins and fathers held this view as to the expiatory nature of\nthe high priest's death, there is absolutely nothing in Scripture or\nreason to support it. All the expiation, moreover, which the Mosaic\nlaw provided for was ceremonial. If the death of the high priest was\nefficacious only so far as his functions were, then there could be\nno atonement or appearance of atonement for moral guilt, even that\nof culpable homicide for instance. The death of the high priest\nwas therefore in no sense a type of the death of Christ, the whole\nmeaning of which lies in relation to moral, not ceremonial, offences.\n\nWhile it cannot be said that \"light is thrown by the provisions\nregarding cities of refuge on the atonement of Christ\"--for that\nwould be the morning star shedding light on the sun--still there are\nsome points of illustration; and one of these may be noted. As the\nprotection of the sanctuary city extended only to the boundaries or\nprecincts belonging to it, so the defence the sinner has in Christ\ncan be enjoyed only so far as life is brought within the range of\nthe influence and commands of Christ. He who would be safe must be\na Christian. It is not mere profession of faith--\"Lord, Lord, have\nwe not prophesied in Thy name?\"--but hearty obedience to the laws of\nduty coming from Christ that gives safety. \"Who shall lay any thing\nto the charge of God's elect?\"--and the elect are those who yield the\nfruit of the Spirit, who are lovers of God and their fellow-men, who\nshow their faith by their works. It is a misrepresentation of the\nwhole teaching of Scripture to declare that salvation can be had,\napart from life and practice, in some mythical relation with Christ\nwhich is hardly even to be stated in words.\n\n\n3. TRIBAL INHERITANCE. Already we have heard the appeal of the\ndaughters of Zelophehad to be allowed an inheritance as representing\ntheir father. Now a question which has arisen regarding them must be\nsolved. The five women have not cared to undertake the work of the\nupland farm allotted to them, somewhere about the head waters of the\nYarmuk. They have, in fact, as heiresses been somewhat in request among\nthe young men of different tribes; and they are almost on the point of\ngiving their hands to husbands of their choice. But the chiefs of the\nfamily of Manasseh to which they belong find a danger here. The young\nwomen may perhaps choose men of Gad, or men of Judah. Then their land,\nwhich is part of the land of Manasseh, will go over to the tribes of\nthe husbands. There will be a few acres of Judah or of Gad in the north\nof Manasseh's land. And if other young women throughout the tribes, who\nhappen to be heiresses, marry according to their own liking, by-and-by\nthe tribe territories will be all confused. Is this to be allowed? If\nnot, how is the evil to be prevented?\n\nThe national centre and general unity of Israel could not in the\nearly period be expected to suffice. Without tribal coherence and\na sense of corporate life in each family the Israelites would be\nlost among the people of the land. Especially would this tend to\ntake place on the eastern side of Jordan and in the far north. Now\nthe clan unity went with the land. It was as those dwelling in a\ncertain district the descendants of one progenitor realised their\nbrotherhood. Hence there was good reason for the appeal of the\nManassites and the legislation that followed. Women who succeeded\nto land were to marry within the families of their fathers. Men were\napparently not forbidden to marry women of another tribe if they were\nnot heiresses. But the possession of land by women carried with it a\nresponsibility and deprived them of a certain part of freedom. Every\ndaughter who had an inheritance was to be wife to one of her near\nkin; so should no inheritance remove from one family to another; the\ntribes should cleave every one to his own inheritance.\n\nThe exigencies of the early settlement appear to have required\nthis law; and it was maintained as far as possible, so that he who\nlived in a certain region might know himself not only a Reubenite\nor a Benjamite as the case might be, but a son of Hanoch of the\nReubenites, or a son of Ard among the Benjamites. But we may doubt\nwhether the unity of the nation was not delayed by the means used\nto keep the land for each tribe and each tribe on its own land. The\narrangement was perhaps inevitable; yet it certainly belonged to a\nprimitive social order. The homogeneity of the people would have been\nhelped and the tribes held more closely together by interchange of\nland. In every law made at an early stage of a people's development\nthere is involved something unsuitable to after periods. And\nperhaps one error made by the Israelites was to cling too long and\ntoo closely to tribal descent and make too much of genealogy. The\nenactment regarding the marriage of heiresses within their own\nfamilies was an old one, bearing the authority of Moses. There came\na time when it should have been revoked and everything done that\nwas possible to weld the tribes together. But the old customs held;\nand what was the result? The tribes east of Jordan, as well as Dan\nand Asher, were well-nigh lost to the Confederacy at an early date.\nSubsequently a division began between the northern and southern\npeoples. We cannot doubt that partly for want of family alliances\nbetween Judah and Ephraim, and subordination of tribal to national\nsentiment, there came the separation into two kingdoms.\n\nFor the tribe idea and the other of making inheritance of land a\ngoverning matter, the Israelites would seem to have paid dearly.\nAnd there is danger still in the attempt to make a nation cohere\non any mere territorial basis. It is the spirit, the fidelity to a\ncommon purpose, and the pervasive enthusiasm that give real unity.\nIf these are wanting, or if the general aim is low and material, the\nsecurity of families in the soil may be exceedingly mischievous.\nAt the same time the old feeling is proved to have a deep root in\nfact. Territorial solidarity is indispensable to a nation; and the\nexclusion of a people from large portions of its land is an evil\nintolerable. Christianity has not done its work where the Church,\nthe teacher of righteousness, is unconcerned for this great matter.\nHow can religion flourish where brotherhood fails? And how can\nbrotherhood survive in a nation when the right of occupying the soil\nis practically denied? First among the economic questions which claim\nChristian settlement is that of land tenure, land right. Christianity\ncarries forward the principles of the Mosaic law into higher ranges,\nwhere justice is not less, but more--where brotherhood has a nobler\npurpose, a finer motive.\n\n\n\n\n INDEX\n\n\n Aaron, 16;\n character of, 29;\n and his sons, 32;\n complains of Moses' marriage, 137;\n rod of, 198, 207;\n intercession of, 207;\n close of his life, 235.\n\n Aaronites, support of, 215.\n\n Abstinence, pledge of, 60.\n\n Agag, 307.\n\n Alliances with Christianity, 114.\n\n Amalekites, 312.\n\n Amorites, 157, 253;\n defeat of, by Israel, 255.\n\n Anak, sons of, 157.\n\n Angel of the Lord, 281.\n\n Arabah, Wady, 244.\n\n Arad, King of, 178, 243.\n\n Ark, the, 44;\n borne before the host, 116.\n\n Arnold, Matthew, 304.\n\n Art, claimed for God, 95.\n\n Assemblies, calling of, 96.\n\n Atonement, for omissions, 184;\n great day of, 356.\n\n Azazel, 355.\n\n\n Baal-peor, festival of, 314.\n\n Baals, the, 295.\n\n Balaam, reputation of, 261;\n name of, 262;\n his knowledge of Jehovah, 267;\n refuses to go to Moab, 268;\n his error, 273;\n the critical, 283;\n first parable of, 292;\n prayer of, 296;\n second parable of, 300;\n third parable of, 305;\n fourth parable of, 309;\n end of, 320;\n like Absalom, 322.\n\n Balak, in anxiety, 261;\n and Balaam, 288;\n his sacrifices, 290;\n bewildered, 305.\n\n Bashan reduced, 255.\n\n Bible, the Word of God, 163;\n statements of, 281.\n\n Blessing, the, of Aaron, 67;\n of Moses, 116.\n\n Blood revenge, 400.\n\n Boehme, Jacob, quoted, 69.\n\n Boundaries of land, 390.\n\n Brazen serpent, the, 248;\n symbolism connected with, 249.\n\n Browning, R., quoted, 275, 294.\n\n\n Caleb, one of the spies, 151;\n honoured, 173.\n\n Camp, arrangement of the, 27.\n\n Canaan, to be explored, 152;\n reported on, 157.\n\n Canaanites admitted to fellowship, 183;\n to be driven out, 389.\n\n Candelabrum, 78;\n symbolism of, 79.\n\n Censers, the two hundred and fifty, 198, 205.\n\n Census, the first, 18;\n of all men, 20;\n results of, 22;\n the second, 323.\n\n Ceremonial duties, use of, 47.\n\n Chaldean soothsaying, 263.\n\n Chittim, 306, 312.\n\n Christ, the Light, 83;\n the historical, 88;\n Revealer of God, 92;\n the True Leader, 109;\n sin-bearing of, 126;\n sole headship of, 210;\n the Healer, 249;\n did Balaam prophesy of? 310.\n\n Christian, law, rejection of, 187;\n life, ignorant criticism of, 158;\n limitations of, 393;\n nation, duty of a, 160.\n\n Church, position of the, 20;\n a national, 21;\n and the irresolute, 107;\n helpers of the, 113;\n perils of, 115;\n mistaken claims of, 176;\n unity of, 203.\n\n Civilisation without morality, 372.\n\n Cloud, the pillar of, 89;\n in Isaiah, 90;\n value of, as a symbol, 93.\n\n Complaints of the Israelites, 119;\n against Providence, 119.\n\n Conscience paltered with, 278.\n\n Consciousness, the Divine, 327.\n\n Convocation, holy, 352.\n\n Covetousness, 272.\n\n\n Daily worship, 345.\n\n Dathan and Abiram, 195, 205.\n\n Dead, defilement by the, 53, 220.\n\n Death, conception of, 3;\n desired, 128;\n triumphed over, 238;\n tests faith, 337.\n\n Delitzsch, Prof. F., quoted, 357.\n\n Discipline, the finest, 238;\n of humanity, 325.\n\n Disorder, social, 165.\n\n Divination, 263.\n\n Divine guidance, 268.\n\n Division of land, 330.\n\n Drama of life, 330.\n\n\n Edom, territory of, 230;\n Israel debarred from, 231.\n\n Egyptian worship, 43.\n\n Eleazar, and Ithamar, 31;\n installed as high priest, 241.\n\n Eldad and Medad, 130.\n\n Elders, seventy, chosen, 128;\n became critics of Moses, 200.\n\n Endeavour, law of, 324.\n\n Enthusiasm of faith, 303.\n\n Ethiopians, 136.\n\n Ezekiel, Sabbath law of, 348.\n\n\n Faithless is foolish, 161.\n\n Family feast at new moon, 350.\n\n Feast, of unleavened bread, 351;\n of Pentecost, 354;\n of tabernacles, 359.\n\n \"Fill the hand,\" 32.\n\n First-born, number of, 36;\n sanctity of, 37.\n\n First-fruits, day of, 354.\n\n Freedom, illusory, 110;\n under Christianity, 209.\n\n Future life, 5;\n seems dim, 154;\n right view of, 159.\n\n\n Genealogies, 328.\n\n Gentiles, 266.\n\n Gershonites, 44.\n\n Gifts to be proportionate, 181.\n\n Girls saved alive, 366.\n\n God, modern doubt of, 163;\n compassion of, 213;\n sole allegiance to, 274, 279;\n the Link of the generations, 326.\n\n Go\u00ebl, the, 55, 400.\n\n Gospel, light of the, 82.\n\n Government, the Divine, 187.\n\n Greek tragedy, 2, 3.\n\n Guardians of religion, 26.\n\n\n Heave offering, 184.\n\n Heaven no fable, 155.\n\n Hebrew, the recoil of, from death, 4.\n\n Heifer, the red, 217.\n\n Hierarchy, establishment of, 208.\n\n Hierocracy, 6, 363, 403.\n\n High priest, memory of, 403;\n death of, 404.\n\n Hobab the Kenite, 104;\n refuses to join Israel, 109;\n second appeal to, 111;\n his influence, 201.\n\n Holiness, ideas of, 46.\n\n Holy place, symbolism of, 79.\n\n Homeborn, the, 181.\n\n Hor, Mount, 234.\n\n Hypocrisy, danger of, 281.\n\n\n Impotence confessed, 285.\n\n Iniquity, of tabernacle, 212;\n of priesthood, 214.\n\n Insincerity, 270.\n\n Inspiration, 13;\n of prophets, 143;\n of Moses, 144.\n\n Intrusions on life, 232.\n\n Irresolute, the, 107.\n\n Isaiah, 213.\n\n Israelites, the, separateness of, 7, 295;\n religion of, 9;\n a holy nation, 25;\n not hopeful, 156;\n disaffection of, at Kadesh, 160;\n Moses intercedes for, 169;\n punishment of, not inordinate, 171;\n defiant advance of, on Canaan, 174;\n refused way through Edom, 231;\n no enchantment with, 302;\n unable to convert, 319;\n their advantages, 324;\n purity of race, 328;\n religious enthusiasm of, 353.\n\n Itinerary, 382.\n\n Iye-abarim, 250.\n\n\n Jealousy, water of, 56.\n\n Jehovah, King and Judge, 5;\n authority of, 7;\n Guardian, 68;\n in pillar of cloud, 91;\n Protector of Israel, 117;\n His call to Israel, 123;\n communicates with Moses, 144;\n His \"similitude,\" 146;\n pardons but punishes, 170;\n forbearance of, 225;\n worship of, 295;\n revealed to Moses, 335;\n all time dedicated to, 347.\n\n Jethro, 104.\n\n Jonah, 226.\n\n Joshua, jealous for Moses, 132;\n one of the spies, 151;\n in practical command, 244;\n designation of, 339.\n\n Journal theory, 11.\n\n Judah in the van, 102.\n\n Judgment of murmurers, 120.\n\n Justice, impatient, 315;\n right course of, 316;\n and blood revenge, 401.\n\n\n Kadesh, the tribes at, 103;\n mustering at, 222;\n position of, 384.\n\n Kenites, the, 105, 266, 312.\n\n Kibroth-hattaavah, 134.\n\n Kiriath-huzoth, 290.\n\n Kohathites, duties of, 42.\n\n Korah, revolt of, 195;\n his claim, 196;\n doom of, 205.\n\n\n Land law, 407.\n\n Laymen, 202.\n\n Leader, qualifications of a, 340.\n\n Leaven banished from houses, 352.\n\n Legislation in Numbers, 12.\n\n Lepers, exclusion of, 48;\n their condition, 48;\n no pariahs, 51.\n\n Leprosy, and moral disease, 49;\n cases of, 50;\n of Miriam, 147.\n\n Levi, tribe of, separate, 7;\n service of 25;\n in Deuteronomy, 33.\n\n Levites, admitted priests, 33;\n given to Aaron, 34;\n service of the, an atonement, 39;\n consecration of, 40;\n duties of, 42;\n revolt of, with Korah, 201;\n support of, 215;\n cities of, 396.\n\n Levitical law, 8.\n\n Liberality Christian, 75.\n\n Life, close of, 235.\n\n Lord's Supper, the, 86.\n\n\n Manna, complained of, 121;\n glorified, 122.\n\n March, order of, 97;\n of humanity, 98;\n in the wilderness, 101.\n\n Marriage, laws, 58;\n of expedience, 280.\n\n Meal and drink offerings, 180.\n\n Merarites, duties of, 44.\n\n Message, the Divine, 219.\n\n Midianites, 261;\n plot of, against Israel, 313;\n to be vexed, 318;\n war with, 365;\n number of, 368.\n\n Militarism in Numbers, 17.\n\n Ministry, a, duties of, 212;\n provision for, 399.\n\n Miriam, jealousy of, 136;\n punishment of, 147;\n death of, 223.\n\n Mixed multitude, 121.\n\n Moab, overrun by Amorites, 254;\n plains of, 260.\n\n Moral severity, 370.\n\n Morley, J., quoted, 88.\n\n Moses, not hero of Numbers, 2;\n no priest, 6;\n reverence for, 16;\n his communion with God, 76;\n acted for Jehovah, 92;\n appeals to Hobab, 105;\n strain on, as leader, 125;\n prays for death, 128;\n magnanimity of, 133;\n position of, 142;\n and Isaiah, 146;\n represented God, 162;\n great offer to, 167;\n authority of, 203;\n coalition against, 204;\n and Korah, 204;\n and Dathan, 205;\n intercedes for Israel, 206;\n at the rock, 225;\n judgment of, 228;\n with Aaron at the last, 240;\n close of his life, 313;\n faith of, 336;\n his order as to Midianites, 367;\n rebukes Reuben and Gad, 374.\n\n Mustering, the, 18.\n\n\n Nabi or prophet, 143.\n\n Nadab and Abihu, 29.\n\n Nahshon, 22.\n\n Napoleon, 285.\n\n Nature and God, 80.\n\n Nature-cultus, 313.\n\n Naziritism, parallels to, 59;\n statutes regarding, 60;\n ceremonies of discharge, 64.\n\n \"Nephesh,\" 53.\n\n New moon, 343, 349;\n of seventh month, 355.\n\n Numbers, the Book of, and prophecies, 1;\n like Greek drama, 2;\n three main channels in, 7;\n Puritanism of, 8;\n sources of, 10;\n time covered by, 11;\n date of, 12;\n as history, 13;\n spirit of, 16.\n\n\n Offerings, laws of, 179;\n meal and drink, 344;\n daily, 344.\n\n Ordeal of jealousy, 57.\n\n Organisation, idea of, 44.\n\n Overcrowding, 331.\n\n\n Parables of Balaam, 292, 300, 305.\n\n Pardon and restoration, 171.\n\n Passover, the Little, 84, 86;\n the, 351.\n\n Peace, Divine, 70.\n\n Pentecost, 354.\n\n Peor, 305.\n\n Pethor, 261.\n\n Philanthropy, 373.\n\n Phinehas, zeal of, 315;\n accompanies the army, 365.\n\n Pisgah, 299.\n\n Plato, 5.\n\n Possessions, 325.\n\n Price, has each man his? 288.\n\n Priest, place of, 340, 363.\n\n Priesthood, the, 29;\n consecration of, 32;\n of Christ, 203;\n human, 208;\n Aaronic, duties of, 212;\n support of, 215.\n\n Priests' Code, 6, 12, 314, 317, 363, 368.\n\n Primogeniture, 35.\n\n Princes, offerings of the, 73.\n\n Prophesying of the seventy, 130;\n false, 133;\n oracle regarding, 142.\n\n Prophets, calling of, 45;\n of Old Testament, 143;\n vision of, 306.\n\n Purification, water of, 216.\n\n\n Quails, 129.\n\n\n Red Sea, 383.\n\n Redemption, of first-born, 38;\n signified by the Passover, 86.\n\n Refuge, cities of, 400.\n\n Religion, power of, 303.\n\n Repentance, 287.\n\n Responsibility of a leader, 126.\n\n Reuben and Gad, 374;\n their decay, 380.\n\n Reubenites, the, claim of, 200, 202.\n\n Rich, dangers of the, 377.\n\n Righteous, death of the, 296.\n\n Robertson, F. W., quoted, 320.\n\n Ruskin, John, quoted, 75.\n\n\n Sabbath, the, breach of, 180;\n social aspect of, 189;\n means of unity, 191;\n in Chaldea, 346;\n oblations for, 348.\n\n Sacerdotalism, 209.\n\n Sacred, year, 343;\n places, 391.\n\n Sacrifice, significance of, 360.\n\n Sanctuary, the, carefully guarded, 43;\n iniquity of, 212.\n\n Sanctuary, right of, 402.\n\n Sayce, A. H., quoted, 183, 262, 346.\n\n Self-consecration, call to, 23.\n\n Serpents, fiery, 246.\n\n Service, age of, 23.\n\n Shechinah, 89.\n\n Sihon, the Amorite, 253.\n\n Simeon, tribe of, 330.\n\n Sin offering, for Nazirite, 64;\n not for moral guilt, 65;\n the, 349;\n a he-goat, 354.\n\n Sinai, 383.\n\n Smith, W. Robertson, quoted, 37.\n\n Spies, the, despatched, 151;\n evil report of, 158;\n doom of the ten, 173.\n\n Spirit, endowment of the, 130.\n\n Spiritual maladies, 149.\n\n Spirituality, 296.\n\n Standards, 27.\n\n Strange fire, 31.\n\n Strangers, 182.\n\n Symbolism, of Sabbath, 191;\n Christian, 193.\n\n Sympathy with Christianity, 112.\n\n\n Taberah, 120.\n\n Tabernacles, feast of, 359.\n\n Tassels, memorial, 192.\n\n Temple, the, 75.\n\n Temptations, 371.\n\n Theocracy, not hierocracy, 6;\n sustained, 319.\n\n Tithes, 215.\n\n Transgressors, high-handed, 185.\n\n Trespass, atonement for, 55.\n\n Tribes, the, in camp, 27.\n\n Trumpets, the silver, 95;\n signalled the advance, 97;\n in war time, 99;\n at festivals 100, 355.\n\n\n Unbelieving, doom of the, 167.\n\n Uncleanness, ideas of, 46;\n by leprosy, 48;\n by the dead, 52, 220.\n\n Unity of Christians, 97.\n\n Unleavened bread, feast of, 351.\n\n Urim, 341.\n\n\n Vaheb in Suphah, 251.\n\n Virtue, safety of, 279.\n\n Vocation of the Christian, 123.\n\n Vows, 344, 361;\n of women, 362.\n\n\n 'Wars of Jehovah, Book of,' 251.\n\n Water fails, 224.\n\n Way of the soul, 386.\n\n Well, song of the, 252.\n\n Wellhausen, J., on theocracy, 6;\n on Korah, 199;\n quoted, 317, 368.\n\n Wilderness, our life in, 124, 258;\n near Maan, 245;\n discipline of, 256.\n\n Women, claim of, 139, 332.\n\n\n Young, the, hopefulness of, 172.\n\n\n Zared, valley of, 251.\n\n Zelophehad, daughters of, 331, 406.\n\n Zippor, 262.\n\n Zophim, 299.\n\n\n\n\nTranscriber's Notes:\n\n\nObvious punctuation and spelling errors have been fixed throughout.\n\nInconsistent hyphenation is as in the original.","title":"The Expositor's Bible: The Book of Numbers","tradition":"scripture-revelation","translated_text":null,"word_count":122671}