กันดารวิถี 16:13 วิจารณ์

The date of the history contained in this chapter is altogether uncertain. Probably these mutinies happened after their removal back again from Kadesh-barnea, when they were fixed (if I may so speak) for their wandering in the wilderness, and began to look upon that as their settlement. Presently after new laws given follows the story of a new rebellion, as if sin took occasion from the commandment to become more exceedingly sinful. Here is, I. A daring and dangerous rebellion raised against Moses and Aaron, by Korah, Dathan, and Abiram (Num 16:1-15). 1. Korah and his accomplices contend for the priesthood against Aaron (Num 16:3). Moses reasons with them, and appeals to God for a decision of the controversy (Num 16:4-11). 2. Dathan and Abiram quarrel with Moses, and refuse to obey his summons, which greatly grieves him (Num 16:12-15). II. A solemn appearance of the pretenders to the priesthood before God, according to order, and a public appearance of the glory of the Lord, which would have consumed the whole congregation if Moses and Aaron had not interceded (Num 16:16-22). III. The deciding of the controversy, and the crushing of the rebellion, by the cutting off of the rebels. 1. Those in their tents were buried alive (Num 16:23-34). 2. Those at the door of the tabernacle were consumed by fire (Num 16:35), and their censers preserved for a memorial (Num 16:37-40). IV. A new insurrection of the people (Num 16:41-43). 1. God stayed in the insurrection by a plague (Num 16:45). 2. Aaron stayed the plague by offering incense (Num 16:46-50). The manner and method of recording this story plainly show the ferment to have been very great.

INTRODUCTION TO NUMBERS 16 This chapter gives an account of a sedition of Korah and others against Moses and Aaron, Num 16:1, with whom Moses expostulates, and shows the unreasonableness of their clamour against Aaron, Num 16:5; sends for Dathan and Abiram, who were in the confederacy, but refused to come, which greatly angered Moses, Num 16:12; orders Korah and his company to appear before the Lord the next day, with Aaron, to have the controversy decided, Num 16:16; when all the congregation gathered together would have been, consumed had it not been for the intercession of Moses and Aaron, Num 16:19; and who, being separated from the rebels by the command of the Lord, some of the rebels were swallowed up in the earth, and others destroyed by fire from heaven, Num 16:23; and their censers were made a covering for the altar, as a memorial of their sin, Num 16:36; on which there was a new insurrection of the people, which brought a plague upon them, and destroyed 14,700 persons, and which was stopped at the intercession of Aaron, Num 16:41.

Is it a small thing that thou hast brought us up out of a land that floweth with milk and honey?.... Meaning Egypt, as the Targum of Jonathan expresses it; which, though a plentiful country, never had, nor deserved to have this epithet given it, which is peculiar to the land of Canaan, and is here given, in opposition to the description of that land, which the Lord himself had so described; and argues great impudence and want of reverence of the divine Being, as well as great ingratitude to Moses, the instrument of their being brought out of Egypt, where they laboured under bondage and servitude intolerable; and yet here represent it as an injury done to them, and as if the intent and design of it was purely to destroy them: for they add: to kill us in the wilderness; with want of food, of which they had plenty in Egypt, they suggest; referring, it may be, to what the Lord by Moses had said to them, that their carcasses should fall in the wilderness; but that would not be for want of provisions, but because of their sins. It was bad enough, they intimate, to be brought out of such a plentiful country, into a barren wilderness; but what was still worse, the despotic and tyrannical government of Moses, as they represent it, they were brought under: except thou make thyself altogether a prince over us? ruling in an arbitrary way, making laws, and setting up offices and officers at pleasure, so that it is more eligible to be in bondage in Egypt than under thy government. Aben Ezra takes their meaning to be, as if the end of bringing them out of Egypt was to assume and exercise such rule and authority over them. His words are,"hast thou brought us up out of Egypt, that thou mayest exercise dominion over us as a prince, yea, many dominions, thou and thy brother?''and who also observes, that Egypt lay to the south of the land of Israel, so that one that came from Egypt to the land of Canaan may be truly said to come up, that part of Canaan lying higher than Egypt.

The month of Abib to be observed, Deu 16:1. The feast of the passover and of unleavened bread, Deu 16:2-8. The feast of weeks, Deu 16:9-12. The feast of tabernacles, Deu 16:13-15. All the males to appear before the Lord thrice in the year, none to come empty, each to give according to his ability, Deu 16:16, Deu 16:17. Judges and officers to be made in all their cities, Deu 16:18. Strict justice shall be executed, Deu 16:19, Deu 16:20. No grove to be planted near the altar of God, nor any image to be set up, Deu 16:21, Deu 16:22.

THE REBELLION OF KORAH. (Num. 16:1-30) Now Korah, the son of Izhar--Izhar, brother of Amram (Exo 6:18), was the second son of Kohath, and for some reason unrecorded he had been supplanted by a descendant of the fourth son of Kohath, who was appointed prince or chief of the Kohathites (Num 3:30). Discontent with the preferment over him of a younger relative was probably the originating cause of this seditious movement on the part of Korah. Dathan and Abiram, . . . and On--These were confederate leaders in the rebellion, but On seems to have afterwards withdrawn from the conspiracy [compare Num 16:12, Num 16:24-25, Num 16:27; Num 26:9; Deu 11:6; Psa 106:17]. took men--The latter mentioned individuals, being all sons of Reuben, the eldest of Jacob's family, had been stimulated to this insurrection on the pretext that Moses had, by an arbitrary arrangement, taken away the right of primogeniture, which had vested the hereditary dignity of the priesthood in the first-born of every family, with a view of transferring the hereditary exercise of the sacred functions to a particular branch of his own house; and that this gross instance of partiality to his own relations, to the permanent detriment of others, was a sufficient ground for refusing allegiance to his government. In addition to this grievance, another cause of jealousy and dissatisfaction that rankled in the breasts of the Reubenites was the advancement of Judah to the leadership among the tribes. These malcontents had been incited by the artful representations of Korah (Jde 1:11), with whom the position of their camp on the south side afforded them facilities of frequent intercourse. In addition to his feeling of personal wrongs, Korah participated in their desire (if he did not originate the attempt) to recover their lost rights of primogeniture. When the conspiracy was ripe, they openly and boldly declared its object, and at the head of two hundred fifty princes, charged Moses with an ambitious and unwarrantable usurpation of authority, especially in the appropriation of the priesthood, for they disputed the claim of Aaron also to pre-eminence [Num 16:3].

Rebellion of Korah's Company - Numbers 16:1-40(17:1-5) The sedition of Korah and his company, with the renewed sanction of the Aaronic priesthood on the part of God which it occasioned, is the only important occurrence recorded in connection with the thirty-seven years' wandering in the wilderness. The time and place are not recorded. The fact that the departure from Kadesh is not mentioned in Num 14, whilst, according to Deu 1:46, Israel remained there many days, is not sufficient to warrant the conclusion that it took place in Kadesh. The departure from Kadesh is not mentioned even after the rebellion of Korah; and yet we read, in Num 20:1, that the whole congregation came again into the desert of Zin to kadesh at the beginning of the fortieth year, and therefore must previously have gone away. All that can be laid down as probable is, that it occurred in one of the earliest of the thirty-seven years of punishment, though we have no firm ground even for this conjecture.