NUMBERS 3 COMMENTARYEDITED BY GLENN PEASE

The Levites1 This is the account of the family of Aaron and Moses at the time the Lord spoke to Moses at Mount Sinai.

BARNES, "The “generations” (see Gen_2:4) now given, though entitled those of Aaron and Moses (Aaron standing first as the older brother), are those of Aaron only. The personal dignity of Moses, though it gave him rank as at the head of his tribe, was not hereditary. He had, and desired to have Num_14:12; Exo_32:10, no successor in his office but the distant prophet like unto himself Deu_18:18. Aaron was the ancestor of a regular succession of priests.

CLARKE, "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 ואלה תלדות 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 Gen_2:4; Gen_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

1

the Old and New Testaments, to give some vitality to the otherwise inert mass.

GILL, "These also are the generations of Aaron and Moses,.... The descendants of them, those of the former, who is named first, because the eldest, were priests, and those of the latter Levites, and who are not very plainly pointed at, but are included among the Amramites, Num_3:27; the posterity of Moses being very obscure, only Levites, and these not particularly named but swallowed up among the Kohathites: find the following account was as it stood: in the day that the Lord spoke with Moses in mount Sinai; and not, altogether as it then, was when he spoke to him in the wilderness, of Sinai, for then Aaron had four sons, but now two of them were dead as is after observed; and it seems to be for the sake of this circumstance chiefly that this clause is so put.

HENRY 3-13, "Here, I. The family of Aaron is confirmed in the priests' office, Num_3:10. They had been called to it before, and consecrated; here they are appointed to wait on their priests' office: the apostle uses this phrase (Rom_12:7), Let us wait on our ministry. The office of the ministry requires a constant attendance and great diligence; so frequent are the returns of its work, and yet so transient its favourable opportunities, that it must be waited on. Here is repeated what was said before (Num_1:51): The stranger that cometh nigh shall be put to death, which forbids the invading of the priest's office by any other person whatsoever; none must come nigh to minister but Aaron and his sons only, all others are strangers. It also lays a charge on the priests, as door-keepers in God's house, to take care that none should come near who were forbidden by the law; they must keep off all intruders, whose approach would be to the profanation of the holy things, telling them that if they came near it was at their peril, they would die by the hand of God, as Uzza did. The Jews say that afterwards there was hung over the door of the temple a golden sword (perhaps alluding to that flaming sword at the entrance of the garden of Eden), on which was engraven, The stranger that cometh nigh shall be put to death.

II. A particular account is given of this family of Aaron; what we have met with before concerning them is here repeated. 1. The consecration of the sons of Aaron, Num_3:3. They were all anointed to minister before the Lord, though it appeared afterwards, and God knew it, that two of them were wise and two were foolish. 2. The fall of the two elder (Num_3:4): they offered strange fire, and died for so doing, before the Lord. This is mentioned here in the preamble to the law concerning the priesthood, for a warning to all succeeding priests; let them know, by this example, that God is a jealous God, and will not be mocked; the holy anointing oil was an honour to the obedient, but not a shelter to the disobedient. It is here said, They had no children, Providence so ordering it, for their greater punishment, that none of their descendants should remain to be priests, and so bear up their name who had profaned God's name. 3. The continuance of the two younger: Eleazar and Ithamar ministered in the sight of Aaron. It intimates, (1.) The care they took about their ministration not to make any blunders; they kept under their father's eye, and took instruction from him in all they did, because, probably, Nadab and Abihu got out of their father's sight when they offered strange fire. Note, It is 2

good for young people to act under the direction and inspection of those that are aged and experienced. (2.) The comfort Aaron took in it; it pleased him to see his younger sons behave themselves prudently and gravely, when his two elder had miscarried. Note, It is a great satisfaction to parents to see their children walk in the truth, 3Jo_1:4.III. A grant is made of the Levites to be assistants to the priests in their work: Give the Levites to Aaron, Num_3:9. Aaron was to have a greater propriety in, and power over, the tribe of Levi than any other of the prices had in and over their respective tribes. There was a great deal of work belonging to the priests' office, and there were now only three pairs of hands to do it all, Aaron's and his two sons'; for it does not appear that they had either of them any children at this time, at least not any that were of age to minister, therefore God appoints the Levites to attend upon them. Note, Those whom God finds work for his will find help for. Here is, 1. The service for which the Levites were designed: they were to minister to the priests in their ministration to the Lord (Num_3:6), and to keep Aaron's charge (Num_3:7), as the deacons to the bishops in the evangelical constitution, serving at tables, while the bishops waited on their ministry. The Levites killed the sacrifices, and then the priests needed only to sprinkle the blood and burn the fat: the Levites prepared the incense, the priests burnt it. They were to keep, not only Aaron's charge, but the charge of the whole congregation. Note, It is a great trust that is reposed in ministers, not only for the glory of Christ, but for the good of his church; so that they must not only keep the charge of the great high priest, but must also be faithful to the souls of men, in trust for whom a dispensation is committed to them. 2. the consideration upon which the Levites were demanded; they were taken instead of the first-born. The preservation of the first-born of Israel, when all the first-born of the Egyptians (with whom they were many of them mingled) were destroyed, was looked upon by him who never makes any unreasonable demands as cause sufficient of the appropriating of all the first-born thenceforward to himself (Num_3:13): All the first-born are mine. That was sufficient to make them his, though he had given no reason for it, for he is the sole fountain and Lord of all beings and powers; but because all obedience must flow from love, and acts of duty must be acts of gratitude, before they were challenged into peculiar services they were crowned with peculiar favours. Note, When he that made us saves us we are thereby laid under further obligations to serve him and live to him. God's right to us by redemption corroborates the right he has to us by creation. Now because the first-born of a family are generally the favourites, and some would think it a disparagement to have their eldest sons servants to the priests, and attending before the door of the tabernacle, God took the tribe of Levi entire for his own, in lieu of the first-born, Num_3:12. Note, God's institutions put no hardships upon men in any of their just interests or reasonable affections. It was presumed that the Israelites would rather part with the Levites than with the first-born, and therefore God graciously ordered the exchange; yet for us he spared not his own Son.

JAMISON, "Num_3:1-51. The Levites’ service.These ... are the generations of Aaron and Moses, etc. — This chapter contains an account of their families; and although that of Moses is not detailed like his brother’s, his children are included under the general designation of the Amramites (Num_3:27), a term which comprehends all the descendants of their common father Amram. The reason why the family of Moses was so undistinguished in this record is

3

that they were in the private ranks of the Levites, the dignity of the priesthood being conferred exclusively on the posterity of Aaron; and hence, as the sacerdotal order is the subject of this chapter, Aaron, contrary to the usual style of the sacred history, is mentioned before Moses.in the day that the Lord spake with Moses in mount Sinai — This is added, because at the date of the following record the family of Aaron was unbroken.

K&D, "Muster of the Tribe of Levi. - As Jacob had adopted the two sons of Joseph as his own sons, and thus promoted them to the rank of heads of tribes, the tribe of Levi formed, strictly speaking, the thirteenth tribe of the whole nation, and was excepted from the muster of the twelve tribes who were destined to form the army of Jehovah, because God had chosen it for the service of the sanctuary. Out of this tribe God had not only called Moses to be the deliverer, lawgiver, and leader of His people, but Moses' brother Aaron, with the sons of the latter, to be the custodians of the sanctuary. And now, lastly, the whole tribe was chosen, in the place of the first-born of all the tribes, to assist the priests in performing the duties of the sanctuary, and was numbered and mustered for this its special calling.Num_3:1

In order to indicate at the very outset the position which the Levites were to occupy in relation to the priests (viz., Aaron and his descendants), the account of their muster commences not only with the enumeration of the sons of Aaron who were chosen as priests (Num_3:2-4), but with the heading: “These are the generations of Aaron and Moses in the day (i.e., at the time) when Jehovah spake with Moses in Mount Sinai(Num_3:1). The toledoth (see at Gen_2:4) of Moses and Aaron are not only the families which sprang from Aaron and Moses, but the Levitical families generally, which were named after Aaron and Moses, because they were both of them raised into the position of heads or spiritual fathers of the whole tribe, namely, at the time when God spoke to Moses upon Sinai. Understood in this way, the notice as to the time is neither a superfluous repetition, nor introduced with reference to the subsequent numbering of the people in the steppes of Moab (Num_26:57.). Aaron is placed before Moses here (see at Exo_6:26.), not merely as being the elder of the two, but because his sons received the priesthood, whilst the sons of Moses, on the contrary, were classed among the rest of the Levitical families (cf. 1Ch_23:14).

CALVIN, "1.These also are the generations of Aaron and Moses He now separately enumerates the Levites; but, before he proceeds to state their number, he first shortly refers to what he had just before more fully narrated, that of the four sons of Aaron only two survived their father, inasmuch as Nadab and Abihu had suffered the penalty of their negligence in their defilement of the sacrifice. The six verses (423) which Moses inserts respecting the office of the priests have been expounded in their proper place. The dignity of the tribe of Levi is here exalted, when God compares the Levites to the first-born; the distribution of their charges is also touched upon, (424) but, since these things are connected with the census of the

4

people, and the mode of pitching the camp, I have thought it best to annex them to what has just preceded, inasmuch as otherwise the history would be interrupted. And, in fact, in the order that I have followed, the office of each family is only incidentally treated of, so that all might know their proper station.

COFFMAN, "This chapter has the enumeration of the Levites, their duties, and the substitution of the first-born. As is generally true, most of the writings available on these chapters have the nature of an extended harangue on the numbers in this section of the book, whether or not they are accurately reported, or if they are "fabricated,"[1] or that maybe the word for "thousand" originally meant merely, "squads," "families," or some other unit far smaller than "thousand."These numbers in Moses' fourth book present no problem whatever to the believer.(1) If the numbers are exactly accurate in all respects, the only problem would be connected with how so vast a multitude could be maintained in the kind of environment the Sinai area is supposed to have been during Israel's sojourn there. But where is the problem? Is anything too hard for God? Our holy text makes it perfectly clear that God Himself provided the food and drink for that whole era of forty years. The people who have trouble with this evidently know nothing of the God of the Bible.(2) If, as strongly suggested by some writers, the word here rendered "thousand(s)" actually meant something else originally, then, in this particular, the Masoretic Text would be in error, but, of course, there is no evidence whatever to support such a view. However, even if such an error could be revealed here and there in the Holy Bible, the effect would be of as little consequence as a fly-speck on the Washington Monument. We do not believe any error exists in these numbers, but if God did indeed allow, through the weakness of men, some little flaw now and then in the Sacred Scriptures, it would have been by design to test the faith of his children. If people are going to believe merely those things that appear "reasonable" to them, the whole character of true faith in God is already destroyed. How REASONABLE could it have been to Abraham that he should slay his son Isaac as a SACRIFICE to God, when that same God had promised through that son Isaac to make Abraham's posterity as numerous as the stars of heaven?We shall not, therefore, waste any more time by exploring the controversy about these numbers, but shall attempt to interpret them as they stand in the text."Now these are the generations of Aaron and Moses in the day that Jehovah spoke with Moses in mount Sinai. And these are the names of the sons of Aaron: Nadab the first born, and Abihu, Eleazar, and Ithamar. These are the names of the sons of Aaron, the priests that were anointed whom he consecrated to minister in the priest's office. And Nadab and Abihu died before Jehovah, when they offered strange fire before Jehovah, in the wilderness of Sinai, and they had no children;

5

and Eleazar and Ithamar ministered in the priest's office in the presence of Aaron their father.""These are the generations ... " (Numbers 3:1). Here again we have the magnificent [~toledowth] encountered ten times in Genesis. "It is used here in a technical sense, referring to what follows (as in Genesis 2:4; 5:1; 6:9; 10:1; 11:10; 11:27; 25:12; 25:19; 36:1; and Genesis 37:2). It marks a new departure looking DOWN not UP the course of history."[2] Moses and Aaron were in themselves the beginning of vast influences that would flow downward throughout the course of history; and the account of that begins here."In the day that Jehovah spoke with Moses in Sinai ..." Noth referred to this as "a completely meaningless indication of time,"[3] presumably meaning that it was meaningless to him. The words used here are very similar to the passage in Genesis 2:4, where is found the very first use of this word [~toledowth] in the Bible along with the qualifying words "in the day that Jehovah God made earth and heaven." The significance of this is profound, proving that the passages in Genesis subsequent to Genesis 2:4 are a record not of the original creation, but what took place afterward, and that the new focus would not be on the heavens and the earth, but on the earth and heaven! The same implications are here, and are clearly indicated by the use of these words lifted from Genesis 2:4, where first the significant term [~toledowth] was used. Note the two pairs of words: earth and heaven, indicating the shift of emphasis to the lesser from the greater, and Aaron and Moses, indicating that same definite shift from the greater to the lesser in the passage here.Numbers 3:2 has the names of Aaron's four sons, but the punctuation takes no notice of their being named as pairs. "The names are listed in pairs: Nadab and Abihu, Eleazar and Ithamar."[4]In Numbers 3:2 and Numbers 3:3 are the identical words, "these are the names of the sons of Aaron ... these are the names of the sons of Aaron the priests." Jewish writers make much of this verbatim repetition in successive verses:The statement, "These are the names of the sons of Aaron" occurs twice, first in the naming of the sons, and then in the characterization of the sons as priests, in order to show that even after their appointment to the priesthood, the sons of Aaron did not receive new names but were still considered the same human beings as before.[5]We find full agreement with the Jewish deductions from this passage, regardless of the fact that the purpose of the repetition here may not necessarily be connected with their deductions. Certainly the conceit of the Medieval Church in giving new names to their Cardinals and Popes upon their elevation to certain offices is not at all justified by anything in the Holy Scriptures."Nadab and Abihu died ... when they offered strange fire ... " (Numbers 3:4). The very mention of this unhappy event proves that post-exilic priests had nothing to do

6

with composing, editing, adding to, or deleting anything from the Book of Numbers! This sad story of Nadab and Abihu would never have been found in any kind of Bible they could or would have produced. This verse, of course, explains why NO descendants of Nadab and Abihu were ever to be found among the priests of Israel, as they had died childless. Eleazar and Ithamar became thus the heads of the Aaronic order."In the presence of their father ..." The true meaning of this is not that they served "under the oversight of Aaron,"[6] although, of course, they might actually have done this also. The true meaning is in the RSV, as noted by Whitelaw, "in the lifetime of their father."[7]

COKE, "Numbers 3:1. These also are the generations of Aaron and Moses— As the posterity of Aaron only is mentioned, some have thought that generations here signifies, not only posterity, but acts, passages of their history, or what happened to them; as the word is used, Genesis 2:4; Genesis 6:9. Le Clerc is of opinion, that Aaron is mentioned first, as being the elder brother, and on that account having the priesthood attached to his posterity; whereas the posterity of Moses were numbered only among the common Levites: and he thinks that one reason for excluding the sons of Moses from the priesthood, was their not being born of an Israelitish mother; see Exodus 2:21. The words, "In the day that the Lord spake with Moses in mount Sinai," seem to be added, because at that time Nadab and Abihu were both alive, though now dead at this numbering of the Levites. The disinterestedness of Moses, in making no provision for his own immediate descendants, is an evident proof of the Divinity of his mission.

ELLICOTT, "(1) These also are the generations of Aaron and Moses . . . —The name of Aaron is placed first, not only because he was the elder brother, but also because the ministry of Moses was restricted to his own person, and his sons are merely classed amongst the rest of the Levitical families in 1 Chronicles 23:14; whereas the office of Aaron was perpetuated in the persons of his descendants. Hence we find no mention made in this place of the sons of Moses, but only of those of Aaron. The word generations here, as in the book of Genesis (e.g., Genesis 6:9; Genesis 25:19) and elsewhere, is used to denote the history; and in this sense the present and the following chapters pertain as much to Moses as to Aaron. Or the reference may be to the fact that Moses and Aaron were made the heads of the whole tribe of Levi, and therefore that the Levitical families generally are traced up equally to both.

BENSON, "Numbers 3:1. 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

7

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, (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, after whom he is elsewhere commonly named. In Sinai — Nadab and Abihu were then alive, though dead at the time of taking this account.

TRAPP, "Numbers 3:1 These also [are] the generations of Aaron and Moses in the day [that] the LORD spake with Moses in mount Sinai.Ver. 1. Of Aaron and Moses.] Of Aaron by nature, of Moses by education and instruction. See 1 Corinthians 4:15, Galatians 4:12, {See Trapp on "1 Corinthians 4:15"} {See Trapp on "Galatians 4:12"} So the Jesuits call themselves padres, and require of their novices blind obedience, which is more than ever Moses did.

POOLE, "The genealogy of Moses, Aaron, and his sons, Nadab and Abihu, Numbers 3:1-4. The Levites are joined with them in the administration of the tabernacle, Numbers 3:5-10, instead of all the first-born, Numbers 3:11-13. The three families of the Levites numbered, Numbers 3:14-39. The first-born numbered, Numbers 3:40-43. Being more than the Levites, some of them are redeemed, and the money given to Aaron and his sons, Numbers 3:41-51.1491These which follow in this chapter are the generations, i.e. either,1. The things done by them; as the word generation is sometimes used, as Genesis 6:9 25:19 37:2. Or rather,2. The kindred or family, for that is the subject of this chapter, and not their events or actions.Object. Aaron’s family indeed is here mentioned, but not Moses’s family.Answ. Moses’s family and children are here included under the general name of the Amramite, Numbers 3:27, which includes all the children and grandchildren 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 the day that the Lord spake with Moses in Mount Sinai: this seems to be added, because Nadab and Abihu, mentioned Numbers 3:2, were then alive, though dead at the time of taking this

8

account.

WHEDON, " THE SONS OF AARON CONSECRATED, Numbers 3:1-4.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, Numbers 3:27, 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.

9

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; Exodus 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.”

EBC 1-10, "PRIESTS AND LEVITES1. THE PRIESTHOODNumbers 3:1-10In the opening verse of this chapter, which relates to the designation of the priesthood, Moses is named, for once, after his brother. According to the genealogy of Exodus 6:1-30, Aaron was the elder; and this may have led to the selection of his as the priestly house-which again would give him priority in a passage relating to the hierarchy. If Moses had chosen, his undoubted claims would have secured the priestly office for his family. But he did not desire this; and indeed the duties of administrative head of the people were sufficiently heavy. Aaron was apparently fitted for the sacerdotal office, and without peculiar qualifications for any other. He seems to have had no originating power, but to have been ready to fall in with and direct the routine of ceremonial worship. And we may assume that Moses knew the surviving sons of Aaron to be of the stamp of their father, likely to inaugurate a race of steady, devoted servants of the altar.Yet all Aaron’s sons had not been of this quiet disposition. Nadab and Abihu, the two eldest, had sinned presumptuously, and brought on themselves the doom of death. No fewer than five times is their fall referred to in the books of Leviticus and Numbers. Whatever that strange fire was which they put in their censers and used before the Lord, the judgment that befell them was signal and impressive. And here

10

reference is made to the fact that they died without issue, as if to mark the barrenness of the sacrilegious. Did it not appear that inherent disqualification for the priesthood, the moral blindness or self-will which was shown in their presumptuous act, had been foreseen by God, who wrote them childless in His book? This race must not be continued. Israel must not begin with priests who desecrate the altar.Whether the death of those two sons of Aaron came by an unexpected stroke, or was a doom inflicted after judgment in which their father had to acquiesce, the terrible event left a most effectual warning. The order appointed for the incense offering, and all other sacred duties, would thenceforth be rigidly observed. And the incident-revived continually for the priests when they studied the Law-must have had especial significance through their knowledge of the use and meaning of fire in idolatrous worship. The temptation was often felt, against which the fate of Nadab and Abihu set every priest on his guard, to mingle the supposed virtue of other religious symbols with the sanctities of Jehovah. Who can doubt that priests of Israel, secretly tempted by the rites of sun-worship, might have gone the length of carrying the fire of Baal into Jehovah’s temple, if the memory of this doom had not held back the hand? Here also the degradation of the burnt offering by taking flame from a common fire was by implication forbidden. The source of that which is the symbol of Divine purity must be sacredly pure.Those who minister in holy things have still a corresponding danger, and may find here a needed warning. The fervour shown in sacred worship and work must have an origin that is purely religious. He who pleads earnestly with God on behalf of men, or rises to impassioned appeal in beseeching men to repent, appearing as an ambassador of Christ urged by the love of souls, has to do not with symbols, but with truths, ideas, Divine mysteries infinitely more sacred than the incense and fire of Old Testament worship. For the Hebrew priest outward and formal consecration sufficed. For the minister of the New Testament, the purity must be of the heart and soul. Yet it is possible for the heat of alien zeal, of mere self-love or official ambition, to be carried into duties the most solemn that fall to the lot of man; and if it is not in the Spirit of God a preacher speaks or offers the sacrifice of thanksgiving, if some other inspiration makes him eloquent and gives his voice its tremulous notes, sin like that of Nadab and Abihu is committed, or rather a sin greater than theirs. With profound sorrow it must be confessed that the "strange fire" from idolatrous altars too often desecrates the service of God. Excitement is sought by those who minister in order that the temperament may be raised to the degree necessary for free and ardent speech; and it is not always of a purely religious kind. Those who hear may for a time be deceived by the pretence of unction, by dramatic tones, by alien fire. But the difference is felt when it cannot be defined; and on the spiritual life of the ministrant the effect is simply fatal.The surviving sons of Aaron, Eleazar and Ithamar, were anointed and "consecrated to minister in the priest’s office." The form of designation is indicated by the expression, "whose hand he filled to exercise priesthood." This has been explained

11

as referring to a portion of the ceremony described Leviticus 8:26 f. "And out of the basket of unleavened bread, that was before the Lord, he took one unleavened cake, and one cake of oiled bread, and one wafer, and placed them on the fat, and upon the right thigh: and he put the whole upon the hands of Aaron, and upon the hands of his sons, and waved them for a wave offering before the Lord." The explanation is scarcely satisfactory. In the long ceremony of consecration this incident was not the only one to which the expression "filling the hand" was applied; and something simpler must be found as the source of an idiomatic phrase. To fill the hand would naturally mean to pay or hire, and we seem to be pointed to the time when for the patriarchal priesthood there was substituted one that was official, supported by the community. In Exodus 28:41 and in Leviticus 8:33, the expression in question is used in a general sense incompatible with its reference to any particular portion of the ceremony of consecration. It is also used in Jude 1:17., where to all appearance the consecration of Micah’s Levite implied little else than the first payment on account of a stipulated hire. The phrase, then, appears to be a mark of history, and carries the mind back to the simple origin of the priestly office.Eleazar and Ithamar "ministered in the priest’s office in the presence of Aaron their father." So far as the narrative of the Pentateuch gives information, there were originally, and during the whole of the wilderness journey, no other priests than Aaron and his sons. Nadab and Abihu having died, there remained but the two besides their father. Phinehas the son of Eleazar appears in the history, but is not called a priest, nor has he any priestly functions: What he does is indeed quite apart from the holy office. And this early restriction of the number is not only in favour of the Pentateuchal history, but partly explains the fact that in Deuteronomy the priests and Levites are apparently identified. Taking at their very heaviest the duties specially laid on the priests, much must have fallen to the share of their assistants, who had their own consecration as ministers of the sanctuary. It is certain that members of the Levitical families were in course of time admitted to the full status of priests.The direction is given in Numbers 3:10, "Thou shalt appoint Aaron and his sons, and they shall keep their priesthood; and the stranger that cometh nigh shall be put to death." This is rigorously exclusive, and seems to contrast with the statements of Deuteronomy, "At that time the Lord separated the tribe of Levi to bear the ark of the covenant of the Lord, to stand before the Lord to minister unto Him and to bless in His name unto this day"; {Deuteronomy 10:8} and again, "The priests the Levites, even all the tribe of Levi, shall have no portion nor inheritance with Israel; they shall eat the offerings of the Lord made by fire, and His inheritance"; {Deuteronomy 18:1} and once more, "Moses wrote the law and delivered it unto the priests, the sons of Levi, which bore the ark of the covenant of the Lord, and unto all the elders of Israel". {Deuteronomy 31:9} Throughout Deuteronomy the priests are never called sons of Aaron, nor is Aaron called a priest. Whether the cause of this apparent discrepancy is that Deuteronomy regarded the arrangements for the priestly service in a different light, or that the distinction of priests from Levites fell into abeyance and was afterwards revived, the variation cannot be ignored. In the

12

book of Joshua "the children of Aaron the priest" appear on a few occasions, and certain of the duties of high priest are ascribed to Eleazar. Yet even in Joshua the importance attached to the Aaronic house is far less than in Exodus, Leviticus, and Numbers; and the expression "the priests the Levites" occurs twice. If we regard the origin of the Aaronic priesthood as belonging to the Mosaic period, then the wars and disturbances of the settlement in Canaan must have entirely disorganized the system originally instituted. In the days of the judges there seems to have been no orderly observance of those laws which gave the priesthood importance. Scattered Levites had to do as they best could what was possible in the way of sacrifice and purification. And this confusion may have begun in the plain of Moab. The death of Aaron, the personal insignificance of his sons, and still more the death of Moses himself, would place the administration of religious as well as secular affairs on an entirely different footing. Memoranda preserved in Leviticus and Numbers may therefore be more ancient than those of Deuteronomy; and Deuteronomy, describing the state of things before the passage of Jordan, may in regard to the priesthood reflect the conditions of new development, the course of which did not blend with the original design till after the captivity.The tribe of Levi is, according to Numbers 3:6 ff, appointed to minister to Aaron, and to keep his charge and that of the congregation before the "tent of meeting," to do the service of the tabernacle. For all the necessary work connected with the sanctuary the Levites are "wholly given unto Aaron on behalf of the children of Israel." It was of course in accordance with the patriarchal idea that each clan should have a hereditary chief. Here, however, an arbitrary rule breaks in. For Aaron was not by primogeniture head of the tribe of Levi. He belonged to a younger family of the tribe. The arrangements made by Moses as the representative of God superseded the succession by birthright. And this is by no means the only case in which a law usually adhered to was broken through. According to the history the high-priesthood did not invariably follow the line of Eleazar. At a certain point a descendant of Ithamar was for some reason raised to the dignity. Samuel, too, became virtually a priest, and rose higher than any high-priest before the captivity, although he was not even of the tribe of Levi. The law of spiritual endowment in his case set the other aside. And is it not often so? The course of providence brings forward the man who can guide affairs. While his work lasts he is practically supreme. It is useless to question or rebel. Neither in religion nor in government can the appeal to Divine right or to constitutional order alter the fact. Korah need not revolt against Moses; nor may Aaron imagine that he can push himself into the front. And Aaron, as head of the tribe of Levi, and of the religious administration, is safe in his own position so long only as his office is well served. It is to responsibility he is called, rather than to honour. Let him do his duty, otherwise he will surely become merely a name or a figure.

LANGE, "[The generations, Numbers 3:1. “These are the res gestæ, that happened to them,” Fagius, Vatablus, Ab. Ezra, Piscator. The act of birth is only the first in the series. On this use of the word comp. Genesis 5:1; Genesis 6:9; Genesis 25:18

13

and Bush, in loc.—Tr.].Order or the Levitical Service (Chap3).A. The Calling of the Tribe of Levi. This calling was foreshadowed in the religious zeal of the brothers Simeon and Levi ( Genesis 34), and in the judgment of their father Jacob upon their act ( Genesis 49). The two brothers resembled each other, as did also their deed and their destiny; they were scattered in Israel. But while Simeon gradually disappears in Israel, Levi looms up greater and greater, until at the summit of his elevation he destroys himself, in the person of Caiaphas. In this contrast the two natures of youthful, religious zeal come out in relief. In the one, religious zeal passes over into fanaticism, into fleshly passion, the glow becomes smoke and vapor; in the other, the flame clears itself from smoke, the seething must becomes pure wine. It should be borne in mind, that Israel owes its theocratical and historical salvation to the tribe of Levi: even a weak maid, Miriam, had a large share in the rescue of Moses; and the latter, the saved saviour (Muscha Mosche) of his people, was in a large measure supported by his brother Aaron. Soon, however, after the moment when Aaron wavered, the tribe of Levi stood manfully at the side of Moses for the Revelation -establishment of the fear of Jehovah; and afterwards, when Phineas executed summary judgment, it displayed a bravery which received quite a mysterious acknowledgment in the blessing of Moses, Deuteronomy 33:8. Thus the vocation of Levi was ontological; but the historical development took place gradually. The prophetic starting place of the Levitic calling is found in the person of Moses; and the self-renunciation, with which he calls his brother Aaron to the priesthood, and allows the priestly dignity to pass over to the descendants of the latter, while his own sons attend Aaron as mere serving Levites, is the sign and the seal of the divine purity which ruled, in combination with divine Revelation, at the institution of the Levitical vocation. Three stages can be distinguished in the development of this vocation: first, the historical reason for their call, ( Exodus 32); second, their preliminary appointment; third, the establishment and definition of the services of the office, given in the present section; special modifications follow hereafter, especially the elevated position of the order.We distinguish regarding the hierarchical organization the following gradations:—(1) The people of the tribe, embracing the families as well as the men, the emeriti and demeriti, as well as the serving members. The boys were set apart for the Levitical service after the first month of their age; for no rule can be set for the earliness of spiritual illumination, as the history of Samuel proves. The entrance upon the general duties begins at the age of twenty-five; for the proper high-priestly and priestly duties, as well as for the Levitical ministration in the care of the Sanctuary, the age of thirty years was required. The typical hierarchy descends in the following gradations.:—(1) Aaron and his sons; (2) The priestly Levitical assistants; (3) The Levites in general as devoted to God and the priestly service

)ְנתּוִנים( ; (4) The servants, afterwards attached to the tribe, of non-Levitical and even of non-Israelitish blood (ְנִתיִגים). Although the tribe of Levi, after the division of the tribe of Joseph into two separate tribes, seems to form a thirteenth tribe; yet this

14

would be an entirely false conception, since it represents the first-born, the priestly dignity of all twelve tribes.B. The Relations of the Levites. In relation to Moses and Aaron, they are to be regarded as the spiritual family ( Numbers 4-3:2 ); Aaron appears as the priestly head. With reference to their ministerial functions, they are presented to the high-priest, and are devoted to him as his servants. With reference to the tribes, however, they have this advantage, that they represent the first-born of all the tribes; they are an eminent tribe wholly made up of native first-born; and the complete infatuation of the company of Korah is shown by the fact that they were not content with that eminence. However they did not form a caste, like the Brahmins in India and the Magi in Media, because their physical condition was subject to a strict moral censorship, and because their importance was greatly limited by the prophetic order on the one hand, and on the other by the princely order. Hence they first attained to a hierarchical power in the time of Zerubbabel, when the princely power had become extinct and the prophetic authority was on the point of dying out.C. The numbering of the Levites. The numbers of the tribe branches, 7,500, 8,600, and6,200, added together give the sum22,300; whereas the number given is only22,000. We think the Rabbinical solution of this apparent discrepancy of numbers quite well founded, notwithstanding the doubts of Knobel and Keil. If the sum total of the Levites was to determine the ratio which they bore to the sums of the first-born in the other tribes, because the surplus of the first-born had to be redeemed with money, then the first-born among the Levites should certainly not be included in the count, else there would be nullity in the calculation. For them300was therefore deducted. This seems to us a much more evident explanation than the supposition of a blunder in the text, (see Keil, p204) [who conjectures that in Numbers 3:28 ׁשלׁש should be read for ׁשׁש or8,300 for8,600.—Tr.]. We do not at all assume that the first-born of the tribes paid a ransom to the Levites on account of the worship which they conducted for them, for they were by that in a certain measure superseded (chap16); at all events the Levites had a favored position, and in that case, too, all the first-born would have had to pay, and not merely the excess of273. We have already seen that the mention here is of a numbering of the first-born from the first month on to twenty years, being a contrast with the numbering of the first-born from twenty years and over, but forming a parallel to the Levites who were over a month old. These young first-born are represented by the young Levites, and hence their excess must be ransomed by a payment to the high-priestly tribe. And this not indeed because the Levites represented them at the Sanctuary generally, but because they took their place at the theocratic headquarters. It was a kind of a military tax for minors. Thus we read in chap7 of the great offerings which the heads of tribes presented for the care of the Tabernacle—they had already given their contributions for the building of the Tabernacle ( Exodus 35:27). In that case, as also in that of the shekel of the Sanctuary, their payment was properly a religious tax; here it was a sort of war tax. [“The ransom money, reckoning the shekel at half a crown, would amount to12s. 6d.” Dr. Jamison.—Tr.]. And when it is likewise laid down that the cattle of the Levites should represent the

15

first-born of the cattle of the individual tribes, which they had to offer up, it doubtless means that they were not slaughtered immediately on their being offered, but were taken into the herds of the Levites, which even consisted wholly of sacrificial beasts, according to the needs of worship. On the meaning of the first-birth see Knobel, p13.D. The organic basis of the camping of the Levites. The sons of Levi were called: Gershon, (stranger, banishment); Kohath (assembly, congregation); Merari.—From Gershon came: Libni (white), and Shimei (Jah is prince of praise). From Kohath sprang: Amram (people of the high one?); Izehar (oil); Hebron (union); and, Uzziel (power of God). The sons of Merari were: Mahli (a tender one, according to Fuerst), and Mushi (drawn upward? allied to Moses). The aggregate see in the text.E. Levitical Camping Order. The Gershonites encamp behind the tent, that Isaiah, westward: their chief was Eliasaph (whom God has added—similar to Joseph), son of Lael (for God, consecrated to God). Their charge is over the external parts of the Sanctuary, viz., the coverings and hangings, except the screen of the Holy of Holies. The Kohathites camp to the south-ward. Their chief was called Elizaphan (whom God guards), son of Uzziel (God is power). To their care are entrusted all the interior parts of the Sanctuary, viz., the Ark of the Covenant. Thus they have an exalted occupation, as, indeed, they embrace also the priestly branch, whence, also, Eleazar, the son of Aaron, is the superior of all the individual Levitic chiefs. Opposite the Kohathites upon the northern side, camp the families of Merari: their chief was named Zuriel (God is rock), son of Abahail (father of strength; or, father the strength); they attend to all that belongs to the frame work of the Tabernacle. In front of the entrance to the Tabernacle towards the east encamped Moses and Aaron with his sons, who performed the sacred acts of the worship. All intrusion of strangers to this place was forbidden on the pain of death. [ Numbers 3:10; Numbers 3:38, the stranger, זר see on Numbers 1:51.—Tr.][On the difficulty presented by the proportion of first-born to the sum-total of men fit for service, see Introduction, § 7 b. Numbers 3:49. The redeemed of the Levites mean those ransomed by the equal member of the Levites.—Tr.]

PETT, "Verse 1‘Now these are the generations (family histories, records) of Aaron and Moses in the day that Yahweh spoke with Moses in mount Sinai.’This is probably the remnants of a colophon closing off this military record. A colophon was included at the end of an ancient record in this way just as we would put a title and author’s name on a book cover. It gave a quick reference to the contents of the record. As we saw earlier, in Numbers 1 & Numbers 2 Moses and Aaron were seen in this section as continually acting together apart from when Moses was receiving Yahweh’s direct commands (see on Numbers 1:2-3). This verse

16

is not really suitable as a heading for what follows, for Moses does not feature there, but it does make a very suitable ending.

PULPIT, "These … are the generations of Aaron and Moses. The word "generations" (toledoth) is used here in a peculiar and, so to speak, technical sense, with reference to what follows, as in Genesis 2:4; Genesis 6:9. It marks a new departure, looking down, not up, the course of history. Moses and Aaron were a beginning in themselves as the chosen heads of the chosen tribe: Moses having the higher office, but one entirely personal to himself; Aaron being the first of a long and eminent line of priests. The actual genealogy, therefore, is that of Aaron, and he is placed first. In the day. Apparently the day mentioned in Numbers 1:1; or it may be more general, as in Genesis 2:4.

bi 1-13, "The priests which were anointed.Aaron and his sons: parents and childrenIn Num_3:1-4 we have—I. An incidental illustration of the exalted personal character and the divine mission of Moses.II. An intimation that the duties of the ministers of religion demand for their faithful discharge their entire consecration thereto.III. An example of wicked sons descending from a godly parent.IV. An example of the widest difference of character and destiny in children of the same parents. Our subject utters earnest counsels—

1. To the children of godly parents. Trust not in the character and prayers of your parents for salvation. These are of priceless value, yet they will not avail to your salvation apart from your own faith and obedience. (See Eze_18:1-32.)2. To parents. Be diligent and faithful in the discharge of your duty to your children.

(1) Let your own life be right, and so set them a good example.(2) Give them wise religious instruction and training.(3) Commend them often and earnestly to God in prayer.(4) Afford them encouragement in every manifestation of pious feeling and conduct. (W. Jones.)

The dedication of the Levites—Church work and workersverses 5-10.I. The offices of the church are divinely instituted.

17

II. There are different ranks in the offices of the church as instituted by God.III. The lowliest labour in the service of God is sacred and blessed.IV. God also appoints the persons to fill the various offices in his church.V. Intrusion into sacred places and duties awakened the stern displeasure of the Lord.Conclusion:

1. Encouragement to those who are called of God to Christian work. He who has called you to your work will sustain you in it, make it efficient by His blessing, and confer upon you rich rewards.2. Admonition as to our estimate of the ministers of the Lord. They “are ambassadors for Christ.” God Himself speaks through them to men. (W. Jones.)

God’s claim upon man’s service:From Num_3:11-13, we learn—I. God’s claims upon man’s service are incontestable. Upon what are they grounded?

1. Upon what He is in Himself.2. Upon what He does for man.

II. There is a correspondence between the gifts and the claims of God. His demands are proportioned to His bestowments.1. This is righteous.2. This is beneficent.

III. The divine arrangements are ever marked by infinite wisdom and kindness. (W. Jones.)

The measure of the Divine demands upon man:I. God gave the best he had to effect our salvation.II. The son gave himself. Let us sacrifice ourselves to God as He sacrificed His Son for us.

1. Thus only can we attain to a high ideal in religion. Be the best possible Christian: be not content with mediocrity: aim high.2. This is the best way to be useful. The power of Christianity is in the fact of Christ giving Himself. Our influence for good is in proportion to our selfsacrifice.3. This is the way to enjoy religion. The more we give of self to God, the more will He give of Himself to us. Let all think of what God has done for them, and consider what returns they have made to Him. (David Lloyd.)

The necessity of a standing ministry 18

We see in this place, how Moses immediately after the numbering of the people, that meddled not with the ministry of the word, or killing of the sacrifices, or serving in the tabernacle, or carrying of the ark, or teaching of the people, handleth in the next place the fashion of the ministry. For let there be never so great order or good policy in the commonwealth, yet if the care of the ministry be neglected, all is to little purpose. We see from hence the goodly order that God observeth in this great army. He establisheth among them most carefully the holy ministry to the end they might be instructed in the Word. Hereby we learn that among all nations and people under the heavens, the ministry of the Word ought to be planted and established, to guide them in the ways of godliness.1. A certain and settled ministry is an evident token that God hath a church and a people to be begotten by the immortal seed of the Word.2. Without the light of the Word the people remain in darkness and cannot see: they grope at noonday, and know not what they do—as it was in Egypt when the plague of palpable darkness was sent among them (Exo_10:23).3. The necessity of a ministry is so evident that all the Gentiles had their priests and prophets that attended on their profane and superstitious altars, and it was their first care to establish a religion, such as it was, among them. If it were thus among them who saw darkly, and were without the true light of the Scripture, much more ought we to learn it, that have been taught better things, and have the sure word of the prophets to guide us.4. Such is our frailty, that notwithstanding we live under a settled ministry, and have given our names to the faith, yet we are ready to start back again. For as the body is prone to pine away without supply of daily food, so are our souls ready to perish, being destitute of the heavenly manna of the Word of God.

Uses:1. There is offered unto us this truth arising from the doctrine itself, that the preaching of the Word by the minister, and the hearing of it by the people, is no ceremony nor a matter of indifferency, such as may either be done or left undone at our own discretion, but it is such a part of the public service of God as ought not to be neglected without great sin.2. It serveth to reprove divers abuses.

(1) Such as think and spare not to say that the ministry is a vain and superfluous thing, and that the ministers are men that may very well be spared, as if they were a sixth finger upon the hand, or a sixth toe upon the foot; that is bringing a burden rather than a benefit. For as they account the Sabbath the loss of one day in a week, so they account the maintenance of the ministry the loss of their goods. These have learned another language than the tongue of Canaan. They do not the works that beseem Christians, and they cannot speak as beseemeth those that profess the fear of God, if so be they do profess so much. Is it a needless thing to have the light of the sun in the firmament, without which all things are covered with darkness, and nothing can have life and quickening? But the sun is not more necessary to be in the world than the light of the Word in the Church to give life and light unto them that sit in darkness (Mat_4:16). Is it needless to have labourers to reap down our corn in time of harvest? To have meat brought

19

unto us and provided for us when we are hungry, or drink when we are thirsty?(2) The vain conceit of their hearts, who having learned the principles of religion and some grounds of knowledge, proceed no further, as if they had no more use of the Word, whereas there is matter of instruction always to be learned out of the Word for all persons. When we have eaten one kind of meat one day, we eat the next day as hungrily of it as we did before.(3) They that extol to the skies the kingdoms and commonwealths of the heathen as the only prosperous, flourishing, and happy nations, which indeed excelled in outward glory and thereby dazzled the eyes of many, yet indeed were no better than assemblies of men destitute of religion, and consequently of salvation. Their peace and prosperity, their wealth and dignity, were all carnal and momentary, rising out of the earth, and sinking down into the earth again; their praise also is of men. It is the maintenance of true religion that maketh a people truly happy, and the means of spreading abroad true religion is the ministry of the Word. There is no way to know it and to practise it but by this.

3. Must the ministry be established among all people under heaven? Then let every one of us be careful for our parts to plant it among us, and to bring it home to the places of our abode.4. Let the ministers be careful to discharge their calling, and to teach the people in season and out of season. They must be lights of the world, and as savoury salt to season them with wholesome doctrine.5. Let the people carefully attend to the ministry of the Word, where it is settled and planted, with a good conscience, as to God’s holy ordinance vouchsafed unto them. Let them bring attention in hearing, diligence in marking, and obedience in practising. Let them not use any delays to shift off the performance of this duty. (W. Attersoll.)

Consecrated lives:In the artist’s studio a fleck of paint lies upon the palette. It is so much colour and nothing more; till, taken up by the brush of the master and laid upon the canvas, it becomes a rosy flush on beauty’s cheek, or a lustrous cloud in a golden sunset. So has many a mean and common life been touched by the Master’s hand to higher uses; so has many an humble believer been caught up from the poverty of his earthly lot to be a glorious spirit before the throne of the “Eternal Light.”Vocation is in a line with fitnessIf we agree that the Christian ministry is a vocation for the teaching, in various forms, of Christian righteousness, the question next comes, What is meant by a “call” to it? Is this anything different from that inward impulse to a specific form of work which arises in a man from a consciousness of special gifts in that direction? In that sense a man may be said to be called to the work of a musician or artist. The parents of Mozart, when they found their son, at the age of seven, playing before the crowned heads of Europe, need have been in no doubt as to his life work. It was revealed in his gifts more plainly than it could have been by a voice from heaven. And when, on the other hand, Mozart’s own son, once asked whether he loved music, replied by flinging down some coins on the

20

table and exclaiming, “That’s the only music I care for,” it was equally evident that whatever he came into the world to do, it was not to follow in the steps of his father. Vocation here undoubtedly is in a line with fitness. The tools are for him who can use them. (Christian World.)

God improves the life given to Him in service:It is said of vapours, that rising out of the earth, the heavens return them again in pure water, much clearer, and more refined than they received them; or as it is said of the earth, that receiving the sea-water and puddle-water, it gives it better than it received it in the springs and fountains, for it strains the water and purifies it, that whereas when it came into the bowels of the earth it was muddy, salt, and brinish, it returns pure, clear, and fresh, as out of the well-head waters are well known to come. Thus, if men would but give up their heart’s desire, and the strength of their affections unto God, He would not only give them back again, but withal much better than when He received them, their affections should be more pure, their thoughts and all the faculties of soul and body should be renewed, cleansed, beautified, and put into a far better condition than formerly they were. (J. Spencer.)

2 The names of the sons of Aaron were Nadab the firstborn and Abihu, Eleazar and Ithamar.

GILL, "And these are the names of the sons of Aaron,.... The Targum of Jonathan adds, disciples of Moses, the master of the Israelites; none of the posterity of Moses being expressly, named; Jarchi observes, that the sons of Aaron are called the generations of Moses, because he taught them the law; for whoever, he says, teaches his neighbour's son, the law, the Scripture accounts of him as if he begat him, see 1Co_4:15, Nadab the firstborn, and Abihu, Eleazar and Ithamar; as in Exo_6:23.

JAMISON, "And these are the names of the sons of Aaron — All the sons of Aaron, four in number, were consecrated to minister in the priest’s office. The two oldest

21

enjoyed but a brief term of office (Lev_10:1, Lev_10:2; Num_3:4; Num_26:61); but Eleazar and Ithamar, the other two, were dutiful, and performed the sacred service during the lifetime of their father, as his assistants, and under his superintendence.

K&D, "Num_3:2-4Names of the sons of Aaron, the “anointed priests (see Lev_8:12), whose hand they filled to be priests,” i.e., who were appointed to the priesthood (see at Lev_7:37). On Nadab and Abihu, see Lev_10:1-2. As they had neither of them any children when they were put to death, Eleazar and Ithamar were the only priests “in the sight of Aaron their father,” i.e., during his lifetime. “In the sight of:” as in Gen_11:28.

PETT. "Verses 2-4Chapter 3 The Priests and the Levites.In this chapter more information is given about the priests and Levites, those set apart by Yahweh to watch over His Dwellingplace. Their task was to watch over the holiness of the Sanctuary.The Consecration of the Priests to Yahweh (Numbers 3:2-4; Numbers 3:10).We are first given a summary of the priesthood as it then was, and their consecration. At this stage it can be seen why they would need assistance from the tribe of Levi. Apart from these five, soon to become three, no one apart from Moses was allowed within the Sanctuary, although the sons of these priests were no doubt already growing up. Aaron was by this time ‘well matured’ (Exodus 7:7) and Eleazar and Ithamar were no doubt married and would have developing sons of their own. The priests would soon multiply. But as yet they were still few.Numbers 3:2-3‘And these are the names of the sons of Aaron, Nadab the first-born, and Abihu, Eleazar, and Ithamar. These are the names of the sons of Aaron, the priests that were anointed, whom he consecrated to minister in the priest’s office.’The names of the anointed priests apart from Aaron are given, Nadab, Abihu, Eleazar and Ithamar. These were his natural born sons whom, at Yahweh’s command, he had consecrated to minister with him in the priest’s office. (Or the ‘he’ may be Yahweh).Numbers 3:4‘And Nadab and Abihu died before Yahweh, when they offered strange fire before

22

Yahweh, in the wilderness of Sinai, and they had no children; and Eleazar and Ithamar ministered in the priest’s office in the presence of Aaron their father.But two of these four were slain ‘before Yahweh’, in the Sanctuary precincts, because they treated the things of God lightly, offering non-holy incense (‘strange fire’, that is, not in accord with God’s commandments) before Him. In view of the fact that everything in Numbers 4 is described as being under the control of Eleazar and Ithamar it is clear that that event had already happened by this stage.

3 Those were the names of Aaron’s sons, the anointed priests, who were ordained to serve as priests.

BARNES, "whom he consecrated - i. e. whom Moses consecrated, or literally as in the margin, whose “hand he filled,” by conferring their office upon them (Lev_8:1 ff).GILL, "These are the names of the sons of Aaron, the priests that were anointed,.... With the holy, anointing oil, with which they were anointed when, Aaron was and they only, see Exo_30:30, whom he consecrated to minister in the priest's office; that is, whom Moses consecrated, by anointing them, putting the priest's garments on them, offering sacrifice for them, and filling their hands with sacrifices which is the phrase here used for consecration: see Exo_29:15.

ELLICOTT, "(3) Whom he consecrated . . . —Literally, filled their hand. The rites of consecration are described at length in Exodus 29:1-37, where the command given to Moses is related. and in Leviticus 8:1-13, where the account is given of the actual consecration, on which occasion the appointed sacrificial offerings were placed by Moses in the hands of Aaron and in the hands of his sons. The act of consecration was performed by Moses in the case of Aaron’s sons, as well as in that

23

of Aaron himself.

TRAPP, "Numbers 3:3 These [are] the names of the sons of Aaron, the priests which were anointed, whom he consecrated to minister in the priest’s office.Ver. 3. Which were anointed.] And so should have walked, as became God’s anointed; leaving a sweet smell behind them everywhere; but they went out in a stench; they fell, as if they had not been anointed with oil. [2 Samuel 1:21]

WHEDON, " 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; 1 John 2:27; 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, (Num 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.

4 Nadab and Abihu, however, died before the Lord when they made an offering with unauthorized fire before him in the Desert of Sinai. They had no sons, so Eleazar and Ithamar served as priests during the lifetime of their father Aaron.

24

GILL, "And Nadab and Abihu died before the Lord,...., By flaming fire, as the Targum of Jonathan adds, see Lev_10:2; and so were not alive at this time when the account of the priests and Levites was taken: when they offered strange fire before the Lord in the wilderness of Sinai; after the tabernacle was set up, and the service of it begun, and quickly after their unction and consecration: of this strange fire; see Gill on Num_10:1, and they had no children; which is observed, partly to show the punishment of them, and the reproach upon their names, that they died childless, and had none to succeed them in the priesthood; for as the Jewish writers (n) observe if they had left any behind them, those would have come into the office before Eleazar and Ithamar; and partly to show that all the priests in succeeding ages sprung from those next mentioned: and Eleazar and Ithamar ministered in the priest's office, in the sight of Aaron their father; in his presence, under his inspection, and by his direction, he seeing and observing that they did everything according to the laws delivered by Moses, relating to, the office of the priesthood; or while he was yet alive, as Aben Ezra, they were concerned with him, and acted under him in the priestly office; and so the Septuagint version renders it, "with Aaron their father" (o); but a Jewish writer (p) interprets it in a different manner, "in the room of Aaron their father"; as if it respected not any conjunction with him in the then present exercise of their office in his lifetime, but their succession in it after his death; but the former seems most correct.

ELLICOTT, " (4) Died before the Lord.—The account is given in Leviticus 10:1-2, where the same expression “before the Lord” is used both in regard to the offering of strange fire by Nadab and Abihu, and also in regard to their death.And they had no children.—To die childless was regarded not only as a reproach, but also as a judgment. This was especially the case in regard to Nadab and Abihu, inasmuch as the sons of one, or of both (as was the case in regard to the sons of Eleazar and of Ithamar), would have succeeded to the high priesthood.

TRAPP, "Numbers 3:4 And Nadab and Abihu died before the LORD, when they offered strange fire before the LORD, in the wilderness of Sinai, and they had no children: and Eleazar and Ithamar ministered in the priest’s office in the sight of Aaron their father.Ver. 4. And Nadab and Abihu.] Such a cross had David in his two eldest, Amnon and Absalom. {See Trapp on "Leviticus 10:1"} {See Trapp on "Leviticus 10:2"}]

POOLE, " In the time of Aaron’s life, as this phrase is taken, Numbers 3:4; see also Psalms 72:5,17; and under their father’s inspection and direction, and as their

25

father’s servants or ministers in the priest’s office; for servants are oft described by this phrase of being, or standing, or serving in the sight or presence, we of their master.

WHEDON, " 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; Leviticus 6:13. 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.

26

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.

PULPIT."They had no children. If they had left sons, these would have succeeded to their office, and to the headship of the priestly line. In the sight of Aaron. In his lifetime (cf. Genesis 11:28). Septuagint, "with Aaron." In the time of David the descendants of Eleazar were divided into sixteen courses, the descendants of Ithamar into eight (2 Chronicles 24:3).

5 The Lord said to Moses,

GILL, "And the Lord spake unto Moses,.... After he had given him the order for the numbering the children of Israel, and for the manner of their encampment and journeying:

JAMISON 5-10, "Bring the tribe of Levi near — The Hebrew word “bring near” is a sacrificial term, denoting the presentation of an offering to God; and the use of the word, therefore, in connection with the Levites, signifies that they were devoted as an offering to the sanctuary, no longer to be employed in any common offices. They were subordinate to the priests, who alone enjoyed the privilege of entering the holy place; but they were employed in discharging many of the humbler duties which belonged to the sanctuary, as well as in various offices of great utility and importance to the religion and morals of the people.

CALVIN, "5.And the Lord spake unto Moses. This passage contains two heads: first, That the Levites should be set apart for the ministry of the sanctuary and altar; and, secondly, That they should obey the chief priests of the family of Aaron, and do nothing except by their authority and command. But it has been already said, and we shall hereafter see again, that the tribe of Levi in general was divinely chosen to perform the sacred offices; so that the people might know that no one was worthy of so honorable a charge; but that it depended on the gratuitous calling of God, whose attribute it is to create all things out of nothing. In this way, not only was the temerity of those repressed who might be foolishly ambitious of the honor,

27

but the whole Church was taught that, in order to worship God aright, there was need of extraneous aid. For, if the Levites had not stood between, the Law prohibited the rest of the people from having access to God, since it brought in the whole human race guilty of pollution. But, in order that they might be more certainly directed to the One Mediator, the high priesthood was exalted, and one priest was chosen to preside over all the rest: on this account God would have the Levites subject to the successors of Aaron. At the same time, He had regard to order, for a multitude, which is not governed by chiefs, will always be disorderly. Yet, it is unquestionable that the supreme power of Christ was represented in the person of Aaron; and hence the folly of the Papists is refuted, who transfer, or rather wrest, this example to the state of the Christian Church, (180) so as to set the bishops over the presbyters, and thus to fabricate the primacy of the Roman See. But if the true meaning of this figure be sought, it will be more appropriate to reason that, whatever ministers and pastors of the Church are now appointed, they are placed as it were under the hand of Christ, in order that they may usurp no dominion, but behave themselves modestly, as having to render an account to Him who is the Prince of pastors. (1 Peter 5:4.) Hence we conclude that the Papacy is only founded in wicked sacrilege; for Christ is unjustly deprived of His own, if any one else is feigned to be Aaron’s successor. Meanwhile, the political distinction of ranks is not to be repudiated, for natural reason itself dictates this in order to take away confusion; but that which shall have this object in view, will be so arranged that it may neither obscure Christ’s glory nor minister to ambition or tyranny, nor prevent all ministers from cultivating mutual fraternity with each other, with equal rights and liberties. Hence, too, was taken that declaration of the Apostle, that it is not lawful for any man to take this honor upon himself, but that they are the legitimate ministers of the Church who are “called” to be so. (Hebrews 5:4)

COFFMAN, ""And Jehovah spake unto Moses, saying, Bring the tribe of Levi near, and set them before Aaron the priest, that they may minister unto him. And they shall keep his charge, and the charge of the whole congregation before the tent of meeting, to do the service of the tabernacle. And they shall keep all the furniture of the tent of meeting, and the charge of the children of Israel, to do the service of the tabernacle. And thou shalt give the Levites unto Aaron and to his sons: they are wholly given unto him on the behalf of the children of Israel. And thou shalt appoint Aaron and his sons, and they shall keep their priesthood: and the stranger that cometh nigh shall be put to death."This paragraph reveals the divine appointment of the tribe of Levi, not as priests, but as a special class of workers who would be employed continually in the service of the tabernacle, under the oversight and supervision of the High Priest. It is not true that they were thus constituted a tribe of slaves. Theirs was an honored and privileged position in which they were perpetually exempt from military service and were supported entirely and particularly for this service.We cannot agree that this placement of the Levites as essentially custodians and

28

caretakers of the tabernacle derives from a post-exilic priesthood intent upon degrading their kinsmen the Levites. Even if such a priesthood at such a time had devised such a thing, what kind of blindness could have induced them to support their designs by "finding" instructions in the book of God (The O.T.) that are detailed in so specific and circumstantial a manner as are these instructions in Numbers? The post-exilic priests had no tabernacle, and for an extended period had no temple either. Add to this the fact that the instructions for the Levites were detailed in such things as dismantling and transporting the tabernacle, which at the alleged time of those priests writing these passages, had not even existed for ages. Even Noth admitted that all this is "exceedingly remarkable!"[8] The proper word to describe such postulations, however, is not remarkable, but impossible! Moses alone can properly be considered as the human source through whom these instructions were conveyed to men, as clearly stated in Numbers 3:5: "Jehovah spake unto Moses.""The stranger that cometh nigh ... " (Numbers 3:10). This repeated formula (also in Numbers 1:52) did not always have the same meaning. In Numbers 1:51, it means any non-Levites violating the restrictions would be put to death, and here it includes also any Levites who were not also priests. It is not clear whether human agency or divine fiat would accomplish the death of violators. In the case of Nadab and Abihu, just mentioned, it was by divine fiat, and from this, Jewish writers have concluded that God Himself would enforce this rule.[9]

WHEON, "Verses 5-11THE LEVITES SUBORDINATED TO AARON, Numbers 3:5-11.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.

PETT, "Verses 5-13The Dedication of the Levites to the Priests and to Yahweh (Numbers 3:5-13).In the light of the shortage of priests the promotion of someone to act as assistants to them was inevitable. But it should be noted that the Levites had a limited main purpose. It was that of looking after the Dwellingplace and its contents on their travels. They were divine baggage boys. Such a stress could only have arisen during the wilderness period. It would otherwise have had no purpose. For once Israel were settled in the land and the Dwellingplace was permanently in one place this main

29

task would be redundant.That this occurred at an early date is especially confirmed by the fact that they were allotted nine tenths of the tithes. This could only have happened when their numbers were considerably in excess of those of the priesthood.Numbers 3:5-6‘And Yahweh spoke to Moses, saying, “Bring the tribe of Levi near, and set them before Aaron the priest, that they may minister to him.” ’The tribe of Levi, Aaron’s own tribe, were now called on to supply supplementary Sanctuary service. They were set before Aaron as his Sanctuary servants, to ‘minister to him’ in his holy office. That is, they were available to do heavy work such as carrying, doing any work which did not require to be performed by a priest, and acting in general around the Sanctuary (but not within it except when the furniture had been packed) performing non-priestly functions.“Bring near.” A religious term connected with the Sanctuary denoting the bringing of an offering to Yahweh. Thus the Levites were seen here as a kind of offering. They had replaced the firstborn sons of Israel as Yahweh’s servants.

6 “Bring the tribe of Levi and present them to Aaron the priest to assist him.

CLARKE, "Bring the tribe of Levi near - The original word הקרב 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.

GILL, "Bring the tribe of Levi near,.... Separate them from the rest, set them apart for special service about, the sanctuary, let them have a place nearer to it than the other

30

tribes, or offer them, that is, to the Lord, as in Num_8:11; as well as bring them near to Aaron; so it follows: and present them before Aaron the priest; that he may receive them as a gift unto him, as servants to wait upon him; and! that he may appoint and declare unto them their work, and set them about it: that they may minister unto him; in guarding the tabernacle taking care of the vessels of it, taking it down, carrying it, from place to place, and setting it up as there was occasion for it.

K&D, "The Levites are placed before Aaron the priest, to be his servants.Num_3:6

“Bring near:” as in Exo_28:1. The expression ִלְפֵני ָעַמד is frequently met with in connection with the position of a servant, as standing before his master to receive his commands.

COKE, "Numbers 3:6. Bring the tribe of Levi near— God orders the tribe of Levi to be offered in a solemn manner to his service, and to the ministration of the tabernacle, under the priests; into whose peculiar office they were by no means to intrude, (Numbers 3:10.) but were to perform the more servile offices of the tabernacle in the wilderness; guarding it, taking it down, carrying it, and setting it up again; and, when settled in the land of Canaan, were still employed in different functions about the temple; for the more regular performance of which they were distributed into different classes or courses; see more respecting them, 1 Chronicles 23 and following chapters.

PULPIT, "Bring the tribe of Levi near. Not by any outward act of presentation, but by assigning to them solemnly the duties following. The expression is often used of servants coming to receive orders from their masters.

7 They are to perform duties for him and for the whole community at the tent of meeting by doing the work of the tabernacle.

31

BARNES, "keep his charge - i. e. so assist him that the obligations incumbent on him and on the congregation may be fulfilled.

CLARKE, "The charge of the whole congregation - They shall work for the whole congregation; and instead of the first-born.

GILL, "And they shall keep his charge, and the charge of the whole congregation,.... The charge of Aaron and of all the people of Israel, which was to secure the sanctuary from being polluted or plundered: this the Levites were to be employed about, and thereby ease the high priest and the other priests, and the people, of what otherwise would have been incumbent on them: before the tabernacle of the congregation; not within it, neither in the holy place, nor in the most holy place, where they might not enter, to do any service peculiar thereunto, but at the door of the tabernacle, and in the court of it, and in the rooms and chambers in it: and do the service of the tabernacle; not to offer sacrifices on the altar of the burnt offering, which stood in the court, and much less to burn incense on the altar of incense, and to him the lamps, and set on the shewbread in the holy place; and still less to enter into the most holy place, and do there what was to be done on the day of atonement; but to do all that is before observed, and to bring the people's offerings to the priest, and to assist in slaying them; and to keep all profane and polluted persons out of it, the tabernacle, as we find in later times; they were porters at it, and some of them were singers in it, and had the care of various things belonging to it: see 1Ch_9:14.

K&D, "Num_3:7-8They were to keep the charge of Aaron and the whole congregation before the tabernacle, to attend to the service of the dwelling, i.e., to observe what Aaron (the priest) and the whole congregation were bound to perform in relation to the service at the dwelling-place of Jehovah. “To keep the charge:” see Num_1:53 and Gen_26:5. In Num_3:8 this is more fully explained: they were to keep the vessels of the tabernacle, and to attend to all that was binding upon the children of Israel in relation to them, i.e., to take the oversight of the furniture, to keep it safe and clean.

Num_3:9Moses was also to give the Levites to Aaron and his sons. “They are wholly given to

him out of the children of Israel:” the repetition of ְנתּוִנם here and in Num_8:16 is emphatic, and expressive of complete surrender (Ewald, §313). The Levites, however, as nethunim, must be distinguished from the nethinim of non-Israelitish descent, who were given to the Levites at a later period as temple slaves, to perform the lowest duties connected with the sanctuary (see at Jos_9:27).

32

COKE, "Numbers 3:7. They shall keep his charge, and the charge of the whole congregation— This verse is better rendered in our old version, and they shall take the charge with him, even the charge of the whole congregation, before the tabernacle of the congregation, &c

ELLICOTT, "(7) And they shall keep his charge.—The word rendered charge may mean the directions which the Levites should receive from Aaron (comp. Genesis 26:5); or—as seems more probable from the use of the same word in this and the following verse with reference to the congregation—it may refer to the charge which was laid upon Aaron and upon the whole congregation in matters pertaining to the public worship of God.

BENSON, "Numbers 3:7. 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.

POOLE, " His charge, i.e. Aaron’s charge, or those things which are committed principally to Aaron’s care and oversight, and under him and his direction to the Levites.Of the whole congregation, i.e. of all the sacrifices and services which are due to the Lord from all the people, and because all the people could not and might not perform them, or at least divers of them, in their own persons, therefore they were to be performed by some particular persons in their name and stead; formerly by the first-born, Numbers 8:16, and now by the Levites. See Numbers 1:53 16:9.Before the tabernacle, emphatically; not within the tabernacle, for the care of these things within the holy place was appropriated to the priests, as the care of the most holy place was peculiar to the high priest.

WHEDON, "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

33

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 Numbers 3:6, is a sacrificial word, used when an offering is presented to Jehovah.

PETT, "Numbers 3:7-8“And they shall keep his charge, and the charge of the whole congregation, before the tent of meeting, to do the service of the tabernacle, and they shall keep all the furniture of the tent of meeting, and the charge of the children of Israel, to do the service of the tabernacle.”They were to be looked to both by Aaron and by the congregation of Israel to fulfil their responsibilities towards the Tent of Meeting. One of those responsibilities was to guard the Tent of Meeting (compare Numbers 1:53) and to maintain the furniture of the Tent of Meeting. The guarding would involve all the furniture, for while they could not touch it (when they carried the furniture it was wrapped and borne on staves), they must guard it with their lives. The maintenance was probably only in respect of smaller items which could be brought out for the purpose. We are not told what limitations were put on this at this time.

PULPIT, "Numbers 3:7They shall keep his charge, and the charge of the whole congregation. Septuagint, "shall keep his watches, and the watches of the children of Israel." The Levites were to be the servants of Aaron on the one side, and of the whole congregation on the other, in the performance of their religious duties. The complicated ceremonial now prescribed and set in use could not possibly be carried out by priests or people without the assistance of a large number of persons trained and devoted to the work. Compare St. Paul's words to the Corinthians (2 Corinthians 4:5), "Ourselves your servants for Jesus' sake."

8 They are to take care of all the furnishings of the tent of meeting, fulfilling the obligations of the Israelites by doing the work of the tabernacle. 34

CLARKE, "All the instruments - The tabernacle itself and all its contents: see all described, Num_3:25, Num_3:26, Num_3:31, Num_3:36, Num_3:37. 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.

GILL, "And they shall keep all the instruments of the tabernacle of the congregation,.... Take care of them that none be lost or come to any damage, especially while it was moving, and carried from place to place; then the several parts of it, as well as the vessels in it, were committed to their care and charge, the particulars of which see in Num_3:25, and the charge of the children of Israel, to do the service of the tabernacle; See Gill on Num_3:7.

BENSON, "Verse 8-9Numbers 3:8-9. 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.

9 Give the Levites to Aaron and his sons; they are the Israelites who are to be given wholly to him.[a]

GILL, "And thou shalt give the Levites unto Aaron and to his sons,.... To be 35

their ministers and servants: they are wholly given unto him out of the children of Israel: even all of them entirely, none excepted; the whole tribe which were not in the priestly office; those were separated from the rest of the tribes of Israel, and appointed for the service of the priests: or they were "given, given" (q); which is repeated not only to show that they were wholly given, as we render it, but to denote the certainty of it, that they were really given; and especially to declare the freeness of the gift; the priests had them as free gifts, nor did they pay them any thing for, their service; they were maintained another way, namely, by the tithes of the people; and indeed the priests received a tithe out of the tithe of the Levites; so far were they from contributing any thing to their support, or in consideration of the service they did them.

K&D, "Num_3:9Moses was also to give the Levites to Aaron and his sons. “They are wholly given to

him out of the children of Israel:” the repetition of ְנתּוִנם here and in Num_8:16 is emphatic, and expressive of complete surrender (Ewald, §313). The Levites, however, as nethunim, must be distinguished from the nethinim of non-Israelitish descent, who were given to the Levites at a later period as temple slaves, to perform the lowest duties connected with the sanctuary (see at Jos_9:27).

ELLICOTT, " (9) They are wholly given unto him.—Hebrew, Given, given are they to him. This repetition of the word nethunim (given) is emphatic. The same repetition occurs in Numbers 8:16, where the Levites are represented as “wholly given” to the Lord instead of the firstborn; and in Numbers 3:19 of that chapter, as in Numbers 3:12 of this chapter, they are represented as being given by Him to Aaron and his sons. The word nethunim must not be confounded with Nethinim, the name given at a later date (1 Chronicles 9:2; Ezra 2:43; Nehemiah 3:26; Nehemiah 3:31) to the Gibeonites, who were made “hewers of wood and drawers of water for the congregation and for the altar of the Lord” (Joshua 9:27). The tribe of Levi had proved themselves the most zealous for the honour of the Lord at the time of the worship of the golden calf (Exodus 32:26-29), and it was then that Moses gave them the charge to consecrate themselves (literally, to fill their hands, comp. Numbers 3:3 of this chapter) to the Lord. There was, therefore, a special reason for the selection of this tribe, independently of the fact that Moses and Aaron (and consequently the priests, as the descendants of Aaron) belonged to it.

TRAPP, "Numbers 3:9 And thou shalt give the Levites unto Aaron and to his sons: they [are] wholly given unto him out of the children of Israel.Ver. 9. They are wholly given unto him.] Heb. They are given, they are given. So the ministers of the gospel are called "gifts"; [Ephesians 4:8; Ephesians 4:11] honoraries; such as Christ bestowed upon his Church at the day of his coronation,

36

and solemn inauguration into his throne, at his wonderful ascension.

WHEDON, " 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.

PETT, "Numbers 3:9‘And you shall give the Levites to Aaron and to his sons. They are wholly given to him on the behalf of the children of Israel.”The Levites were ‘given to Aaron’, that is were put entirely at the disposal of Aaron and his sons. For all their duties they looked to them. The lack of mention of wider duties is significant. At this time the major one was to be that of total responsibility for the Dwellingplace when travelling, and of guarding it from intrusion. Later their responsibilities would widen, for example with regard to the overseeing of tithes of corn, wheat and barley. They would also teach the people the general requirements of the Torah as instructed by the priests, especially as it related to such things. But that would only be fully necessary when they were finally in the land.

PULPIT, "Numbers 3:9They are wholly given unto him. The word nethunim (wholly given) is emphatic here, and in Numbers 8:16. As the whole house of Israel at large, so especially (for a reason which will presently appear) the tribe of Levi belonged absolutely to God; and he, as absolutely, made them over to Aaron and the priests for the service of his sanctuary. Cf. Ephesians 4:11, "gave some apostles," etc. The Levites, as gifts from God (nethunim) to their brethren the priests, must be distinguished from the nethinim or serfs of foreign extraction given by the congregation to the Levites to do their most menial work for them (Joshua 9:27).

37

10 Appoint Aaron and his sons to serve as priests; anyone else who approaches the sanctuary is to be put to death.”

CLARKE, "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.

GILL, "And thou shalt appoint Aaron and his sons,.... To the priestly office; this was done before, but is renewed for the confirmation of it, and repeated to put them in mind of it, that they be careful to execute it, as follows: and they shall wait on their priest's office, to do what was peculiar to it, both in the holy and in the most holy place, at the altar, and within, the vail, where the Levites had nothing to do; and this is observed that the priests might take notice, that by the gift of the Levites to them, they were not excused from doing any part of service which was proper to them as priests; for they were given them that they might more readily attend their office, and be wholly employed in it; just as, under the Gospel dispensation, deacons were appointed to take care of the secular affairs of the church, that the apostles might give up themselves to the word of God and prayer, Act_6:2, and the stranger that cometh nigh shall be put to death; that comes nigh to perform any part of the priest's office peculiar to him as to offer sacrifice, burn incense, &c. whether he be a common Israelite, or even a Levite, as Korah was; any that was not a priest was reckoned a stranger, and so to be put to death for intruding into the office, as the above mentioned person was: so Aben Ezra interprets it of anyone that came nigh to a priest, to be with him or join with him in the execution of his office, whether an Israelite or a Levite, he shall die: the Targum of Jonathan adds, by flaming fire before the Lord.K&D, "Num_3:10

Aaron and his sons were to be appointed by Moses to take charge of the priesthood; as no stranger, no one who was not a son of Aaron, could approach the sanctuary without being put to death (cf. Num_1:53 and Lev_22:10).

38

TRAPP, "Numbers 3:10 And thou shalt appoint Aaron and his sons, and they shall wait on their priest’s office: and the stranger that cometh nigh shall be put to death.Ver. 10. And the stranger.] Though a Levite, yet if not of Aaron’s seed. [Numbers 18:3 Hebrews 5:4] Let this be thought upon by our too bold intruders into the work of the ministry.

POOLE, " They shall wait, in their own persons, not by the Levites.The stranger, i.e. every one who is of another family than Aaron’s, yea, though he be a Levite. See Numbers 1:53 16:40.That cometh nigh, to wit, to execute any part of the priest’s office.

PETT, "Numbers 3:10“And you shall appoint Aaron and his sons, and they shall keep their priesthood, and the stranger who comes nigh shall be put to death.”It is, however, made clear that the Levites were not to act as priests. The priesthood was to be retained within the close family of Aaron. They were to ‘keep their priesthood’. Only they could approach the altar, manipulate the blood of offerings and sacrifices, and enter the inner Sanctuary. They were the authoritative teachers of the covenant regulations, the discerners of what was clean and unclean (Leviticus 10:11; Deuteronomy 24:8). Any non-Aaronide who acted as a priest and drew near to the altar or the inner sanctuary for priestly service was to be put to death. How this sentence would be carried out, and by whom, is not described. Later, when priests were more numerous, it would clearly require checks on identification, and on ancestry and antecedents before such an execution took place (see Exodus 32:25-29; Numbers 25:7-12).

PULPIT, "The stranger that cometh nigh. This constantly recurring formula has not always quite the same meaning: in Numbers 1:51 it signified any one not of the tribe of Levi; here it includes even the Levite who was not also a priest. The separation of the Levites for the ministry of the tabernacle was not to infringe in the least upon the exclusive rights of Aaron and his sons.

39

11 The Lord also said to Moses,

GILL, "And the Lord spake unto Moses,.... Continued to speak unto him, and give him the reason of his appointing the Levites to minister to the priests and serve the tabernacle:

JAMISON 11-13, "I have taken the Levites, etc. — The consecration of this tribe did not originate in the legislative wisdom of Moses, but in the special appointment of God, who chose them as substitutes for the first-born. By an appointment made in memory of the last solemn judgment on Egypt (from which the Israelitish households were miraculously exempt) all the first-born were consecrated to God (Exo_13:12; Exo_22:29), who thus, under peculiar circumstances, seemed to adopt the patriarchal usage of appointing the oldest to act as the priest of the family. But the privilege of redemption that was allowed the first-born opened the way for a change; and accordingly, on the full organization of the Mosaic economy, the administration of sacred things formerly committed to the first-born was transferred from them to the Levites, who received that honor partly as a tribute to Moses and Aaron, partly because this tribe had distinguished themselves by their zeal in the affair of the golden calf (Exo_32:29), and also because, being the smallest of the tribes, they could ill find suitable employment and support in the work. (See on Deu_33:8). The designation of a special class for the sacred offices of religion was a wise arrangement; for, on their settlement in Canaan, the people would be so occupied that they might not be at leisure to wait on the service of the sanctuary, and sacred things might, from various causes, fall into neglect. But the appointment of an entire tribe to the divine service ensured the regular performance of the rites of religion. The subsequent portion of the chapter relates to the formal substitution of this tribe.

I am the Lord — that is, I decree it to be so; and being possessed of sovereign authority, I expect full obedience.

K&D 11-13, "God appointed the Levites for this service, because He had decided to adopt them as His own in the place of all the first-born of Egypt. When He slew the first-born of Egypt, He sanctified to Himself all the first-born of Israel, of man and beast, for His own possession (see Exo_13:1-2). By virtue of this sanctification, which was founded upon the adoption of the whole nation as His first-born son, the nation was required to dedicate to Him its first-born sons for service at the sanctuary, and sacrifice all the first-born of its cattle to Him. But now the Levites and their cattle were to be adopted in their place, and the first-born sons of Israel to be released in return (Num_3:40.). By this arrangement, through which the care of the service at the sanctuary was transferred to one tribe, which would and should henceforth devote itself with undivided interest to this vocation, not only was a more orderly performance of this service secured, than could have been effected through the first-born of all the tribes; but so far as the whole nation was concerned, the fulfilment of its obligations in relation to this service was

40

undoubtedly facilitated. Moreover, the Levites had proved themselves to be the most suitable of all the tribes for his post, through their firm and faithful defence of the honour of the Lord at the worship of the golden calf (Exo_32:26.). It is in this spirit, which distinguished the tribe of Levi, that we may undoubtedly discover the reason why they were chosen by God for the service of the sanctuary, and not in the fact that Moses and Aaron belonged to the tribe, and desired to form a hierarchical caste of the members of their own tribe, such as was to be found among other nations: the magi, for example, among the Medes, the Chaldeans among the Persians, and the Brahmins among the Indians. ָה ְיה ֲאִני ;to Me, to Me, Jehovah” (Num_3:13, Num_3:41, and Num_3:45“ ,ִליcf. Ges. §121, 3).

COFFMAN, ""And Jehovah spake unto Moses, saying, And I, behold, I have taken the Levites from among the children of Israel instead of all the first-born that openeth the womb among the children of Israel; and the Levites shall be mine: for all the first-born are mine; on the day that I smote all the first-born in the land of Egypt I hallowed unto me all the first-born in Israel, both man and beast; mine they shall be: I am Jehovah."There is important symbolism in this. "As representatives of the hallowed first-born (Exodus 22:29,30; 34:19,20), the Levites picture the saints composing `the church of the first-born ... written (registered) in heaven' (Hebrews 12:23), having no earthly inheritance, but a heavenly place and service."[10]This paragraph is not a clumsy attempt to soften the degrading requirements early in the chapter that seem to enslave the Levites, but a true revelation of what is really meant by being given "unto the Lord." All who are given unto God are given to serve; and the saved are saved to save.The important question of just why God selected the Levites for this assignment is easily answered. Whitelaw has the best analysis of it: "The most obvious reason why Levi was selected is that he was by far the smallest in numbers of the twelve tribes, being less than half the size of the next smallest. Also, he almost balanced the number of the firstborn. Furthermore, a larger tribe could not have been spared, and would not have been needed to supply the number required ... Another reason may appear in the prophecy of Genesis 49:7. Both Levi and Simeon were doomed never to raise their heads as a united and powerful tribe in Israel."[11]That an entire tribe (although the smallest) was required for the services detailed for the Levites in these chapters is manifest in the extensive and elaborate ritual prescribed by God himself for the tabernacle throughout the middle three books of the Pentateuch. A small number of persons could never have done all that God commanded to be done in connection with that extensive ritual.

41

WHEDON, "Verses 11-13THE LEVITES SUBSTITUTED FOR THE FIRSTBORN, Numbers 3:11-13.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, (Numbers 3:40,) and the redemption of the number in excess. Numbers 3:47. 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 Numbers 3:40, note.

EBC 11-13, "2. THE FIRST-BORNNumbers 3:11-13; Numbers 3:40-51These two passages supplement each other and may be taken together. Jehovah claims the first-born in Israel. He hallowed them unto Himself on the day when He smote all the firstborn in the land of Egypt. They are now humbered from a month old and upward. But instead of their being appointed personally to holy service, the Levites are substituted for them. The whole account supplies a scheme of the origin of the sacerdotal tribe.It has been questioned whether the number of the first-born, which is 22,273, can in any way be made to agree with the total number of the male Israelites, previously stated at 603,550. Wellhausen is specially contemptuous of a tradition or calculation which, he says, would give an average of forty children to each woman. But the difficulty partly yields if it is kept in view that the Levites were separated for the service of the sanctuary. Naturally it would be the heir-apparent alone of each

42

family group whose liability to this kind of duty fell to be considered. The head of a household was, according to the ancient reckoning, its priest. In Abraham’s family no one counted as a first-born but Isaac. Now that a generation of Israelites is growing up sanctified by the covenant, it appears fit that the presumptive priest should either be devoted to sacerdotal duty, or relieved of it by a Levite as his substitute. Suppose each family had five tents, and suppose further that the children born before the exodus are not reckoned, the number will not be found at all disproportionate. The absolute number remains a difficulty.Dr. Robertson Smith argues from his own premises about the sanctity of the first-born. He repudiates the notion that at one time the Hebrews actually sacrificed all their first-born sons; yet he affirms that "there must have been some point of attachment in ancient custom for the belief that the Deity asked for such a sacrifice." "I apprehend," he proceeds, "that all the prerogatives of the first-born among Semitic peoples are originally prerogatives of sanctity; the sacred blood of the kin flows purest and strongest in him." {Genesis 49:3} Neither in the case of children nor in that of cattle did the congenital holiness of the first-born originally imply that they must be sacrificed or given to the Deity on the altar, but only that if sacrifice was to be made, they were the best and fittest because the holiest victims. The passage in Numbers may be confidently declared to be far from any such conception. The special fitness for sacrifice of the firstborn of an animal is assumed: the fitness of the heir of a family, again, is plainly not to become a sacrifice, but to offer sacrifice. The first-born of the Egyptians died. But it is the life, the holy activity of His own people, not their death, God desires. And this holy activity, rising to its highest function in the firstborn, is according to our passage laid on the Levites to a certain extent. Not entirely indeed. The whole congregation is still consecrated and must be holy. All are bound by the covenant. The head of each family group will still have to officiate as a priest in celebrating the passover. Certain duties, however, are transferred for the better protection of the sanctities of worship.The first-born are found to exceed the number of the Levites by two hundred and seventy-three; and for their redemption Moses takes "five shekels apiece by the poll; after the shekel of the sanctuary." The money thus collected is given unto Aaron and his sons.The method of redemption here presented, purely arbitrary in respect of the sum appointed for the ransom of each life, is fitly contrasted by the Apostle Peter with that of the Christian dispensation. He adopts the word redeem, taking it over from the old economy, but says, "Ye were redeemed not with corruptible things, with silver or gold, from your vain manner of life handed down from your fathers." And the difference is not only that the Christian is redeemed with the precious blood of Christ, but this also, that, while the first-born Israelite was relieved of certain parts of the holy service which might have been claimed of him by Jehovah, it is for sacred service, "to be a holy priesthood to offer up spiritual sacrifices," Christians are redeemed. In the one case exemption, in the other case consecration is the end.

43

The difference is indeed great, and shows how much the two covenants are in contrast with each other. It is not to enable us to escape any of the duties or obligations of life Christ has given Himself for us. It is to make us fit for those duties, to bring us. fully under those obligations, to purify us that we may serve God with our bodies and spirits which are His.A passage in Exodus {Exodus 13:11 f.} must not be overlooked in connection with that presently under consideration. The enactment there is to the effect that when Israel is brought into the land of the Canaanites every first-born of beasts shall be set apart unto the Lord, the firstling of an ass shall be redeemed with a lamb or killed, and all first-born children shall be redeemed. Here the singular point is that the law is deferred, and does not come into operation till the settlement in Canaan. Either this was set aside for the provisions made in Numbers, or these are to be interpreted by it. The difficulties of the former view are greatly increased by the mention of the "shekel of the sanctuary," which seems to imply a settled medium of exchange, hardly possible in the wilderness.Numbers 8:18-19, the subject of redemption is again touched, and the additions are significant. Now the service of the Levites "in the tent of meeting" is by way of atonement for the children of Israel, "that there be no plague among the children of Israel when the children of Israel come nigh unto the sanctuary." Atonement is not with blood in this case, but by the service of the living substitute. While the general scope of the Mosaic law requires the shedding of blood in order that the claim of God may be met, this exception must not be forgotten. And in a sense it is the chief instance of atonement, far transcending in expressiveness those in which animals were slaughtered for propitiation. The whole congregation, threatened with plagues and disasters in approaching God, has protection through the holy service of the Levitical tribe. Here is substitution of a kind which makes a striking point in the symbolism of the Old Testament in its relation to the New. The principle may be seen in patriarchal history. The ten in Sodom, if ten righteous men could have been found, would have saved it, would have been its atonement in a sense, not by their death on its behalf but by their life. And Moses himself, standing alone between God and Israel, prevails by his pleading and saves the nation from its doom. So our Lord says of His disciples, "Ye are the salt of the earth." Their holy devotion preserves the mass from moral corruption and spiritual death. Again, "for the elect’s sake," the days of tribulation shall be shortened. {Matthew 24:22}The ceremonies appointed for the cleansing and consecration of the Levites, described in Numbers 8:5-26, may be noticed here. They differ considerably from those enjoined for the consecration of priests. Neither were the Levites anointed with sacred oil, for instance, nor were they sprinkled with the blood of sacrifices; nor, again, do they seem to have worn any special dress, even in the tabernacle court. There was, however, an impressive ritual which would produce in their minds a consciousness of separation and devotion to God. The water of expiation, literally of sin, was first to be sprinkled upon them, a baptism not signifying anything like regeneration, but having reference to possible defilements of the flesh. A razor was

44

then to be made to pass over the whole body, and the clothes were to be washed, also to remove actual as well as legal impurity. This cleansing completed, the sacrifices followed. One bullock for a burnt offering, with its accompanying meal offering, and one for a sin offering were provided. The people being assembled towards the door of the tent of meeting, the Levites were placed in front of them to be presented to Jehovah. The princes probably laid their hands on the Levites, so declaring them the representatives of all for their special office. Then Aaron had to offer the sacrifices for the Levites, and the Levites themselves as living sacrifices to Jehovah. The Levites laid their hands on the bullocks, making them their substitutes for the symbolic purpose. Aaron and his sons slew the animals and offered them in the appointed way, burning the one bullock upon the altar, around which its blood had been sprinkled, of the other burning only certain portions called the fat. Then the ceremony of waving was performed, or what was possible in the circumstances, each Levite being passed through the hands of Aaron or one of his sons. So set apart, they were, according to Numbers 8:24, required to wait upon the work of the tent of meeting, each from his twenty-fifth to his fiftieth year. The service had been previously ordered to begin at the thirtieth year. {Numbers 4:3} Afterwards the time of ministry was still further extended. {1 Chronicles 23:24-27}Such is the account of the symbolic cleansing and the representative ministry of the Levites; and we see both a parallel and a contrast to what is demanded now for the Christian life of obedience and devotion to God. Purification there must be from all defilement of flesh and spirit. With the change which takes place when by repentance and faith in Christ we enter into the free service of God there must be a definite and earnest purging of the whole nature. "As ye presented your members as servants to uncleanness and to iniquity unto iniquity, even so now present your members as servants to righteousness unto sanctification" {Romans 6:19}. "Mortify therefore your members which are upon the earth; fornication, uncleanness, passion, evil desire, and covetousness, the which is idolatry, put ye also away all these: anger, wrath, malice, railing, shameful speaking out of your mouth: lie not one to another; seeing that ye have put off the old man with his doings, and have put on the new man." {Colossians 3:5; Colossians 3:8-9} Thus the purity of heart and soul so imperfectly represented by the cleansings of the Levites is set forth as the indispensable preparation of the Christian. And the contrast lies in this, that the purification required by the New Testament law is for all, and is the same for each. Whether one is to serve in the ministry of the Gospel or sweep a room as for God’s cause; the same profound purity is needful. All in the Kingdom of God are to be holy, for He is holy.

PETT, "Numbers 3:11-13‘And Yahweh spoke to Moses, saying, “And I, behold, I have taken the Levites from among the children of Israel instead of all the first-born who open the womb among the children of Israel, and the Levites shall be mine, for all the first-born are mine. On the day that I smote all the first-born in the land of Egypt I hallowed to myself

45

all the first-born in Israel, both man and beast. Mine they shall be. I am Yahweh.” ’The reason for the appointment of the Levites is given. They were to be a substitute for the firstborn sons of Israel whom Yahweh had made holy to Himself at the first Passover (Exodus 13:2). This refers to the ‘bechor’, the first-born of the father. Thus in polygamous households there would still only be one firstborn. The ‘opening of the womb’ probably signifies the opening of the ‘mother womb’ of the family, that is, that of the leading wife, for the ‘first-born’ is a title only applied to such (Numbers 1:20; Genesis 27:32; Genesis 35:23; Genesis 36:15; Genesis 38:6; Genesis 43:33; Genesis 49:3, in comparison with all Jacob’s sons).When Yahweh had slain all the first-born in Egypt He had made holy to Himself all the first-born in Israel, both man and beast (Exodus 13:2; Exodus 13:12; Exodus 13:15; Exodus 22:29; Exodus 34:19-20). It was to be their duty to serve Him in the ritual requirements of the cult. In the case of clean beasts this would be by being offered as an offering or sacrifice. In the case of men they could be ‘redeemed’ from being ‘offered’ by the slaughter of a clean beast in their place (Exodus 13:13; Exodus 13:15), but were then for ever to be available for the service of Yahweh. Those first-born alive at the original Passover were presumably seen as redeemed by the passover lamb, and they thereby became sanctified cult servants. But now the Levites were appointed to take their place.

12 “I have taken the Levites from among the Israelites in place of the first male offspring of every Israelite woman. The Levites are mine,

CLARKE, "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 Num_3:45. Several reasons have been assigned why God should give this honor 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, Exo_32:28, has

46

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, Heb_2:13. And they are a congregation of first-born, whose names are written in heaven, Heb_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, Jam_1:18, to whom he also gives the first-fruits of his Spirit, Rom_8:23. These wait on and follow the Lamb, being first-fruits unto God and to the Lamb, Rev_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, Rev_1:6; Rev_7:15.

GILL, "And I, behold, I have taken the Levites from among the children of Israel,.... Separated them from others, and set them apart for the service of the sanctuary; this was his own act and deed, and which he did of his own will and pleasure, who is a sovereign Being, and might and would do whatsoever he pleased, nor should any object unto him, or contradict him: and this he did: instead of all the firstborn that openeth the matrix among the children of Israel; he made an exchange of those for the Levites; upon the destruction of the firstborn of Egypt, and saving the firstborn of Israel, he claimed the latter as his own in a special sense, and now he gave up his right to them, and instead thereof took the Levites; nor could the people of Israel reasonably object to this, nor be uneasy at it, but rather be pleased with it; since hereby they were not only freed from the charge of redeeming their firstborn, but since they were the Lord's, he might have appointed them to be servants to the priests; and every Israelite would choose rather, no doubt, to part with a tribe for this service than to have their firstborn sons employed in it; and there were none so fit as the tribe of Levi, not only because it was a small tribe, but because the priests were of this tribe, to whom they were to minister; and therefore as there was a connection between them, the Levites would readily serve them: it is a notion that has obtained both among Jews and Christians, that the firstborn before this time were priests in the family, but now the Levites were taken in their room; and Jarchi particularly observes, that when the firstborn sinned in the business of the calf, they were rejected, and the Levites, who did not commit idolatry, were chosen in their room; but it does not appear, before the fixing the priesthood in Aaron's family, that the firstborn in a family were priests, and officiated as such, but rather the father and head of the family for the whole, or everyone for himself, as in Adam's family, he and his two sons; and moreover, it was a recent thing, and only among the Hebrews, that the firstborn were in a peculiar manner the Lord's, not as priests, only to be redeemed, and now the Levites were redeemed in their room; it was not to be priests, but the servants of the priests (r): therefore the Levites shall be mine; whom he gave to the priests to assist them in their work, which was for him and his glory.

CALVIN, "12.And I, behold, I have taken the Levites A little further on we shall see more clearly why God claims one tribe for Himself; He now only shews that the

47

Levites rightfully belong to Him, because by special privilege the first-born of the people were preserved in the destruction of the Egyptians. God, therefore, declares that those, whose lives were thus gratuitously spared, were purchased to Himself. Since, then, He had the free option of devoting to Himself the first-born of every tribe, He was no less at liberty to take (425) only the twelfth part of the people from one tribe. Thus He cuts off all handle for complaint, inasmuch as it would have been intolerable ingratitude to withdraw from His control those whom He had miraculously redeemed; therefore He says that they did not perish in the general slaughter, in order that tie might subject them to ttimself.

COKE, "Verse 12-13Numbers 3:12-13. I have taken the Levites—instead of all the first-born— Some have thought that the Levites were chosen to this office, rather than any other of the tribes, because of the zeal for the true religion which they shewed in the affair of the golden calf; see Exodus 32:28 and some have thought, that the words of Moses, Deuteronomy 33:8-9 are confirmative of this opinion.REFLECTIONS.—The family of Aaron being appointed to the priests office, we have,1. A particular account of them. Nadab and Abihu perished childless for their disobedience: Eleazar and Ithamar remained. Made cautious by the warning given them, they ministered under Aaron's eye. 'Tis good to be under the direction of the elder and more experienced. They alone were permitted to enter the holy place, and it was death for any other to come there. Note; Intruders into the office of the Gospel-ministry, who have no DIVINE call, will one day be met, with a terrible inquiry, "Friend, how camest thou in hither?"2. As there was much work in the tabernacle, and so few to minister, the tribe of Levi are given to Aaron, as his assistants. They were taken of God instead of the first-born, who were consecrated to him in return for their deliverance in Egypt, when God spared them and slew the Egyptians. The lives which God preserves by his providence, he has a double right to expect should be employed in his service: and how much more the souls redeemed by the death of his own Son!

BENSON, "Numbers 3:12. 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

48

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.

POOLE, "Instead of all the first-born, who were God’s propriety by right of redemption, 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; which made it fit that this work should be committed to other hands. 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 and against idolaters; see Exodus 32:26,29 Deu 33:9; and partly, because it was the smallest of the tribes, and therefore most likely to find both employment in and maintenance for the work.

WHEDON, " 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; Exodus 13:12-15; Exodus 34:19-20; Numbers 8:16-17; also Numbers 18:15; Ezekiel 20:26;) but even then, wherever the two are distinguished, the term פׂשר, peter, is applied to the firstborn of animals, and בכור to the firstborn sons of men. On the other hand, where only firstborn sons are referred to, as in Deuteronomy 17-21:15 , 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.

PULPIT, "I have taken the Levites. The actual separation of Levi had been already anticipated (see Numbers 1:47, Numbers 1:53), but the meaning and purpose of that separation is now formally declared, into reason, however, is assigned for the choice of this particular tribe. It is almost always assumed that their zeal in the matter of the golden calf was the ground of the preference shown to them now. But it may be doubted whether there was any "preference" in the matter at all. To Aaron and his seed on undoubted and important preference was shown, but the functions and position of the Levites were not such as to give them any preeminence, or to secure

49

them any substantial advantage. They were tied down to the performance of routine duties, which demanded no intelligence, and gave scope for no ambitions. The one obvious reason why Levi was selected is to be found in the fact that he was by far the smallest in numbers among the tribes, being less than half the next smallest, Manasseh, and almost exactly balancing the first-born. A larger tribe could not have been spared, and would not have been needed, for the purpose in question. If any more recondite motive must be sought for the Divine selection, it must be found in the prophecy of Genesis 49:7. Levi as well as Simeon, though in a different way, was doomed never to raise his head as a united and powerful tribe among his brethren.

13 for all the firstborn are mine. When I struck down all the firstborn in Egypt, I set apart for myself every firstborn in Israel, whether human or animal. They are to be mine. I am the Lord.”

BARNES, "The concluding words are better expressed thus: “Mine shall they be, Mine, the Lord’s.” On the subject of the firstborn see the notes at Num_3:43-51.

GILL, "Because all the firstborn are mine,.... Not merely in a general way, as all creatures are his, but in a special manner as his own, and that for the following reason: for on the day that I smote all the firstborn in the land of Egypt, I hallowed unto me all the firstborn in Israel, both man and beast; that is, sanctified or set them apart as his own special property, or ordered the people of Israel so to do, Exo_13:2; for as when he destroyed the firstborn of the Egyptians, he saved the firstborn of Israel, he had a special claim upon them as his; and though it was in the night when he destroyed the firstborn of Egypt, yet it was the night which preceded that day, and was a part of that day, even the fifteenth of Nisan, when the instructions were given to sanctify all the firstborn; though, as Aben Ezra observes, "day" signifies "time", so that it was at or about the same time that the one and the other were done: mine they shall be; this was declared when they were ordered to be sanctified to him,

50

but now they were to be exchanged for the Levites: I am the Lord; who have sovereign power to do as he would in claiming the firstborn, and then in exchanging them for the Levites, and appointing the Levites to minister to the priests, and serve in the tabernacle.

ELLICOTT, " (13) On the day that I smote all the firstborn.—The command given to Moses respecting the sanctification or separation of the firstborn, both of man and of beast, is recorded immediately after the account of the exodus and of the institution of the Passover (Exodus 13:1-2). It does not clearly appear, however, from the terms employed whether the sanctification or separation applied to the firstborn then in existence—which appears to be by far the more probable supposition—or whether, as some suppose, the command was simply prospective. The whole nation of Israel is described in Exodus 4:22 as the Lord’s firstborn son, and the firstborn sons appear to have been regarded in the light of representatives of the entire nation.Mine shall they be: I am the Lord.—Or, They shall be (i.e., belong) to me, (even) to me, Jehovah. (Comp. Genesis 4:26 : “And to Seth, to him also.” Literally, And to Seth, even him.)

TRAPP, "Numbers 3:13 Because all the firstborn [are] mine; [for] on the day that I smote all the firstborn in the land of Egypt I hallowed unto me all the firstborn in Israel, both man and beast: mine shall they be: I [am] the LORD.Ver. 13. Because all the firstborn.] So they were from the beginning: but here is noted a continuance of this ordinance, when it is said that he sanctified the first born to himself, what time he smote every firstborn in Egypt. Now the firstborn are said to be God’s by a singular right, [Exodus 13:2] and so they were types, (1.) Of Christ, [Romans 8:29] to whom therefore we must give the honour of his first birthright; all our sheaves must vail and bow to his sheaf: (2.) Of Christians; those "firstborn whose names are written in heaven," [Hebrews 12:23] who are dear to God, as his firstborn, [Exodus 4:22] and so "higher than the kings of the earth," [Psalms 89:27] for they are "kings and priests unto God," [Revelation 1:6] to "serve him day and night in his temple." [Revelation 7:15]

WHEDON, " 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

51

hallowed because they were spared. Hallowed — Hebrew, kadash; Greek, αγιαζω; 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.

PULPIT, "Because all the first-born are mine (see Exodus 13:2, and below on verse 43). That the powers of heaven had a special claim upon the firstling of man or beast was probably one of the oldest religious ideas in the world, which it would be difficult to trace to any origin but in some primeval revelation. It branched out into many superstitions, of which the cruel cultus of Moloch was the worst. Among the tribes which preserved the patriarchal faith, it retained more or less of its primitive meaning in the assignment of sacrificial duties to the eldest son. According to the Targums, the "young men of the children of Israel" sent by Moses to offer sacrifices before the consecration of Aaron (Exodus 24:5) were first-born. Whatever ancient and latent claims, however, God may have had upon the firstborn of Israel, they are here superseded by a special and recent claim founded upon their miraculous preservation when the first-born of the Egyptians were slain. All the firstborn in that day became "anathema," devoted to God, for evil or for good, for death or for life. He, to whom belongs the whole harvest of human souls, came and claimed his first-fruits from the fields of Egypt. He took unto himself by death the first-born of the Egyptians; he left for himself in life the first-born of the Israelites. For the convenience, however, of the people, and for the better and more regular discharge of the ministry, he was content to take the single small tribe of Levi in lieu of the first-born of all.

14 The Lord said to Moses in the Desert of Sinai,

GILL, "And the Lord spake unto Moses in the wilderness of Sinai,.... At the same time he gave the order, and made the declaration before mentioned, and in the

52

place where now the children of Israel were, and from whence they shortly removed:

JAMISON 14-31, "Number the children of Levi — They were numbered as well as the other tribes; but the enumeration was made on a different principle - for while in the other tribes the number of males was calculated from twenty years and upward [Num_1:3], in that of Levi they were counted “from a month old and upward.” The reason for the distinction is obvious. In the other tribes the survey was made for purposes of war [Num_1:3], from which the Levites were totally exempt. But the Levites were appointed to a work on which they entered as soon as they were capable of instruction. They are mentioned under the names of Gershon, Kohath, and Merari, sons of Levi, and chiefs or ancestral heads of three subdivisions into which this tribe was distributed. Their duties were to assist in the conveyance of the tabernacle when the people were removing the various encampments, and to form its guard while stationary -the Gershonites being stationed on the west, the Kohathites on the south, and the families of Merari on the north. The Kohathites had the principal place about the tabernacle, and charge of the most precious and sacred things - a distinction with which they were honored, probably, because the Aaronic family belonged to this division of the Levitical tribe. The Gershonites, being the oldest, had the next honorable post assigned them, while the burden of the drudgery was thrown on the division of Merari.

K&D 14-20, "The muster of the Levites included all the males from a month old and upwards, because they were to be sanctified to Jehovah in the place of the first-born; and it was at the age of a month that the latter were either to be given up or redeemed (comp. Num_3:40 and Num_3:43 with Num_18:16). In Num_3:17-20 the sons of Levi and their sons are enumerated, who were the founders of the mishpachoth among the Levites, as in Exo_6:16-19.

COFFMAN, ""And Jehovah spake unto Moses in the wilderness of Sinai, saying, Number the children of Levi by their fathers' houses, by their families: every male from a month old and upward shalt thou number them. And Moses numbered them according to the word of Jehovah, as he was commanded. And these were the sons of Levi by their names: Gershon, and Kohath, and Merari. And these are the sons of Gershon by their families: Libni and Shimei. And the son of Kohath by their families: Areram, and Izhar, Hebron, and Uzziel. And the sons of Merari by their families: Mahli and Mushi. These are the families of the Levites according to their fathers' houses."The effect of this very abbreviated genealogy is that of dividing the Levites into three divisions:(1) the Gershonites

53

(2) the Kohathites, and(3) the MeraritesA marked difference in the method of numbering occurs here in that all males above the age of one month were included, whereas in the case of the military registration, only those above twenty years old were counted. Based upon this, Jewish tradition held that, "A child must live a month before being considered fully viable. Neither funeral nor mourning practices are observed if a child has not reached that age, and the child is considered as if stillborn."[12]

COKE, "Verse 14-15Numbers 3:14-15. And the Lord spake unto Moses— Bishop Kidder remarks here, very judiciously, that though the number of the Israelites was to be taken by Aaron as well as by Moses (chap. Numbers 1:3.); the precept to number the Levites is directed to, and executed only by Moses, Numbers 3:16. In like manner we find that Moses only was concerned in numbering the first-born of Israel, Numbers 3:40-42. 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 authorised to take that number himself. We may observe too, that the Levites being numbered to know how many there were in all, (not how many were able to bear arms, chap. Numbers 1:3.) that so there might be an exchange of them for an equal number of the first-born; it was proper that they should he all numbered without distinction; even from a month old; the age at which the firstling males were appointed to be redeemed.

WHEDON, " THE NUMBERING OF THE LEVITES, Numbers 3:14-39.14. 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 Numbers 3:39 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 Numbers 3:16.Verse 15

EBC 14-39, "3. LEVITICAL SERVICENumbers 3:14-39; Numbers 4:1-49

54

The sacred service of the Levites is described in detail. There are three divisions, the Gershonites, the Kohathites, the Merarites. The Gershonites, from a month old and upward, numbered 7,500; the Kohathites, 8,600; the Merarites, 6,200. Eleazar, son of Aaron, is prince of the princes of the Levites.The office of the Kohathites is of peculiar sanctity, next to that of Aaron and his sons. They are not "cut off" or specially separated from among the Levites; {Numbers 4:18} but they have duties that require great care, and they must not venture to approach the most holy things till preparation has been made by the priests. The manner of that preparation is fully described. When order has been given for the setting forward of the camp, Aaron and his sons cover the ark of the covenant first with the veil of the screen, then with a covering of sealskin, and lastly with a cloth of blue; they also insert in the rings the long staves with which the ark is to be carried. Next the table of shewbread is covered with a blue cloth; the dishes, spoons, bowls, and cups are placed on the top, over them a scarlet cloth, and above that a sealskin covering; the staves of the table are also placed in readiness. The candlestick and its lamps and other appurtenances are wrapped up in like manner and put on a frame. Then the golden altar by itself, and the vessels used in the service of the sanctuary by themselves are covered with blue cloth and sealskin and made ready for carriage. Finally, the great altar is cleansed of ashes, covered up with purple cloth and sealskin, and its staves set in their rings. When all this is done the sons of Kohath may advance to bear the holy things, never touching them lest they die.The question arises, why so great care is considered necessary that none but the priests should handle the furniture of the sanctuary. We have learned to think that a real religion should avoid secrecy, that everything connected with it should be done in the open light of day. Why, then, is the shrine of Jehovah guarded with such elaborate precaution? And the answer is that the idea of mystery appears here as absolutely needful, in order to maintain the solemn feelings of the people and their sense of the holiness of God. Not only because the Israelites were rude and earthly, but also because the whole system was symbolic, the holy things were kept from common sight. In this respect the worship described in these books of Moses resembled that of other nations of antiquity. The Egyptian temple had its innermost shrine where the arks of the gods were placed; and into that most holy place with its silver soil the priests alone went. But even Egyptian worship, with all its mystery, did not always conceal the arks and statues of the gods. When those gods were believed to be favourable, the arks were carried in procession, the images so far unveiled that they could be seen by the people. It was entirely different in the case of the sacred symbols and instruments of Hebrew worship, according to the ideal of the law. And the elaborate precautions are to be regarded as indicating the highest tidemark of symbolised sanctity. Jehovah was not like Egyptian or Assyrian or Phoenician gods. These might be represented by statues which the people could see. But everything used in His worship must be kept apart. The worship must be of faith; and the ark which was the great symbol must remain always invisible. The

55

effect of this on the popular mind was complex, varying with the changing circumstances of the nation; and to trace it would be an interesting piece of study. It may be remembered that in the time of most ardent Judaism the want of the ark made no difference to the veneration in which the temple was held and the intense devotion of the people to their religion. The ark was used as a talisman in Eli’s time; in the temple erected after the captivity there was no ark; its place in the holy of holies was occupied by a stone.The Gershonites had as their charge the screens and curtains of the tabernacle, or most holy place, and the tent of meeting or holy place, also the curtains of the court of the tabernacle. The boards, bars, pillars, and sockets of the tabernacle and of the court were to be entrusted to the Merarites.In the whole careful ordering of the duties to be discharged by these Levites we see a figure of the service to be rendered to God and men in one aspect of it. Organisation, attention to details, and subordination of those who carry out schemes to the appointed officials, and of all, both inferior and superior, to law-these ideas are here fully represented. Assuming the incapacity of many for spontaneous effort, the principle that God is not a God of confusion but of order in the churches of the saints may be held to point to subordination of a similar kind even under Christianity. But the idea carried to its full limit, implies an inequality between men which the free spirit of Christianity will not admit. It is an honour for men to be connected with any spiritual enterprise, even as bearers of burdens. Those who take such a place may be spiritual men, thoughtful men, as intelligent and earnest as their official superiors. But the Levites, according to the law, were to be bearers of burdens, menials of the sanctuary from generation to generation. Here the parallel absolutely fails. No Christian, however cordially he may fill such a place for a time, is bound to it in perpetuity. His way is open to the highest duties and honours of a redeemed son of God. In a sense Judaism even did not prevent the spiritual advancement of any Levite, or any man. The priesthood was practically closed, but the office of the prophet, really higher than that of the priest, was not. From the routine work of the priesthood men like Jeremiah and Ezekiel were called by the Spirit of God to speak in the name of the Highest. The word of the Lord was put into their mouths. Elijah, who was apparently of the tribe of Manasseh, Amos and Daniel, who belonged to Judah, became prophets. The open door for the men of the tribes was into this calling. Neither in Israel nor in Christendom is priesthood the highest religious function. The great servants of God might well refuse it or throw aside its shackles.

PETT, "Verses 14-16Positioning and Arrangements for Travel of the Levites (Numbers 3:14-51).i). The Command to Number The Levites Over One Month Old (Numbers 3:14-16).

56

Numbers 3:14-15‘And Yahweh spoke to Moses in the wilderness of Sinai, saying, “Number the children of Levi by their fathers’ houses, by their families, every male from a month old and upward shall you number them.”God now commanded the numbering of the male children of Levi. But the numbering was to be on a different basis to that in Numbers 1. Rather than being of those who were twenty years old and upwards it was of those who were one month old and upwards. This was because the comparison was to be made with all firstborn sons, not just adult ones. We can therefore assume that the same basis applied to the firstborn. They did not need to be redeemed until they were one month old.Numbers 3:16‘And Moses numbered them according to the word of Yahweh, as he was commanded.’And as Yahweh commanded, so Moses did. He numbered the sons of Levi. He was continually obedient.

15 “Count the Levites by their families and clans. Count every male a month old or more.”

CLARKE, "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.

57

GILL, "Number the children of Levi,.... Who were left out of the general muster of the children of Israel, but now were to be numbered alone, and in a different manner, and for, a different purpose, the Lord having a special regard auto, them, and special service for them: after the house of their fathers, by their families; into which the tribe was divided; house seems to be put for "houses", which were principal ones; and these were divided into families, which branched from them, and according to these, denominated from their fathers, and not their, mothers, were they to be numbered; for as the Jewish writers often say, a mother's family is no family; wherefore, if a Levite woman married into any other tribe, as she might, her, descendants were not taken into this accounts only such whose fathers were Levites, see Num_1:2, every male from a month old and upwards shalt thou number them; the reason of this was, because the firstborn, for whom they were to be exchanged, were at a month old claimed by the Lord as his, and to be redeemed; and as this numbering was on, another account than, that of the children of Israel, who were numbered from twenty years of age and upwards, that they might on occasion be called out to war, from which the Levites were exempted, and the numbering of them was for the service of the sanctuary; so from their youth they were to be brought up and trained for this, that they might be fit for it, and enter upon it at a proper age.

HENRY, "The Levites being granted to Aaron to minister to him, they are here delivered to him by tale, that he might know what he had, and employ them accordingly. Observe,

I. By what rule they were numbered: Every male from a month old and upward,Num_3:15. The rest of the tribes were numbered only from twenty years old and upwards, and of them those only that were able to go forth to war; but into the number of the Levites they must take in both infants, and infirm; being exempted from the war, it was not insisted upon that they should be of age and strength for the wars. Though it appears afterwards that little more than a third part of the Levites were fit to be employed in the service of the tabernacle (about 8000 out of 22,000, Num_4:47, Num_4:48), yet God would have them all numbered as retainers to his family; that none may think themselves disowned and rejected of God because they are not in a capacity of doing him that service which they see others do him. The Levites of a month old could not honour God and serve the tabernacle, as those that had grown up; yet out of the mouths of babes and sucklings the Levites' praise was perfected. Let not little children be hindered from being enrolled among the disciples of Christ, for such was the tribe of Levi, of such is the kingdom of heaven, that kingdom of priests. The redemption of the first-born was reckoned from a month old (Num_18:15, Num_18:16), therefore from that age the Levites were numbered. They were numbered after the house of their fathers, not their mothers, for, if the daughter of a Levite married one of another tribe, her son was not a Levite; but we read of a spiritual priest to out God who inherited the unfeigned faith which dwelt in his mother and grandmother, 2Ti_1:5.

58

CALVIN, "15.Number the children of Levi after the house of their fathers The enumeration of the tribe now follows, commencing with the three sons of Levi, Kohath, Gershon, and Merari, from whom many families afterwards descended. It must, however, be observed, that all were numbered down to the youngest infants, whereas of the rest of the people only those who had passed their twentieth year were taken into account; whence it appeared that this was the smallest tribe; but by causing the infants to be reckoned, God intended to maintain a just proportion, as we shall see; for, if He had only taken them above their twentieth year, it would not have been known how many first-born there were, and thus the compensation to be made for them would have been uncertain. By this indulgence the people should have been induced to pay the tribute for the surplus with more readiness; for since, after the computation was made, it appeared how much their number came short of the required amount, God justly willed that those should be redeemed for money, who would else have been transferred to that tribe which represented the first-born, and it would have been an act of malignity to refuse God what he demanded, when He had spontaneously condescended to so just a compact. There was also another reason why the Levites were included in the census from their earliest childhood, rather than the others, viz., because it was not necessary that they should be fit for war, when God enrolled from the rest of the people soldiers for Himself who might afterwards bear arms.

ELLICOTT, "(15) From a month old and upward . . . —The males of the other tribes had been numbered “from twenty years old and upward” (Numbers 1:3). The firstborn males, however, among all the children of Israel, in whose place the Levites were taken, wer-directed to be numbered “from a month old and upward” (Numbers 3:40; Numbers 3:43); and this was the age afterwards fixed for their redemption (Numbers 18:16).

BENSON. "Numbers 3:15. 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.

POOLE, " From a month old, because at that time the first-born, in whose stead the Levites came, Numbers 8:16, were offered to God, Luke 2:22, and to be redeemed, Numbers 18:16. And from that time the Levites were consecrated to God, and were as soon as they were capable,’ to be instructed in their work. Elsewhere they are numbered from twenty-five years old, when they were entered as novices to part of their work, Numbers 8:24; and from thirty years old, when they were completely admitted to their whole office.

59

BI 15-22, "From a month old.Dedication of infants to GodThat He taketh them from a month old is a thing of good use, and we may note it, for it notably showeth that we may destinate our children to God before they be fit for any other course of life. In the Gospel, those parents that brought little children to Christ are chronicled up for an eternal praise of them, and for an example to all parents to the end of the world. Matthew calleth them “little children.” Luke calleth them “babes,” even such as yet hanged upon the breast, effectually noting how soon we should bring them to Christ. Satan’s envy even against these babes to be brought to Christ appeareth there, and our Saviour’s unspeakable good against that malice, commanding them to be brought unto Him, and not to be hindered, taking them in His arms, putting His hands upon them, blessing them, and graciously affirming, that “of such is the kingdom of God.” A natural parent wishes all good to his child, and as he is able, procureth it, even as the root spreadeth his sap to the branches without grudge or exception; and a religious parent, above all worldly good, careth for God’s holy fear to be planted in his child. For the effecting whereof soon he bringeth him unto Christ, knowing that the first liquor put into a vessel is of great force ever in the same. Alas, what will the whole world profit them, were we able to give it them, ii eternally they be damned—yea, they and we both, they for not knowing Christ, and we for not bringing them to Christ. Wherefore earnest is that commandment of the Holy Ghost, “Fathers, bring up your children in instruction and information of the Lord.” Abraham is registered up for this care; and whilst this Book of God remaineth it will be found written to their praise that Timothy’s grandmother and mother brought him up in the knowledge of the Scripture from a child. Honour may shine and glory may glitter, but how soon covered with a cloud. Beauty much wished, but permanent with neither wishes nor wisdom whatsoever. Only the good gotten by bringing children to Christ remaineth for ever in his reward. And therefore let religious parents have a care of it, even soon, soon, remembering this place, that the Levites, appointed for His service, He would have numbered from a month old. (Bp. Babington.)

Church membership of children:What, then, is this infant membership? What conception can we take of it which will justify its Christian dignity? A great many persons who are very sharp at this kind of criticism appear to have never observed that creatures existing under conditions of growth allow no such terms of classification as those do which are dead and have no growth; such, for example, as stones, metals, and earths. They are certain that gold is not iron, and iron is not silver, and they suppose that they can class the growing and transitional creatures, that are separated by no absolute lines, in the same manner. They talk of colts and horses, lambs and sheep, and it possibly not once occurs to them that they can never tell when the colt becomes a horse, or the lamb a sheep; and that about the most definite thing they can say, when pressed with that question, is that the colt is potentially a horse, the lamb a sheep, even from the first, having in itself this definite futurition; and, therefore, that while horses and sheep are not all to be classed as colts and lambs, all colts and lambs may be classed as horses and sheep. And just so children are all men and women; and if there is the law of futurition in them to justify it, may be

60

fitly classed as believing men and women. And all the sharp arguments that go to cover their membership as such in the Church with absurdity, or to turn it into derision, are just such arguments as the inventors could raise with equal point to ridicule the horsehood and sheephood of the young animals just referred to. The propriety of this membership does not lie in what those infants can or cannot believe, or do or do not believe, at some given time, as, for example, on the day of their baptism; but it lies in tile covenant of promise, which makes their parents parents in the Lord; their nurture a nurture of the Lord, and so constitutes a force of futurition by which they are to grow up imperceptibly into “faithfuls among faithfuls,” in Christ Jesus . . . The conception, then, of this membership is, that it is potentially a real one; that it stands, for the present, in the faith of the parents and the promise which is to them and to their children, and that on this ground they may well enough be accounted believers, just as they are accounted potentially men and women. Then, as they come forward into maturity, it is to be assumed that they will come forward into faith, being grown in the nurture of faith, and will claim for themselves the membership into which they were before inserted. Nor is this a case which has no analogies that it should be held up as a mark of derision. It is generally supposed that our common law has some basis of common sense. And yet this body of law makes every infant child a citizen; requiring, as a point of public order, the whole constabulary and even military force of the state to come to the rescue or the redress of his wrongs, when his person is seized or property invaded by conspiracy. This infant child can sue and be sued; for the Court of Chancery will appoint him a guardian, whose acts shall be the child’s acts; and it shall be as if he were answerable for his own education, dress, board, entertainments, and the damages done by his servants, precisely as if he were a man acting in his own cause. Doubtless it may sound very absurdly to call him a citizen. What can he do as a citizen? He cannot vote or bear arms; he does not even know what these things mean, and yet he is a citizen. In one view he votes, bears arms, legislates, even in his cradle; for the potentiality is in him, and the state takes him up in her arms, as it were, to own him as her citizen. (H. Bushnell, D. D.)

16 So Moses counted them, as he was commanded by the word of the Lord.

CLARKE, "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, Num_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.

61

GILL, "And Moses numbered them according to the word of the Lord,.... Took the account of all of a month old in the several houses and families of the tribe of Levi; though Moses is only here mentioned, yet it seems from Num_3:39; that Aaron was concerned with him in it; yea, in an after numbering of the Levites who were fit for business from thirty to fifty years of age, the chief of the children of Israel were assisting to him and Aaron, Num_4:46, as he commanded; he was obedient to the divine will in all things, and so in this, though it was his own tribe and his own posterity, which in all successive ages were to be no other than ministering servants to the priests, and to have no inheritance in the land of Israel.

17 These were the names of the sons of Levi:Gershon, Kohath and Merari.

GILL, "And these were the sons of Levi, by their names,.... The immediate offspring and descendants of that patriarch: Gershon, and Kohath, and Merari; these went down with him into Egypt, Gen_46:11.

HENRY, "II. How they were distributed into three classes, according to the number of the sons of Levi, Gershon, Kohath, and Merari, and these subdivided into several families, Num_3:17-20.

1. Concerning each of these three classes we have an account, (1.) Of their number. The Gershonites were 7500. The Kohathites were 8600. The Merarites were 6200. The rest of the tribes had not their subordinate families numbered by themselves as those of Levi; this honour God put upon his own tribe. (2.) Of their post about the tabernacle on which they were to attend. The Gershonites pitched behind the tabernacle, westward, Num_3:23. The Kohathites on the right hand, southward, Num_3:29. The Merarites on the left hand, northward, Num_3:35. And, to complete the square, Moses and Aaron, with the priests, encamped in the front, eastward, Num_3:38. Thus was the tabernacle surrounded with its guards; and thus does the angel of the Lord encamp round about 62

those that fear him, those living temples, Psa_34:7. Every one knew his place, and must therein abide with God. (3.) Of their chief or head. As each class had its own place, so each had its own prince. The commander of the Gershonites was Eliasaph (Num_3:24); of the Kohathites Elizaphan (Num_3:30), of whom we read (Lev_10:4) that he was one of the bearers at the funeral of Nadab and Abihu; of the Merarites Zuriel, Num_3:35. (4.) Of their charge, when the camp moved. Each class knew their own business; it was requisite they should, for that which is every body's work often proves nobody's work. The Gershonites were charged with the custody and carriage of all the curtains and hangings and coverings of the tabernacle and court (Num_3:25, Num_3:26), the Kohathites of all the furniture of the tabernacle - the ark, altar, table, etc. (Num_3:31, Num_3:32), the Merarites of the heavy carriage, boards, bars, pillars, etc., Num_3:36, Num_3:37.2. Here we may observe, (1.) That the Kohathites, though they were the second house, yet were preferred before the elder family of the Gershonites. Besides that Aaron and the priests were of that family, they were more numerous, and their post and charge more honourable, which probably was ordered to put an honour upon Moses, who was of that family. Yet, (2.) The posterity of Moses were not at all dignified or privileged, but stood upon the level with other Levites, that it might appear he did not seek the advancement of his own family, nor to entail any honours upon it either in church or state; he that had honour enough himself coveted not to have his name shine by that borrowed light, but rather to have the Levites borrow honour from his name. Let none think contemptibly of the Levites, though inferior to the priests, for Moses himself though it preferment enough for his sons to be Levites. Probably it was because the family of Moses were Levites only that in the title of this chapter, which is concerning that tribe (Num_3:1), Aaron is put before Moses.

CALVIN, "17.And these were the sons of Levi by their names Hence it appears that the tribe of Levi, like the others, had made an astonishing progress from a small and contemptible beginning; for whereas he himself had only begotten three sons, Gershon and Merari only two each, and Kohath four; who would have expected such an increase, that twelve men in so short a time should have grown into so many thousands? But thus powerfully does God work under the semblance of weakness, that thus His glory may be the more conspicuous. But that He promoted the family of Kohath above the others, not only in the priesthood of Aaron, but also in their common ministry, proceeded from the same source of His gratuitous good pleasure, as the calling of Moses. He then, who had dignified also by so honorable an office, was, for his sake, gracious also to the family of Kohath. Neverthless, lost he should be suspected of ambition, or lest occasion of calumny should be given to the ungodly, God chose that the sons of Moses should remain in the ordinary station of the Levites.

PETT, "Verses 17-20ii). The Descendants of Levi (Numbers 3:17-20).For the purpose of the numbering further details were given of who were involved.

63

This brings out who were qualified to be Levites. It was those who were directly descended from Levi or his household.Numbers 3:17‘And these were the sons of Levi by their names: Gershon, and Kohath, and Merari.’First named were naturally Levi’s own sons, Gershon, Kohath and Merari. From these the Levites were outwardly descended. Of course they were not necessarily naturally so. They could have been born to others in the household of Levi thus becoming a part of the tribe of Levi. But they would be seen as ‘adopted’ sons of Levi.It would appear from this that Gershon was the first-born (compare 1 Chronicles 6:1). It is therefore significant that it was the sons of Kohath who obtained the highest position, that of bearing the Ark and the Sanctuary furniture. This would seem to confirm that the reason for their selection, and therefore also for the selection of the Levites as a whole, was more to do with their relationship with Moses and Aaron. All that the molten calf incident did was demonstrate that they were not to be excluded because of unbelief. But in the end they were chosen because of their connections with the chosen ones.

18 These were the names of the Gershonite clans:Libni and Shimei.

GILL, "And these are the names of the sons of Gershon, by their families,.... Or to Gershon belonged two families, called after the names of his sons, who were now numbered, namely: Libni and Shimei; and who are elsewhere mentioned as his sons, Exo_6:17; and from hence were the families of the Libnites and Shimites, as in Num_3:21.PETT, "Numbers 3:18-20

64

‘And these are the names of the sons of Gershon by their families: Libni and Shimei. And the sons of Kohath by their families: Amram, and Izhar, Hebron, and Uzziel. And the sons of Merari by their families: Mahli and Mushi. These are the families of the Levites according to their fathers’ houses.’Descent from the three sons of Levi was then described. If these were the grandsons, as they seemingly were (Numbers 3:27), then Amram was not the direct father of Moses, but his famous ancestor (see also 1 Chronicles 6:1-3). But it was quite common in those days for an ancestor to be described as a person’s ‘father’.

19 The Kohathite clans:Amram, Izhar, Hebron and Uzziel.

GILL, "And the sons of Kohath, by their families,.... Who was the second son of Levi: Amram, and Izehar, Hebron, and Uzziel; so in Exo_6:18; and from whom were named the family of the Amramites, to which Moses and Aaron belonged; and the families of the Izeharites, Hebronites, and Uzzielites, as they are called, Num_3:27.

20 The Merarite clans:Mahli and Mushi.These were the Levite clans, according to their families.

65

GILL, "And the sons, of Merari, by their families,.... The third son of Levi: Mahli and Mushi; the same as in Exo_6:19; from whom were denominated the families of the Mahlites and Mushites, who, as the preceding families, were numbered at this time: these are the families of the Levites, according to the house of their fathers; in all eight families.

21 To Gershon belonged the clans of the Libnites and Shimeites; these were the Gershonite clans.

GILL, "Of Gershon was the family of the Libnites, and the family of the Shimites,.... The first son of Levi: these are the family of the Gershonites; that were now, numbered.

K&D 21-26, "The Gershonites were divided into two families, containing 7500 males. They were to encamp under their chief Eliasaph, behind the tabernacle, i.e., on the western side (Num_3:23, Num_3:24), and were to take charge of the dwelling-place and the tent, the covering, the curtain at the entrance, the hangings round the court with the curtains at the door, and the cords of the tent, “in relation to all the service thereof” (Num_3:25.); that is to say, according to the more precise injunctions in Num_4:25-27, they were to carry the tapestry of the dwelling (the inner covering, Exo_26:1.), and of the tent (i.e., the covering made of goats' hair, Exo_26:7.), the covering thereof (i.e., the covering of rams' skins dyed red, and the covering of sea-cow skin upon the top of it, Exo_27:16), the hangings of the court and the curtain at the entrance (Exo_27:9, Exo_27:16), which surrounded the altar (of burnt-offering) and the dwelling round about, and their cords, i.e., the cords of the tapestry, coverings, and curtains (Exo_27:14), and all the instruments of their service, i.e., the things used in connection with their service (Exo_27:19), and were to attend to everything that had to be done to them; in other words, to perform whatever was usually done with those portions of the sanctuary that

66

are mentioned here, especially in setting up the tabernacle or taking it down. The suffix in ֵמיָתָריו (Num_3:26) does not refer to the court mentioned immediately before; for, according to Num_3:37, the Merarites were to carry the cords of the hangings of the court, but to the “dwelling and tent,” which stand farther off. In the same way the words, “for all the service thereof,” refer to all those portions of the sanctuary that are mentioned, and mean “everything that had to be done or attended to in connection with these things.”

COFFMAN, ""Of Gershon was the family of the Libnites, and the family of the Shimeites: these are the families of the Gershonites. Those that were numbered of them, according to the number of all the males, from a month old and upward, even those that were numbered of them were seven thousand and five hundred. The families of the Gershonites shall encamp behind the tabernacle westward. And the prince of the fathers' house of the Gershonites shall be Eliasaph the son of Lael. And the charge of the sons of Gershon in the tent of meeting shall be the tabernacle, and the Tent, the covering thereof, and the screen for the door of the tent of meeting, and the hangings of the court, and the screen for the door of the court, which is by the tabernacle, and by the altar round about, and the cords of it for all the service thereof."The writing here follows absolutely the style of the 1500 B.C. period with an elaborate, stylized repetition. Also, there is discernible the same Biblical method observed throughout the Pentateuch of including additional and variations of instructions in each repetition. It is foolish indeed to find different "sources" for such supplemental information. It is simply the Biblical method. It will be remembered that God's "two of each kind" orders for Noah's loading the ark were supplemented later with "seven" of the clean kinds of creatures. The result of this is that the total instructions in each sector of labor would be known only by a careful attention to all that was written concerning it, and not by a mere glance at the first mention of it. Most of the critical scholars seem to be unaware of this, losing themselves in a maze of "various sources." In regard to what is said here of the work of the Gershonites, "Their work concerned not the making of these things but their continuance in connection with the movement of the testimony."[13] On the march, the Gershonites followed the company of Reuben (Numbers 10:17).

PETT, "Verses 21-26iii). The Family And Privileges of Gershon.As Gershon was the first-born details concerning his sub-tribe were given first. Information was now given about general descent, status, sacred task and ‘numbers’ of those in the sub-tribe over one month old expressed in terms of ‘hundreds’ (units

67

of those who serve).Numbers 3:21‘Of Gershon was the family (or ‘clan’) of the Libnites, and the family (or ‘clan’) of the Shimeites: these are the families (or ‘clans’) of the Gershonites.’Coming down to Moses’ day the descendants of the sub-tribe of Gershon were the clans of the Libnites and the Shimeites. These were the ‘families’ of the Gershonites whose males from one month and upwards had to be ‘numbered’.

22 The number of all the males a month old or more who were counted was 7,500.

CLARKE, "Seven thousand and five hundred - Perhaps originally ר resh, 200, instead of ך caph, 500; see the following note Num_3:39 (note).

GILL, "Those that were numbered of them,.... Of the two families that sprung from Gershon: according to the number of all the males, from a month old and upwards: in the said families: even those that were numbered of them, were seven thousand and five hundred; 7,500 men, which was neither the least nor the largest number of the sons of Levi.

PETT, "Numbers 3:22‘Those that were numbered of them, according to the number of all the males, from a month old and upward, even those that were numbered of them were seven thousand and five hundred.’And those who were numbered amounted to seven ’lph. ’lph (‘thousands) were

68

lower levels of ‘family’ to the two clans mentioned above, but larger than a ‘nuclear family’. Thus an ’eleph is lower down the scale from a mishpachah. There was one mishpachah divided up into seven ’eleph. And there were five ‘hundreds’, or service groups in those seven ’lph s.Alternately it means that there were seven chieftains and in all five ‘hundreds’ or service groups. It will be noted that all is in ‘hundreds’ (service groups). There is no attempt to make an individual count.

23 The Gershonite clans were to camp on the west, behind the tabernacle.

GILL, "The families of the Gershonites,.... The two before mentioned, the Libnites and Shimites: shall pitch behind the tabernacle westward; this was their situation when encamped; they were placed in the rear of the camp of the Levites, between the tabernacle and the camp of Ephraim, which was westward also, Num_1:18.

ELLICOTT, "(23) Behind the tabernacle westward.—As the position of the twelve tribes in respect of the tent of meeting had been already determined, so in this and the following verses the position of the priests and Levites is fixed. On the east side of the tent Moses and Aaron and Aaron’s sons were to encamp, on the south the Kohathites, on the west the Gershonites, on the north the Merarites.

PETT, "Numbers 3:23‘The families of the Gershonites shall encamp behind the tabernacle westward.’The sub-tribes of the Gershonites were to encamp between the Rachel tribes of Ephraim, Manasseh and Benjamin to the west, and the Tabernacle. This was the third most prestigious position (Numbers 2:18-24). The first was to the east, occupied by the priests, the second to the south, occupied by the Kohathites, because they were more directly related to Moses and Aaron (compare Numbers 2:3-16).

69

PULPIT, "Shall pitch. These directions as to the position and duties of the Levitical families retain the form in which they were originally given. The way in which they are mixed up with direct narrative affords a striking proof of the inartificial character of these sacred writings. Behind the tabernacle westward. The tabernacle opened or looked eastward towards the sunrise.

24 The leader of the families of the Gershonites was Eliasaph son of Lael.

GILL, "And the chief of the house of the fathers of the Gershonites,.... Who had the chief authority over them, and the chief direction of them in what they were to do: shall be Eliasaph the son of Lael; but who he was, or of which family of the Gershonites, whether of the Libnites or Shimites, is not said here or elsewhere; nor do the Jewish writers, who affect to know every thing, pretend to tell us.

PETT, "Numbers 3:24‘And the prince of the fathers’ house of the Gershonites shall be Eliasaph the son of Lael.’The person appointed to oversee the Gershonites in their sacred tasks was Eliasaph, son of Lael, probably already the chieftain of the sub-tribe rather than a special appointment.

25 At the tent of meeting the Gershonites were 70

responsible for the care of the tabernacle and tent, its coverings, the curtain at the entrance to the tent of meeting,

GILL, "And the charge of the sons of Gershom,.... The Libnites and Shimites: in the tabernacle of the congregation; or with respect to the things of it, when it was taken down and committed to them; for otherwise they had no place in it, nor might they enter into it, or do any service therein: shall be the tabernacle and the tent; the former intends not the boards of it, which were the charge of the Merarites, Num_3:36; but the curtains, as Aben Ezra, or the under curtains, as Jarchi calls them, which were made of fine twined linen, Exo_26:1; and the latter is to be understood of the eleven curtains, as Aben Ezra, the curtains of goats hair, which were made for the roof of the tabernacle, as Jarchi observes, see Exo_26:7, the covering thereof: made of rams' skins, and badgers' skins, which were thrown over the tent, Exo_26:14, and the hanging for the door of the tabernacle of the congregation; the vail, as Jarchi calls it; not what divided the holy and most holy places, for that fell to the charge of the Kohathites, Num_3:31; but the vail or hanging which was at the door of the tent, or which led into the holy place, Exo_26:36.

ELLICOTT, " (25) In the tabernacle of the congregation.—Better, in the tent of meeting. It is important to distinguish between the ohel—i.e., the tent—and the mishkan—i.e., the tabernacle—which was the building of shittim wood with its curtains which was within the tent. The word ohel, where it occurs in the second place in this verse, evidently means the outer covering, as in Exodus 26:7, where the passage may be literally rendered thus :—“And thou shalt make curtains (or hangings) of goats’ (hair) for an ohel upon (or over) the mishkan.”The covering thereof.—The mikseh (covering) appears to include the two coverings described in Exodus 26:14—viz., the covering of rams’ skins and that of badgers’ skins or seals’ skins.The hanging for the door of the tabernacle of the congregation—i.e., for the entrance or opening of the tent of meeting. This hanging was of blue, and purple,

71

and scarlet, and fine-twined linen, and was hung at the entrance—i.e., the eastern or open end of the tent (Exodus 26:36). The word rendered door (pethach, not deleth) means an opening. At a later period, when the Tabernacle was at Shiloh, it had doors (1 Samuel 3:15). Both words occur in 1 Kings 6:31 : “And for the entering (or at the opening) of the oracle he made doors.” &c.

POOLE, " The tabernacle; not the boards, which belonged to Merari, Numbers 3:36, but the ten curtains mentioned Exodus 26:1.The tent, to wit, the curtains of goats’ hair.The covering thereof, i.e. the coverings of rams’ skins and badgers’ skins. See Numbers 4:25.

WHEDON, "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, ναος, 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.

PETT, "Numbers 3:25-26‘And the charge of the sons of Gershon in the tent of meeting shall be the tabernacle, and the Tent, its covering, and the screen for the door of the tent of meeting, and the hangings of the court, and the screen for the door of the court, which is by the tabernacle, and by the altar round about, and the cords of it for all its service.’The responsibility of the Gershonites was to be for the Dwellingplace itself, including the Tent Sanctuary, and all hangings and coverings and cords. This was the second most prestigious task of the Levites, the first being the responsibility for the sacred furniture including the Ark.

72

26 the curtains of the courtyard, the curtain at the entrance to the courtyard surrounding the tabernacle and altar, and the ropes—and everything related to their use.

BARNES, "the cords ... the service thereof - i. e. of the tabernacle, not of the hangings of the court, for these, with their cords and other fittings, belonged to the charge of the Merarites Num_3:36-37. The tabernacle was under the care of the Gershonites.

GILL, "And the hangings of the court,.... Which formed the great open court that encompassed the tabernacle, and was an hundred cubits long and fifty broad; Exo_27:9, and the curtain for the door of the court: which was an hanging of twenty cubits, of blue, purple, scarlet, and fine twined linen, Exo_27:16, which is by the tabernacle, and by the altar round about: this refers to the court, the hangings, and curtains of the door of it, which are spoken of; and this court surrounded the tabernacle, and the altar which was without the tabernacle, as Aben Ezra observes, and which was the altar of burnt offering that stood within this court; for the particle על sometimes signifies "about" (s), and the word סביב, "around", being joined with it, requires this sense: and the cords of it; which seem to be the cords of the court, which fastened the hangings and curtains to brass pins, or stakes fixed in the ground to keep them tight, that the wind might not move them to and fro; but Jarchi says, these were the cords of the tabernacle and tent, and not of the court; and indeed the tabernacle had its cords as well as the court, Exo_38:18; the cords of the court were in the charge of the Merarites, Num_3:37, for all the service thereof: for that part of the tabernacle and court which the Gershonites had in their care and custody.

ELLICOTT, " (26) And the hangings of the court . . . —See Exodus 27:9 and Note.And the cords of it for all the service thereof.—The pronominal suffixes do not seem to refer to the court, the cords belonging to which appear to have been under the custody of the Merarites (Numbers 3:37), but to the mishkan or Tabernacle itself.

73

Or, the latter suffix (its service, or the service thereof) may be designed to refer to each of the various things mentioned, as in Numbers 3:31, inasmuch as the words for all the service thereof may mean for everything which had to be done in connection with the things mentioned.

BENSON, "Verse 25-26Numbers 3:25-26. 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. The cords — By which the tabernacle was fastened to the pins, and stretched out, Exodus 35:18.

27 To Kohath belonged the clans of the Amramites, Izharites, Hebronites and Uzzielites; these were the Kohathite clans.

BARNES 27-32, "Of the Levites, the Kohathites, the kinsmen of Moses and Aaron, and the most numerous, have the most important charge confided to them, namely, that of the ark, the altars, and the more especially sacred furniture generally.

GILL, "And of Kohath was the family of the Amramites,.... So called from Amram, the first son of Kohath, and father of Aaron and Moses; so that Moses and Aaron, and their children, are included in this family: and the family of Izeharites; of which family was Korah, Num_16:1, and the family of the Hebronites, and the family of the Uzzielites; which four families had their names from Kohath's four sons, Num_3:19, these are the families of the Kohathites; which were as many as both the other sons of Levi.

74

K&D 27-31, "The Kohathites, who were divided into four families, and numbered 8600, were to encamp on the south side of the tabernacle, and more especially to keep the charge of the sanctuary (Num_3:28), viz., to take care of the ark of the covenant, the table (of shew-bread), the candlestick, the altars (of incense and burnt-offering), with the holy things required for the service performed in connection therewith, and the curtain (the veil before the most holy place), and to perform whatever had to be done (“all the service thereof,” see at Num_3:26), i.e., to carry the said holy things after they had been rolled up in covers by the priests (see Num_4:5.).

COFFMAN, ""And of Kohath was the family of the Amramites, and the family of the Izharites, and the family of the Hebronites, and the family of the Uzzielites: these are the families of the Kohathites. According to the number of all the males, from a month old and upward, there were eight thousand and six hundred, keeping the charge of the sanctuary. The families of the sons of Kohath shall encamp on the side of the tabernacle southward. And the prince of the fathers' house of the families of the Kohathites shall be Elizaphan the son of Uzziel. And their charge shall be the ark, and the table, and the candlestick, and the altars, and the vessels of the sanctuary wherewith they minister, and the screen, and all the service thereof. And Eleazar the son of Aaron the priest shall be prince of the princes of the Levites, and have the oversight of them that keep the charge of the sanctuary."Here of course, we have exactly the same presentation of the sons of Kohath as was given in the above paragraph for the sons of Gershon. In both, it is most evident that no complete genealogy of any kind is given for the period of time covering over four centuries from the entry into Egypt by Levi and his brother-sons of Jacob, the purpose here not being to give a complete genealogy, but only sufficient information to support the division of the Levites into the three predominant families mentioned in this chapter.

BENSON, "Verse 27-28Numbers 3:27-28. 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.

POOLE, "This family had many privileges above the others; of that were Moses and 75

Aaron, and all the priests; they had the chief place about the tabernacle, and the care of the most holy things here below, Numbers 3:31; and in the land of Canaan they had twenty-three cities, which were almost as many as both their brethren received. See Jos 21.

PETT, "Verses 27-32iv). The Family and Privilege of Kohath (Numbers 3:27-32).Numbers 3:27‘And of Kohath was the family (‘clan’) of the Amramites, and the family of the Izharites, and the family of the Hebronites, and the family of the Uzzielites: these are the families (‘clans’) of the Kohathites.’Of the sub-tribe of Kohath the clans were the Amramites, the Izharites, the Hebronites and the Uzzielites. These together were responsible for the carrying of the Tabernacle furniture.

28 The number of all the males a month old or more was 8,600.[b] The Kohathites were responsible for the care of the sanctuary.

GILL, "In the number of all the males, from a month old and upwards, wereeight thousand and six hundred,.... 8,600 men, which was the largest number of any of the houses of the Levites; but considering it had double the number of families in it, the increase was not so large in proportion, at least to Gershon, whose two families wanted but 1,100 of these four: keeping the charge of the sanctuary; of the holy and most holy places, and the vessels and instruments belonging thereunto; not that the males of a month old were keeping them, but when they were grown up and were capable of it, they had the charge thereof, in which they were instructed and trained up from their youth.

76

POOLE, " Keeping, or keepers, &c., i.e. appointed for that work, as soon as they were capable of it.Of the sanctuary, i.e. of those holy things contained in or nearly belonging to the sanctuary, expressed Numbers 3:31.

PETT, "Numbers 3:28‘According to the number of all the males, from a month old and upward, there were eight thousand and six hundred, keeping the charge of the sanctuary.’In the case of the Kohathites there were eight ‘wider families’ made up of six ‘service units’ who had ‘the charge of the Sanctuary’, that is, they had primary responsibility for looking after its principle effects while on the march. (Or alternately eight chieftains and six ‘hundreds’).

PULPIT, "Eight thousand and six hundred. The four families of the Kohathites, of which that of Amram was one, must have contained about 18,000 souls. Moses and Aaron were sons of Amram, and they seem to have had but two sons apiece at this time. If, therefore, the family of the Amramites was at all equal in numbers to the other three, they must have had more than 4000 brothers and sisters, nephews and nieces. It is urged in reply that Amram lived 137 years, and may have had many other children, and that the variations in the comparative rates of increase are so great and so unaccountable that it is useless to speculate upon them. There is, however, a more serious difficulty connected with the genealogy of Moses and Aaron, as given here and elsewhere. If they were the great-grandchildren of Levi on their father's side, and his grandchildren on their mother's side, it is impossible to maintain the obvious meaning of Exodus 12:40. Either the genealogy must be lengthened, or the time must be very much shortened for the sojourning in Egypt. The known and undoubted habit of the sacred writers to omit names in their genealogies, even in those which seem most precise, lessens the difficulty of the first alternative, whereas every consideration of numbers, including those in this passage, increases the difficulty of the second. To endeavour to avoid either alternative, and to force the apparent statements of Scripture into accord by assuming a multiplicity of unrecorded and improbable miracles at every turn (as, e.g; that Jochebed, the mother of Moses, was restored to youth and beauty at an extreme old age), is to expose the holy writings to contempt. It is much more reverent to believe, either that the genealogies are very imperfect, or that the numbers in the text have been very considerably altered. Every consideration of particular examples, still more the general impression left by the whole narrative, favours the former as against the latter alternative.

77

29 The Kohathite clans were to camp on the south side of the tabernacle.

GILL, "The families of the sons of Kohath shall pitch on the side of the tabernacle southward. Or to the right, which was the more honourable place, excepting the east or front, which was reserved for Moses and Aaron, and his sons, and who were one of these families; and is the reason why this honour was conferred upon them, as well as they had the more honourable charge, having the holy places and holy things committed to their care; and one from among them was appointed over all the Levites, and the chief of them, as they had also, when they came into the land of Canaan, almost as many cities of refuge as both their other brethren had: their situation about the tabernacle was between that and the camp of Reuben, and this accounts for it, how Korah who was of one of the families of the Kohathites, became so intimately acquainted with, and joined in a conspiracy with Dathan and Abiram, who were of the tribe of Reuben, Num_16:1.

PETT, "Numbers 3:29‘The families of the sons of Kohath shall encamp on the side of the tabernacle southward.’These ‘clans’ were to encamp on the south side of the Tabernacle, the second most prestigious position, between the Dwellingplace and the tribes of Reuben, Simeon and Gad. The priests themselves had the most prestigious position.

30 The leader of the families of the Kohathite clans was Elizaphan son of Uzziel. 78

GILL, "And the chief of the house of the father of the families of the Kohathites shall be Elizaphan the son of Uzziel. The same man, who, with his brother Mishael, carried Nadab and Abihu out of the camp, and buried them, Lev_10:4; he descended from the last and youngest of the families of the Kohathites; and some think this was one reason at least of Korah's dissatisfaction, and of his entering into a conspiracy against Moses and Aaron, because one of a younger family of his house was preferred to this dignity before him.

WHEDON, "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.PETT, "Numbers 3:30‘And the prince of the fathers’ house of the clans of the Kohathites shall be Elizaphan the son of Uzziel.’The chieftain of the Kohathite sub-tribe was Elizaphan, the son of Uzziel. He was chief over all the clans which were a part of the sub-tribe.

31 They were responsible for the care of the ark, the table, the lampstand, the altars, the articles of the sanctuary used in ministering, the curtain, and everything related to their use.

GILL, "And their charge shall be the ark,.... That is, when the tabernacle was taken down, and carried from place to place, this, and the following things, were

79

committed to their care and custody, the ark with the mercy seat, and all appertaining thereunto, which were in the holy of holies: and the table, and the candlestick, and the altars; the table of shewbread, and the candlestick of pure gold, with its lamps, and the altar of incense, all which stood in the holy place, and the altar of burnt offering, which was in the court, for both altars were their charge: and the vessels of the sanctuary wherewith they minister; all the vessels which belonged to the above things; for the table, candlestick, and altars, all had vessels appertaining to them: and the hanging; that is, the vail, as Jarchi interprets it, which divided between the, holy and the most holy place; all the other hangings for the court, and the door of it, and for the door of the tabernacle, were the charge of the Gershonites, Num_3:25, and all the service thereof; what belonged to the things in this part of the tabernacle.

PETT, "Numbers 3:31‘And their charge shall be the ark, and the table, and the lampstand, and the altars, and the vessels of the sanctuary with which they minister, and the screen, and all its service.’The responsibility of the Kohathites was to be for the actual Dwellingplace furniture, the Ark, the Table, the Lampstand, the altars (the altar of incense and the bronze altar), the vessels used in the inner Sanctuary, the screen which separated the Holy Place from the Most Holy Place (‘the veil’) and all aspects related to themThis was an awesome responsibility. They would, however, never see them ‘uncovered’. Always the priest would have covered them and packed them adequately first so that there was no danger of their touching them directly, for that would have meant their death.

32 The chief leader of the Levites was Eleazar son of Aaron, the priest. He was appointed over those who were responsible for the care of the sanctuary.80

GILL, "And their charge shall be the ark,.... That is, when the tabernacle was taken down, and carried from place to place, this, and the following things, were committed to their care and custody, the ark with the mercy seat, and all appertaining thereunto, which were in the holy of holies: and the table, and the candlestick, and the altars; the table of shewbread, and the candlestick of pure gold, with its lamps, and the altar of incense, all which stood in the holy place, and the altar of burnt offering, which was in the court, for both altars were their charge: and the vessels of the sanctuary wherewith they minister; all the vessels which belonged to the above things; for the table, candlestick, and altars, all had vessels appertaining to them: and the hanging; that is, the vail, as Jarchi interprets it, which divided between the, holy and the most holy place; all the other hangings for the court, and the door of it, and for the door of the tabernacle, were the charge of the Gershonites, Num_3:25, and all the service thereof; what belonged to the things in this part of the tabernacle.

JAMISON, "chief — rather, “chiefs” of the Levites. Three persons are mentioned as chiefs of these respective divisions [Num_3:24, Num_3:30, Num_3:35]. And Eleazar presided over them; whence he is called “the second priest” (2Ki_25:18); and in the case of the high priest’s absence from illness or other necessary occasions, he performed the duties (1Ki_4:4).

K&D, "As the priests also formed part of the Kohathites, their chief is mentioned as well, viz., Eleazar the eldest son of Aaron the high priest, who was placed over the chiefs of the three Levitical families, and called ְּפֻקָּדה, oversight of the keepers of the charge of the sanctuary,” i.e., authority, superior, of the servants of the sanctuary.

COKE, "Numbers 3:32. And Eleazar, the son of Aaron,—shall be chief— There was an officer in chief set over each of these families, Numbers 32:24; Numbers 32:30; Numbers 32:35 and over all these chiefs a supreme inspector was appointed. The excellent order and regularity observable through this whole disposition of the camp, the services of the Levites, &c. is striking.

81

ELLICOTT, "(32) And Eleazar the son of Aaron the priest . . . —In virtue, as it should seem, of the descent of Moses and Aaron from Kohath, the Kohathites had the most honourable portion of the service of the Tabernacle assigned to them; and hence, as the priests belonged to the Amramites, one of the four families of the Kohathites, Eleazar, the eldest surviving son of Aaron, was chosen to have the oversight over the whole body of the Levites.

BENSON, "Numbers 3:32. 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; Numbers 3:31; Numbers 3:34.

POOLE, " Eleazar shall be 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, 1 Kings 4:4; and he had a superiority over all the rest of the priests and Levites.Over the chief of the Levites, i.e. over those three persons, who were each the chief of their several families; of whom see here, Numbers 3:24,31,35.

PETT, "Numbers 3:32‘And Eleazar the son of Aaron the priest shall be prince of the princes of the Levites, and have the oversight of them that keep the charge of the sanctuary.’The importance of the task of the Kohathites is evidenced by the mention here of Eleazar, Aaron’s son, who would become High Priest on the death of Aaron. He was to be in authority over all the chieftains as ‘prince of the princes’. He was especially to have oversight over the Kohathites in their task, for it was they who ‘kept the charge of the Sanctuary’ (Numbers 3:28).

33 To Merari belonged the clans of the Mahlites and the Mushites; these were the Merarite clans. 82

GILL, "Of Merari were the family of the Mahlites, and the family of the Mushites,.... So called from his two sons Mahli and Mushi, Num_3:20, these are the families of Merari; the youngest son of Levi, Num_3:17.

K&D 23-37, "The Merarites, who formed two families, comprising 6200 males, were to encamp on the north side of the tabernacle, under their prince Zuriel, and to observe the boards, bolts, pillars, and sockets of the dwelling-place (Exo_26:15, Exo_26:26, Exo_26:32, Exo_26:37), together with all the vessels thereof (the plugs and tools), and all that had to be done in connection therewith, also the pillars of the court with their sockets, the plugs and the cords (Exo_27:10, Exo_27:19; Exo_35:18); that is to say, they were to take charge of these when the tabernacle was taken down, to carry them on the march, and to fix them when the tabernacle was set up again (Num_4:31-32).

COFFMAN, ""Of Merari was the family of the Mahlites, and the family of the Mushites: these are the families of Merari. And those that were numbered of them, according to the number of all the males, from a month old and upward, were six thousand and two hundred. And the prince of the fathers' house of Merari was Zuriel the son of Abihail: they shall encamp on the side of the tabernacle northward. And the appointed charge of the sons of Merari shall be the boards of the tabernacle, and the bars thereof, and the pillars thereof, and the sockets thereof, and all the instruments thereof, and all the service thereof, and the pillars of the court round about, and their sockets, and their pins, and their cords."Thus is concluded the detailed enumeration and assignment for Merari, the third division of the Levites. It should be noted that Eleazar, son of Aaron, was appointed over the three princes of these divisions, giving him, in effect, charge of the entire tabernacle complex.The totals of the enrollees of these divisions are 7,500 for Gershon, 8,600 for Kohath, and 6,200 for Merari, yielding a grand total of 22,300, precipitating the "tremendous problem" posed by the flat 22,000 given for this total in Numbers 3:39! Apparently, some of the commentators never heard of "round numbers." Exploring "contradictions" of this nature is certainly a picayune business! The "explanations" usually focus on the fact that the Hebrew word for "6" as given in the enumeration for Kohath might actually have been "3," due to the close similarities in the Hebrew designations for those numbers. The Jews used letters to

83

signify numbers. The numeral six was represented by [~sh-sh], and the numeral three was represented by [~sh-l-sh]; and some scribe might easily have overlooked the [~l][14]. To us, the "round number" explanation is sufficient. The fact, however, that the round number of 22,000 was used when the total was subtracted from the total of the first-born of all Israel, means that whatever "error" existed would certainly have been in one of the totals of the three divisions. It is simply not a momentous question. Certainly, for some reason or other, the total was reduced by the sum of 300 in Numbers 3:39. Jewish expositors explain this by the proposition that certain Levites were ineligible to be counted in the trade off with the whole nation (next recorded) (several reasons for this are given), thus reducing the total to a round 22,000.

BI 33-39, "These shall pitch on the side of the tabernacle.The placing of the Levites throughout the hostIn this division we see more particularly that which was in part noted before, namely, the several situations that these Levites had about the tabernacle, which they compassed round about that they might not be far from any of the people of God, but always resident among them. This teacheth us that God will have every part of His people taught. None are too high in regard of their great places; none are too low in regard of their obscure callings; none are too good to be taught, whatsoever their degrees be. This will be made plain by divers reasons.

1. Consider the titles that are given unto God in the Scriptures. He is worthily called the King of His Church, and the Lord and Master of His house. Is not He “the Shepherd of Israel that leadeth Josephlike sheep”? (Psa_80:1). Will a shepherd that hath any care of his sheep, or any love unto them, look unto some of them and not to all? Will a king regard only the chief cities and most populous places of his kingdom, and suffer the rest to live as they list, without laws and good orders? Or will the master of a house look to some in his family, and not to all?2. Such is the grace and goodness of God, that He would have all His people come to knowledge. Such as know not His will are none of His servants. If then He require the understanding of His ways, not only of rich men, of great men, of learned men, and of the ministers, but of all the people, we must hereof conclude that He hath ordained that all of them should have the means of knowledge and salvation offered unto them, and published among them.3. The Word of God was penned for all estates, degrees, and conditions of men.4. All persons, whatsoever they be, have souls to save: simple persons, small congregations, little assemblies, as well as others that ale many in number.

Uses:

84

1. It is God’s ordinance that every congregation should have a learned minister to teach them the true religion and fear of God.2. It is required of the ministers of the Gospel, whom the Holy Ghost hath made overseers of their several flocks, to look to their whole charge from one corner of it to another. They are to give an account for every soul that dies through their ignorance or through their negligence.3. We have warrant from hence to desire most earnestly that the kingdom of God may flourish everywhere. Christ our Saviour teaches us to pray that His kingdom may come (Mat_6:10), and so to be erected in the hearts of men.4. This doctrine serveth as an instruction to all magistrates (as their places serve them) to further the preaching of the Word, and to furnish such places as belong unto them with able teachers. (W. Attersoll.).

34 The number of all the males a month old or more who were counted was 6,200.

GILL, "And those that were numbered of them,.... Of the above two families: according to the number of all the males, from a month old and upward, were six thousand and two hundred; 6,200 men; the least number of them all.PETT, "Numbers 3:34‘And those that were numbered of them, according to the number of all the males, from a month old and upward, were six thousand and two hundred.’Of these there were six ‘larger families’ (or ‘chieftains’) from which were drawn the two service units or hundreds who looked after the responsibilities of the sub-tribe.

35 The leader of the families of the Merarite clans 85

was Zuriel son of Abihail; they were to camp on the north side of the tabernacle.

GILL, "And the chief of the house of the father of the families of Merari,.... I think it should rather be rendered, "and the chief of the house", that is, of the Merarites, "the father to the families of Merari"; the common father to them all, having the chief authority and power over them, and so in Num_3:24, shall be Zuriel the son of Abihail; of whom we read nowhere else, nor is it certain of which family he was, whether of the Mahlites or Mushites: these shall pitch on the side of the tabernacle northward; to the left of it, between that and the camp of Dan.PETT, "Numbers 3:35‘And the prince of the fathers’ house of the families of Merari was Zuriel the son of Abihail: they shall encamp on the side of the tabernacle northward.’Their chieftain was Zuriel the son of Abihail. They encamped on the north side of the Dwellingplace, between it and the tribes of Dan, Asher and Naphtali.

36 The Merarites were appointed to take care of the frames of the tabernacle, its crossbars, posts, bases, all its equipment, and everything related to their use,

GILL, "And under the custody and charge of the sons of Merari shall be the boards of the tabernacle,.... Both of the holy and the most holy place, which were the walls of the tabernacle, and which were covered with curtains; these when taken down for journeying were committed to the care of the Merarites; and because these, with what, follow, were a heavy carriage, they were allowed wagons to carry them; and who

86

on this account had more wagons given them than to the Gershonites, for the Kohathites had none, Num_7:6, and the bars thereof; which kept the boards tight and close, see Exo_26:26, and the pillars thereof; the pillars on which the vail was hung, that divided between the holy and most holy place, and, on which the hanging was put for the door of the vail, Exo_26:32, and the sockets thereof; in which both the boards and pillars were put, Exo_26:19.

PETT, "Numbers 3:36-37‘And the appointed charge of the sons of Merari shall be the boards of the tabernacle, and its bars , and its pillars, and its sockets, and all its instruments, and all its service, and the pillars of the court round about, and their sockets, and their pins, and their cords.’The responsibility of the sons of Merari was for the ‘nuts and bolts’ of the Sanctuary, all the small parts so necessary for the whole.

37 as well as the posts of the surrounding courtyard with their bases, tent pegs and ropes.

GILL, "And the pillars of the court round about,.... Of the great court which went round the tabernacle, on which pillars the hangings were hung: and their sockets; into which the, pillars were put; of both which see Exo_27:9, and their pins, and their cords, the pins were fixed in the ground, and the cords fastened the hangings of the court to them, whereby they were kept tight and unmoved by the winds; see Exo_27:19.

38 Moses and Aaron and his sons were to camp to 87

the east of the tabernacle, toward the sunrise, in front of the tent of meeting. They were responsible for the care of the sanctuary on behalf of the Israelites. Anyone else who approached the sanctuary was to be put to death.

GILL, "And those that encamp before the tabernacle toward the east,.... At which was the entrance into the tabernacle: even before the tabernacle of the congregation eastward; that is, before the court of the tabernacle, where the people assembled together: shall be Moses, Aaron, and his sons; Moses the chief ruler, and Aaron the high priest, and his sons priests under him; these had the most honourable place of all, beings at the front of the tabernacle, between that and the camp of Judah. There is an extraordinary prick on the word Aaron, to show, as Jarchi says, that he was not in the number of Levites, though of the tribe of Levi, being high priest: keeping the charge of the sanctuary, for the charge of the children of Israel; either in their room and stead, which otherwise they must have kept; or rather for their safety and security, keeping out all persons from entering into the sanctuary, who had no business there, that they died not, as it follows: and the stranger that cometh nigh shall be put to death; that is, whoever came nigh to enter into the holy place, and did, who was no priest, though an Israelite, and even a Levite, or into the most holy place, excepting the high priest, it was death unto him, either by the civil magistrate, or by the hand of heaven; so the Targum of Jonathan.

JAMISON, "those that encamp, etc. — That being the entrance side, it was the post of honor, and consequently reserved to Moses and the priestly family. But the sons of Moses had no station here.

K&D, "Moses and Aaron, with the sons of the latter (the priests), were to encamp in front, before the tabernacle, viz., on the eastern side, “as keepers of the charge of the sanctuary for the charge of the children of Israel,” i.e., to attend to everything that was binding upon the children of Israel in relation to the care of the sanctuary, as no stranger was allowed to approach it on pain of death (see Num_1:51).

88

COFFMAN, ""And those that encamp before the tabernacle eastward before the tent of meeting toward the sunrising, shall be Moses, and Aaron and his sons, keeping the charge of the sanctuary for the charge of the children of Israel; and the stranger that cometh nigh shall be put to death. All that were numbered of the Levites, whom Moses and Aaron numbered at the commandment of Jehovah, by their families, all the males from a month old and upward, were twenty and two thousand."Although Moses was given a place of honor alongside Aaron at the entrance to the tabernacle, Moses' sons were not included, having no part whatever of the priesthood.

ELLICOTT, " (38) Keeping the charge of the sanctuary . . . —The word mikdash (sanctuary) appears to be of a more comprehensive import than mishkan, the shittimwood building, or ohel, the tent which covered it, and it seems to include the court which surrounded the Tabernacle, as in Leviticus 12:4; Leviticus 21:12.For the charge of the children of Israel—i.e., to attend to everything which was commanded the children of Israel.

POOLE, " For the charge of the children of Israel; either in their stead. that charge which they were obliged to keep either by themselves. or by others appointed by them, if God had not committed it to those; or for their good, and service, and benefit; for their preservation, as the word may be rendered.

PETT. "Verse 38vi). The Positioning of the Priests.Numbers 3:38‘And those who encamp before the tabernacle eastward, before the tent of meeting toward the sunrising, shall be Moses, and Aaron and his sons, keeping the charge of the sanctuary for the charge of the children of Israel, and the stranger who comes near shall be put to death.’The Levites would be encamped to the north, the west and the south, but to the east of the Dwellingplace would be encamped Moses, and Aaron and his sons, and their households. That was where the entrance to the Dwellingplace was, and it was their responsibility to ensure that no one approached to enter, unless such approach was valid in accordance with God’s Instruction.

89

PULPIT, "Before the tabernacle toward the east,… Moses, and Aaron and his sons. The most central and honourable place in the camp, and the most convenient for constant and direct access to the sanctuary. Moses held a wholly personal and exceptional position as king in Jeshurun (Deuteronomy 33:5); Aaron was hereditary high priest. Between them they represented the union of royal and sacerdotal authority, which had many partial continuations in Jewish history, but was fully realized in Christ.

39 The total number of Levites counted at the Lord’s command by Moses and Aaron according to their clans, including every male a month old or more, was 22,000.

BARNES, "twenty and two thousand - A number on which the commutation with the firstborn of the twelve tribes depends Num_3:43-46. The actual total of the male Levites is 22,300 (compare Num_3:22, Num_3:28, Num_3:34): and the extra 300 are considered by some to represent those who, being first-born themselves in the tribe of Levi, could not be available to redeem the first-born in other tribes. Others consider the difference due to an error in the Hebrew text.The tribe of Levi is shown by this census to have been by far the smallest of the tribes.

CLARKE, "Which Moses and Aaron numbered - The word ואהרן 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 De Rossi’s. Moses alone, as Houbigant observes, is commanded to take the number of the Levites; see Num_3:5, Num_3:11, Num_3:40, Num_3:44, and Num_3:51.

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 90

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, Num_3:22, where, instead of 7,500, we should read 7,200, as ך caph, 500, might have been easily mistaken for ר 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.

GILL, "All that were numbered of the Levites, which Moses and Aaron, numbered at the commandment of the Lord, throughout their families,.... Whence it appears, that Moses was not alone, but Aaron with him, in numbering the Levites, and that by the appointment of the Lord. The word "Aaron", in the Hebrew text, has a dot on every letter, for what reason it is not certain; the word itself is left out in the Samaritan and Syriac versions: all the males, from a month old and upward, were twenty and two thousand; 22,000 men; but by putting the sums together they amount to three hundred more; for of the Gershonites there were 7,500, and of the Kohathites 8,600, and of the Merarites 6,200, in all 22,300; which difficulty some endeavour to remove by saying, as Aben Ezra observes, that the Scripture takes a short way, mentioning the thousands, and leaving out the hundreds but this, he says, is not right, nor is it the way of the Scripture in this chapter: and in an after account of the firstborn of the Israelites, not only the hundreds are mentioned, but the broken number of seventy three. Others think there is a corruption crept into the text somewhere in the particular numbers, through the inadvertency of some copyist; and suppose it to be in the number of the Kohathites, where they fancy שש, six, is put instead of שלש, three: but there is no occasion to suppose either of these, for which there is no foundation, since the reason why three hundred are left out in the sum total may be, because there were so many firstborn among the Levites, and these could not be exchanged for the firstborn of the other tribes; they, as such, being the Lord's, and one firstborn could not redeem another; and so it is said in the Talmud (t), these three hundred were firstborn, and there is no firstborn redeems a firstborn, or frees from the redemption price of five shekels.

HENRY 39-43, "III. The sum total of the numbers of this tribe. They are computed in all 22,000, Num_3:39. The sum of the particular families amounts to 300 more; if this had been added to the sum total, the Levites, instead of being 273 fewer than the first-born, as they were (Num_3:43), would have been twenty-seven more, and so the balance would have fallen the other way; but it is supposed that the 300 which were struck off from the account when the exchange was to be made were the first-born of the Levites themselves, born since their coming out of Egypt, which could not be put into the exchange, because they were already sanctified to God. But that which is especially observable here is that the tribe of Levi was by much the least of all the tribes. Note,

91

God's part in the world is too often the smallest part. His chosen are comparatively a little flock.

JAMISON, "twenty and two thousand — The result of this census, though made on conditions most advantageous to Levi, proved it to be by far the smallest in Israel. The separate numbers stated in Num_3:22, Num_3:28, Num_3:34, when added together, amount to twenty-two thousand three hundred. The omission of the three hundred is variously accounted for - by some, because they might be first-born who were already devoted to God and could not be counted as substitutes; and by others, because in Scripture style, the sum is reckoned in round numbers. The most probable conjecture is, that as Hebrew letters are employed for figures, one letter was, in the course of transcription, taken for another of like form but smaller value.

K&D, "Num_3:39The number of the Levites mustered, 22,000, does not agree with the numbers assigned to the three families, as 7500 + 8600 + 6200 = 22,300. But the total is correct; for, according to Num_3:46, the number of the first-born, 22,273, exceeded the total number of the Levites by 273. The attempt made by the Rabbins and others to reconcile the two, by supposing the 300 Levites in excess to be themselves first-born, who were omitted in the general muster, because they were not qualified to represent the first-born of the other tribes, is evidently forced and unsatisfactory. The whole account is so circumstantial, that such a fact as this would never have been omitted. We must rather assume that there is a copyist's error in the number of one of the Levitical families;

possibly in Num_3:28 we should read ׁשלׁש for ׁשׁש (8300 for 8600). The puncta extraordinaria above ְוַאֲהֹרן are intended to indicate that this word is either suspicious or spurious (see at Gen_33:5); and it is actually omitted in Sam., Syr., and 12 MSS, but without sufficient reason: for although the divine command to muster the Levites (Num_3:5 and Num_3:14) was addressed to Moses alone, yet if we compare Num_4:1, Num_4:34, Num_4:37, Num_4:41, Num_4:45, where the Levites qualified for service are said to have been mustered by Moses and Aaron, and still more Num_4:46, where the elders of Israel are said to have taken part in the numbering of the Levites as well as in that of the twelve tribes (Num_1:3-4), there can be no reason to doubt that Aaron also took part in the mustering of the whole of the Levites, for the purpose of adoption in the place of the first-born of Israel; and no suspicion attaches to this introduction of his name in Num_3:39, although it is not mentioned in Num_3:5, Num_3:11, Num_3:14, Num_3:40, and Num_3:44.

COKE, "Numbers 3:39. All that were numbered, &c.— See on Numbers 3:43, The words and Aaron, in this verse, Houbigant remarks, are not found in the Arabic and Syriac; in which omission they agree with the 5th verse, wherein Moses, not Aaron, is commanded to take the number of the tribe of Levi; and also with the 11th, 40th, and 44th verses, in which God speaks to Moses alone; and, lastly, with the 51st verse, which see, with the note on the 14th and 15th verses: and it is observable in

92

the Hebrew copies, that ן ר ואה veaheron, is marked with dots at the top, which is generally supposed to be an index of a false reading; and is one proof of the care of the Jewish transcribers. Kennicott observes, that the word is omitted in the most ancient Hebrew manuscript in the Bodleian library: there are fifteen of these words in the printed Hebrew Bibles which have a dot over every letter; see Kennicott's Dissertation, p. 411. It is said at the close of the verse, that the number of the Levites was 22,000; but the sum total of the preceding numbers, instead of being really 22,000 will be found, upon calling them up, to be 22,300. Dr.Kennicott solves this difficulty, by observing, that in Numbers 3:22 where the sum of the Gershonites is given, the Hebrew letter 200, ר , should be read, instead of the letter 500, ד . According to this criticism, the sum total of the three numbers exactly answers to what it is said to be in this verse, 22,000: and it is certain that the Hebrew numbers were formerly expressed by letters.Twenty and two thousand— If the particular numbers mentioned Numbers 3:22; Numbers 3:28; Numbers 3:34 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.

ELLICOTT, " (39) And Aaron . . . —In the Hebrew text the word Aaron has certain marks over it, known as puncta extraordinaria, denoting that it is to be regarded as spurious or doubtful. It is omitted in the Samaritan and Syriac versions and in a few MSS. There appears. however, to be no sufficient reason for its rejection from the text.Twenty and two thousand.—The total of the three several items—viz., 7,500, 8,600, and 6,200—amounts to 22,300. It appears, however, from Numbers 3:46 that the total is correctly given as 22,000, inasmuch as the number of the firstborn, 22,273, exceeded that of the Levites by 273. It has been suggested that in Numbers 3:28 we should read שלש (shalosh), three, for שׁש (shesh), six—i.e., 8,300 instead of 8,600; or, if the numbers were denoted, as it has been commonly supposed, by the letters of the alphabet, it is quite possible that one letter may have been substituted by the scribe for another. Some suppose that the three hundred were themselves firstborn sons, who had been born since the command to sanctify the firstborn, and that it is on this account that they were not included in the census. (See Bishop Wordsworth’s Notes in loc., where the reasons which may be assigned for the extreme paucity of this tribe, as compared with the other tribes, are discussed.) The later census, which also included the children from a month old and upwards, shows but a very small increase in the number of this tribe, the number on that occasion amounting only to 23,000 (Numbers 26:62).

93

BENSON, "Numbers 3:39. Two and twenty thousand — If the particular numbers mentioned (Numbers 3:22; Numbers 3:28; Numbers 3:34) 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.

POOLE, " Object. But if the particular numbers, mentioned Numbers 3:22,28,34, be put together, they make exactly 22,300.Answ. The odd 300 are omitted here, either according to the use of the Holy Scripture, which 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. See Leviticus 27:26. If this number of first-born seem very 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, Num 1, 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. Although if the other tribes had been computed from a month old, as this was, their number of 600,000 had probably been double or treble to that; and consequently the number of their first-born being 22,273 Numbers 3:43, would have been as unproportionable to their whole sum, as this of 300 first-born Levites seems to their whole number. And some add, that only those first-born are numbered, both in this and in the other tribes, which were born since they came out of Egypt, when God challenged all the first-born to be his.

WHEDON, "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, (Numbers 3:46,) 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

94

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.

PETT, "Numbers 3:39‘All who were numbered of the Levites, whom Moses and Aaron numbered at the commandment of Yahweh, by their families, all the males from a month old and upward, were twenty and two thousand.’The total ‘number’ of the male Levites over one month old is now given. Note that they are numbered ‘in terms of (by) their families’. Their total number came to 22 ’lph (families), or 21 family leaders/chieftains plus an ’lph composed of the 13 ‘hundreds’ of people (a rounded figure). Note how 13 ‘hundreds’ could be thought of as ‘a thousand’.The adding up of the ‘numbers’ of the three sub-tribes would actually give us 22,300. Thus the 22 ’lph is clearly under any system a rounding off. Some have suggested that the extra three hundred was taken off in order to allow for the number of first-born in Levi, for as they were already dedicated to Yahweh as first-born they could not replace others who were dedicated as first-born. This is certainly good reason and would have to be allowed for, but the numbers are still rounded and not exact. (And they still are so even if, unnecessarily, an error in the copying of the text is suggested).

PULPIT, "Twenty and two thousand. It is obvious that there is a discrepancy between this total and its three component numbers, which make 22,300. It is so obvious that it must have been innocent; no one deliberately falsifying or forging would have left so palpable a discrepancy on the face of the narrative. It may, therefore, have arisen from an error in transcription (the alteration of a single letter would suffice); or it may be due to the fact that, for some reason not stated, 300 were struck off the Levitical total for the purpose of this census. Such a reason was found

95

by the Hebrew expositors, and has been accepted by some moderns, in the fact that the Levites were taken and counted instead of the first-born, and that, therefore, their own first-born would have to he excluded. There is nothing to be said against this explanation, except that no trace of it appears in a narrative otherwise very full and minute. The first-born of the Levites may have been just 300 (although the number is singularly small), and they may have been considered ineligible for the purpose of redeeming other first-born; but if so, why did not the sacred writer say so, instead of silently reducing the total of "all that were numbered of the Levites"?

40 The Lord said to Moses, “Count all the firstborn Israelite males who are a month old or more and make a list of their names.

GILL, "And the Lord said unto Moses,.... After he had taken the number of the Levites: number all the firstborn of the children of Israel, from a month old and upward, and take the number of their names; that they might be compared with the number of the Levites, and the difference between them observed.

HENRY 40-51, "Here is the exchange made of the Levites for the first-born. 1. The first-born were numbered from a month old, Num_3:42, Num_3:43. Those certainly were not reckoned who, though first-born, had become heads of families themselves, but those only that were under age; and the learned bishop Patrick is decidedly of opinion that none were numbered but those only that were born since their coming out of Egypt, when the first-born were sanctified, Exo_13:2. If there were 22,000 first-born males, we may suppose as many females, and all these brought forth in the first year after they came out of Egypt, we must hence infer that in the last year of their servitude, even when it was in the greatest extremity, there were abundance of marriages made among the Israelites; they were not discouraged by the present distress, but married in faith, expecting that God would shortly visit them with mercy, and that their children, though born in bondage, should live in liberty and honour. And it was a token of good to them, an evidence that they were blessed of the Lord, that they were not only kept alive, but greatly increased, in a barren wilderness. 2. The number of the first-born, and that of the Levites, by a special providence, came pretty near to each other; thus, when he divided the nations, he set the bounds of the people according to the number of the children of

96

Israel, Deu_32:8. Known unto God are all his works beforehand, and there is an exact proportion between them, and so it will appear when they come to be compared. The Levites' cattle are said to be taken instead of the firstlings of the cattle of the children of Israel, that is, the Levites, with all their possessions, were devoted to God instead of the first-born and all theirs; for, when we give ourselves to God, all we have passes as appurtenances with the premises. 3. The small number of first-born which exceeded the number of the Levites (273 in all) were to be redeemed, at five shekels apiece, and the redemption-money given to Aaron; for it would not do well to have them added to the Levites. It is probable that in the exchange they began with the eldest of the first-born, and so downward, so that those were to be redeemed with money who were the 273 youngest of the first-born; more likely so than either that it was determined by lot or that the money was paid out of the public stock. The church is called the church of the first-born, which is redeemed, not as these were, with silver and gold, but, being devoted by sin to the justice of God, is ransomed with the precious blood of the Son of God.

JAMISON, "Number all the first-born of the males of the children of Israel, etc. — The principle on which the enumeration of the Levites had been made was now to be applied to the other tribes. The number of their male children, from a month old and upward, was to be reckoned, in order that a comparison might be instituted with that of the Levites, for the formal adoption of the latter as substitutes for the first-born. The Levites, amounting to twenty-two thousand, were given in exchange for an equal number of the first-born from the other tribes, leaving an excess of two hundred seventy-three; and as there were no substitutes for these, they were redeemed at the rate of five shekels for each (Num_18:15, Num_18:16). Every Israelite would naturally wish that his son might be redeemed by a Levite without the payment of this tax, and yet some would have to incur the expense, for there were not Levites enough to make an equal exchange. Jewish writers say the matter was determined by lot, in this manner: Moses put into an urn twenty-two thousand pieces of parchment, on each of which he wrote “a son of Levi,” and two hundred seventy-three more, containing the words, “five shekels.” These being shaken, he ordered each of the first-born to put in his hand and take out a slip. If it contained the first inscription, the boy was redeemed by a Levite; if the latter, the parent had to pay. The ransom-money, which, reckoning the shekel at half a crown, would amount to $2.50 each, was appropriated to the use of the sanctuary. The excess of the general over the Levitical first-born is so small, that the only way of accounting for it is, by supposing those first-born only were counted as were males remaining in their parents’ household, or that those first-born only were numbered which had been born since the departure from Egypt, when God claimed all the first-born as his special property.

K&D 40-48, "After this, Moses numbered the first-born of the children of Israel, to exchange them for the Levites according to the command of God, which is repeated in Num_3:41 and Num_3:44-45 from Num_3:11-13, and to adopt the latter in their stead for the service at the sanctuary (on Num_3:41 and Num_3:45, cf. Num_3:11-13). The number of the first-born of the twelve tribes amounted to 22,273 of a month old and upwards (Num_3:43). Of this number 22,000 were exchanged for the 22,000 Levites, and the cattle of the Levites were also set against the first-born of the cattle of the tribes

97

of Israel, though without their being numbered and exchanged head for head. In Num_3:44 and Num_3:45 the command of God concerning the adoption of the Levites is repeated, for the purpose of adding the further instructions with regard to the 273, the number by which the first-born of the tribes exceeded those of the Levites. “And as for the redemption of the 273 (lit., the 273 to be redeemed) of the first-born of the children of Israel which were more than the Levites, thou shalt take five shekels a head,” etc. This was the general price established by the law for the redemption of the first-born of men (see Num_18:16). On the sacred shekel, see at Exo_30:13. The redemption money for 273 first-born, in all 1365 shekels, was to be paid to Aaron and his sons as compensation for the persons who properly belonged to Jehovah, and had been appointed as first-born for the service of the priests.

COFFMAN, ""And Jehovah said unto Moses, Number all the first-born males of the children of Israel from a month old and upward, and take the number of their names. And thou shalt take the Levites for me (I am Jehovah) instead of all the first-born among the children of Israel; and the cattle of the Levites instead of all the firstlings among the cattle of the children of Israel. And Moses numbered, as Jehovah commanded him, all the first-born among the children of Israel. And all the first-born males according to the number of names, from a month old and upward, of those that were numbered of them, were twenty and two thousand and threescore and thirteen."There is no difficulty whatever with these verses, except in the matter of the final total of all the first-born in Israel. The critics have been screaming for a hundred years that this number of 22,273 is absurd for an accurate account of the first-born males among a nation of some 2,000,000 people. Well, for the demographic experts in this field, this figure must indeed appear extremely small, and critics extrapolate these numbers to show that, according to these figures, every Jewish family would have had to have about fifty children!However, the critics have missed the point altogether. Only those Israelites born AFTER the exodus were covered by this law of the dedication of the first-born, and this figure of 22,273 represents the first-born who were born AFTER the exodus. As Keil expressed it: "Of course, the reference was only to the first-born of men and cattle that came into the world from that time forward (the time of the announcement of the law regarding the first-born), and not to those whom God had already sanctified to Himself by sparing the Israelites and their cattle (the night of the 10th plague)."[15]Critics, however, are never satisfied, and their answer to this true explanation of the low number is shouted, `that figure is too large for the births in a little over a year after Exodus.' Well, the answer to their objection is patently obvious. That very first year when the Hebrews received their liberty, after years of galling service under

98

the yoke of Pharaoh, there were bound to have been as many marriages (and consequently births) as would normally have occurred in five or ten years. It is easy to see that every person of age fit for marriage would have celebrated their liberation by choosing a mate. This figure of 22,273 first-born sons proves it. How else could it have happened? To be sure, the number is abnormally high for a similar statistic in any normal year for any people on earth, but that was not a normal year in any sense of the word. That certainly takes care of the nonsense about these figures being "absurd."[16] What an amazing folly is demonstrated by men who seek to "correct" writings of the third millennium anterior to themselves, especially in view of the fact that they simply do not have the knowledge to sustain them in such an effort. Long after this generation of unbelievers has been buried and forgotten, people will go on believing the Sacred Scriptures as has already been demonstrated throughout history.

WHEDON, "Verses 40-43CENSUS OF THE FIRSTBORN MALES OF THE ISRAELITES, Numbers 3:40-43.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; Exodus 13:11, and the following verses, we find nothing inconsistent with that interpretation which makes the requirement to sanctify the firstborn wholly prospective and not retrospective.

EBC 40-51, "2. THE FIRST-BORNNumbers 3:11-13; Numbers 3:40-51These two passages supplement each other and may be taken together. Jehovah claims the first-born in Israel. He hallowed them unto Himself on the day when He smote all the firstborn in the land of Egypt. They are now humbered from a month old and upward. But instead of their being appointed personally to holy service, the Levites are substituted for them. The whole account supplies a scheme of the origin of the sacerdotal tribe.It has been questioned whether the number of the first-born, which is 22,273, can in

99

any way be made to agree with the total number of the male Israelites, previously stated at 603,550. Wellhausen is specially contemptuous of a tradition or calculation which, he says, would give an average of forty children to each woman. But the difficulty partly yields if it is kept in view that the Levites were separated for the service of the sanctuary. Naturally it would be the heir-apparent alone of each family group whose liability to this kind of duty fell to be considered. The head of a household was, according to the ancient reckoning, its priest. In Abraham’s family no one counted as a first-born but Isaac. Now that a generation of Israelites is growing up sanctified by the covenant, it appears fit that the presumptive priest should either be devoted to sacerdotal duty, or relieved of it by a Levite as his substitute. Suppose each family had five tents, and suppose further that the children born before the exodus are not reckoned, the number will not be found at all disproportionate. The absolute number remains a difficulty.Dr. Robertson Smith argues from his own premises about the sanctity of the first-born. He repudiates the notion that at one time the Hebrews actually sacrificed all their first-born sons; yet he affirms that "there must have been some point of attachment in ancient custom for the belief that the Deity asked for such a sacrifice." "I apprehend," he proceeds, "that all the prerogatives of the first-born among Semitic peoples are originally prerogatives of sanctity; the sacred blood of the kin flows purest and strongest in him." {Genesis 49:3} Neither in the case of children nor in that of cattle did the congenital holiness of the first-born originally imply that they must be sacrificed or given to the Deity on the altar, but only that if sacrifice was to be made, they were the best and fittest because the holiest victims. The passage in Numbers may be confidently declared to be far from any such conception. The special fitness for sacrifice of the firstborn of an animal is assumed: the fitness of the heir of a family, again, is plainly not to become a sacrifice, but to offer sacrifice. The first-born of the Egyptians died. But it is the life, the holy activity of His own people, not their death, God desires. And this holy activity, rising to its highest function in the firstborn, is according to our passage laid on the Levites to a certain extent. Not entirely indeed. The whole congregation is still consecrated and must be holy. All are bound by the covenant. The head of each family group will still have to officiate as a priest in celebrating the passover. Certain duties, however, are transferred for the better protection of the sanctities of worship.The first-born are found to exceed the number of the Levites by two hundred and seventy-three; and for their redemption Moses takes "five shekels apiece by the poll; after the shekel of the sanctuary." The money thus collected is given unto Aaron and his sons.The method of redemption here presented, purely arbitrary in respect of the sum appointed for the ransom of each life, is fitly contrasted by the Apostle Peter with that of the Christian dispensation. He adopts the word redeem, taking it over from the old economy, but says, "Ye were redeemed not with corruptible things, with silver or gold, from your vain manner of life handed down from your fathers." And

100

the difference is not only that the Christian is redeemed with the precious blood of Christ, but this also, that, while the first-born Israelite was relieved of certain parts of the holy service which might have been claimed of him by Jehovah, it is for sacred service, "to be a holy priesthood to offer up spiritual sacrifices," Christians are redeemed. In the one case exemption, in the other case consecration is the end. The difference is indeed great, and shows how much the two covenants are in contrast with each other. It is not to enable us to escape any of the duties or obligations of life Christ has given Himself for us. It is to make us fit for those duties, to bring us. fully under those obligations, to purify us that we may serve God with our bodies and spirits which are His.A passage in Exodus {Exodus 13:11 f.} must not be overlooked in connection with that presently under consideration. The enactment there is to the effect that when Israel is brought into the land of the Canaanites every first-born of beasts shall be set apart unto the Lord, the firstling of an ass shall be redeemed with a lamb or killed, and all first-born children shall be redeemed. Here the singular point is that the law is deferred, and does not come into operation till the settlement in Canaan. Either this was set aside for the provisions made in Numbers, or these are to be interpreted by it. The difficulties of the former view are greatly increased by the mention of the "shekel of the sanctuary," which seems to imply a settled medium of exchange, hardly possible in the wilderness.Numbers 8:18-19, the subject of redemption is again touched, and the additions are significant. Now the service of the Levites "in the tent of meeting" is by way of atonement for the children of Israel, "that there be no plague among the children of Israel when the children of Israel come nigh unto the sanctuary." Atonement is not with blood in this case, but by the service of the living substitute. While the general scope of the Mosaic law requires the shedding of blood in order that the claim of God may be met, this exception must not be forgotten. And in a sense it is the chief instance of atonement, far transcending in expressiveness those in which animals were slaughtered for propitiation. The whole congregation, threatened with plagues and disasters in approaching God, has protection through the holy service of the Levitical tribe. Here is substitution of a kind which makes a striking point in the symbolism of the Old Testament in its relation to the New. The principle may be seen in patriarchal history. The ten in Sodom, if ten righteous men could have been found, would have saved it, would have been its atonement in a sense, not by their death on its behalf but by their life. And Moses himself, standing alone between God and Israel, prevails by his pleading and saves the nation from its doom. So our Lord says of His disciples, "Ye are the salt of the earth." Their holy devotion preserves the mass from moral corruption and spiritual death. Again, "for the elect’s sake," the days of tribulation shall be shortened. {Matthew 24:22}The ceremonies appointed for the cleansing and consecration of the Levites, described in Numbers 8:5-26, may be noticed here. They differ considerably from those enjoined for the consecration of priests. Neither were the Levites anointed with sacred oil, for instance, nor were they sprinkled with the blood of sacrifices;

101

nor, again, do they seem to have worn any special dress, even in the tabernacle court. There was, however, an impressive ritual which would produce in their minds a consciousness of separation and devotion to God. The water of expiation, literally of sin, was first to be sprinkled upon them, a baptism not signifying anything like regeneration, but having reference to possible defilements of the flesh. A razor was then to be made to pass over the whole body, and the clothes were to be washed, also to remove actual as well as legal impurity. This cleansing completed, the sacrifices followed. One bullock for a burnt offering, with its accompanying meal offering, and one for a sin offering were provided. The people being assembled towards the door of the tent of meeting, the Levites were placed in front of them to be presented to Jehovah. The princes probably laid their hands on the Levites, so declaring them the representatives of all for their special office. Then Aaron had to offer the sacrifices for the Levites, and the Levites themselves as living sacrifices to Jehovah. The Levites laid their hands on the bullocks, making them their substitutes for the symbolic purpose. Aaron and his sons slew the animals and offered them in the appointed way, burning the one bullock upon the altar, around which its blood had been sprinkled, of the other burning only certain portions called the fat. Then the ceremony of waving was performed, or what was possible in the circumstances, each Levite being passed through the hands of Aaron or one of his sons. So set apart, they were, according to Numbers 8:24, required to wait upon the work of the tent of meeting, each from his twenty-fifth to his fiftieth year. The service had been previously ordered to begin at the thirtieth year. {Numbers 4:3} Afterwards the time of ministry was still further extended. {1 Chronicles 23:24-27}Such is the account of the symbolic cleansing and the representative ministry of the Levites; and we see both a parallel and a contrast to what is demanded now for the Christian life of obedience and devotion to God. Purification there must be from all defilement of flesh and spirit. With the change which takes place when by repentance and faith in Christ we enter into the free service of God there must be a definite and earnest purging of the whole nature. "As ye presented your members as servants to uncleanness and to iniquity unto iniquity, even so now present your members as servants to righteousness unto sanctification" {Romans 6:19}. "Mortify therefore your members which are upon the earth; fornication, uncleanness, passion, evil desire, and covetousness, the which is idolatry, put ye also away all these: anger, wrath, malice, railing, shameful speaking out of your mouth: lie not one to another; seeing that ye have put off the old man with his doings, and have put on the new man." {Colossians 3:5; Colossians 3:8-9} Thus the purity of heart and soul so imperfectly represented by the cleansings of the Levites is set forth as the indispensable preparation of the Christian. And the contrast lies in this, that the purification required by the New Testament law is for all, and is the same for each. Whether one is to serve in the ministry of the Gospel or sweep a room as for God’s cause; the same profound purity is needful. All in the Kingdom of God are to be holy, for He is holy.

PETT, "Numbers 3:40-41102

‘And Yahweh said to Moses, “Number all the first-born males of the children of Israel from a month old and upward, and take the number of their names. And you shall take the Levites for me (I am Yahweh) instead of all the first-born among the children of Israel, and the cattle of the Levites instead of all the firstborn among the cattle of the children of Israel.” ’The overall principle here is that the Levites and their cattle were to take the place of the firstborn of Israel and the firstborn of cattle who were obligated to Yahweh because of the deliverance at the Passover when the firstborn of sons and cattle were spared. That obligation was now removed by virtue of the setting apart of the Levites.Moses was firstly to number all the first-born males of the children of Israel taking ‘the number of their names’. These were then to be released from their dedication to Yahweh by being replaced by Levites. Up to this point, since the setting up of the Dwellingplace, the firstborn sons had had to perform the duties there. That would be required no longer. While these duties would not have been onerous while in the wilderness, had they continued once in the land they would have become so. The firstborn sons would have had to leave home and would not have been fully available for work on the farms and with the flocks and herds. But now the service in the Dwellingplace was to be the privilege of the Levites.“And the cattle of the Levites instead of all the firstborn among the cattle of the children of Israel.” The interpretation of quite what this indicates is complicated by the fact that while the Passover obligation of ‘the firstborn’ was being removed, the firstborn cattle of the children of Israel were still owing to Yahweh as firstfruits. That obligation was not removed. So it did not mean that the firstborn cattle were not to be offered to Yahweh. They were Yahweh’s anyway under the principle of the firstfruits. The point was rather that as the firstborn cattle were now already Yahweh’s as firstlings, they could not also be separately offered as firstborn. Thus they had to be substituted by the cattle of the Levites otherwise they would need to be offered twice over.Initially all firstborn of cattle were to be ‘made holy to Yahweh’ (Exodus 13:2) because of the deliverance from Egypt and their sparing at the Passover. They shall be Yahweh’s (Exodus 13:12). They were to be ‘given to Yahweh’ (Exodus 22:30). They were later made holy to Yahweh as firstfruits (Deuteronomy 15:19). When they were being sacrificed the meat was to go to the priests (Numbers 18:15; Numbers 18:17-18). Some was, however, to be made available for feasting before Yahweh as Deuteronomy reveals (Deuteronomy 12:6; Deuteronomy 12:17; Deuteronomy 14:23; Deuteronomy 15:19). This latter ‘making holy as firstfruits’ is clearly not being abrogated as these future references make clear. But that is because they were firstfruits. The only obligation to be abrogated was that of the firstborn as a result of the Passover.

103

It should be noted that the Levite cattle now became Yahweh’s. All the cattle that they held in future would also be seen as Yahweh’s. All that a Levite owned from now on was his own home, or anything he purchased. The fields and cattle around his city belonged to Yahweh, while being available for the use of the Levites as Yahweh’s servants. Thus they could be substituted for the Passover firstborn cattle without being killed.It is significant that the closer to Yahweh’s service they came the less possessions they had. Their minds were not to be filled with a desire for possessions, but to the desire to have God as their possession. They were not to be dragged down by ‘the deceitfulness of riches’. Their whole attention was to be on serving Him. Once this attitude was lost, they were lost.“I am Yahweh.” This brings out the great privilege that was to be theirs. They were to be YAHWEH’s, servants of the One Who Is, the Creator, the Controller of History.

41 Take the Levites for me in place of all the firstborn of the Israelites, and the livestock of the Levites in place of all the firstborn of the livestock of the Israelites. I am the Lord.”

GILL, "And thou shall take the Levites for me,.... For his service, to minister to his priests, and serve in his tabernacle: I am the Lord; who has a right to all, and can claim who he pleases for himself in a special manner, and therefore could and did take the Levites to himself: instead of the firstborn among the children of Israel; these he had taken to him before, and ordered to be sanctified unto him, and for whom a redemption price was paid to his priests for the support of them, and the tabernacle service, and now it was his will to make an exchange of these for the Levites: and the cattle of the Levites, instead of all the firstling among the cattle of the children of Israel: every firstling of clean cattle was the Lord's, and given to his priests, and the firstlings of unclean cattle were redeemed with a lamb, and which were given to the same; and now instead of these he requires the cattle of the Levites; not that

104

they should be deprived of their use of them, or that they should be taken and sacrificed, but that they should be with them devoted to him, and they should possess them in his right.

K&D 40-48, "After this, Moses numbered the first-born of the children of Israel, to exchange them for the Levites according to the command of God, which is repeated in Num_3:41 and Num_3:44-45 from Num_3:11-13, and to adopt the latter in their stead for the service at the sanctuary (on Num_3:41 and Num_3:45, cf. Num_3:11-13). The number of the first-born of the twelve tribes amounted to 22,273 of a month old and upwards (Num_3:43). Of this number 22,000 were exchanged for the 22,000 Levites, and the cattle of the Levites were also set against the first-born of the cattle of the tribes of Israel, though without their being numbered and exchanged head for head. In Num_3:44 and Num_3:45 the command of God concerning the adoption of the Levites is repeated, for the purpose of adding the further instructions with regard to the 273, the number by which the first-born of the tribes exceeded those of the Levites. “And as for the redemption of the 273 (lit., the 273 to be redeemed) of the first-born of the children of Israel which were more than the Levites, thou shalt take five shekels a head,” etc. This was the general price established by the law for the redemption of the first-born of men (see Num_18:16). On the sacred shekel, see at Exo_30:13. The redemption money for 273 first-born, in all 1365 shekels, was to be paid to Aaron and his sons as compensation for the persons who properly belonged to Jehovah, and had been appointed as first-born for the service of the priests.

COKE, "Numbers 3:41. And thou shalt take the Levites for me, &c.— The Levites were now to be exchanged for the first-born males of the whole nation, man for man; and the cattle of that whole tribe, instead of the firstling male cattle of the whole nation; that so the Levites and their cattle, instead of the Israelites first-born men and cattle, might be given unto Aaron and the priests, to minister unto them, Numbers 3:45. This was for the first-born males of man and beast, which the Israelites now had. All the first-born that came after this, were to be redeemed, or given to the priests.

ELLICOTT, " (41) And thou shalt take the Levites for me (I am the Lord) . . . —Or, And thou shalt take the Levites for Me—for Me, Jehovah. The assertions which have been frequently made respecting the transference of the priesthood of the firstborn to the Levites appear to be altogether without foundation. For (1) the priesthood which was exercised in patriarchal times was not restricted to the firstborn, but appears to have been common to the head of every family. (2) This priesthood was exercised previously to the exodus, and consequently previously to the command given to Moses to sanctify the firstborn. And (3) the priesthood, which belonged not to the firstborn exclusively, but to the Israelites at large, was thenceforth strictly confined to the family of Aaron, who inherited it not as the substitutes of the firstborn, but in the place of the whole nation.

105

BENSON, "Numbers 3:41. 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 foPOOLE, " Instead of all the first-born, to wit, such are now alive of them, but those which should be born of them hereafter are otherwise disposed.The 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 that 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. r themselves as God’s ministers, and for their support in God’s work.

WHEDON, "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.

42 So Moses counted all the firstborn of the Israelites, as the Lord commanded him.

GILL, "And Moses numbered, as the Lord commanded him,.... No doubt assisted by others, though not mentioned: all the firstborn among the children of Israel; which some think were only those that were born since they came out of Egypt, as Bonfrerius, Bishop Patrick, and others.

PETT, "Numbers 3:42106

‘And Moses numbered, as Yahweh commanded him, all the first-born among the children of Israel.’So Moses did what Yahweh had commanded. He ‘numbered’ all the firstborn among the children of Israel, allocating them to their service.

43 The total number of firstborn males a month old or more, listed by name, was 22,273.

BARNES, "This result, when compared with the number of male adults (603,550, compare Num_2:32), is small, the usual proportion of first-born sons to a total male population being about one in four: and the explanation offered is that the law of Exo_13:1-2, prescribed a dedication of those only who should be firstborn “thenceforward”.

On the other hand, the number is very large to be born among two millions of persons in a single year; and it must be admitted, that some unusual causes must have been concerned. Such, not to mention the divine blessing, may be found in the sudden development of national energies which would immediately ensue on the Exodus. Before that event, the miserable estate of the people, and especially the inhuman order for the destruction of their first-born, would check very seriously the ratio of marriages and births; and this ratio would naturally, when the check was removed, exhibit a sudden and striking increase.

CLARKE, "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, Num_3:46, to be redeemed; and the redemption price is to be five shekels each, Num_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, Num_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.

107

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, 1Pe_1:18, 1Pe_1:19 : “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 (τιμιω αἱματι, valuable) blood of Christ, as of a lamb without blemish and without spot,” etc. And it is not the first-born only which are thus redeemed, for he, by the grace of God, tasted death for Every man; Heb_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.

GILL, "And all the firstborn males,.... For such only were ordered to be numbered, and not firstborn females: by the number of names; which were particularly taken: from a month old and upward; for before that time they were not sanctified to the Lord, nor subject to the redemption price: of those that were numbered of them were twenty and two thousand two hundred and threescore and thirteen; 22,273 men; so that there were two hundred seventy three more than the Levites, Num_3:39.

COKE, "Numbers 3:43. All the first-born males, &c.— All the males of the tribe of Levi are said to be twenty and two thousand, Numbers 3:39 but if we put together the particular sums mentioned Numbers 3:22; Numbers 3:28; Numbers 3:34 they amount to 300 more; which Patrick, Le Clerc, and others think to be omitted, because they were the first-born of the Levites themselves, and on that account belonged to God already. But we have shewn in the note on Numbers 3:39 how this difficulty may be otherwise solved. The number of the first-born exceeded that of the Israelites by 273, and for these it is enjoined, Numbers 3:47 that they should be redeemed at the rate of five shekels, i.e. about 12s. a head; see Leviticus 27:6. Numbers 18:16. It has been asked, who was to pay this money? for every Israelite would think he had an equal right to be redeemed by a Levite. The Jews tell us, as Bishop Patrick remarks, that it was done by drawing lots thus: Moses took 22,000 scrolls of parchment, on which he wrote a son of Levi, and 273 more, whereon he wrote five shekels; and then, putting all the lots into an urn, that every first-born might draw, he that drew one of the former lots was redeemed, and he that drew one of the latter paid his price. It has appeared surprising to same, that from above 600,000 full grown men, there should not be more first-born sons: but it is to be considered, that so many had been born since the slaughter of the Egyptian first-

108

born; from which time and event only the first-born were to be consecrated to God; see Exodus 13:2.

ELLICOTT, "(43) Twenty and two thousand two hundred and threescore and thirteen.—The extremely small number of the firstborn in proportion to a male population of 600,000 of twenty years of age and upwards—i.e., to a population of about 1,000,000 males—has been a fruitful source of difficulty, and, in some cases, a ground for the rejection of the historical truth of the narrative, which involves, it has been alleged, the incredible conclusion that there was only one firstborn to forty-four males. It might suffice, in answer to those who urge this difficulty as a ground for rejecting the truth of the narrative, to reply that it is difficult, if not impossible, to conceive that a writer who has recorded, or, according to the theory in question, invented so many complicated calculations, should have inserted amongst them one which is fraught with so much apparent improbability. Many solutions of the problem have been proposed which relieve the apparent disproportion of the number of the firstborn not only of its alleged impossibility, but even of improbability. Some have urged that we are constrained by every principle of analogy to restrict the firstborn sons to those who were under twenty years of age, and who had not been included in the census which had been already taken. The destruction of the firstborn of the Egyptians was clearly subject to a somewhat similar limitation. Pharaoh himself was, in all probability, a firstborn son; and in regard to the Egyptians generally there does not appear to have been above one death in each house (Exodus 12:30), although there must have been very many houses in which the father (and it may be the grandfather) as well as the son was a firstborn child. Another opinion is that by the firstborn in every family we are to understand the firstborn in every household, including the children of concubines and slaves. When due allowance has been made, on either of these hypotheses, for the average proportion of the sexes, the average number of early deaths, and also for the limitation of the term firstborn to those who were the firstborn on the side of the father as well as of the mother, it has been contended that the number of the firstborn is consistent with the supposition that each family of the Israelites consisted of about eight or nine children—a supposition which, considering how prolific the Hebrew women are said to have been, cannot be regarded as deserving of rejection on the ground of its incredibility. The most probable solution of the difficulty, however, appears to be that which is given in the Introduction.

PETT, "Numbers 3:43‘And all the first-born males according to the number of names, from a month old and upward, of those that were numbered of them, were twenty and two thousand two hundred and threescore and thirteen.’The number of the firstborn males was assessed at 22 ’lph and two hundred and seventy three. All this is actually saying is that the number of Levites was twenty

109

two ’lph (whatever that meant), and that by assessment the firstborn were 273 more. This incidentally removes any difficulty from the figures. There was simply a surplus of 273 extra to be accounted for, however we interpret the 22,000.We have already noted that ‘according to the number of the names’ has a specialised meaning representing a grouping. See 1:18, 20, 22, etc.This would also explain why there were so ‘few’ Levites compared with the other tribes. (22,000 Levites of one month old and upwards compared with 32,200 ‘above 20 years old’ of even the smallest other tribe). It could partly be explained by the fact that the Levites had probably not adopted so many resident aliens. But if the ’lph simply refers to ‘wider families’ (or ‘chieftains’) then it may simply have been due to the fact that their ‘family’ system worked on the basis of closer ties, this resulting in larger ‘families’.EXCURSUS.Note On The 22,273 Firstborn of Israel.For those who take all the ‘numbers’ in the Pentateuch in terms of modern translations and apply them literally this number has caused considerable problems. It is asked how could there only be 22,273 firstborn of Israel if there were 600,000 men of over 20? This would indicate excessively large families. The explanation could certainly be helped by the fact that ‘bechor’ meant simply the firstborn of the father (1:20), but only if polygamous marriages were fairly common. Later evidence is that they were not so, but circumstances may have been very different at this stage. The situation in Egypt may well have caused a shortage of men compared with women (compare Isaiah 4:1). Furthermore it may well be that the firstborn, due to their position in the family, had suffered most in Egypt, being the first to be put to death for infractions by ‘the slaves’. This could then have resulted in a small number of living firstborns, and would help to explain the judgment on the firstborn of Egypt.However, in our view the difficulty does not arise for the reasons mentioned above.

PULPIY, "Twenty and two thousand two hundred and threescore and thirteen. These were the first-born of the twelve tribes; but who were included under the designation "first-born" is a matter of grave dispute. The smallness of their number (not much above one per cent. of the whole population) has given rise to several conflicting theories, all of which seem to be artificial, arbitrary, and therefore unsatisfactory. It is urged by some that the expression "every male that openeth the womb" must be strictly pressed, and that there would be no "first-born" in those families (which form a considerable majority) in which either a girl was born first, or the eldest, being a boy, had died. It is further urged that only those first-horn would be counted who were not themselves fathers of families. These considerations

110

will indeed reduce the probable numbers very largely, but not to the required amount. Others, again, give an entirely different turn to the difficulty by urging that as the command in Exodus 13:1-22. I was prospective only, so at this time only the first-born since the exodus were counted. This makes it necessary to assume an altogether unprecedented birth-rate during that short period. One other explanation strives to satisfy the arithmetical conditions of the problem by assuming that the whole of the Divine legislation in this matter was in reality directed against the worship of Moloch, and was designed to prevent the offering of first-born to him by redeeming them unto himself. As the rites of Moloch only demanded young children of tender age, only such were counted in this census. It may, indeed, be very probably concluded that their heavenly Father did claim these first-born, partly in order to save them from Moloch, because the people would thereafter be exposed to the fascination of that horrid superstition; but there is no proof whatever that they were acquainted with it at this time. These cruel rites, together with many other heathen abominations, are forbidden in Le Exodus 18:21 and Deuteronomy 18:10, in view of the entry into Canaan, where they were practiced. The prophet Amos, when he reproaches them with having "carried the tabernacle of" their "Moloch" even in the wilderness (Amos 5:26), absolves them by implication from any darker superstition; and the highly rhetorical passage Ezekiel 20:26 seems to refer to the consequences of disobedience at a later date, and can hardly be pressed against the entire silence of the Pentateuch. Anyhow it does not seem possible, on the strength of a supposed intention on the part of God of which no trace appears in the text, to impose a narrow and arbitrary limit upon the plain command to number "all the first-born, from a month old and upward." If we turn from these speculations to the reason and ground of the matter as stated by God himself, it will appear much more simple. It was distinctly on the ground of their preservation from the destroying angel in Egypt that the first-born of Israel were claimed as God's peculium now (see Ezekiel 20:13). The command in Exodus 13:1 was no doubt prospective, but the sanctification of the first-born was based upon the deliverance itself; and this command was intended not to limit that sanctification for the present, but to continue it for the future. Now if we turn to Exodus 12:29, Exodus 12:30, and ask who the first-born were whom the destroying angel cut off, we see plainly enough that they included the eldest son, being a child, in every house; that every family lost one, and only one. On the one hand, Pharaoh himself was in all probability a first-born, but he was not in any personal danger, because he ranked and suffered as a father, not as a son. On the other hand, the majority of families in which the first-born was a daughter, or had died, did not therefore escape: "there was not a house where there was not one dead." Taking this as the only sure ground to go upon, we may conclude with some confidence that the first-born now claimed by God in-eluded all the eldest sons in the families of Israel who were not themselves the heads of houses. These were the destroyed in Egypt—these the redeemed in Israel. How they came to be so few in proportion is a matter in itself of extremely slight importance, and dependant, perhaps, upon causes of which no record was left.

111

44 The Lord also said to Moses,

BARNES 44-51, "This redemption money (see the marginal references) would perhaps be exacted from the parents of the “youngest” children of the 22,273 Num_3:43. The cattle of the Levites was doubtless taken in the gross as an equivalent for the first-born cattle of the other tribes, which of course, no less than the first-born of men, belonged to the Lord; and in future would have to be redeemed Num_18:15; Deu_15:19.

GILL, "And the Lord spake unto Moses,.... After the number was taken, and gave him directions what to do upon it: COFFMAN, "Verse 44"And Jehovah spake unto Moses, saying, Take the Levites instead of all the first-born among the children of Israel, and the cattle of the Levites instead of their cattle; and the Levites shall be mine: I am Jehovah. And for the redemption of the two hundred and three-score and thirteen of the first-born of the children of Israel, that are over and above the number of the Levites, thou shalt take five shekels apiece by the poll; after the shekel of the sanctuary shalt thou take them (the shekel is twenty gerahs): and thou shalt give the money, wherewith the odd number of them is redeemed, unto Aaron and to his sons. And Moses took the redemption money from them that were over and above them that were redeemed by the Levites; from the first-born of the children of Israel took he the money, a thousand three hundred and threescore and five shekels, after the shekel of the sanctuary: and Moses gave the redemption-money unto Aaron and to his sons, according to the word of Jehovah, as Jehovah commanded Moses."It is of interest that the 1,365 shekels equals the number of shekels procured by collecting five shekels each from 273 people. The author of the account here was most careful to give an exact report of everything related. How amazing it is, that after so many millenniums of time, the account is as perfect as it is.It is significant that in the case of the cattle mentioned here, there was evidently permitted a redemption, through exchange, of both clean and unclean animals, some of which, according to legislation in Numbers 18:15-17, had to be sacrificed and not redeemed. Obviously, this was a special case not subject to normal requirements. Plaut noted that, normally, only "unclean animals could be redeemed, and therefore the Talmud applied this chapter only to clean animals."[17] It is not known, exactly,

112

what happened.

WHEDON, "Verses 44-51THE SUPERNUMERARY FIRSTBORN REDEEMED, Numbers 3:44-51.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.

PETT, "Numbers 3:44-45‘And Yahweh spoke to Moses, saying, “Take the Levites instead of all the first-born among the children of Israel, and the cattle of the Levites instead of their cattle. And the Levites shall be mine. I am Yahweh.” ’Yahweh now repeats His instruction, stressing its importance, and making it crystal clear. The Levites were to replace the firstborn sons as servants of the Sanctuary, and their cattle, now set aside as Yahweh’s, were to replace the firstborn which would otherwise be due from the Israelite cattle. They would be released from their double obligation of firstling and firstborn, being now only responsible for firstlings.

113

45 “Take the Levites in place of all the firstborn of Israel, and the livestock of the Levites in place of their livestock. The Levites are to be mine. I am the Lord.

GILL, "Take the Levites instead of all the firstborn among the children of Israel,.... The Lord had declared before that he had taken them, and now he bids Moses take them, who had numbered them, and give them to Aaron, instead of the firstborn, whose numbers were also taken for this purpose: and the cattle of the Levites instead of their cattle; but not to be given to Aaron and his sons, or to the priests for their use, but to remain with the Levites for their use, who were now separated from the other tribes, and taken into the service of God; and as they were dedicated to God, so their cattle likewise for their support as his ministers: and the Levites shall be mine; in a special manner his, being devoted to his service: I am the Lord; who had a right to do this, and expected to be obeyed in it.

CALVIN, "45.Take the Levites instead of all the first-born The compensation of which I have spoken follows; for, since the complete portion of God was not found in the tribe of Levi, it must needs be supplied from elsewhere. Since, then, the Levites, infants as well as men, were less by two hundred and seventy-three than the first-born of the twelve tribes of Israel, God required that five shekels of the sanctuary should be paid for every head. We have elsewhere seen that the shekel of the sanctuary was double, amounting to two ordinary ones.

ELLICOTT, "(45) And the cattle of the Levites instead of their cattle.—There appears to have been no numbering of the cattle. Had it been otherwise, an argument might have been used in support of the prospective reference of the command to number the firstborn, derived from the fact that it would have been impossible to ascertain the number of firstborn among the cattle. It appears,

114

however, that the whole of the cattle of the Levites was given in redemption of the firstborn of all the cattle of the other tribes.

46 To redeem the 273 firstborn Israelites who exceed the number of the Levites,

GILL, "Thou shall even take five shekels apiece the poll,.... Or head; every firstborn, or his parent for him, was bound to pay five shekels, which were about eleven or twelve shillings of our money, and which was afterwards settled as the price of such a redemption, Num_18:16, after the shekel of the sanctuary shall thou take them; being full weight according to the standard there kept: the shekel is twenty gerahs; See Gill on Lev_27:25.

BENSON, "Numbers 3:46. 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.

PETT, "Numbers 3:46-48“And for the redemption of the two hundred and threescore and thirteen of the first-born of the children of Israel, that are over and above the number of the Levites, you shall take five shekels apiece per head. After the shekel of the sanctuary you shall take them (the shekel is twenty gerahs), and you shall give the money, with which the odd number of them is redeemed, to Aaron and to his sons.”The remaining surplus of 273 were now brought into account. They were to be redeemed by their parents at a ransom of 5 shekels per person. This money was then to be given to the priests. This was the estimate of the value of a male child under five years old (Leviticus 27:6 - possibly the equivalent of the slave price for a male under five years old), the redeemed children clearly being seen as those most recently born. The ones to be paid for were probably selected by Urim and Thummim. Or it may have been paid by the more wealthy. The resulting

115

redemption silver was to be handed over to the priests.

47 collect five shekels[c] for each one, according to the sanctuary shekel, which weighs twenty gerahs.

GILL, "Thou shall even take five shekels apiece the poll,.... Or head; every firstborn, or his parent for him, was bound to pay five shekels, which were about eleven or twelve shillings of our money, and which was afterwards settled as the price of such a redemption, Num_18:16, after the shekel of the sanctuary shall thou take them; being full weight according to the standard there kept: the shekel is twenty gerahs; See Gill on Lev_27:25.

ELLICOTT, " (47) Thou shalt even take five shekels apiece by the poll.—It is not stated in what manner the 273 families of whom the redemption money was exacted were determined. Inasmuch, however, as the law of the redemption of the firstborn by the payment of five shekels came into operation from this time (Numbers 18:16), it seems probable that the money was exacted in the case of those who had been most recently born; or it may be that the matter was decided by lot.After the shekel of the sanctuary.—See Exodus 30:13, where the expression occurs for the first time, and the value of the shekel is stated, as in this verse.

POOLE, " Five shekels apiece was the price to be paid for the redemption of a first-born a month old, Numbers 18:15,16; but this money, though paid for these 273 persons, was probably paid out of the common stock of all, except lots were cast who should pay, which is not probable in so small a concern accompanied with so much trouble.

WHEDON, " 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

116

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 διδραχμον, 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.

PULPIT, "Five shekels apiece. This amount had already been fixedthat every one who has some special call is a partner partly in the work of Christ, partly in the duty of the Church; he helps to carry on the one or to discharge the other (or both). The atonement indeed was made by Aaron—as by Christ—himself, alone; but the outward and subordinate matters of his office he discharged by means of the Levites, and he could not otherwise have discharged them. Even so does Christ outwardly and visibly fulfill his manifold office upon earth by the months and by the hands of his servants. Thus, if any preach the word, he is doing the work of Christ our Prophet; if any minister to the sick, of Christ our Healer; if any feed his lambs, of Christ our Good Shepherd; if any rule over men for their good, of Christ our King. Even if any suffer in the spirit of Christ, he is filling up the yet unfilled measures of the afflictions of Christ (Colossians 1:24), because it is appointed unto Christ to suffer, as once in himself, so now in his earthly members, until the cup be wholly drained (cf. Revelation 1:9; Revelation 14:12). So, on the other hand, every one that is devoted to some ministry is discharging the duty of all to all, and through all to God. The body of Christ, which is the Church, owes unto all her members spiritual and temporal care and tendance; unto God ceaseless worship, prayer, and praise. But as the natural body discharges many of its functions through separate members or organs, so does the body of Christ through individuals set apart thereunto.Consider, again, WITH RESPECT TO THE FIRST-BORN—I. THAT GOD CLAIMED, AS OF RIGHT, THE SERVICES OF ALL THE FIRST-BORN BECAUSE OF THEIR PRESERVATION THROUGH THE

117

BLOOD OF THE (PASSOVER) LAMB IN EGYPT. Even so all who belong to "the general assembly and Church of the firstborn," which are enrolled not in the lists of Aaron on earth, but in the book of God in heaven (Hebrews 12:23), i.e; all Christian people, so far as they understand their high calling, are claimed as his, and wholly his, by God; and this because he redeemed them by the precious blood of Christ (1 Corinthians 6:19, 1 Corinthians 6:20; Romans 14:8; 1 Peter 1:19, etc.). And notice that this "hallowing" of the first-born was a kind of death. All the first-born throughout the land of Egypt were "anathema"—a thing devoted. God had claimed them. If then these are saved from the destroyer by the death of the substituted lamb, they are still regarded as dead unto the old, the ordinary, life of men who are sui juris, as living only for God, and unto God. And this is precisely and unequivocally the position of all redeemed souls. Christ did not die that they should not die, but that their death should take a happy and blessed form, instead of one dark and terrible (2 Corinthians 5:15; Colossians 3:3, &c.). Every soul, elect, first-born, redeemed, is hallowed and dedicated and marked as dead unto sin and self, alive only unto God.II. THAT THE FIRST-BORN WERE NUMBERED BY NAME, EVEN TO THE LAST INDIVIDUAL; which does not seem to have been the ease even with the Levites. Even so there is no one of his redeemed, first-born, that does not come into separate remembrance before God, because a soul hallowed by the precious blood is of priceless worth.III. THAT THE ODD NUMBER of the first-born over and above those redeemed by the Levites HAD TO BE REDEEMED WITH A PRICE; for they were his, and he could by no means renounce his rights over any. Even so all the assembly of the first-born are the Lord's, and he cannot forego his claims over any one of them, neither can any one of them say, "It does not matter about me—I shall not signify—I need not be counted." The services of all are due to Christ, and God will have this acknowledged without any exception.Consider, again, as incidentally appearing—1. That the whole matter begins with the genealogy of Aaron and Moses—the priest and the Ruler in Israel. Even so all questions of religion and devotion, however seemingly simple or entirely practical, do really begin with and from the "generations" of him who is both Priest and Ruler in Israel, of him who came forth out of Bethlehem, whose goings forth are from everlasting (Micah 5:2). And so do the Gospels begin with the human genealogy (Matthew, Luke), or the Divine (John), of the Anointed, or with the briefest summary of both (Mark—"the Son of God").2. That Nadab and Abihu, priests of the line of Aaron, who offered strange fire, had no children. Even so the solitary priesthood of Christ is ministered visibly in the Church, and there are that attempt to minister it presumptuously and falsely, as though it were their own; but these are spiritually barren, and leave no children in the faith, because the blessing and power of God is not with their ministry, and

118

because human ambitions are "strange" to the gospel of love.3. That Moses and Aaron camped on the east of the tabernacle, as the place at once most central and most near the Divine presence. Even so our King and Priest doth so abide as that he may ever appear in the presence of God for us (Hebrews 9:24), and yet may ever be in the midst of his Church (Matthew 28:20; Revelation 2:1).

48 Give the money for the redemption of the additional Israelites to Aaron and his sons.”

GILL, "And thou shalt give the money, wherewith the odd number of them is to be redeemed,.... Or the superfluous number, the number of them that exceeded the Levites, namely, two hundred seventy three; the price of their redemption is ordered to be given unto Aaron, and to his sons; since the Levites were taken in lieu of the firstborn, whose redemption money belonged to the priests; and seeing the Levites were given to Aaron and his sons on that consideration, and there being a deficiency of them to answer to the firstborn, it was but right and just that the redemption price of the superfluous number should be paid to them.COKE, "Numbers 3:48. And thou shalt give the money, &c.— The original rendered money, is כסּף ceseph, silver, and so it certainly should have been rendered here. Note; Though silver or gold could ransom these first-born, nothing less than the blood of Jesus Christ could redeem those firstborn, whose names are written in heaven.

49 So Moses collected the redemption money from those who exceeded the number redeemed by the Levites. 119

GILL, "And Moses took the redemption money,.... Of five shekels per head: of them that were over and above redeemed by the Levites; or were more than those redeemed by them. A Levite redeemed a firstborn, or freed him from the redemption price, being taken in lieu of him: 22,000 Levites were answerable to 22,000 firstborn of Israel; but as there were no more Levites than the above number, there remained two hundred seventy three firstborn to be redeemed by money, and it was the redemption money of these Moses took.

K&D, 49-51, "“The redeemed of the Levites” are the 22,000 who were redeemed by means of the Levites. In Num_3:50, the Chethibh ַהִּפְדֹים is the correct reading, and the Keri ַהְּפֻדִים an unnecessary emendation. The number of the first-born and that of the Levites has already been noticed in the introduction to Numbers 1.

PETT, "Numbers 3:49-50‘And Moses took the redemption-silver from those who were over and above those who were redeemed by the Levites. From the first-born of the children of Israel took he the silver, a thousand three hundred and threescore and five shekels, after the shekel of the sanctuary.’So Moses collected the redemption silver which amounted to 1,365 shekels.

50 From the firstborn of the Israelites he collected silver weighing 1,365 shekels,[d] according to the sanctuary shekel.

GILL, "Of the firstborn of the children of Israel took he the money,.... Or "for the firstborn", as the Vulgate Latin version renders it, and so the Hebrew particle מאת is sometimes used (u); for children of a month old or little more could not pay the money,

120

but their parents for them, which was paid by them, and Moses received it for the superfluous number of two hundred seventy three; but it is a matter of doubt of whom this was exacted, and by whom paid, and who could be reckoned as this superfluous number, unless they were the last two hundred seventy three that were numbered: some have thought this was paid out of the public stock, which was a ready way of doing it, but whether reasonable is not so manifest, since these firstborn were the properties of particular persons; the more commonly received method of doing it with the Jewish writers was, according to Jarchi and Abarbinel, and so in the Talmud (w) by lot; the former of which describes the manner of doing it thus, 22,000 pieces (of paper or parchment) were brought, and on them written, "a son of Levi", or "a Levite", and two hundred seventy three other pieces, and on them were written, "five shekels"; these were mixed together and put into an urn or box, and then they were bid to come and take out the pieces, and according as the lot was, they were allowed as redeemed by the Levites, or paid the redemption money: and as this was a method much in use with the Hebrews, it is not improbable: a thousand three hundred and threescore and five shekels, after the shekel of the sanctuary; 1,365 shekels, which is exactly the number of shekels that two hundred seventy three should pay, reckoning five shekels per head; which Jarchi counts thus, for two hundred firstborn, a thousand shekels; for seventy firstborn, three hundred fifty; and for three firstborn fifteen, shekels, which in all amounted to about an hundred seventy pounds of our money.

51 Moses gave the redemption money to Aaron and his sons, as he was commanded by the word of the Lord.

GILL, "And Moses gave the money of them that were redeemed,.... That were redeemed this way, and not by Levites, as in Num_3:49, but by money, paying five shekels a head: unto Aaron and his sons; to whom the Levites were given; and this money, as a recompence for the deficiency of the number of them, to answer to the firstborn exchanged for them: according to the word of the Lord; Num_3:48, as the Lord commanded Moses; so did he, being a faithful servant in all things in the house of God; he did not convert it to his own use, or to any other use than to what God had appointed it.

121

PETT, "Numbers 3:51‘And Moses gave the redemption-silver to Aaron and to his sons, according to the word of Yahweh, as Yahweh commanded Moses.’Moses then passed it on to the priests, as he had been commanded by Yahweh, so that ‘the word of Yahweh’ was fulfilled.One important lesson for us that comes from this chapter is its lesson on substitution and redemption. In the economy of God, like could be substituted for like. Thus was our Lord Jesus Christ, Creator of the world and all that is in it (John 1:1-3; Colossians 1:14-17), a more than sufficient substitute for His creation.We may also draw the lesson of responsibility. The Levites were required to respond to Yahweh and be totally dedicated to His service. God requires that of us too. But we are not restricted by the tribe that we belong to. Our dedication is a matter of willingness on our part. The question for us is, ‘Who is on the Lord’s side?’

122