And Israel sent messengers to Sihon king of the Amorites, saying,
Israel now meets the first kingdom standing between them and the Jordan. Moses sends messengers instead of an army, which raises two questions: why ask permission from a people already marked for judgment, and what happens when the answer is no?
Israel's first move toward Sihon was not an attack. One writer draws out the principle:
We meet people we do not want to fight, but they will not let us pass in peace. Our war is with those who hold our inheritance beyond the Jordan. If someone attacks us, we must defend ourselves; but we must not be the attackers. Israel wants to pass quietly through the land of the Amorites, but the Amorites will not allow it. So they suffer the consequences of the war they chose to make on the people of God.
Another writer asks what methods God gave Israel to use with this king:
Did He authorise Israel to force Sihon with threats of vengeance, or to win him by flattery? Did He offer him the book of the law with one hand and the sword with the other? Nothing of the sort. Look at the way the LORD treated even these enemies of Israel. "Let me pass through your land. I will go only by the road; I will turn aside neither to the right nor to the left. You shall sell me food for money, that I may eat, and give me water for money, that I may drink. Only let me pass through on foot." … Israel kept the path of right and courtesy. Sihon rushed on them to his own ruin.
Not every writer reads Israel's message as faultless. One asks why they needed to ask at all:
God's original gift to Israel included the land of the Amorite. So why send messengers asking permission to pass through it, as they did to Edom? … God had given them the land of the Amorite. Was it faith to ask only for leave to pass through it? The request did bring out their hatred and their effort to stop Israel, and their destruction followed. But the question remains: should Israel not have taken possession at once?
So commentators differ: some see the path of right and courtesy, others a request that fell short of faith.
The name of this people carries a warning:
What is the character of the Amorites? Their name means "Sayer." That recalls the Lord's words about the scribes and Pharisees: "they preach, but do not practice" (Matt. 23:3). They are those who have a form of godliness, but only know how to use their tongue to get their own way.
The king's own name points the same way, and it shapes how Israel answered him:
Sihon's name means "sweeping away," for mere talk tends to sweep away all that is good, for it is empty vanity. So when Sihon and his army attacked, Israel did not answer him with talk, but with decided action.
Sihon's "no" did not wreck God's plan. It served it:
They did not want to quarrel with the king of Heshbon, even though he was an Amorite, unless he was actually inside the holy land. But God was behind it: these Amorites, to their own ruin, would not let Israel pass through in peace. This makes Israel's case clearer still. People might have assumed that the Amorite had to be removed anyway, since God had marked that most wicked race for destruction.
One writer sees an order in the chapter, and the same order in our own lives:
As at the beginning of our chapter, so at the end, we hear the noise of conflict. Sihon had struck Moab, but now he falls before Israel. So does Og the king of Bashan, even though he was a giant, as we learn in Deuteronomy 3:11. First come the events that picture victory over the flesh within. Then comes the record of victory over the foes outside. And this is indeed the way things work in our spiritual experience.
The chapter preserves old songs and records about this territory, and they had a legal purpose:
These foreign traditions are purposely quoted with the exceptional aim of proving, from witnesses unquestionable in the eyes of their most zealous opponents, that the land in dispute, when Israel took it by conquest, did not belong to Ammon or Moab, but to the doomed races of Canaan and its neighbourhood. To the country of the former they had no just claim; that of the Amorite was handed over to them by God.
- Ask first. Israel asked for safe passage instead of threatening war — the path of right and courtesy, with no force and no flattery.
- Ask, or take? Commentators differ: was the polite request proper restraint, or a failure to claim at once what God had already given?
- Words, not deeds. "Amorite" means sayer; "Sihon" means sweeping away. Their strength was their tongue, and Israel answered it with decided action.
- The no was God's. Israel did not come looking for a fight. God was behind Sihon's refusal, and that refusal ruined him.
- Inside, then outside. Victory over the flesh within comes first, then victory over the enemies outside — the same order in a believer's experience.
Let us pass through thy land; we will not turn into the fields, or into the vineyards; we will not drink water out of the wells; on the king's road will we go until we have passed thy border.
Israel's road to the Jordan ran through the land of the Amorites, ruled by Sihon at Heshbon. The message Moses sent was a request, not a threat. So why ask permission for land God had already given? And what turned a polite request into a war?
Israel's request is narrow. They will keep to the road, touch nothing on either side, and pay for what they use. One writer asks how God taught Israel to treat even an enemy:
Look at the principles of the Lord's discipline here. Did He authorise Israel to force Sihon with threats of vengeance, or to win him by flattery? Nothing of the sort. Look at the way in which the Lord treated even these enemies of Israel. "Let me pass through your land. I will go only by the road; I will turn aside neither to the right nor to the left. You shall sell me food for money, that I may eat, and give me water for money, that I may drink; only let me pass through on foot." "But Sihon the king of Heshbon would not let us pass by him, for the Lord your God hardened his spirit and made his heart obstinate, that He might give him into your hand." … Israel kept the path of right and courtesy. Sihon rushed on them to his own ruin.
The same restraint carries a lesson for anyone who follows God. Israel had a real war ahead of them, but this was not it:
We meet people we do not want to fight, but they will not let us pass in peace. Our war is with those who hold our inheritance beyond the Jordan. If someone attacks us, we must defend ourselves; but we must never be the one who attacks first. Israel wants to pass quietly through the land of the Amorites. The Amorites will not allow it, and they suffer the consequences of the war they had sought against the people of God.
Commentators differ here. Some read the message as plain courtesy. One writer sees a problem in it, because God had already given this land to Israel:
The land of the Amorite was part of God's original gift to Israel. So why send messengers asking permission to pass through it, as they did to Edom? The land of Edom and of Moab was no part of what God had promised Israel. God had commanded that Israel should not take it. But the land of the Amorite was given to them. Was it faith to ask only for passage through it? … The question remains: should Israel not have taken possession at once? To ask permission to pass quietly through a land God had given them — was that the obedience of faith?
Whatever the answer, Israel's right to the land was never in doubt. God had said so to Moses:
These lands were won by conquest, and won according to God's will. "Behold, I have begun to give Sihon and his land over to you. Begin to take possession, that you may occupy his land" (Deut. 2:31) is the Lord's word to Moses. So there can be no question about their right to the land.
One writer draws a lesson from the meaning of the Amorites' name:
When Sihon refused, Israel did not turn away, as they did from Edom. Sihon came out with an army to fight against Israel. What is the character of the Amorites? Their name means "Sayer," which reminds us of the Lord's words about the scribes and Pharisees: "they preach, but do not practice" (Matt. 23:3). They are those who have a form of godliness, but only know how to use their tongue to get their own way.
The peaceful terms of verse 22 were not lost detail. They became Israel's legal defence long afterwards, when Ammon claimed the same land:
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; they took it from the Amorites. About three hundred years later, Jephthah quoted this history to the king of the Ammonites. That king claimed the land Israel had taken from Sihon, king of the Amorites, as belonging to Ammon (Judges 11:12-27).
- Request — Israel asked only to use the road. They would touch no field or vineyard and would pay for their water. This was the path of right and courtesy, not force or flattery.
- Restraint — the real war lay beyond the Jordan. God's people defend themselves when attacked, but they never strike first.
- Riddle — writers differ. Was asking permission for land already given the obedience of faith, or a lack of confidence in God?
- Right — Sihon's refusal settled nothing about ownership. God's own word, "Begin to take possession," left no doubt about Israel's title.
- Record — Sihon rejected a peaceful offer. Three hundred years later, Jephthah used that fact against Ammon's claim to the land.
But Sihon would not suffer Israel to go through his border; and Sihon gathered all his people, and went out against Israel into the wilderness, and came to Jahaz, and fought against Israel.
Israel asked Sihon for safe passage through his land. His answer was an army. This verse turns a peaceful appeal into Israel's first real conquest, and it raises a hard question: why did God let the refusal happen?
Commentators note the restraint in how Israel approached this king.
In this case let us see the principles of the Lord's discipline. Did He authorise Israel to force Sihon with threats of vengeance, or to win him by flattery? … Nothing of the sort… Israel kept the path of right and courtesy. Sihon rushed on them to his own ruin; and only so did Israel strike down and drive out the king of Heshbon.
Another writer turns the same restraint into a rule for believers who meet people blocking their way:
We meet people we do not want to fight, but they will not let us pass in peace… If they attack us, we must defend ourselves. But we are not to be the aggressors. Israel wants to pass quietly through the land of the Amorites. The Amorites will not allow it. So they suffer the consequences of the war they had sought against the people of God.
Sihon's stubbornness was no accident. Writers trace it back to God's own purpose.
God Himself had ordered things so. He knew well that the presence of the Amorites on their borders would be a constant snare and evil. He allowed the Amorites to have no confidence in Israel's peaceful intentions, for the very purpose of putting Israel in possession of the land.
That purpose also clears Israel of greed or bloodlust:
What is emphasised here… is that God gave him into their hand. Even the stubbornness that refused passage to the advancing army came from Him, since the wickedness of the Amorites was now full… Neither greed for land nor love of destruction drove Israel to bring this merciless removal on Sihon and his people. The mercy was for the world, in rooting out of it a deadly evil.
Commentators differ here. Kelly and Darby see courtesy. Another writer asks whether it was faith to ask at all, since God had already given this land to Israel.
God's original gift to Israel included the land of the Amorite. So the question arises: why send messengers asking permission to pass through it, as they did to Edom? The lands of Edom and Moab were no part of Israel's promised possession, and God had commanded that they should not be driven out. The land of the Amorite was given. Was it faith to ask only to pass through it? The asking did bring out their hatred and their effort to stop Israel. Their destruction was the result. But the question remains — should Israel not have taken possession at once?
One writer finds a picture in the names themselves — the king's, his city's, and the battlefield at Jahaz.
There is not much agreement about his name… It may be, actively, "sweeping away," as pride of intellect would sweep away the things of God. He is always called king of Heshbon, where he lived. The common version only translates that word as "account," "device," or "reason." It certainly gives the thought of mental work. He comes out to meet Israel at Jahatz, which Gesenius gives, from the Arabic, as "a place trodden down" — probably a "threshing-floor."
Another writer reads the king's name the same way, and draws a lesson about answering words with deeds.
Sihon's name means "sweeping away," for mere talk tends to sweep away all that is good, since it is empty vanity. On this occasion, then, when Sihon and his army attacked, Israel did not meet him with talk but with decided action. By the grace and power of God they defeated this proud enemy and took his cities… So Israel showed something of the courage of faith before they ever entered the land of Canaan.
One writer brings this home to the Christian life. What God has given us, we still have to take hold of.
As soon as we begin to possess, opposition springs up. The old powers do not yield without a struggle. It is a hard business… It means exercise and conflict and trouble. But it is well worth it. Then comes the joy of victory — the joy of really holding a little more of what is ours by an unquestionable title, given to us by God.
- Ask first. Israel asked to pass through. They did not threaten or flatter. They struck only after Sihon attacked.
- Refusal served God. The refusal itself came from God. He used it to sweep away a people whose wickedness was full and to put Israel in the land.
- A question left open. Was it courtesy to ask permission for land God had already given, or a lack of faith? Commentators differ.
- Talk meets action. The names picture a king of words and reasoning. Israel answered him not with talk but with action.
- Possession costs conflict. You keep what God gives only through struggle. Opposition rises the moment you take hold. Then comes the joy of victory.
And Israel smote him with the edge of the sword, and took possession of his land from the Arnon to the Jabbok, even unto the children of Ammon; for the border of the children of Ammon was strong.
Israel asked Sihon for safe passage and got a war instead — and with it their first land, from the Arnon to the Jabbok. Why this land, and what does a victory east of the Jordan have to do with the promise of Canaan?
Israel did not want this war.
We meet people we do not wish to fight, but they will not let us pass peaceably. Our warfare is with those who hold our inheritance beyond Jordan. If we are attacked, we must defend ourselves; but we are not to be the aggressors. Israel wants to pass quietly through the land of the Amorites. But the Amorites will not allow it. They suffer the consequences of the war they had sought against the people of God. Israel takes their cities. Already on this side of Jordan they begin to enjoy, ahead of time, the possession of the promise.
God had signed this land over to Israel before a sword was drawn.
So two things are quite definite. First, God had given. Second, He had also begun to give. A superficial reader might object to this. He might demand the reverse order, if we are to accept both statements: first, He began to give; second, He had fully given. But the Scriptural order is the right one. First He gives, so that the title deeds are ours. Then He begins to give practically and in detail, as we begin to possess.
Because the title was real, taking the land was not theft:
Both of these kings — Sihon and Og — hold land that God has given to Israel. Israel may seize it and keep it — indeed, should do so… Whatever God has given, we may take from His hand without suspicion, if it really is from His hand.
The land stopped at Ammon's border, and that limit was deliberate. Later a king of Ammon claimed Israel had stolen this same strip.
The answer was not true. The king of Ammon did not speak honestly. Israel had not taken those lands, as he pretended. The Ammonites had lost them before Israel ever took them from others. Those others Israel was free to attack and plunder. But God had forbidden Israel to plunder Ammon, Moab, or Edom. God held even to a distant tie of connection. That is a striking proof and witness of the ways of our God… The lands might be good pasture. The temptation might be great. Moab or Ammon might give real provocation. On human grounds there might be a just right of conquest; but all this would not do.
Israel's appetite does not explain what happened to Sihon's people. God's verdict on the Amorites does.
Moses stresses here that God gave Sihon into their hand. Even the stubbornness that refused passage to the advancing army came from Him, since the iniquity of the Amorites was now full… Neither greed for land nor love of destroying brought this on Sihon and his people. The mercy was for the world, in rooting a deadly evil out of it.
Commentators differ on Israel's opening move. Darby reads it as restraint. Others ask whether it showed doubt about God's promise.
God's original gift to Israel included the land of the Amorite. So why send messengers asking permission to pass through it, as they did to Edom?… They asked to pass quietly through a land God had given them. Was that the obedience of faith? On the Amorite there was righteous retribution. They had taken that land from Moab, and now Israel, by the will of God, takes it from them.
Whatever the hesitation at the start, the fight itself steadied them.
When Sihon and his army attacked, Israel did not meet him with talk, but with decided action. By the grace and power of God they defeated this proud enemy and took possession of his cities. So Israel showed something of the courage of faith before they entered the land of Canaan. In this way God was preparing them for the conquest of the land.
This eastern territory was never an accident or an afterthought.
So the land of Israel's inheritance lay on both sides of the Jordan, just as God had determined beforehand… This is a picture of the full inheritance of the heavenly saints, which takes in heaven and earth. In symbolic language, it takes in what is east of Jordan as well as what is west, for Jordan is a picture of death.
- Given. The title deeds came before the battle — God gave the land, then began to give it in practice as Israel moved in.
- Bounded. God handed Sihon's land over, yet forbade touching Edom, Moab and Ammon. Old ties still counted with Him.
- Judged. Sihon's fall was a sentence carried out on a full measure of evil, not a land grab.
- Grasped. Faith had to act. Asking to pass through land already promised raises a question: did Israel trust the gift?
- Enlarged. East and west of Jordan together picture an inheritance that spans earth and heaven.
And Israel took all these cities, and Israel dwelt in all the cities of the Amorites, at Heshbon, and in all its dependent villages.
Here Israel stops passing by other people's land and starts living in it. The cities of Sihon, king of the Amorites, become Israel's homes — ground they had only asked to walk through.
Israel is still on the wilderness side of the Jordan. Yet taking these cities is more than a win in battle. It is the promise starting to come true.
We meet people we do not want to fight, but they will not let us pass in peace. Our warfare is with those who hold our inheritance beyond the Jordan. If someone attacks us, we must defend ourselves; but we are not to be the aggressors. Israel wants to pass quietly through the land of the Amorites. The Amorites will not allow it, and they suffer the consequences of the war they had sought against the people of God. Israel takes their cities, and already on this side of the Jordan begins to enjoy, ahead of time, the possession of the promise.
God had told Israel to leave Edom and Moab alone. The Amorite land was different. One writer asks whether asking to pass through it was the right move at all.
The land of the Amorite was part of God's original gift to Israel. So why send messengers asking permission to pass through it, as they did to Edom? The land of Edom and of Moab was no part of Israel's promised possession; God had commanded that they should not be driven out. The land of the Amorite was given. Was it faith to ask only to pass through it? The request did bring out their hatred, and their attempt to stop Israel. Their destruction followed. But the question remains: should Israel not have taken possession at once? Upon the Amorite there was righteous retribution, for they had taken that land from Moab; and now Israel, by the will of God, takes it from them.
Commentators differ here. Darby sees the request as restraint, since Israel were not to be aggressors. This writer sees it as a failure to trust what God had already given.
Heshbon had not always belonged to Sihon. That detail still mattered centuries later, when Ammon claimed the land and Israel's leader Jephthah had to answer them.
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, gathered all his people together and fought against Israel (Num. 21:21-23). This was the undoing of Sihon and his people. Israel defeated them completely and took possession of their land from the Arnon to the Jabbok, as far as the Ammonites (Num. 21:24). Heshbon, the city of Sihon, once belonged to Moab, but Israel did not take it from Moab; they took it from the Amorites. About three hundred years later, Jephthah used this against the king of the Ammonites, who claimed for Ammon the land Israel had taken from Sihon, king of the Amorites (Judges 11:12-27).
One writer sees the Amorites as a picture of an enemy whose religion is all talk.
What is the character of the Amorites? Their name means "Sayer," which reminds us of the Lord's words about the scribes and Pharisees, the religious teachers of His day — they say things and do not do them (Matthew 23:3). They are people who keep the outward form of godliness, but only know how to use their tongue to get their own way.
Israel gave that enemy the only answer it understands.
Sihon's name means "sweeping away," because empty talk tends to sweep away all that is good. So when Sihon and his army attacked, Israel did not meet him with talk, but with firm action. By the grace and power of God they defeated this proud enemy and took possession of his cities (vv. 24-26). So Israel showed something of the courage of faith before they ever entered the land of Canaan. In this way God was preparing them for the conquest of the land.
East of the Jordan was part of the inheritance too. One writer sees in the two sides of the river a picture of something larger.
The Amorite territory east of the Jordan was to form part of the inheritance of Israel, and God told Moses so… So they took the country of Sihon, and that of Og as well (Num. 21:24, 35; Deut. 3:12). The land of Israel's inheritance lay on both sides of the Jordan, settled beforehand by God — though it does not appear that He meant any of them to live on the east of that river… So we must remember that the inheritance of the people, as God designed it, lay east of the Jordan as well as west. This is a picture of the full inheritance of the heavenly saints, which takes in heaven and earth.
- Given. God had already granted Israel the Amorite land. Edom and Moab He told them to leave alone.
- Contested. Israel asked only to pass through. Sihon refused and attacked, and it destroyed him. One writer asks whether faith should have claimed the land from the start.
- Taken. Against an enemy whose name means "Sayer," Israel answered talk with decided action, and by God's power took his cities.
- Settled. Israel lived in Heshbon and its villages. Their claim held so well that Jephthah still argued from it three hundred years later.
- Foreshadowed. Living in these cities east of the Jordan was the promise coming true ahead of time — a first taste of an inheritance that reaches to heaven and earth.
For Heshbon was the city of Sihon the king of the Amorites; and he had fought against the former king of Moab, and had taken all his land out of his hand, even unto the Arnon.
This verse pauses to explain how Sihon came to own the land Israel had just taken. Heshbon once belonged to Moab, and the Amorite king seized it before Israel ever arrived — so why does Moses record the earlier owner?
Verses 26-30 read like an aside. One writer explains why Moses quotes outside records here:
The account of this makes two references. One is to a book of that day, the book of the wars of Jehovah (verse 14). The other is to sayings or legends that were passed around at the time (verses 27-30). This gives no support at all to the theory that Moses composed the Pentateuch out of earlier material floating among the Israelites of his age and their Gentile neighbours. These foreign traditions, written and spoken, are quoted on purpose, with one special aim. They prove that the land in dispute, when Israel took it by conquest, did not belong to Ammon or Moab, but to the doomed races of Canaan and the region around it. And they prove it from witnesses that Israel's most zealous opponents could not question. Israel had no just claim to the country of Ammon or Moab. God gave them the land of the Amorite. The Amorite had taken it from Moab, and Israel took it from the Amorite.
This record of the earlier owner mattered far beyond Moses' own day:
Heshbon, the city of Sihon, once belonged to Moab. But Israel did not take it from Moab; Israel took it from the Amorites. About three hundred years later, Jephthah quoted this to the king of the children of Ammon. That king claimed that the land Israel had taken from Sihon, king of the Amorites, belonged to Ammon (Judges 11:12-27).
Why could Israel take this land and not Moab's? One writer also sees an older score being settled:
The land of Edom and of Moab formed no part of Israel's promised possession. God commanded that Israel should not drive those nations out. The land of the Amorite, though, God gave to Israel... On the Amorite there was righteous retribution, for they had taken that land from Moab. And now Israel, by the will of God, takes it from them.
The song in verses 27-30 began as an Amorite victory chant about this very capture:
The Amorite boasted against Moab. Israel now boasts over the Amorite, and in mockery turns their boasting against them. They had a national song celebrating the capture of Heshbon, and Israel takes it up as a proverb against them. In his boasting song, Sihon seems to have made the captured city the source of the fire that went out and consumed Ar of Moab... If fire came from Heshbon and destroyed Ar of Moab, fire came from Israel and Heshbon perished.
Some writers read these nations as pictures of spiritual conditions. One draws a warning from how easily Moab lost the city:
We are told that Heshbon, Sihon's chief city, had been captured from the Moabites, for the self-satisfied, lazy pride of man (as seen in Moab) will often give way to the persuasive talk of a deceiver. Our only protection from such things is a vital knowledge of the Lord Jesus.
One writer follows the meanings of the names, and finds a lesson in who ends up holding the city:
It is Reuben who builds up again Sihon's capital, Heshbon, which falls to him (Numbers 32:37). "Heshbon" means "the reason, cause, or ground of a thing as an object of thought or study." ... Sihon cannot hold Heshbon against Reuben, although the Moabite may have had to give it up to him. And so "reason" is not alien to faith. Faith only destroys reason in its alien form, in order to build it up again more securely.
The same writer applies this beyond Heshbon:
Do not give up reason because Satan is using it against the truth of God. Do not refuse natural blessings because men turn them into carnality and disorder. Whatever God has given, we may take from His hand without suspicion, if it is indeed from His hand.
- Boast — Heshbon fell to Sihon first, and the Amorites made a song about it. Moab's self-satisfied pride gave way to a deceiver's persuasive talk.
- Record — Moses cites the enemy's own song as evidence. Even hostile witnesses confirm that the land was Amorite, not Moabite, when Israel took it.
- Restraint — Israel took nothing from Moab or Edom; God had forbidden it. Only the Amorite territory was theirs by gift.
- Retribution — Israel received by God's will what the Amorite had seized from Moab. The boast that burned Ar of Moab ended with Heshbon itself in ruins.
- Rebuilding — Heshbon, the city of "reasoning," does not stay in enemy hands. Reuben builds it again. What an enemy misuses, faith may still take back from God's hand and hold securely.
Therefore the poets say, Come to Heshbon; let the city of Sihon be built and established.
Israel has just taken Heshbon from Sihon and settled in his cities. Then the story stops to repeat the victory boast of the beaten king — why?
The lines that follow belong to the Amorites. They had celebrated their capture of Heshbon from Moab in verse, and Israel now repeats that celebration back at them.
The Amorite boasted against Moab. Israel now boasts over the Amorite, turning their boasting back on them in mockery. They had a national song celebrating the capture of Heshbon, and Israel takes it up as a proverb against them. Sihon seems to have made the captured city the point from which, in his boasting song, fire went out and consumed Ar of Moab.
The same writer notes that verse 29 is not certain: it may still be the Amorite boast, or it may be Israel's lament over Moab.
Whoever the speakers are, the song does not end the way Sihon meant it to.
Verses 27-30 record the words of the "ballad singers," showing Moab's defeat by Sihon (vs. 28-29), for Moab's pride could not resist the smooth talk of the Amorites. However, verse 30 introduces a "But." In other words, Israel changed everything. They had shot at the Amorites, and Heshbon had perished instead of consuming Moab (v. 28). Israel laid the country of the Amorites waste and took possession.
There is a legal reason for quoting a song Israel did not write. Everything depended on proving whose land this was when Israel arrived. An enemy's own song was evidence no one could accuse Israel of inventing.
These are well known records, quoted to prove that the country in question was in the hands of the Amorites, and not of Moab, when Israel took possession. This mattered enormously, because Israel was forbidden to touch Moab, while the country of the Amorites was given to them. Israel's own statements, whatever weight they carried for Israel, would have been no record against their enemies. So, to hold Israel's title to these lands, the account preserves memorials the whole region knew: the earlier conquest of Moab by the Amorites, how the Amorites gained this territory, and where the border ran at that time.
That record mattered later. When the Ammonites demanded this territory back, Jephthah answered them from the history this proverb preserves.
Jephthah's title was plain and sure. Israel had not taken these lands from Ammon at all. They had taken them from the Amorite. If the Amorite first got them from Ammon, as was no doubt the fact, that was a matter between Ammon and Sihon, not between Israel and Ammon. It was the business of the Ammonites to defend their claims as best they could against the Amorites... They had won the land in a fight the Amorite provoked and drew them into. They had sought peace, and Sihon wanted war.
Some writers look for meaning in the names themselves. Sihon's name is debated, but Heshbon — the city the proverb calls to rebuild — carries the sense of thought and reasoning.
There is not much agreement about his name. The most likely sense from the Hebrew root is "sweeping off," perhaps "refuse," "off-scouring" — which is what the wisdom of the world really is, the very wisdom that would count God's wisdom as refuse. Or it may mean "sweeping away," as pride of intellect would sweep away the things of God. He is always spoken of as king of Heshbon, where he lived. Older English translations render that word only as "account," "device," or "reason." It clearly gives the thought of mental work.
Read that way, Israel is meant to take the land these kings held and keep it.
Both of these kings — Sihon and Og — occupy a land which by the gift of God Israel may seize and hold; indeed, Israel should do so. Do not give up reason because Satan is using it against the truth of God, and do not refuse natural blessings because men turn them into self-indulgence and disorder. Whatever God has given, we may take from His hand without suspicion — if it really is from His hand.
- Boast. The words belong to the Amorites, who set them to music after taking Heshbon from Moab.
- Borrowed. Israel repeats the enemy's own song back at him, and the fire that once went out from Heshbon ends by consuming Heshbon.
- Deed. A song from outside Israel proved the land was Amorite, not Moabite — the one witness Israel's enemies could not dismiss.
- Tested. Later, when Ammon claimed this land, Jephthah answered from this same history: the quarrel was Ammon's with Sihon, never Israel's.
- Held. Heshbon speaks of reasoning. Do not abandon what an enemy has misused; take it from God's hand as His gift.
For there went forth fire from Heshbon, a flame from the city of Sihon; It consumed Ar of Moab, the lords of the high places of the Arnon.
This verse sits inside a song Israel did not write: verses 27–30 quote an old ballad about fire going out from Heshbon to burn up Moab. So why does Scripture record a foreign war-song, and what does it mean that the city that sent the fire has now burned?
The line belonged to the Amorites. They had taken Heshbon from Moab and sang about the victory. Israel now picks up that same song and turns it back on the singers.
The Amorite boasted against Moab. Israel now boasts over the Amorite, and mockingly turns their own boast against them. They had a national song about the capture of Heshbon, and Israel takes it up as a proverb against them. In his boasting song, Sihon seems to have made the captured city the place from which fire went out and consumed Ar of Moab. Whether the next verse continues the Amorite's boast, or is Israel's lament over Moab, it declares that Chemosh, the god of Moab, was powerless… If fire came from Heshbon and destroyed Ar of Moab, fire came from Israel and Heshbon perished.
There is a legal reason for the quotation. Moab and Ammon later claimed the land east of the Jordan. Israel needed proof that it had not been theirs. An enemy's own song settles the matter.
These foreign traditions are quoted on purpose, and for one unusual reason. They prove, from witnesses that Israel's fiercest opponents could not question, that the land in dispute did not belong to Ammon or Moab when Israel took it by conquest. It belonged to the doomed races of Canaan and the region around it… An enemy could dismiss a Jewish record of the land's earlier owners and of Israel's own victories as self-interested. But a quotation from the enemy's own popular songs settled the matter. And the Spirit of God is pleased to use such an extract for this purpose.
One writer weighs what the two names mean. Sihon's name is hard to pin down, while Heshbon points to the mind.
The most likely meaning of Sihon's name, from the Hebrew root, is "sweeping off" — perhaps "refuse" or "off-scouring." That is what the wisdom of the world really is, and that is how it would count God's wisdom. Or the name may mean "sweeping away," as pride of intellect would sweep away the things of God. He is always called king of Heshbon, where he lived. The older English version gives that word only as "account," "device," or "reason." It certainly gives the thought of mental work.
The song records a defeat. One writer takes it as a warning about the enemy that overcomes a self-satisfied people.
Heshbon, Sihon's chief city, had been captured from the Moabites. That is because the self-satisfied, lazy pride of man — as seen in Moab — will often give way before the persuasive talk of a deceiver. Our only protection from such things is a living knowledge of the Lord Jesus.
The boast did not stand. What Heshbon did to Ar, Israel has now done to Heshbon — and one writer sees more than a turn of fortune in it.
Upon the Amorite there was righteous retribution, for they had taken that land from Moab; and now Israel, by the will of God, takes it from them.
Verse 30 answers the boast with one word.
However, verse 30 introduces a "But." In other words, Israel changed matters decisively. They had shot at the Amorites, and Heshbon had perished instead of consuming Moab. Israel laid the Amorites' country waste and took possession.
Israel did not answer the boast with words.
So when Sihon and his army attacked, Israel did not meet him with talk, but with firm action. By the grace and power of God they defeated this proud enemy and took his cities. Israel was showing something of the courage of faith before they entered the land of Canaan. In this way God was preparing them for the conquest of the land.
Israel had asked only to pass through, and fought because they were attacked:
If we are attacked, we must defend ourselves; but we are not to be the aggressors. Israel wishes to pass quietly through the land of the Amorites; but they will not allow it, and they suffer the consequences of the war they sought against the people of God. Israel takes their cities, and begins already on this side of Jordan to realise, as if beforehand, the possession of the promise.
- Boast. The fire-from-Heshbon line is the Amorites' own victory song about beating Moab. Israel did not write it.
- Evidence. Scripture quotes it as proof no opponent could deny: the land was the Amorite's, not Moab's or Ammon's.
- Fall. Moab's pride gave way to persuasive talk; Heshbon changed hands before Israel ever arrived.
- Reversal. The city that sent out fire is burned by fire — righteous repayment, sealed by the "But" of the next verse.
- Possession. Israel answered the boast with action, took the Amorite cities, and learned the courage of faith before ever entering Canaan.
Woe to thee, Moab! thou art undone, people of Chemosh He gave his sons that had escaped, and his daughters into captivity to Sihon the king of the Amorites.
These lines come from an old battle song about Sihon's defeat of Moab, which Israel then sang back at the Amorites. Its centre is a jeer at Chemosh, Moab's god: what sort of god hands his own worshippers over to the enemy?
The song began as the Amorites' own boast, and Israel took it up after beating them. One commentator leaves open who speaks in verse 29:
The Amorite boasted against Moab. Israel now boasts over the Amorite, and in mockery turns their boasting against them. They had a national song celebrating the capture of Heshbon, and Israel takes it up as a proverb against them... The following verse (the 29th) may be the continuation of the Amorite's boast, or Israel's lament over Moab. Either way, it declares the powerlessness of their god Chemosh. In irony they say that Chemosh had played them false. He had given his sons and daughters (the Moabites) to the Amorite as captives. If these are Israel's own words, they only prove how deceitful the heart is. Israel later worshipped the god they despise here.
Moab had lost Heshbon to Sihon before Israel ever arrived. The song names the cause of that loss, and then the reversal that followed:
Verses 27-30 record the words of "those who speak in proverbs." They point to Moab's defeat by Sihon (vv. 28-29), for Moab's pride was unable to resist the smooth talk of the Amorites. However, verse 30 introduces a "But." In other words, Israel changed matters decisively. Israel had shot at the Amorites, and Heshbon had perished instead of consuming Moab (v. 28). The country of the Amorites was laid waste, and Israel took possession.
The verse calls Moab "the people of Chemosh" — a nation named after its god. A later prophecy against Moab says who that god was, and where he ends up:
Moab's national deity was Chemosh. The Ammonites, their sister nation, worshipped him too. Chemosh was probably the same as Molech. He is now to go forth into captivity with his priests and princes.
Why could a god like this not protect his people? Set him beside the living God and the answer is plain:
Idols are contrasted with Jehovah, but cannot for one moment be compared with the true God. Jehovah is the Maker, but an idol has to be made. Once made, it does not carry others; it has to be carried. Set in its place, it cannot move, cannot answer the cry of need, and cannot save from trouble.
Israel mocked Chemosh here, and later bowed to him. Centuries after this song, Israel's wisest king built a shrine to that same idol:
The case of Solomon is the flagrant proof of how great a snare idolatry was for Israel in its brightest days. What could be more solemn or humbling? The pages of inspiration record that the wise king built the magnificent temple to Jehovah's glory, the house where God's glory was pleased to dwell. That same king also built a high place for Chemosh, the abomination of Moab, on the mount that is before Jerusalem, and another for Molech, the abomination of the children of Ammon.
- Song. These words began as the Amorites' victory song. Israel took their boast and turned it back on them as a proverb.
- Pride. Moab lost Heshbon through pride that could not stand up to Amorite smooth talk. Then verse 30 turns it all around with a single "But."
- Powerlessness. The jeer targets Chemosh. He handed his own sons and daughters — the Moabites — to the Amorite king. Someone must make an idol and then carry it; it cannot move, or answer, or save.
- Captivity. The god who gave his people away goes into captivity himself, with his priests and princes.
- Warning. The people who sang this mockery later worshipped that same god. Solomon built Chemosh a high place facing Jerusalem. Mocking an idol is no protection against taking it up.
And we have shot at them; Heshbon is perished even unto Dibon; and we have laid [them] waste even unto Nophah, which reacheth unto Medeba.
Numbers 21:30 ends a piece of poetry quoted into the story, just after Israel defeats Sihon, king of the Amorites. The lines are short and the place names are strange. Two questions matter here: who is speaking, and why is an old war song in the Bible at all?
Israel did not write the song in verses 27–29. It was the Amorites' own victory chant about taking Heshbon from Moab. This closing line answers it.
The Amorite boasted against Moab. Now Israel boasts over the Amorite, and mockingly turns their own boast against them. They had a national song celebrating the capture of Heshbon, and Israel takes it up as a proverb against them… Verse 30 seems to be Israel's triumph over the Amorite… If fire came out of Heshbon and destroyed Ar of Moab, then fire came out of Israel and Heshbon perished.
The Hebrew opens this line with a sharp contrast. Everything before it describes what the Amorites did to Moab; here the subject changes.
Verses 27-30 record the words of the ballad singers. They point to Moab's defeat by Sihon (verses 28-29), because Moab's pride could not resist the smooth talk of the Amorites. However, verse 30 introduces a "But." In other words, Israel changed everything. Israel had shot at the Amorites, and Heshbon had perished instead of consuming Moab (verse 28). Israel laid the Amorites' country waste and took possession of it.
Israel had been forbidden to attack Moab. So the legal question mattered: did this land belong to Moab when Israel seized it? Quoting the enemy's own folk songs settles it in a way Israel's own records never could.
These are well known records. They are quoted to prove that the land in question was in the hands of the Amorites, and not of Moab, when Israel took possession. This mattered enormously. Israel was forbidden to touch Moab, but the country of the Amorites was given over to them. Israel's own statements, whatever weight they carried among themselves, would have proved nothing against their enemies. So, to establish Israel's title to these lands, the text gives well known popular records of how the Amorites had earlier conquered Moab and taken this territory, and of where the border ran at that time.
Centuries later this same argument was used in court, so to speak, when Ammon claimed the territory back.
A Jewish record of its previous possessors and of their own victories might be disputed as biased by an enemy; but a quotation from their own current proverbial songs was conclusive; and the Spirit of God stoops to use an extract to this end.
The verse names towns to mark how far the defeat reached. Dibon is known, and it changed hands again later.
City on the east of the Jordan in Moab, afterwards possessed by Gad; but near the time of the captivity it was again seized by Moab.
Morrish Bible Dictionary — on Dibon
Nophah is lost to us:
Ancient name of some place, probably near Heshbon.
Commentators differ on how far to press the meaning of these names. The writer below presses them, but admits the evidence is thin. He follows the song from Sihon's own city to the last place it names.
There is little agreement about his name. What seems to come most fairly from the Hebrew root is "sweeping off," perhaps "refuse," "sweepings" — which is what the wisdom of the world is, and what it would call God's wisdom. Or it may mean "sweeping away," as pride of intellect would sweep away the things of God. He is always called king of Heshbon, the city where he lived. That word is only translated "account," "device," or "reason" in the common English version, so it gives the thought of mental work… And in the song of victory the pursuit ends at Medeba, "quiet waters."
The same writer draws a practical lesson. Do not throw away a good thing because an enemy has misused it.
Do not give up reason because Satan is using it against the truth of God. Do not refuse natural blessings because people turn them into self-indulgence and disorder. Whatever God has given, you may take from His hand without suspicion, if it really is from His hand.
- Boast — The Amorites composed a song about the fire that went out from Heshbon and burned Moab. It was their own trophy.
- Reversal — This verse is the "but." The fire that went out from Heshbon came back on Heshbon. The city that burned Moab perished itself.
- Reach — Geography measures the defeat: as far as Dibon, as far as Nophah, as far as Medeba. Sihon's whole kingdom fell inside those lines.
- Title — The song stands as legal evidence. The land was Amorite, not Moabite. Israel's claim rests on words its enemies wrote.
- Possession — What God hands over is to be taken and held, not shunned. The enemy's misuse of a thing does not forfeit Israel's right to it.
And Israel dwelt in the land of the Amorites.
Numbers 21 takes Israel from murmuring and the bronze serpent to a well and a song. It ends with the nation settled in Amorite country — so what right did they have to it, and why did their first home lie outside Canaan?
Their claim did not begin with the battle. One writer compares this land with the nations Israel had to leave alone. He also notes how the Amorites got it:
The land of the Amorite was included in the original gift of God to Israel... The land of Edom and of Moab formed no part of Israel's promised possession; it was God's command that they should not be dispossessed. The land of the Amorite was given; was it an act of faith to ask only to pass through it?... On the Amorite there was righteous retribution, for they had taken that land from Moab; and now Israel by the will of God takes it from them.
Israel asked only for a road through, and commentators differ over whether they should have asked at all. Another writer takes the refusal as the pattern of a believer's conflict. He sees the settling east of the river as an early taste of the promise:
If we are attacked, we must defend ourselves; but we are not to be aggressors. Israel wishes to pass quietly through the land of the Amorites, but the Amorites will not allow it. So they suffer the consequences of the war they had sought against the people of God. Israel takes their cities, and already on this side of Jordan begins to enjoy in advance the possession God promised.
One writer finds the clue to these people in what their name means:
What is the character of the Amorites? Their name means "Sayer," which reminds us of the Lord's words about the scribes and Pharisees, "they preach, but do not practice" (Matt. 23:3). They are those who have a form of godliness, but only know how to use their tongue to get their own way.
Against such an enemy, the answer was not more words. The same writer sees the fight as training for what lay ahead:
Israel did not meet him with talk, but with decided action. By the grace and power of God they defeated this proud enemy and took possession of his cities. So Israel was showing something of the courage of faith before they actually entered the land of Canaan. In this way God was preparing them for the conquest of the land.
The order of the chapter is itself the lesson — serpents and a well before Sihon and Og:
The events that picture victory over the flesh within come first, and the record of victory over the foes outside follows. And this is indeed the way things work in our spiritual experience.
Numbers 21 quotes outside sources: a book of wars and a popular saying about Heshbon. One writer explains why, and what it settled in the days of Jephthah, a later leader of Israel:
These foreign traditions are quoted on purpose... The aim is to prove that the land in dispute did not belong to Ammon or Moab when Israel took it by conquest. The proof comes from witnesses their most zealous opponents could not question... The Amorite had taken it from Moab, and Israel took it from the Amorite. Israel then lived in all their cities, from Arnon to Jabbok, in Heshbon and all its villages. In Judges 11 we see Jephthah take his stand on this same recognised fact against the claims of the king of Ammon. Those claims collapsed under the undeniable evidence that the Amorite held the disputed land when Israel took it over...
What God gives, His people may take up without apology:
Both of these kings — Sihon and Og — occupy land that God has given to Israel, so Israel may seize it and hold it; indeed, should do so... We may take whatever God has given from His hand without suspicion, if it truly is from His hand.
But the gift came with a warning. One writer treats both sides of the Jordan as the inheritance God planned. He then notes what the eastern tribes found:
On both sides of the Jordan, then, lay the land of Israel's inheritance, just as God had determined beforehand. Yet it does not appear that He intended any of them to live east of that river. The tribes who asked for their portion there got it. But they soon discovered its drawback.
- Gift — the Amorite land was Israel's by God's earlier promise; Edom and Moab were off limits because God had not given them.
- Provocation — Israel asked only to pass through; Sihon chose the war, and lost the land he had himself seized from Moab.
- Courage — faith answered talkers with action, and the win east of Jordan trained Israel for Canaan.
- Order — victory over the enemy within came first in the chapter, then victory over the enemy outside.
- Caution — hold without hesitation what God has truly given, yet the tribes who settled east of the river found a drawback in it.
And Moses sent to spy out Jaazer, and they took its dependent villages, and he dispossessed the Amorites that were there.
Israel is near the end of the long desert journey, east of the Jordan. The mood of the story has changed. Instead of complaining there is a song, and instead of retreat there is advance. Jazer is the next town on that advance. Its capture gets one short line, and that line raises two questions. Why send scouts at all? And what did Israel do with the ground once it was won?
The verse sits at the end of a chapter that moves from the serpent's bite to the well and the song, and then to open warfare. One writer reads that order as deliberate.
As at the start of our chapter, so at the end, we hear the noise of battle. Sihon had struck Moab, but now he falls before Israel. So does Og the king of Bashan, even though he was a giant, as we learn in Deuteronomy 3:11. The events that picture victory over the flesh within come first. The record of victory over the enemies outside follows. And this is truly the way things work in our spiritual experience.
Sihon's defeat had not finished the Amorites off. Jazer was a pocket of them still holding out.
However, other Amorites remained in the area of Jazer. Israel first spied it out, then captured its villages and drove out the people living there… Though some of the spies had been afraid before because of giants in the land, now Israel attacked without fear and completely subdued the Amorites.
Commentators differ on how to read the scouting party. Grant sees Israel showing courage at last. Another writer hears an echo of the earlier lesson about sending spies, and is struck that this time nothing goes wrong.
Again the old lack of confidence in God appears: "And Moses sent to spy out Jazer." Had they not already been taught enough about the use of spies? Here, however, no disaster follows. Is it not that the fullness of grace, seen in the "well," covers their lack of faith in God's promise? This is not the only time that sovereignty and grace rise above failure (do we not have daily proof of it?) and set it aside, so that the goodness of God might triumph over the distrustful heart of man.
The same writer draws the plain contrast from it:
It is the opposite of faith. Faith rests on His word and never sends spies. It does not look at obstacles with the eye of doubt and fear. It refuses to meet unfavourable or opposing circumstances in a human way. It counts on God and His unfailing word, and so it overcomes.
Israel took towns and villages that had belonged to other nations. The chapter even quotes the local songs about who held them first. One writer explains why.
These foreign traditions are quoted on purpose, with one unusual aim. They prove, from witnesses their fiercest opponents could not challenge, that the land in dispute did not belong to Ammon or Moab when Israel took it by conquest. It belonged to the doomed nations of Canaan and the region around it. To the country of Ammon and Moab Israel had no just claim. The country of the Amorite and the rest God handed over to them. The Amorite had taken it from Moab, and Israel took it from the Amorite. Israel then lived in all their cities, from the Arnon to the Jabbok, in Heshbon and all its villages.
The name Jazer comes back later in the book, and not happily. The fertile country won here is what Reuben and Gad later asked to keep.
Reuben and Gad looked at the beautiful territory taken from the two Amorite kings, Sihon and Og. They were very rich in cattle and the land was extremely fertile, so they were eager to have it… But by asking for the land of Jazer and Gilead, they would separate themselves from their fellow Israelites. They would let them go and fight alone in the land.
Hole draws out the warning:
Here we see that the rich and good things of earth make it hard for those who own them to take hold of their heavenly possessions. It is so easy for us to agree that our calling is heavenly, and then settle down in our comfortable earthly circumstances. We never take hold of it as something faith actually experiences.
- Order — inward victory first, outward victory after. The healing and the song come before the fighting, and that is the order of real spiritual experience.
- Remnant — Sihon's fall left Amorites still holding Jazer. Pockets of a beaten enemy still need clearing.
- Grace — Moses sent spies again, yet no disaster followed. Grace rose above the distrustful heart.
- Title — the land was never Moab's or Ammon's to claim. God gave Israel the Amorite's country, and the enemy's own songs prove it.
- Danger — the ground won at Jazer later tempted Reuben and Gad to settle short of the promise. Good earthly things can cost a heavenly portion.
And they turned and went up by the way to Bashan; and Og the king of Bashan went out against them, he and all his people, for battle to Edrei.
Israel's years in the wilderness are nearly over. Turning north into Bashan, they meet a giant king with walled cities, and two questions come with him: why does God tell Moses not to fear before the fight starts, and why is a whole kingdom wiped out?
God's word to Moses was not a promise of help. It reported something already done.
Then they went to Bashan, another Amorite city, and King Og came out with his people to fight them. The Lord had told them not to fear Og, because God had already given him into their hand. So Israel defeated him easily and took his land. In Deuteronomy 3:11 we read that Og was a giant. His bed was nine cubits long and four cubits wide, which is over thirteen feet by six feet. Some of the spies had once been afraid of the giants in the land. Now Israel attacked without fear and fully subdued the Amorites.
Og had every advantage a king of his day could have. The fight still cost Israel nothing.
It had been a war of extermination. Every man, woman and child was killed, and as far as we read, not one Israelite was wounded (Deuteronomy 2:33-34; 3:6). And Og, one of the Rephaim, an ancient and very powerful race, found that his walled cities, with their high walls, gates and bars, could give him no protection against the invading army. Israel swept over his land like a flood that carries everything before it. They took all his cities.
Why such severity? One writer answers by separating two ways God acts, and warns that the difference is easy to miss.
God's instructions about Og king of Bashan were exactly like those He gave in the previous chapter about Sihon the Amorite. To understand either one, we must look at them only in the light of the government of God. Few people understand this subject, though it is deeply interesting and very practical. We must carefully distinguish between grace and government. When we look at God in government, we see Him using His power in the way of righteousness, punishing evildoers.
Commentators differ over how far to read the details as a picture. One takes the names in the verse — Bashan and Edrei — and finds in Og a danger that is not brute force.
He is king of Bashan, or the Bashan, which means "the fertile." His strong city is Edrei, "plenty of pasture," and he lives in Ashtaroth, a city named after the Phoenician goddess Venus, whose worship involved shameful acts. Add to this that the only thing left of him is a monstrous bed, and that is perhaps all that can be said of him. It may be enough to identify him with the spirit of luxury and soft living, the second enemy of the church at Corinth. That this Og is a giant we know only too well: he has brought down many a strong man.
Another writer reads the two defeated kings as a pattern for Christian experience.
Sihon had struck Moab, but now he falls before Israel. So does Og the king of Bashan, though he was a giant, as we learn in Deuteronomy 3:11. The events that picture victory over the flesh within come first, and then comes the record of victory over the enemies outside. And this is indeed the way things work in our spiritual experience.
One writer draws the practical lesson: what God has already done settles what is still to come.
He had given His people such a victory over the Amorites. He had destroyed a fearsome enemy like Og king of Bashan, and handed them the whole land of the giants. What could He not do for them? In all the land of Canaan they were unlikely to meet any enemy stronger than Og, whose bed was so huge that Moses gave it special mention. But what was he in the presence of his Almighty Creator? Dwarfs and giants are all alike to Him. The great thing is to keep God Himself always before our eyes. Then difficulties vanish.
- Given — God handed Og and his land over before a sword was drawn. Israel fought a battle God had already settled.
- Given past walls — High walls, gates and bars gave an ancient and powerful race no protection at all.
- Given in government — God's severity toward Og is God acting as ruler and judge of evildoers. That is not the same as His grace.
- Given against giants — One writer reads Og as the pull of luxury and soft living, a giant that has brought down many strong men.
- Given as a pledge — What God has already done answers the fear of what comes next. Dwarfs and giants are alike to Him.
And Jehovah said to Moses, Fear him not! for into thy hand have I given him, and all his people, and his land; and thou shalt do to him as thou didst unto Sihon the king of the Amorites, who dwelt at Heshbon.
Israel has reached the last stretch of the desert road, and the giant king of Bashan comes out to block it. God tells Moses not to fear before a single blow is struck. The reason is in the past tense: the victory is already given.
The order not to fear is not a call to summon up courage. It rests on a fact God has already settled. Israel acts on that fact.
Israel had the Lord's word not to fear Og, because God had already given him into their hand. So Israel defeated him without difficulty and took possession of his land. In Deuteronomy 3:11 we read that Og was a giant. His bed was nine cubits long and four cubits wide, which would be over thirteen feet by six feet. Some of the spies had been afraid of the giants in the land before. Now Israel attacked without fear, and fully subdued the Amorites.
Og's bed was so large that Moses thought it worth recording. One writer sets that size beside the God who made him.
In all the land of Canaan they could hardly expect to meet an enemy more powerful than Og. His bed was so huge that Moses gave it special notice. But what was he in the presence of his Almighty Creator? Dwarfs and giants are all alike to Him. The great point is to keep God Himself always before our eyes. Then difficulties vanish.
God measures the coming victory by the one just won. Sihon had already fallen; Og would fall the same way. One writer sees a lesson in it for the campaign still ahead.
The victory over these two enemies held the prediction of further victory in the land. Israel had been afraid to enter the land before because of enemies like these. Now God had given them an object lesson in experience that should encourage them.
This war came to Israel; Israel did not go looking for it. One writer draws a rule of conduct from that.
We meet people we do not want war with, but they will not let us pass in peace. Our warfare is with those who hold our inheritance beyond the Jordan. If someone attacks us, we must defend ourselves; but we are not to be the aggressors.
Some compare Israel's wars here with the Spanish conquest of South America. One writer names the difference.
There is one grand and all-important difference. Israel had the direct authority of God for what they did to Sihon and Og. The Spaniards could show no such authority for what they did to the poor ignorant native peoples of South America. That changes the case completely. Bringing in God and His authority is the one perfect answer to every question.
One writer reads the order of these events as a pattern of Christian experience.
The events that picture victory over the flesh within come first. Then comes the record of victory over the foes outside. This is indeed the way things work in our spiritual experience.
One writer traces the details around Og — his land, his city, his one surviving relic — to a particular enemy.
He is king of Bashan, which means "the fertile." His strong city is Edrei, "plenty of pasture." He lives in Ashtaroth, a city named after the Phoenician Venus, whose worship involved shameful rites. Add to that the one relic left of him, a monstrous bed. That says all that can be said of him, and perhaps enough to mark him out as the spirit of luxury and self-indulgence… This Og is a giant, and sadly we know it too well. He has cast down many a strong man.
The two fallen kings were a promise of everything still to come. A warning comes with it.
The victories over Sihon and Og should have been the pledge to Israel that every power of man would be swept away — every power Satan used as his instrument to stop them reaching and possessing their inheritance… Fighting enemies outside is not renouncing self. The sense of deliverance from outward foes is not always matched by a sense of deliverance from self. In fact, the rest and ease that follow a victory over the enemy may lead to self-indulgence.
- Given, then fought. God handed the land over before the battle. Israel's courage was obedience to a fact, not a guess about the odds.
- Given, so size is irrelevant. Before the Creator, "dwarfs and giants are all alike" — keep God in view, and difficulties vanish.
- Given, so the pattern repeats. Og falls as Sihon fell, an object lesson to steady Israel for the land ahead.
- Given, so the war is lawful. Israel asked to pass in peace, and God Himself gave the authority. This was not human conquest.
- Given, but not finished. Victory over the foe outside is a pledge of more, yet the ease that follows it can feed the self within.
And they smote him, and his sons, and all his people, so that they left him none remaining, and took possession of his land.
Og was a giant king east of the Jordan, and Israel left none of his people alive. Two questions follow. Why did God order destruction this complete? And how could a people still outside Canaan already be taking land?
Israel went into this fight with God's word about Og already given.
Then they went to Bashan, another Amorite city, and King Og came out with his people to fight them. The Lord had told them not to fear Og, because God had already delivered him into their hand. So Israel defeated him without difficulty and took possession of his land. In Deuteronomy 3:11 we read that Og was a giant. His bed was nine cubits long and four cubits wide — over thirteen feet by six feet. Some of the spies had been afraid before because of giants in the land. Now Israel attacked without fear and fully subdued the Amorites.
The chapter begins and ends in conflict. One writer reads the order of events as a picture of our own spiritual experience.
As at the beginning of our chapter, so at the end, we hear the din of conflict. The events that picture victory over the flesh within come first, and the record of victory over the foes without follows. And this is indeed the way things work in our spiritual experience.
Og and Sihon were not the last enemies Israel would meet.
Satan uses the power of man to keep Israel from reaching and possessing their inheritance. The victories over Sihon and Og should have been the pledge that every such power would be swept away.
Leaving no survivor is the hardest line in the verse. One writer says only one thing explains it: the government of God.
The divine instructions about Og king of Bashan were exactly like those given in the previous chapter about Sihon the Amorite. To understand both, we must look at them only in the light of the government of God. Few understand that subject, though it is of very deep interest and practical importance. We must clearly distinguish between grace and government. When we look at God in government, we see Him displaying His power in the way of righteousness. He punishes evildoers and pours out vengeance on His enemies. He overthrows empires, upturns thrones, destroys cities, and sweeps away nations, tribes and peoples.
Some compare Israel's wars with the conquests of later empires. One difference answers that.
There is this great and all-important difference. Israel had the direct authority of God for what they did to Sihon and Og. The Spaniards could show no such authority for what they did to the poor ignorant natives of South America. This changes the case completely.
Israel took Og's land while still outside Canaan. They had not gone looking for these wars.
We meet people we do not want to fight, but they will not let us pass in peace. Our warfare is with those who hold our inheritance beyond Jordan. If we are attacked, we must defend ourselves; but we are not to be aggressors. Israel wishes to pass through the land of the Amorites without fighting. The Amorites will not allow it. They suffer the consequences of the war they had sought against the people of God. Israel takes their cities. Already on this side of Jordan they begin to enjoy, in advance, the possession of the promise.
God had fixed the borders of this inheritance long before the battle.
On both sides of the Jordan lay the land of Israel's inheritance, as God had determined beforehand. Yet it does not appear that He intended any of them to live on the east of that river.
The names around Og carry a meaning of their own.
He is king of Bashan, which means "the fertile." His strong city is Edrei, "plenty of pasture." He lives in Ashtaroth, a city named after the Phoenician goddess Venus, whose worship involved shameful rites. The only relic of him is a monstrous bed. That may be all that can be said of him — and enough to identify him with the spirit of luxury and self-indulgence. That this Og is a giant we know too well: many a strong man has been cast down by him.
The same writer will not let the misuse of good things spoil the things themselves.
Do not give up reason because Satan is using it against the truth of God. Do not refuse natural blessings because men turn them into indulgence and disorder. Whatever God has given, we may take from His hand without suspicion, if it really is from His hand.
- Given first. God had already handed Og over. The fighting only carried out a decision He had made.
- Fear gone. Giants had frightened the spies before. This time Israel attacked one without hesitation.
- Government, not cruelty. Leaving no survivor belongs to God's righteous government. Israel acted on His direct authority, and no human conqueror can claim that.
- Pledge of more. Every power standing between Israel and their inheritance would fall the same way.
- Possession begun. Israel took the cities of the kings they beat, and tasted the promise before crossing the Jordan.