And the children of Reuben and the children of Gad had much cattle, a very great multitude; and they saw the land of Jaazer, and the land of Gilead, and behold, the place was a place for cattle.
Israel has stopped east of the Jordan. The land ahead is Canaan, the land God promised. But Jazer and Gilead, the conquered country on this side of the river, are good grazing ground — and two tribes with huge herds notice. The verse turns on one detail: livestock. Commentators have long asked whether what follows is a fair plan or a quiet loss of nerve.
The chapter opens with the word "saw." One writer traces the whole story back to that word, and sets it beside Lot's choice of the Jordan Valley.
But note how this great altar began. We read: "They saw the land of Jazer and the land of Gilead, and behold, the place was a place for livestock." It was exactly the same principle at work in Lot, who "lifted up his eyes and saw that the Jordan Valley was well watered everywhere like the garden of the LORD, like the land of Egypt." The sight-principle confuses the garden of the Lord with the land of Egypt. Just think of those two put together — "Egypt" and "the garden of the Lord"! What a contrast! The one is above and unseen; the other is below and visible. Jordan separates them. And sadly many today have lifted up their eyes like Lot and like Reuben. They have seen well-watered plains and places for livestock, and they are settling down on this side of Jordan.
Their herds came from God's own hand. That is what makes the next step so searching.
Two tribes, Reuben and Gad, and half the tribe of Manasseh asked Moses to let them settle on the conquered lands east of Jordan. They would not find their portion in what was definitely the land of God's promise. What particularly moved them to want this was the abundance of cattle they had gained. The good things God had granted took away their desire for Canaan.
Several writers judge the plan by one question. Where had God placed Israel's inheritance?
First of all, where was Israel's proper portion — the inheritance God had destined for them? Most surely on the other side of Jordan, in the land of Canaan… 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… They surveyed "the land of Jazer and the land of Gilead," and they valued it entirely according to their own interests, with no reference to the judgement and will of God.
One writer reads the Jordan itself as a picture. That shows what the two tribes gave up.
So they have to cross the Jordan (the river of death) to enter the land, a picture of heavenly places. But sadly, two and a half tribes prefer the "other side of Jordan," the land of Gilead, which is "a place for livestock" — in other words, earthly prosperity.
Another writer turns the same picture into a test of what drives daily life:
There, the motive for our walk will no longer be "much cattle"; it will no longer be a question of arranging our life more or less faithfully according to what we own.
Commentators differ on the men themselves. Some set them beside Lot. One writer refuses that comparison.
In moral power they fell short of the call of God. Yet they held to the hope of that calling, and claimed fellowship only with those who shared it… I do not regard them like Lot, a people of mixed principles who had deliberately shaped their lives by something inconsistent with the call of God, but rather as a generation who own that call, and prize it, and refuse any other, yet are not found in the full moral power of it.
The choice was not punished on the spot. Its cost showed up generations later.
One thing more we must notice. When Israel declined, captivity began with the two and a half tribes. Even in the days of Ahab, Ramoth in Gilead was in the hands of the Syrians. Later those parts were the first to fall captive to Assyria. In just the same way, the spirit of the world captures the earthly-minded Christian most easily.
Yet God did not abandon them to their own boundary. What He did next says more about Him than about them.
Here we have a lovely display of the grace of God rising, as it always does, above human weakness and failure… Despite this failure, God in His abounding grace would not leave the poor manslayer without a refuge in the day of his distress. If man cannot rise to the height of God's thoughts, God can come down to the depths of man's need. He does it so richly here that the two tribes and a half were to have as many cities of refuge on this side of Jordan as the nine tribes and a half had in the land of Canaan.
- Sight — the story starts with what the eye valued. The same principle moved Lot toward the well-watered plain.
- Gift — the herds were God's provision, yet that blessing dulled their hunger for the land He promised.
- Short — choosing a border this side of Jordan meant settling short of the portion God had assigned.
- Slow — no immediate judgment fell, but the border tribes were the first taken captive.
- Grace — God still set cities of refuge on their chosen side. He came down to the need of people who fell short of His thoughts.
And the children of Gad and the children of Reuben came and spoke to Moses, and to Eleazar the priest, and to the princes of the assembly, saying,
Israel camps east of the Jordan, with the promised land just across the river. Two tribes now ask Moses, Eleazar the priest and the nation's leaders to let them stay on the near side — a choice readers still debate.
The chapter opens a debate instead of settling it. One writer states the problem before answering it:
The fact recorded in this chapter has given rise to considerable discussion. Were they right or were they wrong in choosing their inheritance on the wilderness side of Jordan? Was their action the expression of power or of weakness?
His answer rests on one fact: God had already fixed where their portion lay.
Reuben and Gad, and the half tribe of Manasseh chose a boundary line short of the river Jordan. That 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 motives of the flesh. They looked over "the land of Jazer and the land of Gilead." They valued it by their own interests alone, with no reference to the judgement and will of God. Had they been simply looking to God, the question of settling short of the river Jordan would never have been raised at all.
The verse just before gives their reason: they owned large herds.
Two tribes, Reuben and Gad, and half the tribe of Manasseh asked Moses to let them settle on the conquered lands east of Jordan. They did not want their portion in what was definitely the land of God's promise. What moved them most was the great number of cattle they had gained. The good things that God had granted took away their desire for Canaan.
Strangest of all is how they put it. They call it grace not to have to go in:
How could they possibly refuse the very land that God had promised to Abraham? Moses would have loved to enter the land, but his earlier failure barred him. Yet these two and a half tribes regard it as a sign of having found grace if they do not need to go in. Their reasoning was clear and sobering: the land they were in "is a land for livestock, and your servants have livestock." Their thoughts never rose above livestock — that is, their material possessions.
They were not deserters. One writer sets them apart from those who deliberately choose another path:
In moral power they came short of the call of God. Yet they held to the hope of that calling, and claimed fellowship only with those who were the objects of it. In power they were not a risen people, though by faith they were one with those who were. I do not see them as a people of mixed principles, who had deliberately shaped their lives by something inconsistent with the call of God. I see them instead as a generation who owned that call, prized it, and refused the thought of having any other — yet they did not live in its full moral power.
Their request reminded Moses of something in Israel's past:
This move by Reuben and Gad, and the half tribe of Manasseh, makes Moses uneasy at once. He expresses this uneasiness with much force. He tells them that they bring to his mind the conduct of the spies he had sent out years before from Kadesh-barnea. The way those spies acted discouraged their brothers and caused the forty years of wandering in the wilderness.
One writer draws out what this pictures for believers today:
The sight of their eyes swayed them, and they settled down on the wrong side of Jordan. It is a picture of true believers who are content to settle down. They never do the spiritual work 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... in Christ with every spiritual blessing in the heavenly places" (Eph. 1:3). How many there are in this condition today!
Commentators differ over how harshly to judge the choice. One weighs it against God's purpose, and traces what it cost Israel later:
God's purpose was Canaan, which lies beyond Jordan. They did not choose Egypt. Their choice lay beyond the Red Sea, yet it was still not Canaan. Losing sight of the call of God, they made their choice in these mournful words: "Do not take us across the Jordan." ... Later, Israel's sin and weakness left them easy prey for their foes. The lovely country east of Jordan was the first to pass into enemy hands.
- Sight — They looked at good grazing land and priced it by their own interests, with no reference to God's will.
- Short — The gifts God had given them killed their appetite for the land He had promised. Their own prosperity stopped them at the river.
- Sincere — They owned Israel's calling and prized it, but never lived in its full moral power.
- Startled — Moses heard in their request the same note as the spies who turned Israel back years before.
- Stripped — The land they chose by sight was the first the enemy took.
Ataroth, and Dibon, and Jaazer, and Nimrah, and Heshbon, and Elaleh, and Sebam, and Nebo, and Beon,
These nine towns are the list Reuben and Gad lay before Moses. They name the country they want before they even ask for it. Every town on the list sits east of the Jordan, outside the land God had promised. So one question hangs over the list: what was driving the choice?
This was land Israel had just taken from two Amorite kings. It was rich pasture, and these tribes owned a lot of cattle.
Reuben and Gad looked at the beautiful territory Israel had taken from the two Amorite kings, Sihon and Og. They were very rich in cattle, and the territory was very fertile, so they were eager to have the land. The half tribe of Manasseh seems to have made the same request and joined them. A long dispute followed between Moses and these tribes. Moses saw at once the evil bound up in such a request. They despised the land of promise. God had commanded them to take that land as their own. By their request they showed they were ready to disobey God. What is more, by wanting the land of Jazer and Gilead they would end up separated from their brothers. They would let them go and fight alone in the land. The whole request showed selfishness.
One writer quotes Matthew Henry, who names what lay behind the choice — and what came of it long afterward.
"Two things common in this world led these tribes to make this choice and this proposal: the lust of the eye, and the pride of life. The land was pleasant to look at, and it was good for pasture. Too many seek their own things, and not the good of all or the things of Christ, and so stop short of the heavenly Canaan. Their choice implied: 1. A contempt for the land of promise. 2. A distrust of the power of God. 3. A neglect of the interests of their brothers. 4. An excessive regard for their own convenience and wealth... It is worth noticing something. These tribes were now placed first, before the other tribes. Long afterward they were also the first to be driven out."
Some of these names carry meanings worth knowing. One writer works through what fell to Reuben, starting with Heshbon.
Reuben rebuilds Sihon's capital, Heshbon, which falls to him. "Heshbon" means "the reason, cause, or ground of a thing as an object of thought or study." ... "In Heshbon they have devised evil against her," says the prophet, playing on the name. Sihon cannot hold Heshbon against Reuben. In the same way, reason is not foreign to faith. Faith destroys reason only in its foreign form, and then builds it up again more firmly... Dibon also ("enough knowledge"?) falls to Reuben... And he purifies and renames the places dedicated to Baal.
Beon is one of those places. It goes by several names in Scripture, and it was no small town.
A city of Reuben east of the Jordan. It is apparently also called Baal-meon, Beth-baal-meon, and Beon (Joshua 13:17; Numbers 32:3; Numbers 32:38, which notes that their names were changed). Ezekiel 25:9 speaks of it as a city that was "the glory of the country."
All nine towns lie east of the Jordan. That river marked a line.
The Jordan can also be seen as the boundary of the promised land. So the two and a half tribes who stayed east of it stopped short of their privileges. They picture many Christians who never take up by faith the heavenly portion God intends for them. That portion is reached through death and resurrection. So the enemy attacks them more easily. That is what happened to the two and a half tribes: they were the first to be carried away into captivity.
Take Elealeh, one of the nine. Reuben held it, but not forever.
A city east of the Jordan. Reuben held it, but the Moabites took it later.
The same pattern held for the tribes as a whole when Assyria came.
The Assyrian Tiglath-Pileser comes up against Pekah, king in Samaria. He carries away captive the Reubenites, the Gadites, and that half tribe of Manasseh — all the people settled beyond the Jordan... The kingdom of Ephraim starts to break up with these tribes. For their own convenience, they had chosen their portion on the other side of the Jordan.
- Sight — they picked these towns because the pasture looked good. The motive was the lust of the eye and the pride of life.
- Short — every town lies east of the Jordan, the boundary of the promised land. To settle there was to stop short of their privileges.
- Spoil — this was captured Amorite land. It held Sihon's capital, Heshbon, and a town named after Baal that had to be renamed.
- Exposed — those who stop short are more open to enemy attack. The kingdom began to break up with the tribes east of the river.
- Displaced — these tribes were placed first, and they were the first to be carried away captive. The towns they asked for ended up in Moab's hands.
the country that Jehovah smote before the assembly of Israel, is a land for cattle, and thy servants have cattle;
The two and a half tribes make their case in one breath: God has just cleared this land, it suits herds, and herds are what they own. The plea sounds practical, even grateful — so why do commentators call it a mistake and a failure?
Their case fits the ground to the herds. One writer asks what that reasoning leaves out, and points to something stranger — they treat staying out of the land as a mark of God's grace:
How could they refuse the very land that God had promised to Abraham? Moses would have loved to enter the land, but his earlier failure shut him out. Yet these two and a half tribes treat it as a sign of having found grace if they do not need to go in. Their reasoning was as clear as it was sobering: the land they were in "is a land for livestock, and your servants have livestock." Their thoughts did not rise above livestock, that is, their material possessions.
One writer names what their survey left out:
Reuben and Gad, and the half tribe of Manasseh, chose a boundary line short of the river Jordan. That was a mistake, a failure, a stopping short of the mark God had set. Worldly and selfish thinking ruled their conduct — what their eyes could see, what their flesh wanted. They surveyed "the land of Jazer and the land of Gilead," and they judged it only by their own interests. They gave no thought to God's judgement and will.
The same habit appears much earlier. Lot, Abraham's nephew, chose his ground by the look of it:
Long before this, Lot thought he could trust the sight of his eyes (Gen. 13:10-11). He felt no need to think about the Lord's guidance. But his own choice led him into deep trouble. Abram depended on the Lord to lead him, and the Lord kept him safe.
It was not poverty that held them back. It was prosperity, and the herds were God's own gift:
Reuben, Gad and half the tribe of Manasseh asked Moses to let them settle on the conquered lands east of Jordan, rather than take their portion in the land God had promised. What moved them was the abundance of cattle they had acquired. The good things that God had granted took away their desire for Canaan.
Their request touched more than themselves. It touched the other tribes, and God's command:
Moses saw at once the evil in such a request. They despised the land of promise. God had commanded them to take that land. By asking as they did, they showed they were ready to disobey God. Also, by wanting the land of Jazer and Gilead they would be cut off from their brothers. They would let them go and fight alone in the land. The whole request showed selfishness.
Was the east side outside God's gift? One writer answers, and marks where God meant His people to live:
after
The land of Israel's inheritance lay on both sides of the Jordan, as God had settled beforehand. Even so, it does not appear that He meant any of them to live on the east of that river. The tribes who asked for their portion there did get it. But they soon discovered the drawback of it.
That drawback surfaced twice — once in their own anxiety, and once under God's hand:
On returning to their possessions, the two and a half tribes built an altar by the Jordan, afraid that in time they would be disowned as not belonging to God's people Israel. This fear was only one of the results of coming short of God's purpose. A second result: they were the first to come under God's discipline when Israel turned away from Him.
One writer draws out what crossing the Jordan pictures:
We have already seen how unbelief shut great numbers out of the land, even though afterwards they wanted to go in. Now we see how the good things of earth may lead people to shut themselves out. To enter the land, they had to cross the Jordan. That crossing pictures death and resurrection with Christ. It is the way into the real enjoyment of the heavenly portion God has called us to, as we see in Colossians 2 and 3. Only then can we truly seek the things that are above, and not the things on the earth.
- Sight — They judged Jazer and Gilead by their own interests, not by God's will. Lot chose that way too, and it cost him.
- Substance — Their thoughts did not rise above their livestock. The very abundance God had given them took away their desire for Canaan.
- Separation — Their request left their brothers to fight alone. Moses saw the selfishness at once.
- Shortfall — They asked, and they got it. Then came the drawback: an altar built from fear of being disowned, and first place under God's discipline.
- Summons — The land lies beyond Jordan. Crossing pictures death and resurrection with Christ, and there the heart seeks what is above.
and they said, If we have found favour in thine eyes, let this land be given to thy servants for a possession bring us not over the Jordan.
Israel has reached the edge of Canaan after the long desert journey. Now two and a half tribes ask Moses to let them settle where they already stand, east of the Jordan. Was this a fair thing to ask, or a quiet refusal of everything God had promised?
One writer answers the whole case with one earlier question. Where had God said Israel's portion was?
First, 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. Well then, should not that fact have been enough? What about a true heart — a heart that thought and felt and judged with God? Would such a heart ever have considered 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. It was a failure, a stopping short of God's mark.
So what put the idea in their heads? One writer points to what they already owned.
They asked Moses to let them settle on the conquered lands east of the Jordan, and not to take their portion in the land of God's promise. What moved them most to want this was the large number of cattle they had acquired. The good things that God had granted took away their desire for Canaan.
One writer compares them to Lot, who also chose land by what he saw.
Their own separate history begins the way Lot's did. They saw the well-watered plains — land good for their cattle on the wilderness side of the Jordan. They think of their cattle rather than of the call of God and the pilgrimage of their brothers. Had their hearts been full of Christ, they would not have seen anything until they had crossed the river. Abraham, their father, had not stayed on that side of the river. And Moses had said nothing to them about these plains in the land of Gilead.
Notice the words they choose. They make staying out of the land sound like a favour granted to them.
How could they refuse the very land that God had promised to Abraham? Moses would have loved to enter that land, but because of his earlier failure he was not allowed in. Yet these two and a half tribes regard it as a sign of having found grace if they do not need to go in. Their reasoning was as clear as it was sobering. The land they were in "is a land for livestock, and your servants have livestock." Their thoughts did not rise above cattle — that is, their material possessions.
One writer sees the same choice being made today.
They did not want or intend to stop being Israelites — not at all. But they would be Israelites on this side of Jordan. And is it not the same today? Are there not believers who, for one supposed reason or another, stop short of the call of God? They do not lack zeal or earnestness. But some hold back through fear and timidity, and others from dislike and distaste. Both alike say: "Do not take us across the Jordan."
Crossing the Jordan is not a picture of dying and going to heaven. It stands for something a believer can enter now.
Will you say, that is when we die? When Israel crossed the Jordan, they entered a scene of conflict. I ask, when we die and go to heaven will we have to fight there? No. Well then, it is wrong to make it our dying and going to heaven. Crossing the Jordan means bringing the believer into "the heavenly places." And it brings him there in such a way that he will fight and win the victory too.
The choice did not end with them. It shaped what happened to their land long after.
Blinded like this, they lost sight of the call of God. They put their choice into these sorrowful words: "Do not take us across the Jordan." Alas, these beautiful meadows, so well suited to feed their flocks, have found far too many Lots and tribes of Israel to settle in them to their loss. Such was their history. In later days Israel's sin and weakness left them easy prey to their foes. This lovely country on this side of Jordan was the first to pass into enemy hands.
One writer turns the lesson on the reader:
Beware of falling short of your proper position and your proper portion. Beware of being content with the things that belong to this world. Beware of taking any stand short of death and resurrection — the true, the spiritual Jordan.
- Sight — They looked at pasture, not at promise. Their eyes made the choice for them.
- Gift — The good things God gave them on the journey killed their appetite for Canaan.
- Grace, misnamed — They called it grace to skip the inheritance Moses himself longed to enter.
- Short — This was not rebellion. They stayed Israelites, only on the wrong side of the river.
- Cost — What they chose short of God's mark they could not keep. Their land was the first to fall to the enemy.
And Moses said to the children of Gad, and to the children of Reuben, Shall your brethren go to war, and shall *ye* abide here?
Two tribes ask Moses to settle east of the Jordan instead of crossing into the land God had promised. His answer is a question that turns their private plan about pasture into a matter for the whole nation.
Moses asks them to picture the scene: the rest of the nation marching into battle while they stay put.
Moses asked them a question. Would they settle down where it seems comfortable for them, while the other tribes go to war across the Jordan (v.6)? This would tend to discourage the people of Israel (v.7).
The land they wanted was good for grazing, and the sight of it settled the matter. One writer lists four things a choice like that implies.
Two things common in this world led these tribes to make this choice and to act on it. They were the lust of the eyes and the pride of life. The land was pleasant to look at, and it was good for pasture. Too many seek their own things, and not the things of the public good, or of Christ. So they stop short of the heavenly Canaan. Their choice implied: 1. A contempt for the land of promise. 2. A distrust of the power of God. 3. A neglect of the interests of their brothers. 4. An undue regard for their own convenience and wealth.
Moses himself would never cross the river. That makes his answer to men who did not even want to cross sharper still.
It is very clear that Moses had no sympathy with their proposal. God did not let him go over, as a judgement on his own conduct. His heart was in the promised land, and he longed to go there in person. How then could he approve of men who were not only willing, but eager, to settle somewhere else? Faith can never be satisfied with anything short of the true position and portion of God's people.
Moses points back to the spies he had sent out from Kadesh-barnea years earlier. He sees the same thing starting again.
He tells these people that they bring to his mind the spies he had sent out years before from Kadesh-barnea. The way those spies acted discouraged their brothers and caused forty years of wandering in the wilderness. God had called them out of Egypt in the hope of Canaan. To linger like this anywhere on the road was so unlike that call, and Moses resents it. It is a bad thing when this happens. A believer may be walking in the power of the resurrection of Christ. Yet his first instinctive thought is alarm at what he sees in, or hears from, a brother. And yet how common it is!
One writer turns the question on the reader. The cost does not stop with the half-hearted; it reaches everyone around them, and it shows up in their words.
Some are not, in spirit, inheriting "on the other side of the Jordan and beyond." They are not fighting the fight of faith with a whole heart. Let them consider what it is to "sit here." The half-hearted believer is a serious check on the devotion of others. This brings dishonour to God and wrong to ourselves, and it robs others of their zeal. One false step usually leads to another — evil leads to evil. These tribes began with the spirit of doing what was convenient. To that they added wilfulness, and to wilfulness division: "We will not inherit with them." To carry out their purpose they were ready to split Israel. "We" and "them," they said, of the Lord's one undivided family.
Moses gave way in the end, but not on their terms. Whatever ground they chose, they could not opt out of the fight.
This grieved Moses. Still, after consulting, he gives way to them; only he insists that they must help their brothers. Meanwhile, whatever share of land they had chosen for themselves, they must still share the conflicts of the people in Canaan. And they must certainly prove how unwise it is to choose this way, instead of accepting the Lord's choice.
Commentators differ on the verdict. Some read the whole arrangement as plain failure. Others note that these tribes answered Moses with real zeal and integrity, and refused to cut themselves off from their brothers.
- The question — Moses meets a plea for easy land with one test: will you sit still while your brothers go to war?
- The motive — what the eyes saw drove the choice. It carried contempt for the promised land, distrust of God's power, and neglect of others.
- The ripple — the choice was never private. It would discourage the nation, just as the spies' report had done at Kadesh-barnea.
- The drift — convenience became wilfulness, and wilfulness became "we" and "them," said of one undivided family.
- The terms — Moses granted the land, but no way out of the war. Wherever they settled, they still had to fight.
And why do ye discourage the children of Israel from going over into the land that Jehovah has given them?
Commentary for this verse has not been generated yet.
Thus did your fathers, when I sent them from Kadesh-barnea to see the land
The tribes of Reuben and Gad asked to settle on the near side of the Jordan, outside Canaan. Moses answers with history, not with arguments about pasture. He points back nearly forty years to Kadesh-barnea, on the border of Canaan, where he sent out spies and the people then refused to go in. Is this plan a new idea, he asks, or the old refusal in new clothes?
To Reuben and Gad the plan was practical. To Moses it was the same act repeated:
Moses asked them a question. Would they settle down where life seems comfortable for them, while the other tribes go to war across the Jordan (v.6)? This would tend to discourage the children of Israel (v.7). This was the same thing Israel had done nearly 40 years before, when the spies brought back their report of the land. They refused to go into the land of Canaan.
Knowing the old story was not enough. The same writer explains why:
But we do not learn easily from what happens to others, even when we know it well. Moses answered them very strongly. He would die without crossing the Jordan himself. Even so, he cared about the nation God had used him to lead out of Egypt. He wanted no part-way measures.
The plan struck Moses as out of step with why Israel left Egypt at all:
He tells them that they remind him of the spies. He had sent those men out years before from Kadesh-barnea. Their behaviour discouraged their brothers and caused the forty years of wandering in the wilderness. Everything these tribes suggest is so unlike the call of Israel out of Egypt in the hope of Canaan that Moses resents it at once… Many a Moses today is called in spirit to challenge what offends him, because it does not belong with the calling of God's people. The heart of a believer approves or excuses many a thing that cannot stand when faith judges it.
The spies were sent to see the land. Reuben and Gad also judged by what they saw. One writer traces the whole failure to that:
Reuben and Gad, and the half tribe of Manasseh, chose a boundary line short of the river Jordan. That was a mistake, a failure, a falling short of God's mark. Worldly and selfish thinking ruled what they did — the sight of their eyes, their own appetites. They looked over "the land of Jazer and the land of Gilead," and they valued it only by their own interests, with no reference to the judgment and will of God. If they had simply been looking to God, no one would ever have raised the question of settling short of the river Jordan.
Commentators differ on how to judge these men. One reads their whole character from the choice:
They were half-and-half men. Their principles were mixed. They lived on the border and nothing more. They sought their own interests, not the things of God.
Another writer sees men who still valued God's call, yet lived below it:
In moral power they fell short of the call of God. Yet they held on to the hope of that calling, and they claimed fellowship only with the people who were called… I do not see them as a people of mixed principles, who had chosen to build their lives on something at odds with the call of God. I see them as a generation who owned that call, prized it, and would not think of having any other — and yet were not found in its full moral power.
Later history proved Moses right:
Still, the history in the holy book shows us that these tribes were the first to suffer, and the first to fall into the hands of the Gentiles. King Ahab later asked whether they did not know that Ramoth in Gilead was theirs, while the Syrians held it. Happy are those who wait for the blessings of God until they have crossed the Jordan. In the meantime they take patience for their portion, instead of the blessings on this side. Those blessings are gifts of God's providence, yet they are less secure… There is no boundary like the Jordan, which God appointed as a boundary in His purposes of grace.
- Precedent — Moses names Kadesh-barnea. Settling short of the land is the old refusal to enter it, dressed as a reasonable plan.
- Repetition — Knowing the story is not the same as learning from it. Moses wanted no half-measures.
- Sight — They surveyed the pasture and never asked God. A heart looking to God would never have raised the question.
- Short — Commentators differ on these men's character. They agree on the verdict: the men stopped short of God's line.
- Cost — Ground chosen this side of the Jordan is the least secure ground there is. These tribes were the first to fall to the enemy.
they went up to the valley of Eshcol, and saw the land, and discouraged the children of Israel, that they should not go into the land that Jehovah had given them.
In Numbers 32:9 Moses looks back nearly forty years. He recalls the day the scouts came home from Canaan and drained the courage out of a whole nation. He brings it up because Reuben and Gad have just asked to settle short of the Jordan. To Moses it sounded like the same voice again.
The valley named in the verse was fruitful ground.
It is called both a brook and a valley, because the one ran through the other. It was near Hebron, the place explored by the spies, and from where they carried the huge bunch of grapes.
The same men who carried that fruit turned Israel against the land.
At first the report is very good. The bunch of grapes took two men to carry it, and it proved how good the land was. Then they said, "The land, through which we have gone to spy it out, is a land that devours its inhabitants" (Numbers 13:32); that is, the land did not give plenty of provision. Caleb and Joshua stood up for the truth, and the people nearly stoned them. "They despised the pleasant land" (Psalm 106:24) is the next step. They did not want to go on. It is like a heart now that does not want to go to heaven.
Why did a bad report work so fast? One writer points to the hearts that heard it.
This was enough to discourage the people; or rather to feed the flame of their unbelief. The Lord allowed the sending of the spies, but it was after all only evidence of the wavering heart of the people. Granted that the cities were great and the inhabitants tall, what of that if God were with His people? Had He not already triumphed over the power of Egypt?… They walked by sight. Faith was not working.
These tribes had not spoken against the land. They only wanted to stop short of it. Moses heard in it the echo of Kadesh-barnea — the camp where Israel first refused to go in.
He tells them that they bring to his memory the conduct of the spies. He had sent those men out years before from Kadesh-barnea, and their way had discouraged their brothers and caused the forty years' journey in the wilderness… Many a Moses today is called in spirit to challenge what offends, because it is out of step with the calling of the saints. Many a thing gets its approval, or its excuse, from the heart of a saint, when it cannot stand before the judgment of faith.
The verse ends by calling the land a gift God had already given. Yet a gift given and a land entered are two different things. Unbelief can stand between them.
We have already seen how unbelief shut multitudes out of the land, though afterwards they wanted to go in. We now see how the good things of earth may lead people to shut themselves out. To enter the land, they had to cross the Jordan. That crossing, recorded in Joshua 3, pictures death and resurrection with Christ. This is the way into the heavenly portion to which we are called.
The damage did not stop with one generation of refusers. It ran forward through the nation's history.
Indifference to the honour of God leads Israel to despise the land of God. This unbelief led to their overthrow in the wilderness. This in turn leaves their descendants lost among the nations and scattered in other lands.
Moses' worry is not only that these tribes will lose out themselves. What one believer settles for becomes another believer's ceiling.
The half-hearted believer is a serious check on the devotion of others. This not only dishonours God and wrongs ourselves; it robs others of their zeal. One false step usually leads to another — evil leads to evil. These tribes began with the spirit of convenience. Then they added self-will to convenience, and division to self-will — "We will not inherit with them."
- Seen. The spies stood in Eshcol and handled the fruit. Evidence was never the problem; faith was.
- Said. Their report fed a flame of unbelief already burning in the camp. They walked by sight and left God's victory over Egypt out of the reckoning.
- Spread. The discouragement of a few emptied the courage of a nation. So Moses treats a discouraging voice as a wrong done to others, not a private choice.
- Shut out. The land was already given, but unbelief still kept them out. Good things of earth can shut a person out, just as fear did.
- Same again. Moses names the old sin because he hears it repeating. The test of any choice is not whether our hearts approve it, but whether it can stand before the judgment of faith.
And Jehovah's anger was kindled the same time, and he swore, saying,
Reuben and Gad asked for land east of the Jordan, and Moses answered by taking them back to the day at Kadesh-barnea. On that day God's anger burned and He bound Himself by an oath, and Moses wants these men to know what provoked Him.
Moses heard an older refusal echoing in what they asked.
This movement makes Moses uneasy, and he says so very firmly. He tells this people that they remind him of the spies he had sent out years before from Kadesh-barnea. Their conduct discouraged their brothers and caused forty years of wandering in the wilderness. To linger like this on any part of the road was so unlike the call of God out of Egypt in the hope of Canaan, and Moses resents it.
The original offence looked reasonable. Sending scouts into a hostile country is the caution the world praises. One writer locates the sin elsewhere.
Here at the border of the land, there is nothing wild or openly shameful; no idol, no feasting and playing. The respectable world condemns the obscene practices of idolatry, yet it approves the wisdom that guided Israel then. Was it not wise and careful, before entering a hostile country, to find out how likely victory was and how strong the enemy was? The sin here is independence from God. They would test how fruitful the land was and how strong its people were. They did not realise that God was testing them… This despising of the land was the provocation.
"He swore" is not a figure of speech. It is a formal act. One writer looks back to the chapter where God first spoke that oath.
Yet this grievous sin brought penalties under the government of God. Verse 21 begins, "But truly, as I live…", which is the formula of an oath. The Letter to the Hebrews records the unchangeable oath made to Abraham. It also records how He swore in His wrath, "They shall not enter my rest." The men who brought an evil report of the land would never enter it.
The oath had a boundary. Moses names it as he recounts the story, and the exception tells you what God was looking for in the rest.
Moses reminds them that the Lord's anger burned against Israel then. He declares that none of those in Israel over 20 years of age at the time would ever enter the land. The only exceptions were Caleb and Joshua, who had fully followed the Lord (vv. 10-11).
Moses is not reciting history for its own sake. He warns the men in front of him that they could restart the judgment their parents died under.
Now all of these had died, as the Lord had said. But Moses tells the men that they, a new generation, had arisen — a brood of sinful men, to increase still more the fierce anger of the Lord. For if they will not go over Jordan now, God would once again leave Israel to wander in the wilderness. Then the men of Reuben and Gad would be responsible for Israel's destruction (vv. 14-15).
The spies did their damage by discouraging everyone else. The same risk sits inside what Reuben and Gad are asking.
The half-hearted believer is a heavy drag on the devotion of others. This dishonours God, wrongs ourselves, and robs others of their zeal. One false step usually leads to another — evil leads to evil.
These tribes settled short of the Jordan. The later history shows what that cost them.
Still, 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 wait patiently for the blessings of God until they have gone over Jordan… There are no frontiers like Jordan, appointed by God as such in His counsels of grace.
- Provocation — What kindled God's anger at Kadesh was not open scandal. It was independence from Him. People who looked sensible were despising the land.
- Oath — His anger that day hardened into a sworn sentence: the men who slandered the land would never set foot in it.
- Exception — Caleb and Joshua alone were exempt, because they fully followed the Lord.
- Repetition — The same sentence could fall again. A new generation refusing the Jordan would send the whole nation back into the wilderness.
- Contagion — Unbelief never stays private. A half-hearted believer drains the zeal of everyone nearby, and one false step leads to another.
If the men that came up out of Egypt, from twenty years old and upward, shall see the land that I swore to Abraham, to Isaac, and to Jacob! for they have not wholly followed me;
Reuben and Gad ask to settle east of the Jordan, and Moses answers by quoting an oath God swore almost forty years before. That oath shut a whole generation out of the promised land for one reason: they had not followed God fully.
God first spoke these words in Numbers 14, after the spies came back and the people refused to go up. The wording He used was the wording of an oath.
Verse 21 begins, "But as truly as I live…" which is the formula of an oath. The letter to the Hebrews records the unchangeable oath made to Abraham. It also records how He swore in His wrath, "They shall not enter my rest." The men who brought a bad report of the land should never enter it. Moreover, the very next day the people were to begin a fresh journey — not into the land but away from it. So began a weary pilgrimage of no less than forty years. Verse 29 says, "Your dead bodies shall fall in this wilderness."
Why does forgiveness not always cancel the consequence? One writer draws a line between two ways God acts.
But then there is such a thing as government, as well as grace. This must never be forgotten, and these things must never be confused. The whole book of God illustrates the distinction between grace and government... Grace will pardon. Grace will fill the earth with the blessed beams of divine glory. But notice the terrible movement of the wheels of government, set out in these burning words: "Because all those men... have not obeyed my voice, they shall not see the land that I swore to give to their fathers."
This verse names a failure to follow fully. Caleb is the man who did follow fully, and he said so himself.
Do you know what Caleb said? "I wholly followed the LORD my God" (Joshua 14:8). Oh, you say, he was conceited. No, no, he was consecrated, not conceited. Hear what the Lord says about him: "But my servant Caleb, because he has a different spirit and has followed me fully, I will bring into the land into which he went, and his descendants shall possess it" (Num. 14:24)... My friend, if you get three witnesses like the Lord, Moses and Joshua to testify to your devotedness, you will do.
Moses is not only reciting history. He sees the old failure in the request in front of him.
Moses asked them: would they settle down where it seems comfortable for them while the other tribes go to war across the Jordan (v.6)? This would tend to discourage the children of Israel (v.7). It was really the same thing that Israel had done when the spies brought back the report of the land nearly forty years before. They refused to go into the land of Canaan.
God promised this land to Abraham, Isaac and Jacob. Any other choice was a loss, however good the ground east of the Jordan looked.
For Reuben and Gad and the half tribe of Manasseh, choosing 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 motives of the flesh... If they had been looking to God, they would never have raised the question of settling short of the river Jordan.
The pattern did not end with those tribes.
What a voice this has for us! How many true Christians there are who come short of taking hold of their heavenly possessions! Like the two and a half tribes, they have no thought of being untrue to their Christian position. They are content to know their salvation is secure, and they settle down in comfortable circumstances.
- The cause. God gives one reason for shutting the generation out: they had not wholly followed Him.
- The oath. God used the formula of an oath, and it stood. Their dead bodies fell in the wilderness, and the journey turned away from the land.
- The exception. Caleb had "a different spirit" and followed fully. God brought him into the land he had walked through, and gave it to his descendants.
- The repeat. Reuben and Gad ask to stay east of the Jordan. Moses hears the old refusal in it, so he quotes the oath.
- The warning. Pardon does not cancel consequence. Settling for comfort short of God's promise costs the inheritance He gave.
save Caleb the son of Jephunneh the Kenizzite, and Joshua the son of Nun; for they have wholly followed Jehovah.
Reuben and Gad want to settle east of the Jordan. Moses answers by reciting an old oath: the generation that came out of Egypt would not see the land. The oath spared two men. The reason is the heart of the verse: they had wholly followed the LORD.
What they asked for was not open rebellion, yet Moses answered it as an echo of an older sin. One writer shows how clinging to what is near dulls the appetite for what God promised.
Possessions down here catch the heart. Then the heart clings to the blessings on this side of the Jordan as well. It clings to that measure of rest which the people of God have gained outside Canaan. "Do not bring us over the Jordan," they say. Moses felt what this meant. If he could not enter the land himself, according to the government of God, his heart was there all the same. He recalls the contempt shown to the pleasant land at Kadesh-barnea, and severely rebukes Reuben and Gad.
Caleb said this of himself, which sounds like pride. One writer meets that objection head on.
Do you know what Caleb said? "I wholly followed the LORD my God" (Joshua 14:8). Oh, you say, he was conceited. No, no, he was consecrated, not conceited. Hear what the Lord says about him: "But my servant Caleb, because he has a different spirit and has followed me fully, I will bring into the land into which he went, and his descendants shall possess it" (Num. 14:24)… My friend, if you get three witnesses like the Lord, Moses, and Joshua to testify to your devotedness, you will do.
Following fully is not the same as always pressing forward.
Caleb's soul rested entirely on the grace and power of God… The very same principle of fully following the Lord made him encourage the people to go up. That same principle would keep him from trying to go up after the Lord had said, "Tomorrow turn back toward the Red Sea." The Lord had no delight in the people. Where the Lord was, there was both grace and power. Caleb had to learn that grace and power for forty years in the wilderness, and in the end it put him in possession of the very ground he had walked on.
Only two names survive the oath. Commentators read that pair as a picture of how anyone enters the heavenly inheritance.
A great army of six hundred thousand men came out of Egypt. Only two of them crossed the Jordan and entered the land: Caleb, the man of faith, and Joshua, a picture of the energy of the Spirit of Christ in a man. This, I have no doubt, is meant to teach us one thing. We can take possession of our heavenly inheritance only on the principle of faith and in the power of the Holy Spirit.
The verse gives Caleb a second name: the Kenizzite. It points back to a family line outside Israel.
Kenaz is an Edomite name (Genesis 36:11). So at some point the family of Kenaz, and with it the family of Caleb the son of Jephunneh, was taken into the tribes of Israel. Other foreigners came in the same way, such as Rahab and Ruth, who became members of the people of God by their faith… Caleb by his origin really had no right of citizenship in Israel. He received that right among Judah by virtue of his faith, and was brought into the family of Caleb the son of Hezron.
Moses sets Caleb's whole heart against the divided hearts in front of him. One writer names what changed the mind of Reuben and Gad.
What particularly moved them to want this was the abundance of cattle they had acquired. The good things God had granted took away their desire for Canaan.
The result was a settled character, not a single bad decision.
They were half-and-half men; men of mixed principles; mere borderers; men who sought their own things and not the things of God. If the things of God had filled their hearts, nothing would have persuaded them to settle short of the true boundary line.
The two names survive in the oath because God would not let their confidence go unanswered.
God must always honour the faith He has implanted in the soul. It is His own gift… They held fast their confidence in God in the face of every difficulty, and He clearly honoured their faith in the end. Their brothers' bodies were crumbling in the dust of the wilderness. Their own feet, meanwhile, were treading the vine-covered hills and fertile valleys of Canaan.
- Whole. God's own verdict on Caleb and Joshua is that they followed Him fully. Moses and Joshua said the same of Caleb.
- Whole obedience. The same loyalty that said "go up" also accepted "turn back." It followed the Lord, not a plan.
- Not birth. Caleb the Kenizzite had no natural claim to a place in Israel. Faith won it for him, as it did for other outsiders.
- Half-hearted. Reuben and Gad were not rebels but borderers. Their cattle cooled their desire for Canaan.
- Whole arrival. Two men out of six hundred thousand crossed the Jordan. God honours the faith He Himself plants.
And Jehovah's anger was kindled against Israel, and he made them wander in the wilderness forty years, until the whole generation was consumed that had done evil in the eyes of Jehovah.
Moses is replying to the tribes of Reuben and Gad. He reaches back nearly forty years to Kadesh, where Israel refused to enter the land, and this verse sums up what that refusal cost them.
Their proposal reminded Moses of something he had seen before.
This move by Reuben and Gad, and the half-tribe of Manasseh, made Moses uneasy at once. He tells them that they remind him of the conduct of the spies. He had sent those men out years before from Kadesh-barnea. Their behaviour discouraged the rest of the people, and it brought on the forty years of wandering in the wilderness. There was something in this whole proposal from these tribes so unlike the call of Israel out of Egypt in the hope of Canaan, that Moses resents it straight away.
The generation that "had done evil in the sight of the LORD" was kept out of the land by one thing. It is the same thing that robs believers today.
What kept them back? Just that hateful thing which, day after day and hour after hour, robs us of the precious privilege of walking the very highest stages of the divine life. And what is that? Unbelief! "So we see that they were unable to enter because of unbelief" (Heb. 3:19). This is what made Israel wander in the desert for 40 weary years. Instead of looking at Jehovah's power to bring them into the land, they looked at the enemy's power to keep them out of it.
Israel did not lose its way in the desert. God made them wander, and the wandering itself was the sentence.
God always directed the Israelites in their journeys, and told them when and where to pitch their tents. It was God who caused them to 'wander' because of their sin.
The delay had nothing to do with the distance.
The journey would take 11 days (Deut. 1:2). Israel's faithless disobedience stretched it out to nearly forty years.
The forty years were not a round number. Nor were the children who had to walk them out wasting their lives.
During those years the people who had said they wished to die in the wilderness did die there. Their little ones, whom they had mourned over as sure to fall to the enemy, were the ones brought into the land. In the meantime those children bore the consequences of their fathers' sin, as the children of such fathers needed to: a year in the wilderness for each day of the fruitless search. Yet thank God — for the very reason that He appointed these years, we cannot say they were fruitless… Divine love could inflict no useless pain, just as it cannot withhold the pain that profits.
Those decades were not empty of sin — but neither were they empty of God's care.
They continued in stubbornness and rebellion and became idolaters. But oh! the mercy of God! He continued to feed them and gave them water. "These forty years the LORD your God has been with you. You have lacked nothing" (Deut. 2:7).
Moses told this story to warn the people in front of him. It carries the same warning for readers now.
Unbelief may work in us as it did in Israel, about both the way and the end. They were weary of the one, and they despised the other. Let us take care that none of us fall into the same disobedience. So that generation, instead of going quietly into the inheritance of Jehovah, had to wander forty years in the wilderness, so that the unbelievers would fall and a later generation would be led into the good land.
- Provocation. The "evil" that kindled God's anger was unbelief — measuring the enemy's power to keep them out instead of God's power to bring them in.
- Sentence. God Himself made them wander. The aimless route was the judgment — an eleven-day journey stretched into forty years.
- Measure. A year in the wilderness for each day the spies searched the land. The generation that refused it died out, and their children went in.
- Mercy. Even while they rebelled through those years He fed them and went with them, so that they lacked nothing.
- Warning. Moses told this story to stop Reuben and Gad repeating it. The same caution stands for anyone who grows tired of the road, or stops valuing where it leads.
And behold, ye are risen up in your fathers' stead, a progeny of sinful men, to augment yet the fierce anger of Jehovah toward Israel.
Reuben and Gad asked to settle east of the Jordan, and Moses answered by recalling the day their fathers refused to enter Canaan. Why should asking for good pasture stir God's anger afresh?
These men had survived the wilderness themselves. One writer ties the charge to the threat that comes next:
All of these had died, as the Lord had said. But Moses tells the men that they, a new generation, had arisen — a brood of sinful men, to increase still more the fierce anger of the Lord. For if they will not go over Jordan now, God would once again leave Israel to wander in the wilderness. The men of Reuben and Gad would then be responsible for Israel's destruction.
Kadesh-barnea was where Israel first refused to enter Canaan. One writer explains why a plan to settle east of the river brought that old failure to mind:
When the heart clings to possessions down here, it clings also to the blessings on this side of Jordan. It clings to that measure of rest which the people of God have gained outside Canaan. "Do not bring us over Jordan," they say. Moses felt what this wish meant. If he could not enter the land himself, under the government of God, his heart was there all the same. He recalls the contempt shown to the pleasant land at Kadesh-barnea, and severely rebukes Reuben and Gad.
God's anger grows here; it does not simply continue. One writer explains why that is just:
Suppose a child has grown up knowing his father's dishonour, hearing of his disgrace and punishment. If any right feeling existed, would not that sin be especially hateful in his eyes? The public example of his father's evil ways would always be before him. But suppose the son made light of it, and used it as encouragement to walk the same path. Is it not just to demand a still more severe punishment of that son?
One writer traces the choice to plain prosperity:
Two tribes, Reuben and Gad, and half the tribe of Manasseh asked Moses to let them settle on the conquered lands east of Jordan. They did not want their portion in what was definitely the land of God's promise. What particularly moved them to want this was the abundance of cattle they had gained. The good things God had granted took away their desire for Canaan.
One writer quotes Matthew Henry's list of what that single choice involved:
The lust of the eye and the pride of life led these tribes to make this choice and this proposal. Both are common in this world. The land was pleasant to the eye, and it was good for pasture. Too many seek their own things, and not the things of the public good or of Christ. So they stop short of the heavenly Canaan. Their choice implied: 1. A contempt of the land of promise. 2. A distrust of the power of God. 3. A neglect of the interests of their brothers. 4. An undue regard for their own convenience and wealth.
Moses did not stay this severe. One writer weighs his later words to these tribes against the record in Chronicles:
Moses said that if they went armed over Jordan, then afterwards "you shall return and be guiltless before the LORD." Guiltless! So said Moses, but not the LORD. On the contrary, here in 1 Chronicles 5:25 the divine record is, "And they transgressed." Moses' words contain no rebuke for choosing possessions outside the promised land. But was not this their transgression, the one the Holy Spirit clearly marks? … "And they transgressed" points to their great sin in choosing for themselves when God had chosen for them. … They stand out here as despisers of God's gift, for they plainly thought they had chosen a better land than the one the Lord had chosen for them.
(The quote above uses an older translation. The ESV renders 1 Chronicles 5:25, "But they broke faith with the God of their fathers.")
One writer turns the whole episode into a warning for us:
It sounds in our ears with deep solemnity: "Beware of falling short of your proper position — your proper portion. Beware of being content with the things that belong to this world. Beware of taking any stand short of death and resurrection, the true, the spiritual Jordan."
- Repetition. Moses does not accuse them of a new sin. He says they have stepped into their fathers' vacant place and taken up the fathers' refusal of the land.
- Increase. Anger grows because the warning was already public. The son who knows his father's disgrace and copies it anyway deserves the heavier punishment.
- Cause. Prosperity, not persecution, did this. Cattle and good pasture removed their appetite for what God had promised.
- Reach. The choice was never private. It risked sending the whole nation back to the wilderness, and it neglected the interests of their brothers.
- Result. Moses finally called them guiltless. The record in Chronicles still calls it transgression: they chose for themselves when God had already chosen for them.
If ye turn away from after him, he will yet again leave them in the wilderness; and ye shall destroy all this people.
Reuben and Gad ask to settle on the near side of the Jordan, short of the promised land. Moses answers by telling them where that road ends: turn back now, and God leaves the whole nation in the desert again, with these two tribes to blame.
What did that turning away look like when it started?
Israel's portion, the inheritance God appointed, lay on the other side of the Jordan, in the land of Canaan. Should that fact not have been enough? Reuben and Gad and the half tribe of Manasseh chose a boundary line short of the river Jordan. That was a mistake, a failure, a stopping short of the mark God had set. Worldly and selfish considerations governed their conduct — what their eyes saw. They looked over "the land of Jazer and the land of Gilead." They valued it entirely by their own interests, with no reference to God's judgement and will.
The same method of choosing had already ruined a man generations earlier:
Long before this, Lot thought he could trust the sight of his eyes (Gen. 13:10-11), so he did not need to think about the Lord's guidance; but his own choice led him into deep trouble. Abram depended on the Lord to lead him, and was preserved.
Why "again"? Moses had heard this refusal before:
Moses asked them a question. Would they settle down where it seems comfortable for them, when the other tribes go to war across the Jordan (v.6)? This would tend to discourage the children of Israel (v.7). It was really the same thing Israel had done nearly 40 years before, when the spies brought back the report of the land. They refused to go into the land of Canaan.
Moses could not cross the Jordan himself. That makes his answer striking. He points back to Kadesh-barnea, where the earlier generation refused to go in:
The heart that clings to possessions down here clings also to the blessings on this side of the Jordan. It clings to that measure of rest the people of God have gained outside Canaan. "Do not bring us over the Jordan," they say. Moses felt what this wish meant. If he could not enter the land, under the government of God, his heart was there all the same. He recalls the contempt shown for the pleasant land at Kadesh-barnea, and severely rebukes Reuben and Gad.
Moses tells Reuben and Gad that their comfort would cost the whole nation:
Moses tells the men what they are: a new generation, a brood of sinful men. They have risen up to increase still more the fierce anger of the Lord. For if they will not now go over the Jordan, God would once again leave Israel to wander in the wilderness. Then the men of Reuben and Gad would be responsible for Israel's destruction (vs.14-15).
Commentators differ over how serious this choice was. Most see little wrong beyond the tribes' first refusal to cross. Matthew Henry read it far more sharply:
Two things common in this world led these tribes to make this choice and this proposal: the lust of the eye and the pride of life. The land was pleasant to the eye, and it was good for pasture. Too many seek their own things and not the public good, or the things of Christ, and so stop short of the heavenly Canaan. Their choice implied: 1. Contempt for the land of promise. 2. Distrust of the power of God. 3. Neglect of the interests of their brothers. 4. Undue regard for their own convenience and wealth.
Their herds were good gifts from God. That is what held them back:
The New Testament tells us plainly that those who have riches enter the kingdom of God with much difficulty. It also tells us that not many who are wise and mighty and noble are called. Here we see that the rich and good things of earth make it hard for their owners to lay hold of their heavenly possessions. We agree with the truth of our heavenly calling so easily. Then we settle down in our comfortable earthly circumstances, and never lay hold of that calling as a matter of faith's experience.
Later history tested the warning:
The tribes promised to go forward with the rest until the land was conquered, so Moses granted their request and settled them in the land, with the half tribe of Manasseh. Yet the history of the holy book shows us that these tribes were the first to suffer, and the first to fall into the hands of the Gentiles. Ahab himself asks whether they do not know that Ramoth in Gilead is theirs, while the Syrians hold it. Happy are those who wait patiently for the blessings of God until they have gone over the Jordan. In the meantime they take patience as their portion, instead of the blessings on this side. Those blessings are gifts of God's providence, yet they are less secure.
- Sight — they chose by looking at good pasture and weighing it by self-interest, not by God's will.
- Repeat — Moses heard the same refusal that had already cost one generation the land.
- Spread — one group's private choice would discourage the whole nation. Moses holds Reuben and Gad responsible for Israel's destruction.
- Neglect — their choice implied contempt for the land God promised, distrust of His power, and disregard for their brothers.
- Cost — God's own gifts kept them short of God's portion, and enemies took the ground they chose first.
And they drew near to him, and said, We will build sheepfolds here for our cattle, and cities for our little ones;
Moses had just rebuked Reuben and Gad for wanting to settle east of the Jordan. This verse is their answer: build first, then fight. The offer sounds generous. But it plants their home on the near side of the river, and commentators read what they build as a window into their hearts.
The verse is the first half of a plan. Here is the whole of it, in order.
They said they would first build sheepfolds for their flocks, and cities for their women and children to stay in, while the men went over Jordan to battle (vv. 16-17). Only when the other tribes had received their inheritance would they return to Gilead (v. 19).
Building is not a neutral act here. Up to this point Israel had lived in tents — movable homes for people on the way somewhere.
With Canaan in full view they say, We will settle down where we are. They were not content with a tent; they wanted a house... These tents had been forty years on the road, and the people living in them were going to get into the land... But sadly, these two tribes grew tired of the tent, and said, We will settle down. "We will build sheepfolds here for our livestock, and cities for our little ones" (Num. 32:16). God let them have their way, and they were the first to be carried into captivity (see 2 Kings 15:29).
Another writer counts what that permanent home cost them:
These two and a half tribes did not stop being Israelites. But they lived outside the promised land, so they lost the special privileges of the temple. They also lost the confidence the other tribes could have, that the power of the Lord shown in the battles with the Canaanites was for them. All their armed men went over the Jordan to help their brothers in the war. Yet they did not go to win an inheritance for themselves where God had chosen it for them. They went in order to come back to their own choice, where they made their home. And it was not a temporary home, for there they built fortified cities for their children... They became mere onlookers of the triumphs of Israel. The lessons of Ai and Gibeon reached them only second-hand.
(Ai and Gibeon are places inside the land where Israel learned hard lessons.)
Their offer really is brave. That is what makes the question sharper: brave for whose sake, and at what cost to their children?
It looked like a remarkable display of unselfishness and energy. They would leave all their loved ones behind, cross the Jordan, and fight only for their brothers. But where had they left those loved ones? They had left them short of the mark God had set. They had deprived them of a place and a portion in the true land of promise. That was the inheritance God had spoken of to Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob. And for what? Just to get good pasture for their cattle.
Why treat a grazing decision as a spiritual failure? Because of what the river itself pictures.
We have already seen how unbelief shut crowds of people out of the land, though afterwards they wanted to go in. We now see how the good things of earth may lead people to shut themselves out. To enter the land, they had to cross the Jordan. That crossing, recorded in Joshua 3, is a picture of death and resurrection with Christ. It is the way into the real enjoyment of the heavenly portion God has called us to, as we see in Colossians 2 and 3.
Both halves of the verse stand: real cities behind, real war ahead. Brave service and a wrong address can go together.
So they build cities on the wrong side of Jordan, and raise their little ones there. Yes, their armed men may go to war with their brothers on the other side, and may do praiseworthy deeds there.
Commentators do not all judge these tribes the same way. One writer sees a weak faith here — real faith, but set on the things of this life.
For such believers, 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 (Num. 32:16). These Christians are not, strictly speaking, lacking in faith... Theirs is not a worldly Christianity, but an earthly one... Moses is angry at first, but afterwards he bears with them. He saw that their faith was weak, yet it was still faith, and that these earthly ties did not cut them off from their brothers.
- Order — Their plan builds first and fights second: folds for the livestock, cities for the children, then war.
- Permanence — Tents became fenced towns. Settling was the choice, and God allowed it.
- Cost — They left their children short of the promised inheritance, all for good pasture.
- Distance — The Jordan pictures death and resurrection with Christ. Stop short of it, and you watch Israel's triumphs second-hand.
- Verdict — Brave deeds on the far bank do not fix a home on the near one. Yet Moses bore with a weak faith that was still faith.
but we ourselves will go with diligence armed before the children of Israel, until we have brought them to their place; and our little ones shall dwell in the strong cities because of the inhabitants of the land.
Reuben and Gad asked Moses to let them settle east of the Jordan, where the land suited their cattle. Verse 17 is their answer to his rebuke: full service in the war, in exchange for a home outside the promised land.
The pledge in this verse is what drew Moses toward agreement. It sounded impressive — but the question is where it left their families.
Their promise to cross the Jordan, ready armed, before their brothers, drew a half-agreement from Moses. 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 God had spoken of to Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob. And for what? Just to get good pasture for their cattle.
The pledge was not empty talk. Years later, Joshua sent these men home with nothing held against them.
They had gone on armed before their brothers, to fight the enemies of the Lord in the land of promise. Now they receive permission from Joshua to return to their inheritance on the other side of the Jordan. They had been faithful to the commands of Moses and Joshua, had kept the commandment of the Lord, and had not forsaken their brothers. Obedience to clear commands and brotherly love marked them the whole time they lived away from the land of their possession. On the surface there was nothing to find fault with in them, but... their hearts (I do not say their thoughts) were not set on heavenly things.
"Until we have brought them to their place" describes a war fought for someone else's home. These tribes needed a special word of instruction, because their interests no longer matched the nation's.
The two and a half tribes need a special instruction. Their interests differ from those of the whole nation, and they have partly separated themselves from it. They are now to have the fighting without the personal reward. In the same way, no Christian is exempt from the conflict with the power of Satan; yet for many it may not carry its true meaning.
The verse names two places at once: where the men would fight, and where their families would stay. One of those addresses reveals more than the other.
Gilead, we say, was their home, and a Christian is in his life what he is at home. He may go out at times on the warpath, but the true test of his spiritual condition is the character of his inner life. All through their wars in Canaan, these forty thousand were fighting for others, not for themselves. It is a most serious thing when Christians in spiritual warfare are, in a sense, only support troops... Sooner or later these warriors would return home. Not one of them was a soldier across the Jordan for life.
Walled towns are not the language of a short stay. What the men built before they marched decided what their children would inherit.
All their armed men went over the Jordan to help their brothers in the war. But they did not go to win an inheritance for themselves where God had chosen for them. They went to return to their own choice, where they made their home. It was 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.
Their whole plan began with cattle. That is where this chapter touches every reader.
The New Testament tells us plainly that those who have riches enter the kingdom of God with much difficulty, and that God calls not many wise or mighty or noble. Here we see that the rich and good things of earth make it hard for those who own them to lay hold of their heavenly possessions. It is so easy for us to agree with the truth of our heavenly calling. Then we settle down in our comfortable earthly circumstances, and never lay hold of that calling as a matter of faith's experience.
- Cause: Good pasture, not open rebellion, drove the choice. The good things of earth made the promised inheritance harder to grasp.
- Offer: Marching armed at Israel's head looked like unselfish devotion. It still left their families short of the promised land.
- Kept: They did what they said. Their obedience and love for their brothers were real. Their hearts were not set on heavenly things.
- Cost: They took the fighting without the personal reward. They became onlookers at victories for others.
- Result: Fortified cities for the children made the choice permanent. Comfort can still settle us short of our own calling.
We will not return to our houses, until the children of Israel have inherited each one his inheritance.
Moses had just rebuked Reuben and Gad for cutting themselves off from the rest of Israel. This verse is their answer. They pledge to keep fighting until every other tribe holds the land God promised it. Commentators read the promise two ways at once — as real devotion, and as the patch on a choice that should never have been made.
The pledge came as a counter-offer after Moses rebuked them. One writer sets out both halves of the deal — what the two tribes asked for, and what they promised in return.
Reuben and Gad had cattle. They saw the wide pasture land in the countries that had now been taken. So they ask for their inheritance to be given them in Gilead and Bashan, instead of going over the Jordan with the rest. Moses rebukes them for cutting themselves off from the common interest, but they still press the request. They only offer this: to leave their children in the fortified cities on the east side, and to send their men of war over armed ahead of all the rest. Those men will help the other tribes to their possession, and will not return from the war until the tribes are settled in it.
A generous vow does not settle whether the request was right in the first place. One commentator is blunt about the motive behind it.
Reuben and Gad, and the half tribe of Manasseh, chose a boundary line short of the river Jordan. That was a mistake, a failure, a stopping short of the divine mark. Worldly and selfish thinking governed what they did — the sight of their eyes — motives of the flesh. They looked over "the land of Jazer and the land of Gilead," and they valued it by their own interests alone, with no reference to the judgement and will of God.
Their homes lay east of the river, outside the land God had promised. The same writer counts the cost to the families left there.
Their promise to cross the Jordan armed, ahead of their brothers, drew something like agreement from Moses. 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 — the inheritance God had spoken of to Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob. And for what? Just to get good pasture for their cattle.
Whatever their motives, the duty stood. Every fighting man had to cross the river. One writer notes the odd position this put them in.
They had made their choice and had found rest on this side of Jordan. But the coming war did not excuse them. They had orders to help their brothers by crossing the Jordan with them. Then, after their brothers had found rest, they were to return to their rest. They could not escape the conflict, though they had no reward in the land itself.
Another writer looks at the timing: no one goes home until the last tribe is settled. He reads that as a mark of Israel's unity, and applies it to us.
These warriors were not to return to their possessions east of Jordan until all Israel were settled in peace in the land. This was to be an effective testimony to the unity of Israel. We too should have such concern for the blessing of all the children of God.
Commentators differ over how much unity the pledge preserved. One hears a split in the pronouns of their own speech.
One false step usually leads to another — evil leads to evil. These tribes began in the spirit of convenience. To convenience they added self-will, and to self-will division — "We will not inherit with them." They were ready to split Israel to get what they wanted. "We," and "them," they said, of the LORD's one undivided family.
Another writer is kinder to the same men. He counts their weak faith as faith all the same.
The two and a half tribes picture those who lower Christianity to a life of faith for the earthly circumstances they pass through. They make their life consist in these things. "They had a very great number of livestock." Moses is angry at first, but later he bears with them. He sees that their faith was weak, yet it was still faith, and that these earthly ties did not separate them from their brothers.
Years later, in Joshua, the promise came due.
They kept the promise they had made, carefully and in full. The time had come for them to return to their homes. Joshua commends them for their faithfulness.
- Choice. They saw good pasture, judged it by self-interest, and never asked what God wanted.
- Compromise. The vow to fight won Moses over. It still left their families settled short of the promised land.
- Obligation. Settling early bought no escape. They fought the whole war and held no reward in the land itself.
- Unity. They stayed until every Israelite had his inheritance. That showed Israel was one, and we should care as much for the blessing of all God's children.
- Verdict. They kept their word, and Joshua commended them. Commentators still read it as faith that stopped short of God's purpose.
For we will not inherit with them on yonder side the Jordan, and further, because our inheritance is fallen to us on this side the Jordan eastward.
Israel is camped east of the Jordan, ready to cross into the land God promised. In verse 19 two tribes and a half announce a settled decision: they will stay on this side of the river, and leave "the other side" to everyone else.
The whole nation was facing one direction, and these tribes turned the other way. One writer finds two things in these words:
To settle on the eastern side of the river and build cities there was to fall short of God's purpose for Israel's blessing. Their words, "For we will not inherit with them on the other side of the Jordan and beyond" (v.19), mark a set determination to refuse to live in the portion that truly belonged to Israel. They also show a spirit of separation from those who would be faithful to the word of promise.
Notice the pronouns. The same writer traces the steps from convenience to a divided nation:
One false step usually leads to another — evil leads to evil. These tribes began with the spirit of convenience. To convenience 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 in two. "We," and "them," they said of the Lord's one undivided family. The Lord had given one inheritance to His people. But they would have their inheritance, and Israel should have theirs!
They say the inheritance has already fallen to them east of the river. One commentator asks what was really driving the choice:
Reuben and 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 God's mark. Worldly and selfish thinking ruled how they acted — what their eyes saw, what their appetites wanted. They looked over "the land of Jazer and the land of Gilead," and they judged it by their own interests alone, with no regard for the judgement and will of God.
What held them back was a gift. As one commentator puts it: "The good things that God had granted took away their desire for Canaan." (F. B. Hole)
Moses was angry at first. He agreed once they promised to fight for their brothers. One commentator weighs the cost of that bargain:
It seemed a remarkable show of unselfishness and energy to 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 God's mark. They had robbed them of a place and a portion in the true land of promise.
Another writer points to a later verdict in Scripture that does not match the one Moses gave:
Moses said that if they went armed over the Jordan, then afterward "you shall be free of obligation to the LORD" — older translations read, "you shall be guiltless before the LORD". Guiltless! So said Moses, but not the Lord. On the contrary, the divine record in 1 Chronicles 5:25 is, "But they broke faith" — older translations read, "And they transgressed". Those words point to their great sin: they chose for themselves when God had chosen for them.
The Jordan is more than geography. Crossing it stands for something the New Testament applies to believers:
To enter the land, they had to cross the Jordan. That crossing, recorded in Joshua 3, is a picture of death and resurrection with Christ. This is the way into the heavenly portion God has called us to, as we see in Colossians 2 and 3. Only then can we truly seek the things that are above, and not the things on the earth.
Their choice looked safe. History says otherwise:
When Israel declined, captivity began with the two and a half tribes. Even in the days of Ahab, Ramoth in Gilead was in Syrian hands, and later those parts were the first to fall captive to Assyria. In the same way, the spirit of the world captures the earthly-minded Christian most easily.
Yet the story does not close there. One writer sums up their history: they refused God's land, turned to other gods, and Assyria carried them away. Then he adds: "Sovereign grace will bring them back at the end. Reuben, Gad, and Manasseh will take their place with the other tribes, and in equal numbers (Revelation 7), at least in symbol." (The Bible Treasury)
- Short. They stopped short of the mark God set. They drew their boundary by the sight of their eyes, not by His will.
- Split. "We will not inherit with them" turned a preference into a division. One inheritance became two.
- Snare. What held them back was not poverty but prosperity — God's own gifts took away their desire for the land.
- Sanctioned. Moses agreed in the end. But a later record calls it transgression, and the two verdicts do not agree.
- Seized. Living on the wrong side cost them first: captivity began with these tribes. Yet grace names Reuben, Gad and Manasseh again at the end.
And Moses said to them, If ye do this thing, if ye arm yourselves before Jehovah for war,
Reuben and Gad have asked to settle east of the Jordan. Moses does not refuse them. He answers with a condition: cross over armed, and the land is theirs. Commentators read this verse as a test — of where a believer's real inheritance lies, and of what makes conflict succeed.
The two tribes had looked the land over and liked what they saw. One writer traces the whole problem back to 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 a boundary line short of the river Jordan. Worldly and selfish thinking ruled their conduct — the sight of their eyes, motives of the flesh. They surveyed "the land of Jazer and the land of Gilead," and they weighed it by their own interests alone, with no regard for the judgement and will of God. If they had simply been looking to God, the question of settling short of the river Jordan would never have come up at all.
Moses sets three terms: cross the Jordan, go armed, and go before the LORD. One commentator reads them as the conditions for every real spiritual battle.
In these words about the two and a half tribes, Moses lays down the three conditions that no one can do without in the conflict with Satan's power. First, they must cross the Jordan... Next, Moses says they must be armed. In the same way the apostle urges us to take up "the whole armor of God, that you may be able to withstand in the evil day, and having done all, to stand firm" (Eph. 6:13). It would be nothing but folly to expose ourselves to Satan's attacks, his tricks and his flaming arrows, unless we were clothed in the armor God gives... Finally, he says they must cross the Jordan, every man armed for battle, "before the LORD." This is the secret of all courage in conflict: to know that we are before the Lord, that we are under His eye. When these conditions are met, Moses promises that the land will be subdued before them, for victory would then be certain.
The same writer explains what that crossing means for a believer:
The Red Sea is Christ's death and resurrection for us, but the Jordan is our death and resurrection with Christ... He says these tribes must "pass over" Jordan if they are to have part in the Lord's wars; in the same way, all who would take part in true Christian conflict must take up for themselves their association with Christ in death and resurrection.
Their homes would be on one side of the river; their weapons had to be on the other. One writer carries the lesson over to believers today.
They wanted to settle in an area short of crossing the Jordan. Even so, they were not excused from standing with the rest of Israel in the same conflict. It is the same today. Some believers do not have the spiritual energy and faith to enter fully into the blessings of our inheritance in heavenly places. Even so, they are expected to take part in fighting "the good fight of the faith" (1 Tim. 6:12). That conflict identifies them with all the people of God, and not with an ungodly world.
Moses' condition carries a promise, and the promise carries a warning.
Moses agreed to this. If they kept their promise, and all their armed men went over Jordan to fight with the rest of Israel until all were settled in the land, then they would be blameless, and could return to settle in Gilead (vs.20-22). Yet he warned them: if they did not carry out their promise, they had sinned against the Lord, and they could be sure their sin would find them out. God would deal with them in righteous government.
Not every writer reads the eastern settlement as pure failure. One sees a real danger in the request, and notes what Moses was guarding against.
These tribes are not condemned outright for choosing their portion this way. The ideal, as seen in the millennium, was a portion on both sides of the river... Yet the very fact that their desire raises questions — first with Moses, and later with the whole congregation — shows the danger of such a position. Wherever someone's interests raise questions among the people of God, those interests should be looked at closely. Moses guards, as far as possible, against any future split between the tribes... by demanding that they bear their full share of the warfare.
- Choice. The two and a half tribes judged the land by the sight of their eyes and their own interests, and settled for a boundary short of the line God had set.
- Cross. Moses' first condition was the Jordan — the picture of dying and rising with Christ, not only of Christ dying and rising for us.
- Armed. The second condition was weapons. Facing Satan without the whole armor of God is folly.
- Watched. The third condition, "before the LORD," is where courage comes from — knowing you fight under His eye.
- Cleared. Keep the promise and you return blameless; break it and your sin will find you out.
and all of you that are armed go over the Jordan before Jehovah, until he have dispossessed his enemies from before him,
Reuben and Gad have just asked Moses to let them settle east of the Jordan. Here he sets his terms. Their fighting men must cross the river with the rest of Israel and stay in the field until God has driven out His enemies. Two questions follow. What did Moses require of them? And can such a promise make up for choosing land God never gave them?
Moses answers with a condition. It has a clear start and a clear end.
Moses agreed. Their promise was that all their armed men would go over the Jordan and fight with the rest of Israel until everyone was settled in the land. If they kept it, they would be blameless, and could return to settle in Gilead (vs.20-22). Yet he warned them: if they did not carry out their promise, they had sinned against the Lord. They could be sure their sin would find them out.
The armed men are not the ones who defeat the enemies. They go "before the LORD," and the driving out is His work.
The Lord was also driving out nations before Israel who were greater and stronger than they were. He did this to give Israel their proper inheritance (v.38). This pictures God's power defeating satanic forces, so that believers might enjoy their inheritance "in heavenly places in Christ Jesus."
Choosing a lesser portion bought no exemption. Every man fit to fight still had to cross.
They wanted to settle in an area short of crossing the Jordan. Even so, this tells us they were not excused from the unity of bearing the same conflict that the rest of Israel bore. So it is today: some believers do not have the spiritual energy and faith to enter fully into the blessings of our inheritance in heavenly places. Yet they are still expected to take part in fighting "the good fight of faith" (1 Tim. 6:12). That conflict marks them out with all the people of God, and not with a godless world.
They took the hardest side of the bargain: all the danger, none of the gain.
They had made their choice and had found rest on this side of the Jordan. But they were not exempt from the coming war. They were commanded to help their fellow Israelites by crossing the Jordan with them. Then, once their brothers had found rest, they were to return to their own rest. They could not escape the conflict, though they had no reward in the land itself.
Crossing armed ahead of everyone else, and leaving your family behind, looks generous. But one writer asks where those families were left.
Their promise to cross the Jordan, armed and ready, ahead of their brothers, drew a half-agreement out of Moses. It looked like a remarkable sign of unselfishness and energy to leave all their loved ones behind and cross the Jordan just to fight for their brothers. But where had they left those loved ones? They had left them short of the mark God had set. They had deprived them of a place and a portion in the true land of promise... And for what? Just to get good pasture for their cattle.
Moses' terms end with a promise of no blame. The quote below follows an older translation, which reads "guiltless" in verse 22 and "they transgressed" in 1 Chronicles 5:25. Commentators differ on whether Moses' verdict was God's last word.
Moses said that if they went armed over Jordan, then afterward "you shall return and be guiltless before the Lord". Guiltless! So said Moses, but not the Lord. On the contrary, here in 1 Chron. 5:25 the divine record is, "And they transgressed"... "And they transgressed" points to their great sin in choosing for themselves when God had chosen for them... God did not forget them while He noted their sin. He helped them in their wars because they trusted in Him... But where was their obedience?
Whatever the flaw in their choice, these men did what verse 21 required. They stayed to the finish.
To their credit, the warriors from Reuben, Gad and the half tribe of Manasseh stayed faithfully with the other tribes in the fight against the enemy. They kept on until the enemy's power was completely broken.
That long campaign had a purpose beyond the land itself.
This was to be an effective testimony to the unity of Israel. We too should have such concern for the blessing of all the children of God.
- Choice — They took land for their cattle instead of the portion God had allotted. They chose for themselves where God had already chosen for them.
- Condition — Moses agreed, but only on terms. Every armed man crosses, stays to the end, and only then goes home blameless.
- Conflict — Stopping short of the inheritance excuses no one from the battle. They got all the fighting and no reward in the land.
- Commander — The war belonged to God. They marched "before the LORD," and it was He who drove out the enemies before them.
- Consequence — Moses called them guiltless. Commentators differ on whether that settled it, since the later record calls their choice a transgression. Yet they kept their word in the field, and their long campaign stood as a testimony to Israel's unity.
and the land is subdued before Jehovah, and afterwards ye return, ye shall be guiltless toward Jehovah and toward Israel, and this land shall be your possession before Jehovah.
Reuben and Gad asked for land east of the Jordan, and Moses set his price: cross over, fight until the land is won, then come back and call this ground your own. Two questions follow: what does it mean to be cleared "before the LORD," and can land God never gave them truly be theirs?
Commentators start with an earlier question: should the tribes have asked at all? They sized up the land and judged by what they saw.
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 short of the river Jordan. They were ruled by worldly and selfish thinking — by the sight of their eyes… They looked over "the land of Jazer and the land of Gilead," and they judged it only by their own interests, with no regard at all for the judgement and will of God.
The verse closes a bargain. Moses ties their freedom to a finished job, and warns them about leaving it unfinished.
Moses agreed to this. He told them that if they kept their promise and sent all their armed men over the Jordan to fight with the rest of Israel until everyone was settled in the land, then they would be blameless and could return to settle in Gilead (vs.20-22). Yet he warned them that if they did not keep their promise, they had sinned against the Lord, and they could be sure their sin would find them out. God would deal with them in righteous government.
Moses makes crossing the river the way into the Lord's wars. One writer reads it as a picture of the believer's death and resurrection with Christ.
In these words about the two and a half tribes, Moses lays down three conditions that are essential for the fight with Satan's power. First, they must cross the Jordan. Applied to believers now, that means they must accept for themselves the truth of death and resurrection with Christ, because this is what the Jordan pictures. The Red Sea is Christ's death and resurrection for us, but the Jordan is our death and resurrection with Christ… He says that these tribes must "pass over" the Jordan if they are to share in the Lord's wars.
The same writer names the other two conditions, and what victory rests on.
Next, Moses says they must be armed… Finally, he says they must pass over the Jordan, every man armed for battle, "before the Lord." This is the secret of all courage in conflict: to know that we are before the Lord, that we are under His eye. When these conditions are met, Moses promises that the land will be subdued before them, for victory is then certain.
Wanting a different address did not release them from the shared battle. One writer applies the same demand to believers today who have not entered into what is theirs.
This tells us that, though they wanted to settle short of crossing the Jordan, they were not excused from sharing the same fight that the rest of Israel bore. So it is today. Some believers do not have the spiritual energy and faith to enter fully into the blessings of our inheritance in heavenly places. Even so, they are expected to take part in fighting "the good fight of faith" (1 Tim.6:12). That fight marks them out as belonging with all the people of God, and not with a godless world.
The clearance Moses offers covers the promise they made, not the choice they made. One writer sets the words of Moses against a later verdict in Scripture. (Older translations read "guiltless" where the ESV has "free of obligation.")
Moses said that if they went armed over the Jordan, then afterwards "you shall return and be guiltless before the Lord." Guiltless! So said Moses, but not the Lord. On the contrary, in 1 Chron. 5:25 God's own record says, "And they transgressed"… The words of Moses carry no rebuke for choosing land outside the promised land. But was this not their transgression? The Holy Spirit marks it out strongly… "And they transgressed" points to their great sin: they chose for themselves when God had chosen for them.
They got the land. One writer names two results of holding ground outside the place God gave.
When the two and a half tribes went back to their land, they built an altar by the Jordan. They were afraid that in time they would be disowned as not belonging to God's people Israel. This fear was but one of the consequences of coming short of God's purpose. Another consequence was that they were the first to come under God's discipline when Israel turned away from Him.
- Choice. The trouble starts before the verse. They measured Gilead by their own interests, and stopped short of the line God had set.
- Condition. Moses agrees, but only on terms. Every armed man crosses and fights until the land is won; only then may they return.
- Conflict. Crossing the Jordan opens the Lord's wars, fought under His eye. No believer escapes the fight the rest of God's people bear.
- Clearance. Moses clears them, yet a later record says they transgressed. They were cleared of their promise, not of their choice.
- Cost. Land outside God's gift left them afraid of being disowned. They were the first to feel God's discipline.
But if ye do not do so, behold, ye have sinned against Jehovah, and be sure your sin will find you out.
Reuben, Gad and half of Manasseh asked to settle east of the Jordan River, outside the land God had promised. Moses agreed on one condition — and the warning he attached has outlived the moment that produced it.
The two tribes were not rebels. What pulled them was prosperity.
Two tribes, Reuben and Gad, and half the tribe of Manasseh asked Moses for permission to settle on the conquered lands east of the Jordan, instead of taking their share in the land that was truly God's promised land. What especially made them want this was the large number of cattle they had gained. The good things that God had granted took away their desire for Canaan.
The warning is the second half of an "if." Moses had just told them how to stay blameless. Breaking their word to their brothers would count as sin against the LORD Himself.
Moses agreed to this. He told them that if they kept their promise — sending all their armed men over the Jordan to fight with the rest of Israel until everyone was settled in the land — then they would be blameless, and could return to settle in Gilead. But he warned them that if they did not keep their promise, they had sinned against the LORD, and they could be sure their sin would find them out. God would deal with them in righteous government.
Breaking the promise would have left their brothers to fight alone — yet Moses calls it sin against God. One writer traces how the small compromise had already been growing.
One false step usually leads to another — evil leads to evil. These tribes started by doing what suited them. That grew into self-will, and self-will grew into division — "We will not inherit with them." To carry out their plan they were ready to split Israel.
The verse does not promise a quick discovery. One writer points to a sin that stayed buried for about forty years.
You may try and forget your sins, but wait a moment, God has a great memory and a long look-out. Many, many years roll by — in fact, about forty years rolled by before it all came out. But note this, it must come out. "Be sure your sin will find you out," is a God-given word.
The later record of Reuben, Gad and Manasseh reads like the warning working itself out — and it does not end there.
Their tribal history comes down to three main facts: 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. By staying outside the promised land, it was as if they had cut themselves off from the privileges of the temple and from the protection of the LORD's presence among them. Sovereign grace will bring them back at the end.
The sentence is meant to be uncomfortable. One writer said this to a room of children:
The thought that all men's sins will some day be found out and exposed is meant to sting the conscience… Some day, children, all will be found out, though you may now hide them from your parents and teachers.
The sting has a purpose. Being exposed while forgiveness is still open is a very different thing from being exposed when it is not.
You cannot hide your sins from the eye of God; the day is coming when your sins will all be uncovered and exposed. The Scripture says: "Be sure your sin will find you out." And if you miss God's forgiveness through the Name of Christ Jesus, what a terrible finding out it will be!
- Cattle. Prosperity, not rebellion, kept the tribes short of the promised land. The good things God gave took away their appetite for what He had promised.
- Condition. Moses did not curse them; he set terms. Keep the promise and be blameless, break it and the sin stands against the LORD Himself.
- Creep. Doing what suited them grew into self-will, and self-will into division. One false step usually leads to the next.
- Consequence. Delay is not escape. A sin can stay buried forty years and still come out; these tribes refused God's land, went after other gods, and ended in Assyria — yet sovereign grace will bring them back at the end.
- Cure. The warning is meant to sting your conscience awake now, while forgiveness through the name of Jesus Christ is still open. The alternative is a finding out with nothing left to cover it.
Build yourselves cities for your little ones, and folds for your flocks, and do that which has gone out of your mouth.
Reuben and Gad asked to settle east of the Jordan, in Gilead, instead of crossing into Canaan with the rest of Israel. Moses answers with a permit and a condition in one breath: he lets them build, but only if they keep the promise they just made.
Moses sets out the terms first. He warns them second. Permission comes last.
Moses gave a favourable answer. If they kept their promise and sent all their armed men over the Jordan to fight with the rest of Israel, until all Israel was settled in the land, then they would be blameless. They could come back and settle in Gilead (vs. 20-22). But he warned them too. If they did not keep their promise, they had sinned against the Lord, and they could be sure their sin would find them out. God would deal with them in righteous government. Still, Moses gave them permission to build in Gilead, as they had asked (vs. 21-24).
Building cities meant settling down for good. One writer traces where that choice led.
They saw that the land of Gilead was a nice place, and they said to Moses: if you will allow us, we will leave our wives and little ones and cattle here, and we will go over and help you fight, and then come back to them... In full view of Canaan they say, we will settle down where we are. They were not content with a tent, they wanted a house... "We will build sheepfolds here for our livestock, and cities for our little ones" (Num. 32:16). God let them have their way, and they were the first to be carried into captivity.
In their own request the sheepfolds came first. In Moses' answer the little ones come first.
The men offered to cross the Jordan armed and fight for the others. One writer asks what that offer cost the people left behind.
Their promise to cross the Jordan, armed and ready, ahead of their brothers won a kind of agreement from Moses. It looked like a remarkable sign of unselfishness and energy: to leave all their loved ones behind, cross the Jordan, and fight only for their brothers. But where had they left those loved ones? They had left them short of God's mark. They had robbed them of a place and a portion in the true land of promise — the inheritance God had spoken of to Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob. And for what? Just to get good pasture for their cattle.
Moses did not leave this promise as a private understanding. He put it on record before Joshua and the priest Eleazar, the two men who would lead Israel after him.
When these two tribes confirmed the promise, Moses gave orders about it to Eleazar and Joshua. If the armed men of Gad and Reuben fought in Canaan until the other tribes were settled, then Gad and Reuben could settle in Gilead (vs. 28-29). If they did not, they would have to take their possession in Canaan instead (v. 30)... Moses knew that he himself would not enter the land, so Eleazar and Joshua needed to know all of this.
The two tribes kept their promise. Even so, the altar they later built by the Jordan threw the nation into confusion.
All this serious misunderstanding, all this trouble and alarm, came from the failure of Reuben and Gad. True, they are able to explain themselves and satisfy their brothers about the altar. But there would have been no need of the altar, no demand for explanation, no cause of alarm, if they had not taken up an unclear position.
One writer applies the chapter to Christians today. The world has a pull even on those who do not belong to it.
Sadly, the night has its influence on those who are not children of the night, and the world has power over those who are not of it. They go blind and cannot see far ahead. The land beyond the Jordan lies in the gathering twilight. The things they see are the things of the present. They pay little attention now to the fact that these things are temporary, so they build here.
Another writer names the cure:
It is a great thing to be whole-hearted, decided, and clear in taking our stand for Christ... An undecided, half-and-half Christian is less consistent than an open, out-and-out man of the world or unbeliever... What we need right now is a band of whole-hearted, thorough, unmistakable witnesses for Jesus Christ. We need men who say plainly that they are seeking a country — earnest men who are not at home in this world.
- Permitted — Moses lets them build. But first he warns them: break the promise, and you sin against the Lord, and God deals with you in righteous government.
- Prioritised — they asked for sheepfolds first and children second. Moses names the little ones first. Good pasture for cattle cost those families their portion in the land of promise.
- Pledged — Moses put the terms on record before Joshua and Eleazar, so they would still hold after his death.
- Priced — they kept the promise, yet the half-way choice still led to the trouble over the altar. They had to explain themselves only because their position was unclear.
- Pictured — do not build where everything is temporary. Be whole-hearted, and say plainly that you are seeking the country God promised.
And the children of Gad and the children of Reuben spoke to Moses, saying, Thy servants will do as my lord commands.
The two and a half tribes asked to settle east of the Jordan, and Moses answered with terms. Here Gad and Reuben accept those terms — but can a sincere promise make up for a portion chosen short of what God gave?
Their words answer terms already set. Moses had said what obedience would win them, and what failure would bring.
Moses welcomed this. Their promise was that all their armed men would go over Jordan and fight with the rest of Israel. They were to fight until all Israel was settled in the land. If they kept that promise, they would be blameless, and could return to settle in Gilead. Yet he warned them too. If they did not carry out their promise, they had sinned against the Lord, and they could be sure their sin would find them out. God would deal with them in righteous government.
Their pledge was sincere. Yet it did not change where they had chosen to stop.
Reuben, Gad, and Manasseh have to explain themselves. They have to give Moses fresh pledges that they are not cutting themselves off from the fellowship and interests of their brothers. And they do this with zeal, and with integrity too... They are ready to give pledges that they will be foremost in the actions which still remain, on behalf of their brothers' inheritance. They have no thought at all of losing fellowship with them... but still they have stopped short of Canaan... They are pausing, before they reach their promised inheritance, for the sake of their cattle in the wilderness.
Their promise won Moses' consent. What came later shows what their choice cost them.
The tribes promised to go forward with the others until the land was conquered. So he grants what they ask, and settles them in the land, with the half tribe of Manasseh. Still, the history in Scripture shows us that these tribes were the first to suffer, and the first to fall into the hands of the Gentiles... Happy are those who wait for the blessings of God until they have gone over Jordan. In the meantime they take patience as their portion instead of the blessings on this side. Those blessings are gifts of God's providence, but they are less secure.
One writer sets their promise beside what the other tribes rested on when the fighting began.
Joshua encouraged Israel to go and take the land which the Lord gave them. But he has a different word for these men who had done wrong. He speaks of their land as the land Moses gave them. And they go through the Jordan to keep their promise to Moses — their warriors, that is, for their wives and children remain behind. 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!
Choosing a smaller inheritance did not buy them a smaller share of the war. One writer carries that duty straight over to believers today.
They wanted to settle in an area short of crossing the Jordan. Even so, they were not excused from joining in the same conflict that the rest of Israel bore. The same is true today. Some believers do not have the spiritual energy and faith to enter fully into the blessings of our inheritance in heavenly places. They are still expected to take part in fighting "the good fight of the faith" (1 Timothy 6:12). That conflict marks them out with all the people of God, and not with a godless world.
Years later, Joshua sends these same men home. What they said to Moses, they did.
They had to pass over Jordan with the other tribes and help them in the conflict. They kept the promise they had made with care, and the time for their return home had come. Joshua commends them for their faithfulness. He urges them to love the Lord, to walk in all His ways, to keep His commandments, to cling to Him and to serve Him. May we also heed these words. We can enjoy the fellowship and the spiritual blessings that belong to us only as we walk in all His ways and obey His Word.
- Terms, then consent. Moses set the conditions first: cross armed, fight until all Israel has its land, and you are blameless. Fail, and your sin will find you out.
- Pledge sincere. They promised with zeal and integrity. They never meant to break company with their brothers.
- Grant, not approval. The pledge won Moses' permission. Yet these tribes were the first to fall into enemy hands, because blessings on this side of the Jordan are less secure.
- Different ground. The nine and a half went to war resting on God's promise; these two and a half went resting on their own promise to Moses.
- Same conflict. A smaller inheritance did not excuse them from the fighting. They kept their promise to the end, and Joshua commended them.
Our little ones, our wives, our cattle, and all our beasts shall be there in the cities of Gilead;
Reuben and Gad answer Moses with the detail of their offer: the families and herds stay east of the Jordan, and the fighting men cross over. It sounds like sensible planning, but commentators press a harder question — why settle the next generation outside the land God promised?
This verse is one half of a two-part deal. One writer states both halves:
The two and a half tribes made a proposal, and Moses finally accepted it. Their wives and children, together with much cattle and other possessions, would settle in comfort in the land of Jazer and Gilead. The men would cross with the other tribes to help fight their battles and see them settled in the land of promise. Yet they would find their own inheritance outside the place of God's promise.
They chose these cities over the land ahead. One writer names what drove the choice:
"Do not bring us over the Jordan." That was the settled decision of the two and a half tribes. God had greatly enriched them on their way to the promised land. They preferred sitting down and enjoying their riches to pressing on to the inheritance. Expediency rather than faith guided them. The cities of Gilead had greater attractions for them than the soldiers' tents over the Jordan. Settling down, whatever form it takes, is a sorrowful thing.
Moses condemned this plan at first, then consented. One writer grants that the offer looked generous, then asks where they left their families:
Moses at once condemned the proposal of Reuben and Gad. True, he later relaxed his judgement and gave his consent. Their promise to cross the Jordan armed, ahead of their brothers, drew a kind of assent from him. 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 God had spoken of to Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob. And for what? Just to get good pasture for their cattle.
The herds stay behind in Gilead's pastures. One writer points to a better pasture:
If He leads us through this world, it is not here that He gives us rest. The green pastures and the still waters are not the fields, nor the sheepfolds, nor the cities of Gilead, but the rich pastures of the land of Canaan.
Commentators differ over whether these tribes did anything wrong. One writer notes that most find no fault beyond their first unwillingness to cross, then quotes another writer who judges the choice harshly:
"Two things common in this world led these tribes to make this choice and this proposal — the lust of the eye and the pride of life. The land was pleasant to the eye, and it was good for pasture. Too many seek their own things, and not the things of the public good or of Christ, and so take up short of the heavenly Canaan. Their choice implied: 1. A contempt for the land of promise. 2. A distrust of the power of God. 3. A neglect of the interests of their brothers. 4. An undue regard for their own convenience and wealth… Notice this. These tribes were placed first, ahead of the other tribes. Long afterward they lost their place first, ahead of the other tribes."
Israel's later history bore that out. Gilead was the first region Israel lost:
One thing more we must observe. When Israel declined, captivity began with the two and a half tribes. Even in the days of Ahab, Ramoth in Gilead was in the hands of the Syrians, and later those parts were the first to fall captive to Assyria. Just so, the earthly-minded Christian is captivated most easily by the spirit of the world.
Later Moses retells this history to Israel. One writer notes what he leaves out:
In that passage there is no reference at all to this side of the question. Moses' aim is to set the great goodness, loving-kindness, and faithfulness of God before the whole assembly. God brought them through all the difficulties and dangers of the wilderness. He had also already given them remarkable victories over the Amorites, and put them in possession of regions so attractive and so suited to them.
- Cattle first. The choice started with good pasture. The cities of Gilead outweighed the soldiers' tents across the river, and expediency, not faith, decided it.
- Short of the mark. The men left their families outside the promised inheritance. The cost of the bargain fell on the little ones, not on the men who made it.
- Short of the pasture. The rich feeding ground God had in mind was Canaan, not Gilead; they secured grazing and missed the land.
- Short-lived. Placed first, they lost their place first: Gilead was the earliest territory Israel lost.
- Not short of grace. Retelling it later, Moses passes over the fault. He speaks only of God's goodness in the victories and the land already given.
but thy servants will pass over, every one armed for war, before Jehovah to battle, as my lord says.
Reuben and Gad asked for land east of the Jordan, and Moses condemned the plan. This verse is their answer, and commentators differ over how much the pledge in it is worth.
What changed Moses' mind was the pledge of this verse. One writer asks what it cost the families left behind.
So Moses at once condemned the proposal of Reuben and Gad. True, he afterwards relaxed his judgement and gave his consent. Their promise to cross the Jordan, ready armed, ahead of their brothers, drew from Moses a kind of assent. 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 — the inheritance God had spoken of to Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob. And for what? Just to get good pasture for their cattle.
Their choice of land changed where they lived, not what they owed. One writer carries that duty forward to believers today.
Though they wanted to settle in an area short of crossing the Jordan, they were not excused from joining in the same conflict that the rest of Israel bore. So today, if some believers do not have the spiritual energy and faith to enter fully into the blessings of our inheritance in heavenly places, they are still expected to take part in fighting "the good fight of faith" (1 Tim. 6:12), by which conflict they are identified with all the people of God, and not with an ungodly world.
Their pledge points to a man: they will do as "my lord orders". One writer sets that beside what moved the other tribes.
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 the land Moses gave them. And these go through the Jordan — that is, their warriors, for 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!
Their courage was real. One writer asks where their hearts were while they fought.
Like many Christians today, they were ready to fight the battles of the Lord, but they did not wish to dwell where the Name of the Lord was set. They were content to have their inheritance in a place that suited their earthly possessions. But they came short of God's thoughts for the good of His people. They were no doubt good fighters. Yet their thoughts would be on their wives and children and their lands east of the Jordan, not on the blessedness of being where the Lord's Name was found.
The cause of the whole arrangement was cattle and good grazing. That detail is the warning.
Here we see that the rich and good things of earth make it hard for those who have them to lay hold of their heavenly possessions. We agree with the truth of our heavenly calling. Even so, it is so easy to settle down in our comfortable earthly circumstances and fail to lay hold of it as a matter of faith's experience.
They did keep the promise, and God did not overlook it — though the word that finally sent them home carries its own sadness.
There is a blessing for any child of God who follows the Lord with a true heart, even if he does so only for one day. There is always spoil for such a person to share with those who stay at home and guard the supplies. But "Return" is a solemn sentence.
- Short — They chose land short of the Jordan for pasture. Every later trouble traces back to that choice, not to their courage.
- Pledge — Their offer to cross armed won Moses' consent. But it rested on their own promise, while the other tribes moved on God's promise.
- Duty — Settling short did not cancel the call to fight. Those who have not entered their full portion are still expected in the battle.
- Divided — They were good soldiers who did not want to live where His Name was. Their hearts stayed with what they had left behind.
- Return — Faithfulness for even a day brings blessing and spoil to share. Yet "Return" sent them back over the river, away from the land.
So concerning them Moses commanded Eleazar the priest, and Joshua the son of Nun, and the chief fathers of the tribes of the children of Israel.
Moses had agreed to let Reuben, Gad, and half of Manasseh settle east of the Jordan, but only on terms. Here he hands those terms to the men who will outlive him, and two questions arise: why did Moses need witnesses, and was the deal a good one?
Moses is near the end of his life, and someone else will have to enforce this agreement. One writer sets out both sides of the terms:
These two tribes confirmed their promise, so Moses gave orders about them to Eleazar and Joshua. If the armed men of Gad and Reuben would fight in Canaan until the other tribes were settled, then Gad and Reuben could settle in Gilead (vs.28-29). If they did not, they would have to take a possession in Canaan (v.30), and they would have to fight for that possession too. Moses knew he would not enter the land himself, so Eleazar and Joshua had to be told all of this.
The whole arrangement exists because two and a half tribes asked for something other than what God had given. Commentators are direct about this:
It was a mistake, a failure, a stopping short of the mark God had set, for Reuben and Gad and the half tribe of Manasseh to choose any boundary line that stopped short of the river Jordan. Worldly and selfish thoughts governed what they did — the sight of their eyes — the desires 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 for the judgement and will of God.
Another writer breaks the choice into its parts and traces how it ended:
Two things common in this world led these tribes to make this choice and to ask for it: the lust of the eye and the pride of life. The land was pleasant to look at, and it was good for pasture. Too many seek their own things, and not the good of all, or the things of Christ, and so they stop short of the heavenly Canaan. Their choice meant: 1. Contempt for the land of promise. 2. Distrust of the power of God. 3. Neglect of the interests of their brothers. 4. Too much regard for their own comfort and wealth. … Notice this: these tribes were the first to be given a place, ahead of the other tribes, and long afterwards they were the first to lose it, ahead of the other tribes.
The offer to go armed ahead of their brothers sounded generous. Moses agreed, but only barely:
Moses condemned the proposal of Reuben and Gad at once. True, he later softened his judgement and gave his consent. Their promise to cross the Jordan, armed and ready, ahead of their brothers, drew from Moses something like agreement. It looked like a remarkable show of unselfishness and energy to 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 mark God had set.
The one thing Moses will not waive is the crossing. Writers read the Jordan as a picture, and see in Moses' wording a rule for spiritual conflict:
In these words of Moses about the two and a half tribes, he lays down the three conditions of conflict with Satan's power that no one can do without. First, they must cross the Jordan. Applied to believers now, that means they must accept for themselves the truth of death and resurrection with Christ, for this is what the Jordan pictures. The Red Sea is Christ's death and resurrection for us, but the Jordan is our death and resurrection with Christ. … He says that these tribes must "pass over" Jordan if they are to have part in the Lord's wars. … Moses says they must also be armed. … Finally, he says they must cross the Jordan, every man armed for battle, "before the Lord." This is the secret of all courage in conflict: to know that we are before the Lord, that we are under His eye.
Whatever the flaw in their choice, these tribes did what they had promised:
They still had to cross the Jordan with the other tribes and help them in the fight. They carefully kept the promise they had made, and the time came for them to return home. Joshua praises them for their faithfulness, and urges them to love the Lord, to walk in all His ways, to keep His commandments, to hold fast to Him and to serve Him.
- Choice. The tribes picked their land by what looked good for their cattle, and so stopped short of the heavenly Canaan.
- Condition. Because the choice fell short, Moses attached a condition: cross the Jordan armed, or take a possession in Canaan instead.
- Custodians. Moses knew he would not enter the land. So he charged Eleazar, Joshua and the family heads to hold the tribes to their word.
- Crossing. The one term he would not drop was crossing the Jordan. It pictures death and resurrection with Christ, and without it there is no share in the Lord's wars.
- Consequence. They kept their promise and Joshua praised them. Yet the tribes placed first were long afterwards the first to lose their place.
And Moses said unto them, If the children of Gad and the children of Reuben pass with you over the Jordan, every one armed for battle, before Jehovah, and the land be subdued before you, then ye shall give them the land of Gilead for a possession;
Moses answers Reuben, Gad and half of Manasseh with terms, not a simple yes. Their fighting men must cross the Jordan armed and fight before the LORD. Only then does the land east of the river become theirs. Why must they fight for land they will never live in?
Moses sets out three conditions, not one. The first is the crossing. One writer takes the Jordan as a picture of the believer's own death and resurrection with Christ:
In these words about the two and a half tribes, Moses lays down the three essential conditions for conflict with Satan's power. First, they must pass over Jordan. Applied to believers now, this means they must accept for themselves the truth of death and resurrection with Christ, for this is what the Jordan pictures. The Red Sea is Christ's death and resurrection for us, but the Jordan is our death and resurrection with Christ.
The other two conditions are the weapons and the place. Armed, and under God's eye, these men can count on the verse's closing promise — the land subdued:
Furthermore, Moses says that they must be armed. The apostle likewise urges us to take up "the whole armour of God, that you may be able to withstand in the evil day, and having done all, to stand firm" (Ephesians 6:13). It would be nothing but folly to expose ourselves to Satan's attacks, his tricks and his flaming arrows, unless we wear the armour God gives. Finally, he says they must pass over Jordan, every man armed for battle, "before the LORD." This is the secret of all courage in conflict — to know that we are before the Lord, that we are under His eye. When they meet these conditions, Moses promises that the land shall be subdued before them, for victory would then be certain.
Their choice does not excuse them from Israel's battles. Families and herds stay behind, but the soldiers cross with everyone else:
Though they wanted to settle in an area short of crossing the Jordan, they were not excused from sharing the same conflict that the rest of Israel bore. So today, some believers may not have the spiritual energy and faith to enter into the full blessings of our inheritance in heavenly places. They are still expected to fight "the good fight of the faith" (1 Timothy 6:12). That conflict marks them out with all the people of God, and not with an ungodly world.
Another writer names the oddity: the war without the winnings.
The two and a half tribes need a special instruction, because their interests differ from those of the whole nation. They have separated themselves from it to some extent. They are now to have the fighting without the personal reward. In the same way, no Christian is excused from the conflict with the power of Satan, and yet for many it may not carry its true meaning.
Commentators differ over how to judge these tribes. Some read their whole plan as a failure of faith, whatever they promised about fighting:
Reuben and Gad and the half tribe of Manasseh chose a boundary line short of the river Jordan. That was a mistake, a failure, a falling short of the divine mark. Worldly and selfish thinking governed their conduct — what their eyes saw, what their own nature wanted. They looked over "the land of Jazer and the land of Gilead." They valued it only by their own interests, with no regard for the judgement and will of God.
Others notice that Moses' first anger gives way, and say why:
The two and a half tribes picture those who lower Christianity to a faith that deals only with the earthly circumstances they pass through. They make their life consist in these things. "They had much cattle." Moses is angry at first, but later he bears with them. He sees that their faith was weak, yet it was still faith, and that these earthly ties did not separate them from their brothers.
They did receive Gilead. Later it was the least safe ground in Israel, and its city Ramoth-gilead was lost:
Israel sinned, and the weakness that followed left the people open to successful attacks by their enemies, the enemies of God. This was the first region that fell into their hands. "Do you know that Ramoth-gilead belongs to us?" brings no blessing to a people who are grieving over its loss.
- Cross — the first condition is the Jordan. The Red Sea pictures Christ's death for us; the Jordan pictures our death and resurrection with Him.
- Armed — God sends no one against Satan's power unprotected. The whole armour of God is the only sane preparation.
- Before the LORD — courage in battle comes from knowing we fight under His eye.
- Subdued — meet the conditions and Moses promises the outcome. The land will be subdued, and victory assured.
- Possession — they gained Gilead, but they fought for others without sharing the reward, and Gilead was the first ground Israel lost when it grew weak.
but if they do not pass over with you armed, they shall have possessions among you in the land of Canaan.
Reuben, Gad and half of Manasseh asked to settle east of the Jordan, and verse 30 is the condition Moses attached: cross over armed to fight, or take your land inside Canaan like everyone else. So why did the choice need a condition at all, and why is settling in the promised land itself the penalty?
Moses would not enter the land himself. So he handed the terms to the two men who would carry them out.
When these two tribes confirmed this promise, Moses gave Eleazar and Joshua a command about it. If the armed men of Gad and Reuben would fight in Canaan until the other tribes were settled, then Gad and Reuben could settle in Gilead (vs.28-29). If they did not, they would have to take a possession in Canaan (v.30), and that would mean fighting for it. Moses knew he would not enter the land himself. So Eleazar and Joshua had to know all of this.
One writer goes back further, to how these tribes picked their land in the first place.
Reuben and Gad and the half tribe of Manasseh made a mistake. They failed. They stopped short of God's mark when they chose a border short of the river Jordan. Worldly, 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 judged it only by their own interests, with no regard for the judgement and will of God. If they had been looking to God alone, the idea of settling short of the river Jordan would never have come up at all.
These tribes still claimed their place among God's people. One writer weighs what they kept and what they lost.
In moral power they fell short of God's call, though they still held the hope of that call. They claimed fellowship only with the people God had called. In power they were not a risen people, though in faith they were one with those who were. They took care to state and keep their alliance with the tribes who would cross the Jordan, though they themselves were drawn to stay on the wilderness side of it.
The condition in this verse fixes one thing: wherever they lived, they would share the war.
They wanted to settle in an area short of crossing the Jordan. Even so, they were not excused from bearing the same conflict as the rest of Israel, in unity with them. It is the same today. Some believers do not have the spiritual energy and faith to enter fully into the blessings of our inheritance in heavenly places. Yet they are still expected to fight "the good fight of faith" (1 Tim.6:12). That conflict marks them out with all the people of God, and not with a godless world.
Another writer listens to the words these tribes chose, and hears a split:
These tribes started with the spirit of convenience. To convenience they added self-will, and to self-will division — "We will not inherit with them." To carry out their plan they were ready to make a split in Israel. "We," and "them," they said, of the Lord's one undivided family.
Moses gives them what they asked for. One writer points out what is missing from that grant.
But Moses gives them the land! He does. Yet no lot is cast for them there — thank God, there is not. He does not mean to agree to it for ever. In the end He will be better to them than their own plan was. For now, though, there must be consent: they must be allowed, as men often must be, to have their way.
The choice also shaped what happened to those tribes long afterwards.
When Israel declined, captivity began with the two and a half tribes. Even in the days of Ahab, Ramoth in Gilead was in the hands of the Syrians, and later those regions were the first to fall captive to Assyria. In the same way, the spirit of the world captures the earthly-minded Christian most easily.
- Choice: they judged the land by their own interests, with no regard for God's will — a border short of the mark He had set.
- Condition: verse 30 puts terms on the eastern land. If they do not cross over armed, their possession lies inside Canaan, and they must fight for it.
- Conflict: settling short did not excuse them from the war. Believers who fall short of their heavenly blessings must still fight the good fight alongside all God's people.
- Consent: Moses lets them have their way, but no lot is cast for them there — God allows the choice without agreeing to it for ever.
- Consequence: captivity began with these tribes — the picture of the earthly-minded believer whom the spirit of the world captures most easily.
And the children of Gad and the children of Reuben answered, saying, As Jehovah has said to thy servants, so will we do.
Numbers 32 ends a long negotiation: two tribes and a half asked for land east of the Jordan, and Moses rebuked them. Here they settle the matter by promising to do what the LORD says — a promise they would have to keep years later, after Moses was gone.
Their "we will do" answers a deal already worked out. One commentator sets out its two halves — a home outside the promised land, and a share in the fighting inside it:
The two and a half tribes made a proposal, and Moses accepted it in the end. Their wives and children, with much cattle and other possessions, would settle in comfort in the land of Jazer and Gilead. The men would cross over with the other tribes to help fight their battles and see them settled in the land of promise. Yet their own inheritance would lie outside the place of God's promise.
Moses did not leave the promise as words only. He put Eleazar and Joshua in charge of it, and said what would follow if the men failed to cross:
When these two tribes confirmed this promise, Moses gave Eleazar and Joshua a command about it. If the armed men of Gad and Reuben would fight in Canaan until the other tribes were settled, then Gad and Reuben could settle in Gilead (vs.28-29). If they did not, they would have to take a possession in Canaan (v.30), and they would have to fight for it. Moses knew that he himself would not enter the land, so Eleazar and Joshua needed to know all of this.
Commentators differ over how to read these men. One sees real loyalty in them — men who hold the hope of God's people, yet do not live where that hope belongs:
They had no thought at all of rebelling, of giving up the portion of Israel, or of cutting themselves or their interests off from the call of God. But their cattle would be well provided for in Gilead, and there they wanted to stay — though, of course, only as Israelites under the call of God. How natural! How common! They hold to the hope of the people of God, yet they do not walk in the place that fits that hope.
Another reads the same men as divided in heart, and points to what they really sought:
They were half-and-half men, men of mixed principles, men who merely stayed on the border. They sought their own things, and not the things of God. Had the things of God filled their hearts, nothing would have made them take up their position short of the true boundary line.
One writer notices that Joshua later speaks of the two groups in different terms:
When Joshua urged 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 the land which Moses gave them. Their warriors do cross the Jordan, while their wives and children stay behind, to keep their promise to Moses. The nine and a half go to 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!
Whatever their motives, these men kept their word. Years later they crossed over armed, leaving their families behind:
It is good to see that about 40,000 of the men of Reuben and Gad and of the half tribe of Manasseh kept their word. They crossed over Jordan ready for war with the rest of Israel, though their families and possessions stayed on the eastern side (vs.12,13).
Keeping the promise did not undo the choice behind it. They fought Israel's wars, but the gain was not theirs:
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. They also lost the sense, which the other tribes could have, that the power of Jehovah shown in the battles with the Canaanite was for them. All their armed men went over the Jordan to help their brothers in the war. Yet they did not go to win an inheritance for themselves where God had chosen for them. They went so that they could return to their own choice, where they made their home… They became mere onlookers of the triumphs of Israel.
- Choice — They set their homes in Gilead and sent their fighting men over, so their inheritance lay outside the place of God's promise.
- Condition — Their word came with terms: cross and fight, or take a possession in Canaan instead. Moses told Eleazar and Joshua to hold them to it.
- Character — Commentators differ. One sees men who hold the hope without walking in it. Another sees half-and-half men who sought their own things.
- Contrast — Nine and a half tribes went to war on God's promise; these two and a half went on their own promise to Moses.
- Cost — Forty thousand kept their word, yet as tribes they stayed outside, and became onlookers at Israel's triumphs.
We will pass over armed before Jehovah into the land of Canaan, and the possession of our inheritance on this side the Jordan shall be ours.
Reuben, Gad and half of Manasseh give Moses their word: they will cross the Jordan armed and fight for Israel, if they may keep the land they chose east of the river. It is a real promise and a bargain at once, and commentators read the verse as a picture of serving God's people while settling for less than God has given.
Their offer to fight is genuine. But writers note what it was meant to buy.
"Do not take us across the Jordan" had been the cry of these tribes; "we will not inherit with them" — that is, with the mass of Israel — was their decision. We may well admire the zeal of the forty thousand who fought on the Lord's side of Jordan for their brothers' sake. Surely they had their reward. Even so, no one can deny this: the two and a half tribes sent them forward to fight the Lord's battles to settle matters by compromise.
The place they chose was not the place God had given them.
Where was Israel's proper portion — their divinely appointed inheritance? Most surely on the other side of Jordan, in the land of Canaan. Reuben, Gad and the half tribe of Manasseh chose a boundary line short of the river Jordan. That was a mistake, a failure, a stopping short of the divine mark. Worldly and selfish motives governed their conduct — the sight of their eyes. If they had simply looked to God, they would never have raised the question of settling down short of the river Jordan.
The two groups crossed into Canaan on different ground.
Joshua encouraged Israel to go and take the land which the Lord gave them (Joshua 1). But he has a different word for these transgressors: he speaks of their land as the land Moses gave them. Their warriors go through the Jordan to keep their promise to Moses, while their wives and children stay behind. 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!
Their lower choice did not release them from the war.
They wanted to settle in an area short of crossing the Jordan. Even so, they were not excused from sharing the same conflict that the rest of Israel bore. It is the same today. If some believers do not have the spiritual energy and faith to enter fully into the blessings of our inheritance in heavenly places, they are still expected to fight "the good fight of faith" (1 Tim. 6:12). That conflict identifies them with all the people of God, and not with an ungodly world.
They would fight for the land, but they would not live in it.
Like many Christians today, they were ready to fight the battles of the Lord, but they did not wish to live where the Name of the Lord was set. They were doubtless good fighters. But their thoughts would be on their wives and children and their lands east of Jordan, not on the blessedness of being where the Lord's Name was found.
One writer finds three conditions for spiritual warfare in Moses' words.
In these words of Moses he lays down the three necessary conditions of conflict with Satan's power. First, they must pass over Jordan. Applying it to believers now, they must accept for themselves the truth of death and resurrection with Christ, for that is what Jordan pictures. The Red Sea is Christ's death and resurrection for us, but the Jordan is our death and resurrection with Christ. Next, Moses says they must be armed; and the apostle likewise urges us to take up "the whole armor of God" (Eph. 6:13). Finally, he says they must pass over Jordan, every man armed for battle, "before the Lord." This is the secret of all courage in conflict: to know that we are before the Lord, under His eye.
Two consequences followed for these tribes.
When the two and a half tribes returned to their possessions, they built an altar by the Jordan. They feared that in time they would be disowned as not belonging to God's people Israel. This fear was one of the consequences of falling short of God's purpose. Another was that they were the first to come under God's discipline when Israel turned away from Him: "In those days the LORD began to cut off parts of Israel. Hazael defeated them throughout the territory of Israel: from the Jordan eastward, all the land of Gilead, the Gadites, the Reubenites, and the Manassites" (2 Kings 10:32-33).
- Cause — worldly and selfish motives decided the matter; they judged by the sight of their eyes instead of looking to God.
- Bargain — the pledge to cross armed was real service, but they offered it to buy the land they had already chosen.
- Ground — the nine and a half fought holding God's promise; these two and a half held a promise made to Moses.
- Duty — falling short never excused them from the shared fight. It does not excuse believers now.
- Result — they fought for the land but never lived in it, and they were the first to lose what they had.