Section I Introductory Address: Review
Deuteronomy 1:1—4:43
These be the words, or discourses, which Moses spake unto all Israel (1). Deuteronomy was essentially a book for the laity, as Leviticus was a manual for the priests and Levites. It is improbable that all the people would be able to hear Moses at one time, but representatives of the whole nation would be present.
On this side Jordan is literally eber, “the crossing,” or “valley” of the Jordan. It is used of both the east side (4:41, 49) and the west side (3:20, 25; 11:30). If there is no qualifying expression to indicate which side is intended, surprisingly, it may be taken to refer to the opposite side from which the author wrote. If so, the language might indicate that the opening verses were written in the land of Canaan as an editorial explanation of the place where the addresses were given. Adam Clarke suggests that the words might have been added by Joshua or Ezra.1 But some scholars regard eber Yorden as a technical description of the eastern side of the Jordan.
The Hebrew for wilderness means any uninhabited tract of land, not necessarily a desert. The plain is the Arabah (ERV), the deep valley running north and south of the Dead Sea. The identification of the other places, Paran, and Tophel, and Laban, and Hazeroth, and Dizahab, has long been a subject of discussion among scholars. Some take them to indicate the route from Horeb (2, another name for Sinai) to the border of the land of Canaan. If so, the reference to them is historical and dramatic as well as geographical. The depression of the Arabah in which the oration was given continued to the gulf of Aqaba (Red Sea; see map 3), and along its western side lay the route to Sinai, where the law was first proclaimed. Another view is that a place called Suph (1; cf. RSV) is intended, not the Red Sea (yam suph), and that the other names are of places which can no longer be identified in the valley of the Jordan opposite Beth-peor in the land of Moab (cf. 4:46).
The writer adds a pregnant comment: There are eleven days' journey from Horeb by the way of mount Seir (the eastern route skirting the borders of Edom) to Kadesh-barnea (2). Only eleven days' journey but it had taken them almost 40 years! How many condemn themselves for years to wandering in the wilderness of the second best when they could be enjoying the fullness of God's blessing of entire sanctification (cf. Heb. 4:1-11)!
Like Jacob (Genesis 49), Joshua (Joshua 24), Samuel (I Samuel 12), David (I Kings 2), and our Lord (John 14—16), Moses delivered a final exhortation at the close of his life. His leadership finished on a note of victory with the defeat of Sihon (4; cf. 2:24-37) and Og (cf. 3:1-22).
After the time and place have been carefully indicated, we are informed that Moses spake…according unto all that the Lord had given him in commandment unto them (3). The basis of his final address was the revelation already given to and through him by God, though some laws are mentioned for the first time and others already given are modified. This was essentially his final exposition of the law—for this is the meaning of declare (5).
The Hebrew for “law” is torah. “The word torah may refer to moral guidance, or to a single specific teaching, as in Prov. 1:8, ‘forsake not the teaching (torah) of thy mother.’ It is also applied to a body of religious precepts or teachings—such as form the central portion of the Book (Deut. xii-xxvi). Often it denotes the entire sum of Israel's religious doctrine and life—the Torah of Moses.”2 The law (Torah) came to be the Hebrew name for the Pentateuch (Ezra 7:6) and sometimes for the whole OT (Rom. 3:19).
B. FROM HOREB TO KADESH-BARNEA, 1:6-46
The first address is mainly a historical review of the Lord's dealings with Israel. Recent investigations have established that the structure of Deuteronomy corresponds closely to the treaties drawn up by nations of those days between a suzerain and his vassal. These usually began with a historical recital, then a list of conditions setting out the terms of the covenant. They concluded with a pronouncement of blessing on the faithful observance of the conditions and of anathemas in the event of unfaithfulness (see Introduction: Authorship). The form, therefore, of Deuteronomy is a testimony to its unity and antiquity.
1. Call to Possess the Land (1:6-8)
Revelation calls for action. Israel was not to encamp indefinitely at Horeb. The Lord called the nation to possess the land of Canaan, of which a clear description is given (7). The plain is the northern part of the Arabah, the Jordan valley, ending in the Dead Sea. The hills are the central mountain range. The vale is the Shephelah, the foothills between the central mountain range and the maritime plain. The sea side is the plain extending inward from the coast of the Mediterranean a distance of from four to 15 miles. The south is the Negeb, the dry steppe district south of Judah. The mountain range of Lebanon in the north and the Euphrates in the east are ideal natural boundaries.
Two chief nations are identified with the land. The Amorites, or Amurru, were a powerful nation which entered Palestine from the north and settled in the hill country. The Canaanites, who occupied the plain, were probably of Phoenician stock.
Verse 8 introduces a theme which recurs throughout the book. I have set the land before you: go in and possess the land which the Lord sware unto your fathers…to give unto them and to their seed. The land is a divine gift to be possessed by faith in the divine promise which holds good for all generations of believers.
2. The Appointment of Assistant Rulers (1:9-18)
Increase has its problems. Would that all our problems were of this kind! God's promise to Abraham that He would make his seed as numerous as the stars (10) in the night sky is regarded as having been fulfilled (cf. Gen. 15:5). In v. 12, Moses refers to the difficulty of governing a vast number of people. Cumbrance and burden probably refer to the general responsibilities of leadership, and strife to disputes between groups and individuals. It was not long before Moses realized that he needed assistants. The suggestion came in the first place from Jethro, his father-in-law (cf. Exod. 18:13-27), but it is possible that some such solution had already been in his mind. He adopted it and laid it before the tribes. He first stipulated the qualifications for leadership—“wise, understanding, and experienced men” (13, RSV). Moses then gave the people an opportunity of putting forward candidates acceptable to them, and he appointed them to office. A similar arrangement in the NT is described in the choosing of the first deacons (Acts 6:1-6).
The men thus appointed are described as heads (15; rashim), captains (sarim), and officers (shoterim). The officers were either those enforcing the orders of a superior, or else recorders. The word judges (16) seems to refer to the rulers in their judicial capacity. The equity and compassion which are characteristic of Deuteronomy are shown in judge righteously. Ye shall not respect persons in judgment—there was to be impartial dealing for small and great (17), the brother Israelite and the stranger (16). The leaders were not to be afraid of men, for they are God's representatives (17). Moses gave general directions (18) and was the ultimate authority (17).
There is guidance here for “Church Leadership”: (1) The responsibility of leadership, 12; (2) The sharing and qualification of leadership, 13, 15; (3) The execution of leadership, 16-17.
3. Exploration of the Land (1:19-25)
Poignant memories are summed up in v. 19. The modern conflict between Israel and the Arab nations has brought before the world the savage heat and desolation of that great and terrible wilderness—the Sinaitic peninsula. But in the days of which Moses speaks the nation was on the march to a land flowing with milk and honey. It is impossible to identify Kadeshbarnea with any certainty, but we know it was near the southern border of Canaan (see map 3).
Moses spoke with realism and faith—a good combination. He took account of the mountain and the Amorites (20), but he saw the land as a gift and a possession. He exhorted the Israelites: Go up and possess it…fear not, neither be discouraged (21). To possess (yarash) means “to enter into possession of a land or property by casting out or replacing its previous occupier, whether by conquest or by process of inheritance. It occurs no less than fifty-two times in Deuteronomy.”3
In v. 22 a new insight is given into the exploration of the land by the spies. In Num. 13:1-2, God tells Moses to send men to spy out the land. The Jewish rabbis emphasize that the Hebrew term is leka, “Send for thyself,” which they interpret as, “If thou wishest to send spies, do so.” In other words, God permits without approving. This may be an indication that the initiative came from the people, as is expressly asserted here. Moses approved (23), confident that the land would bear inspection. Notice the care to see that each tribe was represented in the investigation (23). The valley of Eshcol ( “cluster,” 24) was so named by the spies. It was near Hebron (see map 3). The spies made an excellent beginning when they returned. They showed the fruit of the land and bore testimony to its goodness (25). But they failed dismally when they lapsed into the language of unbelief.
4. The Refusal to Enter (1:26-33)
The refusal of the people to possess the land is stated forcefully and condemned in the most emphatic terms. First, they would not go up (26). Secondly, they murmured in their tents (27). They stayed at home and refused to take part in the forward march. And, finally, they charged God with hatred. And it all happened because those bringing the report magnified the difficulties and ignored the possibilities (28). For comment on the Anakims (28), cf. 2:21. True, the cities were great and walled, but God could bring the walls down—as, indeed, He did later at Jericho (Josh. 6:20). The Canaanites were stronger and greater than Israel; but as Moses rightly reminded Israel, the Lord had already delivered them from the Egyptians, a far mightier nation than any in Canaan, and He was going before them to fight for them (30).
In reply to their absurd accusation that the Lord hated them, Moses speaks tenderly of the Lord's fatherly care in the wilderness (31). He envisages God going before them like a shepherd to find the place for them to pitch their tents, giving His presence night and day (33).
5. Judgment of the Lord (1:34-40)
The Lord was as displeased with the Israelites for refusing to enter the Promised Land as He was when they made the golden calf (cf. Num. 14:11-12). Deliberate refusal to receive God's blessings can be as disastrous as positive transgression.
The irrevocable sentence was pronounced: Surely there shall not one of these men of this evil generation see that good land (35). We can jeopardize our future usefulness and happiness in a moment of unbelief and rebellion. The people disinherited themselves and held up God's purpose of blessing for an entire generation. But there were exceptions. Caleb and Joshua stood out against the movement of rebellion at the risk of their lives (Num. 14:10). Because of this God excluded them from the sentence on the rebels and promised them a place in the land. Caleb is mentioned first. What finer commendation can a man have than for it to be said that he wholly followed the Lord (36)? “Only such men as Joshua and Caleb who take God at his word, and who know that against his might no strength can prevail, are likely to follow God fully, and receive the heights, lengths, breadths, and depths of the salvation of God.”4
Caleb obtained the portion of the land he had surveyed, for his offspring (36; cf. Josh. 14:9, 12). Joshua (38) was given the privilege of leading the entire second generation into the Promised Land. What we do and are affects others besides ourselves.
There is a note of personal tragedy in this speech of Moses: Also the Lord was angry with me for your sakes (37). “Rather, because of you, on account of you. The Heb. word (galal) comes from a root meaning to roll, and signifies primarily a turn in events, a circumstance, an occasion or reason.”5
The sentence God passed on the rebellious people reminded Moses of the sentence of exclusion which he himself had incurred at Kadesh many years later. Provoked by the complaints of the people, he had behaved in such a way as to displease the Lord. His lapse is described as unbelief resulting in failure to sanctify the Lord (Num. 20:10-12); breaking faith with the Lord and not revering Him as holy (Deut. 32: 51, RSV); and a bitter spirit and rash words (Ps. 106:33, RSV). In a very real sense, this was vicarious suffering; for if Moses had not identified himself so completely with the people, he would have consented to their destruction and have become the progenitor of another nation (Exod. 32:10; Num. 14:12). “They angered him also at the waters of strife, so that it went ill with Moses for their sakes: because they provoked his spirit, so that he spake usnadvisedly with his lips” (Ps. 106:32-33).
An indication of the moral stature of Moses is seen when God committed to him the task of encouraging his young assistant, Joshua, to do the job he was forbidden to do himself. Moses' love for his heartbreaking flock was so great that he willingly undertook the task of preparing the man to lead them into the land he was forbidden to enter. No wonder he is a type of the Messiah (cf. 18:18-19; Acts 3:22-23)!
Your little ones, which ye said should be a prey…shall go in thither (39). God is always more concerned about the welfare of our children than we are. Going His way may often seem to impose hardship on them, but it is always the best way for them and us. Note the allowance God makes for those not morally accountable. The Hebrew for little ones (tappim) signifies those who walk with short steps or trip along. The small children would be incapable of arriving at a right decision on such an issue. Even the older ones up to 20 years of age would find it difficult to discern the moral issues involved when all their elders apart from Moses, Aaron, Joshua, and Caleb, were unanimous in refusing to enter the land.
The solidarity of the nation is prominent in this passage. Moses was addressing mainly the children of the chief actors in the drama he was rehearsing, but they were treated as part of the nation which passed through these experiences. Those who were above 12 and even younger children would have some personal reminiscences of the events.
6. The Price of Presumption (1:41-46)
It is characteristic of human nature, especially fallen human nature, not to appreciate a good until it is lost. This may be one of the chief pangs of hell. When the Israelites were told that they must not do the very thing they had refused to do, they immediately resolved to do it. Probably there was an awful realization that there was no alternative to 40 years' experience in “that great and terrible wilderness” (19). Anything was better than that.
There is also an element of moral carelessness in the people's attitude. “Often we attempt to make up for our moral failure to do the right thing at the right time by a lighthearted attempt to do now, at the wrong time, what we should have done before.”6
To insist on doing the right thing at the wrong time is as much rebellion as to do the wrong thing at the right time (43). In spite of the warning that the Lord is not among you (42) they presumed to go up. Presumptuously (43) is a very strong word in the original. It means “to act insolently, fiercely, wickedly.” There could be only one result. The Amorites chased them like bees do (44). In Num. 14:45 the Amalekites and the Canaanites are mentioned. This is an instance of how the terms Amorite and Canaanite were sometimes used interchangeably. The Amalekites were quick to seize an opportunity for victory (cf. 25:17-18). Hormah ( “destruction” ) was in the extreme south, probably a little to the north of Kadesh-barnea (see map 3). They were pursued almost to their camp. Small wonder they wept! But apparently it was remorse rather than repentance, for the Lord would not hearken (45).
Verse 46 is an example of Semitic idiom often employed by a writer who is either unable, or has no occasion, to speak explicitly:7 So ye abode in Kadesh many days, according unto the days that ye abode there.
In the story of Israel at Kadesh-barnea we see that “Obedience Means Progress.” The key idea is in 2:3. (1) Disobedience brought delay, 38 years of frustration and futility. Obedience would have brought them into the Promised Land in 11 days, 1:2, 26-28; (2) Disobedience always results in restless, wearisome activity with no progress, 2:1, et al.; 1:34-35; (3) Obedience results in a sense of right direction toward fulfillment, 2:3-4 (G. B. Williamson).
C. DEALINGS WITH EDOM, MOAB, AND AMMON, 2:1-23
Moses turns from the description of the rebellion at Kadeshbarnea and its tragic outcome to the period preceding the time of his oration. There is only a brief reference to the long years spent in the wilderness in the region of Kadesh-barnea and Mount Seir.
Before referring to the victories over Sihon and Og, Moses refers to the Israelites' dealings with those related to them by blood. “The friendliness shown to Edom, Moab, and Ammon as ‘brethren’ is characteristic of the patriarchal and Mosaic ages, and a testimony to the contemporary character of the narrative. In the days of the kingdom it gave place to constant wars, and prophecies of bitter wars.”8
1. Edom (2:1-8 a)
After many days (1) in Kadesh-barnea (1:46), the Israelites journeyed in a southeast direction along the border of Edom to the Red sea (Gulf of Aqabah). Mainly in this region most of the 40 years were spent with perhaps one or more visits to Kadesh-barnea (cf. 14). According to the account in Num. 20:14-21 it appears that on a journey from Kadesh-barnea Israel requested permission to pass through the territory of Edom. When this was turned down, accompanied by threats of war, they skirted the borders of Edom and journeyed south to the Red Sea (Gulf of Aqabah; Num. 21:4). From here, according to the account before us, God commanded them, Turn you northward (3), through the eastern outskirts of the land of Edom (4).
They were to annex no territory, for the Lord had given this area to the descendants of Esau, Jacob's brother (5). The Israelites were to possess only the territory assigned to them by the Lord; they were not to be merely a nation of conquerors. They were commanded to buy whatever food or drink they required (6). The Lord who gave the command had made the fulfillment of it possible by blessing them even in their wilderness journeyings (7). Even God's second best has more abiding prosperity in it than the world's best.
We passed by from…the children of Esau…from Elath, and from Ezion-gaber (8). These are either two names for the same place or two places in the same vicinity, the northern end of the Gulf of Aqabah (see map 3). The impression is given that Israel kept to the fringes of the Edomite territory. The eastern frontiers were probably not as well defined as the west and not as easily defended.
2. Moab (2:8 b -15)
The Lord gave precisely the same instructions about Moab as He had given concerning Edom.
Most of this paragraph is taken up with a historical note concerning the former inhabitants of Ar (9), the chief city. The information may have been added later as an explanatory note after Israel was settled in the land (cf. 12 b). The Hebrew for giants (11) is Rephaim (RSV). The Rephaim were a giant aboriginal race inhabiting parts of Palestine. They were given different names in different localities. Emims (10) may be derived from Emah, “terror.” The Anakims were notorious for their huge stature. Anak may mean “the long-necked [people].”
The account continues with a reference to the destruction by the Edomites of the former inhabitants of Mount Seir (12; see map 3). There are two views of the Horims. One is that they were cave dwellers, a possible meaning of horim (cf. Isa. 42:22, where the term is translated “holes” ). A more recent view is that they were the powerful and civilized Hurrians, some of whom settled in Palestine.9
Underlying these references is the philosophy of divine sovereignty in human history. Amid the movements and conflicts of nations, overruling human motives and endeavors, God works out His purpose. The battle is not always to the strong. There is another factor in history.
Now rise up, said I, and get you over the brook Zered (13). The brook Zered is a mountain torrent, a river in the time of rain, dry at other times. It flowed into the southeast end of the Dead Sea and formed the border between Edom and Moab (see map 2). In Num. 21:12 we are told that the Israelites encamped in this valley. Hence the command to rise up (13). This was a definite stage in their journey along the borders of Edom and Moab towards Ammon.
The period from leaving Kadesh-barnea (14) initially to the crossing of Zered is given as thirty and eight years. God's purpose had to wait until those who stood in the way of it were removed.
3. Ammon (2:16-23)
The Ammonites (20) occupied the territory between the rivers Arnon and Jabbok (see map 2) to the west of the territories of the Amorite kings, Sihon and Og. As the Israelites moved along the eastern frontier of Moab, perhaps crossing it near Ar, they would “approach the frontier of the sons of Ammon” (19, RSV). Hence the warning is given again not to annex any of this territory. The Ammonites were to be treated as brethren, even as Edom and Moab.
The original inhabitants of Ammon had also been “Rephaim” (RSV), whom they had called Zamzummims (20). This name “has been connected with the Arabic Zamzamah, ‘a distant and confused noise,’ and with Zizim, the sound of the jinn heard in the desert at night. The word may thus be translated ‘Whisperers,’ ‘Murmurers,’ and may denote the spirits of the giants supposed to haunt the hills and ruins of Eastern Palestine.”10
It was known that the brethren of the Israelites in Edom and Moab had all been able to drive the giants out of the territories given them by God to possess. This fact makes all the more culpable the unbelief of the Israelites concerning His power to give them the land of Canaan in spite of the Anakims (21).
Another historical note is added about the Avims (23), “Avvim, who lived in villages as far as Gaza” (RSV). These were destroyed by the Caphtorims (Philistines), who came from Caphtor (Crete). It may be that they are mentioned because they belonged to the Rephaim, or because they were dispossessed in a similar way by invaders.
These historical notes have their lessons. Verses 10-13, 20-24 suggest: (1) That the present may learn from the past. History, sacred and secular, is a powerful influence in forming the characters of the living race. (2) That the Church may learn from the world. The holy nation is here incited by pointing to what other peoples have done in pursuit of their secular ambitions. (3) That the desponding may learn from the successful. It is something to feel that we are not the first who have had to face the giants.11
D. CONQUEST OF SIHON AND OG, 2:24—3:29
Moses now turns to the recent victories over the two Amorite kings. These were epoch-making. They were not the first victories which God had given to His people (cf. Exod. 17:8-13; Num. 21:1-3). But this was the beginning of the possession of the land.
1. Sihon of Heshbon (2:24-37)
The first step in the conquest of Sihon was God's call to action buttressed by His assurance of victory. The victory and the land were Israel's by the gift of God, but they had to be possessed and fought for, mile by mile. There must be a beginning if there is going to be a winning. Morale is a vital factor in warfare. God here promises that He will begin to put the dread of thee and fear of thee upon the nations that are under the whole heaven (25). Influence is as vital in service as morale is in warfare. We must depend on God if we are rightly to affect the hearts of those whom we seek to win for Him.
Although aware of what the response was likely to be, Moses approached Sihon king of Heshbon (26) with a peaceful and reasonable proposal. We must act rightly even though we know our neighbor will do the opposite. It appears from Moses' proposition that some at least of the Edomites and Moabites had dealings with the Israelites as they travelled along the eastern frontiers (28-29). Were there merchants among them who could not miss business, or kindhearted folk who were moved by Israel's need?
As in the case of Pharaoh, so here God is said to have hardened Sihon's spirit, and made his heart obstinate, that he might deliver him (30) into the hand of Israel. In a very real sense, all the processes of life, material and moral, are attributable to the sovereignty of God. The more a man resists God and good, the more prone he will be to do so, because of the very character he is forming, and the less easy it will be to choose the right. In the case of Sihon and Pharaoh there may well have been a judicial hardening as a climax to a course of deliberate rebellion and self-will. “Whom the gods destroy they first make mad.” Thus Sihon willfully and deliberately set himself and his people on a course which brought deserved judgment upon them. The iniquity of their nation was now full (cf. Gen. 15:16) and they must give place to a people who would remove evil out of the land.
The battle was fought at Jahaz (32), which was probably on the route to Heshbon (26), the capital city. Moses attributes Israel's decisive victory to the Lord our God (33). All the cities with all the inhabitants were put to the ban (cherem), i.e., totally destroyed (34; cf. 20: 16-18). It was not done in blood lust nor wanton destruction, but lest the inhabitants should teach the Israelites “to do after all their abominations, which they have done unto their gods” (20:18). These abominations included child sacrifices, ritual prostitution, and sodomy. Nevertheless our hearts turn sick at the thought of the total destruction of men, women, and especially the little children. And they should. But sin is a sickening thing with sickening results, and sometimes death alone can arrest its course. On the Cross the Son of God himself died to put it away.
The whole of Sihon's kingdom from Aroer, which is by the brink of the river of Arnon…even unto Gilead (36) was subdued. This gave Israel a possession on the frontier of Ammon, which they left inviolate, and up to the river Jabbok (37), the frontier of Og, to whom the story now turns.
2. Og of Bashan (3:1-29)
Chapter 3 deals first with the defeat of Og, then with the distribution of his territory. It closes with Moses' request of God to enter the land west of the Jordan, now that the possession of it on the eastern side had begun.
a. The conquest (3:1-11). Og was the king of Bashan, the kingdom to the north of Sihon's territory. It lay above the river Jabbok, with Edrei (1) and Astaroth (1:4) as its capitals. The king was a formidable contestant in himself, being of the giant Rephaim race. But Israel, stimulated by the victory over Sihon (2) and encouraged by God, invaded his territory and completely defeated him at Edrei. These two victories made a deep impression on the national consciousness of Israel and were celebrated in speech (Neh. 9:22) and song (Ps. 135:11; 136:19-20). To live in the past is a sign of decadence, but to learn lessons from the past and take heart is the secret of future success.
This account is part of Moses' oration. There is a point in his rehearsing the number of cities and their strong defenses: fenced with high walls, gates, and bars (5). The spies had dwelt on the impossibility of possessing Canaan because of its “cities…great and walled up to heaven” and the giant Anakim (1:28). But trusting in God, Israel had been able to capture the strongly fortified cities of Bashan and overthrow its giant king.
Again the cities (5-6) were put to the ban (cherem). It seems terrible to us to slay the people and save the cattle (7). But man, so much higher than the beasts, can sink so much lower that his presence constitutes a threat in a way that the presence of beasts cannot.
Verse 8 gives the extent of the territorial accessions: from the river of Arnon, the border of Moab (see map 2), right up to mount Hermon in the north, a distance of about 120 miles. On the eastern border was the territory of Ammon. So Moses was permitted to see Israel in possession of a considerable territory before his death. Note the names for mount Hermon (9), visible from most parts of the Promised Land. They are all descriptive: Hermon, “the lofty peak”; Sirion and Senir (RSV), the glittering “breastplate” of ice. Verse 10 enumerates the gains in terms of cities: “cities of the tableland” (RSV), and Edrei, the royal city, and “Salecah” (RSV) in the extreme west. Gilead and Bashan were excellent pasturelands.
Scholars are divided as to whether v. 11 refers to Og's iron bedstead or stone coffin (sarcophagus). There are many such stone coffins in the area made of black basalt which contains a percentage of iron. The measurements are thirteen and a half feet by six feet.12 Apparently the Ammonites took possession of it and preserved it in their capital city, Rabbah or Rabbath.
b. The distribution of the territory (3:12-22). Apparently the best portion of the territory, though not the largest, was that between the rivers Arnon and Jabbok. This was given to the two tribes, Reuben and Gad (12, 16). The rest of the territory northward was given to the half tribe of Manasseh (13). Jair (14), a descendent of Manasseh, took possession of the northern part of Og's territory, called Argob, up to the frontiers of the Geshuri and Maachathi, two Syrian tribes located east of Hermon. He called the villages after his name, “Havoth-jair” (RSV), i.e., “tent villages” of Jair. Machir (15) was either the name of the leader of the Manassites who possessed Gilead or another name for the tribe of Manasseh. The eastern border of the two and a half tribes was the east side of the Jordan valley from Chinnereth (17, a city after which the Sea of Chinnereth, the Sea of Galilee, was called) to the salt sea (Dead Sea).
Moses reminded the two and a half tribes of their obligation. They were to help the other tribes possess their inheritance west of Jordan even as the others had enabled them to possess the territory on the east. Their wives and children and cattle might remain in their recently acquired territory but the men would not be discharged from their obligation until their brethren had entered into their inheritance (18-20).
With this glance across the Jordan, Moses encouraged Joshua to take courage for the future from the triumphs of the past (21-22).
These verses reveal “Qualities of a Leader”: (1) Recognition of past divine triumphs, 21 a; (2) Realization of future assistance, 21 b; (3) Refusal to fear, 22.
c. The request of Moses (3:23-29). Moses makes no disguise of his deep longing to enter the Promised Land. The places where he refers to this unfulfilled desire are among the saddest portions of Deuteronomy. The tragedy is that the one who desired most to enter the land found it bolted against him by an uncharacteristic attitude of unbelief and an act of folly on his part. We may not understand this fully, but it clearly illustrates the principle that much light implies great responsibility.
I pray thee, let me go over, and see (25). But the Lord was wroth with me for your sakes (26). Some scholars interpret this as purely vicarious suffering by Moses on behalf of the people. Admittedly, for your sakes is a different Hebrew expression from that in 1:37. It seems, however, that a similar thought is present here as there, and in both places the translation in the RSV is “on your account.”
The Lord…would not hear me: and the Lord said unto me, Let it suffice thee; speak no more unto me of this matter. Some take Let it suffice thee to mean simply, “That's enough”; others, that Moses had had privileges enough without asking for more.
Yet half of his prayer was answered. He was permitted to see the land from Pisgah's height, nearby, even though he was not allowed to enter. And he was assured that the enterprise he had begun would be carried through to a successful conclusion by Joshua (28).
This was not the last that Moses was to see of the land. “For on some ‘goodly mountain’ (Hermon or Lebanon) Moses and Elias stood with the Saviour of the world, and spake of a far more glorious conquest than Joshua's, even ‘His exodus, which he should fulfil at Jerusalem’ (Luke 9:31).”13
This paragraph gives us an insight into the “Principles of Prayer”: (1) Prayer should begin with praise, 24; (2) Prayer should include aspiration, 25; (3) Prayer calls for believing and obedient conduct, 26; (4) Prayer is answered in God's way, 27-28.
E. CLOSING EXHORTATION, 4:1-40
Having brought the historical review to an end, Moses launched into his final exhortation. This is also interwoven with appeals to the past experiences of the nation to give point to the substance of his appeal.
1. The Privilege of Israel's Revelation (4:1-8)
Moses commences his peroration by enlarging upon the great privilege of being recipients of divine revelation. This revelation calls for a practical response. It must be heeded and translated into active obedience: hearken…do (1). Some scholars make no distinction between statutes (chuqqim) and judgments (mishpatim). Others regard statutes as revelations of abiding validity (choq is “engraved or inscribed” ) and sanctioned by God and conscience. By contrast, judgments are rules of law “laid down by authority or settled by ancient custom, by which a judge (mishpat) must be guided in certain specific cases.”14 According to the Jewish tradition statutes are the precepts, the reason for the observance of which is withheld in order to inculcate discipline and obedience—e.g., the dietary laws (cf. 14: 3-20),15 Commandments (2, mitswoth) is a more general term for anything which is commanded by God, including such temporary regulations as the gathering of the manna (Exod. 16:28).
To the law of God nothing must be added or taken away (2). The main idea is that there must be no attempt to pervert the plain meaning of the divinely given law. Jesus charged the Pharisees with “making the word of God of none effect through…[their] tradition” (Mark 7:13). The law must be reverently preserved as well as observed. To keep God's word means life; to disobey means death, as witness the fate of those who died as a result of succumbing to the seductions of the Moabitesses in worshipping Baal-peor (3; cf. Num. 25:1-9). Baal means “Lord.” Among the nations in and around Canaan each place had its local god or baal. Immorality was a regular part of Baal worship and child sacrifices were also offered. Baal-peor was the name of the local deity of Peor. Beth-peor (3:29; “house of Peor” ) may well have been the site of his temple. Cleave (4) is a word of strong allegiance (cf. Acts 11:23).
Note teach (1) and taught (5). Deuteronomy is an exposition of laws already given, with the new conditions in the Promised Land especially in mind. The keeping of these laws would impress the surrounding nations with the wisdom and understanding of Israel (6). In like manner, when the Christian Church takes God's Word to heart, the world respects her. The paragraph closes with an exclamation concerning the greatness of Israel. There was no other contemporary nation, not even the greatest, whose god was as near as the Lord was to Israel, near enough to hear her every call (7). There was no other nation which was exalted by such a righteous…law (8).
2. The Peril of Idolatry (4:9-31)
The great privilege of God's revelation to Israel carried with it a special responsibility.
a. The original revelation must be remembered (4:9-14). Time and again in Deuteronomy, Moses takes the nation back to the historic revelation of God at Horeb (10). The main facts must be kept firmly in mind and taught to successive generations. Moses especially emphasized the absence of any form that could give ground for idolatry. A voice (12) was heard giving commandments and making a covenant, appealing to conscience and faith, but there was no similitude (“form,” RSV). Moses was delegated to teach them statutes and judgments (14), thereby validating divine revelation through a chosen man. But nothing that could be seen or touched was in evidence at Horeb, lest worship should be materialized and sensualized, and matter exalted over spirit. As with Israel, so with Christians; we must constantly refer to the original revelation given in the NT and keep our faith and service pure.
b. The revelation must not be corrupted with idolatry (4:15-24). The various forms of idolatry are given in this paragraph. Israel was warned against graven (pesel, “carved” ) images (16). No figure or form was to be copied. The likeness of male or female may well refer to the adulation of sex in heathen worship in which the sex organs were worshipped with obscene rites. Beasts, birds, insects, reptiles, and fish (17-18) were all worshipped by the Egyptians and other nations.
Verse 19 prohibited Israel from worshipping sun, moon, or stars, which were the dominant influence in Babylonian religion. What is the meaning of which the Lord thy God hath divided unto all nations under the whole heaven (19)? Some take it to mean that this form of worship was permitted by God to nations without the special revelation of Israel as a stage toward the true worship (cf. Acts 14:16-17; 17:30). But for Israel to stoop to this was apostasy and repudiation of the covenant of the Lord (23), who had delivered them. Out of the iron furnace (20) is a metaphor for severe affliction (cf. I Kings 8:51; Isa. 48:10; Jer. 11:4). A consuming fire…a jealous God (24) indicates the burning love which will tolerate no rival and destroys everything contrary to His nature. Moses' reference to the Lord's anger towards him, excluding him from the Promised Land, is repeated here (21-22). The purpose was probably to warn the people that the Lord is not to be trifled with and also to urge them not to forget the covenant when Moses would no longer be with them to enforce its claims.
c. God will deal with Israel on the basis of the revelation (4:25-31). If the Israelites despise the unique revelation given by God, He will chastise them; but if they repent and turn to Him again on the terms of the covenant, He will restore them.
Moses foresaw the peril of forgetfulness in the coming generations. The further we are in years from the days of the original covenant, the greater the danger of spiritual decay unless the covenant is renewed in fresh accessions of the Spirit. The word translated remained long (25) contains the idea of growing old and stale. This can happen even to those who have entered into the Canaan of heart holiness. Because the covenant is not renewed, their experience becomes stale and they lose their inheritance.
Moses called heaven and earth to witness (26). This was either an appeal to celestial and human witnesses or a poetic appeal to the fixed phenomena of nature outlasting the passing generations of men. He affirms that judgment will inevitably attend any form of idolatry transgressing the covenant. A complete reversal of the blessings of faithful observance will take place: they will be dispossessed of the promised land, and their number will be reduced (27). Again they will be in bondage to idolatrous nations and in serving them will eventually be in bondage to their gods, man-made, blind, dumb, and inanimate.
But the God who is a consuming fire is also a merciful God who does not forget the covenant (31). In exile He will hear the cry of His people if they seek him with all their heart and with all their soul (29) and turn to Him and obey his voice (30).
Moses, as “the first and greatest of the long succession of prophets,”16 was given such insight into the character of God and the frailty of His people that he was able to lay down the pattern of future events. Beside this, like others of the prophets, he was no doubt given ecstatic visions of the future.
3. The Privilege of Being God's Elect (4:32-40)
The speech of Moses moves to a magnificent climax in this paragraph.
a. A unique privilege (4:32-34). These verses are in the form of rhetorical questions. Moses invites time (32 a) and space (32 b), history and geography, to furnish any other instance of a nation having the experience of God which Israel had. No other nation had heard God speaking out of the midst of the fire and survived (33). No other god had taken for himself a nation from the grip of a greater nation (34). Temptations are trials. Some refer these to Pharaoh, others to God's testings of Israel. Probably both are right. Signs are significant acts; wonders, supernatural deeds; war, the overthrow of the Egyptian army in the Red Sea. A mighty hand, and…a stretched out arm represent divine omnipotence in action. Great terrors are terrifying demonstrations of divine power. The redemption of Israel was grounded in history, and ours is too, in the Cross and the Resurrection. Of three Greek words used for NT miracles, two are found here in the LXX: semeion, “sign,” and teras, “wonder.” The third is dynamis, “work of power” (cf. Heb. 2:4).
b. The purpose of the privilege (4:35-38). God chose the Israelites because he loved their fathers (37). It was an election based on divine love and grace; but the response of faith and obedience on the part of the patriarchs, notably Abraham, must not be overlooked. Because of His love, God gave Israel not only His power but His presence (cf. Exod. 33:14-15). And His purpose in it all was, first, that they might know that the Lord he is God; there is none else beside him (35). Davies declares that 35 and 39 “teach absolute monotheism.”17 Second, that they might be taught (“disciplined,” RSV) in His ways (36); and, third, that He might settle them in the Promised Land (37-38).
c. The obligation of the privilege (4: 39-40). The Israelites were not the pampered favorites of an indulgent God. Such a conception is an insult to the divine character. To be His elect people carried with it the obligation to honor Him in the heart as supreme (39) and to keep…his statutes (40). Only thus could it go well with them. There is a vital truth in the Deuteronomic emphasis. Ultimately we are preserved by keeping God's Word or broken by breaking it.
F. APPOINTMENT OF CITIES OF REFUGE, 4:41-43
It appears that this action was taken between the first and second discourses. The account could be by the hand of Moses or in the nature of an editorial note. For the purpose of a city of refuge see comments on 19:13, also on Num. 35:6, 11-34.
It is impossible to locate these three cities with certainty. Bezer (43) is thought to have been due east from the place of the oration in the territory of Reuben. Ramoth is identified with Ramoth-gilead. This, however, was in the territory of Manasseh rather than of Gad. Golan is thought to have been in the north of Manasseh's territory. All the cities would be chosen so as to be readily accessible to the majority of the population in order that the unintentional killer would have an opportunity of declaring his innocence. On this side Jordan (41) here clearly refers to the eastern bank (cf. comments on 1:1).