Numbers · Chapter 12

V. 1. Miriam-Miriam seems to be first named, because she was the first mover of the sedition; wherefore she is more eminently punished. The Ethiopian-Either,

1. Zipporah, who is here called an Ethiopian, in the Hebrew a Cushite, because she was a Midianite: the word Cush being generally used in scripture, not for Ethiopia properly so called below Egypt, but for Arabia. If she be meant, probably they did not quarrel with him for marrying her, because that was done long since, but for being swayed by her and her relations, by whom they might think he was persuaded to chose seventy rulers, by which co-partnership in government they thought their authority and reputation diminished. And because they durst not accuse God, they charge Moses, his instrument, as the manner of men is. Or,

Verse 1. Miriam and Aaron spake against Moses] It appears that jealousy of the power and influence of Moses was the real cause of their complaint though his having married an Ethiopian woman-tyvkh hvah haishshah haccushith-THAT WOMAN, the Cushite, probably meaning Zipporah, who was an Arab born in the land of Midian-was the ostensible cause.

Verse 1. And Miriam — Miriam seems to be first named, because she was the first mover of the sedition; wherefore she is more eminently punished. The Ethiopian — Either, 1st, Zipporah, who is here called an Ethiopian, in the Hebrew, a Cushite, because she was a Midianite: the word Cush being generally used in Scripture, not for Ethiopia, properly so called, above Egypt, but for Arabia. If she be meant, probably they did not quarrel with him for marrying her, because that was done long since, but for being swayed by her and her relations, by whom they might think he was persuaded to choose seventy rulers; by which copartnership in government they thought their authority and reputation diminished. And because they durst not accuse God, they charge Moses, his instrument, as the manner of men is. Or, 2d, Some other woman whom he married, either while Zipporah lived, or rather because she was now dead, though that, as many other things, be not recorded. For, as the quarrel seems to have been about marrying a stranger, it is probable it was a flesh occasion about which they contended. And it was lawful for him as well as any other to marry an Ethiopian or Arabian woman, provided she were a sincere proselyte.

Verse 1. The Ethiopian woman; that is, the Cushite, the daughter of Jethro. Miriam and Aaron seem to have been offended because Moses had honourably received her as his wife. But Josephus affirms, that while Moses enjoyed the confidence of Pharaoh, he had carried his victorious arms into Ethiopia, and married a princess of that nation. There is however little probability that this was the woman. Some rabbins have contended, that this woman was called Tharba. If so, she must have lived in Egypt till the emancipation, and could not now be less than seventy years of age.

THE SEDITION OF MIRIAM, 1-8.

Up to this time the various insurrections against Moses had arisen in consequence of the peculiar hardships of the journey through the wilderness. In these outbreaks against his authority he had been sustained by the loyalty and sympathy of his own kindred. But now he is to find disloyalty and bitter envy in his own father’s family. In this respect Moses resembled his great antitype, the Prophet like unto himself, who went forth to proclaim the “kingdom of God” as at hand, notwithstanding the unbelief of his brethren. Mark 3:21; John 7:5, note. A high spiritual vocation is always an enigma to worldly minds; and, if accompanied by authority, awakens envy and resistance on the part of equals in worldly circumstances.

1. Miriam — The only sister of Moses named in history, (Numbers 26:59,) was older by several years. Exodus 2:4. From the fact that she is mentioned first, and from the feminine form of the Hebrew verb, we infer that she was the prime mover in this revolt, and that Aaron, with characteristic pliancy and instability, as in the affair of the golden calf, (Exodus 32,) yielded to his misjudging sister, and was led into an act which tarnishes his fair name. Though Jehovah was angry with both of them, punishment fell only on Miriam. Because of the Ethiopian woman — The subsequent account shows that the marriage with the “Cushite woman” (R.V.) was rather the occasion, and the envy rankling in Miriam’s heart was the real cause, of her collision with her brother. Some have supposed that Zipporah, the Midianite wife of Moses, was the occasion of offence. Against this are: (1.) The fact that this marriage had occurred forty years before, while Moses was a fugitive from Pharaoh’s wrath. There had been ample time for chagrin to be allayed. (2.) The Midianites are called Cushites, or Ethiopians, only once, and that at least seven centuries after the exode. Habakkuk 3:7. A more reasonable theory is that Zipporah had died and Moses had married a Cushite wife from Arabia, or from the foreigners who had come out of Egypt with Israel. This was lawful, since only intermarriage with the Canaanites was forbidden. Exodus 34:16. Yet Ezra (Ezra 9:1) includes the Amorites, Moabites, and Egyptians among the nations with whom it was unlawful for Israelites to intermarry. Edersheim says: “For the first time we here encounter that pride of Israel after the flesh, and contempt for other nations, which often appeared throughout their after history, and in proportion as they have misunderstood the spiritual meaning of their calling.” The suggestion of Ewald, that the Cushite was a concubine taken while the first wife was still living, is an irreverent reflection upon the purity of the great lawgiver. The lofty character of Moses is a sufficient answer to such an assertion.

2. some other woman, whom he married either whilst Zipporah lived, or rather because she was now dead, though that, as many other things, be not recorded. For, as the quarrel seems to be about his marrying a stranger, it is probable it was a fresh occasion about which they contended. And it was lawful for him as well as any other to marry an Ethiopian or Arabian woman, provided she were, a sincere proselyte. V. 2. By us-Are not we prophets as well as he? so Aaron was made, Exodus 4:15,16, and so Miriam is called, Exodus 15:20. And Moses hath debased and mixed the holy seed, which we have not done. Why then should he take all power to himself, and make rulers as he pleaseth, without consulting us. The Lord heard-Observed their words and carriage to Moses.

Verse 2. Hath the Lord indeed spoken only by Moses?] It is certain that both Aaron and Miriam had received a portion of the prophetic spirit, (see Exodus 4:15, and Exodus 15:20), and therefore they thought they might have a share in the government; for though there was no kind of gain attached to this government, and no honour but such as came from God, yet the love of power is natural to the human mind; and in many instances men will sacrifice even honour, pleasure, and profit to the lust of power.

Verse 2. By us — Are not we prophets as well as he? So Aaron was made, (Exodus 4:15, 16,) and so Miriam is called, Exodus 15:20. And Moses hath debased and mixed the holy seed, which we have not done. Why then should he take all power to himself, and make rulers as he pleaseth, without consulting us? The Lord heard — Observed their words and carriage to Moses.

2. Only by Moses — Jealousy of Moses, as the exclusive organ of divine revelation, is the inspiration of this unpleasant affair. Human forbearance is put to a severe test when those who were once our equals or inferiors are promoted to dignities and honours far above us. This truthfulness to fallen human nature is no small confirmation of the reality of this account. And the Lord heard — The fact here mentioned prepares the way for the divine judgment which follows.

V. 3. Meek-This is added as the reason why Moses took no notice of their reproach, and why God did so severely plead his cause. Thus was he fitted for the work he was called to, which required all the meekness he had. And this is often more tried by the unkindness of our friends, than by the malice of our enemies. Probably this commendation was added, as some other clauses were, by some succeeding prophet. How was Moses so meek, when we often read of his anger? But this only proves, that the law made nothing perfect.

Verse 3. Now the man Moses was very meek] How could Moses, who certainly was as humble and modest as he was meek, write this encomium upon himself? I think the word is not rightly understood; wn[ anav, which we translate meek, comes from hn[ anah, to act upon, to humble, depress, afflict, and is translated so in many places in the Old Testament; and in this sense it should be understood here: “Now this man Moses was depressed or afflicted more than any man hmdah haadamah, of that land.” And why was he so? Because of the great burden he had to bear in the care and government of this people, and because of their ingratitude and rebellion both against God and himself: of this depression and affliction, see the fullest proof in the preceding chapter. The very power they envied was oppressive to its possessor, and was more than either of their shoulders could sustain.

Verse 3. The man Moses was very meek — This is added as the reason why Moses took no notice of their reproach, and why God did so severely plead his cause. Thus was he fitted for the work he was called to, which required all the meekness he had. And this is often more tried by the unkindness of our friends, than by the malice of our enemies. This meekness of Moses was a great aggravation of the sin or his brother and sister, namely, that they should behave so insolently toward a man of his mild and sweet disposition, who was farthest of all men living from abusing his power, slighting any person beneath him, or harbouring the least malice for personal affronts. Probably this commendation was added, as some other clauses were, by some succeeding prophet. But how was Moses so meek, when we often read of his anger? Not to mention that the law made nothing perfect, (Hebrews 7:19,) it must be observed, true meekness does not exclude every kind of anger, but only such as is sinful. We may and ought to be angry when God is dishonoured, in the sense in which Christ was when he looked round about upon the people with anger, grieved for the hardness of their hearts, Mark 3:5. Displeasure or grief on account of the sin or folly of another, if it be not immoderate, and imply no resentment, is not sinful, but commendable, Ephesians 4:26.

Ver. 3. Now the man. Moses, obliged here to speak in his own praise, does it in the third person, as St. John, who says, “that disciple whom Jesus loved.”

3. Moses was very meek — This statement is not a gratuitous piece of self-praise, but is necessary in order to bring out the reason why Moses not only refused to vindicate himself, but also to invoke the vengeance of Jehovah on account of the injury which had been done to him. “For this is the idea of the eulogium of his meekness, that he had swallowed the injury in silence, since he had imposed a law of patience upon himself because of his meekness.” — Calvin. This verse furnishes no argument against the Mosaic authorship of this book, as, when properly viewed, it contains no offensive egotism or vain-glorying. “As he praises himself without pride, so he will blame himself elsewhere with humility.” Numbers 20:12, note. We must call to mind the great candour of Moses in recording his own faults — his killing the Egyptian, (Exodus 2:12,) his backwardness to obey God’s call, his neglect to circumcise his child, (Exodus 4:10-26,) and the sin which excluded him from Canaan. We must bear in mind that Moses was repelling the foul and envious slander that he was fond of power and ambitious to usurp it. Since the inner life is inscrutable, and its external manifestations may be counterfeited, all the graces inwrought by the Sanctifier are to be declared by the lips while they are confirmed by the life. That the meekness of Moses was only of grace and not of nature is plainly seen from the sudden vengeance wreaked on the Egyptian oppressor. Exodus 2:12. “Should we admit that in a very few instances a word or even a verse or paragraph may have been inserted by some duly authorized person for the sake of explanation or of greater completeness of record, we would not invalidate the Mosaic authorship of the Pentateuch.” — Dr. W.H. Green.

V. 4. Suddenly-To stifle the beginnings of the sedition, that this example might not spread amongst the people. Come out-Out of your private dwellings, that you may know my pleasure and your own doom.

Verse 4. And the Lord spake suddenly] The sudden interference of God in this business shows at once the importance of the case and his displeasure.

Verses 4, 5. The Lord spake suddenly — To stifle the beginnings of the sedition, that this example might not spread among the people, the divine voice from the Shechinah interrupts them in the midst of their dispute, commanding Aaron and his sister to come forth from their tents to meet Moses immediately at the door of the tabernacle, which they did accordingly. The Lord stood in the door — While they stood without, Aaron not being admitted into the tabernacle as he used to be, a sign of God’s displeasure.

4. Spake suddenly — Indicating the fierceness of Jehovah’s displeasure. Come out — Of the camp. Unto the tabernacle — Not into the tabernacle, into which only the priests were permitted to enter. Hence Knobel’s fancied discrepancy between the so-called Elohist writer in chap. 18:7, and the Jehovist here and in Exodus 33:11, vanishes.

V. 5. In the door-While they stood without, not being admitted into the tabernacle, as Aaron used to be; a sign of God’s displeasure.

Verses 4, 5. The Lord spake suddenly — To stifle the beginnings of the sedition, that this example might not spread among the people, the divine voice from the Shechinah interrupts them in the midst of their dispute, commanding Aaron and his sister to come forth from their tents to meet Moses immediately at the door of the tabernacle, which they did accordingly. The Lord stood in the door — While they stood without, Aaron not being admitted into the tabernacle as he used to be, a sign of God’s displeasure.

5. The Lord came down — This anthropomorphic expression is to be understood as an accommodation of the mystery of divine revelation to human comprehension. Though God is everywhere, there is a sense in which he draws near to man when he wishes to communicate with him. They both came forth — Leaving the company of Moses, the two placed themselves near the door of the tabernacle, in the doorway of which the cloud stood, to hear what the Lord had to say to them.

V. 6. Among you-if you be prophets, yet know there is a difference among prophets, nor do I put equal honour upon all of them.

Verse 6. If there be a prophet] We see here the different ways in which God usually made himself known to the prophets, viz., by visions-emblematic appearances, and by dreams, in which the future was announced by dark speeches, tdyjb bechidoth, by enigmas or figurative representations, Numbers 12:8. But to Moses God had communicated himself in a different way-he spoke to him face to face, apparently, showing him his glory: not in dark or enigmatical speeches; this could not be admitted in the case in which Moses was engaged, for he was to receive laws by Divine inspiration, the precepts and expressions of which must all be ad captum vulgi, within the reach of the meanest capacity. As Moses, therefore, was chosen of God to be the lawgiver, so was he chosen to see these laws duly enforced for the benefit of the people among whom he presided.

Verse 6. If there be a prophet among you — If you be prophets, yet know there is a difference among prophets, nor do I put equal honour upon all of them. In a vision — To some the divine will was communicated by strong impressions upon their imaginations when they were awake, but in an ecstasy, as in the case of Abraham, Genesis 15:1; Jacob, Genesis 46:2; and Daniel 8:1-15. Now we never read that Moses was thus entranced in a prophetic vision. He was always awake and quite master of himself when conversing with God, or receiving communications from him. In a dream — To others God revealed his mind by figurative, enigmatical representations, exhibited to them in their sleep; as the ladder which was represented to Jacob in a dream, Genesis 28:12.

6. If there be a prophet — The literal rendering of this verse is, If there be a prophet of Jehovah to you, (that is, if ye have one,) I reveal myself to him in a vision, I speak to him in a dream. Vision… dream — Trances and dreams are here represented as modes of divine communication, but they do not bestow the highest dignity upon the man who is the organ of the revelation.

V. 7. In all my house-That is, whom I have set over all my house, my church and people, and therefore over you; and who hath discharged his office faithfully, and not partially as you falsely accuse him.

Verse 7. Moses-is faithful] נאמן neeman, a prefect or superintendent. So Samuel is termed, 1 Samuel 2:35; 3:20; David is so called, 1 Samuel 18:27, Neeman, and son-in-law of the king. Job 12:20, speaks of the Neemanim as a name of dignity. It seems also to have been a title of respect given to ambassadors, Proverbs 13:17; 25:13. Calmet well observes that the word fidelity is often used for an employ, office, or dignity, and refers to 1 Chronicles 9:22, 26, 31; 2 Chronicles 31:12, 15; 34:12, &c. Moses was a faithful, well-tried servant in the house of God, and therefore he uses him as a familiar, and puts confidence in him.

Verse 7. My servant Moses is not so — He is a prophet of a higher rank. To him I impart my mind in a far more noble and clear way. Who is faithful in all my house — God had set him over all Israel, who were his house, his family, or chosen people, and Moses was faithful in the performance of the trust reposed in him, executing all the divine commands, and doing nothing partially or of himself, as he was now falsely accused. In this he was an eminent type of Christ, as the apostle represents him, Hebrews 3:1-6.

7. Faithful — Tried, trustworthy, and true. The root of the Hebrew word is amen. See Revelation 3:14. All mine house — The whole family of Israel, to the government of which Moses had been called. Baumgarten says that the house is “primarily his dwelling, the holy tent.” But in this sense the word “all” would be out of place. Moreover, after the consecration of Aaron the tabernacle was in his charge. The duties of Moses were not sacerdotal, but administrative and prophetic. Not to the priests, but to Moses and succeeding prophets, was intrusted the office of receiving and declaring the holy oracles which make wise unto salvation. The aggregate of believers in Jesus Christ are now God’s house. Hebrews 3:6.

V. 8. Mouth to mouth-That is, distinctly, by an articulate voice; immediately, not by an interpreter, nor by shadows and representations in his fancy, as it is in visions and dreams; and familiarly. Apparently-Plainly and certainly. Dark speeches-Not in parables, similitudes, dark resemblances; as by shewing a boiling pot, an almond tree, &c. to Jeremiah, a chariot with wheels, &c. to Ezekiel. The similitude-Not the face or essence of God, which no man can see and live, Exodus 33:20, but some singular manifestation of his glorious presence, as Exodus 33:11,20. Yea the Son of God appeared to him in an human shape, which he took up for a time, that he might give him a foretaste of his future incarnation. My servant-Who is so in such an eminent and extraordinary manner.

Verse 8. Mouth to mouth — In a most familiar manner, distinctly, and by an articulate voice, as one friend discourses with another, or as two friends in conversation hear and answer each other by turns. Moses enjoyed this singular privilege, which was vouchsafed to no other of the prophets, that God spoke to him immediately, and not by an interpreter, nor by shadows, and representations in his fancy, as in visions and dreams, but by a distinct audible voice, and that upon all occasions. Even apparently — Plainly and certainly, so that there was no difficulty to apprehend his meaning. Not in dark speeches — Not in parables, similitudes, dark resemblances; as by showing a boiling pot and an almond-tree to Jeremiah; a basket of summer fruits to Amos; a chariot with wheels, &c., to Ezekiel. The similitude — Not the face or essence of God, which no man can see and live, (Exodus 33:20,) but some singular manifestation of his glorious presence, as that spoken of Exodus 33:11-23. Yea, the Son of God, it seems, appeared to him in a human shape, which he assumed for a time, that he might give Moses a fore-token of his future incarnation. Against my servant Moses — Who is such in so eminent and extraordinary a manner and degree.

Ver. 8. With him will I speak mouth to mouth. See on Exodus 33:11, 23.

8. Mouth to mouth — This answers to “face to face” in Exodus 33:11. It implies great familiarity, mutual confidence and esteem, and the absence of all reserve and of any mediation. Such converse is the highest honour bestowed upon man under the Old Testament dispensation. Even apparently — Literally, as an appearance; R.V., “manifestly,” implying sight, or rather insight, and not vision. Dreams and visions are subjective; that is, pertain to the internal perception of the thinking subject. But the phenomena attending the intercourse of Jehovah with Moses were not intuitive and subjective, but objective; that is, outward and addressing the senses. Dark speeches — Riddles or enigmas. These are a test to one on probation who is not yet approved and taken into the fullest confidence. Moses was treated as a man of fixed fidelity who had passed his probation. The similitude of the Lord — The form of Jehovah was not the essential nature of God, his unveiled glory, for this no mortal can see, (Exodus 33:18-20,) “but some unmistakable evidence of his glorious presence.” — Bible Commentary. He talked with Moses without figure, addressing his spiritual intuitions in such a way as to give to him infallible certainty. Thus since the day of Pentecost, Jesus manifests himself to the advanced believer. John 14:21, note. “Here (in verses 2-8) we have, as it were, in epitome, the mystery of the prophetic gift and function; and in such a manner as to exhibit the strength of this credential most impressively. It is the voice of Jehovah, jealous of his own honour and of the honour of his servants, at once describing and defending the prophetic law of revelation.” — W.B. Pope. Were ye not afraid — In view of the extraordinary honour which God had bestowed upon Moses they should have restrained all murmuring and envious words.

V. 9. He departed-From the door of the tabernacle, in token of his great displeasure, not waiting for their answer. The removal of God’s presence from us, is the saddest token of his displeasure. And he never departs, till we by our sin and folly drive him from us.

Verse 9. He departed — From the door of the tabernacle, in token of his great displeasure; not waiting for their answer. The removal of God’s presence from us is the saddest token of his displeasure. And he never departs till we, by our sin and folly, drive him from us.

MIRIAM PUNISHED, 9-15.

9. He departed — Phraseology importing that the Lord withdrew all manifestation of his presence when the cloud departed from the tabernacle.

V. 10. From the tabernacle-Not from the whole tabernacle, but from that part, whither it was come, to that part which was directly over the mercy-seat, where it constantly abode. Leprous-She, and not Aaron, either because she was chief in the transgression or because God would not have his worship interrupted or dishonoured, which it must have been if Aaron had been leprous. White-This kind of leprosy was the most virulent and incurable of all. It is true, when the leprosy began in a particular part, and thence spread itself over all the flesh by degrees, and at last made it all white, that was an evidence of the cure of the leprosy, Leviticus 13:12,13. But it was otherwise when one was suddenly smitten with this universal whiteness.

Verse 10. Miriam became leprous] It is likely Miriam was chief in this mutiny; and it is probable that it was on this ground she is mentioned first, (see Numbers 12:1,) and punished here, while Aaron is spared. Had he been smitten with the leprosy, his sacred character must have greatly suffered, and perhaps the priesthood itself have fallen into contempt. How many priests and preachers who deserved to be exposed to reproach and infamy, have been spared for the sake of the holy character they bore, that the ministry might not be blamed! But the just God will visit their transgressions in some other way, if they do not deeply deplore them and find mercy through Christ. Nothing tends to discredit the work of God so much as the transgressions and miscarriages of those who minister in holy things.

Verse 10. From off the tabernacle — Probably not the whole tabernacle, but from that part to which it had come, to that part which was directly over the mercy-seat, where it constantly abode. Or, perhaps, it quite disappeared, or stood at a great distance till Miriam was removed from the tabernacle, and carried out of the camp. Miriam became leprous — The original expresses the fact here recorded with much more spirit and force. The cloud departed — and behold, Miriam became leprous — She, and not Aaron, either because she was chief in the transgression, or because God would not have his worship interrupted or dishonoured, which it must have been if Aaron had been leprous. White — This kind of leprosy was the most virulent and incurable of all. It is true, when the leprosy began in a particular part, and thence spread itself over all the flesh by degrees, and at last made it all white, that was an evidence of the cure of the leprosy, (Leviticus 13:12, 13,) but it was otherwise when one was suddenly smitten with this universal whiteness.

10. Leprous — See the symptoms of leprosy described in Leviticus xiii, and notes. Also, 2 Kings 5:27. This disease developes itself so slowly that it requires a week or two for the priest to determine its character. See the rules laid down in Leviticus 13. Hence the suddenness of this leprosy of Miriam shows that it was a supernatural infliction.

V. 11. Lay not the sin-Let not the guilt and punishment of this sin rest upon us, upon her in this kind, upon me in any other kind, but pray to God for the pardon and removal of it.

Verses 11, 12. Lay not the sin — Let not the guilt and punishment of this sin rest upon us, upon her in this kind, upon me in any other kind, but pray to God for the pardon and removal of it. As one dead — Because part of her flesh was putrefied and dead, and not to be restored but by the mighty power of God. Like a still-born child, that hath been for some time dead in the womb, which, when it comes forth, is putrefied, and part of it consumed.

11. I beseech thee — Here we have an instance of a double supplication. Aaron, the anointed high priest, having sympathized with the revolt against Moses, dare not go directly to Jehovah and plead for his partner in sin, but feels that he himself needs a mediator. We have sinned — Here is Aaron’s confession of complicity in the wrong. The exigency was too great for him to wait till the great day of atonement, in which he could offer a sin offering for himself, and thus become qualified to offer for the sins of the people. Leviticus 16:11, note.

V. 12. As one dead-Because part of her flesh was putrefied and dead, and not to be restored but by the mighty power of God. Like a still-born child, that hath been for some time dead in the womb, which when it comes forth, is putrefied, and part of it consumed.

Verses 11, 12. Lay not the sin — Let not the guilt and punishment of this sin rest upon us, upon her in this kind, upon me in any other kind, but pray to God for the pardon and removal of it. As one dead — Because part of her flesh was putrefied and dead, and not to be restored but by the mighty power of God. Like a still-born child, that hath been for some time dead in the womb, which, when it comes forth, is putrefied, and part of it consumed.

12. As one dead — Cut off from society and from all religious privileges, dwelling alone without the camp. Compelled to proclaim her own defilement to all comers. Leviticus 13:45, 46, notes. Keil renders this thus: Let her not be as the dead thing on whose coming out of his mother’s womb half its flesh is consumed; that is, like a stillborn child, which comes into the world half decomposed. Leprosy decomposes the living body.

13. Heal her now — Strong faith always insists on a present blessing. Says J. Wesley, in respect to the healing of the leprosy of inbred sin, “If it is by faith, why not NOW?” Weak faith drops out the now, grasps no definite time, and looks only for a gradual cure. The greatest achievement of faith requires for its condition the idea of immediateness and instantaneousness.

V. 14. Spit in her face-That is, expressed some eminent token of indignation and contempt, which was this, Job 30:10 Isaiah 50:6. Ashamed-And withdraw herself, from her father’s presence, as Jonathan did upon a like occasion, 1 Samuel 20:34. So though God healed her according to Moses’s request, yet he would have her publickly bear the shame of her sin, and be a warning to others to keep them from the same transgression.

Verse 14. If her father had but spit in her face] This appears to have been done only in cases of great provocation on the part of the child, and strong irritation on the side of the parent. Spitting in the face was a sign of the deepest contempt. See Job 30:10; Isaiah 50:6; Mark 14:65. In a case where a parent was obliged by the disobedient conduct of his child to treat him in this way, it appears he was banished from the father’s presence for seven days. If then this was an allowed and judged case in matters of high provocation on the part of a child, should not the punishment be equally severe where the creature has rebelled against the Creator? Therefore Miriam was shut out of the camp for seven days, and thus debarred from coming into the presence of God her father, who is represented as dwelling among the people. To a soul who knows the value and inexpressible blessedness of communion with God, how intolerable must seven days of spiritual darkness be! But how indescribably wretched must their case be who are cast out into outer darkness, where the light of God no more shines, and where his approbation can no more be felt for ever! Reader, God save thee from so great a curse!

Several of the fathers suppose there is a great mystery hidden in the quarrel of Miriam and Aaron with Moses and Zipporah. Origen (and after him several others) speaks of it in the following manner:-“1. Zipporah, a Cushite espoused by Moses, evidently points out the choice which Jesus Christ has made of the Gentiles for his spouse and Church. 2. The jealousy of Aaron and Miriam against Moses and Zipporah signifies the hatred and envy of the Jews against Christ and the apostles, when they saw that the mysteries of the kingdom of heaven had been opened to the Gentiles, of which they had rendered themselves unworthy. 3. The leprosy with which Miriam was smitten shows the gross ignorance of the Jews, and the ruinous, disordered state of their religion, in which there is neither a head, a temple, nor a sacrifice. 4. Of none but Jesus Christ can it be said that he was the most meek and patient of men; that he saw God face to face; that he had every thing clearly revealed without enigmatical representations; and that he was faithful in all the house of God.” This, and much more, Origen states in the sixth and seventh homilies on the book of Numbers, and yet all this he considers as little in comparison of the vast mysteries that lie hidden in these accounts; for the shortness of the time, and the magnitude of the mysteries, only permit him “to pluck a few flowers from those vast fields-not as many as the exuberance of those fields afford, but only such as by their odour he was led to select from the rest.” Licebat tamen ex ingentibus campis paucos flosculos legere, et non quantum ager exuberet, sed quantum ordoratui supiciat, carpere.

Verse 14. If her father had but spit in her face — That is, had expressed some eminent token of indignation and contempt, in consequence of her having provoked him to anger by some undutiful behaviour. See Job 30:10; Isaiah 50:6. Should she not be ashamed seven days — And withdraw herself from her father’s presence, as Jonathan did on a like occlusion? 1 Samuel 20:34. And how much more ought she to be ashamed when she lies under this severe mark of the divine displeasure! So, though God had healed her according to Moses’s request yet he would have her publicly bear the shame of her sin, and be a warning to others to keep them from the same transgression.

14. Spit in her face — “Spitting at or upon a person or thing has been the mode of expressing the utmost contempt from very ancient times. It is still an intolerable insult, and you may thus interpret the spitting upon the ground by fanatical Moslems as we pass them. They dare not do more, or we would have it in our faces! Many years ago I saw a woman in great rage pluck off her old shoe, and, spitting on the sole of it, shake it frantically in the face of her antagonist.” — Dr. W.M. Thomson. Ashamed seven days — The humiliating indignity and defilement of the father’s spitting in a child’s face would cause her to hide seven days from the presence of Jehovah at the tabernacle. Much more ought she to be banished from the holy God and his holy people, after receiving so striking evidence of Jehovah’s displeasure, infinitely more polluting than the contempt of her supposed father.

V. 15. Journeyed not-Which was a testimony of respect to her both from God and from the people, God so ordering it, partly lest she should be overwhelmed by such a publick rebuke from God, and partly lest, she being a prophetess, the gift of prophesy should come into contempt.

Verse 15. Journeyed not — Which was a testimony of respect to her both from God and from the people; God so ordering it, partly lest she should be overwhelmed by such a public rebuke from God, and partly lest, she being a prophetess, the gift of prophecy should come into contempt.

15. And the people journeyed not — More than two million people — Bertheau calculates three million — are retarded in their journey by the sin of one influential person. Thus the unbelieving spies kept the whole nation out of Canaan nearly thirty-nine years. The sins of the great are national calamities. Till Miriam was brought in — There is no account of her healing. She was probably healed when Moses prayed. The healed leper was not permitted to enter his tent till seven days after the priest declared him healed. Leviticus 14:8. Two of the Targums read thus: “Because Miriam, the prophetess, had watched for a little hour on the river bank to know what would be the fate of Moses, for the sake of that merit all Israel, numbering sixty myriads, being eighty legions, and the cloud of glory, the tabernacle, and the well, went not till she was healed.”

V. 16. Paran-That is, in another part of the same wilderness.

Verse 16. The wilderness of Paran.] This could not be the same Paran with that mentioned Deuteronomy 1:1, for that was on the borders of the promised land, see the note on Deuteronomy 1:1, 2; they were long near the borders of Canaan, and might have speedily entered into it, had it not been for their provocations and iniquities. They spent thirty-eight years in a journey which might have been accomplished in a few weeks! How many through their unfaithfulness have been many years in gaining that for which, in the ordinary procedure of Divine grace, a few days had been sufficient! How much ground may a man lose in the Divine life by one act of unfaithfulness or transgression! Israel wandered in the wilderness because Israel despised the pleasant land, and did not give credence to the word of the Lord. They would have a golden calf, and they had nothing but tribulation and wo in return.

NUMBERS

FROM HAZEROTH TO KADESH, 16.

16. Wilderness of Paran — Genesis 12:6, note; Numbers 10:12, note. By comparing Numbers 13:26 with Deuteronomy 1:19-24, it will be seen that the place in this wilderness to which they removed was Kadesh-barnea. Genesis 14:7; Joshua 10:41, note. But in Numbers 33:18, the station after Hazeroth is Rithma, which is either the same as Kadesh or perhaps the modern Wady Abu Retemet, a wide and well-watered plain near Ain Gadis, which Rowland and other recent travelers identify with Kadesh.