Numbers · Chapter 3

V. 1. These-Which follow in this chapter. The generations-The kindred or family. Moses his family and children are here included under the general name of the Amramites, Numbers 3:27, which includes all the children and grand-children of Amram, the persons only of Aaron and Moses being excepted. And the generations of Moses are thus obscurely mentioned, because they were but common Levites, the priesthood being given solely to Aaron’s posterity, whence Aaron is here put before Moses, who elsewhere is commonly named after him. In Sinai-Nadab and Abihu, were then alive, though dead at the time of taking this account.

Verse 1. The generations of Aaron and Moses] Though Aaron and Moses are both mentioned here, yet the family of Aaron alone appears in the list: hence some have thought that the word Moses was not originally in the text. Others think that the words twdlt hlaw veelleh toledoth, these are the generations, should be rendered these are the acts, or transactions, or the history of the lives, as the same phrase may be understood in Genesis 2:4; 6:9. However this may be, it is evident that in this genealogy the family of Aaron are alone mentioned, probably because these belonged to the priesthood. Moses passes by his own family, or immediate descendants; he gave no rank or privilege to them during his life, and left nothing to them at his death. They became incorporated with the Levites, from or amongst whom they are never distinguished. What a strong proof is this of the celestial origin of his religion! Had it been of man, it must have had the gratification of some impure passion for its object; lust, ambition, or avarice: but none of these ever appear during the whole of his administration amongst the Israelites, though he had it constantly in his power to have gratified each. What an essential difference between the religion of the Pentateuch and that of the Koran! The former is God’s workmanship; the latter is a motley mixture of all bad crafts, with here and there a portion of heavenly fire, stolen from the Divine altar in the Old and New Testaments, to give some vitality to the otherwise inert mass.

Verse 1. All the other tribes being mustered and registered, and the genealogy of each stated, next follows all account of the priests and Levites, first of their descent from the two principal heads of their families; namely, Aaron and Moses; and then of the particular services allotted to each family. These — Which follow in this chapter; are the generations — The kindred or family. Moses’s family and children are here included under the general name of the Amramites, (verse 27,) which includes all the children and grand-children of Amram, the persons only of Aaron and Moses being excepted. And the generations of Moses are thus obscurely mentioned, because they were but common Levites, the priesthood being given solely to Aaron’s posterity, whence Aaron is here put before Moses, after whom he is elsewhere commonly named. In Sinai — Nadab and Abihu were then alive, though dead at the time of taking this account.

THE SONS OF AARON CONSECRATED, 1-4.

Because man is a religious being whose hopes and fears are constantly grasping the invisible and the immortal, his imperative religious wants require the ministry of a class of men set apart from secular cares and dedicated solely to sacred offices. Since they touch the deepest springs of human action and national character, it can never be a matter of indifference who shall sway the influence of the priestly office. “He who would rule a nation must first conciliate its priests.” Augustus did not complete the subversion of the Roman Republic until he created himself Pontifex Maximus. It is the prerogative of God to select his own priesthood. They are to be his apostles to man, and man’s representatives before him. Chosen by reason of their personal fitness, they hold their sacred office only so long as that fitness shall continue. The Lord chose Aaron for the office of high priest. That there might be some always in training for the succession, he made the priesthood conditionally hereditary. When one branch of the family became hopelessly corrupt, it was either disqualified for the headship or wholly repudiated, and another branch was chosen. 1 Samuel 2:27-36.

1. The generations — Hebrews, toldoth — as in Genesis 5:1 — the descendants. This term as here used indicates the Levitical families generally, because Aaron and Moses, when Jehovah spake on Sinai, were exalted to be the spiritual fathers of the tribe of Levi, of which they were members. Of Aaron — Aaron is placed before Moses because of his high priesthood. The generations of a person are commonly inserted in Scripture history at a “crisis when either a signal and accomplished fulfilment of the Divine counsels is to be indicated, or a stage has been reached which establishes a basis for a fulfilment to be narrated at large in the sequel.” And Moses — The posterity of Moses may be expected to follow, but it is not found. For this omission we find no very satisfactory explanation. Prof. Bush partially relieves the difficulty when he says that “Moses’s lineage is probably included under the general name Amramite, verse 27, embracing all the children and grandchildren of Amram, with the exceptions only of Moses and Aaron.” The sons of Moses were ranked as Levites, since their father’s extraordinary office was not hereditary. Hence his sons are enumerated as Levites, (see 1 Chronicles xxiii, 14,) where the family record of Moses is inserted. In the day — This was the register of Aaron’s sons then living when Moses went up to the summit of Sinai. But two were judicially smitten by Jehovah before the awful transactions of the mount were concluded, so that at the time of the present enumeration they were not living. Mount Sinai — Of the Sinaitic group, the peak which bears the name of Jebel Musa, or Mount of Moses, was formerly identified by travellers as Mount Sinai. But the hypothesis that this peak is the peak from which the Decalogue was proclaimed to man must be abandoned, because the plain at its base is, in the words of Stanley, “rough, uneven, and narrow,” and utterly insufficient for the vast Hebrew host who are represented as spectators of that tremendous manifestation of Divine power. Military surveys confirm this conclusion, and hence Jebel Musa, the traditional Mount Sinai, has been abandoned. At the northern extremity of the Sinaitic range is found Ras Suf-safeh, with two wadies or valleys opening from its foot, where there is space for the entire assembly of Israel to gaze upon its summit, taking the highest estimate of their number. Modern travellers are quite unanimous in the opinion that this peak is Sinai. See notes on Exodus 3:1 and 19:2. Dr. Robinson, who rejects the claims of Jebel Musa, says of the peak Ras Sufsafeh, which he calls Horeb: “We were surprised, as well as gratified, to find here, in the inmost recesses of these dark granite cliffs, this fine plain spread out before the mountain, because even to the present day it is a current opinion among scholars that no open space exists among these mountains; and I know not when I have felt a thrill of stronger emotion than when, in first crossing the plain, the dark precipices of Horeb rising in solemn grandeur before us, we became aware of the entire adaptedness of the scene to the purposes for which it was chosen by the Hebrew legislator.”

THE SONS OF AARON CONSECRATED, 1-4.

Because man is a religious being whose hopes and fears are constantly grasping the invisible and the immortal, his imperative religious wants require the ministry of a class of men set apart from secular cares and dedicated solely to sacred offices. Since they touch the deepest springs of human action and national character, it can never be a matter of indifference who shall sway the influence of the priestly office. “He who would rule a nation must first conciliate its priests.” Augustus did not complete the subversion of the Roman Republic until he created himself Pontifex Maximus. It is the prerogative of God to select his own priesthood. They are to be his apostles to man, and man’s representatives before him. Chosen by reason of their personal fitness, they hold their sacred office only so long as that fitness shall continue. The Lord chose Aaron for the office of high priest. That there might be some always in training for the succession, he made the priesthood conditionally hereditary. When one branch of the family became hopelessly corrupt, it was either disqualified for the headship or wholly repudiated, and another branch was chosen. 1 Samuel 2:27-36.

1. The generations — Hebrews, toldoth — as in Genesis 5:1 — the descendants. This term as here used indicates the Levitical families generally, because Aaron and Moses, when Jehovah spake on Sinai, were exalted to be the spiritual fathers of the tribe of Levi, of which they were members. Of Aaron — Aaron is placed before Moses because of his high priesthood. The generations of a person are commonly inserted in Scripture history at a “crisis when either a signal and accomplished fulfilment of the Divine counsels is to be indicated, or a stage has been reached which establishes a basis for a fulfilment to be narrated at large in the sequel.” And Moses — The posterity of Moses may be expected to follow, but it is not found. For this omission we find no very satisfactory explanation. Prof. Bush partially relieves the difficulty when he says that “Moses’s lineage is probably included under the general name Amramite, verse 27, embracing all the children and grandchildren of Amram, with the exceptions only of Moses and Aaron.” The sons of Moses were ranked as Levites, since their father’s extraordinary office was not hereditary. Hence his sons are enumerated as Levites, (see 1 Chronicles xxiii, 14,) where the family record of Moses is inserted. In the day — This was the register of Aaron’s sons then living when Moses went up to the summit of Sinai. But two were judicially smitten by Jehovah before the awful transactions of the mount were concluded, so that at the time of the present enumeration they were not living. Mount Sinai — Of the Sinaitic group, the peak which bears the name of Jebel Musa, or Mount of Moses, was formerly identified by travellers as Mount Sinai. But the hypothesis that this peak is the peak from which the Decalogue was proclaimed to man must be abandoned, because the plain at its base is, in the words of Stanley, “rough, uneven, and narrow,” and utterly insufficient for the vast Hebrew host who are represented as spectators of that tremendous manifestation of Divine power. Military surveys confirm this conclusion, and hence Jebel Musa, the traditional Mount Sinai, has been abandoned. At the northern extremity of the Sinaitic range is found Ras Suf-safeh, with two wadies or valleys opening from its foot, where there is space for the entire assembly of Israel to gaze upon its summit, taking the highest estimate of their number. Modern travellers are quite unanimous in the opinion that this peak is Sinai. See notes on Exodus 3:1 and 19:2. Dr. Robinson, who rejects the claims of Jebel Musa, says of the peak Ras Sufsafeh, which he calls Horeb: “We were surprised, as well as gratified, to find here, in the inmost recesses of these dark granite cliffs, this fine plain spread out before the mountain, because even to the present day it is a current opinion among scholars that no open space exists among these mountains; and I know not when I have felt a thrill of stronger emotion than when, in first crossing the plain, the dark precipices of Horeb rising in solemn grandeur before us, we became aware of the entire adaptedness of the scene to the purposes for which it was chosen by the Hebrew legislator.”

3. Anointed — The anointing with oil symbolizes separation and consecration. The oil in both the Old Testament and the New typifies the grace of the Holy Spirit, “the unction from the Holy One.” Zechariah 4:2-12; 1 John 2:20, 27; Acts 10:38. See Alford’s note on the ten virgins. Matthew 25:1-13. No man can acceptably minister at the altar of God who is not anointed with the anointing “that abideth and teach-eth.” Consecrated — Hebrews, whose hands he filled. Septuagint, whom he perfected as to their hands. Vulgate, whose hands he filled and consecrated. In giving over the priesthood to the sons of Aaron there was the ceremony of putting an offering into the hand of the candidate, (chap. 8:27, 28,) as the Christian bishop fills, at his ordination, the hand of the candidate for the ministry of the Gospel of Christ with a copy of the Holy Scriptures.

V. 4. In the sight of Aaron-Under his inspection and direction, and as their father’s servants or ministers in the priest’s office.

Verse 4. Nadab and Abihu died] See the notes on Leviticus 10:1-5.

Verse 4. In the sight of Aaron — Under his inspection and direction, and as his servants or ministers in the priest’s office.

4. Nadab and Abihu — The tragic end of these sacrilegious priests is detailed in full in Leviticus 10:1-7, where see an extended annotation. They had but just been inducted into office. As men of note, they had been taken up the mount and had seen God. Exodus 24:9. A glorious manifestation of the power and mercy of God had just been given: “And the glory of Jehovah appeared unto all the people, and there came a fire out from before the Lord, and consumed upon the altar the burnt offering.” The effect upon the people was to awaken the commingling emotions of joy and awe: “They shouted and fell on their faces.” Amid this scene Nadab and Abihu committed a rash act of sacrilege, “and there went out fire from the Lord, and devoured them.” One vengeful flash from the Shekinah “struck them dead, with their censers in their hands, with not a moment’s warning. What a fearful exhibition of the truth that God’s jealousy burns fiercest about his altar!” Strange fire — Up to this event, which occurred just after the tabernacle was set up, and hence not more than four weeks before the census of the Levites, there is no record of any regulation respecting the character of the fire to be used for burning incense. But immediately after this sad catastrophe, in Leviticus 16:12, the command is given to take the coals of fire from the altar of burnt offerings on which it was perpetually burning. Leviticus 6:9, 13. We infer that such a command had been given before to these newly-robed priests. The fire on the altar had been enkindled by God, and it was the duty of the priests to see that it never should go out. It is probable that this fire, and this only, had been prescribed for this service, and that these sons of Aaron wilfully transgressed this requirement. Some are of the opinion that the fire was called “strange” because the incense was not prepared in accordance with the prescription, “Ye shall offer no strange incense.” Exodus 30:9. It has also been suggested that the incense was burned in uncanonical hours, and that this was the offence. Before the Lord — These words do not necessarily imply that they had usurped the office of their father Aaron, and had rushed into the awful sanctity of the most holy place, where Jehovah, in the cloud of the Shekinah, was enthroned between the cherubim, for the entire tabernacle was filled with the special presence of the Lord. See on Leviticus 1:3. But from the prohibition of wine and strong drink to Aaron and his sons immediately following the account of the awful death of these two, we have good grounds for the inference that these priests were drunken when this impious act was committed. See Leviticus 10:8-11, and note the preceding context. Drunkenness impairs the faculty of moral discernment to discriminate “between the holy and the unholy,” and incapacitates to “teach all the statutes of the Lord.” “I will be sanctified in them that come nigh unto me.” Inebriation involves all vices and sacrileges. Eleazar and Ithamar — Aaron’s sole surviving sons. Half the Aaronic priesthood had been cut off at a stroke, as before noticed. God can carry on his work better with a pure ministry few in number, than with a multitude of unholy men in priestly robes serving their own lusts. THE LEVITES SUBORDINATED TO AARON, 5-11.

In the performance of the prescribed ritual there were many duties of a semi-sacerdotal nature, and some that were even menial. For the latter the Gibeonites were subsequently held, as a punishment for their mendacious diplomacy and as a relief to the Levites, who had been charged with all the sub-priestly duties connected with the tabernacle. Hence the propriety of a public presentation of the Levites, and a solemn charge pronounced by the high priest.

V. 6. Present them-Offer them to the Lord for his special service. This was promised to them before, and now actually conferred.

Verse 6. Bring the tribe of Levi near] The original word brqh hakreb is properly a sacrificial word, and signifies the presenting of a sacrifice or offering to the Lord. As an offering, the tribe of Levi was given up entirely to the service of the sanctuary, to be no longer their own, but the Lord’s property.

Verse 6. Present them — Offer them to the Lord for his special service. This was promised to them before, and now actually conferred.

V. 7. His charge-That is, Aaron’s, or those things which are committed principally to Aaron’s care and oversight. Of the congregation-That is, of all the sacrifices and services which are due to the Lord from all the people, because the people might not perform them, in their own persons, therefore they were to be performed by some particular persons in their stead; formerly by the first-born, Numbers 8:16, and now by the Levites. Before the tabernacle-Not within the tabernacle, for the care of the things within the holy place was appropriated to the priests, as the care of the most holy place was to the high-priest.

Verse 7. The charge of the whole congregation] They shall work for the whole congregation; and instead of the first-born.

Verse 7. His charge — That is, Aaron’s, or those things which were committed principally to Aaron’s care and oversight. Of the congregation — That is, of all the sacrifices and services which were due to the Lord from all the people. Because the people might not perform them, in their own persons, therefore they were to be performed by some particular persons in their stead; formerly by the firstborn, (Numbers 8:16,) and now by the Levites. Before the tabernacle — Not within the tabernacle, for the care of the things within the holy place was appropriated to the priests, as the care of the most holy place was to the high-priest.

7. Charge of the… congregation — As the Levites were subordinated to Aaron, it was proper that he should address them concerning their duties. As they were substituted for the firstborn of the people, the whole people were interested in their faithful discharge of their duties, and might with propriety be said to charge the Levitical body with these duties, which they themselves in the persons of their firstborn would have performed if the Levites had not been consecrated. In Numbers 8:11 Aaron is directed to “offer the Levites before the Lord for an offering of the children of Israel, that they may execute the service of the Lord.” The Hebrew for bring near, in verse 6, is a sacrificial word, used when an offering is presented to Jehovah.

V. 8. Of the children of Israel-Those things which all the children of Israel are in their several places and stations obliged to take care of, though not in their persons, yet by others in their stead.

Verse 8. All the instruments] The tabernacle itself and all its contents: see all described, Numbers 3:25, 26, 31, 36, 37. The Levites were to perform the most common and laborious offices. It was their business to take down, put up, and carry the tabernacle and its utensils; for it was the object of their peculiar care. In a word, they were the servants of the priests.

Verses 8, 9. Of the children of Israel — Those things which all the children of Israel are in their several places and stations obliged to take care of, though not in their persons, yet by others in their stead. Given to him — To attend upon him and observe his orders, and ease him of his burden.

V. 9. Given to him-To attend upon him and observe his orders, and ease him of his burden.

Verses 8, 9. Of the children of Israel — Those things which all the children of Israel are in their several places and stations obliged to take care of, though not in their persons, yet by others in their stead. Given to him — To attend upon him and observe his orders, and ease him of his burden.

Verse 9. Thou shalt give the Levites to Aaron. God has a sovereign right to choose and call his own ministers. The service of the tabernacle would be better done by a separate tribe professionally trained, than by the firstborn of a whole nation. The strangers might err and die, like Nadab and Abihu: yet we have no complaint against the young men of all the tribes, who offered sacrifices in the old way. Exodus 19:22. 24:5.

9. 10. Wholly given — The Hebrew repeats nethunim, given, to emphasize it. They are to be like good soldiers, not entangling themselves in secular affairs for personal aggrandizement or pleasure. As ample provision will be made for their support out of the offerings and tithes, so they are to render an undivided service to Jehovah, to Aaron, and to the congregation. The Levites, the nethunim, must be carefully distinguished from the nethinim, the condemned Gibeonites. Joshua 9:27. The stranger — Non-Levite. See Numbers 1:51, note.

THE LEVITES SUBSTITUTED FOR THE FIRSTBORN, 11-13.

On that night of wailing in Egypt, the saddest in the annals of mankind, the fifteenth of the month Nisan, when at midnight Jehovah smote all the firstborn in the land of Egypt, from”the firstborn of Pharaoh that sat on his throne unto the firstborn of the captive that was in the dungeon,” he passed over the blood-stained doors of the Hebrews, sparing their firstborn. These he commanded Moses to “set apart unto the Lord.” Exodus 13:12-16. For reasons not made known Jehovah relinquished this claim, and appointed the tribe of Levi to minister unto him instead of the firstborn. The substitution of adults capable of immediate service harmonizes well with the hypothesis that the phrase, “all the firstborn,” is to be understood prospectively, and so includes only infants born since the Exode, and incapable till thirty years old of rendering service. Levi may have had this honour for special fidelity in times of trial, especially against the abomination of the golden calf, set up and worshipped at the foot of Mount Sinai. Exodus 32:26-28. Dr. A. Clarke suggests that Levi was taken because it was the smallest tribe. This substitution accounts for the census of the tribe of Levi, the enumeration of the firstborn males, (verse 40,) and the redemption of the number in excess. Verse 47. We are not to understand that the claim on the firstborn was to be retrospective, like an ex post facto law, and to cover all the firstborn of all ages, but those born after the passover night up to the census in the wilderness — all born during the first thirteen months of the Exodus. Our reasons for this limitation will be seen when we discuss the number of firstborn, and their ratio to the fighting men. See verse 40, note.

V. 10. The stranger-That is, every one who is of another family than Aaron’s; yea, though he be a Levite. That cometh nigh-To execute any part of the priest’s office.

Verse 10. Aaron and his sons-shall wait on their priest’s office] It was the business of the priests to offer the different sacrifices to God; to consecrate the shew-bread, pour out the libations, burn the incense, sprinkle the blood of the victims, and bless the people. In a word, they were the servants of God alone.

Verse 10. The stranger — That is, every one who is of another family than Aaron’s; yea, though he be a Levite. That cometh nigh — To execute any part of the priest’s office.

V. 12. The first-born-Who were God’s property, Exodus 13:12, and to whom the administration of holy things was formerly committed, which now was taken away from them, either because they had forfeited this privilege by joining with the rest of their brethren in the idolatrous worship of the calf, or because they were to be mainly concerned in the distribution and management of the inheritances which now they were going to possess, and therefore could not be at leisure to attend upon the service of the sanctuary: and God would not commit it to some other persons in each tribe, which might be an occasion of idolatry, confusion, division, and contempt of sacred things, but to one distinct tribe, which might be entirely devoted to that service, and particularly to the tribe of Levi; partly out of his respect to Moses and Aaron, branches of this tribe; partly as a recompence of their zeal for God against idolaters, and partly because it was the smallest of the tribes, and therefore most likely to find both employment in, and maintenance for the work.

Verse 12. I have taken the Levites-instead of all the first-born] The Levites are taken for the service of the sanctuary in place of the first-born. The first-born were dedicated to God in commemoration of his slaying the first-born of the Egyptians, and preserving those of the Israelites. Even the cattle of the Levites were taken in place of the first-born of the cattle of the rest of the tribes. See Numbers 3:45.

Several reasons have been assigned why God should give this honour to the tribe of Levi in preference to all the others, but they do not seem to me to be conclusive. Their zeal in destroying those who had corrupted the worship of God in the business of the golden calf, Exodus 32:28, has been thought a sufficient reason. A better reason is, that this was the smallest tribe, and they were quite enough for the service. To have had a more numerous tribe at this time would have been very inconvenient. Aaron, says Mr. Ainsworth, being in his priesthood a type of Christ, all these rites are fulfilled in him. For unto Christ God gave children, Hebrews 2:13. And they are a congregation of first-born, whose names are written in heaven, Hebrews 12:23, being of God’s own will begotten by the word of truth, that they should be a kind of first-fruits of his creatures, James 1:18, to whom he also gives the first-fruits of his Spirit, Romans 8:23. These wait on and follow the Lamb, being first-fruits unto God and to the Lamb, Revelation 14:4; and Christ hath made us kings and priests unto God and his Father, that we may serve him day and night in his temple, Revelation 1:6; 7:15.

Verse 12. The firstborn — Who were God’s property: (Exodus 13:12,) and to whom the administration of holy things was formerly committed, which now was taken away from them, either because they had forfeited this privilege by joining with the rest of their brethren in the idolatrous worship of the calf, or because they were to be mainly concerned in the distribution and management of the inheritances which now they were going to possess, and therefore could not be at leisure to attend upon the service of the sanctuary: and God would not commit it to some other persons in each tribe, which might be an occasion of idolatry, confusion, division, and contempt of sacred things, but to one distinct tribe, which might be entirely devoted to that service, and particularly to the tribe of Levi; partly out of his respect to Moses and Aaron, branches of this tribe; partly as a recompense of their zeal for God against idolaters, and partly because it was the smallest of the tribes, and therefore most likely to find both employment in, and maintenance for the work.

12. Openeth the matrix — Or womb. “This expression is generally employed in cases in which a common term is required to designate the firstborn of both man and beast, (Exodus 13:2, 12-15; 34:19, 20; Numbers 8:16, 17; also 18:15; Ezekiel 20:26;) but even then, wherever the two are distinguished, the term rcp, peter, is applied to the firstborn of animals, and rwkb to the firstborn sons of men. On the other hand, where only firstborn sons are referred to, as in Deuteronomy 21:15-17, we look in vain for the expression peter rechem — ’openeth the womb.’ Again, the Old Testament, like modern law, recognises only firstborn sons, and does not apply the term firstborn to daughters at all.” — Keil and Delitzsch. The law of inheritance omits the daughter in designating the firstborn. In case of polygamy there was only one firstborn.

13. All the firstborn are mine — This is a claim founded on the sovereignty of Jehovah, as is seen by the declaration, I am the Lord. As he had chosen Israel to be his firstborn (Exodus 4:22, note) by a sovereign national election to certain earthly privileges — not to life everlasting — so he exercised the prerogative of selecting a certain class in Israel to be devoted to his especial service. The intimation in this verse is, that the firstborn were saved from the destroyer because they were set apart or hallowed into Jehovah, and not that they were hallowed because they were spared. Hallowed — Hebrew, kadash; Greek, agiazw; Vulgate, sanctifico. The two senses of these words are: — 1.) To set apart from secular to holy uses. 2.) To cleanse, to purify: of things, a physical cleansing; of persons, a spiritual as well as a physical purification is signified. When the Levites took the place of the firstborn they were not only set apart, but they were washed also. See Numbers 8:6, 7. Hence the figures of the physical and spiritual cleansing from all filthiness of the flesh and spirit enjoined by St. Paul in 2 Corinthians 7:1, and by James in Numbers 4:8. “Hallowed,” in this verse, signifies set apart. The firstborn were never ceremonially washed and initiated into the service of the tabernacle, because of the almost immediate substitution of the Levites.

THE NUMBERING OF THE LEVITES, 14-39.

14. Unto Moses — To whom alone this order is given, probably because Aaron and his sons had a pecuniary interest in the result, inasmuch as the redemption money for the excess of the firstborn was to be paid to them. In verse 39 of this chapter Aaron is spoken of as taking part with Moses in the enumeration; but in the Hebrew the Masoretic marks indicate a spurious reading. The same unauthorized reading occurs again in the Septuagint in verse 16.

V. 15. From a month old-Because at that time the first-born, in whose stead the Levites came, were offered to God. And from that time the Levites were consecrated to God, and were, as soon as capable, instructed in their work. Elsewhere they are numbered from twenty-five years old, when they were entered as novices into part of their work, Numbers 8:24, and from thirty years old, when they were admitted to their whole office.

Verse 15. A month old and upward] The males of all the other tribes were numbered, from twenty years and upward; had the Levites been numbered in this way, they would not have been nearly equal in number to the firstborn of the twelve tribes. Add to this, that as there must have been first-born of all ages in the other tribes, it was necessary that the Levites, who were to be their substitutes, should be also of all ages; and it appears to have been on this ground, at least partly, that the Levites were numbered from four weeks old and upward.

Verse 15. From a month old — Because at that time the firstborn, in whose stead the Levites came, were offered to God. And from that time the Levites were consecrated to God, and were, as soon as capable, instructed in their work. Elsewhere they are numbered from twenty-five years old, when they were entered as novices into part of their work, (Numbers 8:24,) and from thirty years old, when they were admitted to their whole office.

Ver. 15. Every male from a month old; the age when the firstborn were redeemed, and when their names were enrolled.

15. After the house of their fathers — Their mothers might have married into other tribes, and borne sons who were counted in those tribes.

Verse 16. Moses numbered them] Though Moses and Aaron conjointly numbered the twelve tribes, yet Moses alone numbered the Levites; “for as the money with which the first-born of Israel, who exceeded the number of Levites, were redeemed, was to be paid to Aaron and his sons, Numbers 3:48, it was decent that he, whose advantage it was that the number of the first-born of Israel should exceed, should not be authorized to take that number himself.”-Dodd, from Bishop Kidder.

THE NUMBERING OF THE LEVITES, 14-39.

14. Unto Moses — To whom alone this order is given, probably because Aaron and his sons had a pecuniary interest in the result, inasmuch as the redemption money for the excess of the firstborn was to be paid to them. In verse 39 of this chapter Aaron is spoken of as taking part with Moses in the enumeration; but in the Hebrew the Masoretic marks indicate a spurious reading. The same unauthorized reading occurs again in the Septuagint in verse 16.

THE NUMBERING OF THE LEVITES, 14-39.

14. Unto Moses — To whom alone this order is given, probably because Aaron and his sons had a pecuniary interest in the result, inasmuch as the redemption money for the excess of the firstborn was to be paid to them. In verse 39 of this chapter Aaron is spoken of as taking part with Moses in the enumeration; but in the Hebrew the Masoretic marks indicate a spurious reading. The same unauthorized reading occurs again in the Septuagint in verse 16.

THE NUMBERING OF THE LEVITES, 14-39.

14. Unto Moses — To whom alone this order is given, probably because Aaron and his sons had a pecuniary interest in the result, inasmuch as the redemption money for the excess of the firstborn was to be paid to them. In verse 39 of this chapter Aaron is spoken of as taking part with Moses in the enumeration; but in the Hebrew the Masoretic marks indicate a spurious reading. The same unauthorized reading occurs again in the Septuagint in verse 16.

THE NUMBERING OF THE LEVITES, 14-39.

14. Unto Moses — To whom alone this order is given, probably because Aaron and his sons had a pecuniary interest in the result, inasmuch as the redemption money for the excess of the firstborn was to be paid to them. In verse 39 of this chapter Aaron is spoken of as taking part with Moses in the enumeration; but in the Hebrew the Masoretic marks indicate a spurious reading. The same unauthorized reading occurs again in the Septuagint in verse 16.

THE NUMBERING OF THE LEVITES, 14-39.

14. Unto Moses — To whom alone this order is given, probably because Aaron and his sons had a pecuniary interest in the result, inasmuch as the redemption money for the excess of the firstborn was to be paid to them. In verse 39 of this chapter Aaron is spoken of as taking part with Moses in the enumeration; but in the Hebrew the Masoretic marks indicate a spurious reading. The same unauthorized reading occurs again in the Septuagint in verse 16.

THE NUMBERING OF THE LEVITES, 14-39.

14. Unto Moses — To whom alone this order is given, probably because Aaron and his sons had a pecuniary interest in the result, inasmuch as the redemption money for the excess of the firstborn was to be paid to them. In verse 39 of this chapter Aaron is spoken of as taking part with Moses in the enumeration; but in the Hebrew the Masoretic marks indicate a spurious reading. The same unauthorized reading occurs again in the Septuagint in verse 16.

Verse 22. Seven thousand and five hundred] Perhaps originally r resh, 200, instead of Ë caph, 500; see the following note.

22. Numbered… according to the number — Mustered, or inspected, according to the number. The words differ in the Hebrew.

THE NUMBERING OF THE LEVITES, 14-39.

14. Unto Moses — To whom alone this order is given, probably because Aaron and his sons had a pecuniary interest in the result, inasmuch as the redemption money for the excess of the firstborn was to be paid to them. In verse 39 of this chapter Aaron is spoken of as taking part with Moses in the enumeration; but in the Hebrew the Masoretic marks indicate a spurious reading. The same unauthorized reading occurs again in the Septuagint in verse 16.

THE NUMBERING OF THE LEVITES, 14-39.

14. Unto Moses — To whom alone this order is given, probably because Aaron and his sons had a pecuniary interest in the result, inasmuch as the redemption money for the excess of the firstborn was to be paid to them. In verse 39 of this chapter Aaron is spoken of as taking part with Moses in the enumeration; but in the Hebrew the Masoretic marks indicate a spurious reading. The same unauthorized reading occurs again in the Septuagint in verse 16.

V. 25. The tabernacle-Not the boards, which belonged to Merari, Numbers 3:36, but the ten curtains. The tent-The curtains of goats hair. The coverings-That is, the coverings of rams-skins and badgers-skins.

Verses 25, 26. The tabernacle — Not the boards, which belonged to Merari, (verse 36,) but the ten curtains. The tent — The curtains of goats’ hair. The coverings — That is, the coverings of rams’ skins and badgers’ skins. The cords — By which the tabernacle was fastened to the pins, and stretched out, Exodus 35:18.

25. Tabernacle… tent… covering — The tabernacle consisted of three chief parts, namely, the dwelling place, mishkan, or tabernacle strictly so called; the tent, ohel; and mikseh, the covering. The tabernacle itself was made of ten curtains of fine linen, ornamented with coloured cherubim resting upon a framework of boards, and was composed of the holy place and the most holy, corresponding to the adytum, naov, or innermost sanctuary of the temple at Jerusalem. The tent — a goat’s hair fabric — was to cover the tabernacle, while spread over the tent was the covering made of the red skins of rams, or tachash skins, as a protection from the weather. See note on Numbers 4:6. Much confusion arises from the fact that in English tent and tabernacle are synonyms, and mean about the same as covering.

V. 26. The cords-By which the tabernacle was fastened to the pins, and stretched out, Exodus 35:18.

Verses 25, 26. The tabernacle — Not the boards, which belonged to Merari, (verse 36,) but the ten curtains. The tent — The curtains of goats’ hair. The coverings — That is, the coverings of rams’ skins and badgers’ skins. The cords — By which the tabernacle was fastened to the pins, and stretched out, Exodus 35:18.

26. The cords of it — The word “it” does not stand for the altar, which had no cords, nor for the hangings of the court, the care of which belonged to the Merarites, but to the tabernacle.

V. 27. Of Kohath-This family had many privileges above the others: of that were Moses and Aaron, and all the priests: they had the chief place about the tabernacle, and the care of the most holy things here, and in the land of Canaan they had twenty three cities, which were almost as many as both their brethren received. Yet the posterity of Moses were not at all dignified or distinguished from other Levites. So far was he from seeking any advantage or honour for his own family.

Verses 27, 28. Of Kohath — This family had many privileges above the others: of that were Moses and Aaron, and all the priests: they had the chief place about the tabernacle, and the care of the most holy things there, and in the land of Canaan they had twenty-three cities, which were almost as many as both their brethren received. Yet the posterity of Moses were not at all dignified or distinguished from other Levites. So far was he from seeking any advantage or honour for his own family. Keeping — That is, appointed for that work, as soon as they were capable of it. Of the sanctuary — That is, of the holy things contained in, or belonging to the sanctuary.

THE NUMBERING OF THE LEVITES, 14-39.

14. Unto Moses — To whom alone this order is given, probably because Aaron and his sons had a pecuniary interest in the result, inasmuch as the redemption money for the excess of the firstborn was to be paid to them. In verse 39 of this chapter Aaron is spoken of as taking part with Moses in the enumeration; but in the Hebrew the Masoretic marks indicate a spurious reading. The same unauthorized reading occurs again in the Septuagint in verse 16.

V. 28. Keeping-That is, appointed for that work, as soon as they were capable of it. Of the sanctuary-That is, of the holy things contained in or belonging to the sanctuary.

Verses 27, 28. Of Kohath — This family had many privileges above the others: of that were Moses and Aaron, and all the priests: they had the chief place about the tabernacle, and the care of the most holy things there, and in the land of Canaan they had twenty-three cities, which were almost as many as both their brethren received. Yet the posterity of Moses were not at all dignified or distinguished from other Levites. So far was he from seeking any advantage or honour for his own family. Keeping — That is, appointed for that work, as soon as they were capable of it. Of the sanctuary — That is, of the holy things contained in, or belonging to the sanctuary.

THE NUMBERING OF THE LEVITES, 14-39.

14. Unto Moses — To whom alone this order is given, probably because Aaron and his sons had a pecuniary interest in the result, inasmuch as the redemption money for the excess of the firstborn was to be paid to them. In verse 39 of this chapter Aaron is spoken of as taking part with Moses in the enumeration; but in the Hebrew the Masoretic marks indicate a spurious reading. The same unauthorized reading occurs again in the Septuagint in verse 16.

THE NUMBERING OF THE LEVITES, 14-39.

14. Unto Moses — To whom alone this order is given, probably because Aaron and his sons had a pecuniary interest in the result, inasmuch as the redemption money for the excess of the firstborn was to be paid to them. In verse 39 of this chapter Aaron is spoken of as taking part with Moses in the enumeration; but in the Hebrew the Masoretic marks indicate a spurious reading. The same unauthorized reading occurs again in the Septuagint in verse 16.

30. Elizaphan was of the youngest family of the Kohathites. Three other families outranked his in seniority. The ill-will awakened by this promotion of Elizaphan to the headship may have caused the rebellion of Korah, one of the older families.

V. 31. The hanging-Which covered the most holy place, for all other hangings belonged to the Gershonites. The service-That is, all the other furniture belonging to it.

Verse 31. The hanging — Which covered the most holy place, for all other hangings belonged to the Gershonites. The service — That is, all the other furniture belonging to it.

THE NUMBERING OF THE LEVITES, 14-39.

14. Unto Moses — To whom alone this order is given, probably because Aaron and his sons had a pecuniary interest in the result, inasmuch as the redemption money for the excess of the firstborn was to be paid to them. In verse 39 of this chapter Aaron is spoken of as taking part with Moses in the enumeration; but in the Hebrew the Masoretic marks indicate a spurious reading. The same unauthorized reading occurs again in the Septuagint in verse 16.

V. 32. Chief-Next under the high-priest; whence he is called the second priest, 2 Kings 25:18, and in case of the high-priest’s absence by sickness or other necessary occasions, he was to perform his work, and he had a superiority over all the rest of the priests and Levites. The chief of the Levites-That is, over those three persons, who were each the chief of their several families, Numbers 3:24,31,34.

Verse 32. Chief — Next under the high-priest; whence he is called the second priest, (2 Kings 25:18,) and in case of the high-priest’s absence by sickness or other necessary occasions, he was to perform his work; and he had a superiority over all the rest of the priests and Levites. The chief of the Levites — That is, over those three persons, who were each the chief of their several families, verses 24, 31, 34.

Ver. 32. Eleazer—chief of the Levites. For a prince to possess hereditary honours by birth is a natural right, and it prevents confusion in society.

THE NUMBERING OF THE LEVITES, 14-39.

14. Unto Moses — To whom alone this order is given, probably because Aaron and his sons had a pecuniary interest in the result, inasmuch as the redemption money for the excess of the firstborn was to be paid to them. In verse 39 of this chapter Aaron is spoken of as taking part with Moses in the enumeration; but in the Hebrew the Masoretic marks indicate a spurious reading. The same unauthorized reading occurs again in the Septuagint in verse 16.

THE NUMBERING OF THE LEVITES, 14-39.

14. Unto Moses — To whom alone this order is given, probably because Aaron and his sons had a pecuniary interest in the result, inasmuch as the redemption money for the excess of the firstborn was to be paid to them. In verse 39 of this chapter Aaron is spoken of as taking part with Moses in the enumeration; but in the Hebrew the Masoretic marks indicate a spurious reading. The same unauthorized reading occurs again in the Septuagint in verse 16.

THE NUMBERING OF THE LEVITES, 14-39.

14. Unto Moses — To whom alone this order is given, probably because Aaron and his sons had a pecuniary interest in the result, inasmuch as the redemption money for the excess of the firstborn was to be paid to them. In verse 39 of this chapter Aaron is spoken of as taking part with Moses in the enumeration; but in the Hebrew the Masoretic marks indicate a spurious reading. The same unauthorized reading occurs again in the Septuagint in verse 16.

THE NUMBERING OF THE LEVITES, 14-39.

14. Unto Moses — To whom alone this order is given, probably because Aaron and his sons had a pecuniary interest in the result, inasmuch as the redemption money for the excess of the firstborn was to be paid to them. In verse 39 of this chapter Aaron is spoken of as taking part with Moses in the enumeration; but in the Hebrew the Masoretic marks indicate a spurious reading. The same unauthorized reading occurs again in the Septuagint in verse 16.

THE NUMBERING OF THE LEVITES, 14-39.

14. Unto Moses — To whom alone this order is given, probably because Aaron and his sons had a pecuniary interest in the result, inasmuch as the redemption money for the excess of the firstborn was to be paid to them. In verse 39 of this chapter Aaron is spoken of as taking part with Moses in the enumeration; but in the Hebrew the Masoretic marks indicate a spurious reading. The same unauthorized reading occurs again in the Septuagint in verse 16.

THE NUMBERING OF THE LEVITES, 14-39.

14. Unto Moses — To whom alone this order is given, probably because Aaron and his sons had a pecuniary interest in the result, inasmuch as the redemption money for the excess of the firstborn was to be paid to them. In verse 39 of this chapter Aaron is spoken of as taking part with Moses in the enumeration; but in the Hebrew the Masoretic marks indicate a spurious reading. The same unauthorized reading occurs again in the Septuagint in verse 16.

V. 38. For the charge-Either in their stead, that charge which they were obliged to keep, if God had not committed it to those: or for their benefit; for their preservation, as the word may be rendered.

Verse 38. For the charge — Either in their stead, that charge which they were obliged to keep, if God had not committed it to those: or for their benefit; for their preservation, as the word may be rendered.

THE NUMBERING OF THE LEVITES, 14-39.

14. Unto Moses — To whom alone this order is given, probably because Aaron and his sons had a pecuniary interest in the result, inasmuch as the redemption money for the excess of the firstborn was to be paid to them. In verse 39 of this chapter Aaron is spoken of as taking part with Moses in the enumeration; but in the Hebrew the Masoretic marks indicate a spurious reading. The same unauthorized reading occurs again in the Septuagint in verse 16.

V. 39. Two and twenty thousand-If the particular numbers mentioned Numbers 3:22,28,34, be put together, they make 22,300. But the odd 300 are omitted here, either according to the use of the holy scripture, where in so great numbers small sums are commonly neglected, or, because they were the first-born of the Levites, and therefore belonged to God already, and so could not be given to him again instead of the other first-born. If this number of first-born seem small to come from 22,000 Levites, it must be considered, that only such first-born are here named as were males, and such as continued in their parents families, not such as had erected new families of their own. Add to this, that God so ordered things by his wise providence for divers weighty reasons, that this tribe should be much the least of all the tribes, as is evident by comparing the numbers of the other tribes, from twenty years old, Numbers 1:3-49, with the number of this from a month old; and therefore it is not strange if the number of their first-born be less than in other tribes.

Verse 39. Which Moses and Aaron numbered] The word ואהרנ

veaharon, “and Aaron.” has a point over each of its letters, probably designed as a mark of spuriousness. The word is wanting in the Samaritan, Syriac, and Coptic; it is wanting also in eight of Dr. Kennicott’s MSS., and in four of Deuteronomy Rossi’s. Moses alone, as Houbigant observes, is commanded to take the number of the Levites; see Numbers 3:5, 11, 40, 44, 51.

All the males-were twenty and two thousand.] This total does not agree with the particulars; for the Gershonites were 7,500, the Kohathites 8,600, the Merarites 6,200, total 22,300. Several methods of solving this difficulty have been proposed by learned men; Dr. Kennicott’s is the most simple. Formerly the numbers in the Hebrew Bible were expressed by letters, and not by words at full length; and if two nearly similar letters were mistaken for each other, many errors in the numbers must be the consequence. Now it is probable that an error has crept into the number of the Gershonites, Numbers 3:22, where, instead of 7,500, we should read 7,200, as Ë caph, 500, might have been easily mistaken for r resh, 200, especially if the down stroke of the caph had been a little shorter than ordinary, which is often the case in MSS. The extra 300 being taken off, the total is just 22,000, as mentioned in the 39th verse.

Verse 39. Two and twenty thousand — If the particular numbers mentioned (verses 22, 28, 34) be put together, they make twenty-two thousand three hundred. But the odd three hundred are omitted here, either according to the use of the Holy Scripture, where in so great numbers small ones are commonly neglected, or because they were the firstborn of the Levites, and therefore belonged to God already, and so could not be given to him again instead of the other firstborn. If this number of firstborn seem small to come from twenty-two thousand Levites, it must be considered, that only such firstborn are here named as were males, and such as continued in their parents’ families, not such as had erected new families of their own. Add to this, that God so ordered things by his wise providence, for divers weighty reasons, that this tribe should be much the least of all the tribes, as is evident by comparing the numbers of the other tribes, from twenty years old, (Numbers 1.,) with the number of this from a month old; and therefore it is not strange if the number of their firstborn be less than in other tribes.

Ver. 39. Twenty and two thousand. Why are the three hundred omitted? Perhaps this is a round number; perhaps the three hundred were the firstborn, and therefore not redeemed.

39. Twenty and two thousand — Here is bad arithmetic. The sum is three hundred less than the items call for, yet is correct, for it tallies with the total of the firstborn after subtracting the excess, two hundred and seventy-three, (verse 46,) who were to be redeemed by money. The rabbies explain the discrepancy by saying that there were three hundred firstborn among the Levites, and that they could not be offset for the same number of firstborn of the other tribes, and so were left out of the total. We adopt this explanation in preference to that of a clerical error of six hundred for three hundred by dropping the letter lamedth in the Hebrew word for three. Michaelis objects to this solution by the rabbies as inadmissible, because “the rule would apply to the particular amounts, as well as to the sum total.” This does not necessarily follow. Baumgarten makes a valuable suggestion when he says that “the silent omission of three hundred firstborn was intended, in this particular instance, to conceal the fact that there were limits to the assumed holiness of Levi, which were manifested in the inability to redeem Israel, in order that the relation between Levi and Israel might not be disturbed.” It speaks well for the scrupulous fidelity of the Jews in guarding their manuscripts that there has been no attempt to interpolate an explanation of this difficulty, or to alter the items to make them conform to the footing. Thus we have a high probability, amounting to a moral certainty, that the Jews, as “librarians for the Christians,” have faithfully transmitted to our hands the uncorrupted word of God.

CENSUS OF THE FIRSTBORN MALES OF THE ISRAELITES, 40-43.

We have already hinted that the firstborn intended in this enumeration could not be the firstborn of every age, from the babe a month old up to the grandfathers and great-grandfathers. The difficulties of this broad interpretation, as suggested by Keil, are insuperable. The census of the males from the twentieth year upward would show a male population of over a million. Divide this sum by the number of firstborn, and there would be only one firstborn to forty or forty-five males, and, consequently, every father must have begotten, or still have had, from thirty-nine to forty-four sons; whereas the ordinary proportion of firstborn sons to the whole male population is one to four. By an examination of Exodus 13:2, 11, and the following verses, we find nothing inconsistent with that interpretation which makes the requirement to sanctify the firstborn wholly prospective and not retrospective.

40. A month old — In Leviticus 27:6 the age of one month had been fixed as the age to be reached before the parents should redeem their firstborn son. Those dying under that age were not redeemed.

V. 41. Instead of the first-born-Such as are now alive of them, but those which should be born of them hereafter are otherwise disposed. Of the Levites-Not that they were to be taken from the Levites, or to be sacrificed to God, any more than the Levites themselves were; but they together with the Levites were to be presented before the Lord by way of acknowledgment, that the Levites might be set apart for God’s service, and their cattle for themselves as God’s ministers, and for their support in God’s work.

Verse 41. Instead of the firstborn — Such as are now alive of them; but those which should be born of them hereafter are otherwise disposed of. Cattle of the Levites — Not that they were to be taken from the Levites, or to be sacrificed to God, any more than the Levites themselves were; but they, together with the Levites, were to be presented before the Lord by way of acknowledgment, that the Levites might be set apart for God’s service, and their cattle for themselves as God’s ministers, and for their support in God’s work.

41. The cattle of the Levites — These do not seem to have been enumerated, but were estimated in the mass as equal to the firstborn cattle of all the other tribes. They were not all immediately sacrificed, nor were they taken from the Levites, but left in their possession to be sacrificed when needed. This is an impressive illustration of that stewardship of property required by Jesus Christ of all his followers. Having consecrated all their substance to him, they are to be ready to present it as a cheerful sacrifice at the first intimation of his will.

THE SUPERNUMERARY FIRSTBORN REDEEMED, 44-51.

Since the results of the two enumerations disclose an excess of two hundred and seventy-three firstborn above the number of the Levites, Jehovah evinces the exactness of his demands, and sets an example of what men call square dealing, by requiring an equivalent for the services of these unexchanged firstborn. In all ages money has been deemed the equivalent of labour. In accordance with this principle of political economy, Jehovah sets a price upon the services of these two hundred and seventy-three firstborn, namely, five shekels each, about two dollars and seventy cents in the Federal currency, amounting to over seven hundred dollars, reckoning the shekel at fifty-three cents. The entire sum of redemption money was paid to Aaron and his sons as the representatives of Jehovah. The important question here arises, By whom was it paid? Here we have three conjectural answers: —

1. That the question of redeeming the two hundred and

seventy-three was determined by lot; that twenty-two thousand drew lots which entitled them to be offset for as many Levites, and that the supernumeraries drew blanks, which indicated that they, or rather their parents, must pay each five shekels. This is the tradition, and is the theory of the Rabbies. It seems not to be just to the supernumeraries, nor to be in harmony with the dignity of Jehovah.

2. Another hypothesis is, that the firstborn were redeemed by seniority, leaving the two hundred and seventy-three youngest to be redeemed by their parents.

3. The more reasonable solution of the difficulty is the theory that this money was a tax upon the tribes, and was paid out of a common fund.

CENSUS OF THE FIRSTBORN MALES OF THE ISRAELITES, 40-43.

We have already hinted that the firstborn intended in this enumeration could not be the firstborn of every age, from the babe a month old up to the grandfathers and great-grandfathers. The difficulties of this broad interpretation, as suggested by Keil, are insuperable. The census of the males from the twentieth year upward would show a male population of over a million. Divide this sum by the number of firstborn, and there would be only one firstborn to forty or forty-five males, and, consequently, every father must have begotten, or still have had, from thirty-nine to forty-four sons; whereas the ordinary proportion of firstborn sons to the whole male population is one to four. By an examination of Exodus 13:2, 11, and the following verses, we find nothing inconsistent with that interpretation which makes the requirement to sanctify the firstborn wholly prospective and not retrospective.

40. A month old — In Leviticus 27:6 the age of one month had been fixed as the age to be reached before the parents should redeem their firstborn son. Those dying under that age were not redeemed.

Verse 43. All the first-born males-were twenty and two thousand two hundred and threescore and thirteen.] Thus we find there were 273 first-born beyond the number of the Levites. These are ordered, Numbers 3:46, to be redeemed; and the redemption price is to be five shekels each, Numbers 3:47, about 15s. And this money, amounting to 1,365 shekels, equal to £204 15s. English, he took of the first-born of Israel, Numbers 3:50. But how was this collected among 22,273 persons? Rabbi Solomon Jarchi says, “to prevent contention, Moses took 22,000 slips of parchment, and wrote on each a son of Levi, and 273 others, on which he wrote five shekels; then he mixed them in a basket, and each man took out one; those who drew the slips on which five shekels were written, paid the money; the others went free.” This is a most stupid and silly tale, for such a mode of settlement never could have been resorted to by an intelligent people. It would have been much more simple to have paid it out of a general fund; and it is very likely that in this way the expense was defrayed.

This species of redeeming of men is referred to by St. Peter, 1 Peter 1:18,19: “Ye know that ye were not redeemed with corruptible things, as silver and gold, from your vain conversation, received by tradition from your fathers; but with the precious (timiw aimati, valuable) blood of Christ, as of a lamb without blemish and without spot,” &c. And it is not the first-born only which are thus redeemed, for he, by the grace of God, tasted death for EVERY man; Hebrews 2:9. Reader, give glory to God that such a ransom has been paid for thy soul, and see that, redeemed from thy vain conversation, thy empty, fruitless, and graceless observances, on which thou hast built thy hopes of salvation, thou walk in newness of life, giving thy whole soul with thankfulness unto the Father who hath translated thee from darkness, and placed thee in the kingdom of his beloved Son. To Him be glory and dominion for ever and ever! Amen. NUMBERS

CENSUS OF THE FIRSTBORN MALES OF THE ISRAELITES, 40-43.

We have already hinted that the firstborn intended in this enumeration could not be the firstborn of every age, from the babe a month old up to the grandfathers and great-grandfathers. The difficulties of this broad interpretation, as suggested by Keil, are insuperable. The census of the males from the twentieth year upward would show a male population of over a million. Divide this sum by the number of firstborn, and there would be only one firstborn to forty or forty-five males, and, consequently, every father must have begotten, or still have had, from thirty-nine to forty-four sons; whereas the ordinary proportion of firstborn sons to the whole male population is one to four. By an examination of Exodus 13:2, 11, and the following verses, we find nothing inconsistent with that interpretation which makes the requirement to sanctify the firstborn wholly prospective and not retrospective.

40. A month old — In Leviticus 27:6 the age of one month had been fixed as the age to be reached before the parents should redeem their firstborn son. Those dying under that age were not redeemed.

V. 46. For those that are to be redeemed-‘Tis probable, in the exchange they began with the eldest of the first-born, and so downwards, so that those were to be redeemed, who were the two hundred, seventy three youngest of them.

Verse 46. For those that are to be redeemed — It is probable, in the exchange they began with the eldest of the firstborn, and so downward, so that those were to be redeemed who were the two hundred and seventy-three youngest of them.

V. 47. Five shekels-Which was the price paid for the redemption of a first-born a month old.

Verse 47. Five shekels — Which was the price paid for the redemption of a firstborn a month old.

Ver. 47. Five shekels, nearly three ounces of silver, were required of the children of the levites, ten times more than the common people; and it would seem that some special provision was made for their education.

47. Shekel of the sanctuary — Or, sacred shekel. Shekel signifies, in the Hebrew, weight in the abstract. But weights soon pass over into a designation of coins, as the English pound. There are in the Old Testament three shekels mentioned — the ordinary shekel, the shekel of the sanctuary, and the shekel after the king’s weight. 2 Samuel 14:26. It is impossible to show the exact difference between these. According to the best authorities, the shekel was equal to three English shillings, or seventy-four cents. But if we follow the Septuagint, which translates it by didracmon, it equals in English currency one shilling seven pence half penny, or thirty-nine cents. In such case all our estimates of weight and value must be proportionally decreased. The latest conclusions, in Smith’s Dictionary, make the silver shekel equal to two hundred and twenty grains, or 220/417 of the Federal dollar, about fifty-three cents. In the sanctuary were kept the standard weights and measures; hence, “the balances of the sanctuary.” The Jew’s religion touched his ordinary life at every point, as Christianity should its professors. Twenty gerahs — Gerah is Hebrew, meaning berry, or grain, possibly the seed of the carob-tree. The Mosaic gerah, which is equal to thirteen and seven tenths Paris grains, is equal to four or five beans of the carob, and, according to the Rabbies, to sixteen grains of barley.

CONCLUDING NOTE.

The question now arises, whether in a population exceeding two millions there could have been twenty-two thousand two hundred and seventy-three firstborn sons in the thirteen months since the passover. The proportion of male births to female among the Jews of modern times has been as high as twenty-nine to twenty, or nearly three to two. Assuming that in the month of the emancipation there were thirty-eight thousand marriages, it is not unreasonable to suppose that these would produce the required number of firstborn males, twenty-two thousand two hundred and seventy-three, in thirteen months, reckoning in the fruits of marriages previous to the exodus, which up to that time had been productive of no males. The exode must have given a wonderful impulse to marriage among the Hebrews, suddenly lifted up from crushing oppression and inspired and gladdened by freedom. The reasons for limiting the firstborn to those born after the Egyptian Passover are thus concisely stated in the Speaker’s Bib. Com.: “This seems implied in the very language used: — ’Sanctify unto me the firstborn, whatsoever openeth (not hath opened) the womb;’ (Exodus 13:2, 11, 12;) by the ground which God is pleased to assign (Numbers 3:13 and 8:17) for making this claim; by the fact that the special duties of the firstborn had reference to a ritual which, at the time of the exodus, had not yet been revealed; and by the inclusion in the command of the firstborn of cattle, which obviously must mean those thereafter born, for we cannot imagine that an inquisition among the flocks and herds was made at the exodus to discover for immediate sacrifice the firstborn already in existence.”

Colenso’s argument in reply, that rcp is a noun, (womb-opener,) simply removes the tense entirely, so that all presumption against the present tense is taken away.

Dr. M. Mahan thus concisely relieves this arithmetical difficulty: “The best way (perhaps) of reconciling the number of the firstborn with that of the male adults, is suggested by the fact that the total number of Levites was twenty-two thousand three hundred, whereas only twenty-two thousand were available as substitutes for the firstborn. What became of the three hundred? It is answered, that they were the firstborn of the Levites, and, consequently, could only redeem themselves, and not their brethren. If so, the firstborn of the Levites since the Passover would be in the proportion of three hundred to twenty-two thousand, or one to seventy-four, of the males ‘from a month old and upward.’ Now supposing that the firstborn of the other tribes meant only those who had been born since the law of redemption had been instituted, we may make the following calculation: six hundred thousand fighting men would be about one half or one third of the male population of all ages; if we allow one half, the total number would be one million two hundred thousand; if we allow one third, it would be one million eight hundred thousand. Divide these sums respectively by twenty-two thousand, the number of the firstborn, and we get the rate of one to fifty-five in the one case, and one to eighty-one in the other; or, if we take the warriors to be (as is probable) something more than one third, and less than one half, of the whole number of males, we get a closer approximation to the one in seventy-four which has been previously calculated as the proportion of firstborn among the Levites. From this coincidence arises a probability that the firstborn in verse 43 were only those who had been born since the law of redemption had been given; and that said law was not intended to have a retrospective force.” These hypotheses (which are certainly not more violent than the assumptions of Colenso) would put the twenty-two thousand firstborn and the six hundred thousand warriors in a fairer proportion to one another, and so far would relieve the chief difficulty. See Poole’s Synopsis.