TRV
Study This Verse
Public-domain commentary
Matthew Henry
From his Commentary on the Whole Bible. Henry comments on passages, not single verses — this entry covers Numbers 27:1–11. His three-level outline is real structure in the source text, so it is rendered as structure.
Mention is made of the case of these daughters of Zelophehad in the chapter before, v. 33. It should seem, by the particular notice taken of it, that it was a singular case, and that the like did not at this time occur in all Israel, that the head of a family had no sons, but daughters only. Their case is again debated (Num 36:1-13) upon another article of it; and, according to the judgments given in their case, we find them put in possession, Jos 17:3, Jos 17:4. One would suppose that their personal character was such as added weight to their case, and caused it to be so often taken notice of.
Here is, I. Their case stated by themselves, and their petition upon it presented to the highest court of judicature, which consisted of Moses as king, the princes as lords, and the congregation, or elders of the people who were chose their representatives, as the commons, Num 27:2. This august assembly sat near the door of the tabernacle, that in difficult cases they might consult the oracle. To them these young ladies made their application; for it is the duty of magistrates to defend the fatherless, Psa 82:3. We find not that the had any advocate to speak for them, but they managed their own cause ingeniously enough, which they could do the better because it was plain and honest, and spoke for itself. Now observe,
1.What it is they petition for: That they might have a possession in the land of Canaan, among the brethren of their father, Num 27:4. What God had said to Moses (Num 26:53) he had faithfully made known to the people, that the land of Canaan was to be divided among those that were now numbered; these daughters knew that they were not numbered, and therefore by this rule must expect no inheritance, and the family of their father must be looked upon as extinct, and written childless, though he had all these daughters: this they thought hard, and therefore prayed to be admitted heirs to their father, and to have an inheritance in his right. If they had had a brother, they would not have applied to Moses (as one did to Christ, Luk 12:13) for an order to inherit with him. But, having no brother, they beg for a possession. Herein they discovered,
(1.)A strong faith in the power and promise of God concerning the giving of the land of Canaan to Israel. Though it was yet unconquered, untouched, and in the full possession of the natives, yet they petition for their share in it as if it were all their own already. See Psa 60:6, Psa 60:7, God has spoken in his holiness, and the Gilead is mine, Manasseh is mane.
(2.)An earnest desire of a place and name in the land of promise, which was a type of heaven; and if they had, as some think, an eye to that, and by this claim laid hold on eternal life, they were five wise virgins indeed; and their example should quicken us with all possible diligence to make sure our title to the heavenly inheritance, in the disposal of which, by the covenant of grace, no difference is made between male and female, Gal 3:28.
(3.)A true respect and honour for their father, whose name was dear and precious to them now that he was gone, and they were therefore solicitous that it should not be done away from among his family. There is a debt which children owe to the memory of their parents, required by the fifth commandment: Honour thy father and mother.
2.What their plea is: That their father did not die under any attainder which might be thought to have corrupted his blood and forfeited his estate, but he died in his own sin (Num 27:3), not engaged in any mutiny or rebellion against Moses, particularly not in that of Korah and his company, nor in any way concerned in the sins of others, but chargeable only with the common iniquities of mankind, for which to his own Master he was to stand or fall, but laid not himself open to any judicial process before Moses and the princes. He was never convicted of any thing that might be a bar to his children's claim. It is a comfort to parents, when they come to die, if, though they smart themselves for their own sin, yet they are not conscious to themselves of any of those iniquities which God visits upon the children.
II.Their case determined by the divine oracle.
Moses did not presume to give judgment himself, because, though their pretensions seemed just and reasonable, yet his express orders were to divide the land among those that were numbered, who were the males only; he therefore brings their cause before the Lord, and waits for his decision (Num 27:5), and God himself gives the judgment upon it. He takes cognizance of the affairs, not only of nations, but of private families, and orders them in judgment, according to the counsel of his own will.
1.The petition is granted (Num 27:7): They speak right, give them a possession. Those that seek an inheritance in the land of promise shall have what they seek, and other things shall be added to them. These are claims which God will countenance and crown.
2.The point is settled for all future occasions. These daughters of Zelophehad consulted, not only their own comfort and the credit of their family, but the honour and happiness of their sex likewise; for on this particular occasion a general law was made that, in case a man had no son, his estate should go to his daughters (Num 27:8); not to the eldest, as the eldest son, but to them all in copartnership, share and share alike. Those that in such a case deprive their daughters of their right, purely to keep up the name of their family, unless a valuable consideration be allowed them, may make the entail of their lands surer than the entail of a blessing with them. Further directions are given for the disposal of inheritances, Num 27:9-11. "If a man have no issue at all, his estate shall go to his brethren; if no brethren, then to his father's brethren; and, if there be no such, then to his next kinsman." With this the rules of our law exactly agree: and though the Jewish doctors here will have it understood that if a man have no children his estate shall go to his father, if living, before his brethren, yet there is nothing of that in the law, and our common law has an express rule against it, That an estate cannot ascend lineally; so that if a person purchase lands in fee-simple, and die without issue in the life-time of his father, his father cannot be his heir. See how God makes heirs, and in his disposal we must acquiesce.
Continue studying Numbers 27:4 across the web’s major study libraries — every link below opens this exact verse, chapter, or book on the destination site.
Read & Compare
BibleGatewayThis verse in more than 200 translations and 70 languages.
Bible.comThe YouVersion reader — hundreds of translations, reading plans, and highlights.
ESV.orgCrossway's official English Standard Version reader.
NET BibleThe NET translation with 60,000+ translators' notes on every rendering decision.
STEP BibleTyndale House's free study tool — original text, vocabulary, and scholarly resources.
BibliaLogos Bible Software's free web reader.
USCCBThe New American Bible (Revised Edition) with the U.S. bishops' study notes.
Commentaries
BibleHub CommentariesDozens of classic commentaries on this verse, gathered on one page.
StudyLightMore than 100 commentary sets — the largest collection on the web.
BibleRefPlain-English commentary on what this verse means, verse by verse.
Enduring WordDavid Guzik's free commentary on this chapter, widely used by Bible teachers.
Bible Study ToolsVerse commentary alongside Greek and Hebrew study aids.
Original Language & Research
- BibleHub InterlinearThe verse word by word — original language, transliteration, and English.
- BibleHub LexiconEvery word's original-language definition and Strong's entry.
Blue Letter BibleDeep-study tools — Strong's numbers, concordance, and word studies.
SefariaThe Hebrew text with Rashi and centuries of Jewish commentary.
Sermons, Hymns & Audio
TrulyRandomVerse is not affiliated with these sites and doesn’t control their content. They’re linked because they’re genuinely useful.
Summary
Numbers 27:4 presents the compelling and righteous petition of Zelophehad's five daughters—Mahlah, Noah, Hoglah, Milcah, and Tirzah—who courageously approach Moses, Eleazar the priest, and the Israelite leaders. Their father had died in the wilderness without male heirs, a situation that, under the prevailing custom, would have resulted in the complete extinguishment of his family name and the forfeiture of his rightful tribal land inheritance. This verse articulates their profound concern for their father's enduring legacy and their demand for a just resolution, asserting their claim to a permanent land possession among their father's kinsmen in the Promised Land.
Context
Literary Context
Numbers 27:4 is strategically placed within a pivotal transitional period in the book of Numbers, immediately following the second census of Israel (Numbers 26). This census was crucial, as it enumerated the fighting men who would inherit the land, explicitly linking land distribution to the number of males in each family. The preceding verses (Numbers 27:1-3) introduce Zelophehad's daughters and establish the unique circumstances of their father's death, emphasizing that he did not die in Korah's rebellion but "in his own sin," a detail that subtly underscores his family's continued right to inheritance, despite the complicating factor of having no sons. The daughters' bold and unprecedented plea directly challenges the implicit assumption of a purely patrilineal inheritance system, setting the stage for a divine ruling (Numbers 27:6-11) that profoundly reshapes Israelite land law and, subsequently, marriage law (Numbers 36). Their initiative interrupts the standard legal and administrative proceedings, highlighting the extraordinary nature and significance of their case within the unfolding narrative of Israel's journey to the Promised Land.
Historical & Cultural Context
In the ancient Near East, including Israel, land ownership transcended mere economic value; it was inextricably linked to family identity, social status, and the very fabric of the religious covenant. Land was considered an inalienable family possession, intended to be passed down through generations, primarily from father to son. This system was designed to ensure the perpetual continuity of the family "name" (representing their reputation, lineage, and lasting legacy) within their community and tribe. For a family's name to be "done away" (KJV) or "cut off" (NIV) signified the complete erasure of their lineage and legacy from tribal memory, coupled with the loss of their allotted portion in the Promised Land—a direct and devastating blow to the fulfillment of God's covenant with Abraham. Women typically did not inherit land directly, nor did they generally initiate legal proceedings in public forums. Therefore, the daughters' action was culturally audacious and demonstrated remarkable courage, reflecting a deep understanding of their rights within the covenant and a profound faith in God's ultimate justice.
Key Themes
This verse powerfully contributes to several overarching themes woven throughout Numbers and the Pentateuch. It prominently features the theme of Justice and Equity, demonstrating God's profound concern for fairness, even when it necessitates adjusting or clarifying established norms. The daughters' appeal for a "possession among the brethren of our father" underscores the critical theme of Inheritance and the Fulfillment of God's Promises, particularly the promise of the land of Canaan as a permanent dwelling for Israel, a promise foundational to God's covenant with Abraham. Their deep concern for their father's "name" speaks directly to the theme of Preservation of Lineage and Legacy, which was vital for tribal identity and the continuity of the covenant community, echoing the importance of a lasting name as discussed in Deuteronomy 25:6. Furthermore, the daughters' initiative exemplifies Women's Agency and Faith, showcasing how women could act decisively and righteously within the patriarchal structures of ancient Israel, leading to significant legal and theological developments, a theme also seen in the courageous actions of figures like the wise woman of Abel Beth Maacah.
Exposition and Analysis
Key Word Analysis
A primitive word (perhaps rather from through the idea of definite and conspicuous position; compare שָׁמַיִם); an appellation, as a mark or memorial of individuality; by implication honor, authority, character; [phrase] base, (in-) fame(-ous), named(-d), renown, report. In ancient Israelite thought, "name" encompassed far more than a mere label. It represented one's entire identity, reputation, legacy, lineage, and the enduring memory of an individual and their family line. To have one's "name done away" (or "cut off") meant the complete annihilation of their contribution, presence, and future within the tribal and national memory, including the loss of their portion in the land—a deeply significant concern given the covenantal importance of land inheritance.
A primitive root; to scrape off; by implication, to shave, remove, lessen, withhold; abate, clip, (di-) minish, do (take) away, keep back, restrain, make small, withdraw. Here, the verb conveys the idea of being completely removed, extinguished, or diminished from the family register and tribal inheritance. The daughters are arguing against the unjust subtraction of their father's legacy from the collective memory and physical allotment of his clan, simply due to the absence of male heirs.
Feminine passive participle from אָחַז; something seized, i.e. a possession (especially of land); possession. This term refers to a permanent, inherited land holding or property. It signifies a secure, inalienable portion of the Promised Land that was allotted to each family and tribe. The daughters are not asking for temporary use or a handout, but for a permanent, rightful share of the land that would secure their father's legacy and their own future within the community of Israel.
Verse Breakdown
"Why should the name of our father be done away from among his family, because he hath no son?"
This opening clause is a powerful rhetorical question, immediately establishing the daughters' central grievance and the perceived injustice. It highlights their profound concern for their father's legacy and the continuity of his lineage. The phrase "done away from among his family" underscores the fear of complete erasure from tribal identity and memory, which was inextricably linked to land inheritance. The reason "because he hath no son" directly challenges the traditional patrilineal system, implicitly questioning its fairness and applicability in this specific, unique circumstance.
"Give unto us [therefore] a possession among the brethren of our father."
This is the direct, concrete legal petition that logically follows from their rhetorical question. The daughters are not merely lamenting their situation but are actively proposing a definitive solution. They demand a "possession," a permanent and inheritable land allotment, not just any land, but specifically "among the brethren of our father," meaning within their ancestral tribal allotment in Manasseh. This demonstrates their keen understanding of tribal land laws and their desire to maintain their familial and tribal identity within the promised land. The KJV's "[therefore]" (implied in the Hebrew context) rightly connects their plea for justice to their specific request for land.
Literary Devices
The daughters' petition in Numbers 27:4 employs several effective literary devices that amplify its impact and significance. The verse opens with a compelling rhetorical question, "Why should the name of our father be done away from among his family, because he hath no son?" This question is not posed to elicit information but rather to challenge the prevailing legal custom, to highlight the inherent injustice of their situation, and to compel the highest authorities to consider the moral implications of their plight. Following this powerful opening, the verse presents a direct, concise legal petition or appeal: "Give unto us [therefore] a possession among the brethren of our father." This clear and unambiguous demand demonstrates their remarkable agency, their firm resolve, and their precise understanding of their rights within the covenant community. The entire passage functions as a pivotal narrative turning point, as their bold initiative directly leads to a divine revelation that expands and clarifies Israelite inheritance law, showcasing the dynamic and responsive nature of God's justice in the face of human need.
Theological and Thematic Connections
Numbers 27:4 stands as a profound testament to God's character as a God of justice and compassion, who attentively hears the cries of the vulnerable and is willing to adapt and clarify His law to ensure equity. The daughters of Zelophehad, by appealing to a higher principle of fairness beyond rigid custom, reveal that God's law is not static or unfeeling but living, responsive, and designed to address specific circumstances and human need. Their case establishes a critical precedent for the inclusion of women in inheritance rights, challenging patriarchal norms when justice and the preservation of covenantal promises demand it. This episode underscores that the Promised Land was not merely a physical territory but a tangible sign of God's faithfulness to His covenant, and its distribution was meant to reflect His righteousness and care for all His people, ensuring no family's legacy was unjustly extinguished.
Reflection and Application
Numbers 27:4 serves as a powerful and enduring reminder that true justice often requires us to look beyond established traditions and courageously advocate for those who might otherwise be marginalized or overlooked. The daughters of Zelophehad did not passively accept a fate that would have erased their father's legacy; instead, they boldly approached the highest authorities, implicitly trusting that God's ultimate justice would prevail. Their story challenges us to cultivate a similar spirit of righteous advocacy, to critically question systems or customs that perpetuate inequity, and to speak up for the rights and dignity of all individuals, especially those whose voices are often unheard. It encourages us to believe that God is indeed a God who hears the pleas of the vulnerable and is committed to ensuring that His promises and blessings are distributed fairly, preserving the legacy and inherent worth of every person within His covenant community.
Questions for Reflection
FAQ
What was the significance of "the name of our father" being "done away"?
In ancient Israel, a family's "name" (Hebrew: shem) encompassed its entire identity, reputation, lineage, and enduring memory within the community. For a father's name to be "done away" (or "cut off") meant the complete extinguishment of his family line and legacy within his tribe. This was particularly devastating because it also implied the loss of his family's rightful, permanent land inheritance ('achuzzah) in the Promised Land. Since land was inextricably tied to tribal identity and the fulfillment of God's covenant promises, losing one's land meant losing one's place, future, and very existence within the covenant community. The daughters' plea was therefore not just about property, but about the very existence, honor, and continuity of their father's lineage.
Did women typically inherit land in ancient Israel?
No, typically, land inheritance followed a strictly patrilineal system, passing from father to son. Daughters generally did not inherit land directly if there were sons, as their inheritance usually came through their husbands. The case of Zelophehad's daughters was exceptional precisely because their father had no sons, creating a unique legal dilemma that challenged the established custom. Their bold petition led to a landmark divine ruling (Numbers 27:6-11) that established a new precedent: in the absence of sons, daughters could indeed inherit land, ensuring the preservation of the family's name and its tribal portion. This ruling was later clarified to ensure that tribal land remained within the tribe through specific marriage regulations (Numbers 36).
Christ-Centered Fulfillment
The earnest plea of Zelophehad's daughters for the preservation of their father's name and a rightful "possession" in the Promised Land finds profound Christ-centered fulfillment in the New Covenant. The earthly inheritance of land, which secured a family's identity and future within the physical nation of Israel, foreshadows the spiritual inheritance believers receive in Christ—an inheritance that is imperishable, undefiled, and unfading, kept in heaven for us by God's power (1 Peter 1:4). Just as the daughters sought to prevent their father's name from being "done away," Christ ensures that the names of His people are eternally preserved, written in the Lamb's Book of Life. Through His atoning sacrifice, Jesus, the ultimate Lamb of God, who takes away the sin of the world, secures for us an eternal "possession" in God's heavenly kingdom, a spiritual dwelling far greater and more secure than any earthly allotment (Ephesians 1:11). Moreover, the divine justice that responded to the daughters' plea is perfectly embodied in Christ, who, by His life, death, and resurrection, established perfect righteousness and equity, breaking down all barriers and granting all believers, regardless of gender, ethnicity, or social status, equal access to God's grace and an eternal inheritance (Galatians 3:28). He is the ultimate fulfillment of God's promise to provide a lasting place and an enduring name for all who are called by His name and are found in Him.