Bilangan 10:29

The Appeal to Hobab

10:29 ¹ Moses said to Hobab son of Reuel, the Midianite, Moses’ father-in-law, ²  “We are journeying to the place about which the Lord said, ‘I will give it to you.’ Come with us and we will treat you well, ³  for the Lord has promised good things ⁴  for Israel.”

Bilangan 14:9

14:9 Only do not rebel against the Lord, and do not fear the people of the land, for they are bread for us. ⁵  Their protection ⁶  has turned aside from them, but the Lord is with us. Do not fear them!”

Bilangan 22:22

God Opposes Balaam

22:22 Then God’s anger was kindled ⁷  because he went, and the angel of the Lord stood in the road to oppose ⁸  him. Now he was riding on his donkey and his two servants were with him.

[10:29]  ¹ sn For additional bibliography for this short section, see W. F. Albright, “Jethro, Hobab, and Reuel in Early Hebrew Tradition,” CBQ 25 (1963): 1-11; G. W. Coats, “Moses in Midian,” JBL 92 (1973): 3-10; B. Mazar, “The Sanctuary of Arad and the Family of Hobab the Kenite,” JNES 24 (1965): 297-303; and T. C. Mitchell, “The Meaning of the Noun h£tn in the Old Testament,” VT 19 (1969): 93-112.

[10:29]  ² sn There is a problem with the identity of Hobab. The MT says that he is the son of Reuel, making him the brother-in-law of Moses. But Judg 4:11 says he is the father-in-law. In Judg 1:16; 4:11 Hobab is traced to the Kenites, but in Exod 3:1 and 18:1 Jethro (Reuel) is priest of Midian. Jethro is identified with Reuel on the basis of Exod 2:18 and 3:1, and so Hobab becomes Moses’ חֹתֵן (khoten), a relative by marriage and perhaps brother-in-law. There is not enough information to decide on the identity and relationships involved here. Some suggest that there is one person with the three names (G. B. Gray, Numbers [ICC], 93); others suggest Hobab is a family name (R. F. Johnson, IDB 2:615), and some suggest that the expression “the son of Reuel the Midianite” had dropped out of the genealogy of Judges, leading to the conflict (J. Crichton, ISBE 2:1055). If Hobab is the same as Jethro, then Exod 18:27 does not make much sense, for Jethro did go home. On this basis many conclude Hobab is a brother-in-law. This would mean that after Jethro returned home, Moses conversed with Hobab, his brother-in-law. For more discussion, see the articles and the commentaries.

[10:29]  ³ tn The verb is the Hiphil of the root “to be good” (יָטַב, yatav); it may be translated “treat well, deal favorably, generously with.” Here it is a perfect tense with vav (ו) following the imperative, showing a sequence in the verbal ideas.

[10:29]  ⁴ tn The Hebrew text simply has “has spoken good” for Israel.

[14:9]  ⁵ sn The expression must indicate that they could destroy the enemies as easily as they could eat bread.

[14:9]  ⁶ tn Heb “their shade.” The figure compares the shade from the sun with the protection from the enemy. It is also possible that the text is alluding to their deities here.

[22:22]  ⁷ sn God’s anger now seems to contradict the permission he gave Balaam just before this. Some commentators argue that God’s anger is a response to Balaam’s character in setting out – which the Bible does not explain. God saw in him greed and pleasure for the riches, which is why he was so willing to go.

[22:22]  ⁸ tn The word is שָׂטָן (satan, “to be an adversary, to oppose”).