7<\/strong>. mount Hor<\/em> ] This is, of course, quite distinct from the mountain of the same name in the neighbourhood of Edom (Num 20:22<\/span> ff., Num 33:38<\/span>).<\/p>\n The northern border. On the Mount Hor, compare Num 20:22<\/span> note. Here the name denotes the whole western crest of Mount Lebanon, 80 miles in length, commencing east of Zidon, and terminating with the point immediately above the entrance of Hamath (compare Num 13:21<\/span>). The extreme point in the northern border of the land was the city of Zedad (Sadad), about 30 miles east of the entrance of Hamath. Hence, the border turned back southwestward to Ziphron (Zifran), about 40 miles northeast of Damascus. Hazar-enan may be conjecturally identified with Ayun ed-Dara, a fountain situate in the very heart of the great central chain of Antilibanus.<\/P> <\/p>\n Not that Hor<\/I> where Aaron died, Num 20:23<\/span>, which was southward, and bordering upon Edom, Num 33:37<\/span>,38<\/span>, and therefore could not be their northern border; but another mountain, and, as it is conceived, the mountain of Libanus, which is elsewhere mentioned as the northern border of the land, and which, in regard of divers parts, or by divers people, is called by divers names, as Sirion<\/I> and Shenir<\/I>, Deu 3:9<\/span>, and Sion<\/I>, Deu 4:48<\/span>, and Hermon<\/I>, Jos 13:5<\/span>, and here Hor<\/I>, which signifies a mountain<\/I>, and this may be called so by way of eminency. Certain it is, that as Hor<\/I> here, so Hemon<\/I>, Jos 13:5<\/span>, is joined with the entrance of Hamath<\/I>, which makes it probable they are one and the same place. <\/P> <\/p>\n 7-9. north border<\/B>Theprincipal difficulty in understanding the description here arisesfrom what our translators have called mount Hor. The Hebrew words,however, Hor-ha-Hor,<\/I> properly signify “the mountain ofthe mountain,” or “the high double mountain,” which,from the situation, can mean nothing else than the mountain Amana (So4:8<\/span>), a member of the great Lebanon range (Jos13:5<\/span>).<\/P><\/p>\n And this shall be your northern border<\/strong>,…. What follows:<\/p>\n from the great sea ye shall point out for you Mount Hor<\/strong>; not that Mount Hor on which Aaron died, for that was on the southern border of the land; but rather Mount Herman, which is said to be unto the entering into Hamath, Jos 13:5<\/span> as this Mount Hor is in the following verse; or some part of Mount Lebanon might be so called, which was the northern border of the land: the Targum of Jonathan calls it Umanus; and the Jerusalem Targum, Manus or Taurus Umanus, the Mountain Umanus, which divided Syria and Cilicia; it is joined with Lebanon by Josephus p, and with that and Carmel by Aelianus q.<\/p>\n p Antiqu. l. 1. c. 6. sect. 2. q De Animal. l. 5. c. 56.<\/p>\n The northern boundary<\/em> cannot be determined with certainty. “ From the great sea, mark out to you <\/em> ( , from = , to mark or point out), i.e., fix, Mount Hor as the boundary<\/em> ” – from thence “ to come to Hamath; and let the goings forth of the boundary be to Zedad. And the boundary shall go out to Ziphron, and its goings out be at Hazar-enan<\/em>.” Of all these places, Hamath<\/em>, the modern Hamah<\/em>, or the Epiphania<\/em> of the Greeks and Romans on the Orontes (see at Num 13:21<\/span>, and Gen 10:18<\/span>), is the only one whose situation is well known; but the geographical description of the northern boundary of the land of Israel (Num 13:21<\/span>; Jos 13:5<\/span>; Jdg 3:3<\/span>; 1Ki 8:65<\/span>; 2Ki 14:25<\/span>; 1Ch 13:5<\/span>; 2Ch 7:8<\/span>; Amo 6:14<\/span>; Eze 47:15<\/span>, Eze 47:20<\/span>; Eze 48:1<\/span>) is so indefinite, that the boundary line cannot be determined with exactness. For no proof can be needed in the present day that cannot mean “to Hamath” ( Ges.<\/em> thes<\/em>. i. p. 185; Studer<\/em> on Jdg 3:3<\/span>, and Baur<\/em> on Amo 6:2<\/span>), in such a sense as would make the town of Hamath the border town, and a perfectly superfluous pleonasm. In all the passages mentioned, Hamath refers, not to the town of that name ( Epiphania<\/em> on the Orontes), but to the kingdom of Hamath, which was named after its capital, as is proved beyond all doubt by 2Ch 8:4<\/span>, where Solomon is said to have built store cities “in Hamath.” The city of Hamath never belonged to the kingdom of Israel, not even under David and Solomon, and was not reconquered by Jeroboam II, as Baur supposes (see my Commentary on the Books of Kings, and Thenius<\/em> on 2Ki 14:25<\/span>). How far the territory of the kingdom of Hamath extended towards the south in the time of Moses, and how much of it was conquered by Solomon (2Ch 8:4<\/span>), we are nowhere informed. We simply learn from 2Ki 25:21<\/span>, that Riblah (whether the same Riblah as is mentioned in Num 34:11<\/span> as a town upon the eastern boundary, is very doubtful) was situated in the land of Hamath in the time of the Chaldeans. Now if this Riblah has been preserved in the modern Ribleh<\/em>, a miserable village on the Orontes, in the northern part of the Bekaa<\/em>, ten or twelve hours’ journey to the south-west of Hums<\/em>, and fourteen hours to the north of Baalbek<\/em> (Robinson, iii. p. 461, App. 176, and Bibl. Researches, p. 544), the land of Canaan would have reached a little farther northwards, and almost to Hums<\/em> ( Emesa<\/em>). Knobel<\/em> moves the boundary still farther to the north. He supposes Mount Hor<\/em> to be Mons Casius<\/em>, to the south-west of Antioch, on the Orontes, and agrees with Robinson (iii. 461) in identifying Zedad<\/em>, in the large village of Zadad<\/em> ( Sudud<\/em> in Rob<\/em>.), which is inhabited exclusively by Syriac Christians, who still speak Syriac according to Seetzen<\/em> (i. 32 and 279), a town containing about 3000 inhabitants ( Wetstein<\/em>, Reiseber<\/em>. p. 88), to the south-east of Hums<\/em>, on the east of the road from Damascus to Hunes, a short day’s journey to the north of Nebk<\/em>, and four (or, according to Van de Velde’s<\/em> memoir, from ten to twelve) hours’ journey to the south of Hasya<\/em> (Robinson, iii. p. 461; Ritter, Erdk. xvii. pp. 1443-4).<\/p>\n Ziphron<\/em>, which was situated upon the border of the territory of Hamath and Damascus, if it is the same as the one mentioned in Eze 47:16<\/span>, is supposed by Knobel<\/em> and Wetstein<\/em> (p. 88) to be preserved in the ruins of Zifran, which in all probability have never been visited by any European, fourteen hours to the north-east of Damascus, near to the road from Palmyra. Lastly, Hazar-enan (equivalent to fountain-court) is supposed to be the station called Centum Putea<\/em> ( in Ptol<\/em>. v. 15, 24), mentioned in the Tabul<\/em>. Peuting<\/em>. x. 3, on the road from Apamia<\/em> to Palmyra<\/em>, twenty-seven miles, or about eleven hours, to the north-west of Palmyra. – But we may say with certainty that all these conclusions are incorrect, because they are irreconcilable with the eastern boundary described in Num 34:10<\/span>, Num 34:11<\/span>. For example, according to Num 34:10<\/span>, Num 34:11<\/span>, the Israelites were to draw (fix) the eastern boundary “from Hazar-enan<\/em> to Shepham<\/em>,” which, as Knobel<\/em> observes, “cannot be determined with exactness, but was farther south than Hazar-enan<\/em>, as it was a point on the eastern boundary which is traced here from north to south, and also farther west, as we may infer from the allusion to Riblah, probably at the northern end of Antilibanus”. From Shepham<\/em> the boundary was “ to go down to Riblah<\/em>,” which Knobel<\/em> finds in the Ribleh<\/em> mentioned above. Now, if we endeavour to fix the situation of these places according to the latest and most trustworthy maps, the incorrectness of the conclusions referred to becomes at once apparent. From Zadad<\/em> ( Sudad<\/em>) to Zifran<\/em>, the line of the northern boundary would not have gone from west to east, but from north to south, or rather towards the south-west, and from Zifran<\/em> to Centum Putea<\/em> still more decidedly in a south-westerly direction. Consequently the northern boundary would have described a complete semicircle, commencing in the north-west and terminating in the south-east. But if even in itself this appears very incredible, it becomes perfectly impossible when we take the eastern boundary into consideration. For if this went down to the south-west from Hazar-enan<\/em> to Shepham<\/em> according to Knobel’s<\/em> conclusions, instead of going down (Num 34:11<\/span>) from Shepham<\/em> to Riblah<\/em>, it would have gone up six or seven geographical miles from south to north, and then have gone down again from north to south along the eastern coast of the Lake of Gennesareth. Now it is impossible that Moses should have fixed such a boundary to the land of Israel on the north-east, and equally impossible that a later Hebrew, acquainted with the geography of his country, should have described it in this way.<\/p>\n If, in order to obtain a more accurate view of the extent of the land towards the north and north-east, we compare the statements of the book of Joshua concerning the conquered land with the districts which still remained to be taken at the time of the distribution; Joshua had taken the land “from the bald mountain which ascends towards Seir,” i.e., probably the northern ridge of the Azazimeh<\/em> mountains, with its white masses of chalk ( Fries, ut sup<\/em>. p. 76; see also at Jos 11:17<\/span>), “to Baal-Gad<\/em>, in the valley of Lebanon, below Mount Hermon<\/em> ” (Jos 11:17<\/span>; cf. Num 12:7<\/span>). But Baal-Gad<\/em> in the valley ( ) of Lebanon is not Heliopolis<\/em> (now Baalbek<\/em> in the Bekaa<\/em>, or Coelesyria<\/em>), as many, from Iken<\/em> and J. D. Michaelis<\/em> down to Knobel<\/em>, suppose; for “the Bekaa<\/em> is not under the Hermon<\/em>,” and “there is no proof, or even probability, that Joshua’s conquests reached so far, or that Baalbek was ever regarded as the northern boundary of Palestine, nor even that the adjoining portion of Anti-Lebanon was ever called Hermon” (Robinson, Biblical Researches<\/em>, p. 409). Baal-Gad<\/em>, which is called Baal-Hermon<\/em> in Jdg 3:3<\/span> and 1Ch 5:23<\/span>, was the later Paneas<\/em> or Caesarea Philippi<\/em>, the modern Banias<\/em>, at the foot of the Hermon (cf. v. Raumer<\/em>, Pal.<\/em> p. 245; Rob. Bibl. Res. pp. 408-9, Pal.<\/em> iii. pp. 347ff.). This is placed beyond all doubt by 1Ch 5:23<\/span>, according to which the Manassites, who were increasing in numbers, dwelt “from Bashan to Baal-hermon, and Senir, and the mountains of Hermon,” since this statement proves that Baal-hermon was between Bashan and the mountains of Hermon. In harmony with this, the following places in the north of Canaan are mentioned in Jos 13:4-5<\/span>, and Jdg 3:3<\/span>, as being left unconquered by Joshua: – (1.) “All the land of the Canaanites (i.e., of the Phoenicians who dwelt on the coast), and the cave of the Sidonians to Aphek;” , probably the spelunca inexpugnabilis in territorio Sidoniensi, quae vulgo dicitur cavea de Tyrum <\/em> ( Wilh. Tyr<\/em>. xix. 11), the present Mughr Jezzin<\/em>, i.e., caves of Jezzin<\/em>, to the east of Sidon upon Lebanon ( Ritter<\/em>, Erdk<\/em>. xvii. pp. 99, 100); and Aphek<\/em>, probably the modern Afka<\/em>, to the north-east of Beirut (Robinson, Bibl. Res.). (2.) “The land of the Giblites<\/em>,” i.e., the territory of Byblos, and “all Lebanon towards the east, from Baal-Gad below Hermon, till you come to Hamath,” i.e., not Antilibanus, but Lebanon, which lies to the east of the land of the Giblites. The land of the Giblites, or territory of Gebal<\/em>, which is cited here as the northernmost district of the unconquered land, so that its northern boundary must have coincided with the northern boundary of Canaan, can hardly have extended to the latitude of Tripoli, but probably only reached to the cedar grove at Bjerreh<\/em>, in the neighbourhood of which the highest peaks of the Lebanon are found. The territory of the tribes of Asher and Naphtali (Josh 19:24-39) did not reach farther up than this. From all these accounts, we must not push the northern boundary of Canaan as far as the Eleutherus<\/em>, Nahr el Kebir<\/em>, but must draw it farther to the south, across the northern portion of the Lebanon; so that we may look for Hazar-enan<\/em> (fountain-court), which is mentioned as the end of the northern boundary, and the starting-point of the eastern, near the fountain of Lebweh<\/em>. This fountain forms the water-shed in the Bekaa, between the Orontes, which flows to the north, and the Leontes, which flows to the south (cf. Robinson, Bibl. Res. p. 531), and is not only a very large fountain of the finest clear water, springing at different points from underneath a broad piece of coarse gravel, which lies to the west of a vein of limestone, but the whole of the soil is of such a character, that “you have only to dig in the gravel, to get as many springs as you please.” The quantity of water which is found here is probably even greater than that at the Anjar<\/em>. In addition to the four principal streams, there are three or four smaller ones (Robinson, Bibl. Res. p. 532), so that this place might be called, with perfect justice, by the name of fountain-court<\/em>. The probability of this conjecture is also considerably increased by the fact, that the Ain<\/em>, mentioned in Num 34:11<\/span> as a point upon the eastern boundary, can also be identified without any difficulty (see at Num 34:11<\/span>).<\/p>\n Verses 7-9:<\/strong><\/p>\n “Mount Hor,” hor ha-hor, <\/strong>literally, “Mount Mountain.” This is not the mount upon which Aaron died, <\/strong>Nu 20:22-29. The site of the Mount Hor of the present text is not known; however, it is likely a prominent mountain peak in Lebanon, readily visible from the Sea.<\/strong><\/p>\n Hamath, one of the most ancient of all cities still surviving. It is located in upper Syria, on the Orontes River. God permitted some of the Hivites to remain in the region as a test to Israel, Jg 3:3. Hamath figures in Bible History, see 2Sa 8:9; 2 Kings 14:23-28; 18:34; Jer 39:5. Antiochus Epiphanes of Syria renamed it Epiphaneia in honor of himself. It is today predominantly Moslem.<\/p>\n Zedad, <\/strong>location unknown.<\/p>\n Ziphron, <\/strong>possibly the same as Sibraim, Eze 37:16. The village of Zifran lies about forty miles northwest of Damascus. Whether or not this is the Ziphron of the text is uncertain.<\/p>\n Hazar-enan, <\/strong>meaning “village of fountains,” location unknown.<\/p>\n The north border of <\/strong>Canaan is obscure to Bible expositors today. It is virtually impossible to fix it with any degree of certainty.<\/p>\n (7) Mount Hor.<\/strong>It has been thought by some that Hermon is the mountain to which reference is made. But, as Ritter has observed (Comparative Geography of Palestine, 3, p. 176), Hermon stands too far eastward to answer the conditions of the problem, and he thinks that some peak very near the Mediterranean must be meant. Von Raumer considers that it was probably one of the peaks belonging to the Lebanon range, and discernible from Sidon. (Ib.<\/em>)<\/p>\n 7-9<\/strong>. <\/strong> Your north border <\/strong> This cannot be accurately identified, since the whole topography is in a most unsatisfactory state as regards the comprehension of the original record and knowledge of the ground, all the places being now unknown except Hamath<\/strong>, which must mean the kingdom of Hamath, and not Hamath, its capital city, modern Hamah, <\/em> called Epiphania by the Greeks and Romans. Num 13:21<\/span>, note. <\/p>\n Mount Hor <\/strong> This is not to be confounded with the Mount Hor of the Seir range. Num 20:22<\/span>, note. This Mount Hor is spoken of only here. Its identification is one of the puzzles of sacred geography. Some suppose that the great chain of Lebanon itself is meant, which is clearly the natural northern boundary of Palestine. Knobel moves the boundary still farther north, and identifies Mount Hor with Mons Casius, <\/em> southwest of Antioch, on the Orontes. Robinson agrees with him in recognising this Zedad <\/strong> in Zadad, <\/em> a Syriac Christian village of three thousand inhabitants, to the southeast of Hunes, <\/em> on the east of the road from Damascus to Hunes.<\/p>\n Wetstein and Knobel suppose that Ziphron <\/strong> is the same as a ruined city, Zifran, <\/em> of which we have no accurate information except that it is fourteen hours to the northeast of Damascus, near to the road from Palmyra. The location of Hazar-enan <\/strong> is in dispute; some contending for Centum Putea, <\/em> twenty-seven miles northwest of Palmyra, and others showing that it is impossible that this could be a border town.<\/p>\n “<\/strong> And this shall be your north border: from the great sea you shall mark out for you mount Hor; from mount Hor you shall mark out to Lebo-Hamath; and the goings out of the border shall be at Zedad; and the border shall go forth to Ziphron, and its goings out shall be at Hazar-enan. This shall be your north border.” <\/p>\n This Mount Hor was probably by the sea north of Byblos. The boundary then went across to Lebo-Hamath in the Beqa Valley (probably modern Lebweh, and mentioned in both Egyptian and Assyrian sources), and Zedad (modern Sedad) <\/p>\n Num 34:7-9<\/span><\/em><\/strong>. <\/strong>From the great sea ye shall point outmount Hor<\/em><\/strong><\/strong> The north bounds reached from the north end of the Mediterranean along by the mountains Libanus and Anti-Libanus, as far as the two heads of the river Jordan, taking in the several towns, Hamath, Zedad, <\/em>&c. By Hor, here, is not to be understood that mount where Aaron died; (ch. Num 33:38-39<\/span>.) for that was on the south of Canaan, whereas this was diametrically opposite, on the north of it; and therefore by Hor, in this place, we are, probably, to understand Hermon, or some part of Mount Libanus, which bounded Canaan on the north; for we find Lebanon and Hermon joined with the entrance of Hamath, Jos 13:5<\/span>.) as mount Hor is here. Now Hermon was certainly a part of Lebanon, by some called Sirion, <\/em>by others Shenir, <\/em>Deu 3:9<\/span> and by others Sion, <\/em>Deu 4:48<\/span>. Respecting Hamath, <\/em>see chap. Num 13:21<\/span>. Ziphron <\/em>is no where else mentioned in Scripture. St. Jerome takes it for Zephirium <\/em>in Cilicia. Hazar-enan, <\/em>Chitraeus renders the village of the source, <\/em>namely, of Jordan, which took its rise in that tract. See Dr. Shaw, vol. 2 Chronicles 1<\/span> p. 267. <\/p>\n great sea: i.e. the Mediterranean, a modern name for the Great Sea. <\/p>\n point out = mark out or claim. Hebrew. ta’ah. Occurs only here. <\/p>\n mount Hor. Not the mount Hor where Aaron died, which was in the south corner of Edom (Num 33:37, Num 33:38), but another, in the north, mount Hermon, a spur of the Lebanon (Jos 13:5). Hermon had several names. Compare Deu 3:9; Deu 4:48. <\/p>\n north border: Num 34:3, Num 34:6, Num 34:9, Num 34:10 <\/p>\n mount Hor: Num 33:37 <\/p>\n Reciprocal: Num 20:22 – mount Hor Num 34:5 – the sea Jos 15:12 – the great sea 2Ki 14:25 – from the entering Eze 48:1 – From<\/p>\n Num 34:7-8. Mount Hor Not that Hor where Aaron died, which was southward, and bordering upon Edom, but another mountain, probably Hermon, or some part of mount Lebanon, which is elsewhere mentioned as the northern border of the land, and which, in regard of divers parts, or by divers people, is called by divers names, and here Hor, which signifies a mountain, by way of eminence. Accordingly we find Lebanon and Hermon joined with the entrance of Hamath, (Jos 13:5,) as mount Hor is here.<\/p>\n 34:7 And this shall be your north border: from the great sea ye shall point out for you mount {d} Hor:<\/p>\n (d) Which is a mountain near Tyre and Sidon, and not that Hor in the wilderness where Aaron died.<\/p>\n And this shall be your north border: from the great sea ye shall point out for you mount Hor: 7. mount Hor ] This is, of course, quite distinct from the mountain of the same name in the neighbourhood of Edom (Num 20:22 ff., Num 33:38). Fuente: The Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges The … Continue reading “Exegetical and Hermeneutical Commentary of Numbers 34:7”<\/span><\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"","ping_status":"","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[1],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-4832","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-commentary"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.biblia.work\/bible-commentary\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/4832","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.biblia.work\/bible-commentary\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.biblia.work\/bible-commentary\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.biblia.work\/bible-commentary\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.biblia.work\/bible-commentary\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=4832"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.biblia.work\/bible-commentary\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/4832\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.biblia.work\/bible-commentary\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=4832"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.biblia.work\/bible-commentary\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=4832"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.biblia.work\/bible-commentary\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=4832"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}Fuente: The Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n
Fuente: Albert Barnes’ Notes on the Bible<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n
Fuente: English Annotations on the Holy Bible by Matthew Poole<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n
Fuente: Jamieson, Fausset and Brown’s Commentary Critical and Explanatory on the Whole Bible <\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n
Fuente: John Gill’s Exposition of the Entire Bible<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n
Fuente: Keil & Delitzsch Commentary on the Old Testament<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n
Fuente: Garner-Howes Baptist Commentary<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n
Fuente: Ellicott’s Commentary for English Readers (Old and New Testaments)<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n
Fuente: Whedon’s Commentary on the Old and New Testaments<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n
Fuente: Commentary Series on the Bible by Peter Pett<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n
Fuente: Commentary on the Holy Bible by Thomas Coke<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n
Fuente: Companion Bible Notes, Appendices and Graphics<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n
Fuente: The Treasury of Scripture Knowledge<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n
Fuente: Joseph Bensons Commentary on the Old and New Testaments<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n
Fuente: Geneva Bible Notes<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"