DEUTERONOMY 3 COMMENTARYEdited by Glenn Pease

PREFACE

This verse by verse commentary quotes the great old commentaries as well as somecontemporary authors. All of this information is available to anyone, but I have brought ittogether in one place to save the Bible student time in research. If anyone I quote does not wanttheir wisdom shared in this way, they can let me know and I will remove it. My e-mail is glenn_p86@yahoo.com

Defeat of Og King of Bashan

1 Next we turned and went up along the road towardBashan, and Og king of Bashan with his whole armymarched out to meet us in battle at Edrei.

1. Gill, “Then we turned and went up the way to Bashan,.... Which seems to have been higherthan the kingdom of Sihon: this was a fine country for pasturage, for the breeding of cattle,larger and lesser, and was famous for its oaks: it is the same country which in Josephus andothers goes by the name of Batanea:

and Og the king of Bashan came out against us; got his forces together, and came out fromAshteroth, the royal city where he dwelt:

he and all his people, to battle at Edrei; another city in his kingdom, about six miles from theformer; see Deu_1:4.

2. Jamison, “we turned, and went up the way to Bashan — Bashan (“fruitful” or “flat”), now El-Bottein, lay situated to the north of Gilead and extended as far as Hermon. It was a ruggedmountainous country, valuable however for its rich and luxuriant pastures.

Og the king of Bashan came out against us — Without provocation, he rushed to attack theIsraelites, either disliking the presence of such dangerous neighbors, or burning to avenge theoverthrow of his friends and allies.

3. Henry, “Deu 3:1-11 - “We have here another brave country delivered into the hand of Israel,

that of Bashan; the conquest of Sihon is often mentioned together with that of Og, to the praise ofGod, the rather because in these Israel's triumphs began, Psa_135:11; Psa_136:19, Psa_136:20.See,

I. How they got the mastery of Og, a very formidable prince, 1. Very strong, for he was of theremnant of the giants (Deu_3:11); his personal strength was extraordinary, a monument of whichwas preserved by the Ammonites in his bedstead, which was shown as a rarity in their chief city.You might guess at his weight by the materials of his bedstead; it was iron, as if a bedstead ofwood were too weak for him to trust to: and you might guess at his stature by the dimensions ofit; it was nine cubits long and four cubits broad, which, supposing a cubit to be but half a yard(and some learned men have made it appear to be somewhat more), was four yards and a halflong, and two yards broad; and if we allow his bedstead to be two cubits longer than himself, andthat is as much as we need allow, he was three yards and a half high, double the stature of anordinary man, and every way proportionable, yet they smote him, Deu_3:3. Note, when Godpleads his people's cause he can deal with giants as with grasshoppers. No man's might cansecure him against the Almighty. The army of Og was very powerful, for he had the command ofsixty fortified cities, besides the unwalled towns, Deu_3:5. Yet all this was nothing before God'sIsrael, when they came with commission to destroy him. 2. He was very bold and daring: Hecame out against Israel to battle, Deu_3:1. It was wonderful that he did not take warning by theruin of Sihon, and send to desire conditions of peace; but he trusted to his own strength, and sowas hardened to his destruction. Note, Those that are not awakened by the judgments of Godupon others, but persist in their defiance of heaven, are ripening apace for the like judgmentsupon themselves, Jer_3:8. God bade Moses not fear him, Deu_3:2. If Moses himself was so strongin faith as not to need the caution, yet it is probable that the people needed it, and for them thesefresh assurances are designed; “I will deliver him into thy hand; not only deliver thee out of hishand, that he shall not be thy ruin, but deliver him into thy hand, that thou shalt be his ruin, andmake him pay dearly for his attempt.” He adds, Thou shalt do to him as thou didst to Sihon,

intimating that they ought to be encouraged by their former victory to trust in God for anothervictory, for he is God, and changeth not.

II. How they got possession of Bashan, a very desirable country. They took all the cities(Deu_3:4), and all the spoil of them, Deu_3:7. They made them all their own, Deu_3:10. So thatnow they had in their hands all that fruitful country which lay east of Jordan, from the river

Arnon unto Hermon, Deu_3:8. Their conquering and possessing these countries was intended, notonly for the encouragement of Israel in the wars of Canaan, but for the satisfaction of Mosesbefore his death. Since he must not live to see the completing of their victory and settlement, Godthus gives him a specimen of it. Thus the Spirit is given to those that believe as the earnest of their

inheritance, until the redemption of the purchased possession.

4. K&D, “Deu 3:1-9 - “The Help of God in the Conquest of the Kingdom of Og of Bashan. -Deu_3:1. After the defeat of king Sihon and the conquest of his land, the Israelites were able toadvance to the Jordan. But as the powerful Amoritish king Og still held the northern half ofGilead and all Bashan, they proceeded northwards at once and took the road to Bashan, that theymight also defeat this king, whom the Lord had likewise given into their hand, and conquer hiscountry (cf. Num_21:33-34). They smote him at Edrei, the modern Draà, without leaving himeven a remnant; and took all his towns, i.e., as is here more fully stated in Deu_3:4., “sixty towns,

the whole region of Argob, the kingdom of Og in Bashan.” These three definitions refer to one andthe same country. The whole region of Argob included the sixty towns which formed the kingdomof Og in Bashan, i.e., all the towns of the land of Bashan, viz., (according to Deu_3:5) all thefortified towns, besides the unfortified and open country towns of Bashan. חבל, the chain for

measuring, then the land or country measured with the chain. The name “region of Argob,”which is given to the country of Bashan here, and in Deu_3:4, Deu_3:13, Deu_3:14, and also in1Ki_4:13, is probably derived from רגוב, stone-heaps, related to רגב, a clump or clod of earth(Job_21:33; Job_38:38). The Targumists have rendered it correctly טרכונא (Trachona), fromτραθών, a rough, uneven, stony district, so called from the basaltic hills of Hauran; just as theplain to the east of Jebel Hauran, which resembles Hauran itself, is sometimes called Tellul, fromits tells or hills (Burckhardt, Syr. p. 173).

(Note: The derivation is a much more improbable one, “from the town of Argob, πρὸςΓέρασαν πόλιν Ἀραβίας, according to the Onomast., fifteen Roman miles to the west ofGerasa, which is called Ῥαγαβᾶ by Josephus (Ant. xiii. 15, 5).”)

This district has also received the name of Bashan, from the character of its soil; for ּבׁשןsignifies a soft and level soil. From the name given to it by the Arabic translators, the Greek nameΒαταναία, Batanaea, and possibly also the modern name of the country on the north-easternslope of Hauran at the back of Mount Hauran, viz., Bethenije, are derived.

The name Argob probably originated in the north-eastern part of the country of Bashan, viz.,the modern Leja, with its stony soil covered with heaps of large blocks of stone (Burckhardt, p.196), or rather in the extensive volcanic region to the east of Hauran, which was first of allbrought to distinct notice in Wetzstein's travels, and of which he says that the “southern portion,bearing the name Harra, is thickly covered with loose volcanic stones, with a few conical hillsamong them, that have been evidently caused by eruptions” (Wetzstein, p. 6). The central point ofthe whole is Safa, “a mountain nearly seven hours' journey in length and about the same inbreadth,” in which “the black mass streaming from the craters piled itself up wave upon wave, sothat the centre attained to the height of a mountain, without acquiring the smoothness of formobservable in mountains generally,” - “the black flood of lava being full of innumerable streamsof stony waves, often of a bright red colour, bridged over with thin arches, which rolled down theslopes out of the craters and across the high plateau” (Wetzstein, pp. 6 and 7). At a later periodthis name was transferred to the whole of the district of Hauran (= Bashan), because not only isthe Jebel Hauran entirely of volcanic formation, but the plain consists throughout of a reddishbrown soil produced by the action of the weather upon volcanic stones, and even “the Leja plainhas been poured out from the craters of the Hauran mountains” (Wetzstein, p. 23). Through thisvolcanic character of the soil, Hauran differs essentially from Balka, Jebel Ajlun, and the plain ofJaulan, which is situated between the Sea of Galilee and the upper Jordan on the one side, andthe plain of Hauran on the other, and reaches up to the southern slope of the Hermon. In thesedistricts the limestone and chalk formations prevail, which present the same contrast to thebasaltic formation of the Hauran as white does to black (cf. v. Raumer, Pal. pp. 75ff.). - The landof the limestone and chalk formation abounds in caves, which are not altogether wanting indeedin Hauran (as v. Raumer supposes), though they are only found in eastern and south-easternHauran, where most of the volcanic elevations have been perforated by troglodytes (seeWetzstein, pp. 92 and 44ff.). But the true land of caves on the east of the Jordan is northernGilead, viz., Erbed and Suêt (Wetzst. p. 92). Here the troglodyte dwellings predominate, whereasin Hauran you find for the most part towns and villages with houses of one or more stories builtabove the surface of the ground, although even on the eastern slope of the Hauran mountainsthere are hamlets to be seen, in which the style of building forms a transition from actual caves todwellings built upon the ground. An excavation is first of all made in the rocky plateau, of thebreadth and depth of a room, and this is afterwards arched over with a solid stone roof. Thedwellings made in this manner have all the appearance of cellars or tunnels. This style ofbuilding, such as Wetzstein found in Hibbike for example, belongs to the most remote antiquity. Insome cases, hamlets of this kind were even surrounded by a wall. Those villages of Hauran which

are built above the surface of the ground, attract the eye and stimulate the imagination, whenseen from a distance, in various ways. “In the first place, the black colour of the buildingmaterials present the greatest contrast to the green around them, and to the transparentatmosphere also. In the second place, the height of the walls and the compactness of the houses,which always form a connected whole, are very imposing. In the third place, they are surmountedby strong towers. And in the fourth place, they are in such a good state of preservation, that youinvoluntarily yield to the delusion that they must of necessity be inhabited, and expect to seepeople going out and in” (Wetzstein, p. 49). The larger towns are surrounded by walls; but thesmaller ones as a rule have none: “the backs of the houses might serve as walls.” The material ofwhich the houses are built is a grey dolerite, impregnated with glittering particles of olivine. “Thestones are rarely cemented, but the fine and for the most part large squares lie one upon anotheras if they were fused together.” “Most of the doors of the houses which lead into the streets oropen fields are so low, that it is impossible to enter them without stooping; but the large buildingsand the ends of the streets have lofty gateways, which are always tastefully constructed, and oftendecorated with sculptures and Greek inscriptions.” The “larger gates have either simple or (whatare most common) double doors. They consist of a slab of dolerite. There are certainly no doorsof any other kind.” These stone doors turn upon pegs, deeply inserted into the threshold andlintel. “Even a man can only shut and open doors of this kind, by pressing with the back or feetagainst the wall, and pushing the door with both hands” (Wetzstein, pp. 50ff.; compare with thisthe testimony of Buckingham, Burckhardt, Seetzen, and others, in v. Raumer's Palestine, pp. 78ff.).

Now, even if the existing ruins of Hauran date for the most part from a later period, and areprobably of a Nabataean origin belonging to the times of Trajan and the Antonines, yetconsidering the stability of the East, and the peculiar nature of the soil of Hauran, they give atolerably correct idea of the sixty towns of the kingdom of Og of Bashan, all of which werefortified with high walls, gates, and bars, or, as it is stated in 1Ki_4:13, “with walls and brazenbars.”

(Note: It is also by no means impossible, that many of the oldest dwellings in the ruinedtowers of Hauran date from a time anterior to the conquest of the land by the Israelites.“Simple, built of heavy blocks of basalt roughly hewn, and as hard as iron, with very thickwalls, very strong stone gates and doors, many of which were about eighteen inches thick, andwere formerly fastened with immense bolts, and of which traces still remain; such houses asthese may have been the work of the old giant tribe of Rephaim, whose king, Og, was defeatedby the Israelites 3000 years ago” (C. v. Raumer, Pal. p. 80, after Porter's Five Years inDamascus).)

The brazen bars were no doubt, like the gates themselves, of basalt or dolerite, which might easilybe mistaken for brass. Besides the sixty fortified towns, the Israelites took a very large number of

ערי הּפרזי , “towns of the inhabitants of the flat country,” i.e., unfortified open hamlets and villagesin Bashan, and put them under the ban, like the towns of king Sihon (Deu_3:6, Deu_3:7; cf.Deu_2:34-35). The infinitive, החרם, is to be construed as a gerund (cf. Ges. §131, 2; Ewald, §280,a.). The expression, “kingdom of Og in Bashan,” implies that the kingdom of Og was not limitedto the land of Bashan, but included the northern half of Gilead as well. In Deu_3:8-11, Mosestakes a retrospective view of the whole of the land that had been taken on the other side of theJordan; first of all (Deu_3:9) in its whole extent from the Arnon to Hermon, then (Deu_3:10) inits separate parts, to bring out in all its grandeur what the Lord had done for Israel. The noticesof the different names of Hermon (Deu_3:9), and of the bed of king Og (Deu_3:11), are alsosubservient to this end. Hermon is the southernmost spur of Antilibanus, the present Jebel es

Sheikh, or Jebel et Telj. The Hebrew name is not connected with חרם, anathema, as Hengstenbergsupposes (Diss. pp. 197-8); nor was it first given by the Israelites to this mountain, which formed

part of the northern boundary of the land which they had taken; but it is to be traced to anArabic word signifying prominens montis vertex, and was a name which had long been current atthat time, for which the Israelites used the Hebrew name ׂשיאן (Sion = נׂשיאן, the high, eminent:Deu_4:48), though this name did not supplant the traditional name of Hermon. The Sidonianscalled it Siron, a modified form of 1 (ׁשריון Sa_17:5), or נׂשיון (Jer_46:4), a “coat of mail;” theAmorites called it Senir, probably a word with the same meaning. In Psa_29:6, Sirion is usedpoetically for Hermon; and Ezekiel (Eze_27:4) uses Senir, in a mournful dirge over Tyre, assynonymous with Lebanon; whilst Senir is mentioned in 1Ch_5:23, and Shenir in Son_4:8, inconnection with Hermon, as a part of Antilibanus, as it might very naturally happen that theAmoritish name continued attached to one or other of the peaks of the mountain, just as we findthat even Arabian geographers, such as Abulfeda and Maraszid, call that portion of Antilibanuswhich stretches from Baalbek to Emesa (Homs, Heliopolis) by the name of Sanir.

2 The LORD said to me, “Do not be afraid of him, for Ihave delivered him into your hands, along with his wholearmy and his land. Do to him what you did to Sihon kingof the Amorites, who reigned in Heshbon.”

1. Jamison, “Og’s gigantic appearance and the formidable array of forces he will bring to thefield, need not discourage you; for, belonging to a doomed race, he is destined to share the fate ofSihon [Num_21:25].

2. Moody Bible Institute, “Generations of leaders have known that one of the best ways tomotivate the troops on the eve of a big battle is to remind them of their past victories. Moses followed that tradition. He may even have helped to invent it! His retelling of Israel'svictories over Sihon and Og gave the people important encouragement as they faced their biggestbattle of all the conquest of Canaan.

King Og was worth only a few verses in Numbers 21 (vv. 33-35), but here in Deuteronomy Mosesdevotes more space to the story. The extra detail was important for these Israelites to knowbecause the defeat of Og was another example of God's faithfulness.

'Do not be afraid of him,' God told His people concerning Og (Deuteronomy 3:2)Ñand theyweren't. What a difference it would have made if, about forty years earlier, the exodus generationhad moved out as confidently as this one in response to God's promise.

But to Israel's credit, the troops moved out here and enjoyed the victory God had alreadyprepared for them. It didn't hurt that the victory over Sihon was still very fresh on the people'sminds. God made sure they didn't forget by using Sihon as an encouragement to do the same in

Bashan.

Og and his people suffered annihilation, the same fate that befell their fellow Amorites. Peoplemay debate the morality of God's command for the destruction of a people, but the reality of thecommand is undeniable. Moses made this truth explicit in the case of the Canaanites (seeDeuteronomy 7). God's reasons were grounded in His holiness.

The summary of Israel's conquests in the Transjordan had to be another source ofencouragement. The extent of their land holdings in this region secured them from attack byother enemies as they turned west to enter Canaan.

But Moses was not quite finished with this story. It turns out that Og was a Rephaite, the race ofgiants we read about earlier. Israel's cousins, the Edomites and the Ammonites, had defeatedthose giants with God's help. Now Israel too could point to victory over an intimidating enemy asproof of God's blessing.”

3. Chuck Smith, “In other words, they had conquered sixty walled cities from Basham. Nowyou're gonna go in and you got the reports and you remember the report that struck fear in thehearts was that there are high-walled cities and giants. And that was just the thing that struckterror and fear into their hearts that destroyed their faith, caused them to turn away. So nowMoses is pointing out, "Look, it is nothing with God. You don't have to worry about the walledcities. You don't have to worry about the giants. If God be for us, who can be against us?"AndGod has promised to go before you and to drive out your enemies, and thus, these things thatcaused terror and fear in your hearts that destroyed your faith do not need to stop you now, go in.And he's seeking to build up their faith in God. Venture out, let God have an opportunity towork. And so he's careful to point out that they'd already conquered walled cities in the areas ofthe giants.

3 So the LORD our God also gave into our hands Og kingof Bashan and all his army. We struck them down, leavingno survivors.

1. Jamison, “Jamison, “Argob was the capital of a district in Bashan of the same name, which,together with other fifty-nine cities in the same province, were conspicuous for their lofty andfortified walls. It was a war of extermination. Houses and cities were razed to the ground; allclasses of people were put to the sword; and nothing was saved but the cattle, of which animmense amount fell as spoil into the hands of the conquerors. Thus, the two Amorite kings andthe entire population of their dominions were extirpated. The whole country east of the Jordan -first upland downs from the torrent of the Arnon on the south to that of the Jabbok on the north;next the high mountain tract of Gilead and Bashan from the deep ravine of Jabbok - became the

possession of the Israelites.

4 At that time we took all his cities. There was not one ofthe sixty cities that we did not take from them—the wholeregion of Argob, Og’s kingdom in Bashan.

1. Gill, “And we took all his cities at that time,.... Not only Edrei where the battle was fought, andAshteroth his capital city, but all the rest in his kingdom:

there was not a city which we took not from them; not one stood out, but all surrendered onsummons; the number of which follows:

three score cities; which was a large number for so small a country, and shows it to be wellinhabited:

all the region of Argob; which was a small province of

the kingdom of Og in Bashan: Aben Ezra and Jarchi observe, that it was called after a man, i.e.whose name was Argob; the Targum of Onkelos names it Tracona, and the Targum of JonathanTargona, the same with Trachonitis in Josephus and other authors; see Luk_3:1, Jerom relates(h) that in his time, about Gerasa, a city of Arabia, fifteen miles from it to the west, there was avillage which was called Arga, which seems to carry in it some remains of the ancient name ofthis country; and the Samaritan version, in all places where Argob is, calls it Rigobaah; and inthe Misnah (i) mention is made of a place called Ragab, beyond Jordan, famous for its being thesecond place for the best oil.

2. Clarke, “All the region of Argob - כל חבל ארגב col chebel Argob, all the cable or cord of Argob;this expression, which is used in various other parts of Scripture, (see, in the original, Amo_7:17;Mic_2:5; Deu_32:9; Psa_16:6), shows that anciently land was measured by lines or cords of acertain length, in a similar way to that by the chain among us, and the schoenus or cord amongthe Egyptians. Some think that it was the region of Argob that was afterwards called the regionof Trachonites.

3. Barnes, “Threescore cities - Probably the cities of Jair in Bashan described in Deu_3:14 asBashan-havoth-jair.

All the region of Argob - The Hebrew word here rendered “region,” means literally “rope” or“cable”; and though undoubtedly used elsewhere in a general topographical sense for portion ordistrict (e. g. Jos_17:5), has a special propriety in reference to Argob (mod. Lejah). The nameArgob means “stone-heap,” and is paraphrased by the Targums, Trachonitis Luk_3:1, or “therough country;” titles designating the more striking features of the district. Its borders arecompared to a rugged shore-line; hence, its description in the text as “the girdle of the stony

country,” would seem especially appropriate. (Others identify Argob with the east quarter of theHauran.)

5 All these cities were fortified with high walls and withgates and bars, and there were also a great many unwalledvillages.

1. Gill, “That is, all the cities in the kingdom of Bashan; and though they were, it hindered nottheir falling into the hands of the Israelites; and this might serve to encourage them against thosefears they were possessed of by the spies, with respect to the cities in the land of Canaan; seeNum_13:28. besides unwalled towns a great many; small towns and villages adjacent to theseveral cities, as is common.

2. Chuck Smith, “In other words, they had conquered sixty walled cities from Basham. Nowyou're gonna go in and you got the reports and you remember the report that struck fear in thehearts was that there are high-walled cities and giants. And that was just the thing that struckterror and fear into their hearts that destroyed their faith, caused them to turn away. So nowMoses is pointing out, "Look, it is nothing with God. You don't have to worry about the walledcities. You don't have to worry about the giants. If God be for us, who can be against us?"And God has promised to go before you and to drive out your enemies, and thus, these thingsthat caused terror and fear in your hearts that destroyed your faith do not need to stop you now,go in. And he's seeking to build up their faith in God. Venture out, let God have an opportunity towork. And so he's careful to point out that they'd already conquered walled cities in the areas ofthe giants.

3. Barnes, “Gates, and bars - literally, “Double gates and a bar.” The stone doors of Bashan, theirheight pointing to a race of great stature, and the numerous cities (deserted) exist to illustrate thestatements of these verses.

6 We completely destroyed[a] them, as we had done withSihon king of Heshbon, destroying[b] every city—men,women and children.

1. Gill, “ And we utterly destroyed them,.... Not the cities, but the inhabitants of them:

as we did to Sihon king of Heshbon; they did not destroy his cities, for they took them and dweltin them; but the people that lived there, as follows here:

utterly destroying the men, women, and children, of every city; see Deu_2:34.

7 But all the livestock and the plunder from their cities wecarried off for ourselves.

1. Gill, “But all the cattle, and the spoil of the cities,.... The oxen and sheep, camels and asses;their gold and silver, and the furniture of their houses; their stores of corn, and of other fruits ofthe earth, even all their substance of whatsoever kind:

we took for a prey to ourselves; made them their own property, and used them for their ownprofit and service, whereby they became greatly enriched.

8 So at that time we took from these two kings of theAmorites the territory east of the Jordan, from the ArnonGorge as far as Mount Hermon.

1. Gill, “And we took at that time out of the hands of the two kings of the Amorites,.... Sihon kingof Heshbon, and Og king of Bashan:

the land that was on this side Jordan; where Moses then was, being in the plains of Moab, andwas the country beyond Jordan, with respect to the land of Canaan, and when in that:

from the river of Arnon unto Mount Hermon; Arnon was a river which divided Moab and theAmorites, Num_22:13 and Hermon was a mountain of Gilead, which ended where Lebanonbegan, and was the northerly border of this country. It was remarkable for the dew that fell on it;See Gill on Psa_133:3.

9 (Hermon is called Sirion by the Sidonians; the Amorites

call it Senir.)

1. Gill, “Which Hermon the Sidonians call Sirion,.... Which name it has in Psa_29:6 a name theinhabitants of Sidon gave it, but for what reason it is not easy to say; however, that it was wellknown to Tyre and Sidon, appears from snow in summer time being brought to the former, aswill be hereafter observed:

and the Amorites call it Shenir; in whose possession it was last. Bochart (k) thinks it had its namefrom the multitude of wild cats in it, Shunar in the Chaldee tongue being the name of thatcreature; but Jarchi says Shenir in the Canaanitish language signifies "snow"; so, in the Targumsof Onkelos and Jonathan, it is called the mountain of snow; and the Hebrew who read to Jerom,and taught him, affirmed to him that this mountain hung over Paneas, from whence snow insummer time was brought to Tyre for pleasure (l), and the same is confirmed by Abulfeda (m).There is said to be upon the top of it a famous temple, which is used for worship by the Heathens,over against Paneas and Lebanon (n); and it is highly probable there was one even at this time,when it was possessed by the Amorites, since it is called Mount Baalhermon, Jdg_3:3, from theworship of Baal, or some other idol upon it, as it should seem. Besides these, it had another name,Mount Sion, Deu_4:48 but to be distinguished from Mount Zion near Jerusalem. The names of itin this place are very differently interpreted by Hillerus (o); though he thinks it had them all onaccount of the snow on it, which was as a net all over it; for Hermon, he observes, signifies a net,a dragnet, and Shenir an apron, and Sirion a coat of mail, all from the covering of this mountwith snow.

2. Barnes, “Hermon, the southern and culminating point of the range of Lebanon, was also thereligious center of primaeval Syria. Its Baal sanctuaries not only existed but gave it a namebefore the Exodus. Hence, the careful specification of the various names by which the mountainwas known. The Sidonian name of it might easily have become known to Moses through theconstant traffic which had gone on from the most ancient times between Sidon and Egypt.

3. Clarke, “Hermon the Sidonians call - Shenir - I suppose this verse to have been a marginalremark, which afterwards got incorporated with the text, or an addition by Joshua or Ezra.

4. Jamison, “Hermon — now Jebel-Es-Sheick - the majestic hill on which the long and elevatedrange of Anti-Lebanon terminates. Its summit and the ridges on its sides are almost constantlycovered with snow. It is not so much one high mountain as a whole cluster of mountain peaks, thehighest in Palestine. According to the survey taken by the English Government Engineers in1840, they were about 9376 feet above the sea. Being a mountain chain, it is no wonder that itshould have received different names at different points from the different tribes which lay alongthe base - all of them designating extraordinary height: Hermon, the lofty peak; “Sirion,” or inan abbreviated form “Sion” (Deu_4:48), the upraised, glittering; “Shenir,” the glitteringbreastplate of ice.

10 We took all the towns on the plateau, and all Gilead,and all Bashan as far as Salekah and Edrei, towns of Og’skingdom in Bashan.

1. Gill, “All the cities of the plain,.... There was a plain by Medeba, and Heshbon and her citieswere in a plain, with some others given to the tribe of Reuben, Jos_13:16.

and all Gilead; Mount Gilead, and the cities belonging to it, a very fruitful country, half of whichfell to the share of the Reubenites, and the rest to the half tribe of Manasseh:

and all Bashan; of which Og was king, called Batanea, a very fertile country, as before observed:

unto Salcah and Edrei, cities of the kingdom of Og in Bashan; which seem to be frontier cities ofthe latter: see Deu_1:4. The former, Adrichomius (p) says, was situated by the city Geshur andMount Hermon, and was the boundary of the country of Bashan to the north; and according toBenjamin of Tudela (q), it was half a day's journey from Gilead: as Edrei seems to be itsboundary to the south.

2. Barnes, “Salchah - Compare Jos_12:5; 1Ch_5:11, where it is named as belonging to the tribe ofGad. It lies seven hours’ journey to the southeast of Bostra or Bozrah of Moab. As the easternborder city of the kingdom of Bashan it was no doubt strongly fortified.

Edrei - Compare Num_21:33 note.

3. K&D, “The different portions of the conquered land were the following: הּמיׁשר, the plain, i.e.,the Amoritish table-land, stretching from the Arnon to Heshbon, and in a north-easterly directionnearly as far as Rabbath-Ammon, with the towns of Heshbon, Bezer, Medeba, Jahza, and Dibon

(Deu_4:43; Jos_13:9, Jos_13:16-17, Jos_13:21; Jos_20:8; Jer_48:21.), which originally belongedto the Moabites, and is therefore called “the field of Moab” in Num_21:20. “The whole of Gilead,”i.e., the mountainous region on the southern and northern sides of the Jabbok, which was dividedinto two halves by this river. The southern half, which reached to Heshbon, belonged to thekingdom of Sihon (Jos_12:2), and was assigned by Moses to the Reubenites and Gadites(Deu_3:12); whilst the northern half, which is called “the rest of Gilead” in Deu_3:13, themodern Jebel Ajlun, extending as far as the land of Bashan (Hauran and Jaulan), belonged to thekingdom of Og (Jos_12:5), and was assigned to the Manassite family of Machir (Deu_3:15, andJos_13:31; cf. v. Raumer, Pal. pp. 229, 230). “And all Bashan unto Salcah and Edrei.” All Bashanincluded not only the country of Hauran (the plan and mountain), but unquestionably also thedistrict of Jedur and Jaulan, to the west of the sea of Galilee and the upper Jordan, or the ancientGaulonitis (Jos. Ant. xviii. 4, 6, etc.), as the kingdom of Og extended to the coasts of Geshuri andMaachathi (see at Deu_3:14). Og had not conquered the whole of the land of Hauran, however,but only the greater part of it. His territory extended eastwards to Salcah, i.e., the presentSzalchat or Szarchad, about six hours to the east of Bozrah, south of Jebel Hauran, a town with800 houses, and a castle upon a basaltic rock, but uninhabited (cf. v. Raumer, Pal. p. 255); and

northwards to Edrei, i.e., the northern Edrei (see at Num_21:33), a considerable ruin on thenorthwest of Bozrah, three or four English miles in extent, in the old buildings of which there are200 families living at present (Turks, Druses, and Christians). By the Arabian geographers(Abulfeda, Ibn Batuta) it is called Sora, by modern travellers Adra or Edra (v. Richter), or Oezraa

(Seetzen), or Ezra (Burckhardt), and Edhra (Robinson, App. 155). Consequently nearly the wholeof Jebel Hauran, and the northern portion of the plain, viz., the Leja, were outside the kingdomof Og and the land of Bashan, of which the Israelites took possession, although Burckhardt

reckons Ezra as part of the Leja.

11 (Og king of Bashan was the last of the Rephaites. Hisbed was decorated with iron and was more than ninecubits long and four cubits wide.[c] It is still in Rabbah ofthe Ammonites.)

1. Gill, “For only Og king of Bashan remained of the remnant of giants,.... The meaning seems tobe, either that he was the only one that was left of the race of the giants the Ammonites foundwhen they took possession of this country, Deu_2:20 or that was left when the Amorites took itfrom the Ammonites; and who having by some means or other ingratiated himself into theiraffections, because of his stature, strength, and courage, and other qualifications they mightdiscern in him, made him their king:

behold, his bedstead was a bedstead of iron: his body being so large and bulky, he might think itmost proper and safest for him to have a bedstead made of iron to lie upon, or to prevent noxiousinsects harbouring in it; nor was it unusual to have bedsteads made of other materials than wood,as of gold, silver, and ivory; See Gill on Amo_6:4. Some learned men (r) have been of opinion,that the beds of Typho in Syria, made mention of by Homer (s), refer to this bedstead of Og:

is it not in Rabbath of the children of Ammon? which was the royal city of the Ammonites, in thetimes of David, 2Sa_12:26, now called Philadelphia, as Jerom says (t). This bedstead might beeither sent thither by Og, before the battle at Edrei, for safety, or rather might be sold by theIsraelites to the inhabitants of Rabbath, who kept it, as a great curiosity:

nine cubits was the length thereof, and four cubits the breadth of it, after the cubit of a man; acommon cubit, so that it was four yards and a half long, and two yards broad. Onkelos renders it,after the king's cubit; and the king's cubit at Babylon, according to Herodotus (u), was larger bythree fingers than the common one; such as the cubit in Eze_40:5, which was a cubit and anhand's breadth; and this makes the dimensions of the bedstead yet larger. And by this judgmentmay be made of the tallness of Og's stature, though this is not always a sure rule to go by; forAlexander, when in India, ordered his soldiers to make beds of five cubits long, to be left behindthem, that they might be thought to be larger men than they were, as Diodorus Siculus (w) andCurtius (x) relate; but there is little reason to believe that Og's bedstead was made with such aview. Maimonides observes (y), that a bed in common is a third part larger than a man; so that

Og, according to this way of reckoning, was six cubits high, and his stature doubly larger than acommon man's; but less than a third part may well be allowed to a bed, which will make himtaller still; the height of Og is reckoned by Wolfius (z) to be about thirteen feet eleven inches ofParis measure.

2. Barnes, “Giants - Or Rephaim: see the marginal reference note.A bedstead of iron - The “iron” was probably the black basalt of the country, which not only

contains a large proportion, about 20 percent, of iron, but was actually called “iron,” and is stillso regarded by the Arabians. Iron was indeed both known and used, principally for tools (see e. g.Deu_19:5 and compare Gen_4:22 note), at the date in question by the Semitic people of Palestineand the adjoining countries; but bronze was the ordinary metal of which weapons, articles offurniture, etc., were made.

The word translated “bedstead” is derived from a root signifying “to unite” or “bind together,”and so “to arch” or “cover with a vault.” The word may then certainly mean “bier,” and perhapsdoes so in this passage. Modern travelers have discovered in the territories of Og sarcophagi aswell as many other articles made of the black basalt of the country.

Is it not in Rabbath of the children of Ammon? - Probably after the defeat and death of Og atEdrei the remnant of his army fled into the territory of the friendly Ammonites, and carried withthem the corpse of the giant king.

After the cubit of a man - i. e. after the usual and ordinary cubit, counted as people areaccustomed to count. Taking 18 inches to the cubit, the bedstead or sarcophagus would thus befrom thirteen to fourteen feet long.

3. Clarke, “Og king of Bashan remained - Og was the last king of the Amorites; his kingdomappears to have taken its name from the hill of Bashan; the country has been since calledBatanaea.

Remnant of giants - Of the Rephaim. See on Deu_2:10 (note), Deu_2:11 (note).

His bedstead was - of iron - Iron was probably used partly for its strength and durability, andpartly to prevent noxious vermin from harbouring in it.

Is it not in Rabbath, of the children of Ammon? - The bedstead was probably taken in somebattle between the Ammonites and Amorites, in which the former had gained the victory. Thebedstead was carried a trophy and placed in Rabbath, which appears, from 2Sa_12:26, to havebeen the royal city of the children of Ammon.

Nine cubits was the length - four cubits the breadth - Allowing the bedstead to have been onecubit longer than Og, which is certainly sufficient, and allowing the cubit to be about eighteeninches long, for this is perhaps the average of the cubit of a man, then Og was twelve feet high.This may be deemed extraordinary, and perhaps almost incredible, and therefore manycommentators have, according to their fancy, lengthened the bedstead and shortened the man,making the former one-third longer than the person who lay on it, that they might reduce Og tosix cubits; but even in this way they make him at least nine feet high.

On this subject the rabbins have trifled most sinfully. I shall give one specimen. In the Targumof Jonathan ben Uzziel on Num_21:33-35, it is said that “Og having observed that the camp ofthe Israelites extended six miles, he went and tore up a mountain six miles in its base, and put iton his head, and carried it towards the camp, that he might throw it on the Israelites and destroythem; but the word of the Lord prepared a worm, which bored a hole in the mountain over hishead, so that it fell down upon his shoulders: at the same time his teeth growing out in alldirections, stuck into the mountain, so that he could not cast it off his head. Moses, (who was

himself ten cubits high), seeing Og thus entangled, took an axe ten cubits long, and having leapedten cubits in height, struck Og on the ankle bone, so that he fell and was slain.”

From this account the distance from the sole of Og’s foot to his ankle was thirty cubits inlength! I give this as a very slight specimen of rabbinical comment. I could quote places in theTalmud in which Og is stated to be several miles high! This relation about Og I suppose to be alsoan historical note added by a subsequent hand.

4.Jamison, “only Og king of Bashan remained of the remnant of giants — literally, “ofRephaim.” He was not the last giant, but the only living remnant in the trans-jordanic country(Jos_15:14), of a certain gigantic race, supposed to be the most ancient inhabitants of Palestine.

behold, his bedstead was a bedstead of iron — Although beds in the East are with the commonpeople nothing more than a simple mattress, bedsteads are not unknown. They are in use amongthe great, who prefer them of iron or other metals, not only for strength and durability, but forthe prevention of the troublesome insects which in warm climates commonly infest wood. Takingthe cubit at half a yard, the bedstead of Og would measure thirteen and a half feet, so that asbeds are usually a little larger than the persons who occupy them, the stature of the Amorite kingmay be estimated at about eleven or twelve feet; or he might have caused his bed to be mademuch larger than was necessary, as Alexander the Great did for each of his foot soldiers, toimpress the Indians with an idea of the extraordinary strength and stature of his men [Le Clerc].But how did Og’s bedstead come to be in Rabbath, of the children of Ammon? In answer to thisquestion, it has been said, that Og had, on the eve of engagement, conveyed it to Rabbath forsafety. Or it may be that Moses, after capturing it, may have sold it to the Ammonites, who hadkept it as an antiquarian curiosity till their capital was sacked in the time of David. This is a mostunlikely supposition, and besides renders it necessary to consider the latter clause of this verse asan interpolation inserted long after the time of Moses. To avoid this, some eminent critics take theHebrew word rendered “bedstead” to mean “coffin.” They think that the king of Bashan havingbeen wounded in battle, fled to Rabbath, where he died and was buried; hence the dimensions ofhis “coffin” are given [Dathe, Roos].

5. K&D, “Even in Abraham's time, the giant tribe of Rephaim was living in Bashan (Gen_14:5).But out of the remnant of these, king Og, whom the Israelites defeated and slew, was the only oneleft. For the purpose of recalling the greatness of the grace of God that had been manifested inthat victory, and not merely to establish the credibility of the statements concerning the size of Og(“just as things belonging to an age that has long passed away are shown to be credible by theirremains,” Spinoza, etc.), Moses points to the iron bed of this king, which was still in Rabbath-Ammon, and was nine cubits long and four broad, “after the cubit of a man,” i.e., the ordinarycubit in common use (see the analogous expression, “a man's pen,” Isa_8:1). הלה, for הלא,synonymous with הּנה. There is nothing to amaze is in the size of the bed or bedstead given here.The ordinary Hebrew cubit was only a foot and a half, probably only eighteen Dresden inches(see my Archäologie, ii. p. 126, Anm. 4). Now a bed is always larger than the man who sleeps in it.But in this case Clericus fancies that Og “intentionally exceeded the necessary size, in order thatposterity might be led to draw more magnificent conclusions from the size of the bed, as to thestature of the man who was accustomed to sleep in it.” He also refers to the analogous case ofAlexander the Great, of whom Diod. Sic. (xvii. 95) affirms, that whenever he was obliged to halton his march to India, he made colossal arrangements of all kinds, causing, among other things,two couches to be prepared in the tents for every foot-soldier, each five cubits long, and two stallsfor every horseman, twice as large as the ordinary size, “to represent a camp of heroes, and leavestriking memorials behind for the inhabitants of the land, of gigantic men and their supernatural

strength.” With a similar intention Og may also have left behind him a gigantic bed as amemorial of his superhuman greatness, on the occasion of some expedition of his against theAmmonites; and this bed may have been preserved in their capital as a proof of the greatness oftheir foe.

(Note: “It will often be found, that very tall people are disposed to make themselves appeareven taller than they actually are” (Hengstenberg, Diss. ii. p. 201). Moreover, there are stillgiants who are eight feet high and upwards. “According to the N. Preuss. Zeit. of 1857, therecame a man to Berlin 8 feet 4 inches high, and possibly still growing, as he was only twentyyears old; and he was said to have a great-uncle who was nine inches taller” (Schultz).)

Moses might then refer to this gigantic bed of Og, which was known to the Israelites; and there isno reason for resorting to the improbable conjecture, that the Ammonites had taken possession ofa bed of king Og upon some expedition against the Amorites, and had carried it off as a trophy totheir capital.

(Note: There is still less probability in the conjecture of J. D. Michaelis, Vater, Winer, andothers, that Og's iron bed was a sarcophagus of basalt, such as are still frequently met with inthose regions, as much as 9 feet long and 3 1/2 feet broad, or even as much as 12 feet long and6 feet in breadth and height (vid., Burckhardt, pp. 220, 246; Robinson, iii. p. 385; Seetzen, i.pp. 355, 360); and the still further assumption, that the corpse of the fallen king was taken toRabbah, and there interred in a royal way, is altogether improbable.)

“Rabbath of the sons of Ammon,” or briefly Rabbah, i.e., the great (Jos_13:25; 2Sa_11:1), was thecapital of the Ammonites, afterwards called Philadelphia, probably from PtolemaeusPhiladelphus; by Polybius, Ῥαββατάµανα; by Abulfeda, Ammân, which is the name still given tothe uninhabited ruins on the Nahr Ammân, i.e., the upper Jabbok (see Burckhardt, pp. 612ff. andv. Raumer, Pal. p. 268).

Division of the Land

12 Of the land that we took over at that time, I gave theReubenites and the Gadites the territory north of Aroerby the Arnon Gorge, including half the hill country ofGilead, together with its towns.

1. Gill, “And this land, which we possessed at that time,.... Or took possession of, havingconquered it; for it still remained in their possession:

from Aroer, which is by the river Arnon: on the borders of Moab, from thence as far as Gileadwas the land which was taken from Sihon king of Heshbon, Deu_2:36.

and half Mount Gilead, and the cities thereof: which were taken from Og king of Bashan,

Deu_3:10.

gave I unto the Reubenites, and to the Gadites; at their request, on certain conditions to beperformed by them, afterwards repeated.

2. Moody Bible Institute, “Deuteronomy 3:12-20 'It's a truism in sports that a team's success ismore important than the statistics of individual players. Even the jargon of sports reflects thisthinking. Baseball has the sacrifice bunt. And a batter who deliberately makes an out to move arunner along is said to 'give himself up.' This collective effort is called teamworkÑ nd few teamswin without it.

Teamwork was indispensable for the Israelites too. After the defeat of the Amorite kings who heldlarge portions of the Transjordan, Israel was in the position to invade Canaan. The goal of thebattle was victory so that every Israelite could enjoy rest in the land God had promised Hispeople.

But before Israel crossed the Jordan, Moses had to deal with a request by the tribes of Reubenand Gad, along with half of Manasseh a tribe that was divided between those who worked theland and those who raised livestock. It was the latter group that joined the other two tribes inasking Moses for permission to settle east of the Jordan, land ideal for grazing their herds (Num.32:1-5).

Moses was angry at first, since it appeared that these Israelites were content to settle incomfortably and let their brothers fight the Canaanites. So Moses insisted that the armed men ofthese tribes go with the rest of Israel into Canaan until the whole nation was at rest. The meninvolved readily agreed to these terms (Num. 32:18).

What would be the blessing for these tribes' obedience to God in this matter? First, the familiesand livestock they had left behind east of the Jordan would be safe while they were away.

Second, the land they claimed would also be held for them. Since God had given this land to themas their possession they didn't need to worry about losing their homes while they were serving inthe Israelite army.

Someone has said that there is no safer place for anyone on earth than in the will of God. Thetribes who settled in the Transjordan certainly discovered that truth. When the time came tosacrifice for their brothers, they left home as they had promised. Their families and herds werenever safer than when these warriors were helping their fellow Israelites enter into God's rest.”

3. Jamison, “Deu 3:12-13 - “this land, which we possessed at that time, from Aroer ... gave I untothe Reubenites and to the Gadites — The whole territory occupied by Sihon was parceled outamong the pastoral tribes of Reuben and Gad. It extended from the north bank of the Arnon tothe south half of mount Gilead - a small mountain ridge, now called Djelaad, about six or sevenmiles south of the Jabbok, and eight miles in length. The northern portion of Gilead and the richpasture lands of Bashan - a large province, consisting, with the exception of a few bleak androcky spots, of strong and fertile soil - was assigned to the half-tribe of Manasseh.

4. K&D, “Deu 3:12-13 - Review of the Distribution of the Conquered Land. - The land which the Israelites had taken

belonging to these two kingdoms was given by Moses to the two tribes and a half for theirpossession, viz., the southern portion from Aroer in the Arnon valley (see at Num_32:34), andhalf Gilead (as far as the Jabbok: see at Deu_3:10) with its towns, which are enumerated inJos_13:15-20 and Jos_13:24-28, to the Reubenites and Gadites; and the northern half of Gilead,with the whole of Bashan (i.e., all the region of Argob: see at Deu_3:4, and Num_32:33), to thehalf-tribe of Manasseh. לכל־הּבׁשן, “as for all Bashan,” is in apposition to “all the region of Argob,”and the ל simply serves to connect it; for “all the region of Argob” was not merely one portion ofBashan, but was identical with “all Bashan,” so far as it belonged to the kingdom of Og (see at v.4). All this region passed for a land of giants. הּקרא, to be called, i.e., to be, and to be recognised asbeing.

5. Henry, “Deu 3:12-20 - Having shown how this country which they were now in was conquered, in these verses he

shows how it was settled upon the Reubenites, Gadites, and half the tribe of Manasseh, which wehad the story of before, Num. 32. Here is the rehearsal. 1. Moses specifies the particular parts ofthe country that were allotted to each tribe, especially the distribution of the lot to the half tribeof Manasseh, the subdividing of which tribe is observable. Joseph was divided into Ephraim andManasseh; Manasseh was divided into one half on the one side Jordan and the other half on theother side: that on the east side Jordan was again divided into two great families, which had theirseveral allotments: Jair, Deu_3:14, Machir, Deu_3:15. And perhaps Jacob's prediction of thesmallness of that tribe was now accomplished in these divisions and subdivisions. Observe thatBashan is here called the land of the giants, because it had been in their possession, but Og wasthe last of them. These giants, it seems, had lost their country, and were rooted out of it soonerthan any of their neighbours; for those who, presuming upon their strength and stature, had theirhand against every man, had every man's hand against them, and went down slain to the pit,though they were the terror of the mighty in the land of the living. 2. He repeats the condition ofthe grant which they had already agreed to, Deu_3:18-20. That they should send a strongdetachment over Jordan to lead the van in the conquest of Canaan, who should not return totheir families, at least not to settle (though for a time they might retire thither into winterquarters, at the end of a campaign), till they had seen their brethren in as full possession of theirrespective allotments as they themselves were now in of theirs. They must hereby be taught not tolook at their own things only, but at the things of others, Phi_2:4. It ill becomes an Israelite to beselfish, and to prefer any private interest before the public welfare. When we are rest we shoulddesire to see our brethren at rest too, and should be ready to do what we can towards it; for weare not born for ourselves, but are members one of another. A good man cannot rejoice much inthe comforts of his family unless withal he sees peace upon Israel, Psa_128:6.

13 The rest of Gilead and also all of Bashan, the kingdomof Og, I gave to the half-tribe of Manasseh. (The wholeregion of Argob in Bashan used to be known as a land ofthe Rephaites.

1. Gill, “And the rest of Gilead,.... The other half of the mount, with the cities belonging to it:

and all Bashan, being the kingdom of Og, gave I unto the half tribe of Manasseh; see Num_32:33.

all the region of Argob, with all Bashan; the region of Trachonitis, in Bashan; see Deu_3:4,

which was called the land of giants; or of Rephaim; this Jarchi says is the country of the Rephaimgiven to Abraham, Gen_15:20.

14 Jair, a descendant of Manasseh, took the whole regionof Argob as far as the border of the Geshurites and theMaakathites; it was named after him, so that to this dayBashan is called Havvoth Jair.[d])

1. Gill, “Jair the son of Manasseh took all the country of Argob,.... Or Trachonitis; the smalltowns belonging to Gilead, as in Num_32:41.

unto the coasts of Geshuri and Maachathi; these were little kingdoms in Syria, on which thecountry of Argob bordered, and had kings over them in the time of David, and came not into thepossession of the Israelites; see Jos_13:13.

and called them after his own name, Bashanhavothjair, unto this day; see Num_32:41.

2. Jamison, “Jair the son of Manasseh took all the country of Argob — The original inhabitantsof the province north of Bashan, comprising sixty cities (Deu_3:4), not having been extirpatedalong with Og, this people were afterwards brought into subjection by the energy of Jair. Thischief, of the tribe of Manasseh, in accordance with the pastoral habits of his people, called thesenewly acquired towns by a name which signifies “Jair’s Bedouin Villages of Tents.”

unto this day — This remark must evidently have been introduced by Ezra, or some of thepious men who arranged and collected the books of Moses.

3. Barnes, “These Geshurites held territory adjoining, if not included within, Bashan. They arenot to be confounded with those mentioned in Jos_13:2, who were neighbors of the Philistines1Sa_17:8.

The exact position of Maachah like that of Geshur cannot be ascertained; but it was no doubtamong the fastnesses which lay between Bashan and the kingdom of Damascus, and on the skirtsof Mount Hermon.

Unto this day - This expression, like our “until now,” does not, as used in the Bible, necessarilyimply that the time spoken of as elapsed is long. It may here denote the duration to the time thenpresent of that which had been already some months accomplished.

4. K&D, “The region of Argob, or the country of Bashan, was given to Jair (see Num_32:41), asfar as the territory of the Geshurites and Maachathites (cf. Jos_12:5; Jos_13:11). “Unto,” as faras, is to be understood as inclusive. This is evident from the statement in Jos_13:13 : “Thechildren of Israel expelled not the Geshurites nor the Maachathites; but the Geshurites and the

Maachathites dwell among the Israelites until this day.” Consequently Moses allotted the territoryof these two tribes to the Manassites, because it formed part of the kingdom of Og. “Geshuri and

Maachathi” are the inhabitants of Geshur and Maachah, two provinces which formed smallindependent kingdoms even in David's time (2Sa_3:3; 2Sa_13:37, and 2Sa_10:6). Geshur

bordered on Aram. The Geshurites and Aramaeans afterwards took from the Israelites the Jair-towns and Kenath, with their daughter towns (1Ch_2:23). In David's time Geshur had a kingThalmai, whose daughter David married. This daughter was the mother of Absalom; and it wasin Geshur that Absalom lived for a time in exile (2Sa_3:3; 2Sa_13:37; 2Sa_14:23; 2Sa_15:8). Theexact situation of Geshur has not yet been determined. It was certainly somewhere near Hermon,on the eastern side of the upper Jordan, and by a bridge over the Jordan, as Geshur signifiesbridge in all the Semitic dialects. Maachah, which is referred to in 1Ch_19:6 as a kingdom underthe name of Aram-Maachah (Eng. V. Syria-Maachah), is probably to be sought for to the north-east of Geshur. According to the Onomast. (s. v. Μαχαθί), it was in the neighbourhood of theHermon. “And he called them (the towns of the region of Argob) after his own name; Bashan (sc.,he called) Havvoth Jair unto this day” (cf. Num_32:41). The word חּות (Havvoth), which onlyoccurs in connection with the Jair-towns, does not mean towns or camps of a particular kind, viz.,tent villages, as some suppose, but is the plural of חּוה, life (Leben, a common Germantermination, e.g., Eisleben), for which afterwards the word חּיה was used (comp. 2Sa_23:13 with1Ch_11:15). It applies to any kind of dwelling-place, being used in the passages just mentioned todenote even a warlike encampment. The Jair's-lives (Jairsleben) were not a particular class oftowns, therefore, in the district of Argob, but Jair gave this collective name to all the sixtyfortified towns, as is perfectly evident from the verse before us when compared with Deu_3:5 andNum_32:41, and expressly confirmed by Jos_13:30 and 1Ki_4:13, where the sixty fortified townsof the district of Argob are called Havvoth Jair. - The statement in 1Ch_2:22-23, that “Jair had

twenty-three towns in Gilead (which is used here as in Deu_34:1; Jos_22:9; Jos_13:15; Jdg_5:17;Jdg_20:1, to denote the whole of Palestine to the east of the Jordan), and Geshur and Aram took

the Havvoth Jair from them, (and) Kenath and its daughters, sixty towns (sc., in all),” is by nomeans at variance with this, but, on the contrary, in the most perfect harmony with it. For it isevident from this passage, that the twenty-three Havvoth Jair, with Kenath and its daughters,formed sixty towns altogether. The distinction between the twenty-three Havvoth Jair and theother thirty-seven towns, viz., Kenath and its daughters, is to be explained from the simple factthat, according to Num_32:42, Nobah, no doubt a family of sons of Machir related to Jair,conquered Kenath and its daughters, and called the conquered towns by his name, namely, whenthey had been allotted to him by Moses. Consequently Bashan, or the region of Argob, with itssixty fortified towns, was divided between two of the leading families of Machir the Manassite,viz., the families of Jair and Nobah, each family receiving the districts which it had conquered,together with their towns; namely, the family of Nobah, Kenath and its daughter towns, or theeastern portion of Bashan; and the family of Jair, twenty-three towns in the west, which arecalled Havvoth Jair in 1Ch_2:23, in harmony with Num_32:41, where Jair is said to have giventhis name to the towns which were conquered by him. In the address before us, however, in which

Moses had no intention to enter into historical details, all the (sixty) towns of the whole district ofArgob, or the whole of Bashan, are comprehended under the name of Havvoth Jair, probablybecause Nobah was a subordinate branch of the family of Jair, and the towns conquered by himwere under the supremacy of Jair. The expression “unto this day” certainly does not point to alater period than the Mosaic age. This definition of time is simply a relative one. It does notnecessarily presuppose a very long duration, and here it merely serves to bring out themarvellous change which was due to the divine grace, viz., that the sixty fortified towns of thegiant king Og of Bashan had now become Jair's lives.

(Note: The conquest of these towns, in fact, does not seem to have been of long duration,and the possession of them by the Israelites was a very disputed one (cf. 1Ch_2:22-23). In thetime of the judges we find thirty in the possession of the judge Jair (Jdg_10:4), which causedthe old name Havvoth Jair to be revived.)

15 And I gave Gilead to Makir.

1. Gill, “And I gave Gilead unto Machir. The son of Manasseh; not to him personally, who cannotbe thought to have been living at this time, but to his posterity, to the Machirites; see Num_32:40.

2. K&D, “Deu 3:15-20 - “Machir received Gilead (see Num_32:40). - In Deu_3:16 and Deu_3:17the possession of the tribes of Reuben and Gad is described more fully according to itsboundaries. They received the land of Gilead (to the south of the Jabbok) as far as the brookArnon, the middle of the valley and its territory. ּתוך הּנחל is a more precise definition of נחל ארנן ,expressive of the fact that the territory of these tribes was not to reach merely to the northernedge of the Arnon valley, but into the middle of it, viz., to the river Arnon, which flowed throughthe middle of the valley; and ּוגבּול (and the border) is an explanatory apposition to what goesbefore, as in Num_34:6, signifying, “viz., the border of the Arnon valley as far as the river.” On theeast, “even unto Jabbok the brook, the (western) border of the Ammonites” (i.e., as far as the upperJabbok, the Nahr Ammân: see at Num_21:24); and on the west “The Arabah (the Ghor: seeDeu_1:1) and the Jordan with territory” (i.e., with its eastern bank), “from Chinnereth” (i.e., thetown from which the Sea of Galilee received the name of Sea of Chinnereth: Num_34:11; see atJos_19:35) “to the sea of the Arabah, the Salt Sea under the slopes of Pisgah (see at Num_21:15and Num_27:12) eastward” (i.e., merely the eastern side of the Arabah and Jordan). - InDeu_3:18-20 Moses reminds them of the conditions upon which he had given the two tribes and ahalf the land referred to for their inheritance (cf. Num_32:20-32).

16 But to the Reubenites and the Gadites I gave the

territory extending from Gilead down to the Arnon Gorge(the middle of the gorge being the border) and out to theJabbok River, which is the border of the Ammonites.

1. Gill, “And unto the Reubenites, and unto the Gadites,.... The tribes of Reuben and Gad:

I gave from Gilead even unto the river Arnon: see Deu_3:12.

half the valley and the border; or rather half the river, the river Arnon; and so it is rendered "themiddle of the river", in Jos_12:2 and so here the middle of the torrent by the Vulgate Latin andSeptuagint versions, and by Onkelos:

even unto the river Jabbok, which is the border of the children of Ammon; beyond which theland given to the tribes of Reuben and Gad reached not; see Deu_2:37.

2. Jamison, “from Gilead — that is, not the mountainous region, but the town Ramoth-gilead,even unto the river Arnon half the valley — The word “valley” signifies a wady, either filled

with water or dry, as the Arnon is in summer, and thus the proper rendering of the passage willbe - “even to the half or middle of the river Arnon” (compare Jos_12:2). This prudentarrangement of the boundaries was evidently made to prevent all disputes between the adjacenttribes about the exclusive right to the water.

3. Barnes, “The sense is that the Reubenites and Gadites were to possess the district from theJabbok on the north to the Arnon on the south, including the middle part of the valley of theArnon, and the territory (“coast” or “border”) thereto pertaining.

17 Its western border was the Jordan in the Arabah, fromKinnereth to the Sea of the Arabah (that is, the Dead Sea),below the slopes of Pisgah.

1. Gill, “The plain also, and Jordan,.... The plain by Jordan, the plains of Moab on the side of it,together with the river:

and the coast thereof; the country adjoining to it:

from Chinnereth even unto the sea of the plain, even the salt sea; that is, from Gennesaret, as theTargums of Onkelos and Jonathan, called the land of Gennesaret, Mat_14:34, from thence to the

sea of Sodom, the sea of the plain, where the cities of the plain stood, Sodom, Gomorrah, &c. andthe salt sea, so called from the salt and nitrous waters of it, the lake Asphaltites:

under Ashdothpisgah eastward; mentioned among the cities given to the tribe of Reuben,Jos_13:20 rendered "the springs of Pisgah", Deu_4:49, the word having the signification ofeffusions, pourings out; so the Targums.

18 I commanded you at that time: “The LORD your Godhas given you this land to take possession of it. But allyour able-bodied men, armed for battle, must cross overahead of the other Israelites.

1. Gill, “And I commanded you at that time,.... Not all Israel, but the tribes of Reuben and God,and the half tribe of Manasseh; for what follows only concerns them:

saying, the Lord your God hath given you this land to possess it; the land before described, latelyin the hands of Sihon and Og; this at their request Moses gave them, by the direction of the Lord,on the following condition:

you shall pass over armed before your brethren the children of Israel, all that are meet for thewar; that is, they should pass over Jordan with the rest of the tribes, being armed to assist themin the conquest of Canaan: for this phrase, which we render "before your brethren", does notsignify that they went in the forefront of them, only that they were present with them, and joinedthem in their war against their enemies; see Num_32:29 and therefore should be rendered "withyour brethren" (a); even as many of them as were able to bear arms, at least as many as Joshuawould choose to take of them; for he did not take them all by a great many; see Jos_4:13.

19 However, your wives, your children and your livestock(I know you have much livestock) may stay in the towns Ihave given you,

1. Gill, “But your wives, and your little ones, and your cattle,.... These were to be left behind: for

I know that ye have much cattle; which made the countries of Gilead and Bashan, so famous for

pasturage, agreeable to them; see Num_32:1 these, under the care of servants, and also theirwives and children:

shall abide in your cities which I have given you; and which they rebuilt and repaired,Num_32:34.

20 until the LORD gives rest to your fellow Israelites as hehas to you, and they too have taken over the land that theLORD your God is giving them across the Jordan. Afterthat, each of you may go back to the possession I havegiven you.”

1. Gill, “Until the Lord have given rest unto your brethren, as well as unto you,.... Rest from theirenemies, and habitations to dwell quietly in; so the land of Canaan is called a rest, Deu_12:9typical of the rest which remains for the people of God:

and until they also possess the land which the Lord your God hath given them beyond Jordan;for so Canaan was with respect to Moses and the people with him, who were then in the plains ofMoab; otherwise the country in which he was with respect to Canaan is usually called beyondJordan; this the Lord had given in promise to Israel, and they were just now ready to enter intoand possess it, by virtue of his gift, and which made it sure unto them:

and then shall ye return every man unto his possession, which I have given you; as accordinglythey did, Jos_22:1.

Moses Forbidden to Cross the Jordan

21 At that time I commanded Joshua: “You have seenwith your own eyes all that the LORD your God has doneto these two kings. The LORD will do the same to all thekingdoms over there where you are going.

1. Gill, “And I commanded Joshua at that time,.... After the conquest of the two kings, and the

assignment of their countries to the above tribes; and after Moses had it made known to him thathe should quickly die, and Joshua should be his successor; then, by the direction of God, he gavehim the following charge:

saying, thine eyes have seen all that the Lord your God hath done unto these two kings; Sihonand Og; how their kingdoms were taken from them, and given to Israel, and they slain with thesword; this Joshua was an eyewitness of, and was, no doubt, greatly concerned in the battles withthem, being the general in the Israelitish armies; at least this was sometimes his post, and hecannot be thought to have been unemployed in these wars:

so shall the Lord do unto all the kingdoms whither thou passest; all the kingdoms in the land ofCanaan, where there were many, thirty one at least; these would be all conquered and put intothe hands of the Israelites, and their kings slain.

2. Henry, “Deu 3:21-29 - Here is I. The encouragement which Moses gave to Joshua, who was to succeed him in the

government, Deu_3:21, Deu_3:22. He commanded him not to fear. This those that are aged andexperienced in the service of God should do all they can to strengthen the hands of those that areyoung, and setting out in religion. Two things he would have him consider for his encouragement:- 1. What God has done. Joshua had seen what a total defeat God had given by the forces ofIsrael to these two kings, and thence he might easily infer, so shall the Lord do to all the rest of the

kingdoms upon which we are to make war. He must not only infer thence that thus the Lord cando with them all, for his arm is not shortened, but thus he will do, for his purpose is not changed;he that has begun will finish; as for God, his work is perfect. Joshua had seen it with his own eyes.And the more we have seen of the instances of divine wisdom, power, and goodness, the moreinexcusable we are if we fear what flesh can do unto us. 2. What God had promised. The Lord

your God he shall fight for you; and that cause cannot but be victorious which the Lord of hostsfights for. If God be for us, who can be against us so as to prevail? We reproach our leader if wefollow him trembling.

II. The prayer which Moses made for himself, and the answer which God gave to that prayer.

1. His prayer was that, if it were God's will, he might go before Israel over Jordan into Canaan.At that time, when he had been encouraging Joshua to fight Israel's battles, taking it for grantedthat he must be their leader, he was touched with an earnest desire to go over himself, whichexpresses itself not in any passionate and impatient complaints, or reflections upon the sentencehe was under, but in humble prayers to God for a gracious reversing of it. I besought the Lord.

Note, We should never allow any desires in our hearts which we cannot in faith offer up to Godby prayer; and what desires are innocent, let them be presented to God. We have not because weask not. Observe,

(1.) What he pleads here. Two things: - [1.] The great experience which he had had of God'sgoodness to him in what he had done for Israel: “Thou hast begun to show thy servant thy

greatness. Lord, perfect what thou hast begun. Thou hast given me to see thy glory in theconquest of these two kings, and the sight has affected me with wonder and thankfulness. O letme see more of the outgoings of my God, my King! This great work, no doubt, will be carried onand completed; let me have the satisfaction of seeing it.” Note, the more we see of God's glory inhis works the more we shall desire to see. The works of the Lord are great, and therefore aresought out more and more of all those that have pleasure therein. [2.] The good impressions thathad been made upon his heart by what he had seen: For what God is there in heaven or earth that

can do according to thy works? The more we are affected with what we have seen of God, of his

wisdom, power, and goodness, the better we are prepared for further discoveries. Those shall seethe works of God that admire him in them. Moses had thus expressed himself concerning Godand his works long before (Exo_15:11), and he still continues of the same mind, that there are noworks worthy to be compared with God's works, Psa_86:8.

(2.) What he begs: I pray thee let me go over, Deu_3:25. God had said he should not go over; yethe prays that he might, not knowing but that the threatening was conditional, for it was notratified with an oath, as that concerning the people was, that they should not enter. ThusHezekiah prayed for his own life, and David for the life of his child, after both had ben expresslythreatened; and the former prevailed, though the latter did not. Moses remembered the timewhen he had by prayer prevailed with God to recede from the declarations which he had made ofhis wrath against Israel, Exo_32:14. And why might he not hope in like manner to prevail forhimself? Let me go over and see the good land. Not, “Let me go over and be a prince and a rulerthere;” he seeks not his own honour, is content to resign the government to Joshua; but, “Let mego to be a spectator of thy kindness to Israel, to see what I believe concerning the goodness of theland of promise.” How pathetically does he speak of Canaan, that good land, that goodly

mountain! Note, Those may hope to obtain and enjoy God's favours that know how to valuethem. What he means by that goodly mountain we may learn from Psa_78:54, where it is said ofGod's Israel that he brought them to the border of his sanctuary, even to this mountain which his

right hand had purchased, where it is plainly to be understood of the whole land of Canaan, yetwith an eye to the sanctuary, the glory of it.

2. God's answer to this prayer had in it a mixture of mercy and judgment, that he might singunto God of both.

(1.) There was judgment in the denial of his request, and that in something of anger too: The

Lord was wroth with me for your sakes, Deu_3:26. God not only sees sin in his people, but is muchdispleased with it; and even those that are delivered from the wrath to come may yet lie under thetokens of God's wrath in this world, and may be denied some particular favour which theirhearts are much set upon. God is a gracious, tender, loving Father; but he is angry with hischildren when they do amiss, and denies them many a thing that they desire and are ready to cryfor. But how was he wroth with Moses for the sake of Israel? Either, [1.] For that sin which theyprovoked him to; see Psa_106:32, Psa_106:33. Or, [2.] The removal of Moses at that time, whenhe could so ill be spared, was a rebuke to all Israel, and a punishment of their sin. Or, [3.] It wasfor their sakes, that it might be a warning to them to take heed of offending God by passionateand unbelieving speeches at any time, after the similitude of his transgression; for, if this were

done to such a green tree, what should be done to the dry? He acknowledges that God would nothear him. God had often heard him for Israel, yet he would not hear him for himself. It was theprerogative of Christ, the great Intercessor, to be heard always; yet of him his enemies said, He

saved others, himself he could not save, which the Jews would not have upbraided him with hadthey considered that Moses, their great prophet, prevailed for others, but for himself he could notprevail. Though Moses, being one of the wrestling seed of Jacob, did not seek in vain, yet he hadnot the thing itself which he sought for. God may accept our prayers, and yet not grant us thevery thing we pray for.

(2.) Here is mercy mixed with this wrath in several things: - [1.] God quieted the spirit of Mosesunder the decree that had gone forth by that word (Deu_3:26), Let it suffice thee. With this word,no doubt, a divine power went to reconcile Moses to the will of God, and to bring him toacquiesce in it. If God does not by his providence give us what we desire, yet, if by his grace hemakes us content without it, it comes much to one. “Let it suffice thee to have God for they father,and heaven for thy portion, though thou hast not every thing thou wouldest have in this world.Be satisfied with this, God is all-sufficient.” [2.] He put an honour upon his prayer in directing

him not to insist upon this request: Speak no more to me of this matter. It intimates that what Goddoes not think fit to grant we should not think fit to ask, and that God takes such a pleasure inthe prayer of the upright that it is no pleasure to him, no, not in any particular instance, to give adenial to it. [3.] He promised him a sight of Canaan from the top of Pisgah, Deu_3:27. Though heshould not have the possession of it, he should have the prospect of it; not to tantalize him, butsuch a sight of it as would yield him true satisfaction, and would enable him to form a very clearand pleasing idea of that promised land. Probably Moses had not only his sight preserved forother purposes, but greatly enlarged for this purpose; for, if he had not had such a sight of it asothers could not have from the same place, it would have been no particular favour to Moses, northe matter of a promise. Even great believers, in this present state, see heaven but at a distance.[4.] He provided him a successor, one who should support the honour of Moses and carry on andcomplete that glorious work which the heart of Moses was so much upon, the bringing of Israelto Canaan, and settling them there (Deu_3:28): Charge Joshua and encourage him in this work.Those to whom God gives a charge, he will be sure to give encouragement to. And it is a comfortto the church's friends (when they are dying and going off) to see God's work likely to be carriedon by other hands, when they are silent in the dust.

3. K&D, “Deu 3:21-29 - Nomination of Joshua as his Successor. - This reminiscence also recalls the goodness of God in

the appointment of Joshua (Num_27:12.), which took place “at that time,” i.e., after the conquestof the land on the east of the Jordan. In accordance with the object of his address, which was tohold up to view what the Lord had done for Israel, he here relates how, at the very outset, hepointed Joshua to the things which he had seen with his eyes ( עיניך הראת , thine eyes were seeing;cf. Ewald, §335, b.), namely, to the defeat of the two kings of the Amorites, in which the pledgewas contained, that the faithful covenant God would complete the work He had begun, andwould do the same to all kingdoms whither Joshua would go over (i.e., across the Jordan).

Deu_3:22For this reason they were not to be afraid; for Jehovah Himself would fight for them. “He” is

emphatic, and adds force to the subject.

Deu_3:23-24Moses then describes how, notwithstanding his prayer, the Lord had refused him permission to

cross over into Canaan and see the glorious land. This prayer is not mentioned in the historicalaccount given in the fourth book; but it must have preceded the prayer for the appointment of ashepherd over the congregation in Num_27:16, as the Lord directs him in His reply (Deu_3:28) toappoint Joshua as the leader of the people. In his prayer, Moses appealed to the manifestations ofdivine grace which he had already received. As the Lord had already begun to show him Hisgreatness and His mighty hand, so might He also show him the completion of His work. Theexpression, “begun to show Thy greatness,” relates not so much to the mighty acts of the Lord inEgypt and at the Red Sea (as in Exo_32:11-12, and Num_14:13.), as to the manifestation of thedivine omnipotence in the defeat of the Amorites, by which the Lord had begun to bring Hispeople into the possession of the promised land, and had made Himself known as God, to whomthere was no equal in heaven or on earth. אׁשר before מי אל (v. 24) is an explanatory and causalrelative: because (quod, quia), or for. “For what God is there in heaven and on earth,” etc. Thesewords recall Exo_15:11, and are echoed in many of the Psalms, - in Psa_86:8 almost verbatim.The contrast drawn between Jehovah and other gods does not involve the reality of the heathendeities, but simply presupposes a belief in the existence of other gods, without deciding as to thetruth of that belief. ּגבּורת, manifestations of ּגבּורה, mighty deeds.

Deu_3:25“I pray Thee, let me go over.” אעּברה־ּנא, a form of desire, used as a petition, as in Deu_2:27;

Num_21:22, etc. “That goodly mountain” is not one particular portion of the land of Canaan, suchas the mountains of Judah, or the temple mountain (according to Exo_15:17), but the whole ofCanaan regarded as a mountainous country, Lebanon being specially mentioned as the boundarywall towards the north. As Moses stood on the lower level of the Arabah, the promised landpresented itself not only to his eyes, but also to his soul, as a long mountain range; and that nomerely as suggestive of the lower contrast, that “whereas the plains in the East are for the mostpart sterile, on account of the want of springs or rain, the mountainous regions, which are wellwatered by springs and streams, are very fertile and pleasant” (Rosenmüller), but also on a muchhigher ground, viz., as a high and lofty land, which would stand by the side of Horeb, “where hehad spent the best and holiest days of his life, and where he had seen the commencement of thecovenant between God and His people” (Schultz).

Deu_3:26But the Lord would not grant his request. “Let it suffice thee' (satis sit tibi, as in Deu_1:6),

substantially equivalent to 2Co_12:8, “My grace is sufficient for thee” (Schultz). ּדּבר ּב , to speakabout a thing (as in Deu_6:7; Deu_11:19, etc.).

Deu_3:27-28Deu_3:27 is a rhetorical paraphrase of Num_27:12, where the mountains of Abarim are

mentioned in the place of Pisgah, which was the northern portion of Abarim. (On Deu_3:28, cf.Deu_1:38 and Num_27:23.)

Deu_3:29“So we abode in the valley over against Beth-peor,” i.e., in the Arboth Moab (Num_22:1), sc.,

where we still are. The pret. וּנׁשב is used, because Moses fixes his eye upon the past, and looksback upon the events already described in Num 28-34 as having taken place there. On Beth-Peor,see at Num_23:28.

22 Do not be afraid of them; the LORD your God himselfwill fight for you.”

1. Gill, “Ye shall not fear them,.... On account of the numbers, strength, courage, and giganticstature of the inhabitants, at least some of them; nor on account of their walled towns, andfortified cities:

for the Lord your God he shall fight for you; as he did, particularly at Jericho, the walls of whichcity fell at the sound of rams' horns; and at Gibeon, when he cast down hailstones on theirenemies, and more were slain by them than with the sword; and in all their battles it was he thatgave them success and victory.

2. Moody Bible Institute, “There is a definite note of sadness in today's story. Moses reminded thepeople of God's judgment on his disobedience at Meribah (Num. 20:12, 13), which resulted in hisbeing banned from Canaan. Bible commentator Dr. Jack Deere says that Moses' conversationwith God 'reveals something of the intimacy of Moses' relationship with God. It also heightensthe feeling of tragedy in the experience of a man who devoted his life to fulfilling God's promisefor Israel but knew he would never see its completion.'

Yet despite his own deep disappointment and knowing that his life was drawing to a close, Mosesdid not lose sight of the larger objective before Israel. The nation had conquered Sihon and Og,two powerful Amorite kings, and was ready for greater conquests in Canaan. Joshua was atMoses' side as God's appointed commander to lead the people into the Promised Land.

Look at the way Moses encouraged his young successor. Dt 3:21, 22 provide a classic biblicalformula for encouragement. Moses told Joshua, in effect: 'Look at all

that God has done for you in the past. There is nothing you will face in the future that He cannothandle, because He is the same God today.'

Then Moses turned from speaking with Joshua to speaking with the Lord. It's not hard toimagine the anguish in Moses' voice as he stood on the very doorstep of the land he had spentforty years trying to reach. He must have been hopeful that God would relent and allow him toenter Canaan.

The text indicates that Moses kept on asking God to change His mind. But God became angrywith Moses quite angry, according to the original language. He did allow Moses to go to the top ofa mountain called Pisgah from where he could view the Promised Land from a distance. But thatwas the end of the issue.

Even though Moses had to stay in the Transjordan, he still had an important work to do. Joshuawould need all the strength and courage he could muster for the task ahead of him.

God was ready to supply Joshua's need, but He also wanted to make sure that Israel's new leaderhad Moses's blessing. So Moses commissioned Joshua, signaling that Joshua was God's choice.

23 At that time I pleaded with the LORD:

1. Gill, “And I besought the Lord at that time,.... When he was told he should die, and Joshuashould succeed him; or when the two kings were slain, and their kingdoms conquered; this beingthe beginning, pledge, and earnest of what God had promised to do for the people of Israel;Moses was very desirous of living to see the work completed, and therefore sought the Lord by

prayer and supplication:

2. Our Daily Bread, “Deuteronomy 3:23-29Dying For Encouragement

In Deuteronomy 3 we read that Moses encouraged Joshua as he was about to assume leadershipof the Israelites. No doubt Joshua was filled with fear and a feeling of inadequacy to fill Moses'shoes. The Lord therefore told Moses to encourage Joshua.

All of us need a word of encouragement from time to time to spur us on when we are facing amajor new challenge. But we also need words of appreciation and commendation as we carry outour daily responsibilities, whether at home or at work.

When a corporate accountant committed suicide, an effort was made to find out why. Thecompany's books were examined, but no shortage was found. Nothing could be uncovered thatgave any clue as to why he took his life—that is, until a note was discovered. It simply said: "In30 years I have never had one word of encouragement. I'm fed up!"

Many people crave some small sign of approval. They need a word of recognition, a caring smile,a warm handshake, and an honest expression of appreciation for the good we see in them or intheir work.

Every day let's determine to encourage (not flatter) at least one person. Let's do our part to helpthose around us who are dying for encouragement. —Richard De Haan

It may seem insignificantTo say a word or two;But when we give encouragement,What wonders it can do! —K. De Haan

A word of encouragement can make the difference between giving up or going on.

24 “Sovereign LORD, you have begun to show to yourservant your greatness and your strong hand. For whatgod is there in heaven or on earth who can do the deedsand mighty works you do?

1. Gill, “O Lord God, thou hast begun to show thy servant thy greatness and thy mighty hand,....To give a specimen of the greatness of his power in subduing the two kings and their kingdoms,and delivering them up into the hands of the Israelites. Moses had seen instances of the mightypower of God in Egypt, at the Red sea, and in the wilderness; but this was the beginning of hispower, in vanquishing the Canaanites, and putting their land into the possession of the Israelites,as he had promised; of which the Amorites were a part, and a principal nation of them: and thusGod, when he begins a work of grace upon the soul of man, begins to show the exceedinggreatness of his power, and which is further exerted in carrying it on, and bringing it toperfection:

for what God is there in heaven or in earth that can do according to thy works, and according tothy might? here Moses speaks according to the notion of Heathens, who supposed there wereother gods in heaven and in earth besides the true God; and upon this supposition observes, letthere be as many as they will, or can be imagined, there is none of them like the Lord God ofIsrael for power and might; or are able to do such works as he has done, in nature, in the creationof all things out of nothing, in providence, in supporting what he has made, and in governing theworld; and in those amazing instances of his power, in bringing down judgments upon wickedmen, kings, and kingdoms; and in the deliverance of his own people from them, and putting themand their kingdoms into the possession of them; which were the wondrous works of might Moseshad in view, and a sense of which was impressed on his mind at this time.

2. Clarke, “Deu 3:24-25 - “The prayer of Moses recorded in these two verses, and his ownreflections on it, Deu_3:26, are very affecting. He had suffered much both in body and mind inbringing the people to the borders of the promised land; and it was natural enough for him towish to see them established in it, and to enjoy a portion of that inheritance himself, which heknew was a type of the heavenly country. But notwithstanding his very earnest prayer, and God’sespecial favor towards him, he was not permitted to go over Jordan! He had grieved the Spirit ofGod, and he passed a sentence against him of exclusion from the promised land. Yet he permittedhim to see it, and gave him the fullest assurances that the people whom he had brought out ofEgypt should possess it. Thus God may choose to deprive those of earthly possessions to whom heis nevertheless determined to give a heavenly inheritance.

25 Let me go over and see the good land beyond theJordan—that fine hill country and Lebanon.”

1. Gill, “I pray thee, let me go over and see the good land that is beyond Jordan,.... The land ofCanaan, the land flowing with milk and honey; a land which he describes as a most excellent one,Deu_8:7. To see this land, he was very desirous of going over the river Jordan, beyond which itlay with respect to the place where he now was:

that goodly mountain, and Lebanon; or, "that goodly mountain, even Lebanon"; which lay to the

north of the land of Canaan, and was famous for cedar and odoriferous trees. But if two distinctmountains are meant, the goodly mountain may design Mount Moriah, on which the temple wasafterwards built, and of which Moses might have a foresight; and some by Lebanon think that ismeant, which was built of the cedars of Lebanon, and therefore goes by that name, Zec_11:1 anda foreview of this made the mountain so precious to Moses, and desirable to be seen by him. Sothe Targum of Jonathan;"that goodly mountain in which is built the city of Jerusalem, andMount Lebanon, in which the Shechinah shall dwell''to which agrees the note of Aben Ezra, whointerprets the goodly mountain of Jerusalem, and Lebanon of the house of the sanctuary. In theSeptuagint it is called Antilibanus. Mount Libanus had its name not from frankincense growingupon it, as some have thought; for it does not appear that any did grow upon it, for that camefrom Seba in Arabia Felix; but from the whiteness of it, through the continual snows that were onit, just as the Alps have their name for the same reason; and so Jerom says (b) of Lebanon, thatthe snow never leaves from the tops of it, or is ever so overcome by the heat of the sun as whollyto melt; to the same purpose also Tacitus (c) says, and Mr. Maundrell (d), who was there in May,speaks of deep snow on it, and represents the cedars as standing in snow.

2. Chuck Smith, “Oh Moses, though he was a hundred and twenty years old he was ready for it."Lord, come on. Please let me go in. I've seen, Lord, you beginning to wipe out the enemies. Ohthis is exciting, Lord. I love this. And Lord I'd just love to see that land. I'd like to see themountains of Lebanon. I'd like to see this land that you promised. Lord, won't you let me go in?"And Moses here is praying, asking God to allow him to go in.Now, when they had come in the wilderness and were needing water, they had said to Moses,"Give us water to drink. We're perishing." Moses went in before the Lord and said, "Lord, thesepeople are ready to kill me, they want water." And God said, "Go out and speak to the rock andwater will come forth". The first time God said "smite the rock and water will come out." Thesecond time God said "speak to the rock". But Moses was angry with the people and he went outfrom before the Lord and he said, "Must I smite this rock again to give you water?" And he tookhis rod and he smote the rock and water came out. But God said, "Moses, come here son. Moses,you blew it. You did not properly represent me before those people.

Now Moses was God's representative and God wasn't angry with them but Moses was. AndMoses, as God's representative, represented God as being angry with them and he did notproperly represent God before the people. And God said, "Moses, that's a serious error andbecause you have not properly represented me before the people, you cannot go in to the land".

3. Jamison, “I pray thee, let me go over, and see the good land that is beyond Jordan, that goodlymountain, and Lebanon — The natural and very earnest wish of Moses to be allowed to cross theJordan was founded on the idea that the divine threatening might be conditional and revertible.“That goodly mountain” is supposed by Jewish writers to have pointed to the hill on which thetemple was to be built (Deu_12:5; Exo_15:2). But biblical scholars now, generally, render thewords - “that goodly mountain, even Lebanon,” and consider it to be mentioned as typifying thebeauty of Palestine, of which hills and mountains were so prominent a feature.

26 But because of you the LORD was angry with me andwould not listen to me. “That is enough,” the LORD said.“Do not speak to me anymore about this matter.

1. Gill, “But the Lord was wroth with me for your sakes,.... Not at this time, and for this prayer ofhis, but on account of he and Aaron not sanctifying him at the waters of Meribah; or of someexpressions of unbelief, and unadvised words, which dropped from his lips through theirprovocation of him; see Num_20:12.

and would not hear me; now, and grant the above request, having before declared that he andAaron should not bring the people of Israel into the land he had given them; and Moses with allhis entreaties could not prevail upon him to repeal the sentence:

and the Lord said unto me, let it suffice; that he had seen the conquest of the two kings, and thedelivery of their kingdoms into the hands of Israel; and that he had brought the people throughthe wilderness to the borders of the land of Canaan, and that he should have a distant sight of theland, as after directed:

speak no more unto me of this matter; intimating it would be in vain, and to no purpose, to solicitsuch a favour, since it would never be granted; it was a determined point, and he would neverrecede from it.

2. F. B. Meyer, “WE are to pray without ceasing; always praying, never fainting; asking, seeking,knocking. But there are some subjects concerning which God says, "Speak no more unto Me ofthis." In some cases these topics have to do with others, but more often with ourselves, as in thecase of the Apostle Paul (2Cor 12:9-note).It is an awful thing when God says of certain individuals, Ephraim is joined to idols, let himalone; and when the conviction is wrought within us that the sin unto death is being committed,concerning which even the Apostle John said, "I do not say that he should pray for it." Suchtimes come comparatively rarely; and so long as you feel able to pray for another, so long as nonegative has been spoken, you may be sure that God waits to be entreated, and that your prayerwill assuredly be answered.

But have you not realized at times that God has said about some earthly boon you werecraving?-'' Child, do not ask Me more, leave it with Me. I know what you want, and what is bestfor you. Seek first My kingdom, and all these things, literally or in their equivalent, shall beadded." It is well when we have been praying eagerly, to allow God's winnowing-fan to pass overour petitions, to winnow away all that is not in His mind to give; so that only those desires mayremain which His Spirit has indicted, and which He is therefore pledged to bestow. If He does notgive the exact thing you ask, He will give the Pisgah view and more grace. He will say to you, as toPaul, "My grace is sufficient for thee: for my strength is made perfect in weakness."

3. Clarke, “Let it suffice thee - רב לך rab lach, there is an abundance to thee - thou hast had

honor enough already, and may well dispense with going over Jordan. He surely has no reason tocomplain who is taken from earthly felicity to heavenly glory. In this act God showed to Mosesboth his goodness and severity.

4. Barnes, “The Lord was wroth with me for your sakes - Here, as in Deu_1:37; Deu_4:21; the sinof the people is stated to be the ground on which Moses’ prayer is denied. In Deu_32:51; and inNum_27:14; the transgression of Moses and Aaron themselves is assigned as the cause of theirpunishment. The reason why one side of the transaction is put forward in this place, and theother elsewhere, is evident. Here Moses is addressing the people, and mentions the punishment oftheir leaders as a most impressive warning to them, whose principal fault it was. In Deut. 32 andNum. 27, God is addressing Moses, and visits on him, as is fitting, not the sin of the people hut hisown.

27 Go up to the top of Pisgah and look west and north andsouth and east. Look at the land with your own eyes, sinceyou are not going to cross this Jordan.

1. Gill, “Get thee up into the top of Pisgah,.... Which was the highest eminence of Mount Nebo,and so a very proper place to take a prospect from; see Deu_32:49.

and lift up thine eyes westward, and northward, and southward, and eastward; to all the fourpoints of the heaven, and to all the four quarters and borders of the land of Canaan:

and behold it with thine eyes; even the land of Canaan, and particularly Lebanon, though it layto the north of it, that mountain he had such a desire to see. Moses, though old, his natural sightwas very strong, and not in the least dim; and it is not improbable that it might be more thanordinarily increased and assisted at this time:

for thou shall not go over this Jordan; into the land of Canaan; this affair, of not being suffered toenter there, Moses frequently takes notice of, no less than four or five times, it being what laynear his heart.

2. Moody Bible Institute, “One blot marred Moses’ record of leadership during the Exodus: hissin at Meribah. Suffering from lack of water, Israel complained: “Why did you bring us up out ofEgypt to this terrible place?” Moses and Aaron sought the Lord, and in reply He told them tospeak to a rock. Out of it would come enough water for everyone.In anger and frustration, however, Moses struck the rock twice with his staff, rather than obeyingthe Lord exactly. As a result of this disobedience, God judged him: “Because you did not trust inme enough to honor me as holy in the sight of the Israelites, you will not bring this communityinto the land I give them” (Num. 20:12; cf. Nu 27:12, 13, 14).

In today’s reading, Moses’ review of Israel’s history took a personal turn. Because of his sin, hewould be allowed only to gaze upon but not to enter the Promised Land. How agonizing it musthave been for him--all that waiting and wandering, the burdens of leadership, and then to bestopped just short of the goal. In God’s judgment, the people saw the necessity of obedience. Evena great leader like Moses was not above God’s law, and he suffered the consequences for hisdisobedience.

There was an additional warning here. When Moses said he’d sinned “because of you” (Dt 3:26),he wasn’t rationalizing, but recognizing that his sin had resulted in part from their sin ofgrumbling and complaining. They’d often been guilty of this, and he wanted them to see sin’sserious consequences. Actually, Israel’s entire history from Egypt to the present time had beenpounding home this very lesson (Dt 4:9). In this context, Moses urgently exhorted them to fullyobey God’s commands: “Follow them so that you may live” (Dt 4:1).

28 But commission Joshua, and encourage and strengthenhim, for he will lead this people across and will cause themto inherit the land that you will see.”

1. Gill, “But charge Joshua, and encourage him, and strengthen him,.... Charge him to take thecare of the children of Israel, to introduce them into the good land, and put them into thepossession of it; encourage him against all fear of his and their enemies, and strengthen him withpromises of the presence of God, and of his gracious help and assistance:

for he shall go over before this people; over the river Jordan, at the head of them, as their leaderand commander; a type of Christ, the leader and commander of his people, who as their Kinggoes forth at the head of them, and will introduce them all into his Father's kingdom and glory:

and he shall cause them to inherit the land which thou shalt see; and no more; not enter into, butJoshua should; and having conquered it, should divide it by lot for an inheritance to them, andtheir children after them; a type of Christ, in whom and by whom the saints obtain aninheritance by lot, Eph_1:11.

2. Moody Bible Institute, “One blot marred Moses’ record of leadership during the Exodus: hissin at Meribah. Suffering from lack of water, Israel complained: “Why did you bring us up out ofEgypt to this terrible place?” Moses and Aaron sought the Lord, and in reply He told them tospeak to a rock. Out of it would come enough water for everyone.In anger and frustration, however, Moses struck the rock twice with his staff, rather than obeyingthe Lord exactly. As a result of this disobedience, God judged him: “Because you did not trust inme enough to honor me as holy in the sight of the Israelites, you will not bring this communityinto the land I give them” (Num. 20:12; cf. Nu 27:12, 13, 14).

In today’s reading, Moses’ review of Israel’s history took a personal turn. Because of his sin, hewould be allowed only to gaze upon but not to enter the Promised Land. How agonizing it musthave been for him--all that waiting and wandering, the burdens of leadership, and then to bestopped just short of the goal. In God’s judgment, the people saw the necessity of obedience. Evena great leader like Moses was not above God’s law, and he suffered the consequences for hisdisobedience.

There was an additional warning here. When Moses said he’d sinned “because of you” (Dt 3:26),he wasn’t rationalizing, but recognizing that his sin had resulted in part from their sin ofgrumbling and complaining. They’d often been guilty of this, and he wanted them to see sin’sserious consequences. Actually, Israel’s entire history from Egypt to the present time had beenpounding home this very lesson (Dt 4:9). In this context, Moses urgently exhorted them to fullyobey God’s commands: “Follow them so that you may live” (Dt 4:1).

3. Clarke, “But charge Joshua, etc. - Give him authority in the sight of the people, let them seethat he has the same commission which I gave to thee. Encourage him; for he will meet withmany difficulties in the work to which he is called. And strengthen him - show him my unfailingpromises, and exhort him to put his trust in me alone; for he shall go over before this people, andshall cause them to inherit the land; of this let him rest perfectly assured.

29 So we stayed in the valley near Beth Peor.

1. Gill, “So we abode in the valley over against Bethpeor. In the plains of Moab, over against atemple built for Baalpeor upon a mountain, so called from that idol, or that idol from themountain; this is the valley where Moses was buried, Deu_34:6.

2. Barnes, “Beth-peor, i. e., the house of Peor, no doubt derived its name from a temple of theMoabite god Peor which was there situated. It was no doubt near to Mount Peor Num_23:28, andalso to the valley of the Jordan perhaps in the Wady Heshban.

3. Clarke, “Beth-peor - This was a city in the kingdom of Sihon king of the Amorites; and as ביתbeth signifies a house, the place probably had its name from a temple of the god Peor, who wasworshipped there. Peor was nearly the same among the Moabites that Priapus was among theRomans - the obscene god of an obscene people. This we have already seen.

It is very likely that what God speaks here, both concerning Moses and Joshua, was designed tobe typical of the procedure of his justice and grace in the salvation of man.

1. The land of Canaan was a type of the kingdom of heaven.

2. The law, which shows the holiness of God and the exceeding sinfulness of sin, could notbring the people to the possession of that kingdom.

3. Moses may probably be considered here as the emblem of that law by which is theknowledge of sin, but not redemption from it

4. Joshua, the same as Jesus, the name signifying a Savior, is appointed to bring the peopleinto the rest which God had provided for them; thus it is by Jesus Christ alone that the soulis saved - fitted for and brought into the possession of the heavenly inheritance, (seeJoh_1:17; Gal_2:16; Gal_3:12, Gal_3:13, Gal_3:24); for he is the end of the law - the greatscope and design of the law, for righteousness - for justification, to them that believe;Rom_10:4. Such a use as this every pious reader may make of the circumstances recordedhere, without the danger of pushing analogy or metaphor beyond their reasonable limits.