Scripture: “And every daughter who possesses an inheritance in any tribe of the people of Israel shall be wife to one of the clan of the tribe of her father, so that every one of the people of Israel may possess the inheritance of his fathers. So no inheritance shall be transferred from one tribe to another, for each of the tribes of the people of Israel shall hold on to its own inheritance.” Numbers 36:8-9 ESV
Observation: The remainder of the book of Numbers reads like an appendix of Moses’ journal. Chapter 34 presents the boundaries of the entire Promised Land and a list of the tribal chiefs. Chapter 35 addresses the cities where the Levites will dwell and the six cities of refuge with a review of the protocol for avengers and the accused. The last chapter (36) reviews the inheritance laws for female heirs in greater detail.
Thanks to the daughters of Zelophehad, who respectfully and confidently approached Moses about their father’s inheritance (see prior Daily Focus), Moses further instructs any female heirs must marry a man from within her clan. Why? So the integrity of each tribe’s land inheritance remains intact (above verses). Thus, at the book’s end, the author tells us the daughters of Zelophehad (Mahlah, Tirzah, Hoglah, Milcah, and Noah) followed Moses’ command. They married the sons of their father’s brothers—preserving the land inheritance of their clan.
Takeaway: So why did God insist on this matter of marrying within the clan when it involves an inheritance? Doesn’t that infringe on the right to choose your partner? Yes, but in ancient Israel, the parents arranged their children’s marriages—both sons and daughters. So if the mother were alive, the law would apply to her in choosing her daughter’s marriage partner. If both parents were deceased, it would apply to the next of kin (uncles and aunts). But why was this policy so crucial in the first place? Interestingly, the law had more to do with the year of Jubilee, when the land reverted to its original owner. If a female heir were to marry a man from another tribe, then dual rights to the family plot (represented by two tribes) would cause controversy and disharmony.
Our takeaway? While this law would be deemed today unsatisfactory for women’s rights, it intended to perpetuate the nation’s well-being by protecting corporate over individual rights. Perhaps this is why the author revisits this provision for the female inheritance at the book’s end. It sends an underlying message that if Israel truly desires to conquer their enemies and thrive, all will have to make sacrifices of individual rights for the nation’s welfare. In contrast, as we read through the book of judges, one of the darkest eras in biblical history, twice, the author reminds us that everyone did what was right in their own eyes—yielding disaster for the nation.
So how should we fight for our rights and that of others in a godly manner that would account for our nation’s welfare? This discussion is worthy of a book. Undoubtedly, there are times when we should fight for individual rights regardless of whether it may offend others or destabilize the nation. Indeed, we fought a civil war for this reason. But with each battle for human rights, we must come under God’s holiness code that protects the sanctity of all life, including all unborn babies, all factory-enslaved children, all trafficked women, and all battered wives—to name a few. But, as followers of Jesus, we do not have the right to demand our life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. Instead, we pick up our crosses and follow him to fight the good fight for the betterment of all his kingdom.
Prayer: Father God, we thank you for your Son who laid aside his rights as the King of kings to become a servant of all. Would you please help us to cooperate with your Holy Spirit in following your Son’s lead in fighting for the right of others to find freedom in Christ? Amen.
Rev. Gordon Green, M.Div., M.A. Counseling
Leave a Reply