Numbers 32:38

Num 32:38 And Nebo, and Baalmeon, (their names being changed,) and Shibmah: and gave other names unto the cities which they builded.

Ver. 38. Their names being changed.] Out of detestation of those idols, Baal, Nebo, &c. {see Exo 23:13 Psa 16:4 Isa 46:1} Absit ut de ore Christiano sonet Iupiter omnipotens, et Mehercule, et Mecastor, et caetera, magis portenta quam nuraina, saith Jerome. Heathenish gods should not be so far honoured as to be heard of out of Christian mouths, nor Popish idols neither. I myself, saith Latimer, {a} have used in mine earnest matters, to say, Yea, by the rood, by the mass, by St Mary, which indeed is naught. Some simple folk say, they may swear by the mass, because there is no such thing; and by our lady, because she is gone out of the country.

{a} Sermon in Third Sunday in Advent.

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.

Num_32:38

Their names being changed

Changes of name

Many persons live in names.

This is fatal to the grasp of complete truth and relation. The poet asks, Whats in a name? The name of a friend may be necessary to his identification, but the name is not the man. Character is to be studied, motive is to be understood, purpose is to be appreciated, then whatever changes may take place in the mere name, love and confidence will be undiminished. The change of names, both in the Old Testament and the New, deserves careful study. The name of Abram was changed, so was the name of Jacob, so was the name of Saul of Tarsus. Those changes of name symbolise changes of trust and vocation in life. The name should enlarge with the character, but the character should be always more highly valued than the name. The solemn application of this text is to the matter of great evangelical truths and doctrines. For want of attention to this matter, bigotry has been encouraged, and men have been separated from one another. Some persons do not know the gospel itself, except under a certain set of names, words, and stereotyped phrases. This is not Christianity, it is mere literalism; it is, in fact, idolatry, for there is an idolatry of phrase as well as of images. The truth is not in the letters which print it, the letters but stand to express the inexpressible. All life is symbolic. God has spoken in little else than parables. Revelation addresses the imagination, when imagination is used in its highest senses. It is not the faculty of mere cloud-making, but the faculty of insight into the largest meanings and the innermost relations of things. The letter in which you endeavour to express your love, is a poor substitute for the living voice and the living touch; it is indeed invaluable in the absence of the living personality; but what letter was ever written that quite satisfied the writer when love was the subject and devotedness the intention? There is a change of names that inspires the soul with hope. God is to give His servants a new name in the upper world; their name is to be in their foreheads; but in the changing of the name there is no changing in the burning love and the rapturous adoration. (J. Parker, D. D.)

.

The Biblical Illustrator, edited by Joseph S. Exell (c. 1880s–1900s) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

Num 32:38. Their names being changed — Conquerors of places have been wont to change their names. But as the Israelites were forbidden to mention the names of other gods, and as these places, it seems had their names from the false gods worshipped in them, (which was unquestionably the case with Nebo and Baal-meon,) the Israelites might judge it proper to change the names of these places, in order to abolish all footsteps of idolatry.

Joseph Benson's Commentary on the Old and New Testaments (1811–1818) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

(their names being changed)--either because it was the general custom of conquerors to do so; or, rather, because from the prohibition to mention the names of other gods (Exo 23:13), as Nebo and Baal were, it was expedient on the first settlement of the Israelites to obliterate all remembrance of those idols. (See Jos 13:17-20).

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

Verse 38. And Nebo - their names being changed] That is, Those who conquered the cities called them after their own names. Thus the city Kenath, being conquered by Nobah, was called after his name, Nu 32:42.

Adam Clarke's Commentary on the Bible (1810–1826) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword/MySword module.

38. their names being changed] The parenthesis is strange, for the change of names by the Manassites is related immediately afterwards. Some think that it is a marginal note to the reader that the names are to be changed and read otherwise than they are written in the text. The words refer to Nebo and Baal-meon. Both Nebo and Baal suggested pagan worship, and the latter was frequently altered, e.g. Ish-bosheth, Mephi-bosheth, El-yada, for Ish-baal, Merib-baal, Baal-yada.

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.

And the children of Machir the son of Manasseh went to Gilead, and took it,.... That part of it which Moses gave unto the half tribe of Manasseh, which till now was in the hand of the Amorites; for half Mount Gilead, and the cities thereof, were given to the Reubenites and Gadites, which is the land of Gilead they desired, and which was already conquered; for they call it the country which the Lord smote before Israel, Num 32:1,

and dispossessed the Amorite which was in it; for though they were driven out of one part of Gilead, yet not out of the whole.

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

Nabo. Probably the same as Nebo and Nobe. --- Baalmeon. This city had a variety of names, ver. 3, 35. Those who rebuilt these cities gave them their own names, ver. 42. (Hebrew Targum of Jerusalem) Yet they were often known by their former appellations. (Calmet) --- The rebuilders chiefly objected to the names of idols, Baal, &c., which were joined with these cities. (Menochius)

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).

Nebo; of which city see Deu 34:1; Jer 48:1.

Their names being changed; either because conquerors of places use to do so; or because the names of other gods (which Nebo and Baal-meon unquestionably were) were not to be mentioned, Exo 23:13, especially at the first settling of the Israelites there, that the very remembrance of the idols might be blotted out, and so the temptation to idolatry removed, though afterwards, when that danger was over, they were called by their old names again, Jos 13:17,20.

Matthew Poole's English Annotations on the Holy Bible (1683–1685) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword/MySword module.

38. Baal-meon — See Beon, Num_32:3, note.

Names… changed — Num_32:3, note.

Shibmah — See Shebam, Num_32:3, note.

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

Baalomeon. Called Been in verse 3, Beth-meon in Jer_48:23, Beth-Baal-meon in Jos_13:17. Their names being changed. tBosWm, "with change of name," dependent on the verb "built." The Septuagint has perikekuklwmenav (Symmachus, periteteucismenav ), apparently reading rWv for but without authority. It is possible that the Been of verse 3 may be an instance of this attempt to change names, many of which were connected with idolatry. The attempt failed, hut both the attempt itself and its failure were very characteristic of the partial and feeble hold which Israel had on this territory. Gave other names to the cities which they builded. Literally, "they called by names the names of the towns;" a round-about expression correctly paraphrased by the A.V.

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

Their names changed - Either because conquerers of places used to do so: or because the names of other Gods (which Nebo and Baal-meon unquestionably were) were not to be mentioned, Exod. xxiii, 13.

John Wesley, Explanatory Notes Upon the Whole Bible (1754–1765) — public domain. Text via the GEBible commentary corpus.

ואת נבו ואת בעל מעון מוסבת שם AND NEBO AND AND BAAL-MEON, THEIR NAMES BEING CHANGED — Nebo and Baal-Meon were names of idols, and the Ammonites used to call their cities by the names of their gods. The children of Reuben therefore changed their names into other names. This is the meaning of מוסבת שם: Nebo and Baal-Meon were changed to other names.

ואת שבמה AND SIBMAH — i.e., they built (cf. v. 37) Sibmah also. This is identical with Sebam that is mentioned above (v. 3).

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.

AND NEBO, AND BAAL-MEON — THEIR NAMES BEING CHANGED. “Nebo and Baal-meon were names of idols, and the Amorites used to call their cities by the names of their idols, therefore the children of Reuben changed [the names of these cities and gave them] different names, this being the meaning of the expression their names being changed, which means that Nebo and Baal-meon were changed to other names.” This is Rashi’s language. But the [concluding part of this] verse which says, and they called their names unto the cities which they builded refers to all the cities [mentioned there], and not only to Nebo and Baal-meon [and therefore the phrase their names being changed cannot be understood as Rashi explained it]. Furthermore, what sense would there be in Scripture mentioning the cities [only] by the names of their idols, and saying that the children of Reuben built them and changed their names, without mentioning the good names which they were [now] given! And indeed it is quite usual for Scripture when speaking about [any] captured cities to mention always the new names [given them, as in the following cases]: and they called Leshem, Dan, after the name of Dan their father; and he called them the hamlets of Jair; and he called it Nobach., Verse 42. And likewise wherever the name [of a city] was changed [for any reason] Scripture mentions [the new name as well, as it is said], Now the name of Hebron beforetime was Kiryath-arba; now the name of Debir beforetime was Kiryath-sepher., 15:15.The most likely explanation seems to me to be that these names [Nebo, Baal-meon, etc.] were the names of the cities when they were in the possession of Moab, and Sihon captured all these cities from the former king of Moab, for thus it is written about Heshbon, Dibon and Medeba, as it is said, We have shot at them; Heshbon is perished, even unto Dibon etc., Verse 30. This also appears to me to be the [meaning of the] words of Jephthah, when he said, While Israel dwelt in Heshbon and its towns, and in Aroer and its towns, and in all the cities that are along by the side of the Arnon, this being the same Aroer [mentioned here in Verse 34] which they took from Sihon. Now when Tiglath-pileser the king of Assyria exiled the Reubenites and the Gadites, the Moabites returned and settled in their lands and cities, for we find in the Book of Jeremiah that when Nebuchadnezzar [king of Babylon] destroyed Moab, he conquered from them all these cities. And [the Book of Jeremiah] mentions by name Heshbon and Elealeh, Kiryathaim, Verse 23. Dibon and Nebo, Verse 22. Jazer, Verse 32. Aroer, Verse 19. and Baal-meon which is [there] called Beth-meon, Verse 23. and Beth nimrah which is [there] called Nimrim, and Jahza., Verse 21. Thus you see that all these cities mentioned [in these verses] belonged [originally] to Moab, [and Sihon, king of the Amorites captured them from Moab]. Similarly in [the Book of] Isaiah most of these cities are mentioned when Sennacherib [king of Assyria] overran Moab, for he first exiled the Reubenites and the Gadites, and afterwards he overran Ammon and Moab.Therefore it appears that the meaning of [the phrase] their names being changed is that all these cities had [previously] had their names changed, because the Amorites changed their original names when they captured them [from Moab] and these [names] were their original names which they had when they still belonged to Moab. But the children of Reuben and of Gad still called them by [these Moabite] names when they rebuilt them. [This explanation is borne out by the fact that] the verse does not say, “and they gave names to the cities which they built,” but it says, and they called by names the names of the cities [which they builded], meaning that they called them by name with the same names which they originally had [when they were still under the rule of Moab. This was] because they wanted to refer to them by the names with which they had previously been known, either in order to shame Moab, or, as our Rabbis have mentioned, means that they were changed by the children of Reuben and Gad, because their [Amorite] names were the names of idols. According to Ramban, the phrase refers to the Amorites, who changed the original Moabite names in an attempt to erase the Moabite origin of these cities. Since the Amorites gave them the names of their idols, therefore the children of Reuben and Gad reverted to the original Moabite names in order not to have to mention the names of idols, or, as Ramban suggests, in order to shame the Moabites. because [they did not want to use the Amorite names since] the Amorites used to call their cities by the names of their idols. However, we do not find that Joshua changed the names of the cities which he captured.

AND SIBMAH. The meaning of this is that “they built Sibmah,” but it was not [a city] whose name was changed.

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.

Nevo. This could be the Mount of Nevo, where Moshe is buried.

Their names having been changed. These cities had their names changed, and Sivmah as well.

Ibn Ezra on the Tanakh — English translations: “Sefaria Community Translation” (CC0 1.0 (public-domain dedication)); “Yalkut, Sifsei Chachomim Chumash, Metsudah Publications, 2009” (CC BY 4.0); and “Commentary of Ibn Ezra on Isaiah - trans. by M. Friedlander, 1873” (public domain). Text via Sefaria.