Only to the tribe of Levi he gave no inheritance the offerings by fire of Jehovah the God of Israel are their inheritance, as he said to them.
Joshua is dividing the land, and one tribe is left off the map. Levi, the tribe given to the work of the Lord, gets no territory. Instead God names Himself, and the offerings made to Him, as the tribe's inheritance. Is that a loss, or the best portion of all?
This was not an oversight. It rested on a standing command, and what replaced the land had two sides.
Let us now consider the portion of the tribe of Levi (Joshua 13:14, 33). The Lord had commanded that neither Aaron (Num. 18:20), nor the priests, nor anyone from the tribe of Levi could have any inheritance in Israel. Their inheritance was, on the one hand, "the LORD God of Israel," and on the other, "the offerings by fire to the LORD God of Israel." It is the same for us. We have no portion on earth. Our privilege is to stand before God and serve Him — and more than that, to possess Him and have communion with Him. But our portion in the Son is also "the offerings by fire to the LORD." That is to say, Christ in all the perfection of His work and His Person before God. He is the perfect Man, the cake of fine flour anointed with oil and covered with frankincense. He is the victim: the burnt offering and the sacrifice for sin. He is everything in which God finds His eternal delight.
Every other tribe could point to a border on a map. Levi's inheritance went with him instead.
Levi was "scattered in Israel," just as Jacob's prophecy said. But Levi's portion was the most sacred and the most precious of all. Levi lived wherever the other tribes lived. Wherever devout people in Israel worshipped the Lord, there Levi had his inheritance. The Lord — not a place in the land — was Levi's lot… And so the happiest and richest Christians are those who find their portion in the Lord Himself.
Levi was spread through the tribes instead of settling in one block. That began as punishment for his ancestor's violence. It did not end there.
His name means "joined," and it fits the history of the tribe. Their first father joined Simeon in deeds of violence. The punishment for that was the sentence, "I will divide them in Jacob and scatter them in Israel." But in the end it turns out to be true blessing. The sentence fell on Levi more fully than on Simeon, and that only made Levi more blessed. He is joined to the Lord, and the Lord becomes his portion. If he is scattered in Israel, he is scattered like spiritual seed, to bear fruit for God all over the land.
Christ walked this path first. The Psalms give Him the same words about God as His portion.
Christ Himself is our example. He is the Levite without spot, the perfect Servant, and He passed through the same blessed experiences on His path here. When He looks towards the earth, He says: "The LORD is my chosen portion and my cup." When He looks upward He adds: "The lines have fallen for me in pleasant places; indeed, I have a beautiful inheritance." (Ps. 16:5-6)
Levi's inheritance had two halves, and they did not hold up the same way. No enemy could touch one. The other rose and fell with the nation.
In one sense, no one could attack Levi's portion — neither the people living in the land nor a foreign enemy… Yet in another sense, Levi would suffer first in the day of Israel's trouble. The sacrifices of Israel were Levi's portion, and these would stop when the enemy held Israel captive. And so it is with those nearest to Christ. They rejoice in a portion that can never be removed and never changes. Yet they are the first to feel, in all its sharpness, the spiritual poverty of God's people or their affliction by the enemy.
Levi had no fields of his own. That placed a duty on the tribes that did.
Joshua 13:14 emphasises the principle. God divided the land of Canaan among all the tribes except Levi… But Levi received no such portion, because they gave all their time to the work of the Lord. They had no time to develop land or farm it. So God arranged for the other tribes, who had received possessions, to share with Levi what He had given them.
- Portion. God commanded that Levi receive no land. He said instead that He Himself, and the offerings made to Him, were the tribe's inheritance.
- Christ. Those offerings picture Christ, perfect in Person and in work. He is everything in which God finds His eternal delight.
- Person. Levi's inheritance was the Lord, not a place. So it was his wherever he lived and wherever people worshipped.
- Reversal. The scattering began as punishment for his ancestor's violence. It ended as the way blessing spread across the whole land.
- Cost. No enemy could touch half of Levi's portion. The other half dried up when the nation failed. So those nearest to God feel His people's poverty first, and the tribes with fields had to share with the tribe that had none.
And Moses gave [a portion] to the tribe of the children of Reuben according to their families.
This verse opens the tribe-by-tribe record of the land. It starts with Reuben, whose portion Moses handed out east of the Jordan, before Israel ever crossed. Two questions follow: why Moses and not Joshua, and why this tribe's home lay outside the land Israel had just entered.
One writer marks the difference between the two sides of the river, and what the lot showed:
The first section gives the inheritance of the tribes by lot. The casting of the lot belongs to the division on the west side of the Jordan; on the east side, as noted elsewhere, there was no lot. By the lot God made His mind known more plainly than in any other way: "its every decision is from the LORD," as Scripture itself says.
The difference was not only in method. Different men handed out the land west of the Jordan:
Here the order is not the natural one at all. Reuben, Gad and the half-tribe of Manasseh, having chosen their part beyond the Jordan, are left out. Until now Moses was the only leader in view. He gives place to Eleazar (the priesthood) and to Joshua (Christ in the Spirit), who lead the people and mark out their inheritance.
Reuben's borders ran from Moab up to the edge of Gad:
The land of Reuben on the south bordered Moab. On the west of it was the Dead Sea, and a little further north the River Jordan. The north border was the south border of Gad. Heshbon is the farthest north city named in Reuben's territory. The east border is not so clear, perhaps because of the desert that way. But Reuben inherited all the kingdom of Sihon king of the Amorites.
These tribes asked for their portion east of the river. One writer sees the same choice in Christians whose faith is real but fixed on this life:
It is the same with many Christians. Indeed, one might say that today it is the nine and a half tribes who have chosen their home on the other side of the Jordan. For them the main thing in the Christian life is the circumstances of this life: the everyday needs, plenty or want, pens for their cattle, or cities for their families. And these Christians are not really lacking in faith. On the contrary, they find that the Lord can enter in grace into all their circumstances... Theirs is not a worldly Christianity, but an earthly one.
Where they lived carried a cost, and it showed later in Israel's history:
We can also see the Jordan as the boundary of the promised land. So the two and a half tribes who stayed east of the Jordan stopped short of their privileges. They picture many Christians who do not take in faith the heavenly portion, through death and resurrection, that God intends for them. That leaves them more open to the attacks of the enemy, as it did the two and a half tribes, who were the first to be carried into captivity.
Yet stopping short is not the last word:
Some saints do stop short of their proper blessing; but God's mind is that all His people should enter in.
Reuben's portion was not stolen ground, even though it lay east of the river:
So the land of Israel's inheritance lay on both sides of the Jordan, as God had settled beforehand. Yet it does not appear that He meant any of them to live east of that river. The tribes who asked for their portion there did get it... This is a picture of the full inheritance of the heavenly saints, which takes in heaven and earth... for the Jordan stands for death.
- Choice. Reuben asked for this portion instead of receiving it by lot. The tribes who wanted land east of the Jordan got it.
- Concession. So Moses handed them their share before the crossing. They got no lot — and the lot was how God made His mind plain west of the river.
- Boundary. Their ground was real and God-given, all of Sihon's kingdom, bordering Moab — but it lay outside the land Israel entered.
- Cost. Life outside the boundary had a price. They stopped short of their privileges, lay more open to the enemy, and went into captivity first.
- Invitation. Faith aimed only at daily needs is still faith. But God's mind is that all His people come in. The portion Reuben passed by is still held out.
And their territory was from Aroer, which is on the bank of the river Arnon, and the city that is in the midst of the ravine, and all the plateau by Medeba;
This verse begins the list of Reuben's inheritance: a strip of land east of the Jordan, from the edge of the Arnon gorge across the high plain by Medeba. Three questions follow: where the land came from, why a tribe of Israel settled outside Canaan, and what these place names still teach.
Reuben's share lay at the southern edge of Israel's land, right up against Moab.
The land of Reuben on the south bordered Moab. On the west of it was the Dead Sea, and a little further north the River Jordan. The north border was the south border of Gad. Heshbon is the farthest north city mentioned in Reuben's territory. The east border is not as clear, perhaps because of the desert toward the east. But Reuben inherited the whole kingdom of Sihon king of the Amorites (v. 21).
Two places in the verse fix that southern line. Aroer was a
Moabite city on the north bank of the Arnon.
The Arnon itself is no gentle stream.
A ravine or valley with its mountain torrent, which formed the border between Moab and Ammon, now known as Wady Mojib… Its stream runs nearly east and west, rushes through a deep ravine, and falls into the Dead Sea.
So Reuben held land that Moab once owned. Israel never took it from Moab, though. It came to them through a war the Amorite king began.
Israel offered to pass through the land of the Amorites on the king's highway, without drinking the water of the well. Sihon their king refused. He gathered all his people together and fought against Israel (Num. 21:21-23). This was the undoing of Sihon and his people… Heshbon, the city of Sihon, once belonged to Moab, but Israel did not take it from Moab but from the Amorites. About three hundred years later, the king of the Ammonites claimed that land as Ammon's, though Israel had taken it from Sihon, king of the Amorites. Jephthah answered him with this very fact (Judges 11:12-27).
West of the Jordan, the lot decided each tribe's share. Reuben's share came another way.
The first section gives the inheritance of the tribes by lot. Casting the lot marked the dividing of the land on the west side of Jordan; the dividing on the east side, as noted elsewhere, was without it. The lot clearly showed the mind of God, and showed it more plainly than any other way could: every decision of the lot is from the Lord, as the voice of inspiration itself says. (Prov. 16:33.)
Reuben chose this side of the river. Commentators see the choice as a settling for less.
The inheritance of the two and a half tribes on the east side of Jordan gives us something serious to think about. Note that the tribes of Reuben and his companion, Gad, choose their inheritance on the east side of Jordan. Reuben had lost his rights as firstborn, and so he suggests a falling short of the full purposes of God in the calling of His people… Notice that it is the cattle of the two tribes that keeps them east of Jordan, on the wilderness side; we might say, right on the border of the world. How often do business and earthly interests keep the children of God from entering fully and in practice into their heavenly calling!
Commentators differ on how far to press this. Another writer points out that God had marked out land on both sides of the river for Israel:
So the land of Israel's inheritance lay on both sides of the Jordan, just as God had settled beforehand. Yet it does not appear that He meant any of them to live east of that river… In days to come all the tribes will live west of Jordan (Ezek. 47:15-20; 48), yet they will have the territory east of it as well.
The names themselves carry lessons. One writer takes each marker in the verse and reads its meaning.
The first portion also begins with a boundary-line, the line of Moab. There Aroer (which means "laid bare") shows us accepting God's estimate of any merely human trust. That, on the one side, is the secret of the independence of faith. Then we have a nameless "city by the brook." In such a setting this may speak of busy work that is content to be unknown to people. And the upland by Medeba ("quiet waters")… shows that only the power and nourishment of the Spirit keep each person's own character alive.
- Border. Reuben's country ran along Moab's edge. It reached from Aroer on the north bank of the Arnon ravine up to Heshbon, with the Dead Sea to the west.
- Conquest. Moab owned this land long before. But Israel took it from Sihon the Amorite, and Jephthah still used that difference in argument three hundred years later.
- Choice. The lot gave the western tribes their share, and every decision of the lot is the Lord's. The eastern tribes got theirs without it.
- Cattle. Reuben settled here because of his cattle. Business and daily interests can still stop a believer short of his full calling.
- Grace. Even so, the land east of Jordan lies inside the inheritance God marked out. Its names — "laid bare," "quiet waters" — still teach faith.
Heshbon, and all her cities that are in the plateau, Dibon, and Bamoth-Baal, and Beth-Baal-meon,
Joshua 13 is a land register. Much of Canaan is still unconquered, and the record turns back to the ground Moses had already handed out east of the Jordan. Verse 17 lists Reuben's share around Heshbon. Two of the four names in it carry the name of the idol Baal.
Heshbon was not a Hebrew town. It was the seat of an Amorite king. He refused Israel safe passage, and the city became the first major one they took.
Chief city of Sihon king of the Amorites. Lying on the east of the Jordan, it was the first city of importance that fell into the hands of the Israelites. The cause of their attacking it was that Sihon refused to let them pass through his land. Scripture mentions this first conquest often. Heshbon later went to Reuben, but became a city of the Levites, connected with Gad.
Heshbon stands at the northern limit of Reuben's map.
The land of Reuben on the south adjoined Moab. On the west of it was the Dead Sea and a little further north the River Jordan. The north border was the south border of Gad. Heshbon is the farthest north city mentioned in Reuben's territory. The east border is not so clear, perhaps because of desert toward the east. But Reuben inherited all the kingdom of Sihon king of the Amorites (v. 21).
Reuben's ground east of the river came from a request. Two and a half tribes asked Moses to settle them there because the grazing suited their herds. Commentators treat that choice as a loss.
Their promise to cross the Jordan, armed and ready, ahead of their brothers, drew from Moses a sort of agreement. It seemed an extraordinary display of unselfishness and energy. They would leave all their loved ones behind and cross the Jordan, only to fight for their brothers. But where had they left those loved ones? They had left them short of the divine mark. They had deprived them of a place and a portion in the true land of promise — that inheritance of which God had spoken to Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob. And for what? Just to get good pasture for their cattle.
One writer traces the steps from that choice to a split:
These tribes began in the spirit of doing what suited them. To that they added self-will, and to self-will division — "We will not inherit with them." To carry out their purpose they were ready to split Israel apart. "We," and "them," said they of the Lord's one undivided family.
Two of these towns carry Baal's name in their titles. Israel did not leave them that way, as a dictionary entry on Beth-baal-meon shows:
A city of Reuben on the east of the Jordan. It is apparently also called Baal-meon, Beth-baal-meon, and Beon (Joshua 13:17; Num. 32:3; Num. 32:38, which says 'their names being changed').
One writer reads these names as a picture of what faith does with ground once held by idols:
Dibon, "sufficiency of knowledge," or "discernment," shows first that the kingdom of God in the soul is by the truth. This is, indeed, its complete and moral supremacy. All error disappears. Bamoth-Baal, the "heights" where men worship their idols, falls in this way into the hands of faith. So does Beth-baal-meon, the "house of the Baal of the dwelling," the home of idolatry in the house and heart.
The same writer presses the meaning of Heshbon itself. The name is tied to reasoning, and the city changing hands becomes a picture of what faith does with reason.
"Heshbon" means "the reason, cause, or ground of a thing as an object of thought or study." … Sihon cannot hold Heshbon against Reuben, even though Moab may have had to give the city up to Sihon. In the same way, reason is not alien to faith. Faith destroys reason only in its alien form, and builds it up again more securely.
The verse sets these cities "in the tableland," and the same writer describes that ground:
The "tableland by Medeba" ("quiet waters") describes Reuben's inheritance as a whole: a green upland pasture — "green pastures" and "quiet waters"!
It is the pasture they asked for, now written into the record of their inheritance.
The list reads like a permanent record. Heshbon's later history says otherwise.
After the captivity it fell into the hands of the Moabites, and the prophets denounce it (Isa. 15:4; Jer. 48:2, 34, 45). Identified with Hesban… There are extensive ruins showing its former strength as a fortified city.
- Choice. Reuben's towns sit east of the Jordan because the tribes asked for pasture there. It was a portion short of the promised land.
- Conquest. They held won ground. Heshbon was Sihon's capital, the first major city Israel ever took.
- Cleansing. Bamoth-baal and Beth-baal-meon came with idol names attached. The record notes that Israel changed those names.
- Construction. Heshbon's name points to reasoning. Faith does not throw reason away; it breaks reason down in its alien form and builds it up again.
- Collapse. The ground did not stay theirs. Heshbon fell back to Moab, and its ruins stand under the prophets' judgment.
And Jahzah, and Kedemoth, and Mephaath,
Joshua 13:18 is three bare place names inside the list of towns given to Reuben on the east side of the Jordan. Yet commentators find in these three names both a record of how Israel won the ground and a picture of the Christian's fight of faith.
These towns lay outside the land Israel was heading for. One writer sets out Reuben's borders:
The land of Reuben on the south bordered Moab. On the west of it was the Dead Sea and a little further north the River Jordan. The north border was the south border of Gad. Heshbon is the farthest north city mentioned in Reuben's territory. The east border is less clear, perhaps because of desert toward the east. Still, Reuben inherited all the kingdom of Sihon king of the Amorites (v. 21).
The first of the three names carries its own history. A reference work traces it from battlefield to inheritance to sacred use:
A place east of the Jordan where Israel defeated Sihon king of the Amorites. It was given to Reuben, but later became a Levitical city. The site has not been identified.
Israel did not grab this ground. Sihon, the Amorite king who held the region, attacked them first:
Israel kept to the path of what was right and courteous. Sihon rushed at them, to his own ruin. Only in that way did Israel strike down the king of Heshbon and take his land.
Read for their meanings, the three names — Jahaz (spelled Jahzah below), Kedemoth and Mephaath — describe a fight rather than a quiet estate:
But so far only faith recognizes the kingdom, and so the kingdom is in conflict in the world. Jahzah, "treading down," was Israel's battlefield with Sihon. The name implies other fields trodden by the feet of fighters. Kedemoth speaks of "confronting" armies. Mephaath, "shining," may hint at what, in the Lord's eyes, is the brightness of this "good fight of faith."
These names appear again later, among the towns Reuben handed to the Levites, the tribe set apart to serve God. Commenting there, the same writer takes Mephaath forward to the end of the whole story:
Mephaath, "shining forth," speaks of the goal that faith has in front of it: "the appearing of the glory of our great God and Savior Jesus Christ." That day is also tied to the weighing up of the responsibility of disciples, and to the rewards of grace.
He also counts the obstacles in the believer's way as part of what the believer owns:
Kedemoth speaks of "things that confront" him. Yet these too are among his possessions. They are the things that exercise and mature his faith. They are "for" him, just as all things are for the one who loves God — working together for good.
Every town named here lies east of the Jordan. Reuben, Gad and half of Manasseh chose to settle short of the river, and one writer weighs what that choice cost:
"Do not take us across the Jordan" had been the firm decision of the two and a half tribes, whom God had enriched so richly on their way to the promised land. They preferred to sit down and enjoy their riches rather than press on to the inheritance. Convenience guided them, not faith. The cities of Gilead attracted them more than the soldiers' tents across the Jordan. Settling down, whatever form it takes, is a sad thing. Faith inherits further on and ahead, close to God.
Yet the verdict is not all bad. Another writer holds both sides together:
The settling of the two and a half tribes on the other side of the Jordan led to difficulties and suspicions. Still, these tribes were faithful at heart. Their position had harmed them, and their self-seeking had partly weakened the energy of their faith. Even so, they were faithful to Jehovah.
- Ground won. Jahaz was the field where Sihon fell. Israel kept to what was right; Sihon attacked and lost his kingdom.
- Ground contested. The names spell conflict: treading down, confronting armies. Faith owns the kingdom while the fight still goes on in this world.
- Ground that trains you. The things that confront you still belong to you. They exercise and mature your faith.
- Ground that shines. Mephaath, "shining forth," points faith to its goal: the appearing of the glory of our great God and Savior Jesus Christ, with the rewards of grace.
- Ground too soon settled. All of it lay short of the Jordan, chosen for convenience, not faith. Such a position does real harm, even to people who stay faithful at heart.
and Kirjathaim, and Sibmah, and Zereth-shahar in the mountain of the vale,
Three towns fall to the tribe of Reuben here, east of the Jordan river. The list looks like dry surveying, but it raises two real questions. What was this borderland? And was it the portion God meant His people to hold?
This ground had changed hands before Israel arrived, and it sat right on Moab's border.
Reuben finds his portion in what was Sihon's kingdom, in the southern half of it, close to Moab. As we know, the land had belonged to Moab, and Moab lost it to Sihon. All this has to do with the meaning of what is before us.
Sibmah is remembered for one thing in particular, and later Scriptures name it again.
City of Reuben on the east of the Jordan, famous for its vines. Joshua 13:19; Isa. 16:8-9; Jer. 48:32. It is called Shebam in Num. 32:3, and Shibmah in Num. 32:38. Identified by some with Sumia, where there are ancient rock-cut wine presses.
Each name carries a meaning, and read in order they move from unity to sweetness to light.
Kirjathaim, "double city," may point to energy gathered up, and to different capacities joined into one. That is the fitting together which comes from the drill and discipline of war. Sibmah, if we translate it "fragrance," may speak of sweetness spreading out. That is the service we render others without realising it, and it is the fruit of personal character. And Zereth-shahar, "the brightness of dawn," is seen from the "mount within the valley." The low place may bring you to a high one, and from there you look ahead to that sure coming day. It already lights up the clouds of night for us, thank God.
These towns fall to Reuben, and his name itself carries a history of ruin and recovery.
Reuben ("see a son") stands for man as the offspring of God by creation. God gave him an intelligent will, and in that will lies the natural image of God. But the will has fallen, and it has broken out in self-will and corruption. Humbled and restored by grace, it becomes the will that depends on God and clings to Him — the will of that faith by which alone we are truly sons... God is over it all, and He has other lessons for us in it than the lesson of failure.
Kiriathaim had been a Moabite town, and its appeal is easy to see.
Moab has a Kiriathaim, "a walled double city." It combines security with the company he loves, which is so favourable for polish and practical activity. These things stand for principles which men still glory in. They come so near to what is true and right that Reuben, the typical child of God, takes them up and makes them his own — with, no doubt, the same kind of transformation in them that faith brings him into (Joshua 13:17-20).
Commentators weigh this eastern settlement differently. One traces lessons of faith in the names; another asks only where God had placed the inheritance.
Reuben, Gad and the half tribe of Manasseh chose a boundary line short of the river Jordan. It was a mistake, a failure, a stopping short of the divine mark. Worldly and selfish thinking governed their conduct — the sight of their eyes, and motives of the flesh... If they had been looking to God, no one would ever have raised the question of settling down short of the river Jordan.
The later record bears this out. The towns listed here did not stay in Reubenite hands.
The Reubenites, with the other tribes east of the Jordan, went after the gods of the nations around them, and the Lord cut them short by Hazael of Syria. Later, Pul and Tiglath-pileser carried them away captive to Halah, Habor, Hara, and to the river Gozan.
A list of towns is a list of things a people can lose. The safeguard is not a tighter grip on the property.
Let the Lord Himself fill the heart, and you will gain the possessions. But where possessions are the object and not the Lord, the soul goes dry and unprofitable. And the hard, unprofitable soul soon loses its conscious grip on what it owns.
- Border. The three towns sat in Sihon's former kingdom, land that had once been Moab's and still lay on Moab's border.
- Names. Kiriathaim speaks of capacities fitted together. Sibmah speaks of fragrance that spreads without knowing it. Zereth-shahar speaks of dawn, seen from a height the valley led you to.
- Transformation. What Moab gloried in — security, walls, good company — came near enough to what is right that faith could take it up and change it.
- Boundary. One commentator calls any line short of the Jordan a stopping short of the divine mark, a choice made by sight.
- Grip. Reuben lost these towns in the end, cut short by Syria and carried off captive. You keep the portion only while the Lord Himself, not the portion, fills the heart.
and Beth-Peor, and the slopes of Pisgah, and Beth-jeshimoth;
Reuben's boundary list ends with three names, and each one carries a memory into this record of God's gift. One marks Israel's worst fall, one is the height where Moses saw the land he could not enter, and one means "house of the wastes."
Reuben's land lay on the near side of the river — the wilderness side. One writer asks whether that was ever the portion God meant them to have.
Where was Israel's proper portion — the inheritance God had destined for them? Surely on the other side of Jordan, in the land of Canaan. Should that fact not have been enough? Take a true heart — a heart that thought, felt, and judged with God. Would it ever consider choosing a portion other than the one God had allotted and given? Impossible... For Reuben and Gad, and the half tribe of Manasseh, to choose any boundary line short of the river Jordan was a mistake, a failure, a stopping short of the divine mark. Worldly and selfish thinking governed their conduct — the sight of their eyes.
The names can also be read for what they mean. Two of them yield a clear sense; the third one writer leaves open.
Beth-peor is doubtful as to its meaning. Pisgah must speak of faith's "survey" of the future inheritance. Beth-jeshimoth, the "house of the wastes," must speak of provision for the wilderness. These together imply God's sovereignty over the future and the present. Does Beth-peor complete this by showing Him sovereign over what led us captive in the past? This we must leave as only a question.
The name belonged to Moab first, and the place is tied to the end of Moses' life.
A city of Moab, east of the Jordan, near which, in the valley, Israel made one of their last camps, Deut. 3:29; Deut. 4:46; and near which the Lord buried Moses. It was allotted to Reuben. Deut. 34:6; Joshua 13:20.
The same neighbourhood carries a far darker memory.
Peor is where Balaam was called to curse Israel. There the people were trapped into sacrificing to the gods of Moab, eating things sacrificed to their idols, and committing sexual sin. So Israel joined himself to Baal-peor. He had full fellowship with its demon worship and with the uncleanness that went with it. Num. 23:28; Num. 25:1-5, 18; Deut. 4:3; Ps. 106:28; Hosea 9:10.
At Pisgah, Moses was shut out of the land and shown it at the same time. Two things stand together here: God's government and God's love.
Moses (Deut. 34) goes up to the top of Pisgah, and there Jehovah points out to him the land in detail. To pass over the fault of Moses would have weakened the authority of law. There was righteousness in the ways of God. But this did not in the smallest degree hinder the perfectness of His love to Moses. It was part of His government to chasten his fault. His grace to Moses remained entire. The ways of God did not allow Moses to enter the land. But suppose he had entered it. What grief it would have been to Moses to see the unfaithfulness of His people, their slighting of His law, their imperfect conquest of the enemy, their readiness to turn back to wickedness and idolatry even in that land! Can this be compared with the blessedness of looking down on it from beside Jehovah? He did not see it in the hands of man, imperfectly rescued from the Canaanites. He saw God Himself already calling it the land of this tribe and of that, turning His servant's heart to the time when no Canaanite would be in the land.
Beth-jeshimoth was Moab's before it was Reuben's, and its name says what Moab valued.
As noted here in particular, he has a Beth-jeshimoth ("a house of the wastes") to redeem the wastes... These things stand for principles that men still glory in. They come so near to what is true and right that we find them taken up and adopted by Reuben, who pictures the child of God. No doubt these principles are transformed in the same way that faith transforms him.
- Choice. Reuben's border stopped short of the Jordan. One writer calls that a failure — a portion picked by the sight of the eyes, not received where God had allotted it.
- Past. Beth-peor stands near where Israel joined itself to Baal-peor. The ground of that shame now appears on the list of God's gift to Reuben.
- Prospect. Pisgah is faith's survey of the inheritance. Law shut Moses out of the land; love let him see it from beside the Lord.
- Waste. Beth-jeshimoth means "house of the wastes." One writer reads it as God's provision in the wilderness — His hand over the present, as Pisgah is over the future.
- Redemption. What Moab gloried in, faith takes over and transforms. One writer presses each name for its meaning, and leaves Beth-peor as an open question.
all the cities of the plateau, and the whole kingdom of Sihon the king of the Amorites, who reigned at Heshbon, whom Moses smote, him and the princes of Midian, Evi, and Rekem, and Zur, and Hur, and Reba, the chiefs of Sihon dwelling in the land.
This verse closes the list of Reuben's inheritance by naming what the land used to be: the kingdom of Sihon, king of the Amorites. It reads like a title deed written over a battlefield, and it raises two questions: how did land won by war become a settled gift, and why does it lie east of the Jordan?
Israel did not go looking for this war. One writer asks what methods God gave Israel for dealing with such a king.
In this case let us look at the principles of the LORD's discipline. Did He allow Israel to force Sihon with threats of vengeance, or to win him over by flattery? Did He offer him the book of the law with one hand and the sword with the other? Nothing of the sort… Israel kept the path of right and courtesy. Sihon rushed at them to his own ruin. Only in that way did Israel strike down the king of Heshbon and take his land.
Heshbon may have passed from Moab to the Amorite before Israel arrived. Now the Amorite loses it to Reuben. One writer finds meaning in the names themselves.
"Heshbon" means "the reason, cause, or ground of a thing as an object of thought or study." Older English Bibles translate the same word as "device" and "reason." Sihon cannot hold Heshbon against Reuben, although Moab may have had to give it up to Sihon. In the same way, reason is not alien to faith. Faith destroys reason only in its alien form, and then builds it up again more securely… Then the tableland by Medeba ("quiet waters") describes Reuben's inheritance as a whole: a green upland pasture — "green pastures" and "quiet waters"!
The verse names five Midianite princes who lived in Sihon's land. One writer recounts how they fell in Israel's war against Midian.
Twelve thousand went out to war. Twelve thousand returned victorious. Israel lost not one man, though they killed the five kings of Midian — Evi, Rekem, Zur, Hur and Reba — and every Midianite as well.
The verse does not only mark out borders; it names the men who fell. One writer sees a pattern in Midian's defeat.
In the conquest of the Midianites we have a foreshadow of the victories in Canaan. It also hints at the judgment that will fall on all who corrupt the people of God, as well as on His open enemies. Phinehas, who had carried out judgment before, is the fitting leader of the avenging army here.
So the record of Reuben's land carries a warning: God judges the enemy who corrupts His people as surely as the enemy who attacks them.
All the land in this verse lies east of the Jordan. Two and a half tribes settled there instead of crossing over, and one writer reads their choice as a loss.
We may also see the Jordan as the boundary of the promised land. If so, the two and a half tribes who stayed on its east side stopped short of their privileges. They picture many Christians who do not accept in faith the heavenly portion God intends for them, reached through death and resurrection. So they lie more open to the enemy's attacks — as those two and a half tribes did, for they were the first to be carried away into captivity.
Yet the chapter does not read like a rebuke. Scripture still lists Reuben's portion city by city. One writer explains what Reuben stands for, and why failure is not the last word.
Reuben ("see a son") represents man as God's offspring by creation. God gave him an intelligent will, and in that will lies the natural image of God. But in fallen man that will has broken out in self-will and corruption. Humbled and restored by grace, it becomes a will that depends on God and clings to Him — the will of faith, by which alone we are truly sons. We must look at Reuben in this light here, even forgetting, as we may believe, the failure that showed itself when he chose his own inheritance where we now find him. God is over it all, and He has other lessons for us in it than failure.
- Provoked — Israel only asked to pass through. Sihon attacked, and the attack cost him his kingdom.
- Purged — the five princes of Midian fell with him. Their fall points to God's judgment on those who corrupt His people, not just on those who attack in the open.
- Possessed — Reuben received Heshbon and the tableland by Medeba. Enemy ground became green pasture and quiet waters.
- Premature — all of it lies east of the Jordan. The tribes who settled there stopped short of their privileges, and they were the first taken captive.
- Preserved — God is over it all. He still records this inheritance in full, so it teaches more than failure.
And Balaam the son of Beor, the diviner, did the children of Israel kill with the sword among them that were slain by them.
The land survey east of the Jordan runs through towns and kings, then pauses on one name: Balaam, killed with the sword among the slain. Why does a foreign prophet's death belong in a record of Israel's inheritance? And what does his end say about the man who once asked to die like the righteous?
The name sits inside Reuben's share of the land. One writer ties it to that place, and to Balaam's later plot against Israel.
The record notes here, because Reuben is so close to Moab, that the people of Israel killed Balaam the soothsayer. Balak had hired him to curse Israel. Balaam then advised Balak to have his people mix with Israel to corrupt them (Num. 31:16).
That short note carries a verdict.
There were smaller conquests as they took possession, and the record notes the killing of Balaam the soothsayer: God's judgment had reached the wicked man.
The verse marks him out by his trade. That trade sets him apart from every other man whose words fill the Bible.
All the writers of the sixty-six books of the Bible were servants of the Lord. They were holy men of God, clean vessels for the Holy Spirit to use. Balaam is a sharp contrast. He was an idolater and, as we read in Joshua 13:22, a "soothsayer," or "diviner" — in other words, a spiritist. Scripture shows the clear link between idolatry and spiritism.
The same trade explains how Balak approached him in the first place.
Balak's messengers went to Mesopotamia "with the fees for divination in their hand" (Num. 22:7). Balak knew that the false prophet "loved gain from wrongdoing" (2 Peter 2:15), so he made sure of him by sending cash in advance. But the treacherous deceiver brought the Lord's name into the matter. He put the messengers up for the night, pretending to seek the mind of God.
Balaam once wished for the end that the righteous have. Where he died answers that wish.
"Let me die the death of the upright, and let my end be like his": the life of the righteous had no attraction for him ("he loved gain from wrongdoing"). Had it been in his power, he would have sent millions to destruction. The Holy Spirit records his end. Balaam died with the five kings of Midian when they fell in battle (Num. 31:8). He was a long way from home at that tragic moment. But death found him among the lifelong enemies of God's people, still seeking Israel's harm.
(Older Bibles read "the death of the righteous." The writers here follow that wording.)
Many people share that wish. One writer asks how much hope it holds.
So many are like Balaam. They live unrighteous lives, yet they want to die the death of the righteous. Where there is ignorance, God may step in and save unrighteous men at the close of their lives, as with the thief on the cross. But there is little hope for those who choose to live unrighteous lives and then want to escape the judgment their evil lives have earned.
He had already met a drawn sword once, in the hand of the angel who blocked his road to Moab.
The angel that confronted him held a drawn sword in his hand. You would think he could hardly miss what this meant, since the sword blocked his way. Yet Balaam was clearly blind to its meaning, and he went on to his doom, as the end proved. He never returned to his native land. The wealth and honour, if he ever got them, he never lived to enjoy. He fell by the sword — not the sword of the angel who first barred his way to Moab, but the sword of the very people he tried to curse, in defiance of God's purpose.
Balaam's story does not stay in the Old Testament. Three New Testament passages return to him.
Peter writes of people who have "forsaken the right way" and "gone astray," following "the way of Balaam" (2 Peter 2:15). Jude writes of those who "abandoned themselves for the sake of gain to Balaam's error" (Jude 11). And the Lord Jesus, speaking to the church in Pergamum, says, "I have a few things against you: you have some there who hold the teaching of Balaam, who taught Balak to put a stumbling block before the sons of Israel."
- Wages. Balak paid cash in advance, because Balaam loved gain from wrongdoing. He covered the deal with God's name.
- Words. When his curse failed, he sold Balak a scheme: corrupt Israel by mixing with them.
- Wish. He asked for the death of the upright while refusing the life of the upright. His own end denied him that.
- Sword. He never went home and never enjoyed the reward; he fell among Midian's kings, killed by the nation he tried to ruin.
- Warning. Scripture keeps him on record as a way, an error and a teaching to avoid. This verse is where God's judgment caught up with him.
And the border of the children of Reuben was the Jordan, and [its] border. This is the inheritance of the children of Reuben according to their families, the cities and their hamlets.
Joshua 13 ends Reuben's inheritance at the Jordan, the river the rest of Israel crossed to reach their land. Why did this tribe's portion stop at the water instead of starting on the far side?
Reuben's land lay east of the river, with neighbours on every side.
The land of Reuben on the south adjoined Moab. On the west of it was the Dead Sea and a little further north the River Jordan. The north border was the south border of Gad. Heshbon is the farthest north city mentioned in Reuben's territory. The east border is not so clearly defined, perhaps because of the desert toward the east. But Reuben inherited all the kingdom of Sihon king of the Amorites (v. 21).
For Reuben the Jordan was a wall, not a door. Commentators ask what drove that choice.
Reuben and Gad and the half tribe of Manasseh made a mistake. They failed. They stopped short of the mark God had set when they chose any boundary line short of the river Jordan. Worldly and selfish thinking ruled what they did — what their eyes saw — motives of the flesh. They looked over "the land of Jazer and the land of Gilead," and they weighed it only by their own interests, with no regard at all for the judgement and will of God.
Prosperity, not poverty, held these tribes back.
"Do not take us across the Jordan" had been the fixed decision of the two and a half tribes. God had made them very rich on their way to the promised land. They preferred to sit down and enjoy their riches rather than press on to the inheritance. What was convenient guided them, not faith. The cities of Gilead drew them more than the soldiers' tents across the Jordan. Settling down, whatever form it takes, is a sad thing.
Stopping at the bank of the Jordan still has a meaning for believers now.
Moses made a concession in allowing these two and a half tribes their portion east of the Jordan. Even so, this whole history still holds a serious lesson for us. The sight of their eyes had a strong influence on them, and they settled down on the wrong side of the Jordan. It is a picture of true believers who are content to settle down. They never go through the spiritual exercise of learning the truth of death with Christ, which the crossing of the Jordan teaches. So they do not enjoy the truth that they are now "blessed with every spiritual blessing in the heavenly places in Christ" (Eph. 1:3). How many there are in this condition today!
The chapter's long lists of cities and villages are not filler.
Notice too what great care the Spirit of God takes in these chapters to define the place and limits of every tribe. Each one could see and know the exact share given to them in the inheritance. It is the same now for each of us. God has given to us each our own definite place and duties in the body of Christ. Every member of Christ is responsible to be aware of it, and to act in keeping with it.
Commentators differ here. One writer starts from the meaning of Reuben's name and looks past the failure.
Reuben ("see a son") stands for man as the offspring of God by creation, given the intelligent will in which lies the natural image of God. But in fallen man that will has broken out in self-will and corruption. Humbled and restored by grace, it becomes the will that depends on God and holds fast to Him — the will of that faith by which alone we are truly sons. This is how we must think of him here, even forgetting the failure that showed itself when he chose his own inheritance where we now find him. God is over it all, and He has other lessons for us in it than the lesson of failure.
Scripture tells the rest of Reuben's story in a few lines.
Three clear facts sum up their tribal history: they refused God's land; they went after other gods; Assyria carried them away. The first was bound to lead to the second, and then came judgment… In the end sovereign grace will bring them back. Reuben, Gad, and Manasseh will stand in their lot with the other tribes, and in equal numbers (Rev. 7), at least as a symbol.
- Border. Reuben's inheritance ran from Moab in the south to Gad in the north, with the Jordan closing it off on the west.
- Barrier. The river that carried Israel into the land only marked Reuben's edge. He chose that line by the sight of his eyes, not by God's will.
- Bait. Wealth, not hardship, kept them back. They chose to enjoy what they had instead of pressing on to what God promised.
- Believers. Christians stop at the same line today when they settle for less than every spiritual blessing in Christ.
- Beyond. God still measured out their exact place. He still had lessons in it beyond failure, and grace will yet set Reuben in his lot with all the tribes.
And Moses gave [a portion] to the tribe of Gad, to the children of Gad according to their families.
Commentary for this verse has not been generated yet.
And their territory was Jaazer, and all the cities of Gilead, and half the land of the children of Ammon, to Aroer which is before Rabbah;
The verse lists the land given to the tribe of Gad, east of the Jordan. Two questions sit inside that short list. How could Israel hold land that belonged to Ammon? And why did Gad settle outside Canaan?
The verse gives towns, not borders. One writer traces the shape of Gad's land.
The land given to Gad lay north of Reuben's. It took in the area of Jazer, which seems to be just north of Heshbon, and ran north to Succoth, near the Jordan River. The Jordan was again Gad's western border, and the eastern border again seems unclear.
God had spared Ammon. So how could half of Ammon's land fall to Gad? The answer lies in who held that land just before Israel came.
reason: quote left unmodernised; restore Jephthah sentence the lead-in rests on
The boundary stops short at Aroer, which faces Rabbah but does not include it.
Rabbah was the fortified capital of the Ammonites. It was not among the cities taken by the tribes east of the Jordan. Deut. 3:11; Joshua 13:25.
Each name on the list carries meaning. One writer weighs them, and still wishes more could be said about Gad.
It is fitting too that "all the cities of Gilead" (the "heap of witness") should belong to Gad, and half of Ammon, facing which they build another Aroer. It is fitting as well that they should have Mahanaim, with its memorial from Jacob's history. If only one could say more about Gad! But as for what ought to be held, how much is still left!
Jazer, named first in the verse, carries its own promise:
Jazer, "He shall help."
The name Gad itself says something about this tribe.
Gad comes next to Reuben: Gad, the picture of spiritual increase, and of a fighting state too. Leah's cry, "A troop comes," holds both. Spiritual increase can hardly come without conflict in a world like this, and in David's time we find the men of Gad standing out as warriors.
Writers do not treat this portion as a plain fact of geography. They judge the choice behind it.
It was a mistake, a failure, a stopping short of God's mark, for Reuben and Gad and the half tribe of Manasseh to choose any boundary line short of the river Jordan. Worldly and selfish thinking ruled them — what their eyes could see — the desires of the flesh. They looked over "the land of Jazer and the land of Gilead," and they weighed it wholly by their own interests, with no regard for the judgement and will of God.
Later history gave its own verdict on that choice.
His purpose was Canaan, which lies beyond the Jordan. The place they chose was not Egypt. It was beyond the Red Sea, on this side of the Euphrates, but it was not Canaan. What drew them was their many cattle, and the land of Gilead and Jazer gave wonderful room for this… for in later days, when Israel's sin and weakness left them easy prey for their enemies — the enemies of God — this lovely country on this side of the Jordan was the first to pass into enemy hands.
- Choice — Gad settled east of the Jordan. The pasture of Jazer and Gilead suited their cattle, so their own interests drew the line, not God's gift.
- Claim — half of Ammon's land was Israel's to take because invaders had seized it from Ammon first. Israel drove out those invaders, not Ammon.
- Limit — the line runs to Aroer, facing Rabbah, and stops. Ammon's capital stayed outside the inheritance.
- Character — Gad means "a troop." A tribe of increase and warriors fits a border land held facing an enemy.
- Cost — "He shall help" and "heap of witness" stand over these towns. Yet this fine country east of the river was the first Israel lost when the enemy came.
and from Heshbon to Ramath-Mizpeh, and Betonim; and from Mahanaim to the border of Debir;
This verse traces the inland edge of Gad's territory, naming four towns along the line. Every one of them sits east of the Jordan, on the far side from Canaan — which raises the question of what sort of portion Gad had.
Commentators note what put this tribe on the near side of the river, and what it cost them:
Notice that it is the cattle of the two tribes that keeps them east of the Jordan, on the wilderness side — we might say, right on the border of the world. How often business and earthly interests keep God's children from entering fully and practically into their heavenly calling!
The line starts at Heshbon — a city also allotted to Reuben. One writer reads that overlap as meaningful:
Gad shares with Reuben the land of Sihon, and at first sight their possessions seem oddly mixed together. Gad builds Dibon, though it falls to Reuben. Reuben builds Heshbon and is given it, yet later we find it handed to the Levites as a city of Gad (Joshua 21:39). Heshbon was on the boundary line, and could belong to either one. But in this weaving together of Reuben and Gad, do we not see how inseparable "increase" is from faith? And how, if faith builds up reason, it will take growth and fighting strength to hold it?
Mahanaim got its name from something that happened there long before Gad held it:
Mahanaim means "two hosts," and its history speaks of help from heaven, with war implied — and for that war the battle cry is "the Lord of hosts is with us!" So we are not only sent out; we are accompanied and sustained.
That history belongs to Jacob, coming home after years away:
Jacob goes on his way from Mount Gilead, and as he approaches the borders of the land, the angels of God meet him. Jacob at once recognizes them. "This is God's host," he says, and he called the place Mahanaim.
The other names carry meaning too. Ramath-mizpeh means "the watch-tower height" (J. B. Jackson), and Debir means "an oracle" (J. B. Jackson). Where they stood is another matter. Commentators differ over whether Ramath-mizpeh is the place called Mizpah, where Jacob and Laban made their covenant:
Mizpah was the place where Jacob and Laban parted, after making a covenant and raising a heap of stones as a witness of it and as a landmark between them. It was east of the Jordan, somewhere in Gilead. Some suppose it is the same as Ramath-mizpeh in Joshua 13:26, and this the same as Ramoth-gilead. Others judge these to be all different places.
The vagueness is not only in the map. Gad's frontier is described westward with precision and eastward with none:
The Jordan was again the west border of Gad, and the east border is once more unclear. This territory and the meanings of the city names surely hold spiritual instruction for us, if we were diligent and discerning enough to find it.
Gad's borders are only part of the picture in this chapter. One writer finds the same pattern repeated later:
In the end, Joshua only put two and a half tribes in possession. Something similar has happened with the church.
The same chapter records one tribe with no borders at all:
The Lord — not a position — was Levi's lot. And so the happiest and richest Christians are those who find their portion in the Lord Himself. Some Levites lived among the two and a half tribes on the other side of the Jordan, and others among the nine and a half in Canaan. Either way, Levi's inheritance was not the special position of the land where their cities stood, but the Lord Himself and the sacrifices made by fire to Him… It is good to fight the giants and to overcome cities. It is better to offer burnt offerings and to share in peace offerings, to worship God and to have communion with Him about the Lord Jesus.
- Chosen. Gad settled east of the Jordan because of cattle — on the wilderness side, right on the border of the world.
- Shared. Heshbon is listed under Reuben and under Gad. It sat on the boundary line and could belong to either.
- Guarded. Mahanaim, "two hosts," recalls God's host meeting Jacob. We are not only sent out; we are accompanied and sustained.
- Blurred. The Jordan fixed Gad's west border. The east border stays unclear, and even Ramath-mizpeh's site is disputed.
- Better. Levi held no border at all. The Lord Himself, not a place on the map, was Levi's portion — the one portion no border can improve.
and in the valley, Beth-haram, and Beth-Nimrah, and Succoth, and Zaphon, the rest of the kingdom of Sihon the king of Heshbon, the Jordan and [its] border, as far as the edge of the sea of Chinnereth beyond the Jordan eastward.
God promised Israel a land west of the Jordan, yet this verse maps out towns and a lake shore that lie east of the river. So why does part of God's people hold an inheritance outside the land God promised them?
The first thing this verse gives us is a map.
The land given to Gad lay north of Reuben's. It took in the territory of Jazer (apparently just north of Heshbon) and ran north as far as Succoth, which was near the Jordan River. Again the Jordan formed Gad's western border, and again the eastern border seems unclear.
Succoth, one of the towns named here, turns up elsewhere in Israel's story.
A Canaanite city east of the Jordan, given to the tribe of Gad. Here Jacob built a house for himself and shelters for his cattle. Later Gideon punished the city's elders for not helping him when he was worn out from chasing the Midianites.
One thing sets this eastern land apart from everything west of the river.
The first section gives each tribe its inheritance by lot. Casting the lot marked out how the land was shared on the west side of Jordan. The land on the east side, as noted elsewhere, was shared without it. The lot clearly expressed the mind of God, more plainly than any other way could: "its every decision is from the LORD," says the voice of inspiration itself (Prov. 16:33).
Commentators give a blunt answer.
First of all, where was Israel's proper portion — the inheritance God had appointed for them? Surely on the other side of Jordan, in the land of Canaan. Should that fact not have been enough?… It was a mistake, a failure, a stopping short of God's mark, for Reuben and Gad and the half tribe of Manasseh to choose any boundary line short of the river Jordan. Worldly and selfish thinking governed their conduct — the sight of their eyes, the motives of the flesh.
The pasture they chose was rich. Its story does not end well.
Gad held a large district, from a little above the north corner of the Dead Sea to near the south corner of the Sea of Galilee. It was then a very fertile plain, well suited to their flocks and herds, and it took in the highlands of Gilead. The king of Assyria carried away the tribes east of the Jordan first, about 740 B.C., and the Ammonites then took over the territory of Gad.
Commentators differ on how hard to press the blame. One writer notes that Moses allowed it, and still finds a lesson here for us.
Moses made a concession in allowing these two and a half tribes their portion east of Jordan. Even so, this whole history holds a serious lesson for us. What their eyes saw strongly influenced them, and they settled down on the wrong side of Jordan. It is a picture of true believers content to settle down without the spiritual exercise of learning the truth of death with Christ, which the crossing of the Jordan teaches. So they never enjoy the truth that God has "blessed us in Christ with every spiritual blessing in the heavenly places" (Eph. 1:3). How many there are in this condition today!
This arrangement does not have the last word.
First, bringing Reuben, Gad, and the half tribe of Manasseh over from the east side of Jordan removes something that had divided the nation — a feature that was never part of God's order. So the nation is made one and united, its divided interests and natural barriers overcome.
- Sight chose. West of the river the lot expressed God's mind. Here there was no lot; their eyes and their cattle chose the line.
- The river stopped them. Every place named here — the valley towns, Succoth, the lake's lower end — lies east of the Jordan, short of the land God promised.
- Fertile means exposed. The plain was rich, yet Assyria carried Gad off first of all, and the Ammonites took over their land.
- A picture, not just a map. Settling short of Jordan pictures believers who never learn the truth of death with Christ. They miss their blessing in the heavenly places.
- God moves the border. In the final division God brings the eastern tribes across, and the barrier that split the nation is gone.
This is the inheritance of the children of Gad according to their families, the cities and their hamlets.
Joshua 13:28 closes the list of Gad's land east of the Jordan. The verse signs it off as a settled possession, handed out family by family, town by town. Yet every place named lies on the wilderness side of the river. So how can a portion be truly given and still fall short of what God intended?
The verse closes off a stretch of country described just before it.
The land given to Gad lay north of Reuben's land. It took in the territory of Jazer (seemingly just north of Heshbon) and ran north as far as Succoth, near the Jordan River. The Jordan was again Gad's border on the west, and the border on the east seems unclear again.
Gad's ground east of the river suited the tribe's cattle. One writer sets that beside what Moses had spoken of when Israel left Egypt.
When Moses led Israel out of Egypt, he said nothing of Gilead and Bashan. They were no part of "the mountain of the inheritance" that he and the people had sung about in their song. Nor were they the "place" he had told the Midianite that he and Israel were travelling to. But Reuben, Gad and Manasseh had cattle, and on the plains east of the river cattle could feed well. They had no thought of revolting or giving up their interest in the God of Israel; but they had cattle, and Gilead and Bashan suited them.
Their words drew a line through Israel.
These tribes began by doing what suited them. To that they added self-will, and to self-will division — "We will not inherit with them." To get what they wanted they were ready to split Israel. "We" and "them" — that is how they spoke of the Lord's one undivided family.
The verse ends with cities and villages. People build walled towns when they mean to stay.
These two and a half tribes did not stop being Israelites. But since they lived outside the promised land, they lost the special privileges of the temple. All their armed men crossed the Jordan to help their brothers in the war. They did not cross to win an inheritance for themselves where God had chosen for them. They went back to their own choice, where they made their home — and not a temporary home, for there they built fortified cities for their children. As tribes, Reuben, Gad, and half Manasseh did not enter the land. They became mere onlookers of the triumphs of Israel.
Gad's ground was a real inheritance. Even so, the land God gave His people and the part He gave them to live in were not the same.
It was God's purpose that all Israel should dwell over Jordan, but the two and a half tribes fell short of God's purpose for them. They dwelt in the land that God gave to His people, for it was part of the inheritance, but not that part that God gave them as a dwelling. The Jordan separated them from the place where God would dwell among His people.
Gad had brave men. The same writer follows the story to its end.
Their beginning seemed fair; there were men of valour among them. They were famous, yet this fatal charge stood against them: "And they transgressed." They were shut out from the special blessing of the land. How great their loss! Yet their loss is not the most solemn part of their disobedience. The most solemn part was their preference of their own liking to the goodness of God. The consequences were twofold, moral and judicial. They went after the gods of the people of the land — they became idolaters. The judicial consequence is that the "God of Israel" brought the king of Assyria upon them, and he carried them into captivity, far away from the land that they valued above God's land.
Gad's home east of the river is not the end of the story. One writer points to a dividing of the land in which these tribes are brought over.
First, bringing Reuben, Gad, and the half tribe of Manasseh over from the east side of the Jordan removes a division that once existed in the nation — a feature that was never part of God's order. So the nation gains unity and solidarity, and divided interests and natural barriers are overcome.
- Their own choice. Moses had said nothing of Gilead and Bashan when he led Israel out of Egypt. Gad settled there anyway.
- No revolt, just pasture. They had no thought of giving up their interest in the God of Israel. Good grazing land was enough to hold them.
- Cities tell the story. Walled towns and villages mark a settled home. This verse records a permanent address on the wilderness side of the river.
- Real land, wrong side. The inheritance was real, and inside the land God gave. It was still outside the place where God dwelt among His people.
- The line erased. The cost was heavy: lost temple privileges, idolatry, then captivity. Yet in the dividing of the land that one writer describes, Gad is brought over and the old line of division goes.
And Moses gave [a portion] to half the tribe of Manasseh; and for half the tribe of the children of Manasseh according to their families
Moses, not Joshua, handed the eastern half of Manasseh its land. That detail raises the question behind the whole chapter: was this portion God's gift, or a settlement made short of it?
The two sides of the river were not shared out in the same way.
The first section gives the inheritance of the tribes by lot. The casting of the lot belongs to the sharing out of the west side of Jordan; the east side, as noted elsewhere, had none of it. The lot expressed the mind of God more plainly than any other way: "its every decision is from the LORD," says the voice of inspiration itself. (Prov. 16:33.)
One writer fills in where this portion lay, and who handed it over.
Manasseh's inheritance, for its half tribe, lay north of Gad's, and it included the territory taken from Og king of Bashan. Its west border was also the Jordan River. The other half tribe of Manasseh received its portion on the west side of the river, opposite the half tribe on the east. Again the text reminds us that Moses was the one who had given this inheritance to Manasseh (v. 32).
These tribes chose their side of the river, and one writer weighs that choice.
It was a mistake, a failure, a falling short of God's mark, for Reuben and Gad and the half tribe of Manasseh to choose any boundary line short of the river Jordan. Worldly and selfish thinking ruled their conduct — what their own eyes saw — motives of the flesh. They looked over "the land of Jazer and the land of Gilead," and they sized it up only by their own interests, with no regard for God's judgement and will.
reason: unsupported fact about Machir; wordy lead-in
How perfectly fitting it is that Manasseh, the one "forgetful" of the things behind — and of Manasseh just the children of Machir, "he who remembers" (remembering, of course, what he is pressing on to) — should have the kingdom of Og in Bashan put into their hands! For the things of the world can only be used rightly by someone who is pressing on toward another world. Manasseh is also the only one of the tribes on the east side of Jordan that in fact inherits on both sides of the river. Whatever Manasseh's own failure in all this, it seems clear that we are not to look at that here. We are to see in him the ability to use the world with the heart in heaven.
Manasseh alone sits on both sides of the river. Commentators differ over how far to fault these tribes. One sees in Manasseh's position a picture of what is coming, and also a danger.
The ideal, as seen in the millennium, was a portion on both sides of the river, and Manasseh does have this: half the tribe in the land and the other half in Gilead. But the desire of these tribes raised questions with Moses, and later with the whole congregation. That very fact shows the danger of such a position. Wherever someone's interests raise questions among the people of God, those interests should be examined closely.
Elsewhere God speaks of both Gilead and Manasseh as His own.
"Gilead" (on the east of Jordan) "is Mine; Manasseh is Mine." Half of Manasseh was west of Jordan and half on the east, but God will allow no suggestion of a division of that tribe.
Later history gave its own verdict on the choice.
The history in the holy book shows us that these tribes were the first to suffer and to fall into the hands of the Gentiles. "Do you know," says Ahab, "that Ramoth-gilead belongs to us, and we keep quiet and do not take it out of the hand of the king of Syria?" Happy are those who patiently wait for God's blessings until they have crossed Jordan, taking patience as their portion meanwhile rather than the blessings on this side! Those nearer blessings are gifts of God's providence, but they are less secure. And spiritual blessings, if the assembly makes this world the place of them, though real, still deceive the hopes of the saints. There are no frontiers like Jordan, which God appointed as such in His counsels of grace.
- Giver — the lot divided the land west of Jordan and made God's mind plain; the eastern portion came to half-Manasseh from Moses' hand, without the lot.
- Motive — these tribes picked their border by what their eyes saw and what suited them, stopping short of God's mark.
- Gift — Og's kingdom in Bashan is real wealth. Only a heart pressing on to another world can use it rightly.
- Oneness — Manasseh's two halves point to the coming day of a portion on both sides of the river; God allows no talk of a divided tribe.
- Outcome — these tribes were the first to fall to the enemy. No frontier is as safe as Jordan, the border God Himself appointed.
their territory was from Mahanaim, all Bashan, the whole kingdom of Og the king of Bashan, and all the villages of Jair, which are in Bashan, sixty cities.
This verse maps the northern land Moses gave to half the tribe of Manasseh, east of the Jordan: Bashan, the whole kingdom of Og, and sixty towns. Two questions turn the list into teaching. What was this land? And why were God's people settling outside Canaan?
This is a real region, and it changed hands in war before anyone divided it up.
Now best known for the Golan Heights, it is a large district east of the Jordan. Gilead lies to the south. It reaches north to Mount Hermon and west to the Jordan valley. It is sometimes called the "land of Bashan," and it was the kingdom of Og the Amorite. Moses conquered it, and it became, with part of Gilead, the portion of the half tribe of Manasseh.
Sixty cities measure the strength of a kingdom the Lord had already overthrown. Moses had a reason for pointing back to it.
The kingdom of Og in Bashan was a powerful kingdom. The cities had high walls with gates and bars. Their number was sixty… King Og was a giant, and Moses mentions his iron bed. Moses must have mentioned the dead giant's bed to remind the people of the great victory the Lord had given them. He wanted to give them confidence about taking the land. The Lord, who overthrew Og, would certainly not fail them when they entered the land and met the enemies there.
The boundary list keeps one man's name. He won that land in battle and then named the towns after himself.
He was the son of Segub, a descendant of Judah. He is called "son of Manasseh" because of his mother, the daughter of Machir… He conquered the territory of Argob with some towns, and called them Havoth-Jair, "the towns of Jair."
These tribes asked for this land. One writer goes back to Numbers 32 to show what they wanted and why.
To see what first led the two and a half tribes to seek their inheritance on the east side of the Jordan, turn to chapter 32 of Numbers. There we read how these tribes saw that the land of Jazer and the land of Gilead was a place for livestock… To settle on the east side of the river and build cities there was to fall short of God's purpose for Israel's blessing.
Settling in Bashan cost these tribes something the boundary list never shows. They no longer saw God act for them at first hand.
All their armed men crossed the Jordan to help their brothers in the war. They did not go to win an inheritance for themselves where God had chosen for them. They went in order to return to their own choice, the place where they made their home… They became mere onlookers of the triumphs of Israel. The valuable lessons from the battles at Ai and Gibeon, and others like them, reached these tribes only second-hand.
Commentators weigh the east side in different ways. One writer says the land itself was always part of what God had marked out, even though God did not mean them to live there.
God had decided in advance that the land of Israel's inheritance lay on both sides of the Jordan. Even so, it does not appear that He intended any of them to live on the east of that river. The tribes who asked for their portion there did get it… In a coming day all the tribes will be placed west of the Jordan, yet they will possess the territory east of it as well, feeding in Bashan and Gilead as in the days of old. This is a picture of the full inheritance of the heavenly saints, which takes in heaven and earth.
Among the tribes east of the river, only this half tribe holds ground on both banks. One writer ties that to the meaning of Manasseh's name.
How fitting it is that Manasseh, the one who "forgets" what lies behind… should be handed the kingdom of Og in Bashan! Only someone pressing on to something beyond it can use the things of this world properly. And Manasseh is the only tribe found on the east side of the Jordan that in fact inherits on both sides of the river… we are to see in him the ability to use the world while the heart is in heaven.
- Given — Moses conquered Bashan, the kingdom of Og the Amorite, and it became the portion of half of Manasseh.
- Strong — its sixty walled cities showed a power the Lord had already overthrown. Moses held it up so Israel would trust Him for the battles ahead.
- Named — Jair took Argob in battle, and the towns carried his name from then on.
- Chosen — these tribes asked for the east side because of its good pasture. That choice fell short of God's purpose for His people.
- Costly, yet usable — those who settled there saw Israel's victories only second-hand. Manasseh alone held both banks, the picture of a heart that can use the world while it rests in heaven.
And half Gilead, and Ashtaroth, and Edrei, the cities of the kingdom of Og in Bashan, [belonged] to the children of Machir the son of Manasseh, to the one half of the children of Machir according to their families.
This verse closes the list of land Moses handed out east of the Jordan — the old kingdom of Og, with its capital cities, went to the descendants of Machir. Two questions follow: why did this rich land fall to Manasseh, and why did only half of Machir's people settle there?
One reference work traces where Bashan lay and how it changed hands:
Now best known for the Golan Heights, it is a large district on the east of the Jordan, with Gilead to the south, reaching north to Mount Hermon... It was the kingdom of Og the Amorite. Moses conquered it, and it became, with part of Gilead, the portion of the half-tribe of Manasseh. Its main cities were Ashtaroth (or Beeshterah), given to the Levites; Golan, a 'city of refuge'; Edrei; and Salcah on its border.
Ashtaroth and Edrei are not chosen at random. One writer reads Og's whole character out of his land, his stronghold, and the one object he left behind:
Og's name is usually taken to mean "long-necked" — no doubt because that suits a giant. But it can really only mean "a cake baked in the ashes." He is king of Bashan, "the fertile," and his strong city is Edrei, "plenty of pasture." He lives in Ashtaroth, a city named after the Phoenician Venus, whose worship used shameful rites. Add that the only thing left of him is a monstrous bed, and you have said all there is to say of him — perhaps enough to identify him with the spirit of luxury and self-indulgence... That this Og is a giant we know all too well: he has brought down many a strong man.
A city built around that kind of worship did not stay that way. Its later history is striking:
City of Bashan in the kingdom of Og, on the east of the Jordan. It was given to the half-tribe of Manasseh and afterwards devoted to the Levites.
The verse names a man, not just a tribe. Machir heads the line because his father died long before Israel left Egypt:
One man is mentioned by name in verse 1, Machir, the firstborn of Manasseh, "because he was a man of war." Manasseh had died long before Israel's deliverance from Egypt, but Machir succeeded to the place of the firstborn. He was given Gilead and Bashan, which were on the east side of Jordan.
Manasseh alone held land on both sides of the river, and one writer finds meaning in the names themselves:
How fitting it is that the kingdom of Og in Bashan should be put into the hands of Manasseh! His name means "forgetful" of the things behind. And within Manasseh it goes to the children of Machir, "he who recollects" — remembering, of course, the thing he is pressing on towards. For only the person who is pressing on to something else can use the things of the world rightly. Manasseh is also the only one of the tribes on the east side of Jordan that in fact inherits on both sides of the river. So Manasseh comes nearest to the final division in the day still to come, when each tribe receives its inheritance on both sides, with the boundary lines running east and west across the river. Whatever Manasseh's personal failure in all this, it seems clear that we are not to look at it here, but to see in him the ability to use the world while the heart is in heaven.
Commentators differ on how much blame belongs here. What drew these families east was practical:
Moses, when he led them out of Egypt, had said nothing about Gilead and Bashan. They were not part of "the mountain of the inheritance," which he and the people had sung about... But Reuben, Gad and Manasseh had cattle, and cattle could feed well on the plains east of the river. They had no thought of rebelling, or of giving up their interest in the God of Israel. But they had cattle, and Gilead and Bashan suited them.
Another writer draws the point closer to home, noting the meaning behind the tribal names involved:
Manasseh, "forgetting," may remind us of the same. Half of that tribe also finds its lot eastward. Notice that it is the cattle of the two tribes which keep them east of Jordan, on the wilderness side; we might say, bordering closely on the world. How often business and earthly interests hold the children of God back from entering fully and practically into their heavenly calling!
Their choice cost them later. These same tribes were the first to lose the land they had picked:
Tiglath-pileser is named as the one who carried away the Reubenites, the Gadites, and the half tribe of Manasseh. This shows that the Israelites who stopped short of their privileges, and did not cross the Jordan, were the first to go into captivity.
- Conquered — Bashan was Og's kingdom before it was Machir's inheritance. Moses took it from a giant first.
- Named — Edrei means "plenty of pasture," and Ashtaroth carried a pagan goddess's name. One writer sees in Og the spirit of luxury that has brought down many strong men. Yet Ashtaroth later went to the Levites.
- Divided — Machir took his dead father's place as firstborn. Only half his people settled east, and Manasseh alone held land on both banks.
- Chosen — Moses never sang about Gilead and Bashan. Cattle, not God's promise, decided the matter.
- Lost — Those who stopped short of the Jordan were the first taken captive. The land that suited them best kept them least.
This is that which Moses allotted for inheritance in the plains of Moab, beyond the Jordan of Jericho, eastward.
The chapter keeps naming Moses as the one who settled these eastern borders. This closing verse says it once more.
Again we see that it was Moses who had given this inheritance to Manasseh (v. 32), and again that the Levites received no territory of their own, for the God of Israel was their inheritance (v. 33).
The Levites are the contrast in the same breath: no land of their own, and God as their inheritance.
When Joshua later stirs up the nation, he uses one phrase for the eastern tribes and another for everyone else.
When Joshua encouraged Israel to go and take the land which the Lord gave them (Joshua 1), he has a different word for these transgressors; he speaks of their land as that which Moses gave them. Their warriors do go through the Jordan, while their wives and children remain behind, to fulfil their promise to Moses. The nine and a half go to the war on the ground of God's promise to Israel. God's promise on the one hand, man's promise on the other. What a difference!
"Beyond the Jordan" is more than geography. Jordan pictures death, and these tribes asked to settle short of it.
Their lands do not lie in Canaan proper. Canaan is all across the river — the type of the heavenly inheritance, the other side of death. Later the two and a half tribes propose not to go over Jordan, but to take their inheritance in the fertile plains of the eastern side. Moses opposes it as rebellion against God. He afterwards withdraws his opposition. But the fact remains: these tribes settle down on what is, in type, the wrong side of death — not heaven, but earth.
Commentators differ on how much the eastern land counts as inheritance at all. One reading measures it against the plan set out at the start.
The settlement of the two and a half tribes east of the river was a departure from the original plan. It is given no place in the final arrangement: all the tribes receive their inheritance west of the Jordan.
Another reading separates two things: the land God gave, and the place He meant Israel to live.
On both sides of the Jordan, then, was the land of Israel's inheritance, as predetermined by God. Yet it does not appear that He intended any of them to dwell on the east of that river. The tribes who asked for their portion there got it. But soon they discovered the drawback of it (Joshua 22:24-28). By and by all the tribes will live west of Jordan (Ezekiel 47:15-20; 48), yet they will have the territory east of it as well, feeding in Bashan and Gilead as in the days of old. We must remember, then, that the inheritance of the people, as designed by God, was to be found on the east of Jordan as well as on the west. It pictures the full inheritance of the heavenly saints, which takes in heaven and earth — east of Jordan as well as west — for Jordan is a type of death.
Manasseh is the last tribe named before this closing line, and the only one with land on both banks.
How fitting it is that Manasseh, the one "forgetful" of things behind, should have the kingdom of Og in Bashan put into their hands! And of Manasseh, just the children of Machir, "he who recollects" — of course, what he is pressing on towards. For only the one who is pressing on to another can rightly use the things of the world. And this is the only one of the tribes found on the east side of Jordan that in fact inherits on both sides of the river… Whatever Manasseh's personal failure in all this, it seems clear that we are not to regard it here, but to see in him the competence to use the world while having the heart in heaven.
- Given — Moses handed out this eastern portion himself, in the plains of Moab, on the east side of the river.
- Granted — what Moses gave rested on the tribes' own promise; what the other tribes received rested on God's promise. Same nation, two very different foundations.
- Ground — "beyond the Jordan" means short of the river that pictures death: a real portion, but on the earth side, not the heavenly side.
- Grief — the tribes soon found the drawback of their choice (Joshua 22:24-28). Commentators differ on whether the eastern land had any place in God's final arrangement.
- Growth — Manasseh alone held land on both banks. It shows the safe way to handle what lies east of the river: use the world with the heart already in heaven.
But to the tribe of Levi Moses gave no inheritance Jehovah the God of Israel is their inheritance, as he said to them.
Chapter 13 lists the land handed out to the tribes, and leaves one tribe off the map: Levi receives no territory at all. God gives the reason Himself — He is Levi's portion — so the question is whether Levi lost out or came off best.
Levi's lack of land was no oversight. God had said it beforehand, more than once. One writer raises the obvious objection and answers it:
The priests have no inheritance, no possession in Israel. Compare Numbers 18:20; Deuteronomy 10:9; Deuteronomy 18:1. Is this a deprivation? Can it be a loss to be an heir of God, to have Him as one's inheritance and possession? Instead, it marks the highest possible place of nearness and blessing. There, what God is becomes the portion of those so blessed. The whole man is lifted up to Him, in whom all his resources are found and from whom all his expectation must come.
For those who served, that meant living on trust — and when trust failed, their words lost power:
The workmen of the Lord stood on different ground from the rest of His people. God called them to a special confidence in His provision for them and in His word about them. If they failed in this, could they wonder that their words had little power?
Earlier in this chapter, Levi's portion is the offerings burnt on the altar. Here it is the Lord Himself. The two belong together:
Their inheritance had two parts: "the Lord God of Israel," and "the sacrifices of the Lord God of Israel made by fire." It is the same for us, His heavenly people. We have no portion on earth, but our privilege is to stand before God and to serve Him. More than this, we have Him as our own, and we share communion with Him in the heavenly places, with the Father and with the Son. But our portion in the Son is also "the sacrifices of the Lord made by fire." That is to say, Christ in all the perfection of His work and His Person before God — Christ as the burnt offering and the sacrifice for sin, everything in which God finds His eternal delight.
Enemies can overrun land, but they cannot touch the Lord. Yet this portion carried a cost as well:
In one sense, no one could ever attack Levi's portion — neither the dweller in the land nor the foreign enemy. Even in the darkest day of Israel's departure from God, when His people had fled to caves and holes in the earth for fear of the enemy, Levi could look up to the unclouded heavens and say to the Lord, "You are my portion and the lot of my inheritance." Yet in another sense, Levi would be the first to suffer in the day of Israel's trouble. The sacrifices of Israel were Levi's portion, and these would fail when the enemy held Israel captive. And so it is with those nearest to Christ. They rejoice in a portion that can never be taken away and never changes. Yet they are the first to feel, in all its sharpness, the spiritual poverty of God's people.
Levi lived among the other tribes, with no block of land of his own:
Levi was "scattered in Israel," just as Jacob had prophesied, but Levi's portion was the most sacred and most precious of all. Wherever the other tribes lived, Levi lived too. Wherever devout souls in Israel worshipped the Lord, Levi had his inheritance. The Lord — not a position — was Levi's lot... And so it is that the happiest and richest Christians are those who find in the Lord Himself their portion.
The Levites had no land, so their income came only through the people's offerings:
They were scattered among the tribes to serve the Lord where He placed them, and they depended on God to provide for them through the sacrifices and offerings of the people. They were simply to look to God for their support, as is true for any servant of the Lord today who spends his full time in the Lord's work.
Christ is the pattern for this life, and Psalm 16 gives His own words about His portion:
Christ Himself is our example. He is the Levite without spot, the perfect Servant, and He passed through the same blessed experiences on His path here. If He looks towards the earth, He says, "The LORD is my chosen portion and my cup." If He looks upward, He adds, "The lines have fallen for me in pleasant places; indeed, I have a beautiful inheritance." (Psalm 16:5-6)
- Excluded: Levi gets no strip of Canaan. God had said so beforehand. It is a plan, not a gap in the list.
- Exchanged: what looks like loss is the closest place of all. God Himself, not land, becomes the portion.
- Twofold: the portion has two parts — the Lord Himself, and the offerings burnt to Him that God delights in.
- Unassailable: enemies can overrun land, not the Lord. Levi's one real loss is the people's failing worship.
- Dependent: Levi lives on what comes to God's altar. So does every full-time servant today, following Christ, the perfect Servant, who lived it first.