John Calvin Commentary Numbers 27
John Calvin Commentary
Numbers 27
John Calvin Commentary
Numbers 27
"Then drew near the daughters of Zelophehad, the son of Hepher, the son of Gilead, the son of Machir, the son of Manasseh, of the families of Manasseh the son of Joseph; and these are the names of his daughters: Mahlah, Noah, and Hoglah, and Milcah, and Tirzah." — Numbers 27:1 (ASV)
Then came the daughters of Zelophehad. A narrative is introduced here concerning the daughters of Zelophehad, from the family of Machir, who demanded to be admitted to a share of their family's inheritance. The decision of this question might have been difficult, unless God Himself had removed all doubt by His decree.
For, since women are not named in the law regarding inheritance, it would seem that they were not to be considered in the division of the land. Indeed, God established this as the general rule. However, a special exception is made here, i.e., that whenever a family lacks male heirs, females should inherit to preserve the family name.
I am aware that this is a debatable point, as there are obvious arguments both for and against it, but let the decree God pronounced be sufficient for us.
Although (the daughters of Zelophehad) pleaded before Moses for their own private advantage, the discussion still arose from a good principle, since they would not have been so anxious about the succession if God’s promise had not been as certain to them as if they were at that moment demanding to be put in possession of it. They had not yet entered the land, nor were their enemies conquered; yet, relying on the testimony of Moses, they pursued their claim as if peaceful possession of their rights were to be granted to them that very day.
And this must have had the effect of confirming the expectations of all the people, when Moses consulted God concerning a matter of importance and declared by revelation what was just and right. For the discussion, being openly raised before them all, must have encouraged them, at least to imitate these women.
"Our father died in the wilderness, and he was not among the company of them that gathered themselves together against Jehovah in the company of Korah: but he died in his own sin; and he had no sons." — Numbers 27:3 (ASV)
Our father died in the wilderness. The plea they allege is not a contemptible one, that is, that their father died after God had called His people to the immediate possession of the promised land. For if the question had been carried back to an earlier period, it might have caused many quarrels. This restriction with respect to time, therefore, aided their cause.
In the second place, they plead that their father had committed no crime by which he might have been excluded from the general allotment of the land. For in the conspiracy of Dathan and Abiram, they include by synecdoche, in my opinion, the other sins whose punishment affected the posterity of the criminals. His private sin is, therefore, contrasted with public disgrace, for that is how I interpret what they say of his having “died in his own sin.”
And surely, it is mere childish nonsense that the Jews199 affirm: that he was the man who gathered sticks on the Sabbath day, or one of the number of those who were killed by the bite of the serpents. It is also unnatural to refer it to the curse under which the whole human race lies.
They distinguish, then, his private sin from any public crime that would have caused him to deserve to be disinherited, so that their father's condition would not be worse than that of any other person. At the same time, they hold fast to the principle dictated to us by common religious understanding: that death, as being the curse of God, is the wages of sin.
199 S.M. refers to this Rabbinical gloss. R. Sal. Jarchi tells us: “R. Akiba says, that he collected the wood; but R. Simeon says that he was one of those who were contumacious.” — Edit. Breihthaupt, refers to this Rabbinical gloss. R. Sal. Jarchi tells us: “R. Akiba says, that he collected the wood; but R. Simeon says that he was one of those who were contumacious.” — Edit. Breihthaupt, in loco, p. 1243, and notes.p. 1243, and notes.
"And Moses brought their cause before Jehovah." — Numbers 27:5 (ASV)
And Moses brought their cause before the Lord. It is probable either that there was a difference of opinion, or that the minds of the judges were in doubt, concerning an obscure and uncertain point. At any rate, it was fitting that the law should be laid down by God, so that no future controversy would arise; for, if a sentence had been pronounced by human judgment on the matter before them, the obstinacy of many might not have been sufficiently settled.
It is worth noting the pious modesty of Moses, who was not ashamed to confess his ignorance until he had been instructed by the mouth of God. Although he had promulgated the law forty years before, still he was always ready to learn. Besides, there is no doubt that God impelled him to inquire of Him whenever any serious matters were in question, until his doctrine was absolutely perfect.
And, although God does not now deliver from heaven what should be done, nevertheless rulers are reminded that they should turn to God in perplexing situations, so that He may instruct them by the Spirit of wisdom; and assuredly they will not lack this, if they ask Him; since He is no less ready to listen to them than He showed Himself to be to Moses here.
"And thou shalt speak unto the children of Israel, saying, If a man die, and have no son, then ye shall cause his inheritance to pass unto his daughter." — Numbers 27:8 (ASV)
And you shall speak to the children of Israel. This question was the occasion of the delivery of a law, which was to be a perpetual and general rule regarding the right of inheritance. But, although God prefers daughters to all other relatives when there is no male issue, still, with this single exception of the first degree, He admits only males to the succession, and thus preserves the usual order.
And surely it would be very unjust to exclude a man’s (natural) heirs on account of their sex; but when it became necessary to pass from his own children to other relatives, the prerogative of the male line began to be established.
I speak of the land of Canaan, in which not only the name of Abraham but also that of the twelve tribes was to be preserved, so that the memory (of God’s blessing)200 might be more distinct and unclouded.
200 Added from Fr.
"And Moses spake unto Jehovah, saying," — Numbers 27:15 (ASV)
And Moses spoke. Moses here presents not only God’s providence in attending to the welfare of the people, but also his own zeal for them. Thus it appears how paternal his affection was for them, because he not only performed his duty towards them faithfully and earnestly, and spared no effort it cost him, even to the end of his life, but he also made provision for the future. He was anxious about a suitable successor, lest the people should remain without one, like a headless body.
We also perceive his humility, as he does not claim the right of appointment for himself, nor by his own authority submit the matter to the people's election, but establishes God as its sole arbiter.
Indeed, he was permitted to choose the officers, and this was a part of the political constitution. However, this was too difficult a task: to find by human judgment one who would be adequate for its performance. Consequently, it was necessary that the power should be entrusted to God alone, who indeed did not refuse to undertake it.
And this special reason carried much weight in such a difficult matter, namely, that the people should receive their leader from His hand, so that the supreme power would always remain vested in Himself. Therefore, just as He had chosen Moses in an extraordinary manner and had appointed him as His representative, so He continued the same grace in Joshua's case. Indeed, He had already designated him; but, out of modesty, Moses omits his name and simply prays that God would provide for His people.
The title with which he honors God relates to the matter in question. It is true, indeed, that God may often be called the God of the spirits of all flesh, and for another reason, in Numbers 16:22, Moses uses this expression. But he now alludes to this attribute, as if to say that there must be someone ready, and as it were in His hand, to be appointed, since He makes all men according to His own will.
Men are often mistaken and deceived in their opinions. Even if the Spirit of God enlightens them, they go no further than to discern the particular gift for which a person is distinguished. But God is not only the best judge of each person’s ability and aptitude, nor does He only penetrate to the inmost recesses of every heart. He also fashions and refashions the men whom He chooses as His ministers, supplying them with the abilities they require to be capable of bearing the burden.
We gather a useful lesson from this: namely, that when we are deprived of good rulers, they should be sought from the Maker Himself, whose special gift is the power of good government. And on this ground Moses calls Him not only the Creator of men, but “of all flesh,” and expressly refers to their “spirits.”
When he compares the people to sheep, it is to awaken compassion, so that God might be more inclined to appoint them a shepherd.
Jump to: