Bird's-eye view
This remarkable passage in Numbers presents us with a foundational moment in the development of Israel's case law. We are introduced to five daughters of a man named Zelophehad who, having no brothers, find themselves in a legal and covenantal predicament. Their father died without sons, and under the prevailing customs, this meant his name and his family's land allotment would be extinguished. With courage and profound respect for the established order, these women bring their case before the entire leadership of Israel. Their appeal is not a revolutionary demand for abstract rights, but a conservative plea to uphold a core principle of the covenant: the preservation of a father's name and inheritance within the promised land. Moses, in his wisdom, does not act on his own authority but brings the matter directly to Yahweh. The Lord's response is swift and decisive. He not only vindicates the daughters' claim but establishes their petition as a permanent statute in Israel. This is not the Bible caving to early feminism; it is the God of the covenant demonstrating the flexibility and righteousness of His law, ensuring that patriarchal lines are preserved and that no name in Israel is blotted out thoughtlessly. It is a beautiful illustration of how God's law, properly applied, brings justice and flourishing within His established creation order.
The core issue is inheritance and legacy. The land was not a commodity; it was a gift from God, a tangible sign of His covenant promise. To lose one's share in the land was to have one's name "withdrawn" from the family, a kind of covenantal erasure. These women understood that. Their concern was deeply theological. And God's answer shows that His patriarchal order is not a brittle, unthinking system, but a robust framework designed for the preservation and blessing of His people down through the generations. The law that results from this case becomes a foundational piece of Israel's civil code, demonstrating that God's justice is not an abstract ideal but a practical reality that works itself out in the nitty-gritty of property law and family lines.
Outline
- 1. A Righteous Appeal (Num 27:1-11)
- a. The Petitioners Introduced (Num 27:1)
- b. The Case Presented (Num 27:2-4)
- i. The Proper Venue (Num 27:2)
- ii. The Father's Standing (Num 27:3)
- iii. The Central Question (Num 27:4)
- c. The Case Adjudicated (Num 27:5-7)
- i. Moses' Deference (Num 27:5)
- ii. Yahweh's Verdict (Num 27:6-7)
- d. The Precedent Established (Num 27:8-11)
Context In Numbers
This episode occurs at a crucial juncture in the book of Numbers. The generation that came out of Egypt has perished in the wilderness because of their unbelief. A new census has just been completed in chapter 26, numbering the fighting men of the new generation who are poised to enter and conquer the promised land. The primary purpose of that census was to determine the apportionment of the land among the tribes and families of Israel. It is in this immediate context of preparing for settlement and inheritance that the case of Zelophehad's daughters arises. The rules for land distribution were being laid out, and a significant loophole immediately became apparent. What happens when there is no male heir? This story, therefore, is not a random anecdote. It is a vital addendum to the census and land-distribution laws, showing how God, through a real-life test case, refines and clarifies the application of His own commands for the good of His people.
Key Issues
- Biblical Case Law
- Inheritance and Covenant
- The Role of Women in Israel
- Patriarchy and Justice
- Preservation of the Family Name
- Moses' Leadership
- The Nature of God's Law
Preserving the Inheritance
We moderns, steeped as we are in egalitarianism and individualism, are prone to misread a text like this. We see five women appealing for property, and we immediately want to slap a "proto-feminist" label on it and celebrate it as a blow against the patriarchy. But that is to read our own cultural moment back into the text and to miss the point entirely. These women were not trying to overthrow the patriarchy; they were trying to find their proper place within it. Their concern was not for their personal autonomy or self-actualization. Their concern was for the name of their father. "Why should the name of our father be withdrawn from among his family?" That is a profoundly patriarchal concern.
The inheritance in the land was tied to the family name, and the family name was passed down through the male line. This was the structure God had ordained for Israel. These women were not challenging that structure. They were pointing out a situation where the structure, if applied woodenly, would fail to achieve its intended purpose, which was the preservation of every family in Israel. Their appeal was an appeal to the spirit of the law, not a rebellion against the letter of it. And God's resounding affirmation shows that He is more concerned with the substance of His covenant promises than with a bureaucratic, box-ticking application of them. This is how a healthy, godly patriarchy works. It is not rigid and oppressive; it is robust, flexible, and concerned with the flourishing of all its members under God.
Verse by Verse Commentary
1 Then the daughters of Zelophehad, the son of Hepher, the son of Gilead, the son of Machir, the son of Manasseh, of the families of Manasseh the son of Joseph, came near; and these are the names of his daughters: Mahlah, Noah and Hoglah and Milcah and Tirzah.
The narrative begins by carefully establishing the bona fides of these women. Their lineage is traced with great precision, all the way back to Joseph. This is not incidental detail. It establishes that they are true daughters of the covenant, members in good standing of the tribe of Manasseh. They are not outsiders or troublemakers. Their names are listed, giving them honor and individuality. They are Mahlah, Noah, Hoglah, Milcah, and Tirzah. They step onto the stage of redemptive history not as an anonymous group, but as distinct persons with a legitimate claim rooted in their covenant identity.
2 And they stood before Moses and before Eleazar the priest and before the leaders and all the congregation, at the doorway of the tent of meeting, saying,
Notice the propriety and orderliness of their approach. They do not start a protest movement or a whisper campaign. They go straight to the top, to the legitimate, God-ordained authorities. They stand before Moses the lawgiver, Eleazar the high priest, the tribal leaders, and the whole congregation. And they do so at the most official place possible: the entrance to the tent of meeting, the seat of both civil and religious authority. This shows immense courage, but it is a courage tempered by submission. They are honoring God's established order even as they are asking for that order to be clarified. This is the opposite of rebellion; it is righteous and orderly appeal.
3 “Our father died in the wilderness, yet he was not among the congregation of those who gathered themselves together against Yahweh in the congregation of Korah; but he died in his own sin, and he had no sons.
Their legal argument begins. They first establish their father's covenant standing. He died in the wilderness, yes, which means he was part of the generation that was under judgment. But, they are careful to point out, he was not part of Korah's rebellion, a particularly heinous and high-handed sin against God's appointed leadership. He "died in his own sin," which is a way of saying he died the common death of all those in the wilderness generation who failed to trust God at Kadesh Barnea. His sin was a personal failure of faith, not an act of public treason against the covenant. Therefore, there is no reason he should face the additional penalty of having his family line blotted out. The problem, they state plainly, is that he had no sons.
4 Why should the name of our father be withdrawn from among his family because he had no son? Give us a possession among our father’s brothers.”
Here is the heart of their plea, and it is a masterful piece of rhetoric. It is framed as a question that appeals to God's own justice and His commitment to His people. Why should a technicality, the lack of a son, lead to the covenantal erasure of their father's name? The name represents the entire legacy, the memory, the stake in the future of Israel. To be "withdrawn" is to be forgotten, to have no part in the promised inheritance. Their request is specific and reasonable: "Give us a possession among our father's brothers." They are not asking for a special privilege. They are asking to receive the portion that would have rightfully been their father's, so that his name and line can continue in the land.
5 So Moses brought their case near before Yahweh.
This is a mark of true leadership. Moses is the great lawgiver of Israel, but he does not presume to know the answer to every question. He does not rely on his own wisdom or legal expertise. Faced with a novel situation not explicitly covered by previous revelation, he does the only right thing: he takes it to the Lord. He acknowledges that the ultimate lawgiver is God Himself. This humility is what makes Moses a faithful mediator. He is not the source of the law, but the conduit of it.
6-7 Then Yahweh spoke to Moses, saying, “The daughters of Zelophehad are right in their statements. You shall surely give them a possession for an inheritance among their father’s brothers, and you shall have the inheritance of their father pass on to them.
God's verdict is immediate, clear, and emphatic. "The daughters of Zelophehad are right." The Hebrew is literally "they speak rightly." God Himself vindicates their claim and commends their reasoning. The command to Moses is unequivocal. He is to give them a real, landed possession as their inheritance. The father's inheritance is to pass directly to them. God's justice is not thwarted by unforeseen circumstances. He provides a way for His covenant promises to be fulfilled for this family.
8 Further, you shall speak to the sons of Israel, saying, ‘If a man dies and has no son, then you shall have his inheritance pass on to his daughter.
God now takes this specific ruling and elevates it to the level of general law. This one case becomes the precedent for all future cases. The principle is established as a permanent statute. If a man has no son, his inheritance does not simply vanish or get absorbed by the wider clan. It passes to his daughter. This secures the property within the immediate family line and honors the daughter as a legitimate heir for the purpose of carrying on the family's stake in the land.
9-11 And if he has no daughter, then you shall give his inheritance to his brothers. And if he has no brothers, then you shall give his inheritance to his father’s brothers. And if his father has no brothers, then you shall give his inheritance to his blood relative in his own family, and he shall possess it; and it shall be a statutory judgment to the sons of Israel, just as Yahweh commanded Moses.’ ”
The law is then expanded to cover other contingencies, creating a clear order of succession. The goal is always to keep the inheritance within the clan as closely as possible. First sons, then daughters, then brothers, then uncles, then the nearest kinsman. This is not just about property; it is about maintaining the tribal and clan structure that God ordained for Israel. The land was God's gift, and it was to be stewarded by families from generation to generation. This "statutory judgment" provides the legal framework to ensure that this happens in an orderly and just manner. It is a perfect example of God's wisdom providing practical, real-world guidance for the life of His people.
Application
This passage has several points of sharp application for us today. First, it shows us the right way to seek change or clarification within the covenant community. The daughters of Zelophehad acted with courage, but also with profound respect for authority. They made their appeal publicly, orderly, and reasonably. They did not agitate or slander; they reasoned from covenantal principles. In an age of perpetual online outrage, their example is a bracing corrective. If you have a grievance, take it through the proper channels, with humility and respect.
Second, we see the importance of godly leadership. Moses knew his limits. He did not have all the answers, and he was not afraid to admit it. His first instinct was to consult the Lord. Pastors and elders should take note. When faced with difficult or novel cases, the first move is not to pontificate, but to pray and to search the Scriptures. True authority is found in submission to God's authority.
Finally, and most importantly, this passage points us to our great inheritance in Jesus Christ. The land of Canaan was a type, a shadow, of the true inheritance that is ours in the gospel. That inheritance is "incorruptible, and undefiled, and that fadeth not away, reserved in heaven for you" (1 Peter 1:4). Through faith in Christ, we who were once cut off, with no name and no claim, have been made sons and daughters of the living God. We have been adopted into His family and made joint-heirs with Christ (Romans 8:17). The concern of these daughters to preserve their father's name in the land should awaken in us a zealous concern for the name and honor of our God and Father. Our inheritance is not a plot of land, but eternal life in the new heavens and the new earth. And just as God made a way for these daughters to receive their portion, so He has made a way through the blood of His Son for all who believe to enter into their eternal possession.