This week we shall continue the study
of the book of Numbers in the Old Testament.
23:1-12—The First “Curse-turned” Blessing
(1) What’s the point of building seven altars and offering the sacrifices: God couldn’t have accepted the offerings made by “the two of them”?
(2) God could turn a blind eye to all these, after all only He could determine the fate of Israel: Why did He intervene and make Balaam bless Israel before Balak instead?
(3) How did Balaam describe the uniqueness of the people of Israel?
(4) Does God require the same uniqueness of His people (i.e. the Church) today?
(5) Do you think Balaam would say something like this if he had a choice?
23:13-26—The Second “Curse-turned” Blessing
(6) Why didn’t Balak give up? Why didn’t he kill Balaam?
(7) What location did he now choose? Why?
(8) Did Balak believe that the Lord was involved in this event?
(9) Since Balaam knew for sure what God would do, why then did he allow this event to continue and went to consult the Lord again?
(10) Based on the words that God put into Balaam’s mouth, consider the following:
a. What did Balak learn about God and His character?
b. What blessings were bestowed on Israel?
c. What did Balak learn about the recent history of the exodus of Israel?
d. What did he learn about the future of Israel?
(11) What was Balak’s response to the blessed words of Balaam?
(12) What is the main message to you today and how may you apply it to your life?
“How can I curse those whom God has not cursed? How can I denounce those whom the LORD has not denounced?” (Num. 23:8)
If we simply judge Balaam by the words he spoke, we would be led to believe that he was one who feared God and likely a servant of God who would only say and do what God wanted him to. In other words, he must be a faithful servant of the Lord.
However, nothing could be further from the truth as we learned later that it was Balaam who advised the Midianites to seduce the men of Israel into adultery and idol worship (Num. 31:16).
The truth of the matter is, Balaam said what he said not out of choice, but that “The Lord put a word in Balaam’s mouth and said, ‘Go back to Balak and give him this word’.” (Num. 23:5)
It is true that after he had spoken “this word”, he did add that, “Must I not speak what the Lord puts in my mouth?” which indicated that he really had no choice. Not only did he not have the liberty not to speak what was “put into his mouth”, he knew he would probably be killed by the Lord if he did not oblige. In other words, he was telling Balak that had he had a choice, he would not have blessed Israel, but would curse them as he requested.
This serves as a reminder to us that one should not judge a person merely by what he says, but by his consistent character. If we look at (1) the past of Balaam — being a diviner who earned a living by resorting to sorcery (Num. 24:1), (2) his present — being lured to curse Israel because of the rich reward, and (3) his future — advising the Midianites to seduce the Israelites (as mentioned above), we know that what he said did not reflect his true character and that he was used by God in spite of who he was!
The Third “Curse-turned” Blessing
(1) Why did Balak think that a change of location might “please God”? Should Balaam tell him that it was a waste of time, or did Balaam somehow motivate or encourage him to do so? (23:27-30)
(2) While Balaam avoided going up alone to meet with God, thus, perhaps, hoping that God would not put “a word into his mouth”, what did God do instead? (24:2)
(3) Unlike his experience as a sorcerer, Balaam now described the ecstatic experience of being a prophet of God. Through the words of his experience, what insight might we gain into the experience of a prophet? (24:3-5)
(4) Vv. 5-7 describes the dwelling of Israel:
a. What will they be like (against the backdrop of their current dwelling in the wilderness)?
b. Why does it mention “water” a few times and how does it make their place so beautiful?
(5) Vv. 8-9 describe their military might:
a. How would they be compared to the kings and kingdoms in the region?
b. What image does a “wild ox” project?
c. What image does a “lion” or “lioness” project?
d. What is the source of their might? (v. 8)
e. What message should Balak get from this prophecy?
(6) To the Israelites who would have heard about this prophecy later, what was the significance of the last words of this prophecy? (See Gen. 12:3; 27:29)
(7) What is the main message to you today and how may you apply it to your life?
“We also have the prophetic message as something completely reliable, and you will do well to pay attention to it, as to a light shining in a dark place, until the day dawns and the morning star rises in your hearts.” (2 Pet. 1:19)
One of the most amazing features of the Bible is that it is a book of prophecy and that, according to one educated estimation, “there are over 2,000 specific prophecies in the Bible which have already been fulfilled” (Evangelism Explosion, p.88). One wonders how these prophets of old received their prophecies. In a very interesting way, the pagan diviner, Balaam had a taste of this experience.
As we have considered yesterday, Balaam tried to circumvent the intervention of the Lord as he sought to serve Balak rather than the Lord. Twice, he went alone to meet with the Lord before returning to Balak, and twice the Lord put a message into his mouth and he had no choice but to speak what had already been put into his mouth.
Now, at the insistence of Balak, they changed the location of “cursing” and this time, Balaam chose not to do what he did the last two times, that was to go up to meet with God. His intention was clear, he wished to avoid having words put into his mouth by God, so that he could curse as he always intended to (and receive the reward from Balak). However, no one can run away from God’s presence, and God chose to have His Spirit come upon him and made him into a prophet, though a reluctant one.
However, his description of his experience provides us with some insight into such an experience:
- “One whose eye sees clearly…(and) are opened”: the original meaning of the “eye sees clearly” in v. 3 is very debatable. Some translate as “shut” which is just the opposite. However, the translation of “eyes are open” in v. 4 is unanimous. It makes sense to me that, even the holiest of prophets would not be able to see things spiritual unless their eyes were opened by God Himself, let alone a pagan diviner like Balaam. In other words, whatever they saw in their prophetic experience was not of themselves: they saw clearly because God has opened their eyes, and they did not make it up.
- “One who hears the words of God”: They did not seek to interpret what they saw, however clearly. Every word they spoke came from the direct hearing of the words of God. They were only mouth-pieces of God, and they might not necessarily grasp the full meaning of God’s words, but they repeated them just the same.
- “Who sees a vision from the Almighty”: In many of the cases, the prophets also saw visions. As some of these visions might seem mythical and totally out of this world (like the revelations that the Apostle John received in the Island of Patmos), they came directly from the “Almighty”. As a result, no matter how impossible some of these prophecies appeared to be, and no matter how long a period of time has lapsed, they will (and many have) come to pass, because God Almighty is the source of the visions.
- “Who falls prostrate” : Even a diviner like Balaam had no choice, but to fall prostrate before the Lord who showed and/or told him the prophecies.
These words from the mouth of a pagan diviner only serve to distinguish the Bible from all other so-called holy books of other religions. Should we still have any doubt about the trust-worthiness of the Bible, we should heed these words by the Apostle Peter:
“We also have the prophetic message as something completely reliable, and you will do well to pay attention to it, as to a light shining in a dark place, until the day dawns and the morning star rises in your hearts.” (2 Pet. 1:19)
24:10-14—Balak’s Anger
(1) While it was natural for Balak to get angry with Balaam, the question is why Balak didn't kill Balaam. What might be the probable reasons?
(2) If Balaam heard about the fame of the Lord (especially because of the events of Exodus), what might he now know about Him?
24:15-25—Balaam’s Prophesies Against the Nations
(3) Why did Balaam have to repeat how he got the prophecies again in vv. 15-16?
(4) The prophecies against Moab and Edom are most natural as the Israelites are camping in or next to their areas (vv. 17-19):
a. Who will be the one who will crush and conquer these two nations?
b. Why was He likened to a star and a scepter? (See Matt. 2:2 ff; Rev. 22:16; Gen. 49:10)
(5) The prophecies against Amalek and Kenites:
a. In what sense were these nomadic people, the Amalekites, first? (See Exod. 17:8ff)
b. In what sense were these friendly people, the Kenites, secure? (See 10:29ff, Jdg. 1:16 etc.)
c. Who would destroy the Kenites eventually (in fact along with Israel)? (Ashur stands for Assyrian)
(6) The prophecy against Ashur (Assyria ) and Eber (believed to be their neighboring people, unknown to us):
a. Who will subdue Ashur (Assyria)?
b. Why will such a time be so alarming? (v. 23)
(7) What is the overall message of these prophecies against Moab, Edom, Amalek, the Kenites and Ashur etc.?
(8) What is the main message to you today and how may you apply it to your life?
“I see him, but not now; I behold him, but not near. A star will come out of Jacob; a scepter will rise out of Israel.” (Num. 24:17)
As Balaam had finished his business in dealing with the request of Balak to curse Israel, ending with words of blessings concerning Israel each of the three times, he was further given prophetic words concerning several nations in which the appearance of the Messiah was foretold as the “star” and “scepter” which will rise out of Israel (Num. 24:17). However, some scholars wish to interpret this not as a Messianic prophecy, but one that had been fulfilled in David. Allow me to share with you the insight of Timothy Ashley in this respect:
“It has been widely recognized that David’s victories over both Moab and Edom satisfy some of the contents of the oracle (2 Sam. 8:2, 13-14; 1 Ki. 11:15-16), and some scholars want to stop with David. One’s theological convictions as well as critical methods would then determine whether the oracle dates before David’s time or after it. If, however, David fulfilled the requirements here set forth, it was only a temporary fulfillment, since both Moab and Edom regained their independence and were reconquered at several points through Israel’s history. This lack of permanent possession of these enemies led the prophets of Israel to talk about a future conquering of both. Indeed, these two may be thought to represent powers hostile to Yahweh and his people.
“It is only natural that in this process this passage should be interpreted messianically. Already Targ. Onkelos translated star by “the king”…and scepter (v. 17) by “the anointed one”…It is interesting that the messianic pretender of the early or mid-2nd cent. A.D. was called Bar-Kochba, “son of the star” (cf. v. 17). In Rev. 22:16 the risen Jesus calls Himself “the bright and morning star.” The so-called Star of Bethlehem (Matt. 2:2, 7, 9-10) may well have been based on expectation that a literal star would point the way to a scepter (i.e. a ruler, the Messiah). From the early synagogue and church to the present day there have been those who have held that the ultimate reference of this passage is to the Messiah. It is doubtful that this text was originally understood messianically, and whether it can, in isolation from the rest of Scripture, be read in that way. It surely does give some of the first glints of messianic hope, even if only in a highly indirect form, and, when placed in the context of the whole canon of Scripture, some adumbration of the future victory of God such as came to be represented in the Messiah may be seen.” (NICOT, Numbers, 503)
(1) While God had directly intervened to protect the Israelites from the curse of the Midianites and Moabites (through Balaam), how did the Israelites bring curses upon themselves?
(2) Whose idea was it? (See Num. 31:16)
(3) Do you think the Israelites intended to worship the idols of the Moabites from the outset?
(4) What was the first step toward such blatant idol-worship?
(5) What sin does the Bible charge them with?
(6) What does it mean?
(7) Given this incident, how would you understand the admonition of the Apostle Paul in 2 Corinthians 6:14?
(8) It appears that while God had begun inflicting the guilty ones with a plague, He also told Moses to gather the leaders and have them kill the guilty ones and then expose their bodies in broad daylight:
a. What might be the reason the whole assembly was weeping at the entrance of the tent of meeting?
b. How widespread and blatant was this sin as demonstrated by the action of Zimri son of Salu?
c. The action of Phinehas son of Eleazar the high priest:
- How did the Lord commend his action? (v. 11)
- Why did his action bring a stop to the plague? (v. 13)
- What reward did his action bring to him and his descendants?
- Why did God call this a “covenant of peace with him”?
(9) What is the main message to you today and how may you apply it to your life?
“Phinehas son of Eleazar, the son of Aaron, the priest, has turned my anger away from the Israelites. Since he was as zealous for my honor among them as I am, I did not put an end to them in my zeal.” (Num. 25:11)
While the people of Moab and Midian failed to pronounce a curse on the Israelites because of God’s direct intervention, the Israelites were far more capable of putting a curse on themselves. It is inconceivable that with all the miracles they had witnessed in the wilderness in the past 40 years, they would stand ready to worship any other gods. However, as the prophet Hosea says, “Whoredom and wine and new wine take away the heart” (Hos. 4:11, KJV); they started with sexual immorality and ended up “yoking themselves to the Baal Peor” (Num. 25:3).
The extent of their wickedness could be seen both in the blatant action of Zimri, who brought a Moabite woman into his tent in front of a weeping assembly, and the fact that the plague eventually killed 24,000 of those who were guilty of such a sin.
However, God found among the Israelites a person who was as zealous (or jealous) for His honor among them as He was (Num. 25:11). While the other judges (or leaders) appeared to be deliberating on their course of action, Phinehas took action right away. While his action appeared to be harsh, it was not only already commanded by the Lord, he did it as a priest. He understood not only the jealousy of God for His honor, but he also understood the merciful heart of God. His killing of the two offenders amounted to the sacrifice of a sin offering that atoned for the sins of all the people, and the plague stopped right away.
No wonder God made a lasting covenant of peace with him, because in God’s words of commendation, He essentially thanked Phinehas for his action as a result of which, “I did not put an end to them in my zeal” (Num. 25:11). As much as God was angry with His people who turned away from Him to worship idols, He was ready to forgive them once someone offered a sacrifice of intercession.
Cyril
of Jerusalem (ca. 313–386) had this to say about Phinehas’ action:
“If Phinehas when he waxed zealous and slew the evil-doer, stayed the wrath of God, shall not Jesus, who slew not another, but gave up Himself for a ransom (1 Tim. 2:6), put away the wrath which is against mankind?”
(Cath. Lecture, XIII, 2, NPNF, 7, 82)
Although it is a long chapter, the bulk of it (from vv. 5-50) was the census itself of the twelve tribes, plus the census of the Levites (from vv. 57-62).
26:1-4—The Command to take a census: It is helpful to compare this census with the first census in 1:1-4.
(1) What was the difference in timing?
(2) What was the difference in location?
(3) What was the purpose of the two censuses?
(4) What additional purpose was served by this second census according to 26:52-56?
(5) While the criterion for the census appeared to be the same, what was the difference in terms of the actual people counted? (see 26:65)
(6) With Aaron gone, Moses was conducting this census with Aaron’s son, Eleazar: How might Moses feel about this census?
26:5-50—The Census of the Twelve Tribes: While the details of each clan may not be of any importance to us, try to compare the numbers of the first census with the current one:
1st Census 2nd Census
Reuben 46,500 ________
Simeon 59,300 ________
Gad 45,650 ________
Judah 74,600 ________
Issachar 54,400 ________
Zebulun 57,400 ________
Ephraim 40,500 ________
Manasseh 32,200 ________
Benjamin 35,400 ________
Dan 62,700 ________
Asher 41,500 ________
Naphtali 53,400 ________
Total 603,550 ________
(7) Which tribe suffered the greatest loss during the 40 years? What might be the reason? (See Num. 25:14; Gen. 49:5-7)
(8) Which tribe remains the one with the largest number? (See Gen. 49:8-12)
(9) What was the final count compared to the first census? Was there a message from God?
(10) At the first census, the Lord commanded Moses not to count the Levites (Num. 1:49; 2:33). What was the reason, and why did they count the Levites now?
(11) What is the main message to you today and how may you apply it to your life?
“Each inheritance is to be distributed by lot among the larger and smaller groups.” (Num. 26:56)
The added purpose of this second census when they were about to enter the Promised Land at last was for the sake of fair allotment of the land according to the size of their families. However, we may wonder why God chose to use a “lot” to decide their actual allotment. Would it not leave the outcome to “chance”? Allow me to share with you the insight of Procopius of Gaza (ca. 465-528 AD) in this respect:
“A lottery takes place to avoid contention and to assure greater certitude and clarity. The source of the rule is the counsel of God. Devout men do not entrust their affairs to blind chance. This is what Paul means when he says, ‘We have been called to this destiny, predestined according to the mind of Him who moves all things and according to the counsel of His will'. (Eph. 1:11-12) Our use of lots bespeaks grace because by God’s word, it takes place according to faith. The apostles imply the same idea when they say, ‘Lord, knower of hearts, designate the one we should choose from among these two' (Acts 1:24). Thus it is clear that the lot does not happen by chance but by the power of God’s will. So what Scripture now says — whatever the lot designates — it says about God’s choice by lot, not about chance…”
(ACMS, III, 253-4)
The most important point is that “The source of the rule is the counsel of God”, and so we find in the O.T. that every time a lot was taken, it was taken by the direct command of the Lord (e.g. Jos. 7:14ff), without which it would only be presumption on the part of men.
(1) From the words of these women, can we tell how the people of Israel understood the death of their fathers in the desert? (v. 3)
(2) What loopholes did the existing command of the Lord have regarding the distribution of land in Canaan?
(3) How does such a fact speak to the understanding and exercise of the laws of God in the Bible? (See Note below)
(4) Were the women right in approaching Moses with their request? Why or why not?
(5) How Moses handled their request:
a. Did he simply dismiss them because their request appeared to violate the letter of God’s command?
b. Did he consider their request reasonable but not wish to impose his own will on the matter?
(6) What was God’s reply and how does it reveal His character?
(7) Do you have any idea about the law in your country governing “Devolution" (transference of property to another) in case someone dies intestate (i.e. without a will)? In what way was our modern code of law influenced by this command of the Lord in this respect?
(8) What is the main message to you today and how may you apply it to your life?
Note:
The commands of God do not mean to cover every situation, but lay down the overall principle of God’s will.
“What Zelophehad’s daughters are saying is right. You must certainly give them property as an inheritance among their father’s relatives and give their father’s inheritance to them.” (Num. 27:7)
On the face of it, the commands of the Lord concerning the distribution of land contained some loopholes, and one might wonder why God didn’t foresee such a situation faced by the daughters of Zelophehad. Apart from their concern of the “disappearance” of their father’s name from the clan (27:4), they might even face economic hardship in the Promised Land.
The truth of the matter is that the commands of the Lord aim to set out general principles which reflect the character of the Lord. Sometimes, they address specific situations; at other times, they provide general guidelines only. We face very similar situations today. Some have asked, “Where does the Bible teach against gambling?” It is true that the Bible does not mention gambling at all, but it does teach against greed and the desire to get rich quickly (Prov. 15:27; 28:20,22; 1 Tim. 6:9-11). It also teaches us to be good stewards of what God has entrusted to us (1 Pet. 4:10). These teachings obviously provide us with a very sound principle in judging whether gambling is right or wrong.
In the case of these women, it was not so much that God had overlooked their situation, but that God afforded them the opportunity to come to understand not only His fairness, but His care in a personal way. To have God say to them, “you are right”, must been very touching indeed.
Given the customs of the Ancient Near East, “One should not infer that daughters always inherited, or even normally inherited” (NICOT, Numbers, 53). As it turned out, the Lord used the opportunity to give even more comprehensive instructions concerning inheritance, the principle of which can be seen in the Estate Law of Devolution in many civilized countries today.
(1) Why did God choose to remind Moses of his sin? (v. 14)
(2) What was God’s verdict on his action with Aaron?
(3) What is the lesson to you?
(4) What was Moses’ main concern at this time and why? (v. 16-17)
(5) Why did he call the Lord, “the God who gives breath to all living things,” which he once used in 16:22?
(6) Did he make any suggestion about his successor? Why or why not?
(7) Why did the Lord choose Joshua? What qualified him as the next leader to take Moses’ place? (v. 18)
(8) What might be some of Moses’ authority not transferred to Joshua? (12:6-8)
(9) Why was it the case?
(10) What is the main message to you today and how may you apply it to your life?
“May the LORD, the God who gives breath to all living things, appoint someone over this community to go out and come in before them, one who will lead them out and bring them in, so the LORD’s people will not be like sheep without a shepherd.” (Num. 27:16-17)
As Moses’ life was drawing to a close, the Lord reminded him of the sin he and Aaron committed that would lead to his death in the wilderness and the loss of privilege of setting his feet on the Promised Land. This must be the greatest regret in Moses’ life.
However, instead of feeling sorry for himself, Moses’ focus at this time was not the prolonging of his life (as Hezekiah did in Isa. 38:3) or the begging of God to change His mind, but rather his flock, the people of Israel. He was concerned that they would be like sheep without a shepherd. And so he begged the Lord to appoint someone as his replacement.
However, in so asking, he addressed the Lord as “the God who gives breath to all living things”, an address which he also used when faced with the rebellion of Korah and company (16:22). In other words, as he asked God to appoint another leader for the people, he was acutely aware of how rebellious these people were and how tough a job his successor would have. But by so addressing God, he knew that ultimately, the God who gives breath is the true shepherd; He would not just lead the people into the Promised Land, but would also sustain and guide them.
It is such a precious reminder to all of us that as servants of the Lord, our focus should never be on ourselves, not even on our successes or failures, but on the flock, and that we should never fail to pray for the flock that they will not be “like sheep without a shepherd”.