EXPOSITION
THE DAUGHTERS OF ZELOPHEHAD (Numbers 27:1-4).
The daughters of Zelophehad. The genealogy here given agrees with those in Numbers 26:29-4 and in Joshua 17:3. These women would appear to have been in the eighth generation from Jacob, which hardly accords with the 470 years required by the narrative; some links, however, may have been dropped.
By the door of the tabernacle of the congregation, i.e; evidently by the entrance of the sacred enclosure. Here, in the void space, in the midst of the camp, and close to the presence-chamber of God, the princes (i.e; the tribe princes who were engaged upon the census) and the representatives of the congregation assembled for the transaction of business and for the hearing of any matters that were brought before them.
He was not in the company of them that gathered themselves together against the Lord. He had not been amongst the two hundred and fifty who gathered themselves together in support of Korah s pretensions. It does not appear why they should have thought it necessary to make this statement, unless they felt that the fact of his having died without sons might raise suspicion against him as one who had greatly provoked the wrath of God. But died in his own sin. This cannot mean that Zelophehad was one of those who died in the wilderness in consequence of the rebellion at Kadesh (see the next note). Apparently his daughters meant to acknowledge that they had no complaint against the Divine justice because of their father's death, but only against the law because of the unnecessary hardship which it inflicted upon them.
Give unto us … a possession among the brethren of our father. The daughters of Zelophehad did not ask for any share of what had been their father's, but they asked that the lands which would have been assigned to their father in the settlement of Canaan might still be assigned to them, so that their father's name might attach to those lands, and be handed down with them. The request assumes that the "brethren" of Zelophehad would receive an inheritance in the promised land, either personally or as represented by their sons; hence it seems clear that Zelophehad was not of the elder generation, which had forfeited all their rights and expectations in Canaan, but of the younger, to whom the inheritance was transferred (Numbers 14:29-4). This is confirmed by the consideration that these women were not married until some time after this (Numbers 36:11; cf. Joshua 17:8, Joshua 17:4), and must, therefore, according to the almost invariable custom, have been quite young at this time. It is reasonable to suppose that the heads of separate families to whom the land was distributed would be at this time men of from forty-five to sixty years of age, comprising the elder half of the generation which grew up in the wilderness. Zelophehad would have been among these, but that he was cut off, perhaps in the plague of serpents, or in the plague of the Arboth Mesh, and left only unmarried girls to represent him.
Moses brought their cause before the Lord. Presumably by going into the tabernacle with this matter upon his mind, and awaiting the revelation of the Divine will (cf. Exodus 18:19; Numbers 12:8).
If a man die, and have no son. On this particular case a general rule of much wider incidence was founded. The Mosaic law of succession followed the same lines as the feudal law of Europe, equally disallowing disposition by will, and discouraging, if not disallowing, alienation by grant. Upon the land was to rest the whole social fabric of Israel, and all that was valued and permanent in family life and feeling was to be tied as it were to the landed inheritance. Hence the land was in every case so to pass that the name and fame, the privilege and duty, of the deceased owner might be as far as possible perpetuated. Unto his daughter. Not for her maintenance, but in order that her husband might represent her father. In most cases he would take her name, and be counted as one of her father's family. This had no doubt already become customary among the Jews, as among almost all nations. Compare the cases of Sheshan and Jarha (1 Chronicles 2:34, 1 Chronicles 2:35), of Jair (Numbers 32:41), and subsequently of the Levitical "sons of Barzillai" (Ezra 2:61). The question, however, would only become of public importance at the time when Israel became a nation of landed proprietors.
A statute of judgment, לְחֻמקּת מִשְׁפָט. Septuagint, δικαίωμα κρίσεως. A statute determining a legal right.
HOMILETICS
THE CERTAINTY OF THE PROMISED INHERITANCE
The case of Zelophehad's daughters is no doubt in keeping with that favourable consideration of women, as capable of claiming rights and holding a position of their own, which certainly distinguished the Mosaic legislation, and affected for good the Jewish character. But the one thing which we may spiritually discern here is the security of the heavenly inheritance and the faithfulness with which it is Divinely reserved for them that have received the promise. Zelophehad died, and that through sin, but since he was not of the disinherited, therefore his name did not cease, neither was his portion taken away from among the people of the Lord. Consider, therefore—
I. THAT ZELOPHEHAD, AS ONE OF THE YOUNGER GENERATION, HAD A PROMISE OF AN INHERITANCE IN CANAAN TO BE HIS (i.e; HIS FAMILY'S) FOR EVER. Even so we, in that we belong to "this generation" (cf. Matthew 24:34), which has received the promise of eternal life, and a kingdom which cannot be moved (Hebrews 12:28), are without question heirs of salvation, and look forward to a portion amongst the faithful.
II. THAT ZELOPHEHAD HIMSELF DIED IN THE WILDERNESS, AND THAT BY REASON OF SOME SIN WE KNOW NOT WHAT. Even so we die without having received the promised glory; in all probability we shall all so die; and death is the wages of sin, and the body is turned to corruption because of sin.
III. THAT THE DEATH OF ZELOPHEHAD SEEMED TO BAR Ills CLAIM TO ANY INHERITANCE AMONGST HIS BRETHREN, SEEING HE HAD NO SON TO TAKE HIS PLACE AND NAME. Even so death seems at first sight, and in the eyes of the unwise, to cut off hope and to separate from the living, and to deprive those that "are not" of the reward to which they looked. And this was thought to be the case even by them that believed in the first days (1 Thessalonians 4:13, sq.).
IV. THAT BY THE WILL OF GOD, HIS NAME AND INHERITANCE WERE PRESERVED IN ISRAEL BY MEANS OF HIS DAUGHTERS. Even so, neither death nor failure in this world will be permitted to deprive us of that inheritance in a better world which the mercy of God reserves for us, not because we have deserved it, but because he has promised it.
Consider again, with respect to the daughters of Zelophehad—
I. THAT THEY RECEIVED THE REWARD OF FAITH, IN THAT THEY DOUBTED NOT THAT THE LORD'S PEOPLE WOULD RECEIVE EVERY MAN HIS PORTION IN THE LAND OF PROMISE; although they were yet on the other side of Jordan. It is in perfect faith of the fulfillment of God's promises that we must so ask as to receive.
II. THAT THEY RECEIVED THE REWARD OF COURAGE, IN THAT THEY BEING WOMEN WITHOUT ANY NATURAL PROTECTOR, BROUGHT THEIR CAUSE OPENLY BEFORE MOSES, AND SO BEFORE GOD. It is with boldness, not confounded by our own weakness, that we are to make our requests known unto God (Ephesians 3:12; Hebrews 10:19), assured that no one is unimportant with him, and no cause disregarded by him.
HOMILIES BY D. YOUNG
THE DISABILITIES OF SEX
I. THE POSSIBLE INJUSTICE CONSEQUENT ON A STRICT ADHERENCE TO SOCIAL TRADITIONS. Try to imagine how this appeal of the daughters of Zelophehad arises. Canaan is now very near, the borders of it visible across the flood; and God has just told Moses the great general principles on which it is to be allotted. Thus the minds of the people are naturally filled with the thoughts of the inheritance. They can no longer complain of being in desolate places. There was good land even before they crossed Jordan (Numbers 32:1-4), and so Canaan was looked forward to with great expectations. In such circumstances, every family would be on the look-out to anticipate and assert its share. The disciples after they had heard Jesus discoursing so frequently and earnestly on the coming kingdom of heaven, fell to in hot rivalry as to who should be greatest in the kingdom. So here we may well suppose that the sons of Hepher were only too ready to reckon the daughters of their brother Zelophehad as outside any right to the land that would fall to Hepher's children. Natural relations are only too easily trampled on in the greed of gain. Disputes over the division of property breed and sustain deadly quarrels among kindred (Luke 12:13). Very possibly the brothers of Zelophehad told their nieces that they had no claim to inherit, it being the settled custom that inheritances were to go to sons. Let them be satisfied with marriage into some other family. But the daughters felt pride in their father's name. They do not claim great things for him, feeling that such a claim would not accord with the lot of one who belonged to the doomed generation; but at all events they can say that he died in his own sin; he was free from the taint of that great rebellion which left so deep an impression on Israel's mind. Why then should his name perish from among his family, because he had no son? The answer which we are led to infer is very simple; very worldly also, it is true, but all the more conceivable because of that, "We cleave to our customs; we cannot even give way to feelings which are so creditable to daughters." This perhaps openly—then in their own hearts they would add, "They are only women; they can do nothing."
II. A BOLD REVOLT AGAINST THE ARTIFICIAL DISABILITIES OF SEX. We have imagined an actual refusal to let these women share in the possession. But even if it were not actual, they have a shrewd idea of what will happen, and come appealing to Moses, in the most public manner, so that they may have his weighty authority to settle the matter before he goes. They were but women, yet they had all a man's decision and courage—and more than belongs to most men—to break away from all conventional notions rather than tamely submit to injustice. Paul's disapproval of women speaking in the churches was of course very good as pointing out a general rule, but probably he would have allowed, on a prudent occasion for allowing it, that it was a rule not without exceptions. He may have reckoned it well at the time, for reasons drawn from the state of a particular church, to make the injunctions express and decided. Who were to speak for these women, if not they themselves? When the down-trodden find no sufficient advocate among spectators, it is time for them to raise their own voices. Is it not plain that these women were the best judges of their own position? So in the pressure of modern social life, is it not very inconsistent with the maintenance of liberty and truth, to hinder women from asserting their claims in whatever way they deem best? They may indeed be unfit for many fields of labour which they profess their fitness and anxiety to occupy, but at all events let them discover the unfitness for themselves. Has it not been said beforehand of many achieved and glorious facts that they were impossible of attainment? Modern history abounds with such disgraced predictions. Paul said, "Let every man be fully persuaded in his own mind," which is surely every whit as needful and every whit as serviceable for the woman as the man.
III. THE ACTION OF THESE WOMEN WAS JUSTIFIED BY THE RESULT. God approves their action, as they gain from him the authoritative laying down of a general principle, applied indeed to property, but surely of equal application to all disabilities of sex which arise in other ways than from the impassable limits of nature. God has written for the woman, in her own nature, certain laws she must not transgress, but he never gave man the right to construe these laws, certainly not after the domineering fashion he so frequently adopts. It is undoubtedly true that God made the woman for the man; human nature finds here its completeness, derives hence the means of its continuance, and that diversity of personality and character which constitute so much of the peculiar riches of humanity. But man is not therefore to settle the woman's sphere with his strong and irresponsible hand. Is it not a thing almost certain that many disabilities of sex have arisen through man being from the first the stronger? In the days when might made right—
He took advantage of his strength to be
First in the field.
There is a parallel between much in man's treatment of woman and his treatment of the Sabbath. Christ had to free the Sabbath, in his day, from Pharisees. It had been so fettered up by opinionated, obstinate clingers to the traditions of the fathers, as to have become useless for its original purposes, a burden and a terror more than anything else. He freed it by the great declaration that the Sabbath was made for man, and now we have those who rush to the other extreme, and quote his words for purposes utterly alien from his own. So there are the two extremes in judging the place of woman and the scope of her life and service. Some, blindly wedded to custom, would shut woman up in strict limitations, which though not as degrading as those of a Turkish harem, are quite as unjust and injurious in their own way. Others there are who seem inclined to claim for women more than nature in its utmost kindliness will ever yield. Women, who know their own nature best, can be the only true judges, ever under the guidance of God himself, as to the capabilities of their sex. Paul pleading for oneness in Christ Jesus, says, that in relation to him, as there is neither Jew nor Greek, bond nor free, so there is neither male nor female. The woman is on the same level as the man in the sight of Christ. To Christ she is directly responsible, bound to serve him with the fullness of her powers. Hence to take the highest ground, that of allegiance to Christ, it is unfaithfulness to him to put even the smallest obstacles in the way of women acting as their own hearts tell them they may best serve their Master.
IV. WE SEE A GOD OF EQUITY SHOWING HIS DISREGARD FOR MERE LEGAL RIGHTS. Nowhere is it shown more clearly than in the Scriptures that law is one thing and equity another. How should a world ignorant of the righteousness of God, and full of the selfish and domineering, make laws such as he will sanction and uphold? "We have law with us," the uncles may have said. Possibly so; but not the law of him who spoke from Sinai. Any law of men which contradicts the law of love to God, and love to the neighbour, is doomed in the very making of it. And is it not a blessed thing that such laws get broken and ultimately destroyed by the energy of an expanding life which cannot be contained within them? (Matthew 9:10-40; Matthew 12:1-40; Matthew 15:1-40; Matthew 19:8-40; Matthew 22:34-40; Romans 14:5; Galatians 3:28).—Y.
THE MAN WHO DIED IN HIS OWN SIN
I. A PLEA FOR FAVOURABLE CONSIDERATION. The daughters of Zelophehad felt that if he. had been numbered among the conspirators with Korah, it would have been very difficult for them to stand forward and make this claim. It is one of the saddest things in a world of sad things that the innocent children of guilty parents are made to inherit the shame of the parental offence. The parental name, instead of being one of the sweetest sounds to fall upon their ears, becomes one of the most hideous and torturing. Not seldom they are looked upon with suspicion, and though it be admitted they cannot help the parents' crime, yet they begin life with a millstone round their necks. The words of these women, meant only as a plea for themselves, inflicted at the same time a blow, none the less severe because unconsciously given, on any children of Korah (Numbers 26:11) or of his confederates who might be present. Not that it made any real difference to the principle of the matter in question, whether Zelophehad died in his own sin or as partaker in a huge rebellion, but it did make a difference in the spirit with which these women presented their case. The fact that they were women did not make them afraid to go into the face of the whole congregation, but if they had been children of Korah, the chances are that a sense of shame would have compelled them to suffer wrong. What an admonition to those who stand among temptations to some shameless and heinous deed to ponder well the consequent stain and difficulty that may come to their innocent progeny! That the sins of the fathers are visited on the children is a fact apparent in nature, but society heartily accepts the principle, and only too often works it out in the most unsparing fashion.
II. IT WAS THE RIGHT SPIRIT OF APPROACH TO GOD IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES. Zelophehad belonged to the doomed generation. He may indeed have been a better man than most, but a census had just been taken which revealed the fact that there was not a single survivor of the generation; and it was not the time to say more in way of commendation than that Zelophehad died in his own sin. A deferential humble recollection of the holiness of Jehovah we may well believe to have marked the present approach of these women. He would hardly have connected the assertion of a general principle with their request if there had been anything unseemly or insolent in the manner of it. We shall do well not to claim too much for men in the way of commendation, when we are thinking of them in relation to God. We must neither abase them too low nor exalt them too high, but preserve the golden mean of a loving, charitable, and Christian appreciation. How offensive in the hearing of God many eulogies of men must sound, where not only superlative is piled on superlative, but altogether erroneous principles of judgment are adopted. There is a time and a need to praise devoted servants of God, and to maintain their reputation for fidelity, zeal, and spiritual success, but never let it be forgotten that the very best of men, to say the least of him, dies in his own sin. That will be largely his own consciousness. Whatever his services may have been, it is in the grace, wisdom, and ample preparedness of God in Christ Jesus that he will find his only hope. It only needs a little thought to see the impropriety of praising men, because they are laden with the free gifts of God's grace, and at the very time when the suitability of those gifts is especially made manifest. Any sort of praise of human excellence and service which even for a moment pushes into the background the universal depravity of man and the universal necessity of God' s grace and mercy, is thereby self-condemned.
III. THOUGH A MAN DIE IN HIS OWN SIN ONLY, YET THAT IS ENOUGH TO WORK IRREPARABLE MISCHIEF. It was well to be able to say of Zelophehad that he had kept out of Korah's conspiracy, but it was a poor thing to say, if there was nothing better behind. Out of negations, nothing but negations will ever come. It is of no avail to keep out of ten thousand wrong ways, unless we take the one right way. The sum of human duty is to leave undone all the things which ought to be left undone, and to do all the things which ought to be done. Your own sin, small as it may seem in your present consciousness, is enough to bring death. The mustard seed of inborn alienation from God will grow to a mighty and everlasting curse if you do not stop it in time. Those who have passed through untold agonies because of conviction of sin, once laughed at sin as a little thing. They did not dream it would give them such trouble, and drive them about incessantly till they got the question answered, "What must I do to be saved?" Sin sleeps in most, as far as the peculiar consciousness of it is concerned, but when it wakes it will prove itself a giant. Look at the analogy in physical life. A man says that he is full of health and vigour, and he looks it; he even gets complimented upon it. Suddenly, in the midst of these compliments, he is stricken down with a fierce disease, and a few days number him among the dead. Why? The real disease was in him already, even with all his consciousness of health. There must have been something in his body to give the outward cause a hold. Our present consciousness is no criterion of our spiritual state. The word of God in the Scriptures, humbly apprehended and obeyed, is the only safe guide to follow.
IV. THOUGH A MAN MUST NEEDS DIE IN HIS OWN SIN, HE MAY ALSO DIE IN THE FULNESS OF CHRIST'S SALVATION FROM SIN. The end of life, with all its gloom, with all its manifestations of despair, callousness, and self-righteousness in some, is in others an occasion to manifest in great beauty the power of God in the spirits of men. One must die in his own sin, yet he may also experience the cleansing of that blood which takes away all sin. One must die in his own sin, yet this very necessity may also lead to dying in the faith of Jesus, in the hope of glory, and in the arms of infinite love.
V. WE SHOULD AIM THAT NOTHING WORSE THAN DYING IN OUR OWN SIN MAY BE SAID OF US. It is bad enough that sin should be dominant, even without compelling us to leave the ordinary paths of life; those reckoned, among men, useful and harmless. It is bad enough to feel that in us there are the possibilities of the most abandoned and reckless, of the worst of tyrants, sensualists, and desperadoes; only lacking such temptations, associations, and opportunities: as may make the possible actual. Be it ours, if we cannot show a spotless record, if we cannot claim a personality that started from innocence, at all events to show as little of harm to the world as possible. We cannot keep out of Zelophehad's company; let us keep out of Korah's. There is a medium between being a Pharisee and a profligate.—Y.