Online Resource Library
Commentary Index | Return to PrayerRequest.com | DownloadPulpit Commentary - Numbers 16:1 - 16:40
(Show All Books | Show All Chapters)
This Chapter Verse Commentaries:
VINDICATION OF THE AARONIC PRIESTHOOD.
Num_16:1
Now Korah … took men. åÇéÄÌ÷ÇÌç ÷ÉøÇç . The word "took" stands alone at the head of the sentence in the singular number. This does not by itself confine its reference to Korah, because it may be taken as repeated after each of the other names; at the same time, the construction suggests that in its original form Korah alone was mentioned, and that the other names were afterwards added in order to include them in the same statement. The ellipsis after "took" (if it be one) may be filled up by "men," as in the A.V. and in most versions, or by "counsel," as in the Jerusalem Targum. The Septuagint has in place of éÄ÷ÇÌç ἐλάλησε , representing apparently a different reading. Some commentators regard it as an anacoluthon for "took two hundred and fifty men … and rose up with them;" others, again, treat the "took" as a pleonasm, as in 2Sa_18:18 and elsewhere; but the change of number from åÇéÄÌ÷ÇÌç to åÇéÈÌ÷åÌèåÌ makes it difficult. It seems best to say that the construction is broken and cannot be satisfactorily explained. Indeed there can be no question that the whole narrative, like the construction of the opening verses, is rely confused, and leaves on the mind the impression that it has been altered, not very skillfully, from its original form. The two parts of the tragedy, that concerning the company of Korah, and that concerning the Reubenites, although mingled in the narrative, do not adjust themselves in the mind, and the general effect is obscure. It is sufficient to point out here that no one can certainly tell what became of the ringleader himself, who was obviously the head and front of the whole business. Some are strenuously of opinion that he was swallowed up alive, others as strenuously that he was consumed with fire; but the simple fact is that his death is not recorded in this chapter at all, although he is assumed to have perished. The obscurity which hangs over this passage cannot be traced to any certain cause; the discrepancies and contradictions which have been discovered in it are clue to mistake or misrepresentation; nor can any evil motive be plausibly assigned for the interpolation (if it be such) of that part of the story which concerns the Reubenites. If, for some reason unknown to us, an original narrative of Korah's rebellion was enlarged so as to include the simultaneous mutiny of the Reubenites and their fate; and if, further, that enlargement was so unskillfully made as to leave considerable confusion in the narrative, wherein does that affect either its truth or its inspiration? The supernatural influence which watched over the production of the sacred narrative certainly did not interfere with any of those natural causes which affected its composition, its style, its clearness or obscurity. Korah, the son of Izhar, the son of Kohath, the son of Levi. On the genealogy of the Levites see Exo_6:16-22, and above on Num_3:17-19. It is generally supposed that some generations are passed over in these genealogies. Korah belonged to the same Kohathite sub-tribe as Moses and Aaron, and was related to them by some sort of cousinship; his father (or ancestor) Izhar was the younger brother of Amram and the elder brother of Uzziel, whose descendant Elizaphan had been made chief of the Kohathites. Dathan and Abiram, the sons of Eliab. Eliab himself was apparently the only son of Pallu, the second son of Reuben (Num_26:5, Num_26:8). If the word "son" is to be literally understood in all these cases, then Korah, Dathan, and Abiram would all be great-great-grandsons of Jacob himself. On, the son of Peleth. It is one of the strange obscurities of this narrative that On, who appears here as a ringleader, is never mentioned again either in this chapter or elsewhere. Sons of Reuben. Reubenites. The encampment of their tribe was on the south side of the tabernacle in the outer line (Num_2:10), while that of the Kohathites was on the same side in the inner line. Thus they were to some extent neighbours; but see below on Num_3:24.
Num_16:2
And they rose up before Moses. It is suggested that the Reubenites were aggrieved because their father had been deprived of his birthright in favour of Judah, and that Korah was aggrieved because the Uzzielites had been preferred in the person of Elizaphan to the Izharites (Num_3:30). These accusations have nothing whatever in the narrative to support them, and are suspicious because they are so easy and so sure to be made in such cases. In all ecclesiastical history the true reformer, as well as the heretic and the demagogue, has always been charged with being actuated by motives of disappointed ambition. Without these gratuitous suppositions there was quite enough to excite the anger and opposition of such discontented and insubordinate minds as are to be found in every community. With certain of the children of Israel. These were gathered front the tribes at large, as implied in the statement that Zelophehad a Manassite was not amongst them (Num_27:8). Famous in the congregation. Literally, "called men of the congregation." Septuagint, σύγκλητοι βουλῆς , representatives of the host in the great council (cf. Num_1:16; Num_26:9).
Num_16:3
They gathered themselves together against Moses and against Aaron. They had risen up before Moses, i.e; made a tumult in his presence, because they regarded him (and rightly) as the actual ruler of Israel in religious as well as in secular matters. At the same time, the attack of Korah and his company (with whom alone the narrative is really concerned here) was directed especially against the ecclesiastical rule which Moses exercised through his brother Aaron. Ye take too much upon you. øÇáÎìÈëÆí , "much for you," probably in the sense of "enough for you" (cf. the use of øÇá in Gen_45:28), i.e; you have enjoyed power long enough; so the Targum Palestine. It may, however, be taken with the following ëÄÌé as meaning, "let it suffice you that all the congregation," &c.; and so the Septuagint, ἐχέτω ὑμῖν ὅτι , κ . τ . λ . The Targum of Onkelos renders it in the same sense as the A.V. All the congregation are holy, every one of them. This was perfectly true, m a sense. There was a sanctity which pertained to Israel as a nation, in which all its members shared as distinguished from the nations around (Exo_19:6; Le Exo_20:26); there was a priesthood which was inherent in all the sons of Israel, older and more indelible than that which was conferred on Aaron's line—a priesthood which, apart from special restrictions, or in exceptional circumstances, might and did assert itself in priestly acts (Exo_24:5, and compare the cases of Samuel, Elijah, and others who offered sacrifice during the failure of the appointed priesthood). It Moses had taken the power to himself, or it he had (as they doubtless supposed) restricted active priestly functions to Aaron because he was his brother, and wholly under his influence, their contention would have been quite right. They erred, as most violent men do, not because they asserted what was false, but because they took for granted that the truth which they asserted was really inconsistent with the claims which they assailed. The congregation were all holy; the sons of Israel were all priests; that was true—but it was also true that by Divine command Israel could only exercise his corporate priesthood outwardly through the one family which God had set apart for that purpose. The same God who has lodged in the body certain faculties and powers for the benefit of the body, has decreed that those faculties and powers can only be exercised through certain determinate organs, the very specialization of which is both condition and result of a high organization. The congregation of the Lord. There are two words for congregation in this verse: ÷ÈäÈì here, and òÅãÈä before. The former seems to be used in the more solemn sense, but they are for the most part indistinguishable, and certainly cannot be assigned to different authors.
Num_16:5
He spake unto Korah. That Korah was the mainspring of the conspiracy is evident (cf. Num_16:22; Num_27:3; Jud Num_1:11). It may well be that his position as a prominent Levite and a relation of Moses gave him great influence with men of other tribes, and earned him a great name for disinterestedness and liberality in advocating the rights of all Israel, and in denouncing the exclusive claims and privileges by which he himself (as a Levite) was benefited. It is often assumed that Korah was secretly aiming at the high-priesthood, but of this, again, there is not a shadow of proof; his error was great enough, and his punishment sore enough, without casting upon him these unfounded accusations. It would be more in accordance with human nature if we supposed that Korah was in his way sincere; that he had really convinced himself, by dint of trying to convince others, that Moses and Aaron were usurpers; that he began his agitation without thought of advantage of himself; that, having gained a considerable following and much popular applause, the pride of leadership and the excitement of conflict led him on to the last extremity. The Lord will show who are his. àÆúÎàÇùÆÑøÎìåÌ , the meaning of which is defined by the following words, "whom he hath chosen." Moses refers the matter to the direct decision of the Lord; as that decision had originated the separate position of Aaron, that should also vindicate it.
Num_16:6
Take you censers. îÇçÀúÌåÉú . Septuagint, πυρεῖα . Translated "fire-pails" in Exo_27:3. From the number required, they must have been either household utensils used for carrying fire, or else they must have been made in some simple fashion for the occasion. The offering of incense was proposed by Moses as a test because it was a typically priestly function, to which the gravest importance was attached (Le Exo_10:1; Exo_16:12, Exo_16:13), and because it was so very simply executed.
Num_16:7
Ye take too much upon you, ye sons of Levi. øÇáÎìÈëÆí , as in Num_16:3. The exact meaning of this tu quoque is not apparent. Perhaps he would say that if he and Aaron were usurpers, the whole tribe of Levi were usurpers too.
Num_16:8
Hear, I pray you, ye sons of Levi. No son of Levi is mentioned in the narrative except Korah, and this address itself passes into the second person singular (Num_16:10, Num_16:11), as though Korah alone were personally guilty. It is possible enough that behind him was a considerable body of public opinion among the Levites more or less decidedly supporting him; but there is no need to impute any general disloyalty to them.
Num_16:9
Seemeth it a small thing to you. Rather, "is it too little for you." çÇîÀòÇè îÄëÆÌí .
Num_16:11
For which cause both thou and all thy company are gathered together. It does not follow that Korah was seeking an exclusive dignity for himself; or for his tribe. His "company" apparently included representative men from all the tribes, or at least from many (see on Num_16:2). They were seeking the priesthood because they affirmed it to be the common possession of all Israelites. Against the Lord. It was in his name that they appeared, and to some extent no doubt sincerely; but since they appeared to dispute an ordinance actually and historically made by God himself, it was indeed against him that they were gathered. And what is Aaron, that ye murmur against him? The construction is broken, as so often when we have the ipsissima verba of Moses, whose meekness did not enable him to speak calmly under provocation. The sentence runs, "For which cause thou and all thy company who arc gathered against the Lord,—and Aaron, who is he, that ye murmur against him?" It was easy to represent the position of Aaron in an invidious light, as though they were assailing some personal sacerdotal pretensions; but in truth he was only a poor servant of God doing what he was bid.
Num_16:12
And Moses sent to call Dathan and Abiram. The part really taken by these men in the agitation is very obscure. They were not of the two hundred and fifty, nor were they with them when they gathered together against Moses and Aaron—perhaps because they took no interest in ecclesiastical matters, and only resented the secular domination of Moses. Neither can we tell why Moses sent for them at this juncture, unless he suspected them of being in league with Korah (see below on Num_16:24). We will not come up, i.e; to the tabernacle, as being spiritually the culminating point of the camp.
Num_16:13
Is it a small thing. Rather, "is it too little," as in Num_16:9. A land that floweth with milk and honey. A description applying by right to the land of promise (Exo_3:8; Num_13:27), which they in their studied insolence applied to Egypt. Except thou make thyself altogether a prince over us. Literally, "that ( ëÄÌé ) thou altogether lord it over us." The expression is strengthened in the original by the reduplication of the verb in the inf. abs; âÇÌíÎäÄùÀÒúÀÌøÆø
Num_16:14
Moreover thou hast not brought us. According to the promises (they meant to say) by which he had induced them to leave their comfortable homes in Egypt (Exo_4:30, Exo_4:31). Wilt thou put out the eyes of these men? i.e; wilt thou blind them to the utter failure of thy plans and promises? wilt thou throw dust in their eyes?
Num_16:15
And Moses was very wroth. The bitter taunts of the Reubenites had just enough semblance of truth in them to make them very hard to bear, and especially the imputation of low personal ambition; but it is impossible to say that Moses did not err through anger. Respect not thou their offering. Cf. Gen_4:4. It is not quite clear what offering Moses meant, since they do not seem to have wished to offer incense. Probably it was equivalent to saying, Do not thou accept them when they approach thee; for such approach was always by sacrifice (cf. Psa_109:7). I have not taken one ass from them. Cf. 1Sa_12:3. The ass was the least valuable of the ordinary live stock of those days (cf. Exo_20:17). The Septuagint has here οὐκ ἐπιθύμημα οὐδενὸς αὐτῶν εἴληφα , which is apparently an intentional paraphrase with a reference to the tenth commandment ( οὐκ ἐπιθυμήσεις κ . τ . λ .). Neither have I hurt one of them. As absolute ruler he might have made himself very burdensome to all, and very terrible to his personal enemies. Compare Samuel's description of the Eastern autocrat (1Sa_8:11-17).
Num_16:16
And Moses said unto Korah. After the interchange of messages with the Reubenites, Moses repeats his injunctions to Korah to be ready on the morrow to put his claims to the test, adding that Aaron too should be there, that the Lord might judge between them.
Num_16:18
Stood in the door of the tabernacle, i.e; at the door of the court, so that they were visible from the space outside.
Num_16:19
And Korah gathered all the congregation against them. It does not follow that the whole congregation was actively or deliberately on Korah's side. But a movement ostensibly in behalf of the many as against the few is sure to enlist a general, if not a deep, sympathy; nor is it to be supposed that Moses and Aaron could escape a large amount of unpopularity under the grievous circumstances of the time. The thoughtless multitude would have hailed their downfall with real though short-lived satisfaction. The glory of the Lord appeared. As before (Num_14:10), filling the tabernacle probably, and flashing out before the eyes of all
Num_16:21
That I may consume them in a moment. Literally, "and I will consume them." The same thing must be said of this as of Num_14:11, Num_14:12.
Num_16:22
O God, the God of the spirits of all flesh. àÅì àÁìÉçÅé äÈøåÌçÉú ìÀêÈÎáÈÌùÈÒø . The ruach is the spirit of life which the Creator has imparted unto perishable flesh, and made it live. In some sense it belongs to beasts as well as to men (Ecc_3:19, Ecc_3:21); but in the common use of the word men only are thought of, as having received it by a special communication of a higher order (Gen_2:7; 1Co_15:45). Moses, therefore, really appeals to God, as the Author and Giver of that imperishable life-principle which is lodged in the mortal flesh of all men, not to destroy the works of his own hands, the creatures made in his own image. Here we have in its germ that idea of the universal fatherhood of God which remained undeveloped in Jewish thought until Judaism itself expanded into Christianity (cf. Isa_63:16; Isa_64:8, Isa_64:9; Act_17:26, Act_17:29). Shall one man sin. Rather, "the one man ( äÈàÄéùÑ ) hath sinned," i.e; Korah, who had misled all the rest.
Num_16:23
The Lord spake unto Moses. No direct answer was apparently vouchsafed to the remonstrance of Moses and Aaron, but it was tacitly allowed.
Num_16:24
Get you up from about the tabernacle of Korah, Dathan, and Abiram. The word "tabernacle" (mishcan) is the same word which is so translated in Num_16:9, but not the same which is used in Num_16:18,Num_16:19; it properly signifies "dwelling-place." It is certainly the natural conclusion, from the use of this expression here and in Num_16:27, that this mishcan was something different from the "tents" ( àÈäÈìÅé ) mentioned in Num_16:26, Num_16:27, and was some habitation common to the three rebels (see below on Num_16:31). The Septuagint, in order to avoid the difficulty, omits the names of Dathan and Abiram, and has only ἀπὸ τῆς συναγωγῆς Κορέ .
Num_16:26
Touch nothing of theirs. Because they, and all that belonged to them, were anathema, devoted to destruction. Compare the case of Achan (Jos_7:1).
Num_16:27
And Dathan and Abiram … stood in the door of their tents. To see what Moses would do. Nothing is said of Korah.
Num_16:28
Nor I have not done them of mine own mind. Literally, "that not of my heart", ëÄÌéÎìÉà îÄìÄÌáÌé . Septuagint, ὅτι οὐκ ἀπ ἐμαυτου
Num_16:29
If they be visited after the visitation of all men. ôÈ÷Çã is of somewhat doubtful meaning; it seems to answer to the ἐπίσκεψις and ἐπισκοπὴ of the Septuagint,, and to our "oversight," or "visitation"
, which is regarded, according to the general instinct of mankind, as being "under the earth" (cf. Philip. Num_2:10 b; Rev_5:13). They were to go down "quick" into Sheol, because they were still alive at the moment that they were lost to sight for ever.
Num_16:31
The ground clave asunder that was under them. As it sometimes does during an earthquake. In this case, however, the event was predicted, and wholly supernatural. The sequence of the narrative would lead us to suppose that the earth opened beneath the tents of Dathan and Abiram in the camp of Reuben. It is difficult to think of the gulf as extending so far as to involve the tent of Korah in the Kohathite lines in the same destruction, while there is nothing to suggest the idea that the earth opened in more than one place. It is true that the camps of the Reubenites and of the Kohathites were more or less contiguous; but when it is remembered that there were 46,500 adult males in the former, and 8600 males in the latter, and that a broad space must have been left between the two lines of encampment, it is obviously improbable that Korah's tent was in a practical sense "near" to those of Dathan and Abiram, unless indeed he had purposely removed it in order to be under the protection of his Reubenite partisans. It is very observable that not a word is said here as to the fate of Korah himself. It is implied in Num_16:40 that he had perished, and it is apparently asserted in Num_26:10 that he was swallowed up with Dathan and Abiram (see the note there). On the other hand, Deu_11:6; Psa_106:17 speak of the engulfing of the other two without any mention of Korah himself sharing their fate; and while "all the men that appertained unto Korah" perished, his own sons did not (Num_26:11). On these grounds it is held by most commentators that Korah died by fire among those who offered incense (Psa_106:35). This, however, is untenable, because "the two hundred and fifty men who offered incense" are distinctly mentioned as having been his partisans (Psa_106:2), and are always counted exclusive of Korah himself. On the whole, while it is certain that the narrative is very obscure, and the question very doubtful, it seems most agreeable to all the testimonies of Holy Scripture to conclude—
1. That Korah had left his own place, and had some sort of dwelling (mischan) either in common with Dathan and Abiram, or hard by their tents.
2. That the earth opened and swallowed up the mishcan, of Korah, and the tents of Dathan and Abiram.
3. That Korah's men (see next verse) and their property were swallowed up with his mishcan, and (as far as we can tell) Korah himself also. If this be correct, then the much disputed heading of the chapter in the A.V. will be right after all.
Num_16:32
And their houses, i.e; their families, as in Num_18:13. And all the men that appertained unto Korah. Literally, "all the men who to Korah." Whether it means his dependants, or his special partisans, is uncertain: Perhaps some had clung to his fortunes in blind confidence when the rest gat up from his mishcan.
Num_16:34
At the cry of them. ìÀ÷ÉìÈí , "at the noise of them;" at the mingled sound of their shrieks and of the natural convulsion amidst which they disappeared.
Num_16:35
There came out a fire from the Lord. The fire probably flashed out from the sanctuary with the destructive force of lightning. The two hundred and fifty men. These had remained swinging their censers before the gate of the tabernacle while Moses and (presumably) Korah himself had gone to the camp of Reuben.
Num_16:37
Speak unto Eleazar. This is the first time that any special duty is assigned to Eleazar, who was destined to succeed to the high-priesthood. We may suppose that he was sent instead of his father because the duty of gathering up the censers could hardly have been carried out without incurring legal defilement by contact with the dead. Out of the burning. Or, "out of the burnt." Septuagint, ἐκ μέσου τῶν κατακεκαυμένων . From amongst the charred and smouldering corpses. Scatter thou the fire yonder; for they are hallowed. The censers had been made holy even by that sacrilegious dedication, and must never revert to any common uses; for the same reason the live coals which still remained in them were to be emptied out in a separate place.
Num_16:38
These sinners against their own souls, áÀÌðÇôÀùÉÑúÈí , "against their own lives." The thought is not that they had ruined their souls, but that they had forfeited their lives. The Pentateuch does not contemplate any consequences of sin beyond physical death. The same phrase occurs in Pro_20:2. For a covering of the altar. The altar of burnt incense. The censers were no doubt brazen pans, and when beaten out would form plates which could be affixed to the boards of which the frame of the altar was composed.
Num_16:40
That he be not as Korah. åÀìÉàÎéÄçÀéÆç . That he do not meet with the same fate as Korah.
I. The first position which we can take up with authority and certainty is the positive position that THE PRIESTHOOD OF AARON AND HIS SONS WAS THE OLD TESTAMENT TYPE AND SHADOW OF THE PRIESTHOOD OF CHRIST CONFERRED UPON HIM IN HIS HUMAN NATURE AS THE SON OF MAN. This is argued and proved with many illustrations by the author of the Epistle to the Hebrews (see especially Num_5:4, Num_5:5; Num_7:11-28; Num_8:1-4; Num_10:11-14, Num_10:21). The elaborate comparison of the two priesthoods, the old and the new, which was also infinitely older,—and especially the assertion that the Levitical priests were many only because death deposed them from office (Num_7:23), whilst Christ abideth for ever,—forbid us to regard any other priesthood than that of our Lord as the Christian analogue of the Jewish priesthood. As far as the type went Aaron lived on in all his priestly race, just as he had lived before in his chosen ancestor Abraham (Heb_7:10): there was but one Jewish high-priest, and unto him corresponds in the kingdom of heaven Jesus and Jesus alone. Herein all will be substantially agreed who loyally accept the testimony of Scripture, and herein (if it be clearly and devoutly held) is the real heart of the matter, and the sufficient safeguard against superstition.
II. The second position which we can take up on purely Scriptural grounds, and which is not fairly assailable, is the negative position THAT NO ARGUMENT AGAINST MINISTERIAL OR SACERDOTAL ASSUMPTIONS OR CLAIMS IS VALID WHICH IS BASED UPON THE HOLINESS AND PRIESTLY CHARACTER OF ALL THE FAITHFUL. It is perfectly clear that Korah and his company had both Scripture and fact on their side when they said that all the congregation were holy and all were priests. They erred in taking for granted that the priesthood of all Israelites was really inconsistent with the special priesthood of Aaron. As things were, it is certain that the universal priesthood of Israel could best express itself, best translate itself into worship, through the ministerial acts of Aaron and his sons. A spiritually-minded Jew, who recognized most deeply his own priestly calling in Israel, would most devoutly give thanks for the separation of the tribe of Levi and family of Aaron, because he would feel that no one benefited so much by that separation as himself; far from standing between him and the God of Israel, it enabled him to draw nigh to God in a multitude of ways otherwise impossible. He would indeed be able to argue from the histories of Gideon, of Samuel, of Elijah, and of others of the chosen race, that the priesthood of the ordinary Israelite, although usually dormant as to outward sacerdotal functions, was always capable of being called into play by Divine permission under stress of circumstances, and he would be prepared to understand the significance of such a passage as Rev_7:5-8, in which Levi takes his place again (and not at all a foremost place) among the tribes, the Holy Ghost thus signifying that in the world to come all such distinctions will be merged for ever in the common priesthood of the saved. But in the mean time there was nothing antagonistic, either in doctrine or in practice, between the truth which Korah asserted and that other truth which Korah assailed: the priesthood of the many was helped, not hindered, by the special priesthood of the few. It is therefore impossible honestly to use such texts as 1Pe_2:9; Rev_1:6, against the doctrine of a special Christian priesthood, because they only assert of Christians what the texts relied upon by Korah asserted of the Jews.
III. Abandoning the false line of argument just mentioned, we may yet so far develop the first position taken up as to maintain with confidence, THAT NO PRIESTHOOD CAN HAVE ANY EXISTENCE IN THE CHURCH OF CHRIST OTHER THAN THAT OF OUR LORD HIMSELF. This is made evident, not only by the exclusive way in which his priesthood is dwelt upon in the New Testament, but (what concerns us more in this place) by the whole analogy of the Old. Aaron alone had the priesthood, and the extreme malediction of God lighted upon all, even of the separated tribe, who dared to meddle with it; but Aaron was certainly the type of Christ Himself. Any priesthood which should claim to have any independent existence, even if it professed to draw its authority from Divine appointment, would be ipso facto in direct antagonism to the solitary prerogative of Jesus Christ. Hence it follows that the upholders, not the impugners, of such a priesthood would be "in the gainsaying of Korah." It follows also that there can be no direct analogy drawn between those who rose up against Moses and Aaron, and those who rise up against any earthly ministry; it will be shown that a true resemblance may be traced under certain conditions.
IV. Admitting these principles, which ought not to be controverted, we may bring the question to a practical issue as follows:—While there cannot be set over us any other priesthood than the only, immutable, and incommunicable priesthood of the Messiah, yet there is nothing in Holy Scripture to negative a priori the idea THAT OUR LORD (being withdrawn from sight and sense) MAY CHOOSE TO PERFORM PRIESTLY FUNCTIONS UPON EARTH VISIBLY AND AUDIBLY BY THE HAND AND MOUTH OF CHOSEN MEN; nor is there anything to negative a priori the further contention that those men were and are set apart in some special and exclusive way. Whether this be so is a matter of fact which must be decided upon the testimony, fairly and conscientiously weighed, of Scripture and of history. It depends upon the two historical questions.
1. Whether our Lord constituted the apostles his representatives for any priestly functions.
2. Whether the apostles transmitted such representation to others after them. In any case our Lord is the only priest, or rather has the only priesthood, although upon one view of the ease he will execute some offices of his priesthood by means of visible human agents, in whom and through whom he himself speaks and acts.
Without, therefore, entering upon any argument, we can safely conclude as to the Christian application of this passage.
1. That it must be directly referred to the everlasting priesthood of Christ, and to assaults upon it, or infringements of it.
2. That it may be in a secondary sense referred to a visible Christian priesthood, and to assaults upon it, on the supposition that such priesthood is in fact and in truth only the priesthood of Christ ministered in time and space by his appointment.
In point of fact there are many obvious and many subtle resemblances between the gainsaying of Korah and the popular contention against a Christian priesthood, or even against any Christian ministry, which no thoughtful student of Scripture can overlook, In the homiletics) however, which follow these are left to speak for themselves, and the deeper line of application will be followed. Consider, therefore—
I. THAT KORAH ON ONE SIDE, DATHAN AND ABIRAM ON THE OTHER, HAD HARDLY ANYTHING IN COMMON EXCEPT DISLIKE TO THE RULE OF MOSES, THE MEDIATOR OF ISRAEL AND KING IN JESHURUN (Deu_33:5). His dislike was ecclesiastical, theirs was political; but this common dislike made them allies, and gave them a "tabernacle" in common (verse 27). Even so amongst the many who say, "We will not have this man to reign over us" (Luk_19:14), there are to be found the most various dispositions, and the most distinct causes of complaint. As in the days of his earthly ministry, so now the opposition to him and to his sole governance is made up of the most heterogeneous, and at other times dissociate, elements.
II. THAT KORAH WAS HIMSELF A LEVITE OF SOME DISTINCTION, AND WAS THE SOUL OF THE CONSPIRACY. Even so it is hardly possible to find in history any grave assault upon the work or doctrine of Christ which has not been inspired by some one whose ecclesiastical position has given him both aptness and influence for this evil.
III. THAT KORAH REPRESENTED MOSES AND AARON IN AN INVIDIOUS LIGHT, AS MEN WHO KEPT THE PEOPLE IN SPIRITUAL SUBJECTION, AND DENIED TO THEM THEIR COMMON RIGHTS AS CHILDREN OF ISRAEL. Even so the constant clamour of unbelief is that Christianity is a system devised in the interests of tyranny and obscurantism in order to keep men in moral slavery, and to rob them of their freedom of thought, and to fetter their freedom of action.
IV. THAT KORAH ASSERTED TRUE FACTS AND APPEALED TO TRUE PRINCIPLES IN OPPOSITION TO WHAT HAD BEEN DIVINELY APPOINTED, AND WAS TO BE DIVINELY VINDICATED. Even so do men continually bring against the Truth himself facts which are undeniable, and principles which must be admitted. Herein is the real danger when war upon the Truth is waged with half-truths plausibly paraded as whole, with truths on one side confidently assumed to be fatal to the complemental truths on the other side. The liberty, e.g; of private judgment is arrayed against the authority of inspiration; the universal fatherhood of God against any distinction of the children of God, or necessity for the mediation of Christ; the fact that we are all members of one body against any mutual subordination or distribution of functions amongst those members.
V. THAT KORAH WAS PROBABLY SINCERE IN SO FAR AS HE HAD PERSUADED HIMSELF THAT HE WAS RIGHT, otherwise he would hardly have ventured upon the fatal test. Even so the leaders of opposition to Christ are commonly sincere; only vulgar intolerance brands them off-hand with hypocrisy or self-seeking. And this is their power, for men are led by personal regard and trust much more than by any ability to judge between rival systems. The only way to meet the sincerity and zeal of error is by showing a more transparent sincerity and a more ardent zeal on the side of truth (2Co_6:3-10; 1Ti_4:12-16; Tit_2:10).
VI. THAT WHEN MOSES HEARD THE INDICTMENT AGAINST HIMSELF AND AARON HE COULD BUT REFER IT TO THE DECISION OF THE LORD. The people were either actively or passively on the side of Korah, and argument had been unavailing. Even so when Christianity at large, or any system which we believe to be an integral part of Christianity, is assailed with popular and plausible arguments, there is really nothing to be done but to refer it to the arbitrament of God himself. Arguments convince only those that are convinced; clamours only intensify prejudice; mutual accusations only repel—Moses himself effected nothing by the angry words into which he was betrayed. And the arbitrament of God is unequivocally declared by our Lord to be the practical outcome of our religion in our lives (Mat_7:15, Mat_7:20; Joh_13:35). That the test is not capable of easy or of immediate application, that it has to be applied broadly, and with many allowances for disturbing causes, is true; but yet it is the test, and the only test, to which our Lord calls us. It is the test out of which Aaron, with all the weight of popular opinion against him, will ultimately come triumphant; in which Korah, with all his sincerity and plausibility, will come to nothing. And note that while religious questions must be referred to the arbitrament of God, and that arbitrament is not always distinct or immediate in this world, there is a further decision which will be absolutely certain and conclusive. "Even tomorrow the Lord will show who are his," "for the day shall declare it" (1Co_3:13), and "it shall be revealed by fire," as it was with Korah's company. Woe unto them who cannot abide, whether personally or as to their work, the test of fire. Our God is still, as then, a consuming fire (Heb_12:29), and that fire burns and will burn against all falsity of teaching, as well as all unholiness of living (1Co_3:15; Heb_12:14). And note again that "even him whom he hath chosen will he cause to come near unto him;" for although the election be not arbitrary, yet it is the election of grace, and not the personal worth or aptitude or desire, that does place any, or will place any hereafter, near unto God.
VII. THAT THE AMBITION OF KORAH WAS THE MORE TO BE BLAMED BECAUSE HE WAS HIMSELF A LEVITE, AND INTRUSTED WITH A SPECIAL MINISTRY IN HOLY THINGS. Even so is ambition or envy especially evil in a Christian man, forasmuch as he has an "unction" and an office in the body of Christ to which he cannot with all his zeal do justice, and which if faithfully used will bring him the highest possible reward (cf. Luk_22:26; 1Co_12:16, 1Co_12:22; 1Pe_2:5; 1Jn_2:20, 1Jn_2:27; Rev_3:21; Rev_7:14, sq.).
VIII. THAT THE PARTICULAR OFFENCE OF KORAH AND HIS COMPANY WAS THEIR DARING TO OFFER INCENSE, WHICH AARON ALONE MIGHT DO, The incense seems to have signified not simply "prayer," but rather the intercessory and prevailing prayer of the great High Priest and Mediator. Thus the "much incense" in Rev_8:3, Rev_8:4, which is undoubtedly the intercession of Christ, is added to and rises with the prayers of all saints. Thus then the special sin reprobated in Korah is any interference with the mediatorial office of Christ, whether by endeavouring to draw near to God through other mediators, or without any mediator at all (cf. Joh_14:6; Gal_1:8; 1Jn_2:1).
IX. THAT THE COMPANY OF KORAH (WHATEVER BECAME OF HIMSELF) DIED BY FIRE, THE ELEMENT IN WHICH THEY SINNED. Even so he that presumptuously meddles with holy things, not being holy himself, shall perish by that very nearness which he rashly courted. The hand that is really and entirely wet can be plunged into molten metal without injury, and so he who is covered with the robe of righteousness may be a ministering servant of the consuming Fire, and live; but how great is the risk if the call be not clear.
X. THAT THESE MEN WERE "SINNERS AGAINST THEIR OWN LIVES" IN TRUTH, ALTHOUGH THEY ONLY SEEMED TO BE VINDICATING THEIR JUST RIGHTS AGAINST USURPERS. Even so is every one that seeks his supposed rights not in the spirit of meekness and of personal self-abnegation, but in a spirit of pride, contradiction, and vain-glory. To contend for oneself—albeit sometimes necessary—is of all things most dangerous, lest even in gaining our cause we lose our souls (cf. Mat_23:12; 1Co_13:5; Php_2:5-7).
XI. THAT THEIR CENSERS WERE HALLOWED EVEN BY AN UNLAWFUL RELIGIOUS USE. Even so there is a kind of sanctity which attaches to every religious effort, however much it may be stained with pride or vitiated by error, and whatever ill results it may lead to, if it be made with sincerity. No such effort can be ignored as though it had not been made, nor cast out as wholly evil because not rightly made. Nothing which is done in the sacred name of religion (saving sheer hypocrisy) ought to be despised or neglected.
XII. THAT THE RESCUED CENSERS BECAME AN ADDITIONAL STRENGTH AND ORNAMENT TO THE ALTAR, AND A WARNING TO ALL GENERATIONS. Even so all assaults upon the faith and discipline of Christ are over-ruled for good, at the same time adding strength to some weak or neglected side of religion, and furnishing a warning against the mistakes and faults which misled their authors (cf. 1Co_11:19).
Consider again, with respect to the Reubenites—
I. THAT THEY WERE ANGRY WITH MOSES FOR WHAT WAS DUE TO THEIR OWN FAULT AND THE FAULT OF THE CONGREGATION, If they had not disobeyed they would have been in their own land by this time. Even so men are angry and impatient with the rule of Christ because it has not brought them peace or happiness, whereas this is wholly due to their own unfaithfulness. And so again men assail Christianity for not having reformed the world and abolished all evils, whereas they themselves will not submit to the easy yoke and light burden of Christ.
II. THAT THEY FALSELY AND WICKEDLY SPAKE OF EGYPT IN TERMS ONLY APPLICABLE TO CANAAN. Even so do the enemies of Christ speak of a state of nature, and of the life of the natural man, unvexed by fear of hell or hope of heaven, as if that had been true happiness and peace, whereas they know that it is sheer misery and slavery (Rom_1:28-32 : Rom_6:20, Rom_6:21; Eph_2:2, Eph_2:3).
III. THAT THEY CHARGED MOSES WITH AMBITION AND SELF-SEEKING, AND WITH THROWING DUST IN THE EYES OF THE PEOPLE. Even so is Christianity commonly accounted (or at least described) by its open and more vulgar enemies as mere obscurantism intended to keep the people in darkness, and to make them an easy prey to designing men for power and profit (cf. 2Co_11:12, 2Co_11:20; 2Co_12:16, &c.).
IV. THAT DATHAN AND ABIRAM, BEING OBDURATE, WERE SWALLOWED UP BY THE EARTH, because it was with their earthly lot that they were angry, and with their earthly ruler that they contended. Even so they that are of the earth earthy shall perish with the perishing world; it is their punishment that they are "swallowed up" in gross material cares or pleasures, and have no lot nor part in the upper air of spiritual life (1Co_15:48; Php_3:19, and compare the use of "the earth" in the Apoc; as in chapter 7:1; 8:13).
Consider again, with respect to the congregation at large—
I. THAT THEY WERE IMPLICATED IN THE SIN, AND MIGHT HAVE BEEN INCLUDED IN THE PUNISHMENT, OF THESE MEN. Even so the pride and discontent which is active in a few is latent in the many, and brings danger and damage to the whole Church of Christ. The conventional restraints of Christianity prevent for the most part any open outbreak; nevertheless, it may be said almost of the mass of nominally Christian people that they have "a revolting and a rebellious heart" (cf. 1Co_5:6; 2Ti_2:17; Heb_12:15).
II. THAT THEY WERE SAVED BECAUSE THEY GAT UP FROM THE TABERNACLE OF THESE MEN ON EVERY SIDE, AND TOUCHED NOTHING THAT BELONGED TO THEM. Even so our safety is to separate ourselves wholly from the fellowship or influence (in religious things) of such as oppose themselves to the paramount and absolute claims of Christ as Prophet, Priest, and King (Rom_16:17; 1Co_10:22; 2Co_6:14-17; Jud 2Co_1:22, 2Co_1:23).
I. Let us begin by taking careful note of THE RINGLEADER. Korah was, like Moses and Aaron, of the tribe of Levi and family of Kohath. He was therefore a far-off cousin of the men against whom he rebelled. That Korah was the soul of the sedition is too plain to need proof. (Compare "the company of Korah," Num_16:6, Num_16:16, Num_16:32; Num_26:9, &c.; "the gainsaying of Korah," Jud Num_1:11). His design is not difficult to fathom. He is a man of honourable rank. But being an ambitious man, he cannot rest so long as there is in the camp any one greater than himself. He looks with envious eye on his cousins Moses and Aaron. Moses, under God, is supreme in peace and war. As for Aaron, not only has he been invested with the exclusive right to offer sacrifice and burn incense before the Lord, but his family have been set apart to form a priestly caste in Israel. These honours did not come to the brothers by birthright, but by the special gift and appointment of the Lord. It would seem that Korah was of the elder branch of the family, tie resolves to cast down both brothers from their high place. Thus far his intention is open and avowed. We need not hesitate to add that he means to vault into their place; but about this part of his intention he holds his peace for the present. So much for the man.
II. HIS POLICY.
1. He begins by announcing a doctrine or principle. As much as anything else in the sedition, this enables us to take the measure of Korah's genius for leadership. Movements which repose merely on brute force rarely achieve abiding results. Blood and iron are not all-sufficient. A true leader of men spares no pains to get hold of men's minds. He likes to give his followers a good watchword or rallying cry. When a nation gets thoroughly possessed with a great and sound principle, when some high and far-reaching doctrine seizes its heart, it is almost invincible. It is characteristic of Korah that he so far appreciates the importance of a great doctrine to rally round, that he casts about for some truth which may be made a handle of for his purpose. In the great oracle which was the first to be uttered at Sinai he thinks he sees what will serve admirably. "Ye shall be to me a kingdom of priests, and an holy nation" (Exo_19:6). Accordingly, he raises the cry of Equality and Fraternity! Moses and Aaron have engrossed to themselves privileges which are the inalienable right of every Israelite. They have taken too much upon them, and must be stripped of their usurped honours. A cry of this sort has often been raised, in all sincerity, by men of excitable temperament. But Korah was no enthusiast. The principle that all Israelites are kings and priests, if it had been really inconsistent (as he pretended to think) with the rule of Moses and the priesthood of Aaron, would have been equally inconsistent with the rule which he coveted for himself. Still there can be little doubt that the cry Korah raised would gain him many supporters.
2. He organizes a band of conspirators. By one means or another he succeeds in gathering around him no fewer than 250 accomplices. Nor were these obscure men. They all belonged to the ruling class. They are entitled
(1) "princes of the assembly," i.e; chiefs of the congregation, natural leaders in their several tribes;
(2) "famous in the congregation," more correctly, "men summoned in the assembly," i.e; members of the national council;
(3) "men of renown," i.e; not nameless persons, but men of note among the people. Their names are not given, nor the tribes to which they belonged. Korah would take care to have all the tribes represented; but probably the Levites and Reubenites would be most numerous. It was a formidable conspiracy.
3. He diligently enlists into his company all the malcontents of the congregation. An example is seen in the Reubenites. They had a grievance. Reuben was the first-born, and as such had certain rights of priority, according to immemorial custom. These rights have been ignored, or transferred to Judah and Ephraim. The Reubenites are Korah's neighbours in the camp. He has inflamed their discontents, and held out flattering hopes. So Dathan, Abiram, and their people join him in open revolt (Num_16:12-14).
4. Korah does not confine his attentions to the two hundred and fifty leaders and their pronounced followers. The whole camp is pervaded with his emissaries. Things are in such a train that when the two hundred and fifty confront Moses and Aaron at the door of the tabernacle, Korah is able to "gather all the congregation" at the same time. He hopes to overawe Moses by this demonstration of popular sympathy.
We see here:—
1. An example of fine abilities abused. What an admirable helper in the kingdom of God Korah might have been! He might have been a second Joshua. Instead of that. he leads the wretched life of a conspirator, comes to a bad end, and leaves behind him an infamous name. The lust of power—the determination to be the greatest, has been the ruin of many a richly-gifted man.
2. An admonition to leaders in Church and State. There are leaders, not a few, who are such not of their own choice, but by the call of their brethren and by the clear appointment of Divine providence. It is natural and reasonable for them to expect the loyal support of the people. Certainly they are entitled to expect that they shall not be reviled and resisted, as if they had been ambitious and selfish usurpers. The example of Moses admonishes them not to be surprised if such reasonable expectations should be disappointed. A good conscience is an excellent companion under bitter reproach and opposition, but it will not always ward them off. Never was leader less ambitious, less selfish, than Moses; yet he could hardly have been treated worse if he had been another Korah.—B.
Num_16:4-35
I. HE CARRIED THE CAUSE BY APPEAL TO THE MOST HIGH. A proposal to this effect was made—
1. To Korah and the two hundred and fifty chiefs of the conspiracy; Num_16:5-7 : q.d. "You challenge the legitimacy of my government and of Aaron's priesthood. You insinuate that we climbed so high by treading on the rights of our brethren. I might plead in reply that Aaron and I did not grasp at our present honours; they were thrust on us by the Lord. But let us refer the matter to the Lord's decision. Let him show who are his, who are holy, whom he hath chosen to draw near to him in his sanctuary. Take censers and present yourselves before the Lord tomorrow; I and Aaron will come likewise. Let the Lord answer by fire." Such is the proposal. To Moses the result is not doubtful. Yet his heart yearns over the misguided men. This comes out—
(1) In his putting off the trial till next day. After a night's reflection they may perhaps repent:
(2) In his remonstrance with those of the two hundred and fifty who were Levites (Num_16:8-10). Their participation in the rebellion was peculiarly inexcusable.
2. To the Reubenites. Moses sent for them also; but they were not so bold as the two hundred and fifty, and refused to come. They sent back, instead, an insolent and reproachful reply (Num_16:13, Num_16:14). Nevertheless, in their case also Moses refers the decision to the Lord (Num_16:15): q.d. "They accuse me of playing the prince and tyrant over them, whereas I have never exacted from them an ordinary governor's dues. So far from defrauding' them, I have not taken from them so much as an ass. The Lord judge between them and me, and respect not their offering."
II. THE APPEAL WAS HEARD AND JUDGMENT WAS PRONOUNCED.
1. We are not told bow the two hundred and fifty passed the night. Some of them must have had misgivings. They could not fail to remember the tragic death of Nadab and Abihu when they drew near to the Lord with strange fire. But Korah suffered no flinching. He mustered them on the morrow. His emissaries t