Numbers 20:10

10, 11. As in Num_20:8, part of the narrative seems to have been lost. The sin which Moses and Aaron committed is not clearly defined. In Num_20:10 they appear to shew anger; and that is alluded to in Psa_106:32 f. In Num_20:11 Moses is said to have struck the rock twice. He may have been commanded to strike only once, or to raise the staff (cf. Exo_8:5) and speak to the rock without striking. Whatever his sin was, the action of Moses and Aaron in these verses hardly corresponds to the expression ‘rebelled against my word’ in Num_20:24 (cf. Num_27:14), and still less to unbelief (Num_20:12). The obscurity is increased by Deu_1:37 (cf. Num_3:26, Num_4:21), where we read that Moses was forbidden to enter Canaan on account of the people’s sin at the return of the spies, which occurred (like the present incident) at Kadesh, but 37 years earlier.

The Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges (gen. ed. J. J. S. Perowne; Cambridge University Press, 1878–1918) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

Num 20:10 And Moses and Aaron gathered the congregation together before the rock, and he said unto them, Hear now, ye rebels; must we fetch you water out of this rock?

Ver. 10. Hear now, ye rebels.] They could hardly hear, for the belly hath no ears, and their tongues scarce knew to utter any language but that of Samson, "Give me water, or I die." {Jdg 15:18} But why did Moses speak to them, when he should have spoken to the rock only? {Num 20:8} This was ill; but worse to speak so unadvisedly. He struck at the rock, and as ready almost to split against it, he makes two arguments against it. (1.) Hear now, ye rebels, q.d., Will the Lord ever give water to such rebels? (2.) Shall we give you water out of the rock? Will that ever be done To fetch fire out of a flinty rock is far more likely; but to distil water out of it, how can that be done? Lo, Moses is staggered, and now at a stand. Adeo nihil est in nobis magnum, quod non queat minui: {a} the strongest faith much assailed, may flag and hang the wing. The best carry their treasure but in earthen vessels, which, dashing against the rock of unbelief, miseras rimas ducunt, &c., leak pitifully.

{a} Bucolch.

John Trapp, A Commentary or Exposition upon All the Books of the Old and New Testament (1647–1656) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

20:10-12 Instead of reverently obeying God’s instructions, Moses rebuked the people (Must we bring you water from this rock?) and angrily struck the rock twice with the staff (20:11). God regarded Moses’ words and actions as a serious breach of faith; Moses “spoke foolishly” (Ps 106:32-33; cp. Jas 1:20) and did not trust God enough to demonstrate his holiness. By not doing exactly as he was told, Moses demonstrated a lack of faith in God to provide for his people. This lack of faith is also apparent in Moses’ words to the people. The Lord requires obedience and faith; anything less is an affront to his holy character (Num 20:24; 27:14). Such serious lack of obedience and faith had the same result as it had earlier (14:20-23; see also 1 Cor 10:4-12).

Tyndale Open Study Notes — © Tyndale Open Resources, licensed CC BY-SA 4.0. Text via the HelloAO Bible API.

The punishment which followed hereof, declared that Moses and Aaron believed not the Lord’s promise, as appeareth, verse 12.

Geneva Bible (1599) marginal notes — public domain. Text via Bolls.life.

[Moses] said unto them, Hear now, ye rebels; must we fetch you water out of this rock?--The conduct of the great leader on this occasion was hasty and passionate (Psa 106:33). He had been directed to speak to the rock [Num 20:8], but he smote it twice [Num 20:11] in his impetuosity, thus endangering the blossoms of the rod, and, instead of speaking to the rock, he spoke to the people in a fury.

Jamieson, Fausset & Brown — Commentary Critical and Explanatory on the Whole Bible (1871) — public domain (CC PDM 1.0). Text via the HelloAO Bible API.

(10) Must we fetch you water out of this rock?—In the case of the former miracle at Rephidim the rock is spoken of only under the Hebrew word zur (Exo_17:6). Throughout the present narration the rock is invariably spoken of under the word sela. In Psa_78:15-16, where reference appears to be made to both miracles, both words are used.

A Bible Commentary for English Readers, edited by Charles John Ellicott (1878–1897) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

And Moses lifted up his hand, and with his rod he smote the rock twice,.... At first it only brought out some drops, as Jarchi conjectures, and therefore Moses smote again, when it brought forth water plentifully: the Targum of Jonathan says,"at the first time it dropped blood, at the second time came out much water.''Could this be credited, it would make the agreement between this rock and Christ appear very manifest, from whom, when his side was pierced with a spear, there came out blood and water, Joh 19:34 for justification and sanctification. In what respect this rock was a type of Christ, as the other at Horeb, and the smiting of it an emblem of Christ being smitten with the rod of justice, according to the law of God, and of the abundance of water flowing from it, as typical of the abundance of grace, and the blessings of it, as coming through a smitten wounded Saviour; see Gill on Exo 17:6, where the same things are said of another rock as of this, and both types of Christ:

and the water came out abundantly, and the congregation drank, and their beasts also; there was enough for them and their cattle; for it came out in great quantities, in large streams, so that it ran down like a river, and which gave them drink as out of the great depths, Psa 78:15, where the Psalmist makes mention of rocks in the plural number, for there were two that were smitten in two different places, and at two different times; the one was at Rephidim, the other, as here, in Kadesh; the one was in the first year of Israel's coming out of Egypt, this in the fortieth year of it; that was struck but once, this twice; of this second stone no mention is made by any traveller but one (a), who coming from Mount Sinai, says,"we passed by a large rock on our left hand, in which, as in the other rock which Moses struck with his rod, appear, from the bottom to the top, openings where water hath gushed out.''

(a) See a Journal from Cairo to Mount Sinai, 1722. p. 42, 43. Ed. 2.

John Gill's Exposition of the Whole Bible (1746–1763) — public domain (CC PDM 1.0). Text via the HelloAO Bible API.

Rock. Your frequent murmurs will stop the course of God’s bounty. If God had not condemned the conduct of his ministers on this occasion, we could hardly find any reason to blame them. But the Fathers observe, that they betrayed a want of resolution, and intended to throw the blame upon the incredulity of the people, in case they failed of success. Because they exasperated his spirit, and he distinguished with his lips, Psalm cv. 33. See St. Chrysostom and St. Augustine on this psalm. They were not commanded to strike the rock at all; and when the water did not come at first, they struck again, (Calmet) being afraid lest they should now be taken for impostors. (Haydock) --- They speak as if the work was their own. --- Can we, &c. They exasperate the people, instead of promoting their conversion. In a word, they did not glorify God, (Calmet) by representing him as the sovereign holiness and mercy; and the God of unbounded power. (Haydock)

George Leo Haydock (1774–1849), Haydock's Catholic Family Bible and Commentary, 1859 edition — public domain. Excludes Psalms (Douay-Rheims chapter numbering differs from Protestant) and Deuterocanonical books (Catholic canon only).

10. Hear now, ye rebels — Moses, as a legislator, had a right to address the seditious as rebels, and to suppress and punish them. In a proclamation made to this effect, this style of address would be admissible: “Disperse, ye rebels.” But on this occasion the execution of law is not contemplated, hence the epithet “rebels” seems to be a violation of the law of love. “Charity suffereth long and is kind.”

Must we fetch you water — The word must is not Hebrew, nor is the we emphatic: “Shall we bring water for you?” The strain of uncharitable depreciation is still kept up. Kennicott translates it, “Can we,” etc. This is admissible, since the future tense is often used for the potential mood, which is wanting in the Hebrew. (See Nord., Gram., § 993.) This shows the unbelief in the heart of Moses, with which Jehovah charges him in Num_20:12.

Daniel D. Whedon (gen. ed.), Commentary on the Old and New Testaments (1874–1909) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

Hear now, ye rebels. Septuagint, oi apeiyeiv . The verb is used in a similar sense of Moses and Aaron themselves in verse 24. It has been suggested that this was the word really used by our Lord in Mat_5:22, and translated mwrov . This, however, is extremely precarious, and is indeed to accuse the Evangelist of a blunder, for there is no real correspondence between the words. Must we fetch you water.

Septuagint, mh exaxomen umin udwr . And this is no doubt the sense. It has been rendered by some "Can we fetch you water," on the supposition that Moses really doubted the possibility of such a miracle, but this seems to be an entire mistake (see next note).

The Pulpit Commentary (1880–1919), ed. H.D.M. Spence-Jones & Joseph S. Exell — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

Must we bring water out of this rock for you?

Moses asks this question out of frustration to rebuke the people for complaining. It can be translated as a statement. AT: "You complain that there is no water. Well, we will make water come out of this rock." or "You would not be happy even if we caused water to come out of this rock. But I will do it anyway." (See: Rhetorical Question)

Must we bring

Here "we" refers to Moses and Aaron and may include Yahweh, but does not include the people. (See: Exclusive and Inclusive "We")

translationWords

rebel

unfoldingWord translationNotes — © Distant Shores Media and the Door43 World Missions Community, licensed CC BY-SA 4.0. Source: git.door43.org/Door43/en_tn.

ויקהלו וגו׳ [AND MOSES AND AARON] ASSEMBLED [THE WHOLE CONGREGATION BEFORE THE ROCK] — This was one of the places where the smaller contained the greater, (the entire congregation being assembled in front of one rock) (Leviticus Rabbah 10:9).

המן הסלע הזה נוציא MUST WE BRING [WATER] OUT OF THIS ROCK? — They said this because they could not distinguish it (the rock intended by God), for the rock from which the water had hitherto flowed during these forty years had vanished and taken a place amongst the other rocks when the “well” disappeared after Miriam’s death, and Israel said to them, “What difference is it to you from which rock you bring forth water for us?” — It was on this account that he (Moses) said unto them (called them) המרים — which may mean “refractory”, or, as a Greek expression, “foolish people” (µώροι), or, “such as would teach (מורים) their teachers” — from this rock about which we have received no Divine Command can we bring forth water for you?! (cf. Midrash Tanchuma, Chukat 9).

Rashi on the Tanakh — English translations: “The Judaica Press complete Tanach with Rashi, translated by A. J. Rosenberg” (CC BY 4.0); “Pentateuch with Rashi's commentary by M. Rosenbaum and A.M. Silbermann, 1929-1934” (public domain); “The Metsudah Tanach series, Lakewood, N.J” (CC BY 4.0); and “The Book of Joshua, Metsudah Publications, 1997” (CC BY 4.0). Text via Sefaria.

ARE WE TO BRING YOU FORTH WATER OUT OF THIS ROCK? Far be it and [G-d] forbid that [we should explain this] as a question indicating impossibility! For Moses our teacher, who was trusted in all G-d’s house, [knew] that nothing is too hard for Him; and he together with all Israel had seen greater and more wondrous miracles than this, and especially since this [miracle of providing water from a rock] had already been done once before through him at the rock in Horeb! Now the commentators have said that there are certain questions which [by apparently doubting that which cannot be denied], have the force of an [impassioned or indignant] affirmation. Thus we find: Did I reveal Myself to the house of thy father?; The sense is: “Did I not reveal Myself, although your sons, by their actions appear to belie it!” The king said also unto Zadok the priest: ‘Seest thou?’; Wilt thou judge?; Hast thou eaten of the tree, whereof I commanded thee that thou shouldest not eat? But Rabbi Abraham ibn Ezra wrote [that the meaning of the verse is]: “Do we indeed have power to bring you forth water out of the rock?” He means thereby to explain that Moses said to them: “Hear now, ye rebels against G-d, who say, ‘and why have ye brought the assembly of the Eternal unto this evil place?’, Verse 5. Do we have the power by natural means to bring you forth water out of this flint? You should therefore recognize that this is all from G-d, for it is He Who took you out of Egypt, and brought you to this place, and it is He Who will feed you here.” This is similar to what he [Moses] told the people in the case of the manna, and ye shall know that the Eternal hath brought you out from the land of Egypt. In my opinion this letter hei [in the word hamin — “out of”] indicates a [real] query, [and the meaning thereof is as follows]: “Are we to bring you forth water out of this rock or not?” For sometimes Scripture explains a question in its positive and negative aspects, such as: whether there are trees therein or not? whether thou wouldest keep His commandments, or not? — and at other times it mentions only the positive aspect, [such as in the following verses]: Is this your youngest brother?; Know ye Laban the son of Nachor?;, 29:5. Should I weep in the fifth month, separating myself? But this question here that Moses asked of them was a probing question [to test their true intention]. He said to them: “Hear now, ye rebels. — What do ye devise against the Eternal? — Are we to bring you forth water out of this strong rock? Will this event happen or not?” [i.e., “Do you believe that it is within His power to do it, or not?”] He thus stressed that their [behaviour was a serious] rebellion, telling them they were wanting in faith, and that the reason for their quarrelling with him was because they thought that G-d would not act wondrously for them, in a similar manner to that which it says, And they tried G-d in their heart … ‘Can G-d prepare a table in the wilderness … Can He give bread also?’ Similarly the Rabbis have said: “Ten times our ancestors in the wilderness tried the Holy One, blessed be He.” [Moses’ question was thus] like a query as to the belief of the person addressed, [of which we find examples] in many places in Scripture: Must I then bring thy son back? which means: “Is that your wish?” Shall we go to Ramoth-gilead to battle, or shall I forbear? which means, “If that is your advice.” Here too, [the meaning of Moses’ question is]: “Do you think that we shall bring you forth water out of this rock?” The same is also my opinion with regard to [the following verses]: Did I reveal Myself?; The sense is: “Did I not reveal Myself, although your sons, by their actions appear to belie it!” Seest thou how Ahab humbleth himself before Me? Hast thou eaten of the tree, whereof I commanded thee that thou shouldest not eat?; Wilt thou judge? For all these are questions, but their purpose is to ask about [the truth of] something well-known, so that the person who is asked is compelled to admit [the truth of the fact] against his will. Thus [Did I reveal Myself? The sense is: “Did I not reveal Myself, although your sons, by their actions appear to belie it!” means]: “Have I revealed Myself to your father’s house and chosen you? Since you know this, then Wherefore kick ye at My sacrifice and at Mine offering?” Do ye thus requite the Eternal with such a requital! Similarly, “Hast thou eaten of the tree, about which I commanded you [not to eat], and you are ashamed [and therefore you hid yourself], or [if you did not eat of the tree], why then did you hide?” And in the same way the other [verses are to be explained]. However, the expression Seest thou? is a genuine inquiry about a matter [as to which the questioner is] in doubt, [David saying to Zadok the priest]: “If you ‘advise’ it, then return to the city,” [and the usage of the term ‘seest’ thou? means “do you see fit?”] as in the expression: “I see the words of Admon” [which means: “I find the opinion of Admon correct”]. I have already explained this in Seder Bereshith.

Ramban (Nachmanides) on the Tanakh — English translation: “Commentary on the Torah by Ramban (Nachmanides). Translated and annotated by Charles B. Chavel. New York, Shilo Pub. House, 1971-1976” (CC BY 4.0). Text via Sefaria.