Is Numbers 5:11-31 referring to God causing an abortion?

When the accused wife had sworn an oath of innocence and had been warned of the results of falsehood, then the priest would take the grain offering from the woman and wave it before the Lord, then take from it a handful as a memorial portion to burn on the altar (vs.25-26). The waving of the offering speaks of Christ ascended to heaven following His death and resurrection, now in absolute authority, so that everything must be subject to Him. The portion burned tells us that God is to be glorified in this whole matter. Afterward the woman was required to drink the bitter water. this was mentioned in verse 24, but evidently it took place after the burning of the Lord's portion.

If she was guilty, the Lord would expose this by causing her thigh to rot and her belly to swell. what would develop from this we are not told but the stigma of a curse would be upon her in the eyes of the people. If these symptoms did not follow, then she was fully exonerated (v.28). In a case like this, we may well suppose that the husband should apologize to her for his suspicions.

If the charge of guilt was sustained against the wife, however, the husband was declared to be free from iniquity, for the evil has been exposed and judges. But the woman must bear the results of her guilt (vs.30-31).

This ordinance was for the discovering of unconfessed infidelity. A suspected wife was set by the high priest in the presence of God as the Searcher of hearts. Her head was uncovered, in token that on the present occasion she knew of no subjection to any but to the Lord; and therefore she removed the covering from her head, for that covering was the sign of subjection to her husband (1 Cor. 11:3). The priest then put into her hand "the offering of jealousy." This was a meat-offering prepared by her husband, in a manner suitable to her approach to God, and which the priest afterwards took from her hand, and waved before the Lord, offering the memorial of it on the altar; by which action was signified, on both the husband's and the wife's behalf, the committal of this matter to God. Then holding in his hand a vessel containing holy water or water taken from the brazen laver mingled with dust (the sign of curse or fruit of sin; Gen. 3:19), the priest solemnly abjured the woman, and read to her the curses that would come upon her if she were guilty. To this, if she pleased to stand the trial after all this warning, she said, "Amen, Amen;" and then the priest wrote the curses in a book, blotted them with some of the bitter water, and gave the rest of it to the woman to drink. The trial was then made. If she had been unfaithful, the water would enter into her and become bitter; her belly would swell, and her thigh rot; and she would be made a curse among the people. But if her husband's suspicions had wronged her, none of these things would happen to her. For the curses in the book would all be blotted out, so as to be legible no more; and thus, being freed and avenged, she would receive strength of the Lord to conceive seed.

Now in the Psalm 109, the Lord appears as one Who had brought up Israel to this trial, and by it found her guilty. He was entitled so to bring her up for this trial, for He had of old married her (Jer. 31:32), of old had spread His skirt over Jerusalem (Ezek. 16:8), and at the time of the marriage had warned her of His holy jealousness (Ex. 20:5). And time after time subsequent to the marriage He had been provoked to jealousy, but had forborne, and been patient, calling again and again for repentance and confession (Deut. 32:21, Ezek. 8:3). But at length He pleads with her by this ordeal, while she, like any hardened wife who would dare to stand the trial with the consciousness of sin upon her, defies divine justice. "His blood be upon us and upon our children," from the lips of Israel, was as the woman's "Amen" to the invocation of the curse. But their confidence has been their shame. The sin of their mother was not blotted out in the trial (Ps. 109:14). The water entered in and did its deadly work (v. 18); and to this day they are under the penalties of convicted infidelity. Israel has been judged as a woman that breaks wedlock (Ezek. 16:38).

The mere suspicion of a man that his wife was unfaithful was not to be ignored in Israel, but tested as in the presence of the Lord. We are not told that a wife's suspicions of her husband were to be tested also. This may be because this matter has special spiritual significance. For the man primarily typifies Christ, in whom there can never be even the least suspicion of unfaithfulness. "If we are faithless, He remains faithful; He cannot deny Himself" (2 Tim.2:13). But believers who are joined to the Lord by a bond symbolized by marriage (Rom.7:4) are often exposed to the danger of becoming unfaithful to the Lord. The very fact that suspicion in Numbers was not to be ignored should exercise us to be always on guard against anything that might tempt us from the path of total devotion to our Lord.

However, this was not a matter even for the priest to judge. When the scriptural procedure was followed the whole matter was left in the hand of God, who would make manifest the woman's guilt or her innocence. Yet the man was to bring his wife to the priest as well as an offering to one-tenth of an ephah of barley meal, with no oil or frankincense as in the case of the meal offerings generally (v.15). For this was not a thank-offering, but almost the opposite. Then the priest was to take holy water in an earthen vessel and mix dust with it from the tabernacle floor. The holy water speaks of life, but the dust speaks of death (Ps.22:15). If there was no sin unto death, life would be given, but guilt would lead to death.

In the next paragraph concerning the wife suspected of adultery, no positive defilement or sin is in view, only the suspicion of it. A careful reading of the passage is suggested. The offering of jealousy is described in detail, but the brief character of our annotations forbids a closer examination. We can only point out that the offering consisted not of fine flour as in the meal-offering, but of barley meal, which was coarser. No leaven was mixed with it, for that would have implied before the test, the guilt of the accused woman. Nor was oil and frankincense put on the offering, no joy and worship could be connected with this offering of jealousy. Then the priest took holy water in an earthen vessel and the dust of the tabernacle floor and put it into the water. This also has a symbolical meaning. The water stands for the Word, and the dust typifies death and the curse. It was a most solemn ceremony of a searching nature. The innocent one had nothing to fear; the drinking of the bitter water that causeth the curse but resulted for her in vindication. The guilty one was found out by Jehovah and the curse rested upon her. This ordinance is also applicable to Israel as the unfaithful wife of Jehovah.

THE LAW OF JEALOUSY, when a man suspected his wife of being unfaithful to him, is given in Num. 5:11-31. The woman was required to drink bitter water, composed of 'holy water,' in which was placed dust from the floor of the tabernacle (type of the Holy Spirit applying what death is, as God's judgement of sin, by the word to the conscience). If she had been unfaithful it would be a curse to her. It pointed figuratively to the question of Israel's unfaithfulness to Jehovah.

Thirdly, we have, from verse 11 to the end of the chapter, what is spoken of as "the law of jealousies." The camp was to be holy as the dwelling place of God, and if jealousy as to his wife entered the mind of a man, it was not to be left to rankle there but to be tested, whether based on fact or fancy. If true, judgment fell on the woman; if false, she was free, and demonstrated to be so. We may see here a type of that which marked Israel and Jerusalem, indicated for instance in Ezekiel 16. Possibly too this was in the mind of the Apostle Paul when he wrote 2 Corinthians 11:2.

But there is another case where there was not a trespass, but a suspicion of evil, and this too in the nearest relationship — the husband about his wife. Now Jehovah had his eye on this. He would not have one hardened. What is more dreadful than to be carrying suspicions? We ought to watch against it. Still there may be circumstances that bring a sense of evil, and yet we can hardly give an account of it. We may struggle, fearing that we are wrong as to the person; still, somehow or another, there is the sense of something wrong against Jehovah. What, then, is to be done? In this we see Jehovah making a special provision for it. He ordered that there should be the administration of what is called here "the waters of jealousy:" The wife was to be brought to the priest; everything was to be done in a holy way. It was not human feeling, but connection with God Himself, and a judgment of that which was unsuitable for His presence. "Then shall the man bring his wife to the priest, and he shall bring her offering for her, the tenth part of an ephah of barley meal; he shall pour no oil upon it, nor put frankincense thereon; for it is an offering of jealousy, an offering of memorial, bringing iniquity to remembrance. And the priest shall bring her near, and set her before Jehovah. And the priest shall take holy water in an earthen vessel; and of the dust that is in the floor of the tabernacle the priest shall take, and put it into the water: and the priest shall set the woman before the Lord, and uncover the woman's head, and put the offering of memorial in her hands, which is the jealousy offering: and the priest shall have in his hand the bitter water that causes the curse." Then the charge is given to the woman, after which he says, "Jehovah make thee a curse and an oath among thy people, when Jehovah doth make thy thigh to rot," and so on. The priest was to write the curses in a book, and blot them out with the bitter water, and cause the woman to drink the water. The effect of this would be that, supposing the woman was innocent, all would go on so much the better in the family. She would have the manifestation of God's blessing on her.

This I do not doubt to be a type, whether of Israel or of Christendom; but for moral profit individually it is all-important. It may be very painful for us to be suspected, but when we are, let us never resent it in the pride of our hearts. Alas! evil is possible, and it is a good thing to evince by the very patience of whatever may be that which is laid to our charge that we are above it. It is always a sign of weakness at the least, very often of guilt, when there is a restless desire to extenuate and deny; and the fiercer the denial the more certain the guilt as a rule. But there may be weakness which sometimes gives an appearance of wrong where it does not really exist. Where flesh is not thoroughly judged, there will be a tendency to resent the smallest imputation. Now here it is where we have this bringing in of the water of death. What is there which so admirably meets everything as the taking the place of death to all that is here below? It is very evident a dead man does not resent an injury. It is the bringing in the practical power of death into the soul which enables one then to bear it. Whatever it may be, let it take its course — let us humble ourselves to have, as it were, bitter water administered to us; and most assuredly where the heart, instead of refusing or in a fleshly way merely repelling an insinuation out of the pride of our nature, is willing that all should be thoroughly tested in the presence of God, the result is that the Lord espouses the cause of the one causelessly suspected, and makes all to flourish as never before. Whereas, on the other hand, if there is a trifling with God, with His name, with His nature, then indeed bitter is the curse which falls on such a one. Thus we see it was an invaluable thing, and it is as true now in principle as ever it was in outward type. I do not hesitate to say it is true in a deeper and better sense now than it was then; only it needs faith. It needs self-judgment however; nothing less will carry us through. For although there may be the most genuine faith, still if there is not the willingness to be nothing the willingness to take the bitter draught, the waters of separation or waters of jealousy, it is because there is a power of flesh hindering us — a want of faith to take the place of death. Where we are upright, yet submit to it, who can measure the fruitful blessing which results through the grace of God?

Thus we see that this ordinance for the trial of jealousy bears very distinctly upon it the impress of the divine character. In it He most fully enters into the thoughts and feelings of an injured husband, or of one who even suspected an injury. The bare suspicion is perfectly intolerable, and where it takes possession of the heart, the matter must be sifted to the very bottom. The suspected one must undergo a process of such a searching nature that only the faithful one can endure. If there was a trace of guilt, the bitter water could search down into the very depths of the soul, and bring it full out. There was no escape for the guilty one; and, we may say, that the very fact of there being no possible escape for the guilty, only made the vindication of the innocent more triumphant. The self-same process that declared the guilt of the guilty, made manifest the innocence of the faithful. To one who is thoroughly conscious of integrity, the more searching the investigation the more welcome it is. If there were a possibility of a guilty one escaping, through any defect in the mode of trial, it would only make against the innocent. But the process was divine, and therefore perfect; and hence, when the suspected wife had gone through it in safety, her fidelity was perfectly manifested, and full confidence restored.

What a mercy, then, to have had such a perfect mode of settling all suspected cases! Suspicion is the death blow to all loving intimacy, and God would not have it in the midst of His congregation. He would not only have His people collectively to judge evil, and individually to judge themselves; but where there was even the suspicion of evil, and no evidence forthcoming, He Himself devised a method of trial which perfectly brought the truth to light. The guilty one had to drink death, and found it to be judgement. The faithful one drank death, and found it victory.

When there is suspicion the man brings his wife to the priest, and for her a meal-offering of barley-meal, not the fine wheat-flour of the usual meal-offering. The reason for the substitution has been variously interpreted. The Rabbins took it as a sign that the adulteress had conducted herself like an irrational animal; but the woman is not yet proved to be an adulteress. Others suggest that "the persons presenting the offering were invoking the punishment of a crime, and not the favor of God," but this is not strictly true, nor would an offering for the supposed guilty person appear suitable for such a purpose. Knobel takes it to indicate that the offerer might be innocent, and in that case no offering at all was required. Keil, rightly rejecting all these, supposes it to represent the questionable repute in which the woman stood, or the ambiguous, suspicious character of her conduct; but the first of these the offering does not seem able to express, the second might not be really the truth: circumstances might arise beyond her own control entirely which might bring her into suspicion. Lange thinks that the "poor bond of union that still exists between the parties is designated by the inferior offering;" but the offering is the woman's, not the man's, though the man provide it: it represents in some way her alone. Oehler says, "As an accused person appears before the tribunal in mourning attire, without the question of his guilt or innocence being in any way affected, so may this sacrifice be said to exhibit a merely gloomy character." Which, however, would give no precision to the type at all.

The third and last section of our chapter, which we need not quote at length, teaches us a deeply solemn lesson, whether we view it from a dispensational or a moral point of view. It contains the record of the great ordinance designed for the trial of jealousy. Its place here is remarkable. In the first section, we have the corporate judgement of evil: in the second, we have individual self-judgement, confession, and restitution: and in the third, we learn that God cannot endure even the mere suspicion of evil.

Now, we fully believe that this very impressive ordinance has a dispensational bearing upon the relationship between Jehovah and Israel. The prophets dwell largely upon Israel's conduct as a wife, and upon Jehovah's jealousy, on that score. We do not attempt to quote the passages, but the reader will find them throughout the pages of Jeremiah and Ezekiel. Israel could not abide the searching trial of the bitter water. Her unfaithfulness has been made manifest. She has broken her vows. She has gone aside from her Husband, the Holy One of Israel, whose burning jealousy has been poured forth upon the faithless nation. He is a jealous God, and cannot bear the thought that the heart that He claims as His own should be given to another.