Exegetical and Hermeneutical Commentary of Numbers 21:21
And Israel sent messengers unto Sihon king of the Amorites, saying,
21 25. Sihon, refusing passage through his territory, was conquered, and his towns were occupied.
Fuente: The Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges
21 35. The victories over Sihon and Og. See the parallel account in Deu 2:24 to Deu 3:13. The previous verses have described the Israelites’ march through the territory occupied by the Amorites on the north of the Arnon, and their arrival at one of the glens which cleave the western edge of the plateau, close to the spot where it ran into the Jordan valley. The narrative now returns to the earlier point, described in Num 21:13, when they were still on the eastern border of the Amorites.
Since the town of Heshbon commanded the glens, it would have been impossible to penetrate into them unless the town had first been captured; but the writer has arranged his material in the present order for the sake of convenience. The battles with Sihon and Og being the last struggles before the promised land could be reached, the remembrance of them was cherished; see Jdg 11:19-22, 1Ki 4:19, Neh 9:22, Psa 135:11; Psa 136:19 f.
Fuente: The Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges
Num 21:21-35
Sihon would not suffer Israel to pass.
The wicked hate and persecute the godly without any just cause
This is the practice of wicked men to pursue the children of God with all despiteful dealing, albeit they offer no occasion of hurt unto them. Cain; Josephs brethren, &c. The reasons are very plain.
1. For it seemeth unto them more than strange that the faithful are not brethren with them in evil, but separate themselves from them, and will touch no unclean thing. This is that which the Apostle Peter witnesseth (1Pe 4:4-5). But it is better for us to have the haired of men than fail in any part of our duty unto God.
2. No marvel if the wicked hate the godly, for the world hateth Christ.
Uses:
1. We may assure ourselves that it is a lamentable condition to dwell among such malicious and mischievous enemies.
2. Seeing this is the entertainment that we must look for in the world, it behoves us to live in unity and to love one another as the children of the Father and the disciples of Christ.
3. Seeing hatred lodgeth in the heart of a wicked man toward the faithful, it is our duty to pray to God to be delivered from unreasonable and evil men (2Th 3:2-3). This David declareth (Psa 35:12-13; Psa 35:15-17). Thus doth God wean us from the love of this world, that we should long after His kingdom, where is fulness of joy for evermore. (W. Attersoll.)
The kings highway
I. The kings highway should be a public road. Royalty ought to be democracy personified. What the king holds is for the peoples use; what he does, for their good.
II. The kings highway should, therefore, be, free, But, alas! what kings highway is free? There are taxes and hindrances, and some are not allowed to pass it at all. National jealousies and pride bar the national highway.
III. The kings highway being closed, injures those who close it.
1. It makes enemies. Those who demand access are sore at the refusal.
2. It does not accomplish the object in view. Those who wish to get through, find other ways round.
3. It causes loss. The Israelites would have paid for all they required, and so have benefited the Edomites.
IV. There is one kings highway which is free to all, from which none are turned back, which is free from toll and safe from foes. This is that which Christ has opened, and which leads straight to the throne of God. (Homilist.)
Fuente: Biblical Illustrator Edited by Joseph S. Exell
By Gods allowance, that so Sihons malice might be the more evident and inexcusable, and that their title to his country more clear in the judgments of all men, as being gotten by a just war, into which they were forced for their own defence.
Fuente: English Annotations on the Holy Bible by Matthew Poole
21-23. Israel sent messengers untoSihonThe rejection of their respectful and pacific message wasresentedSihon was discomfited in battleand Israel obtained byright of conquest the whole of the Amorite dominions.
Fuente: Jamieson, Fausset and Brown’s Commentary Critical and Explanatory on the Whole Bible
And Israel sent messengers unto Sihon king of the Amorites,…. Who were one of the nations of the Canaanites, and a principal and powerful one, and who were devoted to destruction, and their land designed for the people of Israel; see Ge 15:16, at this time Sihon was their king, to whom Moses, in the name of Israel, sent a very peaceable message from the wilderness of Kedemoth, which lay near his country, De 2:26:
saying; as follows.
Fuente: John Gill’s Exposition of the Entire Bible
Defeat of the Amorite Kings, Sihon of Heshbon and Og of Bashan, and Conquest of their Kingdoms.
Num 21:21-23 When the Israelites reached the eastern border of the kingdom of the Amorite king Sihon (see at Num 21:13), they sent messengers to him, as they had previously done to the king of Edom, to ask permission to pass peaceably through his territory upon the high road (cf. Num 21:22 and Num 20:17); and Sihon refused this request, just as the king of Edom had done, and marched with all his people against the Israelites. But whereas the Lord forbade the Israelites to make war upon their kinsmen the Edomites, He now commanded them to make war upon the Amorite king, and take possession of his land (Deu 2:24-25); for the Amorites belonged to the Canaanitish tribes which were ripe for the judgment of extermination ( Gen 15:16). And if, notwithstanding this, the Israelites sent to him with words of peace (Deu 2:26), this was simply done to leave the decision of his fate in his own hand (see at Deu 2:24). Sihon came out against the Israelites into the desert as far as Jahza, where a battle was fought, in which he was defeated. The accounts of the Onom. concerning Jahza, which was situated, according to Eusebius, between Medamon ( Medaba) and Debous ( Dibon, see above), and according to Jerome, between Medaba and Deblatai, may be reconciled with the statement that it was in the desert, provided we assume that it was not in a straight line between the places named, but in a more easterly direction on the edge of the desert, near to the commencement of the Wady Wale, a conclusion to which the juxtaposition of Jahza and Mephaot in Jos 13:18; Jos 21:37, and Jer 48:21, also points (see at Jos 13:18).
Num 21:24-26 Israel smote him with the edge of the sword, i.e., without quarter (see Gen 34:26), and took possession of his land “ from Arnon (Mojeb) to the Jabbok, unto the children of Ammon,” i.e., to the upper Jabbok, the modern Nahr or Moiet Ammn. The Jabbok, now called Zerka, i.e., the blue, does not take its rise, as Seetzen supposed, on the pilgrim-road by the castle of Zerka; but its source, according to Abulfeda (tab. Syr. p. 91) and Buckingham, is the Nahr Ammn, which flowed down from the ancient capital of the Ammonites, and was called the upper Jabbok, and formed the western border of the Ammonites towards the kingdom of Sihon, and subsequently towards Gad (Deu 2:37; Deu 3:16; Jos 12:2). “ For the border of the Ammonites was strong” (firm), i.e., strongly fortified; “for which reason Sihon had only been able to push his conquests to the upper Jabbok, not into the territory of the Ammonites.” This explanation of Knobel’s is perfectly correct; since the reason why the Israelites did not press forward into the country of the Ammonites, was not the strength of their frontier, but the word of the Lord, “Make not war upon them, for I shall give thee no possession of the land of the children of Ammon” (Deu 2:19). God had only promised the patriarchs, on behalf of their posterity, that He would give them the land of Canaan, which was bounded towards the east by the Jordan (Num 34:2-12; compared with Gen 10:19 and Gen 15:19-21); and the Israelites would have received no settlement at all on the eastern side of the Jordan, had not the Canaanitish branch of the Amorites extended itself to that side in the time of Moses, and conquered a large portion of the possessions of the Moabites, and also (according to Jos 13:25, as compared with Jdg 11:13) of the Ammonites, driving back the Moabites as far as the Arnon, and the Ammonites behind the Nahr Ammn. With the defeat of the Amorites, all the land that they had conquered passed into the possession of the Israelites, who took possession of these towns (cf. Deu 2:34-36). The statement in Num 21:25, that Israel settled in all the towns of the Amorites, is somewhat anticipatory of the history itself, as the settlement did not occur till Moses gave the conquered land to the tribes of Reuben and Gad for a possession (Num 32). The only places mentioned here are Heshbon and her daughters, i.e., the smaller towns belonging to it (cf. Jos 13:17), which are enumerated singly in Num 32:34-38, and Jos 13:15-28. In explanation of the expression, “ Heshbon and her daughters,” it is added in Num 21:26, that Heshbon was the city, i.e., the capital of the Amorite king Sihon, who had made war upon the former king of Moab, and taken away all his land as far as the Arnon. Consequently, even down to the time of the predecessor of Balak, the king of the Moabites at that time, the land to the north of the Arnon, and probably even as far as the lower Jabbok, to which point the kingdom of Sihon extended (see Deu 3:12-13; Jos 12:5), belonged to the Moabites. And in accordance with this, the country where the Israelites encamped opposite to Jericho, before crossing the Jordan, is reckoned as part of the land of Moab (Deu 1:5; Deu 29:1; Deu 32:49; Deu 34:5-6), and called Arboth Moab (see Num 22:1); whilst the women who seduced the Israelites to join in the idolatrous worship of Baal Peor are called daughters of Moab (Num 25:1).
Num 21:27-28 The glorious conquest and destruction of the capital of the powerful king of the Amorites, in the might of the Lord their God, inspired certain composers of proverbs ( denom. from ) to write songs in commemoration of the victory. Three strophes are given from a song of this kind, and introduced with the words “ therefore,’ sc., because Heshbon had fallen in this manner, “ the composers of proverbs say.” The first strophe (Num 21:27 and Num 21:28) runs thus: “ Come to Heshbon: Built and restored be the city of Sihon! For fire went out of Heshbon; flames from the city of Sihon. It devoured Ar Moab, the lords of the heights of Arnon.” The summons to come to Heshbon and build this ruined city up again, was not addressed to the Israelites, but to the conquered Amorites, and is to be interpreted as ironical ( F. v. Meyer; Ewald, Gesch. ii. pp. 267, 268): “ Come to Heshbon, ye victorious Amorites, and build your royal city up again, which we have laid in ruins! A fire has gone out of it, and burned up Ar Moab, and the lords of the heights of the Arnon.” The reference is to the war-fire, which the victorious Amorites kindled from Heshbon in the land of Moab under the former king of Moab; that is to say, the war in which they subjugated Ar Moab and the possessors of the heights of Arnon. Ar Moab (see at Num 21:15) appears to have been formerly the capital of all Moabitis, or at least of that portion of it which was situated upon the northern side of the Arnon; and the prominence given to it in Deu 2:9, Deu 2:18, Deu 2:29, is in harmony with this. The heights of Arnon are mentioned as the limits to which Sihon had carried his victorious supremacy over Moab. The “ lords” of these heights are the Moabites.
Num 21:29 Second strophe: “ Woe to thee, Moab! Thou art lost, people of Chemosh! He has given up his sons as fugitives, and his daughters into captivity-To Sihon, king of the Amorites.” The poet here turns to Moab, and announces its overthrow. Chemosh ( , from = , subactor, domitor ) was the leading deity of the Moabites (Jer 48:7) as well as of the Ammonites (Jdg 11:24), and related not only to Milcom, a god of the Ammonites, but also to the early Canaanitish deity Baal and Moloch. According to a statement of Jerome (on Isa 15:1-9), it was only another name for Baal Peor, probably a god of the sun, which was worshipped as the king of his nation and the god of war. He is found in this character upon the coins of Areopolis, standing upon a column, with a sword in his right hand and a lance and shield in the left, and with two fire-torches by his side (cf. Ekhel doctr. numm. vet. iii. p. 504), and was appeased by the sacrifice of children in times of great distress ( 2Ki 3:27). Further information, and to some extent a different view, are found in the article by J. G. Mller in Herzog’s Cyclopaedia. The subject to is neither Moab nor Jehovah, but Chemosh. The thought is this: as Chemosh, the god of Moab, could not deliver his people from the Amorite king; so now that Israel has conquered the latter, Moab is utterly lost. In the triumph which Israel celebrated over Moab through conquering its conquerors, there is a forewarning expressed of the ultimate subjection of Moab under the sceptre of Israel.
Num 21:30 Third strophe, in which the woe evoked upon Moab is justified: “ We cast them down: Heshbon is lost even to Dibon; and we laid it waste even to Nophah, with fire to Medeba.” is the first pers. pl. imperf. Kal of with the suffix for (as in Exo 29:30). , to cast arrows, to shoot down (Exo 19:13): figuratively to throw to the ground (Exo 15:4). for , first pers. pl. imperf. Hiph. of , synonymous with , Jer 4:7. The suffixes of both verbs refer to the Moabites as the inhabitants of the cities named. Accordingly Heshbon also is construed as a masculine, because it was not the town as such, but the inhabitants, that were referred to. Heshbon, the residence of king Sihon, stood pretty nearly in the centre between the Arnon and the Jabbok (according to the Onom. twenty Roman miles from the Jordan, opposite to Jericho), and still exists in extensive ruins with deep bricked wells, under the old name of Hesbn (cf. v. Raumer, Pal. p. 262). On Dibon in the south, not more than an hour from Arnon. Nophach is probably the same as Nobach, Jdg 8:11, but not the same as Kenath, which was altered into Nobach (Num 32:42). According to Jdg 8:11, it was near Jogbeha, not far from the eastern desert; and in all probability it still exists in the ruined place called Nowakis ( Burckhardt, p. 619; Buckingham, ii. p. 46; Robinson, App. p. 188), to the north-west of Ammn (Rabbath-Ammon). Nophach, therefore, is referred to as a north-eastern town or fortress, and contrasted with Dibon, which was in the south. The words which follow, , “ which to Medeba,” yield no intelligible meaning. The Seventy give . (fire upon Medeba), and seem to have adopted the reading . In the Masoretic punctuation also, the in is marked as suspicious by a punct. extraord. Apparently, therefore, was a copyist’s error of old standing for , and is to be construed as governed by the verb , “with fire to Medeba.” The city was about two hours to the south-east of Heshbon, and is still to be seen in ruins bearing the name of Medaba, upon the top of a hill of about half-an-hour’s journey in circumference ( Burckhardt, p. 625; v. Raumer, Pal. pp. 264-5).
(Note: Ewald and Bleek (Einleitung in d. A. T. p. 200) are both agreed that this ode was composed on the occasion of the defeat of the Amorites by the Israelites, and particularly on the capture of the capital Heshbon, as it depicts the fall of Heshbon in the most striking way; and this city was rebuilt shortly afterwards by the Reubenites, and remained ever afterwards a city of some importance. Knobel, on the other hand, has completely misunderstood the meaning and substance of the verses quoted, and follows some of the earliest commentators, such as Clericus and others, in regarding the ode as an Amoritish production, and interpreting it as relating to the conquest and fortification of Heshbon by Sihon.)
Num 21:31-32 When Israel was sitting, i.e., encamped, in the land of the Amorites, Moses reconnoitred Jaezer, after which the Israelites took “its daughters,” i.e., the smaller places dependent upon Jaezer, and destroyed the Amorites who dwelt in them. It is evident from Num 32:35, that Jaezer was not only conquered, but destroyed. This city, which was situated, according to the Onom. ( s. v. Jazer), ten Roman miles to the west of Philadelphia (Rabbath-Ammon), and fifteen Roman miles to the north of Heshbon, is most probably to be sought for (as Seetzen supposes, i. pp. 397, 406, iv. p. 216) in the ruins of es Szr, at the source of the Nahr Szr, in the neighbourhood of which Seetzen found some pools, which are probably the remains of “the sea of Jazer,” mentioned in Jer 48:32. There is less probability in Burckhardt’s conjecture, that it is to be found in the ruins of Ain Hazir, near Kherbet el Suk, to the south-west of es Salt; though v. Raumer ( Pal. p. 262) decides in its favour (see my Commentary on Jos 13:25).
Num 21:33-35 The Israelites then turned towards the north, and took the road to Bashan, where king Og came against them with his people, to battle at Edrei. From what point it was that the Israelites entered upon the expedition against Bashan, is not stated either here or in Deu 3:1., where Moses recapitulates these events, and gives a more detailed account of the conquests than he does here, simply because it was of no importance in relation to the main object of the history. We have probably to picture the conquest of the kingdoms of Sihon and Og as taking place in the following manner: namely, that after Sihon had been defeated at Jahza, and his capital had been speedily taken in consequence of this victory, Moses sent detachments of his army from the places of encampment mentioned in Num 21:16, Num 21:18-20, into the different divisions of his kingdom, for the purpose of taking possession of their towns. After the conquest of the whole of the territory of Sihon, the main army advanced to Bashan and defeated king Og in a great battle at Edrei, whereupon certain detachments of the army were again despatched, under courageous generals, to secure the conquest of the different parts of his kingdom (cf. Num 32:39, Num 32:41-42). The kingdom of Og embraced the northern half of Gilead, i.e., the country between the Jabbok and the Mandhur (Deu 3:13; Jos 12:5), the modern Jebel Ajlun, and “all Bashan,” or “all the region of Argob ” (Deu 3:4, Deu 3:13-14), the modern plain of Jaulan and Hauran, which extended eastwards to Salcah, north-eastwards to Edrei (Deu 3:10), and northwards to Geshur and Maacha (Jos 12:5). For further remarks, see Deu 3:10. There were two towns in Bashan of the name of Edrei. One of them, which is mentioned in Deu 1:4 and Jos 12:4, along with Ashtaroth, as a second residence of king Og, is described in the Onom. ( s. v. Ashtaroth and Edrei) as six Roman miles, i.e., fully two hours, from Ashtaroth, and twenty-four or twenty-five miles from Bostra, and called Adraa or Adara. This is the modern Der or Dra (in Burckhardt, p. 385; Seetzen, i. pp. 363, 364), and Draah, Idderat (in Buckingham, Syr. ii. p. 146), a place which still exists, consisting of a number of miserable houses, built for the most part of basalt, and standing upon a small elevation in a treeless, hilly region, with the ruins of an old church and other smaller buildings, supposed to belong to the time when Draa, Adraa (as urbs Arabiae), was an episcopal see, on the east of the pilgrim-road between Remtha and Mezareib, by the side of a small wady (see Ritter, Erdk. xv. pp. 838ff.). The other Edrei, which is mentioned in Deu 3:10 as the north-western frontier of Bashan, was farther towards the north, and is still to be seen in the ruins of Zorah or Ethra (see at Deu 3:10). In the present instance the southern town is intended, which was not far from the south-west frontier of Bashan, as Og certainly did not allow the Israelites to advance to the northern frontier of his kingdom before he gave them battle.
Num 21:34-35 Just as in the case of Sihon, the Lord had also promised the Israelites a victory over Og, and had given him into their power, so that they smote him, with his sons and all his people, without leaving any remnant, and executed the ban, according to Deu 2:34, upon both the kings. (See the notes on Deut 3).
Fuente: Keil & Delitzsch Commentary on the Old Testament
| Sihon and Og Overthrown. | B. C. 1452. |
21 And Israel sent messengers unto Sihon king of the Amorites, saying, 22 Let me pass through thy land: we will not turn into the fields, or into the vineyards; we will not drink of the waters of the well: but we will go along by the king’s high way, until we be past thy borders. 23 And Sihon would not suffer Israel to pass through his border: but Sihon gathered all his people together, and went out against Israel into the wilderness: and he came to Jahaz, and fought against Israel. 24 And Israel smote him with the edge of the sword, and possessed his land from Arnon unto Jabbok, even unto the children of Ammon: for the border of the children of Ammon was strong. 25 And Israel took all these cities: and Israel dwelt in all the cities of the Amorites, in Heshbon, and in all the villages thereof. 26 For Heshbon was the city of Sihon the king of the Amorites, who had fought against the former king of Moab, and taken all his land out of his hand, even unto Arnon. 27 Wherefore they that speak in proverbs say, Come into Heshbon, let the city of Sihon be built and prepared: 28 For there is a fire gone out of Heshbon, a flame from the city of Sihon: it hath consumed Ar of Moab, and the lords of the high places of Arnon. 29 Woe to thee, Moab! thou art undone, O people of Chemosh: he hath given his sons that escaped, and his daughters, into captivity unto Sihon king of the Amorites. 30 We have shot at them; Heshbon is perished even unto Dibon, and we have laid them waste even unto Nophah, which reacheth unto Medeba. 31 Thus Israel dwelt in the land of the Amorites. 32 And Moses sent to spy out Jaazer, and they took the villages thereof, and drove out the Amorites that were there. 33 And they turned and went up by the way of Bashan: and Og the king of Bashan went out against them, he, and all his people, to the battle at Edrei. 34 And the LORD said unto Moses, Fear him not: for I have delivered him into thy hand, and all his people, and his land; and thou shalt do to him as thou didst unto Sihon king of the Amorites, which dwelt at Heshbon. 35 So they smote him, and his sons, and all his people, until there was none left him alive: and they possessed his land.
We have here an account of the victories obtained by Israel over Sihon and Og, which must be distinctly considered, not only because they are here distinctly related, but because long afterwards the memorial of them is distinctly celebrated, and they are severally assigned as instances of everlasting mercy. He slew Sihon king of the Amorites, for his mercy endureth for ever, and Og the king of Bashan, for his mercy endureth for ever,Psa 136:19; Psa 136:20.
I. Israel sent a peaceable message to Sihon king of the Amorites (v. 21), but received an unpeaceable return, worse than that of the Edomites to the like message, Num 20:18; Num 20:20. For the Edomites only refused them a passage, and stood upon their own defence to keep them out; but Sihon went out with his forces against Israel in the wilderness, out of his own borders, without any provocation given him (v. 23), and so ran himself upon his own ruin. Jephtha intimates that he was prompted by his politics to do this (Judg. xi. 20), Sihon trusted not Israel to pass through his coast; but his politics deceived him, for Moses says, God hardened his spirit and made his heart obstinate, that he might deliver him into the hand of Israel, Deut. ii. 30. The enemies of God’s church are often infatuated in those very counsels which they think most wisely taken. Sihon’s army was routed, and not only so, but all his country came into the possession of Israel, Num 21:24; Num 21:25. This seizure is justified, 1. Against the Amorites themselves, for they were the aggressors, and provoked the Israelites to battle; and yet, perhaps, that would not have been sufficient to entitle Israel to their land, but that God himself, the King of nations, the Lord of the whole earth, had given them a grant of it. The Amorites formed one of the devoted nations whose land God had promised to Abraham and his seed, which promise should be performed when the iniquity of the Amorites should be full, Gen. xv. 16. Jephtha insists upon this grant as their title, Jdg 11:23; Jdg 11:24. The victory which God gave them over the Amorites put them in possession, and then, the promise made to their fathers having given them a right, by virtue of that they kept possession. 2. Against the Moabites, who had formerly been the lords-proprietors of this country. If they should ever lay claim to it, and should plead that God himself had provided that none of their land should be given to Israel for a possession (Deut. ii. 9), Moses here furnishes posterity with a replication to their plea, and Jephtha makes use of it against the Amorites 260 years afterwards, when Israel’s title to this country was questioned. (1.) The justification itself is that though it was true this country had belonged to the Moabites, yet the Amorites had taken it from them some time before, and were now in full and quiet possession of it, v. 26. The Israelites did not take it out of the hands of the Moabites, they had before lost it to the Amorites, and were constrained to give up their pretensions to it; and, when Israel had taken it from the Amorites, they were under no obligation to restore it to the Moabites, whose title to it was long since extinguished. See here the uncertainty of worldly possessions, how often they change their owners, and how soon we may be deprived of them, even when we think ourselves most sure of them; they make themselves wings. It is our wisdom therefore to secure the good part which cannot be taken away from us. See also the wisdom of the divine Providence and its perfect foresight, by which preparation is made long before for the accomplishment of all God’s purposes in their season. This country being designed in due time for Israel, it is beforehand put into the hand of the Amorites, who little think that they have it but as trustees till Israel come of age, and then must surrender it. We understand not the vast reaches of Providence, but known unto God are all his works, as appears in this instance, that he set the bounds of the people according to the number of the children of Israel, Deut. xxxii. 8. All that land which he intended for his chosen people he put into the possession of the devoted nations, that were to be driven out. (2.) For proof of the allegation, he refers to the authentic records of the country, for so their proverbs or songs were, one of which he quotes some passages out of (v. 27-30), which sufficiently proves what is vouched for, namely, [1.] That such and such places that are here named, though they had been in the possession of the Moabites, had by right of war become the dominion of Sihon king of the Amorites. Heshbon had become his city, and he obtained such a quiet possession of it that it was built and prepared for him (v. 27), and the country to Dibon and Nophah was likewise subdued, and annexed to the kingdom of the Amorites, v. 30. [2.] That the Moabites were utterly disabled ever to regain the possession. Even Ar of Moab, though not taken or attempted by Sihon, but still remaining the metropolis of Moab, yet was so wasted by this loss that is would never be able to make head, v. 28. The Moabites were undone, and even Chemosh their god had given them up, as unable to rescue them out of the hands of Sihon, v. 29. By all this it appears that the Moabites’ claim to this country was barred for ever. There may be a further reason for inserting this Amorite poem, namely, to show that the triumphing of the wicked is short. Those that had conquered the Moabites, and insulted over them, were now themselves conquered and insulted over by the Israel of God. It is very probable that the same Sihon, king of the Amorites, that had got this country from the Moabites, now lost it to the Israelites; for, though it is said to be taken from a former king of Moab (v. 26), yet not by a former king of the Amorites; and then it shows how sometimes justice makes men to see the loss of that which they got by violence, and were puffed up with the gain of. They are exalted but for a little while, Job xxiv. 24.
II. Og king of Bashan, instead of being warned by the fate of his neighbours to make peace with Israel, is instigated by it to make war with them, which proves in like manner to be his destruction. Og was also an Amorite, and therefore perhaps thought himself better able to deal with Israel than his neighbours were, and more likely to prevail, because of his own gigantic strength and stature, which Moses takes notice of, Deut. iii. 11, where he gives a more full account of this story. Here observe, 1. That the Amorite begins the war (v. 33): He went out to battle against Israel. His country was very rich and pleasant. Bashan was famous for the best timber (witness the oaks of Bashan), and the best breed of cattle, witness the bulls and kine of Bashan, and the lambs and rams of that country, which are celebrated, Deut. xxxii. 14. Wicked men do their utmost to secure themselves and their possessions against the judgments of God, but all in vain, when their day comes, on which they must fall. 2. That God interests himself in the cause, bids Israel not to fear this threatening force, and promises a complete victory: “I have delivered him into thy hand (v. 34); the thing is as good as done already, it is all thy own, enter and take possession.” Giants are but worms before God’s power. 3. That Israel is more than a conqueror, not only routs the enemies’ army, but gains the enemies’ country, which afterwards was part of the inheritance of the two tribes and a half that were first seated on the other side Jordan. God gave Israel these successes, while Moses was yet with them, both for his comfort (that he might see the beginning of that glorious work, which he must not live to see the finishing of) and for the encouragement of the people in the war of Canaan under Joshua. Though this was to them in comparison but as the day of small things, yet it was an earnest of great things.
Fuente: Matthew Henry’s Whole Bible Commentary
Verses 21-23:
The Amorites were of Canaanite descent, Ge 10:16, and thus were not kin to Israel as were the Moabites, Ammonites, and Edomites. They were among those whom Israel was commanded to drive out of the Land because of their iniquity, Ge 15:16.
Sihon and his people were intruders into the region. They had only recently taken from Moab all of his territory north of the Arnon. Their occupation of this region led to Israel’s possession of the Trans-Jordan region.
Israel requested permission from Sihon to be allowed to cross his territory, as they had earlier done with Edom, Nu 20:14-17. As in the case of Edom, permission was denied. Sihon assembled his military forces to resist any attempt by Israel to cross his land.
“Jahaz,” the site of Israel’s encounter with Sihon. Nothing further is known of this locality.
Fuente: Garner-Howes Baptist Commentary
Num 21:21
. And Israel sent messengers. The second narration, which I have subjoined from Deuteronomy, is the fuller; nevertheless, a question arises from it, for what reason this embassy was sent to king Sihon, whose kingdom was already devoted to the Israelites: for it seems to be altogether inconsistent to offer conditions of peace when war is decreed. God commands His people to take up arms: He declares that they shall be victorious, so as to occupy the land of Sihon by right of war; what, then, can be more absurd than to request of him that they might pass through his land in peace? If this attempt were made by Moses without the command of God, such an excess of kindness was not devoid of guilt, inasmuch as it was an act of much temerity to promise what God had appointed otherwise. But, if we should say that the messengers went with the authority, and at the command of God, under what pretext shall the deceptiveness of the act be excused? for it is very improper to flatter with soothing words and promises those whom you have destined to destruction. The conclusion I come to is, that although the event was not unknown to God, still the embassy was sent, nevertheless, by his command and decree, in order to lay open the obstinate ferocity of the nation. But, since the secret judgments of God far surmount our senses, let us learn to reverence their height; and let this sober view restrain our boldness like a rein, viz., that although the reason for the works of God be unknown to us, still it always exists with Him. God knew that the messengers would speak to the deaf, and yet it is not in vain that He bids them go; for, since the kingdom of Sihon was not properly included in the promised land, it was not lawful for the children of Israel to make war upon it until they had been provoked by an unjust refusal. Thus, then, I connect the history. Before they had been assured at God’s command of the event, and the victory, they sent the messengers, who demanded that a pacific passage should be accorded to them; and that then the permission to have recourse to arms was granted. If any prefer to think that, before Moses attempted to preserve peace, he had been made acquainted with all that would occur, I will not contend the point; but I deem it more probable that he had expectations of the peace which he sought, because the judgment of God had not yet been declared. If, therefore, Sihon had allowed himself to be propitiated, Moses would never have dared to deal with him as an enemy; but, he rather simply and honestly promised peace, which he intended to preserve; God, however, had otherwise appointed, as the event presently shewed. Still He was not inconsistent with Himself, or variable, in sending the messengers to an irreclaimable and obstinately perverse man; for thus was all excuse taken away when he had voluntarily provoked to war a people who were ready and willing to maintain peace and equity. But rather may we see in this history, as in a glass, that, whilst God earnestly invites the reprobate to repentance and the hope of salvation, He has no other object than that they may be rendered inexcusable by the detection of their impiety. Hence is their ignorance refuted, who gather from this that it is free for all promiscuously to embrace God’s grace, because its promulgation (doctrina) is common, and directed to all without exception; as if God was not aware of what Sihon would answer when He would have him attracted to equity by friendly and peaceful words; or as if, on his free will, the purpose of God was suspended as to the war, which was soon after carried forward by His decree.
But inasmuch as what is here briefly recorded, would be obscure in itself, we must explain it by the other narrative, where it is thus written, —
Fuente: Calvin’s Complete Commentary
H. VICTORY OVER SIHON AND OG vv. 2135
TEXT
Num. 21:21. And Israel sent messengers unto Sihon king of the Amorites, saying, 22. Let me pass through thy land: we will not turn into the fields, or into the vineyards; we will not drink of the waters of the well: but we will go along by the kings high way, until we be past thy borders. 23. And Sihon would not suffer Israel to pass through his border: but Sihon gathered all his people together, and went out against Israel into the wilderness: and he came to Jahaz, and fought against Israel. 24. And Israel smote him with the edge of the sword, and possessed his land from Arnon to Jabbok, even unto the children of Ammon: for the border of the children of Ammon was strong. 25. And Israel took all these cities; and Israel dwelt in all the cities of the Amorites, who had fought against the former king of Moab, and taken all his land out of his hand, even unto Arnon. 27. Wherefore they that speak in proverbs say, Come into Heshbon, let the city of Sihon be built and prepared: 28. For there is a fire gone out of Heshbon, a flame from the city of Sihon: it hath consumed Ar of Moab, and the lords of the high places of Arnon. 29. Woe to thee, Moab! thou art undone, O people of Chemosh: he hath given his sons that escaped, and his daughters, into captivity unto Sihon king of the Amorites. 30. We have shot at them; Heshbon is perished even unto Dibon, and we have laid them waste even unto Nophah, which reacheth unto Medeba.
31. Thus Israel dwelt in the land of the Amorites. 32. And Moses sent to spy out Jaazer, and they took the villages thereof, and drove out the Amorites that were there.
33. And they turned and went up by the way of Bashan: and Og the king of Bashan went out against them, he, and all his people, to the battle at Edrei. 34. And the Lord said unto Moses, Fear him not: for I have delivered him into thy hand, and all his people, and his land; and thou shalt do to him as thou didst unto Sihon king of the Amorites, which dwelt at Heshbon. 35. So they smote him, and his sons, and all his people, until there was none left alive; and they possessed his land.
PARAPHRASE
Num. 21:21. And Israel sent messengers to Sihon, King of the Amorites, saying, 22. Let me pass through your land; we will not turn aside into the fields or into the vineyards; we will not drink of the waters of the well; we will go along by the Kings Highway, until we have passed your borders. 23. But Sihon would not permit Israel to pass through his territory. He gathered all his men together and went out against Israel in the wilderness, and he came to Jahaz and fought against Israel. 24. And Israel slew him with the edge of the sword and took possession of his land from Arnon to Jabbok, as far as the children of Ammon: for the border of the children of Ammon was strong. 25. And Israel took all these cities, and Israel settled in all the cities of the Amorites, in Heshbon and in all its villages. 26. Now Heshbon was the city of Sihon the king of the Amorites, who had fought against the former king of Moab and had taken all his land out of his hand, as far as the Arnon. 27, Therefore those who speak in similes say,
Come to Heshbon; let it be built;
Let the city of Sihon be established.
28. For a fire went out of Heshbon,
A flame from the city of Sihon:
It consumed Ar of Moab,
And the lords of the high places of Arnon.
29. Woe unto you, Moab!
You are undone, O people of Chemosh!
He made his sons fugitives,
And his daughters captives
To Sihon, king of the Amorites.
30. So their posterity vanished from Heshbon,
As far as Dibon, and we laid waste
Until the fire spread to Medeba.
31. In this manner Israel dwelt in the land of the Amorites. 32. And Moses sent to spy out Jazer; and they took its villages and drove out the Amorites who were there.
33. Then they turned and went by the way of Bashan. And Og, the king of Bashan, went out against them, he and all his people, to the battle at Edrei. 34. And the Lord said to Moses, Do not be afraid of him; I have delivered him into your hand, and all his people, and his land. You shall do to him as you did to Sihon, king of the Amorites, who dwelt at Heshbon. 35. So they slew him, his sons, and all his people until there was not a single survivor; and they took possession of his land.
COMMENTARY
Having passed through the territory controlled by the Edomites and the Moabites, the people of Israel now turn their attention to the next northern neighbors, the Amorites. Unlike the other two nations, the Amorites were not Hebrews, but Canaanites (see Gen. 10:16). The same request made before to Edom and Moab, is addressed to Sihon, and with the same results. It is rejected. To emphasize his refusal, Sihon organized his people into an army and attacked Israel. The encounter occurred at Jahaz, a site as yet unidentified, but probably was found well to the east of Israels camp.
With the conquest of Sihon, the Israelites gained control over a large land, reaching northward to the Jabbok. This river is found about twenty-five miles north of the Dead Sea, and forty-five miles north of the Arnon. North of the Jabbok lived the Ammonites; they may well have prevented the expansion of the Amorites territory. The primary city of the Amorites, Heshbon, had been the capital since Sihon had earlier defeated Moab. It is located about midway between the Arnon and the Jabbok, and eighteen miles east of point where the Jordan flows into the Dead Sea. The immediate area is a plateau of about 3000 feet elevation. Heshbon and her daughters, the small surrounding villages, are listed in Jos. 13:17.
Victory at Heshbon gave rise to the quoted proverbs. These would have been sung by their composers, who may have been professional balladeers. With a succession of favorable events to celebrate, their works are joyous to the Israelites and taunting to their enemies.
The first portion is sometimes thought to have been a work of satirical nature, composed by an Israelite who now challenges the Amorites to recapture their recently-lost capital of Heshbon as they had previously taken it from Moab. The second portion, Num. 21:29, attacks the worshipers of Chemosh, who was Moabs chief god. Certain coins found at Areopolis show Chemosh a god of war armed and flanked by fiery torches. Singing of his defeat in this manner comprised an especially ironic thought. Not only was Chemosh a war god, his direct worship involved human sacrifice via the flame. In the song, Chemosh is powerless to resist Sihon who, in turn, has been soundly defeated by Israel. The third section of the poem details the consequences of Sihons defeat. The text is obscure in the KJV; the RSV seems justified in following the LXX. Heshbon has been utterly destroyed, together with some of the chief cities nearby, Dibon and Medeba.
Jazer was taken next, along with its surrounding villages, which ended the resistance of the Amorites. All of the residents of the city were expelled, and it became an important city in the land of Gad under Joab.
The land of Bashan, lying well to the north of Jazer, is a broad, fertile territory lying to the east of the Sea of Galilee, and extending from Mt. Hermon to a point south and east of the Yarmuk. Edrei, the capital, lay in this corner of the land. The people were Amorites (see Jos. 2:10), but had a separate existence from those governed by Sihon. They lived in heavily fortified cities which had been considered invincible by direct assault. Apparently Ogs forces left the capital for some reason and were beaten in the field. Perhaps, as PC offers, they were victims of their own overconfidence. Speaking as He often did, God told Moses I have delivered him into thy hand . . . ; He speaks of the fait accompli before the battle is engaged. Israel will take army, people and land, and they shall know the same end as did Sihon. And so it happened.
QUESTIONS AND RESEARCH ITEMS
399.
Trace the origin of the Amorites.
400.
Why should Sihon, ruler of a rather small nation, attack such a large group as the Israelites?
401.
Describe the country in which the Amorites lived.
402.
Show the irony in the first simile-ballad, as it relates to the Amorites, and to Moab.
403.
How does the second ballad reflect upon the god Chemosh?
404.
What was the ultimate fate of Jazer?
405.
Show what territory was included in the land of Bashan at this time.
406.
What possible explanation might there be for Ogs abandoning his fortified cities in order to attack Israel in the field?
Fuente: College Press Bible Study Textbook Series
VICTOR OVER SIHON AND OVER OG, Num 21:21-35.
The Moabites and the Amorites having refused to Moses passage through their countries, an entrance to Palestine could now only be gained by war, a resort which he much desired to avoid, especially a collision with Moab, whom Jehovah forbade Israel to “distress.” Deu 2:9. But the result was decisive. The Amorites under their king Sihon, who had years before invaded both Ammon and Moab, and wrested from them almost the whole country between the Arnon and the Jabbok, bore the brunt of the fight with the Israelites, and were defeated with great slaughter.
Fuente: Whedon’s Commentary on the Old and New Testaments
21. Sihon “The Destroyer,” literally, “He who swept all before him.” This formidable chieftain was evidently a man of great courage and daring. He did not hesitate or temporize like Balak, but at once gathered all his people, and attacked Israel as soon as he appeared on his borders.
Amorites See Jos 2:10; Jos 3:10, notes.
Fuente: Whedon’s Commentary on the Old and New Testaments
(II). Victory In The Wars of Yahweh ( Num 21:21 to Num 25:18 ).
Having tasted victory against the king of Arad, and come to the land of plenty, Yahweh now provided them with a series of victories forced on them by belligerent enemies. These would give them possession of the land of plenty on that side of Jordan, continuing the theme of the new beginning. These victories were important. Through their being forced on Israel they had to face them without thinking too hard, so that by the time that they had triumphed they were adequately prepared for ventures ahead. Had they had time to think they might well have decided that Sihon and Og were too powerful for them, but they had no time to think, and Yahweh reversed the defeat of their fathers by the Canaanites/Amorites (Num 14:45 compare Deu 1:44) by giving glorious victories.
Analysis.
a The defeat of Sihon king of the Amorites in the land of the Moabites, with the result that they dwelt there (Num 21:21-31).
b The defeat in the north of Og, king of Bashan, by their armies, and they possess his land (Num 21:32-35).
c The people finally arrive at the plains of Moab and pitch their tents there (Num 21:31 to Num 22:1).
b The defeat of the evil influence of Balaam brought from the north by the Moabites (Num 22:2 to Num 24:25).
a The defeat of the evil influence of Moab in the land of the Moabites (Numbers 25).
The territory that Israel were now operating in was in the land of the Moabites, although it was a section under the control of the Amorites who had seized it from Moab. Moses in fact wished to pass amicably by the land of Sihon, king of the Amorites but Sihon sought to prevent it. That was why he felt able to invade it and take possession of it. These were Amorites, akin to the Canaanites, and thus fair game. Nor had their land been given to them by Yahweh. They were trespassers. Yet they would have been left alone had they been cooperative, for they were not strictly people of ‘the land’. But Deu 2:30 confirms that it was Yahweh’s intention that the attack and defeat took place.
This would then be followed by a campaign against Og, king of Bashan and a ‘battle’ of another kind between Yahweh and the prophet Balaam who was recruited by Moab to curse Israel. They were moving on from victory to victory. It would only be their own lustful desires that would drag them down and bring God’s chastening on them (25). This was a reminder of the fact that the enemy we must most beware of is our own selves.
The term Amorite has various meanings in the Old Testament. It can refer to all the people of Canaan, (e.g. Gen 15:16), to tribes living in the hill country of Canaan (Jos 5:1; Jos 10:5; Jdg 1:34), to inhabitants of the Negeb and the region to the southeast of the Dead Sea (Gen 14:7), and very often, as here, to the inhabitants east of the Jordan under the rule of Sihon and Og.
Battles with the Amorites ( Num 21:21-35 ).
Now commenced the epoch-making battles with the two kings of the Amorites on the east side of the Jordan which would provide Israel with its first conquered land.
1). The Defeat of Sihon, King of the Amorites ( Num 21:21-31 ).
While what is now described passes in a few verses we must not overlook what was involved. The taking of the land of the Amorites and of their fortified cities would not have been easy and would have taken considerable time and effort. But as the poem above made clear, Yahweh was with Israel and thus progress was rapid. It was Israel’s first period of sustained warfare.
Analysis.
a Plea to Sihon to be allowed to pass through the land of the Amorites (Numbers 21-22).
b Sihon refuses and belligerently faces up to Israel (Num 21:23).
c Sihon is defeated and his land possessed up to the borders of Ammon (Num 21:24).
c The cities of Sihon which were once Moab’s are possessed (Num 21:25).
b Sihon’s belligerency against Moab (the song of Heshbon) (Num 21:25-29).
a Israel taunt Sihon and settle in the land of the Amorites (Num 21:30-31).
A Plea to Sihon to Be Allowed to Pass Unscathed Through The Land of the Amorites ( Num 21:21-22 ).
Num 21:21
‘And Israel sent messengers to Sihon king of the Amorites, saying,’
In accordance with practise messengers were sent requesting safe passage without interference. They brought Moses’ words to the king.
Num 21:22
“ Let me pass through your land. We will not turn aside into field, or into vineyard. We will not drink of the water of the wells. We will go by the king’s highway, until we have passed your border.”
The request was from ‘king’ to king. ‘Let me pass through your land.’ It was then promised that if he did so they would use only the highway and not trespass on their fields or drink their water. This was referring to the continuation of ‘the Kings Highway’, the trade route to Damascus, which would make travel easier.
Fuente: Commentary Series on the Bible by Peter Pett
The Overthrow of Sihon and Og
v. 21. And Israel sent messengers unto Sihon, king of the Amorites, v. 22. Let me pass through thy land; we will not turn into the fields or into the vineyards; we will not drink of the waters of the well, but we will go along by the king’s highway until we be past thy borders. v. 23. And Sihon would not suffer Israel to pass through his border; but Sihon gathered all his people together and went out against Israel into the wilderness, v. 24. And Israel smote him with the edge of the sword, v. 25. And Israel took all these cities; and Israel dwelt in all the cities of the Amorites, in Heshbon, and in all the villages thereof.
v. 26. For Heshbon was the city of Sihon, the king of the Amorites, his capital, who had fought against the former king of Moab and taken all his land out of his hand, even unto Arnon, v. 27. Wherefore they that speak in proverbs, v. 28. for there is a fire gone out of Heshbon, a flame from the city of Sihon, v. 29. Woe to thee, Moab! Thou art undone, O people of Chemosh; v. 30. We have shot at them, v. 31. Thus Israel dwelt in the land of the Amorites, v. 32. And Moses sent to spy out Jaazer, v. 33. And they, v. 34. And the Lord said unto Moses, Fear him not; for I have delivered him into thy hand and all his people and his land; and thou shall do to him as thou didst unto Sihon, king of the Amorites, which dwelt at Heshbon. v. 35. So they smote him and his sons and all his people, until there was none left him alive; and they possessed his land.
Fuente: The Popular Commentary on the Bible by Kretzmann
If you consult Deu 2:9 , you will find that Moab was not to be fought with, being descendants of Lot: and therefore, when Israel passed before Oboth, they did not attack Moab; see Deu 2:11-13 . But the Amorites had no such privilege of exemption; and hence became a prey to Israel.
Fuente: Hawker’s Poor Man’s Commentary (Old and New Testaments)
Victory over the Amorites
Num 21:21-35
Two great victories opened the eastern lands to the possession and settlement of two tribes and a half. It is not enough to know our heritage in Christ; we must possess our possessions.
Sihon, the king of the Amorites, made an unprovoked attack on Israel; and his action was the less excusable, because he had himself been an invader. As a proof of this, a passage is quoted from one of their national songs, in which the poet describes his invasion of the land, the burning of Heshbon and Ar, and the erection of new cities in their stead, Num 21:27-30. See also Jdg 11:13-27. Sihon and Og suffered the same fate at the hands of Israel. General Gordon, when crossing the Sudan to attack the slave-trader, often heard these words in his heart: Fear him not, for I have delivered him into thy hand. See Psa 135:11; Psa 136:19-20. Behind all history is divine and everlasting love!
Fuente: F.B. Meyer’s Through the Bible Commentary
Num 20:14-19, Deu 2:26-28, Jdg 11:19-21
Reciprocal: Gen 14:13 – Amorite Deu 1:4 – General Deu 2:12 – as Israel did Deu 2:27 – General Deu 4:46 – Moses Deu 29:7 – General Jos 2:10 – what ye did Jos 24:8 – General Jdg 10:11 – Amorites Jdg 11:12 – sent messengers 1Ki 4:19 – the country of Sihon 1Ch 1:14 – Amorite Neh 9:22 – Sihon Psa 68:14 – When Psa 135:11 – Sihon Psa 136:19 – General
Fuente: The Treasury of Scripture Knowledge
Num 21:21-22. Sent messengers By Gods allowance, that so Sihons malice might be the more evident and inexcusable, and their title to his country more clear in the judgment of all men, as being gotten by a just war, into which they were forced for their own defence. Let me pass They spoke what they seriously intended, and would have done, if he had given them a quiet passage.
Fuente: Joseph Bensons Commentary on the Old and New Testaments
Num 21:21-32. The Conquest of the Amorites.This narrative presupposes the position reached in Num 21:13 (not in Num 21:20), for the embassy to Sihon would naturally be despatched before the Amorite border was crossed.
Num 21:23. Jahaz: the Jahzah of Jer 48:21, probably not far from Dibon.
Num 21:24. Jabbck: the modern Nahr ez-Zerka.was strong: read (LXX) was Jazer (Num 21:32).
Num 21:25. all these cities: a list of cities seems to have been omitted by the compiler.Heshbon: the modern Hesbn, 18 miles E. of the Jordan.
Num 21:26. out of his hand: LXX has from Aroer (Jos 13:25); but perhaps the correct reading is from Jabbok (Num 21:24).
Num 21:27. The poem here quoted is appealed to by the compiler as evidence that Heshbon had been taken by Sihon from the Moabites, and Num 21:29 at first sight confirms the supposition that it relates to an Amorite triumph over Moab. But the allusion to Sihon in Num 21:29 makes the verse too long, and it is omitted in Jer 48:46, where the rest of the verse is cited; and since Num 21:28 celebrates the burning of the city of Sihon, it is probable that the poem really refers to a conquest of Moab subsequent to Sihons time, achieved by Israel (cf. 2Ki 3:4 and the inscription of Mesha).that speak in proverbs: better that recite ballads.the city of Sihon: Heshbon is so termed in consequence of having once been taken by Sihon from the Moabites, just as Jerusalem was called the city of David through having been wrested by David from the Jebusites (2Sa 5:9).be built: i.e. be rebuilt. The counsel is given in mockery.
Num 21:28. implies that Heshbon was the first town fired by the enemy, and that the conflagration extended to Ar, further S. The foe clearly came from the N. In the last line render (with LXX), It hath consumed the high places of Arnon.
Num 21:29. O people of Chemosh: Chemosh was the god of the Moabites (1Ki 11:7), who were called his people, just as the Israelites were styled Yahwehs people (Jdg 5:11).He hath given, etc.: Moabs disasters are attributed to Chemosh, as Israels were ascribed to Yahweh (Jdg 6:1).his sons . . . his daughters: a Semitic nation was regarded as being of the stock of the god whom it worshipped. Similarly the Israelites were termed the children of Yahweh (Deu 14:1).Read (for the fourth and fifth lines), And his daughters into captivity unto the king.
Num 21:30. Read (partly after LXX and Vulg.), Their offspring have perished from Heshbon even unto Dibon, and their women from Nophah unto Medeba. But if this emendation is thought too drastic, and the third line is retained, as in the text, the fourth is best altered (cf. mg.) to, With fire unto Medeba. Dibon is the modern Dhibn, 4 miles N. of the Arnon; Nophah is unknown; Medeba is Mdeba, a few miles S. of Heshbon. Nophah and Medeba may perhaps mark the western and eastern limits of the devastation (as Heshbon and Dibon the northern and southern).
Num 21:32. Jazer: identified with Sar, 8 miles W. of Rabbath Ammon After the conquest it was included in Gad (Jos 13:25).
Fuente: Peake’s Commentary on the Bible
Israel’s defeat of Sihon 21:21-32
This account fits chronologically after Num 21:13. It records two great victories that God gave His people over two of the mighty Amorite kings.
"The term Amorite has various meanings in the OT: Canaanites generally (e.g., Gen 15:16), inhabitants of the land west of the Jordan (e.g., Jos 5:1), inhabitants of the regions of Judah (e.g., Jos 10:5-6), inhabitants of the Negeb and the region to the southeast of the Dead Sea (e.g., Gen 14:7), and very often, as here, the inhabitants east of the Jordan under the rule of Sihon and Og . . ." [Note: Ashley, pp. 418-19. See The New Bible Dictionary, 1962 ed., s.v. "Amorites," by A. R. Millard.]
Moses made his peaceful request for permission to pass through Sihon’s territory and into the Promised Land (Num 21:22) realizing that Sihon would not allow this (cf. Deu 2:24-26). Compare Moses’ request that Pharaoh would let the Israelites go in Exo 5:1 (cf. Exo 3:19).
". . . this was done simply to leave the decision of his fate in his own hand . . ." [Note: Keil and Delitzsch, 3:150.]
Sihon then attacked Israel (Num 21:23), but Israel defeated his army (Num 21:24). Moses had very little to do with the acquisition of any land for Israel. [Note: See George W. Coats, "Conquest Traditions in the Wilderness Theme," Journal of Biblical Literature 95:2 (1976):177-90, for discussion of Moses’ lack of prominence in Israel’s battles during this period.] This victory gave the Israelites possession of all of Sihon’s territory. It extended south to the Arnon and north to the Jabbok, which flows into the Jordan River from the east about halfway between the Sea of Chinnereth (Galilee) and the Dead Sea. It included Jazer, a town that the Israelites defeated (Num 21:32). This victory over one of the most powerful of the Canaanite city-states, Heshbon, inspired poets in Israel who wrote proverbs (Num 21:27) to compose songs commemorating God’s deliverance (Num 21:27-30).
"The summons to come to Heshbon and build this ruined city again [Num 21:27], was not addressed to the Israelites, but to the conquered Amorites, and is to be interpreted as ironical . . ." [Note: Keil and Delitzsch, 3:152.]
Chemosh (Num 21:29) was the chief Moabite deity and was similar to the Ammonite god Molech (cf. Jdg 11:24; 1Ki 11:7). [Note: The Wycliffe Bible Encyclopedia, s.v. "Gods, False," by Andrew K. Helmbolt.] See Deu 2:16-37 for another account of this victory. John Van Seters argued that Num 21:21-25 derives from conflation of Deu 2:26-37 and Jdg 11:19-26. [Note: John Van Seters, "The Conquest of Sihon’s Kingdom: A Literary Examination," Journal of Biblical Literature 91:2 (June 1972):182-97.] John R. Bartlett countered that the Numbers passage is the source of the other two accounts. [Note: John R. Bartlett, "The Conquest of Sihon’s Kingdom: A Literary Re-examination," Journal of Biblical Literature 97:3 (September 1978):347-51.]