Exegetical and Hermeneutical Commentary of Psalms 106:24
Yea, they despised the pleasant land, they believed not his word:
24. They despised, or rejected (as Num 14:31), the pleasant land (Jer 3:19; Zec 7:14), the delightful and desirable land of Canaan; and disbelieved Jehovah’s promise to give it them (Deu 1:32).
Fuente: The Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges
24 27. A fifth instance of Israel’s sin; their unbelief and cowardice on the return of the spies (Num 13:14).
Fuente: The Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges
Yea, they despised the pleasant land – Margin, as in Hebrew, land of desire. That is, a country to be desired, – a country whose situation, climate, productions, made it desirable as a place of abode. Such Palestine was always represented to be to the children of Israel (Lev 20:24; Num 13:27; Num 14:8; Num 16:14; Deu 6:3; Deu 11:9; et al.;) but this land had to them, at the time here referred to, no attractions, and they rather desired to return again to Egypt; Num 11:5.
They believed not his word – His assurance in regard to the land to which they were going.
Fuente: Albert Barnes’ Notes on the Bible
Psa 106:24-31
Yea, they despised the pleasant land.
The persistency of sin, the retribution of God, and the influence of saints
I. The awful persistency of sin (verses 24, 25, 28). You may reason with the sinner, convince him both of the folly and wrongness of his conduct. Trial after trial may come down upon him in consequence of his wicked conduct. You may threaten him with the terrors of death and the terrible retribution of the life beyond, still he continues blindly, and madly he pursues his course (Jer 13:23).
II. The fearful retribution of God (verse 29).
1. It was justly deserved. How great the provocation! The conscience of every sufferer will attest the justice of his fate.
2. It was a warning to others. The punishment that befalls one sinner says to every sinner, Take care. God punishes, not for the sake of inflicting pain, but for the sake of doing good. It is to arrest the progress of sin, which is a curse to the universe.
III. The social influence of saints (verse 30). Phinehas interposed as a magistrate to suppress sin and check its progress. This act of his was approved of God as a righteous act. It was rewarded by God by a perpetual priesthood (Num 25:10). It is said that one sinner destroyeth much good, but one saint may destroy more evil. Not until the last day, if then, shall we know the enormous amount of good that one good man may render to his age and even to his race. (Homilist.)
Contempt of the pleasant land
Take the text as descriptive of the feeling of too many Christians towards that in which we all profess our faith as the life everlasting or the life of the world to come. They thought scorn of that pleasant land. Ours is a freethinking and it is an outspoken generation. It is by no means uncommon to hear men say now, Give me earth and I will give you heaven. I cannot realize, and I see no beauty in, the life of that world. You tell me that it has streets of gold and gates of pearl. It is an orientalism of exaggeration which conveys to me no meaning at all. If it did convey a meaning, it would be an unattractive one. I greatly prefer the Old Testament phraseology. I can understand a land of wheat and barley, of fountains and streams, which God cares for, and upon which His eyes are open from the beginning to the end of the year. Such a land, with the addition of a wiping away of tears from all eyes and a cessation of pain and grief and death, speaks for itself. But you have made it so figurative, so metaphorical, so grotesque, that I cannot admire and I cannot long for it. They thought scorn of that pleasant land. I can see many things to account for this. I can suggest perhaps a few things in correction of it. Theologians and mystics have so described that land as to make it unlovely. They have painted it to the manly and the vigorous, to the large-hearted and the active-minded, as a world of absolute repose, of perpetual quiescence. They have painted it to the feeble and the invalid and the languid and the weary as a scene of perpetual devotions, of a day never clouded and a night as bright as the day–of a praise never silent, a sabbath never ending, a congregation never breaking up. The one kind of men demanded an activity which is absolutely refused them; the other a repose, spiritual as well as physical, which is resolutely shut out. All these descriptions are quite conjectural. Scripture tells of a new heaven and a new earth, and expressly adds in explanation this particular–wherein dwelleth righteousness. How can righteousness dwell in a land of mere inertion, mere torpor, or even unintermitted praise and song? Does not the very choice of the word suggest to us, though without detailing, a multitude of relationships, old perhaps as well as new, which shall give full scope to all the energies and all the activities which have here been coerced and counteracted alike by the weakness of the flesh and by the unwillingness of the spirit? Amongst all negatives and all conjectures, expanding the vision of the great future without stint or limit, we have one certainty and one positive–and with it we conclude. His servants shall serve Him–they shall see His face–His name shall be in their foreheads. Whose servants? whose face? whose name? Look above–you will find the answer in that great combination–God and the Lamb. Yet not their servants but His servants–not their faces but His face–nob their names but His name. Who now shall dare to think scorn of that pleasant land? God is there–there in a sense in which He is not here. Thine eyes shall see the King in His beauty, as He can only be seen in the land that is very far off. Who shall speak of that land in a tone half of condescension–Yes, if I must go hence, I will consent to go thither? Shall any one indeed find entrance there who can only say, I will not refuse–I have no objection? (Dean Vaughan.)
Contempt of the inheritance
I. The pleasant land. Palestine was a country in many views highly desirable–in itself compact, and possessing special facilities of commerce with Asia, Africa, and Europe, all the known quarters of the globe. As to its intrinsic character, we have it portrayed in Deu 8:7-9. Palestine, in all the glory of culture, must have been a pleasant land. We know, however, that this country, with all its distinguishing institutions, formed but a shadow of better things to come; and it becomes us now to be enjoying a land still more pleasant. The Kingdom of God has come to many thousands, has come with power; and its blessings, to which those of Judea were not for a moment to be compared, are brought nigh to the remotest and most unworthy. Its inhabitants He hath delivered from the curse of the law, being made a curse for them. Their depraved and perverse hearts He renovates by the agency of His good Spirit, purifying them unto Himself a peculiar people, zealous of good works. Whatever fightings they may have, they have peace with God; whatever vicissitudes, an immovable kingdom; whatever sorrows, everlasting consolation; whatever poverty, unsearchable riches; whatever disappointments and repulses, victory at last over sin and death and the grave. But I would point you to another land, in which the emblem of the text finds a more perfect accomplishment. True, we are here favoured with a morning, and the morning star shines bright: yet it is only the morning, and the shadows of the night largely intermingle with the dawning of the day. But in that better country which is an heavenly, sunshine is qualified by shadow no longer. There Jesus appears in all that glory which He had with the Father before the world was–the distinctive glory of mediatorial triumph and recompense enhancing His Divine effulgence–and the nations of them that are saved do walk in His light.
II. Contempt of the pleasant land. Every gift of God is good and nothing to be despised. Nay, not only are manifest mercies to be gratefully acknowledged, but we are forbidden to despise the chastening of the Lord, and enjoined to count it all joy when we fall into manifold temptations or trials. And how, then, can God look upon our conduct without anger when we treat with contempt a promised inheritance? As to the liability to this sin, it might appear that our inheritance being more valuable than that of the ancient and literal Canaan, it would be less readily and less probably disparaged. But alas! the things of God are not so appreciable to natural and unaided perception. The eye sees not their beauty, the ear hears not their melody, the nostrils smell not their odour, the tongue tastes not their deliciousness. We have had samples of heaven itself; its righteousness has come down to us; its celestial truth has been proclaimed to our guilty and perishing world; and humanity has discredited and disrelished all.
III. The source of the Israelites contempt. They believed not His word. If we had only full confidence in the Saviour, if we but eyed Him with a completion and constancy of trust at all commensurate with His trustworthiness, what distressing apprehensions of Him would vanish, what ravishing views of Him would succeed! How sure would heaven become! We should feel as secure of it as if we were already there, and something like as happy. (D. King, LL. D.)
Heaven
The Israelites in the wilderness are a recognized illustration of the Christians walk through the world. The promised land is a type of heaven. Is it not true, then, of thousands who have set their faces towards a better home, that, after a time, they think scorn of that pleasant land, and give no credence unto Gods Word? Why?
1. Because the land is hard to reach. Yes, it is hard, and it is easy: hard if the heart is absorbed by the world, the flesh, and the devil; easy, if the world has once been despised, the flesh once crucified, the devil put to scorn.
2. Others think scorn of that pleasant land because they cannot see it, and therefore hardly believe that it exists at all. If we are only to believe in what we see, there will be but little to believe in. We cannot see the Father or the Son or the Holy Ghost with the human eye; we cannot see the soul; we cannot see that the dead are living: but Jesus taught us, and our conscience teaches us to believe these things; and Jesus taught us also to believe in heaven. (W. R. Hutton, M.A.)
Despising Gods gifts
There can be no greater slight and dishonour to a giver than to have his gifts neglected. You give something that has perhaps cost you much, or which, at any rate, has your heart in it, to your child, or other dear one; would it not wound you, if a day or two after you found it tossing about among a heap of unregarded trifles? Suppose that some of those Rajahs that received presents on the recent royal visit to India had gone out from the durbar and flung them into the kennel, that would have been an insult and disaffection, would it not? But these illustrations are trivial by the side of our treatment of the giving God. (A. Maclaren, D.D.)
Fuente: Biblical Illustrator Edited by Joseph S. Exell
Despised; preferring Egypt and the former bondage before it, Num 14:3,4, and not thinking it worthy of a little hazard and difficulty in taking the possession of it.
The pleasant land, Canaan; which was so not only in truth, Deu 11:11,12; Jer 3:19; Eze 20:6, but even by the relation of those spies who discouraged them from entering into it.
His word, i.e. his promise of giving them the land, and subduing all their enemies before them; which they knew by late and manifold experience that God was both able and willing to do.
Fuente: English Annotations on the Holy Bible by Matthew Poole
24-27. The sin of refusing toinvade Canaan, “the pleasant land” (Jer 3:19;Eze 20:6; Dan 8:9),”the land of beauty,” was punished by the destruction ofthat generation (Nu 14:28), andthe threat of dispersion (Deu 4:25;Deu 28:32) afterwards made totheir posterity, and fulfilled in the great calamities now bewailed,may have also been then added.
despised (Nu14:31).
believed not his wordbywhich He promised He would give them the land; but rather the word ofthe faithless spies (compare Ps78:22).
Fuente: Jamieson, Fausset and Brown’s Commentary Critical and Explanatory on the Whole Bible
Yea, they despised the pleasant land,…. Or “land of desire” r; the land of Canaan; a very delightful and desirable country, the glory of all lands, a land that abounded with everything for necessity and pleasure. The spies themselves, that brought an ill report of it, owned it was a land flowing with milk and honey; but that there were such difficulties to possess it which they thought insuperable: and hence the people despised it, inasmuch as, when they were bid to go and possess it, they refused, and did not choose to be at any difficulty in subduing the inhabitants of it, or run any risk or hazard of their lives in taking it, though the Lord had promised, to give it them, and settle them in it; but they seemed rather inclined to make themselves a captain, and return to Egypt, when they were just on the borders of Canaan; which was interpreted as despising the land, Nu 14:1. This was a type of heaven, the good land afar off; the better country, the land of promise and rest; in which is fulness of provisions, and where there will be no hunger and thirst; where flows the river of the water of life, and stands the tree of life, bearing all manner of fruits; where there is fulness of joy, and pleasures for evermore: the most delightful company of Father, Son, and Spirit, angels and glorified saints; and nothing to disturb their peace and pleasure, neither from within nor from without. And yet this pleasant land may be said to be despised by such who do not care to go through any difficulty to it; to perform the duties of religion; to bear reproach for Christ’s sake; to go through tribulation; to walk in the narrow and afflicted way, which leads unto it: and by all such who do not care to part with their sinful lusts and pleasure; but prefer them and the things of this world to the heavenly state.
They believed not his word; his word of promise, that he would be with them, and lead them into the pleasant land, and put them into the possession of it: which disbelief of his word was highly provoking to him; and therefore he swore they should not enter into his rest; and because of their unbelief they did not, Nu 14:11. This is a very heinous sin, to disbelieve God that is true, and cannot lie; it is to make him a liar; nothing can more dishonour him; it is a departure from him, very provoking to him, and of very dangerous consequence; unbelievers shall have their part and portion in the lake which burns with fire and brimstone, Re 21:8.
r “in term desiderii”, Montanus, Cocceius, Gejerus, Michaelis.
Fuente: John Gill’s Exposition of the Entire Bible
The fact to which the poet refers in Psa 106:24, viz., the rebellion in consequence of the report of the spies, which he brings forward as the fourth principal sin, is narrated in Num 13, Num 14. The appellation is also found in Jer 3:19; Zec 7:14. As to the rest, the expression is altogether Pentateuchal. “They despised the land,” after Num 14:31; “they murmured in their tents,” after Deu 1:27; “to lift up the land” = to swear, after Exo 6:8; Deu 32:40; the threat , to make them fall down, fall away, after Num 14:29, Num 14:32. The threat of exile is founded upon the two great threatening chapters, Lev 26; Deu 28:1; cf. more particularly Lev 26:33 (together with the echoes in Eze 5:12; Eze 12:14, etc.), Deu 28:64 (together with the echoes in Jer 9:15; Eze 22:15, etc.). Eze 20:23 stands in a not accidental relationship to Psa 106:26.; and according to that passage, is an error of the copyist for (Hitzig).
Now follows in Psa 106:28-31 the fifth of the principal sins, viz., the taking part in the Moabitish worship of Baal. The verb (to be bound or chained), taken from Num 25:3, Num 25:5, points to the prostitution with which Baal Per, this Moabitish Priapus, was worshipped. The sacrificial feastings in which, according to Num 25:2, they took part, are called eating the sacrifices of the dead, because the idols are dead beings (nekroi’, Wisd. 13:10-18) as opposed to God, the living One. The catena on Rev 2:14 correctly interprets: .
(Note: In the second section of Aboda zara, on the words of the Mishna: “The flesh which is intended to be offered first of all to idols is allowed, but that which comes out of the temple is forbidden, because it is like sacrifices of the dead,” it is observed, fol. 32 b: “Whence, said R. Jehuda ben Bethra, do I know that that which is offered to idols ( ) pollutes like a dead body? From Psa 106:28. As the dead body pollutes everything that is under the same roof with it, so also does everything that is offered to idols.” The Apostle Paul declares the objectivity of this pollution to be vain, cf. more particularly 1Co 10:28.)
The object of “they made angry” is omitted; the author is fond of this, cf. Psa 106:7 and Psa 106:32. The expression in Psa 106:29 is like Exo 19:24. The verb is chosen with reference to Num 17:13. The result is expressed in Psa 106:30 after Num 25:8, Num 25:18., Num 17:13. With , to adjust, to judge adjustingly (lxx, Vulgate, correctly according to the sense, ), the poet associates the thought of the satisfaction due to divine right, which Phinehas executed with the javelin. This act of zeal for Jahve, which compensated for Israel’s unfaithfulness, was accounted unto him for righteousness, by his being rewarded for it with the priesthood unto everlasting ages, Num 25:10-13. This accounting of a work for righteousness is only apparently contradictory to Gen 15:5.: it was indeed an act which sprang from a constancy in faith, and one which obtained for him the acceptation of a righteous man for the sake of this upon which it was based, by proving him to be such.
In Psa 106:32, Psa 106:33 follows the sixth of the principal sins, viz., the insurrection against Moses and Aaron at the waters of strife in the fortieth year, in connection with which Moses forfeited the entrance with them into the Land of Promise (Num 20:11., Deu 1:37; Deu 32:51), since he suffered himself to be carried away by the persevering obstinacy of the people against the Spirit of God ( mostly providing the future for , as in Psa 106:7, Psa 106:43, Psa 78:17, Psa 78:40, Psa 78:56, of obstinacy against God; on cf. Isa 63:10) into uttering the words addressed to the people, Num 20:10, in which, as the smiting of the rock which was twice repeated shows, is expressed impatience together with a tinge of unbelief. The poet distinguishes, as does the narrative in Num. 20, between the obstinacy of the people and the transgression of Moses, which is there designated, according to that which lay at the root of it, as unbelief. The retrospective reference to Num 27:14 needs adjustment accordingly.
Fuente: Keil & Delitzsch Commentary on the Old Testament
24. And they despised It was an evident demonstration of the unconquerable wickedness of the Jews, that, after they had been in the jaws of destruction, and while they had scarcely escaped from danger so great and so imminent, they rose up in rebellion against God. What was the cause of this rebellion? The despising of the Holy Land, which of all things ought to have been most desired by them. The country of Canaan, which had been destined to them, as the place where they were to be brought up under God’s paternal care, and as a people separated from heathen nations were to worship him only, and which, also, was more especially to them a pledge of the heavenly inheritance, — this country here, and in several other passages, is very properly called the pleasant land Was it not, then, the basest ingratitude to despise the holy habitation of God’s chosen people? To the cause of this scorn the prophet refers, when he says, they did not believe God’s word For had they laid hold upon God’s promise with that faith which it was incumbent upon them to do, they would have been inflamed with such a strong desire for that land, that they would have surmounted all obstacles which might occur in their way to it. Meanwhile, not believing his word, they not only refuse the heritage which was offered to them, but excite a rebellion in the camp, as if they would rise up in arms against God.
Fuente: Calvin’s Complete Commentary
(24-27) The rebellion that followed the report of the spies.
Fuente: Ellicott’s Commentary for English Readers (Old and New Testaments)
24. They despised the pleasant land And so God despised and rejected them. So, in later times, they despised Christ and his offer of eternal life, and were again, and more fatally, despised and rejected. See Act 13:46; Act 18:6; Mat 21:43
Fuente: Whedon’s Commentary on the Old and New Testaments
For the same reason as before, I include the whole of what is here rehearsed in one reading. But let not the Reader be as brief upon the interesting things here recorded. Let him consult the several parts of the Jewish history in the Bible, to which they refer. See Num 13 ; Num 14 . And let him recollect that despising Christ and his salvation in the present day, becomes a parallel history, only with ten thousand more aggravated circumstances of guilt and ingratitude, than what here marked Israel’s conduct, in their despising the promised land. The mingling with the idolatrous nations, which marked Israel’s behaviour; we find in their history, Num 25:1-3 ; and the lively zeal of Phinehas, recorded in Num 25:7-13 , cannot fail to remind the Reader of Him, concerning whom it is said, that his zeal consumed him. Psa 119:139 ; Joh 2:17 .
Fuente: Hawker’s Poor Man’s Commentary (Old and New Testaments)
Psa 106:24 Yea, they despised the pleasant land, they believed not his word:
Ver. 24. Yea, they despised the pleasant land ] Heb. The land of desire, flowing with milk and honey, sumen totius terrae, as one calleth it; Egypt they preferred before it, though it were a gage of heaven; as Cardinal Bourbon did his part in Paris, before his part in paradise.
They believed not his word
Fuente: John Trapp’s Complete Commentary (Old and New Testaments)
Psa 106:24-27
Psa 106:24-27
SIN NO. 5
This sin was the rebellion of Israel following the shameful report of the ten unfaithful spies (Numbers 13-14).
“Yea, they despised the pleasant land,
They believed not his word.
But murmured in their tents,
And hearkened not unto the voice of Jehovah.
Therefore he sware unto them,
That he would overthrow them in the wilderness,
And that he would overthrow their seed among the nations,
And scatter them in the lands.”
“They despised the pleasant land” (Psa 106:24). The last half of Numbers 13, reports this. The ten spies brought back an evil report of the land of Canaan, affirming in the strongest terms possible that the Israelites would never be able to take it. “And they brought up an evil report of the land” (Num 13:32).
“They murmured in their tents” (Psa 106:25). The Jerusalem Bible reads this, “They stayed in their camp and muttered treason.” Their actual words were:
“Would that we had died in the land of Egypt! or would that we had died in this wilderness! Wherefore doth Jehovah bring us into this land to fall by the sword? Our wives and our little one will be a prey; were it not better for us to return into Egypt?” (Num 14:2-3).
“Their seed among the nations … scatter them in the lands” (Psa 106:27). This threat of the scattering of Israel among the nations “is founded upon Leviticus 26 and Deuteronomy 28.
E.M. Zerr
Psa 106:24. Despise means to belittle or refuse to consider. The Israelites closed their eyes of faith against the attractions of the promised land and became impatient on account of some unpleasant conditions connected with obtaining it.
Psa 106:25. The original word for murmur is defined in the lexicon, “to grumble, i. e. to rebel.” In 1Co 10:10 Paul refers to the same subject and Thayer defines the word, “to discontentedly complain.” It means a situation where the complainant is dissatisfied, but is not able to specify any valid reason for his discontent.
Psa 106:26. This verse is a specific reference to the death of the men of war after the return of the 12 spies. (Numbers 14.)
Psa 106:27. This verse refers to the captivity of all the nations of Israel. The history of that tragic event is in 2 Kings 24, 25.
Fuente: Old and New Testaments Restoration Commentary
they despised: Gen 25:34, Num 13:32, Num 14:31, Mat 22:5, Heb 12:16
the pleasant land: Heb. a land of desire, Deu 8:7-9, Deu 11:11, Deu 11:12, Jer 3:19, Eze 20:6
they believed: Num 14:11, Deu 1:32, Heb 3:12, Heb 3:18, Heb 3:19, Heb 4:2, Heb 4:6, Heb 4:14, Jud 1:5
Reciprocal: Num 14:2 – murmured Deu 1:26 – General Deu 9:23 – ye believed 2Ki 17:14 – did not believe Neh 9:17 – refused Psa 78:22 – General Heb 11:6 – without
Fuente: The Treasury of Scripture Knowledge
MANS ACCEPTANCE OR REJECTION OF GOD
They thought scorn of that pleasant land: and gave no credence unto His word.
Psa 106:24 (Prayer Book Version)
Whatever diversity of opinion upon the sacred significance of life may be represented in this congregation, there is at least one thing upon which all serious-minded souls will agree, and that is, that there is nothing more important in the moral order than mans acceptance or rejection of God.
I. Causes of mans rejection of God.In the Bible there are many causes for mans rejection of God.
(a) Dissatisfaction with the invisible.The first of these seems to be the incapacity of man to rest satisfied with the invisible. He doubts the invisible. Hence it was that in early days when Moses, the man of God, was in the mount with the Father of us all, receiving from Him a revelation, the privileged people were dissatisfied with his absence and with that which the absence represented; they longed for the visible. They thought that the visible was the real.
(b) Evil associations.But this is not at all the only reason. We come down the stream of Hebrew history. Solomon became associated with heathen women, and his heart strayed from God Who made him what he was. And thus we are enabled to see that evil associates, forbidden by God and known to men, will come between God and man, and will produce the same result in the moral order that is produced by mans impatience with a religion that has in its centre the invisible.
(c) Thinking scorn of religion.But in our text you have not to do with either of these. Here the cause that leads to separation between man and God is in the field of fancy. It is in the realm of the imagination. They thought scorn of that pleasant land. The children of Israel wondered why they had been brought up from Egypt. Their insurrection took the practical form of trying to stone Moses. And the cause of this was that not one of them knew anything about the land. They refused the evidence, and they were in a state of open hostility to God their Father.
II. An everyday experience.That spirit is not quite extinct. There are a large number of persons who first think scorn of religion, and then become not only disobedient to Gods Word, but apparently they lose the power to grasp the weight of its increasing evidence. To bring this subject up to everyday life, we do not say that God gives us a land flowing with milk and honey, we do not adorn this land with all the fertility with which God was pleased to stimulate the spiritual life of the Israelitish nation. But we have our Canaan. What Canaan was to the Israelites Christ is to us, Christ in all the majesty of His Person, Christ in all the potentiality of His office, Christ in all the catholicity of His love, Christ in all His unchanging, undying sympathy with suffering humanity.
III. Factors in coming to Christ.But in our invitations to men to come to our Canaan, that is, to Christ, there are three factors that must not be omitted:
(a) A sense of sin.The first of these is sin. Let men be as optimistic as they may about the advancement of education, about the spread of order, sin cannot be excluded from the body politic nor from the individual nor from the race.
(b) Repentance.The sacred factor in our message is Repentance. Man needs this if he desires to have perpetual affinity and association with God. A bad, unpardoned soul in heaven would make it hell. There must be affinity between those who dwell together, and the only way in which this affinity can be ours is announced to us by Him Who has made it absolutely certain, that is, Christ. He gives us His righteousness, and when we are in Christ God beholds us as in Him. We are one with His righteousness.
(c) Power.And there is the third great factor that we may not be without. I need not only that my sins be forgiven, I want power to resist sin. I want freedom, and freedom consists in the power to master sin that will otherwise master me. Why do men commit sin at all? Because sin is stronger than man. Christ makes man stronger than his sin. Young men, carry away that sentence with you, love it, translate it into the moral rhetoric of your everyday life, and when you are tempted again, remember that Christ makes you stronger than your sin.
IV. What is our response?What is our response to the appeal? Is there nobody here who thinks scorn of the pleasant land, and then gives no credence to the Word of God Almighty? Is there no one who thinks scorn? Why, there are crowds of men who gather their ideas of religion not from their Bible, not from the character of people who love the Bible and God, but from some caustic publication or novel that seems to make light of truths that God holds dear, and of religion by which we are to live and without which we dare not die. You think scorn of the pleasant land and of those who think anything of it. No, you will say, that is hard, that is uncharitablewe do not think scorn, but we will act scorn. God expects every soul baptized into the Church and who rejoices in the association with Christ, to work and to labour. He has purchased to Himself a peculiar people, zealous of good works. How many here are addicted to any form of moral work? Spiritual levity precedes spiritual unbelief, and spiritual unbelief means spiritual sterility. The man that is frivolous about religion will soon disbelieve it, and the man who disbelieves will not only not aid Gods work, but will hinder it. All this is very serious and sorrowful. Now, what are we to do? The first thing, I say, and especially to the young, is this: In all my reading I have never yet read of one experience, and that is that any soul who gave himself to Christ ever regretted having done so. You will never find a nobler religion than the one presented to you. Whoever discovered a better? Frivolity is such a peril to the English nation at the present time. Who would have his spirit tossed upon the torrent of the stream, and in the end find himself without possibility of returning, without capacity to believe? There are dangers in the world of the imagination, dangers in the world of fancy, dangers which God has immortalised for our learning in these well-known words: They thought scorn of that pleasant land, and gave no credence unto His Word.
Dean Wickham.
Fuente: Church Pulpit Commentary
Psa 106:24-27. They despised the pleasant land Canaan, which was so, not only in truth, but even by the relation of those spies, who discouraged them from entering into it. They preferred Egypt and their former bondage before it, Num 14:3-4, and did not think it deserving of a little hazard and difficulty in taking possession of it. They believed not his word His promise of giving them the land, and subduing all their enemies before them, which they knew, by late and manifold experience, that God was both able and willing to do. And hearkened not unto the voice of the Lord To Gods command, which was, that they should boldly and confidently enter into it. Therefore he lifted up his hand He sware, as this phrase is commonly used. Of this dreadful and irrevocable sentence and oath of God, see Num 14:23. To overthrow their seed He sware also, (though not at the same time,) that he would punish their sins, not only in their persons, but also in their posterity: see Exo 20:5; Exo 32:34.
Fuente: Joseph Bensons Commentary on the Old and New Testaments
106:24 Yea, they despised {m} the pleasant land, they believed not his word:
(m) That is Canaan, which acted as a promise of the heavenly inheritance to come, though it was only worth a penny in comparison to the value of the inheritance itself.