Numbers 21:24

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.

EXPOSITORY (ENGLISH BIBLE)

Ellicott's Commentary for English Readers

(24) For the border of the children of Ammon was strong.—These words assign the reason why the conquests of the Amorites were arrested, not why the children of Israel did not take possession of the land of the Ammonites, with whom they were forbidden to meddle, and whose land they were not to occupy. (See Deuteronomy 2:19.)

Benson Commentary

Numbers 21:24. From Arnon — Or, which reached from Arnon; and so here is a description or limitation of Sihon’s conquest and kingdom, that it extended only from Arnon unto the children of Ammon — And then the following words, for the border of the children of Ammon was strong, come in very fitly, not as a reason why the Israelites did not conquer the Ammonites, for they were absolutely forbidden to meddle with them, (Deuteronomy 3:8,) but as a reason why Sihon could not enlarge his conquests to the Ammonites, as he had done to the Moabites. Jabbok — A river by which the countries of Ammon and Moab were in part bounded and divided. Strong — Either by the advantage of the river, or by their strong holds in their frontiers.

Matthew Henry's Concise Commentary

21:21-35 Sihon went with his forces against Israel, out of his own borders, without provocation, and so ran upon his own ruin. The enemies of God's church often perish by the counsels they think most wisely taken. Og, king of Bashan, instead of being warned by the fate of his neighbours, to make peace with Israel, makes war with them, which proves in like manner his destruction. Wicked men do their utmost to secure themselves and their possessions against the judgments of God; but all in vain, when the day comes on which they must fall. God gave Israel success, while Moses was with them, that he might see the beginning of the glorious work, though he must not live to see it finished. This was, in comparison, but as the day of small things, yet it was an earnest of great things. We must prepare for fresh conflicts and enemies. We must make no peace or truce with the powers of darkness, nor even treat with them; nor should we expect any pause in our contest. But, trusting in God, and obeying his commands, we shall be more than conquerors over every enemy.

Barnes' Notes on the Bible

Jabbok (now Wady Zerka: compare Genesis 32:22) runs eastward under Rabbah of the children of Ammon, thence westward, and reaches the Jordan, 45 miles north of the Arnon. It was between Rabbah and Gerasa that it formed the Ammonite boundary.

Jamieson-Fausset-Brown Bible Commentary

24. from Arnon unto Jabbok—now the Zurka. These rivers formed the southern and northern boundaries of his usurped territory.

for the border of … Ammon was strong—a reason stated for Sihon not being able to push his invasion further.

Matthew Poole's Commentary

From Arnon; or which reached from Arnon, &c. such supplements being very usual; and so here is contained a description or limitation of Sihon’s conquest and kingdom, that it extended only from Arnon—unto the children of Ammon; and then the following words, for the border of the children of Ammon was strong, come in very fitly, not as a reason why the Israelites did not or could not conquer the Ammonites, for they were absolutely forbidden to meddle with them, Deu 3:8; but as a reason why Sihon could not enlarge his conquests and empire to the Ammonites, as he had done to the Moabites.

Jabbok; a river by which the countries of Ammon and Moab were in part bounded and divided.

Was strong; either by the advantage of the river, or by their strong holds in their frontiers.

Gill's Exposition of the Entire Bible

And Israel smote him with the edge of the sword,.... Slew him and his army, entirely routed them, and got a complete victory over them; God giving them up into their hands, who otherwise were a very strong, powerful, and warlike people; see Amos 2:9.

and possessed his land from Arnon unto Jabbok; two rivers, the one to the south, the other to the north of his country; the one was the boundary of his country between him and the Moabites, the other the boundary of his country between him and the Ammonites, as it follows:

even unto the children of Ammon; for the border of the children of Ammon was strong; which is given as a reason why the Israelites proceeded no further in their conquest; there was another reason for that, which was the order of the Lord not to distress the Ammonites, nor meddle with them; though Jarchi makes this prohibition to be their strength, Deuteronomy 2:19, but this is given as a reason why Sihon could not extend his conquests further, because it was so well fortified, either by nature or art, or both, by the river Jabbok, by mountains and frontier towns, and particularly by Rabbah, as the Targum of Jonathan suggests, which was their royal city in later times, and a very strong place; see 2 Samuel 12:26.

Geneva Study Bible

And Israel smote him with the edge of the sword, and possessed his land from Arnon unto {h} Jabbok, even unto the children of Ammon: for the border of the children of Ammon was {i} strong.

(h) The river.

(i) For the people were tall and strong like giants; De 2:20.

EXEGETICAL (ORIGINAL LANGUAGES)

Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges

24. from Arnon unto Jabbok, even unto the children of Ammon] This gives three boundaries of Sihon’s kingdom, the Jordan being the western boundary. Arnon was on the south (Numbers 21:13), Jabbok on the north, and the Ammonites on the east, whither the Amorites had driven them. The Jabbok flows into the Jordan nearly 25 miles north of the Dead Sea. The district here described is now known as the Belka‘ (see G. A. Smith, H. G. [Note: . G. Historical Geography of the Holy Land.] 535 f.).

for the border of the children of Ammon was strong] This may be intended to explain why Sihon’s territory extended no further on the east, or why the Israelites did not push their conquests further. The natural features of the country would afford no special obstacle, but the border fortresses might be impregnable. The Heb. adjective, however, is peculiar; ‘az (עַז) usually denotes ‘fierce,’ ‘cruel,’ rather than strong. The LXX. read the word as ‘Jazer,’ a town mentioned in Numbers 21:32, Numbers 32:3; Numbers 32:35; and it is possible that ‘for strong (כי עז) was the border, &c.’ should be emended to ‘at Jazer (ביעזר) was the border, &c.’ a statement which finds a parallel in Joshua 13:25. The words may have been a comment by the writer or a compiler on the preceding clause.

Pulpit Commentary

Verse 24. - And Israel smote him with the edge of the sword. This was the first time that generation had seen war, if we except the uncertain episode of the king of Arad, and they could have had no weapons but such as their fathers had brought out of Egypt. It was, therefore, a critical moment in their history when they met the forces of Sihon, confident from their recent victory over Moab. We may suppose that Joshua was their military leader now, as before and after. From Arnon unto Jabbok. The Jabbok, which formed the boundary of Sihon on the north towards the kingdom of Og, and on the east towards the Ammonites, is the modern Zerka: it runs in a large curve northeast, north-west, and west, until it fails into Jordan, forty-five miles north of the mouth of the Arnon. Even unto the children of Ammon: for the border of the children of Ammon was strong. This is perhaps intended to explain rather why the Amorites had not extended their conquests any further, than why the Israelites made no attempt to cross the border of Ammon; they had another and more sufficient reason (see Deuteronomy 2:19). Rabbah of Ammon, which stood upon the right (here the eastern) bank of the Upper Jabbok, was an extremely strong place which effectually protected the country behind it, even until the reign of David (see on 2 Samuel 11, 12). Numbers 21:24

Keil and Delitzsch Biblical Commentary on the Old Testament

Israel smote him with the edge of the sword, i.e., without quarter (see Genesis 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 (Deuteronomy 2:37; Deuteronomy 3:16; Joshua 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" (Deuteronomy 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 (Numbers 34:2-12; compared with Genesis 10:19 and Genesis 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 Joshua 13:25, as compared with Judges 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. Deuteronomy 2:34-36). The statement in Numbers 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 (Numbers 32). The only places mentioned here are Heshbon and her daughters, i.e., the smaller towns belonging to it (cf. Joshua 13:17), which are enumerated singly in Numbers 32:34-38, and Joshua 13:15-28. In explanation of the expression, "Heshbon and her daughters," it is added in Numbers 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 Deuteronomy 3:12-13; Joshua 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 (Deuteronomy 1:5; Deuteronomy 29:1; Deuteronomy 32:49; Deuteronomy 34:5-6), and called Arboth Moab (see Numbers 22:1); whilst the women who seduced the Israelites to join in the idolatrous worship of Baal Peor are called daughters of Moab (Numbers 25:1).