THE SONG OF MOSES
It was the perverse nature of the people which extorted from Moses that unmixed bitterness with which he again addresses them. Doubtless he would have desired to leave a pleasing and joyful recollection of himself, and therefore would willingly have exhorted them to the performance of their duties, either with blandness, or at any rate with placidity, but their stubbornness compelled him to testify his indignation in the severity of his address. Besides, he does not judge from conjecture what they would do, but expressly declares that he knew it for certain, unquestionably because the Spirit, in dictating the Song, had also informed him of it. He indicates their revolt by two words, corrupting, and turning aside from the way; but, inasmuch as in the first there is an ellipsis, for the active verb is used without any word for it to govern, some supply “the way of the Lord.” I have, however, followed a different reading, 1 which seems more correct, for the signification of the word is rather passive than transitive. He points out the manner of their corruption, declaring that they will depart from the way which they had learned; for this was their perfect soundness, to obey God, and to follow the way which he showed them. By forsaking the Law, then, they were corrupted. Moreover, Moses indirectly reproves their ingratitude, inasmuch as he had thrown away his labor upon such despisers of pious instruction. Thus he desires that this song should be recited by them, in order that, when afflicted and halfconsumed by miseries, they might at last learn that God is a just avenger. And the advantage of this assurance was, that those, whose state was not altogether desperate, should at length return to their senses; whilst the reprobate should be more and more condemned.
We have elsewhere seen what it is to call heaven and earth to witness. 2
DEUTERONOMY 32
GO TO DEUTERONOMY 32: 1-52
1. Give ear, O ye heavens. Moses commences in a strain of magnificence, lest the people should disdain this song with their usual pride, or even reject it altogether, being exasperated by its severe censures and reproaches. For we well know how the world naturally longs to be flattered, and that no strain can be gratifying to it unless it tickles and soothes the ear with praise. But Moses here not only inveighs bitterly against the vices of the people, but with the utmost possible vehemence stigmatizes their perverse nature, their utterly corrupt morals, their obstinate ingratitude, and incorrigible contumacy. Moreover, he desired that these accusations, whereby he rendered their name detestable, should daily echo from their tongues; and thus they became still more offensive. It was, therefore, requisite that their impatience should be bridled, as it were, in order that they might patiently and humbly receive these just reproofs, however severe they might be. If, therefore, they should repudiate this song, or should turn a deaf ear to it, he declares at the outset that heaven and earth would be witnesses of their prodigious obtuseness; nay, he turns and addresses himself to heaven and earth, and thus signifies that it was worthy of the attention of all creatures, even although they were without intelligence or feeling. For it is a hyperbolical mode of expression, when he assigns the faculty of hearing, and being instructed, to the senseless elements; just as Isaiah, when he would intimate that he found none to give heed to him amongst the whole people, in like manner appeals to the heavens and the earth, and even summons them to bear witness to the prodigious iniquity, that there should be less of intelligence amongst the whole people than in oxen and asses. (Isaiah 1:2, 3.) For it is but a meager exposition, which some give of these words, that they are used, by metonymy, for angels and men. 3
2. My doctrine shall drop as the rain. Some, as I think improperly, here resolve the future tense into the optative mood, 4 for in this splendid eulogium he rather celebrates, in order to commend his doctrine, the fruitfulness 5 which is actually imparted to it by the Holy Spirit, than asks for it to be given to him; and my readers must at once perceive that such a request would have been by no means seasonable. He therefore compares his speech to rain or dew, as if he had said that, if only the people were like the soil in a state of softness and preparation, he would deliver doctrine to them which would irrigate them unto abundant fruitfulness.
Although this expression refers especially, and kat j ἐξοχὴν to the Song, still its force and propriety extends to all divine teaching; for God never speaks except to render men fruitful in good works, just as, by instilling succulency and vigor into the earth by means of rain, He makes it fertile for the production of fruit. But, like the rocks and stones, which imbibe no moisture from the most abundant rains, so many are hindered by their own perversity from being fertilized by spiritual irrigation. Wherefore Moses indirectly throws the blame upon the Israelites, if the doctrine of this Song should drop upon them in vain.
3. Because I will publish the name of the Lord. He signifies by these words that, if there were any spark of piety in the Israelites, it must be manifested by their welcoming this address, wherein the majesty of God shines forth. The first clause of the verse, therefore, stands last in order, since it is an assignment of a reason for the other. For when he exhorts them that they should ascribe to God the glory He deserves, he inculcates upon them obedience and attention, as if he had said that, unless they reverently submit themselves to his teaching, God would be defrauded of this due honor; and this he confirms by adding as a reason that he will sincerely and faithfully publish the name of God. For the word invoke 6 is not used here as in many other passages, but is equivalent to making a profession of God. Moses, then, declares himself to be His proclaimer, in order that, under cover of His most Holy name, he may awaken attention to his words.
God’s work is spoken of, not only with reference to the creation of the world, but to the whole course of His providence; as if it were said that nothing could be discovered in God’s works which could be found fault with.
Now this perfection is not perceptible in every individual thing, for even vermin are God’s creatures; and amongst men some are blind, some lame, some deaf, and others mutilated in one of their members; and many fruits also never arrive at maturity. Yet we plainly see that it is foolish and misplaced to bring forward such questions as these as objections to the perfection of God, here celebrated by Moses, inasmuch as the very defects and blemishes of our bodies tend to this object, that God’s glory may be made manifest. (John 9:3.)
The next statement, that all his ways are right, 8 conveys a similar truth; for it is well known that the word משפט, mishphat, is used for rectitude, and works and ways are synonymous.
The latter part of the verse is a confirmation of the former part, since Moses signifies in both that all who censure God may be clearly convicted of petulant impiety, since supreme justice shines forth in all His acts.
The words I have rendered, “God is truth,” others construe with the genitive case, “a God of truth.” Either is true, and agreeable to the usage of Scripture; but the apposition is more emphatic, which declares that God is not only true, but the Truth itself. At any rate, this applies to the persons who pay entire allegiance to the word of God, for their expectations shall never be frustrated. Thus the people are indirectly reproved for their unbelief, in that they deserted God, whose faithfulness was not only tried and proved, but who is the very fountain of truth.
Although what follows, that there is no iniquity in God, seems to some to have but little force, it is nevertheless of great importance; for we well know how often men are so absurd in their subterfuges, as in a manner to arraign God instead of themselves; and although they do not dare to accuse Him openly, still they do not hesitate to acquit themselves, and thus to cast direct obloquy upon Him. Elsewhere, therefore, God inquires by His Prophet, “what iniquity the people had found in Him?” (Jeremiah 2:5,) and in another place expostulates with them, because He was loaded with their hatred and abuse, as if He dealt unjustly with such sinners. (Ezekiel 18:2,5.) When, therefore, He vindicates Himself from such calumnies, it follows that no blame attaches itself to Him, but that the wickedness of those who turn away from Him is abundantly condemned.
5. They have corrupted themselves. Moses now inveighs unhesitatingly against the perfidy of the people, and gives loose to the most unmeasured upbraidings; for if God be just and true, then it was plain enough that the Israelites were a depraved and perverse nation. This perverse nation, he says, has corrupted itself towards Him, namely Him, whom he has just lauded for His perfect justice and faithfulness; and he accuses them of having basely prostituted to every sort of sin the chastity which they had promised to God. There is no doubt but that they were sorely wounded by these epithets, and would have been transported with rage, had they not seen that God’s incomparable servant, when he had now been called upon to die by God’s command, spoke as it were from heaven. The voice, therefore, of the dying man restrained their pride, so that they did not now dare to oppose him as a mortal; and afterwards, when the condemnation had been assented to by public authority, and by general accord, they were less at liberty to vent their madness against it. He introduces, by way of anticipation, the statement that they were not His children; for else they might obviously have made the objection that the sacred race of Abraham, which God had adopted, should be dealt with less reproachfully. Moses, therefore, declares that they are not children, because they are a perverse nation. For although their adoption always stood firm, still its efficacy was restricted to the elect part of them, so that God, without breaking His covenant, might reject the general body. But to explain the matter more clearly, it must be borne in mind that the Spirit, on different grounds, at one time assigns the name of God’s children to hypocrites, at another takes it away; for sometimes it is an aggravation of their criminality, when they are called the children of Abraham and Jacob as well as of God, an instance of which will soon occur. Here, however, in order that they may cease to glory without cause, they are said not to be children, because they are degenerate, and therefore disinherited by God, so as no longer to retain their honorable position. In this sense Moses declares that they are not children, as having cast off God from being their Father. It is added this was done with their spot (or disgrace; 9 ) unless it be thought preferable to take it that. they were corrupted by their spots, or by their sins, to which I willingly assent; although I do not reject the other sense, namely, that their alienation from God had rendered them ignominious, or that they had contracted the stain of disgrace by their faithlessness.
6. Do ye thus requite the Lord. In order to expose the ingratitude of the people to greater infamy, he now begins to commemorate the benefits whereby God had laid them under obligation to Himself: for the more liberally God deals with us, the more earnest ought to be the piety awakened in our hearts; nay, His goodness, as soon as we have tasted of it, ought to draw us at once to Him. Now God, although he has been always bountiful towards the whole human race, had, in a peculiar manner showered down an immense abundance of His bounty upon that people; this, then, Moses alleges, and shows how basely ungrateful they had been. He first expostulates with them interrogatively, asking them whether this was a fitting return for God’s especial blessings; and then proceeds to enumerate them. He inquires of them, then, whether God was not their father, from the time when He had honored them with the distinction of His adoption: and under this single head he comprehends many things, because from this source proceeded whatever blessings God had conferred upon them. Not, however, to examine every point with the accuracy it deserves, what more binding obligation could be imagined than that God should have chosen one nation for Himself out of the whole world, whose father He should be by special privilege? For, although all human beings, since they were created in the image of God, are sometimes called His children, still to be accounted His children was the special privilege of the sons of Abraham. And, in order to prove that this was not a natural, but an acquired dignity, Moses immediately afterwards explains in what way God was their Father: viz., that he purchased, made, and prepared them. The foundation and origin, then, was the gratuitous good pleasure of God, when He took them to be His own peculiar people. Elsewhere, indeed, His second purchase of them is mentioned, when He redeemed them from Egypt; here, however, Moses goes back farther, viz., to the covenant made with Abraham, whereby they were separated from other nations, as will presently more clearly appear. I reject, as not in harmony with the context, the translation which some give of the word, קנה, kanah, i.e., to possess. 10
In the same sense it is added, that they were made by God: which does not. refer to the general creation, but only to the privilege of adoption, whereby they became God’s new work, and in which another form was imparted to them; in which sense also He is called their framer, or Maker. Elsewhere, also, when the Prophet says,
“Know ye that the Lord he is God: it is he that hath made us, and not we ourselves,” (<19A003>Psalm 100:3,)
he undoubtedly magnifies that special prerogative, whereby God had distinguished the sons of Abraham above all other races. For, since the fall of Adam had brought disgrace upon all his posterity, God restores those, whom He separates as His own, so that their condition may be better than that of all other nations. At the same time it must be remarked, that this grace of renewal is effaced in many who have afterwards profaned it. Consequently the Church is called God’s work and creation, in two senses, i.e., generally with respect to its outward calling, and specially with respect to spiritual regeneration, as far as regards the elect; for the covenant of grace is common to hypocrites and true believers. On this ground all whom God gathers into His Church, are indiscriminately said to be renewed and regenerated: but the internal renovation belongs to believers only; whom Paul, therefore, calls God’s “workmanship, created unto good works, which God hath prepared,” etc. (Ephesians 2:10.) The same is the tendency of the third word, which may, however, be taken for to “establish;” 11 although I have preferred to follow the more received sense, viz, that God had prepared His people, as the artificer fashions and fits his work.
7. Remember the days of old. This is an explanation of the preceding verse, for Moses again shows how God had acquired this people, viz., because he had chosen to separate them from other nations according to His own good pleasure. But, since the Israelites might be inflated by their present superiority, they are reminded of their origin, and Moses commands them not to consider what they now are, but also from whence they had been taken, and with this view he says, Remember the old times; ask the elders, etc. For we know how men, when they do not reflect that whatever they have, proceeded from God, and is held, as it were, at will, are blinded by their dignity, so as not only to despise others, but also to exalt themselves against, the Author of all good things. Moses, in order to subdue this arrogance, says that all peoples were alike under the hand and power of God, and thus that their diversity was not in their original nature, but derived from elsewhere, i.e., from God’s free choice. In the word בהנחל, behanchel, there is some ambiguity: for some translate it, When the Most High divided the earth to the nations; and, though I do not reject this, still I have preferred the meaning more in accordance with the context; 2 for Moses says the same thing twice over, and the second clause is the explanation of the first. He says, therefore, that God distributed the nations, as an inheritance is divided; and then this is more clearly repeated, when he mentions the separation of the sons of Adam. When, in the latter part of the verse, it is said, that He set bounds to the nations according to the number of the children of Israel, it is commonly explained that He set bounds to the nations in such sort, that the habitation of the sons of Abraham was secured to them. Some of the Hebrews take it in a more restricted sense, viz., that in the distribution of the world, so much was given to the seven nations of Canaan as should be sufficient for the children of Israel. In my opinion, however, his meaning is, that in the whole arrangement of the world, the object which God had in view was to provide for His elect people: for, although His bounty extended to all, still He had such regard for His own, that, chiefly on their account, His care also extended to others. The word number is expressly employed; as if Moses had said, that, however small a portion of the human race the posterity, of Abraham might be, nevertheless that number was before God’s eyes, when He ordered the state of the whole world; unless it be preferred to take the word מספר, misphar, 12 for a ratio; but it will not be unsuitable to the passage to understand it that this small body was so precious to God, that he arranged the whole distribution of the world with a view to their welfare. Some refer it to the calling of the Gentiles, as if Moses had said that the empire of the whole world was destined to the seed of Abraham, because it was to be propagated through all the regions of the world; but this is altogether erroneous, for nothing is here indicated but the distinction, formerly conferred upon one nation. 13
9. For the Lord’s portion is his people. This is the main point, that God was moved by nothing but His own good pleasure to make so much of this people, who had been derived from a common origin with all others: for when he says, that Jacob was the portion of Jehovah, and the lot of His inheritance, he does not mean that there was anything better in them than in others, but he assigns the reason why God preferred this one nation to the rest of mankind; viz., because He took it to Himself as His hereditary portion, which dignity depends upon His gratuitous election.
10. He found him in a desert land. If the intention of Moses had been to record all the instances of God’s paternal kindness towards the people, he must have commenced from the time of Abraham; like the prophet who, when presenting a complete narrative in the Psalm, begins from that original covenant, which God had made with the fathers, (<19A508>Psalm 105:8;) and also introduces the benefits which He had conferred upon them, when they were but few in number, and strangers in the land, when they went from one nation to another, yet he suffered no man to do them wrong, and reproved kings for their sakes. (<19A514>Psalm 105:14.) But Moses, studying brevity, deemed it sufficient to bring forward a more recent and more notorious blessing; nay, he omits the early part of their deliverance, and only makes mention of the desert, he says, then, that God found them in the desert; not because He then first began to take pity upon them, since they had been previously rescued from the tyranny of Pharaoh by His marvelous power, and had passed the Red Sea dry-shod, but because it was profitable for them to have set before their eyes how they had been extricated from the deep abyss of death, in order that they might more readily acknowledge this to have been, as it were, the beginning of their life. For what was that waste and barren desert, in which not a crumb of bread, nor a drop of water was to be found, but a grave to swallow up a thousand lives? and, therefore, it is further called “the devastation of horror.” 14 The suae is, that it was a kind of type of resurrection, not from one death only, but from innumerable deaths, that the people should have escaped from it in safety. That they should have done so, even had their march through it been straight and speedy, could not have been the case without a miracle; but, inasmuch as they wandered therein for forty years, our minds can hardly comprehend a hundredth part of the miracles (which followed one upon the other. 15) Thus the word “led about,” is not superfluous, for God’s power was far more conspicuous than as if they had flown swiftly through the air. I apply the same meaning to what follows, “he instructed him;” for some, in my opinion improperly, refer it to the Law, 16 whereas it rather relates to the teaching of experience. For there was manifold, and no ordinary instruction in all these acts of bounty and punishment, wherein God, as it were, put forth His hand, and manifested His glory.
Two similitudes follow, to express God’s love, mingled with solicitude more than paternal. First, he says, that God no less anxiously protected them from all injury and annoyance than every one is wont to protect the pupil of his eye, which is the most tender part of the body, and against the injury of which the greatest precautions are taken. And David also, when requesting that he may be kept safe under the special guardianship of God, uses the same expression. (Psalm 17:8.) Secondly, God compares Himself to an eagle, which not only fosters her young ones under her outspread wings, but also indulgently, and with maternal tenderness tempts them to fly. It would be unseasonable to enter here into more subtle philosophical discussions respecting the nature of the eagle. The Jews, who are wont to trifle hazardously with things they do not understand, have invented fables respecting this passage, which have no relation to the meaning of Moses, who unquestionably spoke of the eagle as he might of any other bird. Nor can it be doubted but that Christ, when He compares Himself to a hen, desired to express the same sedulous care.
“How often (he says) would I have gathered thy children together, even as a hen gathereth her chickens under her wings, and ye would not!” (Matthew 23:37.)
If, however, any should choose to apply here, what Aristotle writes respecting the eagle, I would not stand in his way: although I do not think Moses had anything in his mind, beyond what the words naturally express. And, surely that which at once occurs to us ought to be sufficient for us, viz., that we ought to be ravished with just. admiration of God’s inestimable goodness and indulgence, when He condescends so to stoop to us as to protect us with His wings, like a bird, and, hovering before us, to instruct and accustom us to follow Him: in which latter words a more than maternal anxiety to teach us is represented.
12. So the Lord alone did lead hive. This is spoken by anticipation, in order to take away every pretext from the Israelites, provided they should seek, according to their custom, to mingle their superstitions with the pure service of God. For, when they were bringing in, from all quarters, gods of various nations, this was the excuse they commonly made, that God was not thus despoiled of His due honor: and hence it came to pass, that they permitted themselves to heap together a multitude of false gods, whom they worshipped as their patrons. But Moses anticipates them, and declares that God, as having no need of external aid, had not associated with Himself any strange gods in His preservation of the people. Hence it follows, that whatever gods the people introduced, they transferred to them the honor due to the one true God. Let us then learn from this passage, that, unless God be served without a rival, religion is altogether perverted by the impious admixture.
13. He made him ride on the high places. Theirs is but a frivolous imagination, who suppose that Judea was so called as being the navel or center of the earth; 17 it is more likely that it was called high in reference to Egypt; and, indeed, it is by no means an unusual expression, that those who go into Egypt, are said to go down, and those who come into Judea to come up. Still I am rather disposed Lo think that by height he denotes its excellency; inasmuch as that land, on account of its illustrious endowments, was, as it were, the most noble theater in the world.
Moses celebrates its fertility, when he says that the people sucked honey from the rock and oil from the stones: for he means to indicate, that no part of it was unproductive, since they gathered honey from the rocks, and upon them also the olive grew. The same is the intention of the other figures, that they ate “butter of kine, and milk of sheep;” by which he signifies that the land was full of rich pastures. By “fat of lambs,” he undoubtedly means the plumpness of their flesh, because it was not lawful to eat their actual fat; but it is not unusual to denote by this word any kind of richness, as soon afterwards he calls the best meal or flour, from which the more delicate kind of bread was made, “the fat of wheat.” With respect to the wine, he magnifies God’s liberality by the use of a poetic figure, when he says they drank of the blood of the grape. There is no doubt but that he alludes to its color; yet he takes occasion to extol more highly the beneficence of God, by intimating that, when the juice of the grapes is expressed, it is just as if their blood flowed forth for the nutriment of men. Since, then, the metaphor is taken from the redness of wine, I have not hesitated to translate the epithet חמר, chamer, at the end of the verse, red. 18 From many passages it appears to have been very delicious; and in Isaiah 27:2 the word חמר, chamer, is used for a vine of great preciousness and of exquisite flavor. Those who render it pure, have rather taken into consideration the fact, than the signification of the word.
15. But Jeshurun 19 waxed fat. Moses here severely censures the ingratitude of the people, because when filled with delicacies, they began to wax wanton against God; for, according to the vulgar proverb, satiety breeds violence; but this arises from men’s detestable depravity, who ought rather to be inclined to humility and gentleness by the lovingkindness of God, since the more abundantly He supplies us with food, the more does He invite us to show forth the affection that becomes children, inasmuch as He thus more closely and familiarly declares Himself to be our Father. Intolerable, then, is the impiety of profane persons, who increase in insolence against Him, when they have gorged themselves with an abundance of all good things. They are here compared to restive horses, which, if they are well fed, without exercise, kick under their rider, and are rendered almost intractable. By using the word “upright” for Israel, he ironically taunts them with having departed from rectitude, and, reminding them of the high dignity conferred upon them, more severely reproves their sin of unfaithfulness. For elsewhere 20 Israel is honored with the same title without any evil imputation in respect to their calling; but here Moses reproachfully shows them how far they had departed from the pursuit of that piety, to the cultivation of which they had been called.
16. They provoked him to jealousy. It is only figuratively that jealousy is attributed to God, who is free from all passions; but, since men never sufficiently reflect how great pollution they contract by their idolatries, it is necessary that the grossness of the sin should be expressed in such terms as this, implying that men do no less injury to God, when they transfer to others the honor due to Him, and that the offense is no lighter than as if a licentious woman should provoke her husband’s mind to jealousy, and inflict a wound upon him by running after adulterers. This jealousy has reference to the sacred and spiritual marriage, whereby God had bound His people to Himself. The suae is, that the Israelites were as insulting to God by their superstitions as if they had designedly provoked Him.
In the next verse an amplification follows, viz., that they had transferred to devils the worship due to God alone. By the general consent of all nations God ought to be worshipped by sacrifices; for, although the Gentiles invented for themselves divers gods, still the persuasion continued to prevail, that this service was the peculiar prerogative of Deity. Nothing, then, could be more disgraceful or detestable than to rob God of His honor, and to offer it to demons. This, indeed, would never have been admitted by the Israelites, inasmuch as they pretended that their minor gods were their advocates with the supreme and only Creator of the world, and did not hesitate to account as rendered to Him whatever they shared among their idols. Here, however, He first of all repudiates all such mixtures whereby His holy name is unworthily profaned, and suffers Himself not to be associated with idols; and, secondly, by whatever titles they may dignify their idols, He declares all false gods to be demons. Hence it follows that the sacrifices made to them are infected with sacrilege. Both of these points are worthy of careful remark, viz., that God abominates all corruptions of His service; and also, that whatever names the world may invent for its gods, they are so many masks, under which the devil hides himself for the deception of the simple.
Furthermore, Moses reproves the folly of the Israelites in having promiscuously devoted themselves to unknown gods; just as an adulterous woman might prostitute herself indiscriminately to all comers. When he says that they came from near, 21 it has reference to time, and is equivalent to saying that they had lately sprung up. Thirdly, it is said, that these gods were not honored by their fathers; for thus their perverse love of novelty is proved against them, inasmuch as they had not been even led by imitation of their fathers, but in their restless innovation had procured for themselves new and unwonted gods. Not that the law of piety is founded on antiquity alone, as if it were sufficient to follow the customs handed down by our ancestors; for thus any of the religions of the Gentiles might be proved true, but because the genuine and faithful tradition of their fathers would be the sure and approved rule for the worship of God. For Moses assumes a higher principle, viz., that their fathers were truly and most unmistakably instructed who was the one and only God, in whom alone they ought to trust. Yet a distinction is here to be drawn between these holy fathers and the reprobate; for the imitation of their fathers, which here seems to be deemed praiseworthy, is elsewhere severely condemned, because the Jews were carried away, without discrimination, after the bad examples of their fathers. Moses, therefore, here refers to no other fathers than those who were in a position to hand down what they had learned from God Himself. The word fear often comprises, by synecdoche, the whole service of God, and sometimes is applied to outward ceremonies: the word שער, sagnar however, is here used, which means properly to stand in awe of, or to dread; 22 but still in the same sense.
18. Of the Rock 23 that begat thee. He again aggravates the criminality of the people by referring to their ingratitude, inasmuch as they did not fall through ignorance, but willfully stifled that knowledge of God, which ought to have shone brightly in all their hearts: for this is the effect of the reproach, that they were unmindful of their Rock: as much as to say, that they would never have given themselves up to their impious superstitions, unless they had cast into voluntary oblivion that God whom, by the most conspicuous proofs, they had experimentally found to be the foundation and support of their salvation.
19. And when the Lord saw it. The seeing of God, which is mentioned here, has reference to His forbearance in judgment: as if it were said, that He does not act hastily, and is not alienated from His children, without having duly weighed their case; in the same way as it is said elsewhere: “Because the cry of Sodom is great, I will go down now and see whether” it is so, and “I will know.” (Genesis 18:20, 21) Assuredly God has no need to make any examination, since nothing escapes His eyes, however hidden it may be; but this going down and inquiring is contrasted with preposterous haste. Thus in this passage Moses shows that God was wroth, when he saw His sons and His daughters drawn away so faithlessly after their idols. Again, when he calls them God’s children, he does not judge them to be so on account of their merits, but in reference to God’s adoption, which, although it was canceled as regarded themselves, still had the effect of aggravating the guilt of their ingratitude. And for the same reason that he had just. said that God saw them, Moses introduces Him deliberating, as it were, that the time for punishing them might be perceived to be fully come. But we must notice the degrees; for God does not at once break forth into extreme severity, but is said to hide His face, that He might secretly consider what they would do: since this is a middle course between the manifest exhibition of His grace and favor, and the tokens of His wrath. God is, indeed, elsewhere said, in many passages, to hide His face, when He rejects men’s prayers, and withdraws His aid; but here He assumes the character of a man who, when he sees that he produces no effect by acting, 24 goes aside to some place, from whence he may quietly contemplate the result, And thus God’s weariness of them is expressed; for when He at length saw that His efforts to control them were thrown away, He abandoned the care of them. It is a false inference, which some draw from hence, that men, when forsaken by God, recover themselves by the exercise of their own free-will; as if God sat calmly and inactively in a watch-tower expecting what they may do; inasmuch as this hiding of Himself has reference only to the outward manifestation of His grace. In a word, it is a similitude taken from the conduct of men, whereby God signifies that He is overcome with weariness, and will no more be the leader and guardian of the people, until it shall effectually appear that they are altogether intractable. And this is gathered from the reason, which is presently added, wherein He censures their forward nature and want of faith, as much as to say, that, after long trial, nothing remained for Him but to abandon them.
21. They have moved me to jealousy. He now proceeds further, viz., that God, after having withdrawn Himself for a time, would, at length be the open enemy of the people, so as to repay them in kind. And he points out the mode of this retaliation, that as they had insultingly brought into antagonism with God empty phantoms and vanities, so on His part, He would exalt against them barbarous and worthless nations. This similitude is also taken from jealous husbands, who, when they perceive themselves to be despised by their adulterous wives, avenge themselves by their own amours. Why God should attribute to Himself the feeling of jealousy has been explained under the Second Commandment; Moses now only shows that it would be a most equitable mode of revenge, that God should insult, by means of despised and ignoble nations, those apostates, who had made to themselves idols in disparagement of Him.
The fulfillment of this sentence was manifested from time to time, when they were tyrannically oppressed by the neighboring nations. It is true, indeed, that the Egyptians, the Assyrians, and the Chaldeans were included among those people of nought and foolish nations, although they were preeminent in power and wealth, and famous for other splendid endowments; but it is no matter of surprise that, in comparison with that dignity which God had conferred upon the Israelites, all other nations should be accounted but refuse. The suae is, that God’s vengeance was ready whereby He would punish the vanities of His people, inasmuch as He could create out of nothing the enemies by whom they should be reduced to nothing. There is much elegance in the allusion of Paul, in which he extends this sentence further, inasmuch as, when God introduced the Gentiles into His Church, He stirred up the Jews to jealousy, in order that they might be led to repentance by a sense of their ignominy. Surely the calling of the Gentiles was exactly as if He created shadows, whom he might prefer to His reprobate people. (Romans 10:19.)
22. For a fire is kindled in mine anger. He confirms what went before, but more generally; for He compares His anger to a burning fire, which should penetrate to the deepest abysses, and should utterly consume their land, so as not to spare the very roots of the mountains. This metaphor is, indeed, of frequent occurrence; but here more is expressed by it than in other passages. In the same sense also it is presently added, that God would spend all his scourges and arrows upon them; since, when His implacable anger is once aroused, there are no bounds to His severity. The verb אספה aspheh, may, however, also be taken for to heap, or to superadd; 25 but I willingly follow the more received interpretation, viz., that God will not omit anything to destroy them, as if He would apply to this purpose all weapons which were at hand.
24. They shall be burnt with hunger. He now descends to some particular modes of punishment, not, indeed, to enumerate them all, but only to adduce such specimens of them as to inspire the people with greater terror, inasmuch as mere generalities would not have sufficiently affected them. He mentions three especial scourges, pestilence, famine, and the sword, on which the prophets constantly dilate, when their object was to apply the Law to the actual use of the people, from whence it arose that they familiarly employ many of the expressions used by Moses. He introduces indeed other punishments, which the prophets also mention; but the suae of what he says is this, that the Israelites should feel that God was armed with all the punishments which were only too well known by experience, and by them would utterly destroy them.
First., he says, that they should be dried up, or rather roasted with hunger. 26 Instead of pestilence he uses the words burning (uredinem,) and bitter destruction: and before he speaks of the sword, declares that He would send forth beasts and serpents, so that on the one hand, open violence should assail them, and, on the other, secret wiles. Amos has also imitated this figure:
“The day of the Lord (he says) is darkness and not light: as if a man did flee from a lion and a bear met him; or went into the house, and leaned his hand on the wall, and a serpent bit him.” (Amos 5:18, 19.)
To war, and the cruelty of enemies he adds another evil, viz., terror: and this is, indeed, an aggravation worse than death itself, when we tremble within with terror, for it would be better to be slain ten times over bravely fighting in battle, than to be consumed with constant fear, as by a lingering death. 27
Let us learn, then, from this passage, that, whatever perils surround us, and whatever adversities, they are God’s weapons, and that they do not occur by chance to this or that person, but are directed by His hand. Thus it is the case that He not; only stirs up enemies against us, but fierce and noisome beasts also; that He shuts up the heaven and the earth; that He infects the atmosphere with deadly disease; that, in a word, he draws forth from all the elements manifold means of destruction.
But if it be the fact, that the godly are involved in similar punishments, since they suffer from hunger and want, and are not exempt from any evil; for even Paul acknowledges that he had himself experienced what God here denounces against those that wickedly despise Him, for he says that he was troubled without with fightings, and within with fears, (2 Corinthians 7:5;) we must bear in mind that all adversities are in themselves signs of God’s wrath, since they derive their origin from sin; but that through God’s marvelous provision it comes to pass, that to believers they are exercises of their faith and proofs of their patience. Hence we often see God’s children afflicted in common with the ungodly, but to a different end; though nevertheless all adversities are proofs of God’s wrath against the reprobate. On this point I have spoken at greater length in treating of the curses of the Law.
26. I said, I would scatter them. God again represents Himself in the character of a man, as if He were meditating opposite determinations, and restrained His vehemence in consideration of the impediments He encountered. What it amounts to, however, is this, that God suspended His final judgment upon them for no other reason but because He had regard to His own glory, which would else have been subjected to the taunts of the Gentiles. Hence the Jews were reminded that, whereas they had deserved certain destruction, they were preserved on no other grounds but because God was unwilling to give the reins to the insolence of the Gentiles. The expression wrath, is here used for arrogant boasting, because in their prosperity ungodly and profane men burst forth into cruelty; unless it be preferred to render it simply irritation, 28 in which sense it is used in 2 Kings 23. Immediately afterwards it is explained, “lest the adversaries should behave themselves strangely.” נכר, nacar, signifies sometimes to be strange, sometimes to put on a different face, sometimes to acknowledge. Thus I do not doubt but that Moses meant to express the arrogance of those who in a manner transform themselves that they may dazzle the eyes of the simple by their pomp and empty exaltation. If any approve of a different sense, i.e., lest they should separate themselves from God, and arrogate to themselves what belongs to Him alone, I make no objection: and this, indeed, seems to agree with what follows,
29 “Our
high hand, and not the Lord, has done this:” for when men indulge in such unbridled license, they go so far astray as to have nothing in common with God. Thus the judgment of God, which should have been conspicuous in these punishments, would have been put out of sight, when the enemies appropriated to themselves the glory of the people’s destruction. Nevertheless the ungodly did not cease to pride themselves on their victories, (as God complains by Isaiah, and Habakkuk confirms;) 30 although their insolence was in some measure repressed, as long as there were some remnants of the elect people preserved. 31
It is only figuratively that God says, he feared this insolence, which He might have easily remedied and restrained: but I have already stated, that He speaks after the manner of men, to show the Israelites that they escaped rather on account of their enemies, than by their own merits. The question, however, arises, how such a consultation as this could have taken place after God had determined to consume them with the fire of His wrath; 32 I reply, that the consumption there indicated was not such as totally to annihilate the nation, so that no ruins should remain as witnesses of their former state; whereas He now speaks of the destruction, which should altogether blot out the name of the nation, as if it had never been chosen by God.
28. For they are a nation void of counsel. The cause is assigned why God had almost blotted out altogether the memory of the people, viz., because their faculty was incurable: for He does not merely indicate that their conduct was rash and inconsiderate, because they lacked reason mid discretion: but that they could be by no means brought to their senses, and, in fact, that not one drop of sagacity existed in them. The proof of this immediately follows, viz., that the tokens of God’s wrath were too clearly set before their eyes to escape their notice, unless they were utterly blind and stupid. The word לו, lu, which they render, “Would that” 33 (utinam,) denotes commiseration rather than desire; and therefore it may be properly translated, “Oh, if they understood,” etc.
By the expression, “latter,” their exceeding stupidity is censured: since not even by many and long experiences were they aroused to reflect on the causes of their calamities; whereas length of time extorts some sense at last from the very dullest, and almost idiotic persons. It was, therefore, a sign of desperate stupidity that they were still without understanding after so many years; as if by experience itself they had grown callous, when they ought to have shaken off their lethargy, and to have bestirred themselves to earnest inquiry. Justly, then, does Moses reproach them with not having considered even at the latter end; for not once only, nor in a single year, but by constant inflictions of punishment during a long series of years, had they been instructed without profit.
30. How should one chase a thousand. Of all the many tokens of God’s wrath, he selects one which was peculiarly striking; for as long as God was on their side, they had put to flight mighty armies, nor had they been supported by any multitude of forces. Now, when, though in great numbers, they are conquered by a few, this change plainly shows that they are deprived of God’s aid, especially when a thousand, who were wont before, with a little band, to rout the greatest armies, gave way before ten men. Moses, therefore, condemns the stupidity of the people, in that it does not occur to their minds that they are rejected by God, when they are so easily overcome by a few enemies, whom they far exceed in numbers. Moses, however, goes still further, and says, that they were sold and betrayed; 34 inasmuch as God, having so often found them to be unworthy of His aid, not only deserted them, but made them subject to heathen nations, and, as it were, sold them to be their slaves. This threat is often repeated by the prophets: and Isaiah, desiring to awake in them a hope of deliverance, tells them that God would redeem the people whom He had sold. 35 But, in case any should object that it was no matter of wonder, if the uncertain chance of war should confer on others the victory which often, as a profane poet says,
“Hovers between the two on doubtful wings,” 36
Moses anticipates the objection by declaring that, unless the people should be deprived of God’s aid, they could not be otherwise than successful. A comparison is therefore instituted between the true God and false gods: as though Moses had said that, where the God of hosts presides, the issue of war can never be doubtful. Hence it follows, that God’s elect and peculiar people are exempted from the ordinary condition of nations, except in so far as it deserves to be rejected on the score of its ingratitude. He calls the unbelievers themselves to be the arbiters and witnesses of this, inasmuch as they had often experienced the formidable power of God, and knew assuredly that the God of Israel was unlike their idols. It is, then, just as if he had said, that this was conspicuous even to the blind, or were to cite as witnesses those who are blessed with no light from on high. In thus inviting unbelievers to be judges, it is not as if he supposed that they would pronounce what was true, and thoroughly understood by them, but because they must needs be convinced by experience: for, if any one had asked the heathen whether the supreme government and power of heaven and earth were in the hands of the One God of Israel, they never would have confessed that their idols were mere vanity. Still, however malignantly they might detract from God’s glory, Moses does not hesitate to boast, even themselves being judges, that God had magnificently exerted His unconquered might; although he refers rather to the experience of facts themselves, than to their feelings. Other commentators extract a different meaning, viz., that although unbelievers might be victorious, still God remained unaffected by it: neither was his arm broken, because he permitted them to afflict the apostate Israelites: 37 the former exposition, however, is the more appropriate one.
32. For their vine is of the vine of Sodom. I think it was far from the intention of Moses, as some make it to be, to refer to the punishment which the Israelites deserved; but that he rather inveighs against their corrupted morals, and obstinate disposition. But metaphorically he calls them an offshoot from the vine of Sodom and Gomorrah, inasmuch as they resemble in their nature both those nations, as much as if they had sprung from them, just as grafts of the vine produce fruits similar to the stocks from which they are taken. God complains by Isaiah that, when he looked for good and sweet grapes from His vineyard, it brought forth wild grapes. (Isaiah 5:2.) And also by Jeremiah that, when He had planted a trustworthy and genuine seed, it was turned into the branches of a strange vine, (Jeremiah 2:22;) but Moses goes further here, that the people was not merely a degenerate vine, bun poisonous, and producing nothing but what was deadly; and therefore he adds, not only that their clusters were bitter, but that their wine was the poison of dragons and asps; whereby he signifies that nothing worse or more abominable than that nation could be imagined.
34. Is not this laid up in store with me? Although some explain this verse as relating to their punishments, as if God asserted that various kinds of them were laid up with Him, which He could produce whenever He pleased, it is more correct to understand it of their crimes. We are well aware that the ungodly, when God stays His severity, promise themselves impunity, as if His forbearance were a kind of connivance. Unless, therefore, He straightway lifts up His hand to chastise them, they imagine that all recollection of their crimes has vanished from before Him; and consequently the prophets often remind hypocrites of the day of visitation, in order that they may not suppose that they have gained anything by the delay. For this reason Jeremiah says that
“the sin of Judah is written with an iron pen and with the point of a diamond,” (Jeremiah 17:l.)
Moses employs a different figure, that, although God may not appear as an immediate avenger, still their sins are stored up in his treasures, and will be brought to light by Him at the fitting season. Hence we gather the profitable lesson, that although God may make as though He saw not (dissimulet) for a time, still He does not forget the iniquities, the memory of which wretched men foolishly imagine to be blotted out, unless they are pursued by God’s immediate vengeance.
35. To me belongeth vengeance. This passage is quoted to different purposes by Paul, and by the author 38 of the Epistle to the Hebrews, (Romans 12:19; Hebrews 10:30;) for Paul, with a view of persuading believers to bear injuries patiently, admonishes them to “give place unto wrath,” inasmuch as God declares vengeance to be His; but the author of the Epistle to the Hebrews, proclaiming that God will be the avenger of impiety, confirms his declaration by this testimony. Hence it is that part of the commentators suppose that punishment is here denounced against heathen nations because they have cruelly afflicted God’s elect people. And, indeed, this appears to be the meaning of Paul’s words, that injuries should be patiently endured, since God claims for Himself the office of Avenger; but there is nothing to prevent the same statement from being accommodated to different uses, and therefore Paul did not irrelevantly confirm his exhortation by this saying of Moses, although it literally refers to the internal chastisements of the Church. Besides, the apostles are not in the habit of quoting every word from the testimonies which they adduce, but briefly remind their readers to examine more closely the passages quoted. But, since God here joins the two things together, that He will punish the sins of His people, and at the same time be the avenger of their oppressions, there will be nothing absurd in saying that Paul, as it were, points his finger at this passage; 39 still, the simple explanation will be, that the general declaration is accommodated to a special case, in order that believers should bear their injuries patiently, and leave to God the office which He pronounces to appertain to Himself. In my judgment, indeed, these words are connected with the preceding verse; for God pertinently confirms His statement, that he takes account of the number of men’s sins, and has them stored among His treasures, by adding that the power and office of judging rests with Himself; inasmuch as these two things are contrary to each other, that He should be cognizant of whatever is done unrighteously and amiss, and still leave it unpunished. Not that it is opposed to God’s justice to pardon sinners when they repent, but because this principle always continues firm, that God is the judge of the world, for the punishment of all iniquities. Thus the confidence of hypocrites is destroyed, who flatter themselves with the hope of impunity, unless they are overtaken by immediate punishment.
The clause which follows some interpreters pervert by supplying the relative, “in the time in which their foot shall slide;” whereas Moses simply concludes that they will fall in their due time, or that, although they may think they stand, their ruin or fall was not far off; and this is further confirmed by what he adds, viz., that their day of calamity was at hand. This statement, as I have before said, often occurs in the Prophets, that there is with God a fit time, 40 in which to punish the sins which He has appeared to overlook, and therefore His long-suffering detracts nothing from the judgment which He delays. In this doctrine there is a twofold moral; first, that those whom God spares for a time, should not give way to self-indulgence; and, secondly, that the prosperity of the wicked should not disturb the minds of believers, but that they should allow God to decide the time and the place of executing vengeance. Inasmuch, however, as God’s delay renders hypocrites secure, so that they lull themselves to sleep in their vices, and, although they hear that they will have to render account of them, thoughtlessly indulge themselves during 41 their period of enjoyment, Moses declares that the day is near, and makes haste; for, if God does not openly alarm them, and reduce them to straits, they exult in their immunity. Hence those blasphemous sayings recorded by Isaiah, (Isaiah 5:19,) “Let him make speed, and hasten his work that we may see it; and let the counsel of the Holy One draw nigh and come, that we may know it! “Meanwhile we must bear in mind the words of Habakkuk, (Habakkuk 2:3,) “Though the prophecy tarry, wait for it; because it will surely come, it will not tarry.”
36. For the Lord shall judge his people. Some connect this sentence with what precedes it, and thus take the word judge for to punish, and the Apostle in the Epistle to the Hebrews, seems to support their opinion, inasmuch as he proves by this testimony how fearful a thing it is “to fall into the hands of the living God.” (Hebrews10:30, 31.) But there is no reason why the Apostle should not have accommodated to a different purpose what was set forth by Moses for the consolation of the godly, in order that believers might be the more heedful, the nearer they saw God to show Himself as the Judge of His Church; unless it be perhaps preferred to construe the words of Moses thus: Although God should judge His people, yet at length He will be propitiated, or touched with repentance, so as to temper the vehemence of His anger. Whichever way we understand them will be of little difference in the main; for, after Moses has threatened the despisers of God, and the apostates, who desire to be accounted members of His household the Church, he now turns to the strangers and denounces against them that the cruelty which they have exercised towards the Israelites shall not be unpunished, because God will at length be mindful of His covenant, and will pardon His elect people. If you take the word judge for to govern, or to undertake their cause, the particle for must be rendered adversatively, as though it were said nevertheless or but; if we prefer the other sense, it will be equivalent to although, or even though. Doubtless the object of Moses is to encourage the hopes of the pious, who have profited by God’s chastisement, by showing that He will mitigate His severity towards His elect people, and in His wrath will remember mercy. (Habakkuk 3:2.) Thus, then, Moses here teaches the same thing which God afterwards more clearly unfolded to David:
“If thy children forsake my law,… I will visit their transgressions with the rod of man,… nevertheless my loving-kindness will I not take away from them,” etc. 42 (Psalm 89:30, 33; 2 Samuel 7:14, 15.)
For nothing is more fitted to sustain us in afflictions than when God promises that there shall be some limit to them, so that He will not utterly destroy those whom He has chosen. Whenever, therefore, the ills which we suffer tempt us to despair, let this lesson recur to our minds, that the punishments, wherewith God chastises His children, are temporary, since His promise will never fail that “his anger endureth but a moment,” (Psalm 30:5,) whilst the flow of His mercy is continual. Hence, too, that lesson which is especially directed to the Church: 43
“For a moment I afflicted thee, but I will pursue my mercies towards thee for ever.” (Isaiah 54:8.)
He here calls them His servants, not because they had deserved His pardon by their obedience, but because He condescends to acknowledge them as His own; for this honor has reference to His gratuitous election; as when David says, “I am thy servant, and the son of thine handmaid,” (<19B616>Psalm 116:16,) he assuredly arrogates nothing peculiar to himself; but only boasts that he from the womb had been of God’s family, just as slaves are born in the house of their masters. At the same time we must observe that, whenever God declares that He will be merciful to His servants, he only refers to those who heartily seek for reconciliation, and not to the reprobate, who are carried away to destruction by their desperate obstinacy. In short, to the end that God should repent of His severity, repentance is required on the part of sinners; as he teaches elsewhere:
“Turn ye unto me,… and I will turn unto you.” (Zechariah 1:3.)
Instead of shall repent, some translate the word, shall console himself. 44
Jerome, regarding the drift of the passage rather than the meaning of the word, translates it shall have mercy.
We must, however, remark the time which God prefixes for the exertion of His grace, viz., when all their power (virtus) shall have departed from them, and all shall be reduced to almost entire destruction; for the word hand is used for vigor; 45 as though it were said that God would be by no means content with a light chastisement, and consequently would not be appeased until they should have come to extremities. This circumstance is well worthy of notice, so flint our hopes may not fail us even in the most severe afflictions of the Church; but that we may be assured that although all may be in the worst state possible, still the due season of reparation will come even yet.
That none should remain behind, or shut up or left, is almost a proverbial phrase in Hebrew; as when it is said, (1 Kings 14:10,) “I will cut off from Jeroboam,… him that is shut up and left in Israel,” i.e., as well in the city as in the country, or at home as abroad. And this is again repeated respecting the posterity of Ahab. (Ibid. 21:21.) And hence it is plain that they are mistaken 46 who explain this as referring to riches shut up in treasure-houses, and cattle dispersed through the fields. And this will be still more apparent from another passage in which the Prophet unquestionably referred to this, “The Lord saw the affliction of Israel, that it was very bitter; for there was not any shut up, nor any left,” and inasmuch as He had not determined to blot out His people,” he saved them by the hand of Jeroboam;” as much as to say, that God, as He had promised, had pity upon His people in their extreme destitution. (2 Kings 14:26, 27.)
37. And he shall say, Where are their gods? Commentators are here at issue, for some continue the paragraph, as if Moses were reporting the boastings and insults of their enemies in the afflicted state of the Church; whilst others consider it to be a pious exultation, wherein the faithful will celebrate the deliverance of the Church. If we suppose the enemies to be here speaking, it will be inconsistent that the word “gods” should be used in the plural number: besides, what follows will proceed from their mistake and ignorance, that the Israelites “did eat the fat,” which was not lawful for them even in their common food, and much less in the sacrifices wherein the fat was burnt. The other exposition, however, is that which I rather approve of, viz., that when the tables were turned, and God should have shown Himself as the avenger of the unbelievers cruel injustice, God’s children would be at liberty to upbraid them. The word “he shall say,” 47 is used indefinitely for “It shall be said by any or all of God’s children.” Just, then, as unbelievers, when they see the saints afflicted, impudently ridicule their faith, so on the other side Moses, when God comes to the help of His Church, introduces the saints derisively inquiring, where are the gods of the Gentiles, and where are all their patrons? since all of them, as is well known, had their tutelary gods. Thus their impure and spurious sacrifices are satirized in which they ate the fat, and drank the libations of wine. In short, Moses intimates that, when God succors His people, their mouth is opened to sing the song of triumph to the glory of the true God, and to upbraid unbelievers with the false confidence whereby they are deceived.
39. See now that 1, even I, am he. Those who attribute the preceding verses to the unbelievers, now introduce God speaking, as it were, abruptly, and asserting His glory, in rebuke of their blasphemies. But it is rather a confirmation of that holy boasting which He has just dictated to the believers, when God not only bids His people lift up their voices against the idols, but Himself comes forward to condemn the senselessness of the Gentiles; although the context clearly shows that He addresses Himself to the faithful, After, therefore, He has exhorted His people to despise the idols, He now adds that He supplies them with ample grounds of confidence in Himself. For when He bids them “look,” He signifies that no obscure manifestation of His power is before their eyes, if they will only pay attention to it. The repetition of the pronoun I is emphatic, both to arouse the people from their sluggishness, and to keep their minds steadfast, lest they should waver as if in doubt. For we know that men’s minds can hardly be drawn to the true knowledge of God, because they wind about by circuitous courses, so as not to direct themselves straight to Him. And again, when they do apprehend God, we are aware how easily they are drawn away from Him; since the vicissitudes of things becloud them, so that they wander hither and thither in uncertainly. For this reason, when God has overthrown all fictitious deities, He declares that He always remains the same, whether he kills or makes alive, so that in the thick darkness of affliction believers may not cease to look to Him. Let us learn from this passage that God is defrauded of His right, unless He alone is preeminent, all idols being reduced to nothing; and also that our faith is then truly fixed in Him, and has firm roots, if, amidst the various changes which occur, it does not stagger or waver, but surmounts such obstacles, so as not to cease to hope in Him even when He seems to “slay” us, as Job says, (Job 13:15.) And surely nothing is more unreasonable than that our faith should look round upon all events so as to depend upon them; since God would have His promises to quicken us in death itself. The close of the verse may fitly be referred to their enemies, inasmuch as God declares that none can deliver them out of His hand.
40. For 48 I lift up my, hand to heaven. Others render it, “When I shall have lifted up my hand,” and read it connectedly with the foregoing verse, that God’s power in destroying and preserving will be manifest, if He raises up His hand to heaven. I do not doubt, however, but that it is the beginning of a new sentence, and that God thus commences, in order to affirm more strongly what He immediately adds respecting the future destruction of their enemies. If, however, any prefer the adverb of time “when,” I have no great objection to offer, provided these clauses are connected, “As soon as I shall have lifted up my hand to heaven, I will put to confusion the enemies of my Church.”
To lift up the hand is explained in two ways; for some suppose it to be a manifestation of power, as men are wont, by the uplifting of their hand, to glow, when they are confident in their strength, and despise their enemies. Others, however, more correctly state it to be a form of adjuration God, who is exalted above all heavens, cannot, indeed, be literally said to lift His hand; but it is no new thing for Him to borrow modes of expression taken from men’s common habits and customs, especially when He suddenly rises again to sublimity, after having appeared for a while to sink below the level of His greatness. Certainly the words which follow contain in them an oath, “I live for ever;” and hence it is probable 49 that the elevation of His hand was expressive of His taking the oath.
God swears by His life in a very different sense from men. Sometimes, indeed, He adopts our common modes of speaking, as when He is said to swear by His soul; but here, “I live,” is tantamount to His swearing by Himself, or by His eternal essence.
41. If I whet my glittering sword. The conditional particle does not leave the matter doubtful, or in suspense, but must be resolved into an adverb of time; as though He had said, As soon as He should take up arms, the destruction of the enemies would be certain; not indeed that God wants arms for the overthrow of His enemies; just as when He adds directly afterwards, “When my hand shall have taken hold of judgment,” He does not mean that it ever is taken away from Him, or escapes Him, but He thus designates its present and manifest operation. 50 Since, therefore, God, when He spares His enemies, seems, as it were, to have thrown aside His weapons, and to be at rest, having ceased to execute the office of judge, He declares that His arms shall be ready wherewith to destroy His enemies; and again, that then He will once more take upon Him the judgment which He had seemed to lay aside; in which words He indirectly animadverts upon the foolish security of those who conceive that His power is annihilated, unless He openly exerts it, and that the judgment which He postpones is altogether extinct.
42. I will make my arrows drunk with blood. In these words He describes a horrible massacre, as though He had said, There shall be no end to my vengeance, until the earth shall be full of blood and corpses. Elsewhere 51 also, God’s sword is said to be “drunk with blood,” as here His arrows, when His wrath proceeds to inflict great acts of carnage; and in the same sense it is here said to “devour flesh.”
The second מדם, midam, some render, “on account of the blood;” and I admit that מ, mem, is sometimes the causalparticle. They understand it, then, that this would be the just recompense of their cruelty, when the wicked, who had slain the Israelites, or led them away captive, should be cut off by God. But I do not see why the same word should be expounded in two different senses; and I have no doubt but that it is a repetition of the same thing, that God will make His “arrows drunk with blood;” 52 but He says, “the blood both of the slain and of the captives,” since, when an army is put to the sword, some fall in the battle itself, whilst others, maimed and wounded, make an effort to escape.
The conclusion of the verse is twisted into various senses; some expound the word “head” by change of number, “heads,” as though it were said, “I will cut off the heads of the enemies;” it would, however, be more plausible to apply it metaphorically to the leaders. But others translate it more correctly, “the beginning,” not, indeed, with reference to time, but as though it were said, the flower, or best of the multitude, according to the common phrase, “from the first to the last.” My interpretation of “the revenges of the enemy” is, not those which God will inflict upon His enemies, but such as are capital, or deadly, as though He had said that He would deal as an enemy with the wicked, so that there should be no place for mercy. 53
43. Rejoice, O ye nations, with his people. The appositive reading, which some prefer, “Praise him, O nations, His people,” supplying the word “God,” is constrained. For there is no incongruity in the notion that the Gentiles should celebrate the benefits which God has conferred upon His people; at any rate, it is more simple to take it thus, that so conspicuous was the favor of God towards the Israelites, that the knowledge and favor of it should diffuse itself far and wide, and be renowned even among the Gentiles. For Scripture thus magnifies some of the more memorable exertions of God’s power, especially when reference is made to the redemption of the elect people, and commands His praise to be proclaimed among the nations, since it would be by no means fitting that it should be confined within the narrow limits of Judea. A question, however, occurs, because Paul seems to quote this passage differently; for he says, “Rejoice, ye Gentiles, with his people,” (Romans 15:10;) and undoubtedly the word נקם, nakam, which Moses uses, also signifies to rejoice. 54 If we admit that Paul took this sentence from Moses, the same Spirit, who spoke both by Moses and Paul, is the best interpreter of His own words; nor will it be inconsistent that the Gentiles should rejoice at the felicity of God’s people. But it may have been the case that Paul did not take this testimony from any particular place, but from the general teaching of Scripture. At any rate, the dignity of the people is celebrated on the ground that God esteems their blood precious, and will deem their persecutors His own adversaries.
The word כפר, capbar, at the end of the verse, some render to expiate, others, to be propitious, which is the rendering I have preferred, although I do not reject the former meaning. The verb כפר, caphar, signifies that an expiation is made with sacrifice to appease God; and it is probable that Moses alludes to the legal mode of reconciliation; nevertheless, in my judgment, he means that God will restore His land and people to His favor.
A REPETITION OF THE SAME HISTORY
NUMBERS 27
| <042712> NUMBERS 27:12-14 | |
|---|---|
12. And the Lord said unto Moses, Get thee up into this mount Abarim, and see the land which I have given unto the children of Israel. | 12. Dixit Jehova ad Mosen, Ascende in montem istum Abarim: et vide terram quam dedi fillis Israel. |
13. And when thou hast seen it, thou also shalt be gathered unto thy people, as Aaron thy brother was gathered. | 13. Ubi videris eam, aggregaberis ad populos tuos tu quoque, sicut aggregatus est Aharon frater tuus. |
14. For ye rebelled against my commandment in the desert of Zin, in the strife of the congregation, to sanctify me at the water before their eyes: that is the water of Meribah in Kadesh, in the wilderness of Zin. | 14. Quandoquidem rebelles fuistis ori meo in deserto Sin, in jurgio congregationls, ut sanctificaretis me in aquis coram oculis eorum. Istae sunt aquae jurgii Cades in deserto Sin. |
DEUTERONOMY 32:44. And Moses came and spake. It is not without reason that Moses again records that he repeated this Song before the people; because it thence appears how far from all ambition he was, in that he did not fear, at the very close of his life, to irritate all their minds, so as to render the memory of his name hateful; and besides, his authority was sanctioned by the silence and submissiveness of the people, when they suffered themselves to be thus severely dealt with. For, such was their general refractoriness, that they never would have listened to him, had not the secret inspiration of the Spirit interposed to subdue them.
He associates with himself Joshua, whom he undoubtedly desired to furnish with equal authority, and, what is worthy of observation, he bids them be attentive to the threatenings and reprehensions, in order to obtain reverence for the law. For we often see that bare doctrine is cold and nerveless, unless the sluggishness, which as it were stifles men’s minds, is sharply stimulated; lest, then, the teaching of the Law should be despised or forgotten, or, from being but languidly received, should gradually be obliterated from their minds, he as it were spurs them up by the vehemence of this Song, and commands that their posterity should be instructed in it, in order that their attention may be aroused by its menaces. In the next verse (47) he recommends to them zeal in the observance of the Law on the score of its profitableness; for translators render it improperly, as it seems to me, “Lest it should be an empty word to you,” or, “It is not an empty word, such as you should despise.” Jerome’s translation is better “The precepts are not given you in vain;” for Moses simply intimates that the Law was not given in vain, so as to end in fruitlessness; and consequently they were to beware lest they should frustrate God’s purpose, who desired to do them good. רק, rek, therefore, is used as the converse of “fruitful,” as more clearly appears from the confirmation immediately added, that they “might prolong their days in the promised land.” The Law, then, is said not to be vain, because it is fruitful unto salvation. In what way it is also deadly, and has no inherent efficacy, I have already shown. 55 It is indeed true that the Law, as being the sure rule of righteousness, does not deceptively promise salvation to men; but, since there is no one who actually performs what God requires, through the accidental guilt of men, life is turned into death; but, when all are plunged beneath the curse, a new remedy supervenes, and by God’s gratuitous pardon they are so reconciled to Him, as that their obedience, such as it is, becomes acceptable.
48. And the Lord spake unto Moses. We infer that this is not recorded in its regular order, because it is certain that Moses was warned of his approaching death before the Song was composed; and this the second passage, which I have here appended, expressly confirms; for he says that, before he substituted Joshua for himself, the place was pointed out to him in which he was to die. It is, however, by no means unusual for the order of narration to be inverted.
We may here perceive a singular specimen of faith and obedience. All naturally fly from death, so that no one hastens towards it of his own accord. He would never, therefore, have voluntarily entered the tomb, unless relying on the hope of a better life. We have already seen a similar instance in the case of Aaron: although the resurrection was not then so clearly revealed as it now is by the Gospel, nor had Christ appeared, who is the first-fruits of them that rise again. Wherefore, though our carnal sense may be averse from death, let our faith prevail to overcome all its terrors: even as Paul teaches that God’s children, although they desire not “to be unclothed,” still long to be “clothed upon, that mortality may be swallowed up of life.” (2 Corinthians 5:4.) This, however, was remarkable obedience, to prepare himself no less willingly for death than as if he had been invited to some joyful banquet. Thus it is plain that these holy men had so consecrated themselves to God, that they were ready to live or to die, according to His pleasure.
Mount Abarim seems to have obtained its name from its angles or sides, because it was divided 56 into many hills; as it is called also Nebo in this place, and elsewhere by divers other names. Others think it is named from a passage; but the other opinion is more probable, since it is called in the plural number Abarim, that is, heights, or summits, or interstices, which were situated on opposite heights.
Although we shall presently see that there was another reason why God desired to withdraw His servant from the sight of men, still we must take notice of the consolation, which is here referred to, that the pain of his death was alleviated by the permission to behold the land of Canaan. For this reason he is commanded to get up into the top of the mountain; for, although he would have been satisfied with the mere promise of God, even had he been deprived of this blessing, still it had no slight additional effect in enabling him more cheerfully to leave the people on the threshold of their inheritance. For faith does not altogether deprive God’s children of human feelings; but our heavenly Father in His indulgence has compassion on their infirmity. Thus, as it was a cause of sorrow to Moses to be withheld from entering the land, he was supported by a seasonable remedy, that he might not be hindered in his course by this impediment.
51. Because ye trespassed against me. We perceive from his punishment how necessary to Moses was such a token of favor. 57 For death in itself would not have been so bitter, but the cause, which is again alleged, grievously wounded the mind of the holy man, in that he saw himself to be excluded in God’s just vengeance from the common inheritance on account of his own guilt, which is more afflictive to the pious than a hundred, nay, innumerable deaths. Hence those mournful complaints of David and Hezekiah, and others elsewhere, when their life is taken from them by all angry God:
“the grave cannot praise thee, death cannot celebrate thee: they that go down into the pit cannot hope for thy truth.” (Isaiah 38:18; Psalm 6:5; <19B517>Psalm 115:17.)
Surely it was not so formidable a thing for them to die, but that they would have calmly and cheerfully departed from the world when their time came; but what they deprecated was the awful judgment of God, at the thoughts of which they were alarmed. The same grief might have overwhelmed the mind of Moses, had it not been alleviated.
But since none, however eminent, have been altogether exempt from temporal punishments, let us learn to bear them patiently. God did not spare Moses; what wonder if our condition is no better than his? Moreover, in the opinion of men it was a trifling offense, for the sake of which he was so severely chastised; for, carried away by indignation, he had been so irritated against the people that he had attributed less power to God that was due to Him. Now, those errors, into which we fall through thoughtless impetuosity, are more easily pardoned; but hence it is manifest; how precious to God is His glory, when He does not suffer it to be obscured with impunity even by inadvertence. At the same time, also, we are taught that nothing is more irrational than to assume to ourselves the judgment respecting sins, and to weigh them in our own balance, when God is their only legitimate assessor.
But, although He declares that Moses and Aaron revolted, and were rebellious “to His mouth,” 58 still, lest it should be thought that they studiously refused credence to God’s word, a kind of qualification is added, viz., that they did not sanctify God in the midst, or before the eyes, of the children of Israel. Hence it. is plain that they were only condemned for the excessive violence of their passion, whereby they did not uphold God’s glory before the people with sufficient energy.
As to the rest, it may be looked for under Numbers 20.
DEUTERONOMY 33
GO TO DEUTERONOMY 33: 1-29
1. And this is the blessing. The bitterness of the Song was seasoned, 59 as it were, by this palliative, wherein Moses left a testimony with respect to God’s future and perpetual grace, as if depositing an inestimable treasure in the hands of the people. For, as God, after the deliverance of His people, and the giving of the Law, renewed the covenant which Jacob had testified of and proclaimed, so Moses was, as it were, their second father, to ratify anew its blessings, lest the memory of them should ever be lost.
In order to beget confidence in his benedictions, he commences by magnifying his vocation before he proceeds to them; for, although the word benediction is equivalent to a prayer for success, yet must it be borne in mind that Moses does not here pray in the ordinary manner, like a private person, in such a way as fathers are wont to offer supplications for their children; but that, in the spirit of prophecy, he sets forth the blessings which were to be expected from God. This, then, is the reason why he extols the dignity and glory of his office as ruler in such lofty terms, viz., that the twelve tribes of Israel may be thoroughly assured that God is the author of these blessings. For the same reason he calls himself “the man of God:” that the people may receive what he is about to say as if it. proceeded from God, whose undoubted minister he is. Nor is the circumstance of time without its weight — “before his death,” or, “in his death,” which adds to the prophecy the force of a testament.
2. And he said, The Lord came from, Sinai. 60 In these words he reminds them that he is setting before them, a confirmation of the covenant, which God had made with them in this Law, and that it is nothing different from it; for this connection was of exceeding efficacy in establishing the certainty of the blessings, provided only the Law was duly honored; for nothing was better adapted to confirm the grace of God than the majesty which was displayed in the promulgation of the Law. Some, as I conceive improperly, translate it, — “God comes to Sinai,” whereas Moses rather means that he came from thence, when His brightness was made manifest. By way of ornament, the same thing is repeated with respect to Seir and Paran; and, since these three words are synonymous, therefore to go forth, to rise up, and to come, also represent the same thing, viz., that manifestation of the divine glory which should have ravished into admiration the minds of all; as though he had said that his blessings were to be received with the same reverence, as that which God had procured for His Law, when His face was conspicuously displayed on Mount Sinai. The Prophet Habakkuk (Habakkuk 3:3) has imitated this figure, though with a different object, viz., that, the people might confidently rely upon his power, which had formerly been manifested to the fathers in visible brightness.
By “ten thousands of sanctity,” 61 I do not understand, as many do, the faithful, but the angels, by whom God was accompanied as by a royal retinue; for God also commanded the ark to be placed between the Cherubim, in order to show that the heavenly hosts were around Him. So in Isaiah, (Isaiah 6:6,) the Seraphim surround His throne; and Daniel says that he saw “ten thousand times ten thousand,” (Daniel 7:10;) thus designating an infinite multitude, as does Moses also by “ten thousand.” It is probable that both Paul and Stephen derived from this passage their statement that the Law was “ordained by Angels in the hand of a mediator,” (Galatians 3:19; Acts 7:53;) for its authority was greatly confirmed by its having so many witnesses (obsignatores.)
The Law is placed at His right hand, not only as a scepter or mark of dignity, but as His power or rule of government; for He did not merely show Himself as a king, but also made known how He would preside over them. 62 The Law is called fiery, in order to inspire terror and to enforce humility upon them all; although I am not adverse to the opinion that Moses alludes in this epithet to the outward signs of fire and flame, of which he spoke in Exodus 20. But, since the word דת, dath, means any statute or edict, some restrict it to the prohibition that none should more closely approach the mountain. In my own mind, however, there is no doubt but that it designates all the doctrine whereby God’s dominion is maintained.
3. Yea, he loved the people. 63 If it be preferred to apply this to the Gentiles, the sentence must be thus resolved, “Although He loves all human beings, still His saints are honored with His peculiar favor, in that He watches over their safety;” but it is more correct to expound it as referring only to the children of Abraham, whom He calls “peoples,” because, on account of the multitude into which they had grown, in their several tribes, they might be reckoned as so many nations. And since the particle אף, aph, 64 signifies prolongation of time, like adhuc in Latin, the following sense will be very satisfactory, that, Although the descendants of Abraham were divided into various races, and might therefore seem to be no longer a single family, nevertheless God still continued to regard them all with affection, and their numbers and divisions did not prevent Him from accounting them to be a single body. The sum is, that God’s favor towards them was not extinguished, either by the progress of time, or the increase of the people; but that it was constantly extended to the race of Abraham, however far or widely it might be spread.
It must, however, be observed, that in proof of His love, it is presently added, that they were in the hand of God. Hence we infer that, from the time that God has embraced us with His favor, He is the sure guardian of our safety; whence also arises the firm assurance of eternal life. The change of person, from the third to the second, throws no obscurity on the meaning. Since many hypocrites were mixed up with the faithful — for the Church of God has always been like a threshing-floor 65 — Moses restricts this special grace of God to those who willingly submit themselves to Him, and with pious teachableness embrace this instruction, by which sign he distinguishes between the true children of God, and those spurious or degenerate ones, who falsely assume the name. Where my translation is, “They cleaved to thy feet,” others render the words, “They were struck at thy feet,” but in my judgment constrainedly. Others extract from it a useful piece of instruction, that “they were subdued by God’s chastisements, so as to render Him obedience;” but the metaphor is rather taken from disciples, who, according to the common usage of the Hebrew language, are said to sit at their master’s feet, in order to attend more diligently. And this is confirmed by the context, for the faithful are said to have attached themselves to God’s feet, that they might receive of this words, i.e., profit by His instruction.
4. Moses commanded us a law. What he had declared respecting the glory of God, and the excellency of the Law, he now applies to his own person, since it was his purpose, as I have said, to establish the authority of his own ministry. In order, therefore, to prove the certainty of his mission, he boasts that he was appointed by God to be the teacher of the people, and that not for a brief period, but throughout all ages; for by the word “inheritance,” the perpetuity of the Law is signified. He then claims for himself the royal supremacy, not because he had ruled after the manner of kings, but that the dignity of this high office might add weight to his words. He says that “the heads of the people and the tribes were gathered together,” with reference to their unhappy disorganization, which was tending to their destruction, as much as to say that, under his guidance, rind by his exertions, the state of the people was reestablished.
He begins with Reuben, the first-born, and so far removes or mitigates the ignominy of that condemnation wherewith he had been branded by his father Jacob, as only to stop short of restoring him to his place of honor. For the holy Patriarch had pronounced a severe sentence, namely, that Reuben should be “as unstable as water, and should not excel.” (Genesis 49:4.) Lest, therefore, the whole of his posterity should be discouraged, or should be rejected by the other tribes, he abates the severity of his disinheritance, as if to pardon the condemned. In short, he assigns to the family of Reuben a place among the sons of Jacob, lest despair should drive them to headlong ruin. The second clause admits of two contrary meanings. Literally it is, “Let him be small in number;” and, in fact, this tribe was not of the more numerous ones. Since, however, it occupied a middle place, and surpassed several of the others, some repeat the negative, “Let him not die, nor let him be few in number.” 66 But it appears more probable that an abatement is made from the rank to which his primogeniture entitled the family of Reuben, and thus that some remainder of dishonor was introduced into the promise of grace. And, in fact, not only the tribe of Judah, but those of Simeon, Issachar, Zebulun, Dan, and Naphthali, surpassed it in size. Thus the qualification will be by no means inappropriate, that, although Reuben was to be reckoned among the people of God, still he should not altogether recover his dignity.
7. And this is the blessing of Judah. 67 Jerome has faithfully given the sense, “This is the blessing,” although it is not actually expressed.
It might at first sight appear inconsistent that some abatement should be made from the splendid and abundant blessings which had been promised to the tribe of Judah. This, however, is by no means the case; for the inviolable decree respecting the supremacy of Judah is not thus altered; but Moses merely reminds them how difficult of accomplishment it would be. Jacob had declared, as if speaking of a peaceful dominion, that his “brethren should praise” him, that his “father’s children should bow down before” him; that “the scepter should not depart from Judah, nor a lawgiver from between his feet,” (Genesis 49:8, 10;) but, inasmuch as this dignity lay dormant for a long time, and it was necessary that it should contend with many tedious obstacles before it finally manifested itself, Moses consequently speaks in more limited terms. Still, he seems to have referred not merely to the earlier period, but to the various calamities whereby the kingdom of David was not only apparently diminished, but destroyed; and especially to the melancholy interruption of it which arose from the Babylonish captivity. The sum is, that the prosperity of which Jacob prophesied was not to be so conspicuous in the tribe of Judah, as that all things were to be expected to be joyous and successful, but rather that those, to whom the supreme power as well as wealth was promised, would be exposed to many evils, so that they should be reduced to extremities, and be greatly in want of the help of God. He therefore betakes himself to prayer, and by his example admonishes not that tribe only, but the others also, to implore the faithfulness of God in their overwhelming difficulties. And this lesson applies to ourselves also, in order that we may be the more aroused to prayer and supplication, the more Satan is urgent for the destruction of Christ’s kingdom. At the same time, what I have stated must be observed, namely, that the promise remains firm, since it is not in vain that Moses places all the tribes under the dominion of Judah, when he petitions that he may be brought unto his people, nor promises in vain that God will be at hand to help him, so that he may prevail against his enemies.
8. And of Levi he said. This qualification, or modification of the harsher sentence of Jacob was introduced not only for the sake of the tribe of Levi, but rather of the whole people. Jacob had said,
“Simeon and Levi are brethren: instruments of cruelty are in their habitations. O my soul, come not thou into their secret; unto their assembly, my tongue, 68 be not thou united,” (Genesis 49:5, 6.)
Assuredly their descendants might have been discouraged, or at least might have been regarded contemptuously, when a patriarch, and the founder of their race, had thus abominated them. God, however, afterwards consecrated this tribe to Himself, so that their sanctity might be communicated to the other tribes; which could not be the case unless their previous opprobrium were removed.
But if any contentious person had objected to this blessing, as if Moses were too much disposed to favor his own tribe, such a suspicion could not justly be harbored against him; first, because he, who now makes such honorable mention of the tribe of Levi, was also the proclaimer of their ignominy; and on many other occasions had not spared his own family, but, whenever it was requisite, had freely inveighed against their vices; and, secondly, he now commends nothing in the Levites except the new dignity, which it had pleased God to confer upon them. On this point, indeed, he ought to have been least of all suspected, inasmuch as he had degraded his own sons, and had exalted the posterity of Aaron alone to the highest place of honor. Now, therefore, he has no other object but that the dignity of the priesthood should not be depreciated on account of the sins of men, and thus their religion itself be despised. For we all know how disposed people are to lay charges against the persons of men which may derogate from the sacredness of their office. Assuredly, if Levi had not been purged from that disgrace which he had incurred, the priesthood would have been altogether deprived of reverence; and thus God’s worship would have been very lightly esteemed. Now, however, when God sanctifies this family to himself, he, as it were, restores it entirely; and hence it is apparent that its punishment was only temporary, since Moses had no intention of retracting what the Spirit had dictated to holy Jacob. Nor does he, indeed, advance anything of himself; but the same Spirit removes the ignominy, which might have disgraced the tribe of Levi, inasmuch as it had only been imposed upon it for a time. We have already seen elsewhere that what Jacob prophesied respecting the dispersion of this family, resulted in its honor; since God posted the Levites in all directions like sentinels, that through their means purity of doctrine might be fostered amongst the whole people. They were, therefore, scattered in such a manner as that their punishment might be productive of benefit. We must, therefore, conclude, that Moses spoke not to gratify his brethren, but made honorable mention of the priesthood, lest those, whom God had chosen as this ministers, should be treated with contempt. And, doubtless, the subsequent grace of their calling should have blotted out the recollection of their previous infamy. Thus Christ, when He would restore Peter to the office of an apostle, cancels his triple denial, by thrice setting him over His sheep. (John 21:17.)
The address, which follows, must be applied to God; for some translate it improperly, “The Urim and Thummim shall be with thee,” as if Moses were addressing the tribe of Levi. In order, therefore, to avoid ambiguity, it will be well to translate it of Levi, rather than to Levi; and ל, lamed, is often used in this sense. Thus, with the purpose of increasing the authenticity of the benediction, Moses addresses God Himself, as if citing Him as a witness, or referring his injunctions to God’s tribunal.
Although in Hebrew the words Urim and Thummim 69 are here used, which were principal parts of the sacred Ephod, I have not hesitated to translate them as common nouns: for it is unquestionable that by these symbols were denoted, the knowledge of the Law which is the only light of our souls, and integrity of life. The sum, however, is that the honor of the priesthood was deposited with Aaron, whom he calls the man of God’s clemency, or, the meek. Jerome, as usual, renders it the holy, but improperly; for 70 חסיד, chasid, signifies mild, or humane; and this epithet is constantly applied to the children of God, in order that we may learn to imitate that Father of mercy, who “maketh his sun to rise upon the evil and the good.”
What follows, viz., that God tried him at Massah, I conceive to be added by way of exception; for I have no doubt but that Moses magnifies God’s mercy by this allusion, in that He had dignified Aaron with so great an honor, notwithstanding his having been overcome by impatience, and having fallen. Still it must be remarked that, in reference to the people, the zeal of Aaron is recorded as praiseworthy; as much as to say, that the sin of Aaron flowed from the fountain of virtue, since it was from holy indignation that he fell into the passion of impatience, when he could not endure that the people should rebel against God. Unless perhaps it be preferred to understand these words by way of apostrophe to the people, “Thou didst try, thou didst provoke him to contention, or didst quarrel with him.” But the context will run better, if we understand that God then had a controversy with Aaron; inasmuch as, although overcome by the trial, he still gave no despicable proof of his piety, and from that time forward did not cease to execute his office with sedulity.
9. Who said unto his father and his mother. In the person of Aaron an example is set before all the Levites for their imitation. And, first, he is said to have renounced his own flesh and blood, in order that he might be more disencumbered for obeying God; and in fact it is necessary that all the pastors of the Church should put off their earthly affections, which would otherwise often keep them back from devoting themselves entirely to God. Aaron, then, is said to have bid farewell to all his family, that he might be at liberty to lay himself out for God. Christ now requires the same thing of His disciples, that sons should forget their fathers, and fathers their sons, and husbands their wives, lest anything should retard their course, and prevent them from earnestly advancing through life and death to the end to which they are called. (Matthew 10:37.)
Moses afterwards, by using the plural number, embraces the whole Levitical order; and hence we may infer that what had preceded is not to be confined in its application to a single individual. But when he says that they “guarded (custodisse) the word of God, and kept his covenant,” he does not refer to mere ordinary obedience, but to the peculiar care of preserving that which was intrusted to their charge. It is true that in like manner all believers are said to keep the Law, when they zealously devote themselves to live a holy life; but special allusion is here made to the office of teaching. The Levites, therefore, are called guardians of the Law, and keepers of it, as being φύλακες, since with them was deposited the treasure of Divine instruction, as is more clearly set forth in the next verse, “They shall teach Jacob, etc.” If any should prefer that this observing of the Law should be understood of their life and habits, as though it were said, that the Levites should surpass others in the examples they gave, I do not contend the point, though it seems to me that the second clause is explanatory, and that it more familiarly sets forth what was spoken with some little obscurity, pointing out the way in which the Law is to be observed, viz., by their being the teachers and masters of the people. We must, however, remark the method they are to adopt in teaching; for they are not permitted to introduce their own inventions, or to frame a rule of life out of their own heads; but they are commanded to seek in the Law itself what they are to teach, and to interpret it honestly and faithfully. And this condition was inserted in order that whosoever should desire to be successors in the honor should be mindful of their vocation, and faithfully devote themselves to the office of teaching. Thus, when in a corrupt state of the Church, priests, who had nothing of this sort about them, paraded their mere empty title; their silly vaunt is refuted by Malachi:
“My covenant (he says) was with Levi of life and peace;…. for the law of truth was in his mouth, and the priest’s lips should keep knowledge, and they should seek the law at his mouth, but ye have corrupted my covenant,” (Malachi 2:5, 6, 7, 8.)
Let us learn, then, from this passage, that whosoever claims for himself the primacy in the Church must be repudiated, unless he manifests himself to be a faithful teacher.
The third part of the priest’s office follows, viz., that he should apply himself to the performance of the religious services; for God had disencumbered them from the labors of agriculture and other earthly business, that they might be more entirely at liberty for the duties of teaching and sacrifice; and, although this latter might appear to be but an humble occupation, still, if we regard it aright, it was no common honor that they should be mediators and intercessors for the reconciliation of the people to God; for even the very least of the Levites had something to do with making atonement.
Under the words “incense and whole burnt-sacrifice,” the entire legal service is comprehended; and the incense is said to be put before the nose of God; 71 because the odor of this offering was grateful, and, as it were, sweet-smelling to Him, as we have elsewhere seen.
11. Bless, Lord, his substance. This supplication appears to have been intended tacitly to provide against the poverty which awaited the Levites, if God had not supplied them with food from some other source besides the produce of the soil; for they were deprived of a share in the general inheritance, and God alone was their property. Lest, therefore, their condition should be painful to them, Moses offers them consolation, and bids them expect from God abundance for their support, whilst he promises that His blessing shall stand them in stead of the most redundant produce; as it is said in <19D215>Psalm 132:15, “I will abundantly bless her provision, and satisfy her priests 72 with bread.”
What follows, that “the work of his hands may be acceptable to God,” may be either explained generally of the labor which is bestowed for the purpose of obtaining food, or of the service and ministry of the tabernacle; but, inasmuch as God engaged the Levites in sacred occupations, it seems indirectly to promise them that such exercises would be no less profitable to them than as if they were altogether occupied in the pursuit of gain. It was allowable for the rest to employ their industry for the advancement of their domestic interests, whilst the Levites, in order properly to perform their duties, were obliged to neglect their private affairs. Lest, then, they should be afraid of destitution, Moses reminds them that they might expect from God an earthly reward also for their spiritual labors.
The third point appears to be purposely introduced, that “God would smite through or transfix their enemies,” because pious teachers are very much exposed to envy, and ill-will, and persecution; for the complaint which is made by Jeremiah, (Jeremiah 15:10,) that he was “a man of strife,” is applicable to all the prophets and ministers of God; since the world can hardly bear its affections to be slain by the spiritual sword of God’s word, and hence many contentions arise. Besides, Satan, in order to render their: doctrine contemptible, does not cease to harass them by whatever means he can, and to arm his bands to war against them; so that the pastors of the Church have need of God’s special aid. This point, then, is peculiarly worthy of observation that, although many adversaries always threaten God’s servants, besiege them, provoke them to conflict, in a word, are always plotting their destruction, still God’s succor will be at hand, whereby they may be rendered invincible; as it was said to Jeremiah,
“They shall fight against thee, but they shall not prevail against thee.” (Jeremiah 1:19.)
The words I have translated “lest they rise again,” others render “lest they rise against them;” and, although I do not reject this, still it seems to be less appropriate; for Moses did not wish to exempt the Levites from the annoyances of combat, but only to promise them victory, inasmuch as God would overwhelm and destroy their enemies. 73
12. And of Benjamin he said. It is probable that Moses alludes to the inheritance which fell to the lot of the children of Benjamin; for the part of Jerusalem in which the temple stood was contained in it. Since, therefore, God assigned them a dwelling-place, in which He in a manner protected them, and cherished them beneath His wings, they are not without reason called His beloved, for this was no ordinary pledge of His love To “dwell upon God,” 74 and “between his shoulders,” is equivalent to reposing upon Him; a similitude taken from fathers who carry their children whilst yet they are small and tender. Others extract a different meaning, viz., that God would dwell upon the shoulders of Benjamin; but this is very unnatural. 75
13. And of Joseph he said. Moses repeats some portions of the blessing of Jacob; nor with respect to any other tribe does he approach so closely to the words of the Patriarch. And, although the family of Joseph was already divided into two tribes or nations, still he begins by the head itself, and at the conclusion declares that what had been given to their fathers pertains to Ephraim and Manasseh. First, he celebrates the exceeding fertility of the land, in which the descendants of Joseph were to dwell; and then ratifies his testimony by the authority of God. He promises them, then, that their land shall be fertile, from the best treasures of heaven; for מגד, meged, signifies whatever is best and most precious. I do not, therefore, approve of their translation, who render it fruits, although I know not whether Moses speaks of the excellency of the climate, or commends the beneficence of God; the latter, however, accords best with the context, in which he makes mention of the external means of fertility, viz., the dew, and the deep, by which word I understand the depth of the soil itself. In the next verse I admit that by the word מגד, meged, the choicest fruits are indicated, but without any change of its meaning. Others render it delicacies: others sweet fruits, on account of the peculiar excellency of the fruits. But I do not see why some translate the word גרש, geresh, “influence.” It literally means thrusting out; and is used metaphorically for the fruit, which arises and breaks forth from the earth. But it is not very clear to me what fruits he speaks of respectively as “of the sun, and the moon;” for I cannot tell whether there are any grounds for assigning, as some do, to the sun the produce which springs from seed and the vintage; and to the moon, cucumbers and gourds; nor do I attempt to decide whether their idea is more correct who suppose the latter to be flowers or fruits which appear every month.
15. And for the chief things of the ancient mountains. In these words he shows that no part of the land would be barren. We know that the tops of mountains are generally and uncultivated, or at any rate bear nothing but trees that have no fruit. But Moses affirms that even there also there shall be the richest produce, for which reason, at least in my opinion, he calls the mountains ancient, and the hills lasting, as if being very highly renowned; for their antiquity is not praised, as if they were created before the rest of the world, but these mountains are honorably distinguished as the first-born, because God’s blessing eminently rests upon them. Thus in the blessing of Jacob it is said, “unto the utmost bound of the everlasting hills,” as much as to say, that no corner of these most celebrated mountains should be devoid of fertility. (Genesis 49:26.)
In the next verse he extends generally to the whole land what he had said of the mountains.
Those are wide of the meaning of Moses, who translate what follows: “On account of the good-will of the dweller in the bush the blessing shall come;” and his rendering is altogether barbarous who gives it, “On account of the piety,” etc. My opinion is that the word רצון, retzon, is in the nominative case; for it is quite in accordance with the context that the “favor of God would come upon the head of Joseph;” for, after Moses had magnified His bounty, he now points out its source or cause, viz., that this extraordinary fertility was the result of God’s gratuitous favor. The words of Jacob, “by the God of thy father,” and “by the Almighty,” exactly correspond with these; where also I have explained why Joseph was called a Nazarene among his brethren. 76
God is called “the dweller in the bush” by periphrasis, with reference to the vision which was presented to Moses on Mount Sinai; for God then appeared a second time as the Redeemer and Father of His people; after having made His covenant with Abraham and Jacob. And this serves by way of confirmation; as if it were said, that the same God who had formerly blessed Joseph by the mouth of His servant Jacob, now repeated the same prophecy, in order to give fuller assurance of its truth.
17. His glory is like the firstling. Translators obscure the meaning by translating the word firstling in the nominative case. I have no doubt, however, but that he compares the glory of Joseph to the size of a very fine bullock, as if He had said, “His beauty is as of the most choice bullocks in his herds.” At least it is very consistent that the word firstling should be used for pre-eminent. He says, then, that no more magnificent or glorious bullocks should be found in the land of Joseph than the people itself would be. And to beauty he adds strength and vigor, so that they should be victorious over all their enemies.
At the end of the verse (as I have before stated,) he declares that what he had prophesied of Joseph should be common to the two families of Ephraim and Manasseh. At the same time he confirms the declaration of Jacob, whereby he had preferred Ephraim the younger to the elder. Manasseh, therefore, only reckons his thousands, but Ephraim his tell thousands, a proof of which fact God had given in the census which has been already recorded, in which the tribe of Ephraim was found to be the more numerous.
18. And of Zebulun he said. He compares two tribes with each other, which, although neighbors in position, were still very dissimilar; for the one being devoted to mercantile pursuits, went forth frequently in various directions; the other took more delight in quietude and repose; and this their great variety of condition is indicated, when he bids Zebulun rejoice in its expeditions, and Issachar in its domestic repose. Moses thus confirms the prophecy of Jacob, who said that Zebulun should “dwell at the haven of the sea,” so as to make voyages of traffic; whilst Issachar, as delighting more in repose, should be lazy and idle, so as to make no objections against paying tribute, in order to purchase peace. (Genesis 49:13-15.)
What follows I suppose to be added, as though Moses had said that their distant location should not prevent them from going up with the others to Jerusalem, for the purpose of performing their religious duties. For in that they were farther removed from the temple, their zeal in the legal service might have grown cold. Although, then, they dwelt in the utmost borders of the land, Moses says that they should nevertheless come to offer sacrifices to God. By the peoples some understand the other tribes, which does not appear at all consistent; and others, foreign nations, to which their commercial intercourse gave them access. My interpretation, however, is simply that, although the length of the journey should invite them to remain at home, still they should mutually exhort each other to betake themselves in large companies to the temple. The end of the verse may be the statement of a reason for this, as if it were said, that they will be more attentive to the service of God, because, being enriched by him, they will be desirous to offer Him the praise. And assuredly it is a sign of gross ingratitude, when we are not stimulated by God’s blessings to strive more earnestly to render thanks to him, in proportion as he deals more liberally with us. At the same time, Moses shows that, in consideration of their great wealth, the expenses of the journey would be by no means onerous to them; for, although their country was not very fertile, still its position was most advantageous for the acquirement of riches. Thus when it is here said, “they shall suck of the abundance of the seas,” an antithesis is to be understood between the fruits of the earth and the abundant revenues derived from merchandise. To the same effect, “the treasures hid in the sand” are spoken of. For the exposition given by some, that their treasures should be so great as that they should hide them in the sand; and by others, that the sands should there be so prolific in silver and gold; and by others, that they should collect what the sea should throw up, is poor and vapid. Whereas, therefore, others should grow rich from their lands, Moses says, by an elegant figure, that the sands of Zebulun should be filled with hidden treasures, on account of their foreign traffic.
20. And of Gad he said. In the blessing of the tribe of Gad, mention is only made of the hereditary portion, which it had obtained without casting of lots. He therefore celebrates the blessing of God, because He had accorded to the Gadites an ample dwelling-place; for the word “enlargeth” refers to the extent of their possession. But inasmuch as in that extremity of the land beyond Jordan, they were on a hostile border, he declares that they would be warlike, and hence compares them to a lion, which tears its prey sometimes from the head, and sometimes from the arm. Since, then, that position would not be so peaceful as any other region in the midst of Canaan, he declares that they should be safe and sound, through their own audacity. And although it is not a very pleasant condition to be harassed by constant wars, still, in such a disagreeable case, God’s grace was not to be despised, which made them formidable to their enemies, and of great valor, whereby they might not only repel hostile invasions, but be willing of themselves to make predatory expeditions. If any should object that license for rapine was quite unsuitable for God’s children, the solution is obvious, that reference is not here made to what was lawful, or what was desirable and praiseworthy, but that a consolation was offered them by way of protection against the incursions and annoyances of their enemies. Besides, the lust for booty is not made permissible, but praise is merely given to their courage in overcoming their enemies.
21. And he provided the first part for himself. 77 Others translate it not badly, the first-fruits. Jerome’s rendering, pre-eminence (principatum,) however, is quite out of the question. The word beginning (principium,) however, is very suitable, for Moses thus signifies that the Gadites were beforehand in seeking a dwelling-place for themselves; for before possession of the land was accorded to the people, they asked for the kingdom of Sihon for themselves. It is afterwards added, in what way they were provident in choosing their abode, namely, because God suggested to them that Moses was at liberty to assign this portion to them. For it is called the “portion of the lawgiver,” as being that respecting which Moses might lawfully decide, since he appropriated it to the Gadites, not by hazard, nor otherwise than by God’s command. It is called the hidden portion, 78 as not having been included by God in His promise. The sum is, that although God’s will was not yet revealed, with respect to this addition to the land, still they obtained it through His secret liberality. And Moses desires flint his decision with regard to the Gadites remaining on this side Jordan should be thus confirmed, since disputes might have otherwise arisen, inasmuch as God’s promise had assigned the boundaries of the whole people on the opposite bank. Theirs is a poor exposition who explain it that Moses was buried there; and those also violently wrest the words, who understand by “the lawgiver” the chiefs of the Amorites, and render the words “hidden portion,” the ceiled palaces; 79 nor would they have been thus extravagant in their notions, if the natural meaning which I have given had occurred to them.
The other clause of the verse is added by way of qualification; for Moses shows that this advantageous provision was made for the children of Gad, on condition that they should accompany the other tribes, and not return home until the land of Canaan was at peace, and their enemies subdued. And we have already seen that, when they sought for themselves this location outside the land, in the kingdom of the Amorites, they were severely rebuked by Moses, until they promised that they would share the war with their brethren until its conclusion. This is what Moses means by “executing the justice of God, and his judgments with Israel;” not only because it was but just that they should share the war with their brethren, and assist them in obtaining possession of the land, but because God ordained that His just vengeance should be executed upon those heathen and wicked nations by the whole of Israel, and had chosen all the tribes generally to be the ministers of His judgment; as it is said, in <19E907>Psalm 149:7, 8, 9, that they were charged “to execute vengeance upon the heathen, . . to bind their kings with chains, and their nobles with fetters of iron; to execute upon them the judgment written;” for it was no common honor to be appointed to be, as it were, the judges of the ungodly, so as to destroy them all, and thus to purify the land.
22. And of Dan he said. He foretells that the tribe of Dan, like that of Gad, should be warlike, not so much from voluntary disposition, as from necessity; for their love of war was not to be deemed praiseworthy, inasmuch as it is altogether contrary to humanity; but because the unscrupulousness of the enemies, by which that tribe was infested, compelled them to take up arms. He compares it to a lion impetuously leaping from Mount Bashan; and the particle of comparison must be understood here, for Mount Bashan was not situated in the territory of this tribe. But Moses means to say that they should be as ready for the combat as a lion, which, after it has issued from its den into the open plains, makes an attack upon every one that it meets.
23. And of Naphtali he said. He predicts that God would deal bountifully towards these two tribes; for to the first a fertile district would be allotted towards “the west and the south.” What he declares respecting the tribe of Asher is not free from ambiguity; for he is said to be blessed, מבנים, mibanim, i.e., either with children, or above children. If we prefer the former meaning, his prolificness (πολυτεκνία) is celebrated, as though it were said, Asher shall be blessed with a numerous progeny. There may, however, be a comparison between this tribe and the others; and this might justly be made to its advantage, because it had a very fertile district allotted to it, and abounding in wheat of the best quality, as the blessing of Jacob testifies,
“Out of Asher shall bread be fat, and he shall yield royal dainties.” (Genesis 49:20.)
He adds that “Asher shall be acceptable to his brethren;” from whence we gather that his tribe should be of a placid disposition: and afterwards figuratively celebrates the abundance of his oil, and iron, and brass. For to “dip his foot in oil,” is as much as to say that he should collect an abundant supply of oil; and that “his shoes should be iron and brass,” is nothing more than that he should tread upon a soil full of these metals. It is to be readily inferred from hence, as from preceding passages, that the blessings, which are now mentioned, are not so much wishes or prayers, as prophecies; since without the spirit of prophecy Moses could never have divined what, or what sort of, territory was to be bestowed on the several tribes.
Commentators vary as to the latter words; for some render the word דבא, daba, old age, or, grief, as if there were a transposition of the letters, 80 and thus restrict the meaning of the word “days” to youth; but others more correctly suppose, that Asher was to be strong and vigorous through the whole course of his life. Since, therefore, years gradually debilitate men, Moses promises to the posterity of Asher that their rigor should be retained to the very end of life.
26. There is none like unto the God. Moses proceeds from the parts to the whole, and now comes to speak of the whole body, which consisted of the twelve families. All that he says tends to the same end, viz., that the people of Israel were happy as being taken by God under this faithful guardianship: for nothing is more to be desired with regard to our best interests, than that our welfare should be intrusted to the hand of God. But, since this inestimable blessing of being protected by the care of God is often but lightly prized, Moses exclaims in admiration, that there is none to be compared to the God of Israel. We know that all nations had their tutelary gods or patrons, and foolishly gloried in their respective idols; although they often found from experience, that whatever confidence they placed in them was vain and frivolous. Moses, therefore, separates from this imaginary multitude of false gods the God of Israel, like whom, he says, none can be anywhere found. He also extols His power, because He rides gloriously on the heavens and clouds, which is tantamount to all high things being subject to His dominion. But, whereas it would be of little profit to reflect on his infinite power except; in its connection with ourselves, Moses expressly reminds us that God is not strong for Himself, but in order that He may help His people.
27. The eternal God is thy refuge. This is just as if he had said that the Israelites were protected from above by the help of God, and also based, as it were, upon Him. The beginning of the prayer corresponds with that other in Psalm 90:1, “Lord, thou hast been our dwelling-place in all generations.” The sum is, that although the Israelites might be exposed to many injuries, still there was secure repose for them under the shadow of God’s wings; and assuredly unless the hand of God had been like a roof to protect them, they would have perished a thousand times over. But, inasmuch as it would not be sufficient for our heads to be in safety, the other point is also added, viz., that God’s arms should be stretched forth to sustain them from beneath. He calls them “everlasting,” because the security of the pious, who rely upon God, is never shaken: it is, therefore, just as though he represented God to be at the same time the foundation, and the roof, of their abode. Others translate it less correctly, “Thou shalt live under the arms of the Everlasting;” for an elegant distinction is drawn, 81 which, however, tends to the same point, when God it called קדם, kedem, and His arms עלם, gnolam, the first of which words has reference to the past, whilst in the other there is allusion to the future; as if he had said of God, that He was from the beginning, and that His power would endure unto the end.
He adduces experimental evidence of the above statements, inasmuch as God had 82 miraculously destroyed the enemies of His people; at the same time he specifies the manner in which this was done, viz., that He had said, Destroy, or blot out, or dissipate. And by this word he signifies that, although God had made use of the agency of the Israelites, still He only was the conqueror; since the Israelites prevailed not except at His bidding, and by His will.
28. Israel then shall dwell in safety alone. 83 The beginning of the verse is by no means obscure, for Moses promises in it to the elect people what all have naturally a great desire for, viz., peace or tranquillity; for he is said to dwell confidently alone, who: fears no danger, whom no care harasses, and who needs no garrison, or defense. This, indeed, God never vouchsafed altogether to the Israelites, that they should inhabit their land in security and without the fear of enemies, inasmuch as their ingratitude did not allow of it; and therefore the prophets, in enumerating the blessings of Christ’s kingdom, declare that every one should “dwell beneath his own vine, and his own fig-tree.”
For “the fountain of Jacob,” some have the word eye, 84 and suppose it to be used metaphorically for his vision; as though it were said, that the quiet and peaceful habitation referred to was to be expected by the people from the vision of their father Jacob. Others, however, more correctly read the words “fountain of Jacob,” in apposition (with Israel,) inasmuch as all the tribes derived their origin from that one father. In this way the “fountain” will not be only the actual source; but the rivulet, or stream, which flows down from it.
In conclusion, Moses promises that the very sky of the Holy Land should be propitious, and benignant.
29. Happy art thou, O Israel. He again exclaims that happy is the people, whose salvation is in God; and surely this is the only true happiness; for unless we ascend to the first cause of Salvation, all salvations, so to speak, are but transitory. And, since God had honored the Israelites alone with this privilege, their condition is here distinguished from the common lot of the whole human race. By the words shield and sword is meant a perfect defense, as much as to say, that no part of their armor was to be sought elsewhere.
DEUTERONOMY 34
GO TO DEUTERONOMY 34: 1-12
1. And Moses went. up from the plains of Moab. It is not certain who wrote this chapter; unless we admit the probable conjecture of the ancients, that Joshua was its author. But since Eleazar the priest might have performed this office, it will be better to leave a matter of no very great importance undecided.
We have elsewhere said, that one part of mount Abarim was called Nebo, as another was called Pisgah, because they were distinct summits.
Now, the ascent of Moses was equivalent to a voluntary going forth to death: for he was not ignorant of what was to happen, but being called by God to die, he went to meet death of his own accord. Such willing submission proceeded from no other source than faith in God’s grace, whereby alone all terror is mitigated, and set at rest, and the bitterness of death is sweetened. Doubtless to Moses, as to every one else, it must have been naturally an awful thing to die; but inasmuch as the testimony of God’s grace is interposed, he does not hesitate to offer himself without alarm; and Because he was firmly persuaded that the inheritance of the people would be there set before his eyes, he cheerfully ascended to the place from which he was to behold it. Already, indeed, by faith had he beheld the land, and the promise of God had been, as it were, a lively representation of it; but; since some remaining infirmities of the flesh still environ even the most holy persons, an ocular view of it was no slight consolation, in order to mitigate the bitterness of his punishment, when he knew that he was prevented from actually entering it by the just sentence of God.
When it is said, that God “showed him all the land,” it could not have been the case without a miracle. For, although history records that some have been endued with incredible powers of vision, so as to have been able to see further than the whole length of Canaan; there is still a peculiarity to be remarked in this case, that Moses distinctly examined every portion of it, as if he had been really on the spot. I allow, indeed, that Naphtali, and Ephraim, and Manasseh are mentioned by anticipation, but, nevertheless, the Holy Spirit would express that every part was shown to Moses, as if they were close beneath his feet. Else the vision would have been but unsatisfactory and useless, if he had not been allowed to behold the future habitation of the people. And to the same effect is also what is afterwards added, that it was the land, which God sware to give unto His servants; for otherwise the desire of Moses would not have been satisfied, unless he had seen what a pleasant, fertile, and wealthy region the sons of Abraham were about to inhabit.
5. So Moses the servant of the Lord died. Since it was mark of ignominy to die without the borders of the Holy Land, Moses is honored with high eulogy, in order that the Israelites might learn the more to tremble at the judgment of God, who did not spare even his most illustrious servant. And it is expressly added, “according to the word (or mouth) of the Lord,” lest they should despise the threatenings which were accomplished in so memorable a manner. For, if God spared not His own distinguished Prophet, but at length executed upon him what He had threatened, how should the ordinary multitude escape?
What follows, “he buried him,” some render passively, “he was buried;” and others transitively, “he buried himself;” but in both cases improperly; for, whilst they are afraid to assign this office to God, they labor to avoid an absurdity which does not exist; since it may be gathered from the end of the verse, that Moses was buried by divine means, for it is said that his sepulcher is unknown. It is likely that an effort to discover it was not omitted, or neglected to be made by the people; since it would have been barbarous for them not to discharge the last offices of humanity towards such, and so great a man. Since, therefore, no signs of his funeral, nor his body itself, were anywhere to be found, it might be inferred that he was hidden by God’s determinate counsel; whilst it is superfluous to discuss in what manner God buried him, inasmuch as all the elements are under His control. It was enough, therefore, for Him to signify (annuere) to the earth, that it was to receive the body of the holy man into its bosom: nor was there any necessity to call in the assistance of angels, as some think, since the earth would have instantly obeyed the command of its Creator. From the Epistle of Jude (Jude 9) we learn that it was a matter of no slight importance that the sepulcher of Moses should be concealed from the eyes of men, for he informs us that a dispute arose respecting it. between Michael the archangel, and Satan: and, although the cause of its concealment is not stated, still it appears to have been God’s intention to prevent superstition; for it was usual with the Jews, and it is a custom for which Christ reproves them, to kill the prophets, and then to pay reverence to their tombs. (Luke 11:47.) It would have, therefore, been probable that, in order to blot out the recollection of their ingratitude, they would have paid superstitious veneration to the holy prophet, and so have carried his corpse into the land, from which the sentence of God had excluded it. Timely precaution, then, was taken, lest in their inconsiderate zeal the people should attempt to subvert the decree of heaven.
7. And Moses was an hundred and twenty years old. Again he celebrates a special favor of God, viz., that all the senses of Moses remained unimpaired to extreme old age, in order that he might be fit for the performance of his duties: for thus it was manifested how dear to God was the welfare of the people, for which He so carefully provided. Some, indeed, though very few, are found, who are capable of public government, even to their hundredth year. Already, however, at that period, the rigor of the whole human race had so diminished that, after their seventieth year, they dragged on their life in “labor and sorrow,” as Moses himself bears witness. (Psalm 90:10.) It was, consequently a conspicuous sign of the paternal favour wherewith God regarded His people, that Moses should have been thus unusually preserved in rigor and strength. If the powers of Moses had failed him long before their entrance of the promised land, his debility would have been very inconvenient to the people: yet naturally he would not have been so long sufficient for the performance of his onerous duties. It follows, then, that when God did not suffer him to fail, He showed wonderful consideration for the people’s welfare. Mention is specially made of his eyes, by synecdoche, yet the sum of the matter is this, that he was neither imbecile nor feeble, for neither were the faculties of his mind exhausted, nor his body dried up.
It needs not that I expound at any length, what is added respecting the solemn mourning, because I have elsewhere shown, 85 that the ancients were particular in their attention to the performance of funeral rites, on account of their faith not being as yet so elevated from the measure of revelation they had received, as to be easily able to forego those external aids to it, for which there is not the same necessity under the Gospel. It is natural to man to mourn for the dead; and, besides, this mourning was justly instituted in consequence of the loss which the Church had sustained; but a ceremony is here recorded, which was brought to an end with the fulfillment of the shadows of the Law. Our dead are, therefore, now to be buried in such a manner as that our grief may be restrained by the hope of resurrection so clearly revealed by the coming of Christ.
9. And Joshua the son of Nun. It is again shown how perseveringly God provided for the welfare of the people. We have already seen how, at the request of Moses, Joshua was chosen to succeed him. Now, when he is about to take upon him his office, “the spirit of wisdom” was imparted to him, that it might be effectually manifested that he was appointed by God. He had been, indeed, previously endowed with excellent gifts, but he was now much more splendidly adorned with the ensigns of dignity, in order that his calling by God might be more certainly proved; for thus is God wont to furnish those, whom He calls, with capacity for action. The imposition of hands was also subjoined, which was no empty symbol of God’s grace. But inasmuch as I have already fully spoken of these things, I now only lightly touch upon them.
10. And there arose not a prophet. This eulogy seems to have been added, that the children of Abraham might place dependence on Moses until the manifestation of Christ; for although prophets were from time to time raised up, still it was fitting that the superiority should remain with Moses, lest they should decline in the smallest degree from the rule of the Law. It must be concluded, therefore, that Moses was here placed in a position of supremacy, so as to be superior to all the prophets; as also Malachi (Malachi 4:4) exhorts the ancient people, in order that they may continue obedient to the law of Moses. Two signs of his excellency are here recorded, namely, his familiar acquaintance with God, and the glory of his miracles. We have elsewhere seen that, by this prerogative, Moses was distinguished from the other prophets, that God spake to him face to face. For, although Jacob makes the same declaration respecting himself, still we know that God was more intimately revealed afterwards to Moses; not indeed that He beheld His glory in its perfection, but because, in comparison with others, he went beyond them all. As regards miracles, though they were wrought by others, still none of them came near to Moses in their performance.
END OF COMMENTARIES ON THE FOUR LAST BOOKS OF MOSES, IN THE FORM OF A HARMONY.
It is S.M. who has thought fit to fill out the Hebrews idiom, by adding the words, “the way of the Lord.” A. V. supplies yourselves, in its italics, as C. has done; but modern critics would not call this “following a different reading.” W. ↩
See ante, on Deuteronomy 4:26, vol. iii. p. 269, and note. ↩
So the LXX., V., Vatablus, Junius, and others. Ainsworth combines the two, and says, “shall drop, or let it drop, as being a wish, and also a promise, that his doctrine should be profitable and effectual,” etc. ↩
“L’eloquence.” — Fr. ↩
Hebr. אקרא A.V., “I will publish,” from קרא, which is stated by Taylor to signify, in its first sense,”Vocare, advocare, eonvocare, invocare, clamare, exclamare, legere.” — Concord, in voce. ↩
“Quelque chose de coupe on mutile, ou bien real compasse et confus;” anything defective or mutilated, or even ill-contrived and confused. — Fr. ↩
A. V., “all his ways are judgment.” ↩
Added from the Fr. ↩
S. M. has rendered this word possessed. A. V. agrees more nearly with C. in rendering it bought. — W. ↩
So in., which Ainsworth follows; but explains,”formed, fitted; and ordered, firm and stable, that thou mightest abide in his grace.” ↩
A noun heemantic: like our word tale, as used in Milton’s time, and account, as still used, it may either mean a narrative, or an enumeration, or a number, which is the result of an enumeration. — W. I have not ventured to translate C.’s very ambiguous word ratio. In the Fr. it is “Facon ou regle.” ↩
“La distinction du peuple eleu d’avec les autres nations, du temps qu’ils estoyent comme retranchez de l’Eglise;” the distinction of the elect people from the other nations, from the time when these last were, as it were, cut off from the Church.” — Fr. ↩
“The waste howling wilderness.” — A. V. “Un lieu vague off il n’y avoit qu’horreur, ou hurlement;” a waste place, in which there was nothing but horror or howling. — Fr. ↩
Added from Fr. ↩
“He taught them the words of his law.” Chaldee. ↩
“In summa parte orbis, qubd Terra Saneta sit in medio climate mund” — Vatablus, in Poole’s Synopsis. ↩
It may either mean red or effervescing; it is not easy to see why A. V. renders it pure W. ↩
Lat., “Rectus.” See next note. ↩
This word ישרון, yeshurun occurs only here, and in chap. 33:5, 26, and Isaiah 44:2. Commentators appear to be by no means agreed as to its derivation or meaning, — variously rendering it, the upright; the beloved; the fortunate; the abounding; the seer of God, etc. Singularly enough, C. himself, in his Commentary on Isaiah, (G. Soc. Edit. vol. iii., p. 359,) gives the following contradictory opinion: “This designation is also bestowed upon that nation by Moses in his song: for although some render it in that passage Upright, and in this passage also, the old rendering is more suitable, “My beloved is grown fat.” (Deuteronomy 32:15.) ↩
A. V., “newly.” Lat., e propinquo.” ↩
In the editions of Geneva, 1563 and 1573, C. is made to say, that this word is equivalent to “formare, vel pavere;” the former being probably a misprint for reformidare. — W. The Fr. renders the words “Redouter, ou avoir peur.” ↩
Lat., “of the God,” etc. ↩
’Voyant qu’il ne profite rien en advertissant son ami qu’il se pert;’ seeing that he does not at all profit his friend by warning him against selfdestruction. — Fr. ↩
It will be seen that C. translates both the verbs in this verse, אספה aspheh, and אכלה, acalleh, by the same word, consumam; whilst A. V. renders the first I will heap, and the latter, I will spend; in accordance with the view of Ainsworth, Mareldus, and Dathe. ↩
Professor Liebig has pointed out the dreadful fact, in singular confirmation of the expression here employed hy Moses, that “when a person is starved to death, he is, in fact, slowly burnt, as, during the process of starvation, a slow combustion of the body takes place.” ↩
Un accessoire pire que toutes los morts du monde, quand nous maigrissons et sommes minez de frayeur;” an aggravation worse than all the deaths in the world, when we are wasted away, and preyed upon by fear. Fr. ↩
Hebr., כעס, cagnas, used in the plural number in 2 Kings 23:26, and translated in A. V. provocations; margin, “Heb. angers.” ↩
See Margin, A.V. ↩
The references in the original to both these passages are obviously incorrect; it is probable, however, that Marckius in loco supplies them aright, viz., Isaiah 10:12, 13, etc. and Habakkuk 1:16, 17. ↩
“Quand il y est tousjours demeure quelque reserve du peuple eleu;” since some remains of the elect people always existed. — Fr. ↩
See ante on ver 23. ↩
So S.M. “O that.” — A. V. ↩
“Shut them up.” — A. V. ↩
The reference is here generally to Isaiah 52:3, however, to which C. probably alludes, hardly bears out the statement in the text: “Ye have sold yourselves for nought, etc. The Fr. stands thus,”Isaie, en parlant du retour de la captivite de Babylone, dit que Dieu rachetera le peuple qu’il a vendu.” ↩
diuque Inter utrumque volat dubiis Victoria pennis. Ovid, Metam. viii. 11, 12. ↩
This is the view of S.M. “Although our enemies now be our judges, this they have not from their own gods, but from our God, who has delivered us into their hands.” ↩
It is notorious that C. adopted the opinion of the Western Church in the third and fourth centuries, and did not admit St. Paul to be the author of the Epistle to the Hebrews: see the Argument to his Commentary, (C., Soc. Edit.,) p. 27:This discrepancy is noticed, ibid, p. 249, and in Mr. Owen’s additional note, p. 394. ↩
“Sans l’alleguer au long;” without adducing it in full. — Fr. ↩
“Son temps et saison determinee;” his time and determined season. — Fr. ↩
“Usura.” — Lat. “Ils ne laissent pas de se donner bon temps, suyvant le proverbe diabolique, Que le terme vaut l’argent;” they cease not to indulge themselves, according to the diabolical proverb, that the delay is worth the money. — Fr. ↩
C. evidently quoted from memory, and amalgamated the two citations. ↩
Here also the substance, and not the words of the passage, are given. ↩
LXX. Παρακληθήσεται. V. “miserebitur.” Addition in Fr., “Le mot de repentir s’accorde mieux au stile de l’Escriture;” the word repent accords best with the style of Scripture. ↩
Vide margin, A. V. ↩
This notion is attributed in Poole to “many of the Hebrews, and Malvenda.” ↩
This sentence is omitted in the Fr., but implied in the translation, “On dira.” ↩
Lat., certe; Fr., car; V., cum. ↩
I hardly understand the hypothetical form in which this sentence is put, after what C. has already said on this point on Exodus 6:8 (vol. i. p. 131,) and on Numbers 14:30 (ante, p. 81.) Perhaps he merely meant that the coincidence of the adjuration with the uplifting of the hand fixed the sense of the latter expression in this place. ↩
“C’est pour signifier un effet present et manifest, lequel n’estoit point apparu devant;” it is to signify a present and manifest effect, which had appeared before. — Fr. ↩
Jeremiah 46:l0. ↩
Addition in Fr., “pour confermer le propos avee plus grand vehemence;” to confirm the point in question with greater vehemence. ↩
מראש פרעות אויב. A.V., “From the beginning of revenges upon the enemy.” S.M.,”From the head of revenges of the enemy.” V. and Luther,” Of the bare head of the enemies.’ LXX., ”From the head of the chief enemies.” The word ראש is either the head of a body, or the beginning of an event. פרעות comes from a verb signifying to deal out retribution, and has therefore been taken by some to mean revenge, and by others to mean chiefs or rulers, whose office it is to avenge wrongs; there are, however, instances in which פרע is acknowledged to be the hair of the head. — W. ↩
It would scarcely be conceded now that נקם ever means to rejoice. — W. ↩
See especially, “On the use of the Law,” vol. iii. 196. ↩
It seems that Abarim is the general name of a range of mountains; and as Moses is said in one text to die in Mount Nebo, and in the present, (viz, Deuteronomy 34:1,) on the top of Pisgah, we must infer that Nebo was a mountain in the range of Abarim, and that Pisgah was the most elevated and commanding peak of that mountain.” — Illustr. Com. Abarim, from עבר gnabar, to pass over; translated by Taylor vada, transitus, latera. ↩
“Que nous avons veu;” as we have seen. — Fr. ft303 Numbers 27:11. “Against my commandment.” — A. V. ↩
<042711>Numbers 27:11. “Against my commandment.” — A. V. ↩
“Ceste benediction a este comme du suere,” etc.; this blessing was like sugar, etc. — Fr. ↩
Lat., “Went from Sinai.” ↩
A. V.,” Ten thousands of saints. Ainsworth: “Heb., of sanctity; meaning, spirits of sanctity; which Jonathan in his Thargum expoundeth holy angels: so we by grace in Christ are come to ten thousands of angels. Hebrews 12:22.” ↩
“Comme il vouloit presider, et estre honore de son peuple;” how He would preside, and be honored by this people. — Fr. ↩
Lat., “the peoples.” ↩
A. V., “yea.” ↩
In the Fr. this expression is thus explained, “ou les grains de ble sont cachez sous la paille;” where the grains of wheat are hidden beneath the straw. ↩
A. V., “and let not his men be few. ↩
And this also of Judah. ↩
A.V., “Mine honour.” See C. on Genesis 49., C. Soc. Edit., vol. ii. p. 447. ↩
C.’s criticism will be better understood here by giving his version in English: Ver. 8., “But to Levi he said, Thy perfections and splendours were to Thy merciful man, whom Thou didst try in Massah, and madest him to contend at the waters of Meribah.” ↩
A. V., “Holy one.” It cannot be reasonably said that this word is not used for holy, as well as for merciful. — W. ↩
Margin, A. V., “Heb. at thy nose.” ↩
A. V., “poor.” C.’s memory seems here to have failed him, and to have imported the word “priests” from the following verse. ↩
Addition in Fr.,”voire en sorte qu’ils demeurerent couchez tous plats;” that is to say, in such sort as they should remain altogether east down. ↩
A. V., “by God.” ↩
It is, nevertheless, the exposition of the great majority of commentators, who suppose that by shoulders are figuratively meant mountains, or coasts. ↩
A. V., “Separated from his brethren.” See on Genesis 49:26, C. Soc. Edit., vol. ii. p. 470. ↩
Lat., “And he saw the beginning (principium) for himself,” etc. Heb. ↩
A. V., “seated;” marg., “Heb. ceiled.” See next note. ↩
ספון. Part. pahul, ספן, to bide. S. M., (“Pro legislatore) abscondendo.” C. learnt from the notes of S. M. that Rabbi Salomon expounds this clause, “He saw that in that land the legislator, Moses, would be buried,” and that Aben-Ezra had interpreted סהוקק, great, and ספון, a house with a dome-like roof, and had then paraphrased the clause, as meaning, “there is the place suitable for the great and noble, who dwell in palaces.” — W. ↩
דבא, a word whose root does not occur in Hebrew. The LXX., and the Chaldee paraphrast, and the Syriac, are unanimous in rendering it strength; but the V. has old age, and those critics, who maintain this to be its meaning, are driven to suppose that it is formed irregularly from דאב W. ↩
This sentence is omitted in the Latin edition of 1563 though given in substance in the French of 1564. ↩
It will be seen that C. translates the verbs here in the past tense; A. V. in the future: “he shall thrust out, etc.” ↩
Lat., “Israel hath dwelt,” etc. ↩
עין. A spring, or an eye (from its weeping.) The V. with S.M. have taken it to mean an eye here. Luther, Diodati, and A.V. a fountain. C. saw in the notes of S.M. that Kimchi and the Chaldee paraphrast had taken the word literally to be the eye, and, by metaphor, the vision of Jacob. — W. ↩
See on Leviticus 21:1, vol. 2 p. 228. ↩
