1846.] The Place designated by Chittim. 729 in Chron. 20: 8; where, as the author did not take it from the living language but from the Pentateuch, he evidently erred in its use; See Henstenberg's Gesch. Bil. S. 148, and Stuart's Roediger, § 34. Verse 24. And ships shall come from Chittim, DAD 12 D3). , a plural from for from the root, designates ships as being set up, built. See Isa. 33: 21, and Daniel 11: 30.-2 literally means, from the hand, from the direction of. is generally acknowledged to have been derived from an ancient city founded by the Phenicians in Cyprus, and called Citium, Kiziov. By the Hebrews it was used to designate the whole of Cyprus and sometimes in later times in a wider acceptation for the coasts and islands of Greece, and even Italy. Josephus in his Antiquities, I. 6. 1 : Κύπρος αὕτη νῦν καλεῖται καὶ ἀπ' αὐτῆς νῆσοί τε πᾶσαι καὶ τὰ πλείω τῶν παρὰ θάλασσαν, Χεθὶμ ὑπὸ ̔Εβραίων orouάeral. It is not necessary to suppose that it means anything more than Cyprus here. This island formed a principal station for the Phenician ships towards the west, Tuch's Gen. S. 215; and ships coming from the western countries would naturally take the direction of this middle station, between Europe and Asia. Without doubt the declaration in this verse is, that people from the west, either Greeks or Romans, shall come and subdue the Assyrians. When we inquire for the time and manner of its fulfilment, we are naturally and unavoidably reminded of the expedition of Alexander. Even the neological critics are unable to deny that it may have reference to him. De Wette in his " Beiträgen zur Einl. in's A. T." II. S. 364, and Vater in his "Kommentar zum Pentateuch," tell us, indeed, that the passage is obscure and does not necessarily refer to the Macedonians; but they wisely hesitate to point out any other reference. Others, as Bertholdt, Einl. III. 790, arbitrarily attempt to avoid the conclusion that there is a prophecy here, by the supposition of an interpolation. But by a reference to Jeremiah 48: 45 it is shown, as it may subsequently appear, that it was extant in his time, and consequently in the time of Nebuchadnezzar, and therefore long enough before the time of Alexander, to preclude the possibility of a prophecy post eventum. It would certainly be improbable even if we allow only a general reference in the passage, that the thought that Greeks should come in ships and subjugate Assyria, should ever enter the mind of a Jew of the time of the later prophets. Indeed even De Wette is compelled to confess, that we seem to be obliged to understand verses 23 and 24 as in a sense really prophetic, Einl. 2nd ed. S. 229. There is one more argument in favor of a specific reference to the expedition of Alexander, which deserves a brief notice. In Maccabees 1: 1 it is said of Alexander: ös her ex tīs jūs Xetτιεὶμ, καὶ ἐπάταξε τὸν Δαρεῖον βασιλέα Περσῶν καὶ Μήδων. There seems to be an allusion here to the prophecy of Balaam, as havng found its fulfilment. For in addition to other reasons from the internal character of the book, (see Hengstenberg, Gesch. Bil. S. 202,) the author uses the form of the word Xerrieiu, corresponding to the Hebrew, whilst in 8: 5 where he has no reference to this passage, we find Kittéor facilevs, according to the current usage of his time. And shall subdue Asshur, and subjugate Eber, " Eber, has frequently been explained as here meaning the Hebrews. So the LXX: καὶ κακώσουσιν Ασσούρ καὶ κακώσουσιν Epoaiovs; and the Vulgate: Venient in trieribus de Italia, superabunt Assyrios vastabuntque Hebraeos. But a much more probable explanation is, that it is a desiguation of those who dwell beyond the Euphrates, from, to pass over. See Rosenmüeller upon the passage, and Hengstenberg's Gesch. Bil. S. 206 sq. Asshur and Eber do not seem, then, to designate two different regions, but stand in the relation to each cther of general and particular. They shall subdue Asshur, and subjugate the country beyond the Euphrates, which includes Asshur. This explanation is in accordance with Gen. 10: 21, where Shem is designated as the father of all the sons of Eber, among whom Asshur is named. The Assyrians beyond the Euphrates, are also mentioned in connection with the inhabitants of the region, in Isa. 7: 20, "In the same day shall the Lord shave with a razor that is hired, namely, by them beyond the river, by the king of Assyria." And even he shall be destroyed, . It is impossihere refers to ", the peo ble to decide positively whether ple that shall come from the west, or to Asshur and Eber, (see Rosenmueller's and Maurer's Comm.,) but it probably relates to the latter. This explanation seems to accord better with the spirit of the prophecy; as we can see no reason why the destruction of this nation from the west should be foretold here, as they are not represented as the enemies of Israel, but only as the instrument in the hands of God in punishing his enemies. For an explanation of, see note on verse 20 above. 1846.] Did Balaam return directly to Mesopotamia. 733 The Fate of Balaam. " At the close of the prophecies of Balaam, chap. 24: 25, the historian says of him simply, that he "rose up and went and returned to his place," and adds: Balak also went his way." Some have supposed that by "his place" here, the place of the punishment of the wicked is to be understood, and compare this passage with Acts 1: 25, where it is said of Judas, that he fell from his apostleship" that he might go to his own place." But verses 11th and 14th of the same chapter are a sufficient confutation of this interpretation; for after Balak, despairing of accomplishing his designs through Balaam, and angry at the blessings pronounced upon his enemies, says to him: now flee thou to thy place." Balaam answers as if complying with his command: "now behold I go to my people." And, besides, the addition of the declaration, corresponding to “ Balaam rose up and went and returned to his place," that " Balak also went his way," is decisive; for no one can suppose that, in the case of Balak, “his way," is specifically the way to destruction. 66 Others suppose that the historian intends to represent Balaam as returning directly to Mesopotamia. And some find in this representation a direct contradiction to other passages, where he appears as giving counsel to the Midianites for the corruption of the Israelites, and as a just retribution, is slain by the latter in the war of vengeance which they undertake for the punishment of their enemies. But this seems to be making much more of the passage than its author intended. It is true, that we may avoid all contradiction between these passages, by supposing that the seer after his return home, dissatisfied with the result of his first mission, goes again to the aid of his former employers, and while he is laboring to accomplish by indirect measures, the object for which he was called, works his own certain destruction. And as it is not the object of Moses to write a Life of Balaam, it is not strange that we have no definite account of these passages in it. Yet, although this hypothesis would be sufficient to account for the apparent discrepancy in the narrative of the Bibli lical Historian, we are not compelled to resort to it. The word,, rendered returned here, is from, meaning, literally, to turn about, to turn back, and does not in itself designate the attainment of the limit of return; see Gesenius's Lexicon. So that it is not necessary even to give the word an inchoative sense, which is not infrequent in verbs, but merely, its most nat ural and obvious meaning. In Num. 14: 40, we have a parallel construction of the words to go up, followed by, to, toward, the top of the mountain; where in the verses following, it appears that they only partly ascended, since the Amalekites and the Canaanites "came down" and "smote them." But, it may be asked, does not the addition of p, to, (toward) his place, designate the attainment of the goal of the return? Certainly not more than the by in the other passage decides that the Israelites attained the top of the mountain, for and are only different modifications of the same preposition, and both denote motion or direction to, towards an object, whether that object is attained or not. But one more parallel passage in respect to language, may be briefly adverted to. In Gen. 18: 33, after it is said, that the "Lord went his way as soon as he had left communing with Abraham, it is added: and Abraham returned to his place, p. The same words (i. e. from the same root), it will be noticed, are used here in precisely the same relative construction as in the passage under consideration, and in both cases the parallel phrase indicates that not the limit, but only the direction of the return is brought into view. It is granted that if Moses were writing a history of Balaam, we should infer that he did actually reach his home, unless something to the contrary was said. But the whole end of the introduction of Balaam in this place, is accomplished, when it is made known, that he left Balak with blessing for Israel upon his lips instead of cursing. The favor of God toward Israel in turning the devices of his enemy against him, into blessings, is all that the object of the historian requires (see Deut. 23: 4, 6), and that is accomplished when the soothsayer and his employer are separated. The fate of Balaam is afterwards merely incidentally alluded to. And to this we will now direct our attention, and see what traces of his subsequent course can be found. 66 In Num. 31: 8, after enumerating the kings of Midian who were slain in the war, undertaken in accordance with the command of God, to avenge the children of Israel of the Midianites," it is said: "Balaam also the son of Beor they slew with the sword." In the same chapter, 16th verse, to account for Moses' wrath, because the women of Midian were preserved alive in this war, the historian says: "Behold these caused the children of Israel, through the counsel of Balaam, to commit trespass against the Lord in the matter of Beor." In 2 Pet. 2: 15, after declaring in regard to those guilty of certain species of wickedness, that 1846.] The Account of Balaam furnised by himself. 733 they had forsaken the right way, and gone astray, it is added: 'following the way of Balaam the son of Beor, who loved the wages of unrighteousness;" thus not only characterizing the sin which Balaam enticed Israel to commit, which is more definitely explained in Num. 25: 1-3, but also recognizing the cause which impelled him to the commission of it: "who loved the wages of unrighteousness." The fate of Balaam is also mentioned in Josh. 13:22; "Balaam also, the son of Beor, the soothsayer, did the children of Israel slay with the sword among them that were slain by them;" and his crime is also referred to in Rev. 2: 14; "Balaam who taught Balak to cast a stumbling-block before the children of Israel, to eat things sacrificed unto idols and to commit fornication." Compare also Jude, verse 13. We have then, as it should seem, no definite information in reference to Balaam after he left Balak, until he appeared again among the Midianites and taught them the means of seducing the Israelites. But we can at least give a probable account of his course after his last prophecy. His ambition and love of gain, which had failed of their gratification from the Moabites, would naturally lead him to go to the camp of the Israelites, upon whose gratitude for his past service in blessing them, although unwillingly, he would naturally have high expectations. The supposition that Balaam did visit the Israelitish camp, which accords so well with his character, receives strong support from another quarter. The contents of chapters xxii-xxiv of Numbers could hardly have been derived from any other source, than the communications made by Balaam himself to the leaders of the Israelites. For, while the language and style of them, is such as to preclude the probability, if not the possibility, of their composition by any other than an Israelite, and indeed by any other than the author of the history in connection with which they are found,1 the necessary information could scarcely have been obtained from either the Moabites or Midianites.2 In proof of this, see Hengstenberg, Authentie I. S. 404 sq., and Gesch. Bil. S. 215, 16. 2 The only objection to this visit of Balaam to the Israelites, is in the fact that it is nowhere mentioned by the author of the Pentateuch. But this circumstance can have but little weight with any one who is familiar with the historical character of the Pentateuch. Particulars which would be of general interest, and which we should perhaps be especially interested to know, if they have no immediate connection with the design of the writer, are often omitted. Many parallel cases might be cited. In Ex. 4: 20, it is said that Moses, when he returned to Egypt, took his wife and children with him; for this was ne |