Deeper Commentary

 

Num 16:1 Now Korah, the son of Izhar, the son of Kohath, the son of Levi, with Dathan and Abiram, the sons of Eliab, and On, the son of Peleth, sons of Reuben, took men-
Korah is presented as the ringleader of the rebellion (Jude 11). But his sons apparently survived, dissociating themselves from their father, becoming the "sons of Korah" who were musicians in the sanctuary. As we see throughout the Biblical records, good men have bad sons and vice versa. Spirituality is in the end totally individual and personal. The Kohathites pitched on the same side of the tabernacle as the Reubenites. So we see the simple takeaway lesson- watch whom you mix with, even amongst the people of God. For people tend to lead each other into sin.

Initially God's intention was that the firstborn of all Israel would be priests (Ex. 13:2; 19:6). But after the golden calf, they were replaced by the Levites (Num. 3:12). The priestly work was split up among Levi’s four sons: Aaron, Kohath, Merari, and Gershon (Num. 3:17,38; 1 Chron. 23:12,13). But the most senior role was given to Aaron, passing over Kohath (Ex. 28:1; Num. 17:1-10). And Kohath's family had to be supervised by Eleazer, a son of Aaron (Num. 3:32). This is typical of how God doesn't always honour the firstborn, as we see from the Abraham, Isaac and Jacob family stories. In this case, the discontented fed off each others' discontent; for the Levites were led by Elizaphan, the son of Kohath's fourth son (Num. 3:30). Aaron was the son of Amram, Kohath's firstborn. Korah was the son of Kohath's second son Izhar. Korah was the firstborn son of Izhar, so he was a firstborn; but his father was not a firstborn. He was younger brother to Amram, Moses' father. Making Korah a cousin to Moses. He clearly was discontented that he as a firstborn didn't have more seniority. He obviously felt that he ought to lead the Levites. The Reubenites were the deposed firstborns just as the Kohathites thought they were. Again we see how the Biblical record is so psychologically credible; for we see discontented people feed off each other all the time.

Num 16:2 and they rose up before Moses with certain of the children of Israel, two hundred and fifty princes of the congregation, men called to lead the assembly, men of renown-
We note that Korah was a firstborn, and Reuben was a deposed firstborn. Possibly there was some discontent about the firstborn of Israel being exchanged for the Levites. The rejected Israelites had wanted a captain to lead them back to Egypt. We are told that they in their hearts returned there. So it is likely that this putsch was in order to take Moses and Aaron out of leadership positions, so that the people could be led back to Egypt.

Num 16:3 They assembled themselves together against Moses and against Aaron, and said to them, You take too much on yourself, since all the congregation are holy, each one of them, and Yahweh is among them. Why then lift yourselves up above the assembly of Yahweh?-
The complaint may have been that Moses was exalting his own immediate family to the priesthood, and Korah and the Levites were subservient to them. Perhaps Korah led the rebellion against Moses because he objected to how Elzaphan son of Uziel had been appointed over the Kohathites (Num. 3:30). Kohath had four sons, Amram, Izhar, Hebron and Uziel (Ex. 6:18). Amram's sons, Moses and Aaron, had already received high honour in ruling over all Israel. So Korah, as the firstborn son of the next born son Izhar, thought that he ought to have been over the Kohathites. But instead, the son of Uziel, Kohath's youngest son, had been made prince of the Kohathite clan. This is typical of how God appoints those who are least qualified and strong in secular terms. But Korah disliked this. He felt he was next in line to be the leader of the Kohathites.

Aaron had made this same complaint against Moses in Num. 12 and now he experiences the same. As God was gracious to him then, thanks to Moses' intercession, so Aaron is going to reflect that grace to others. He was falsely accused as he had falsely accused Moses. This kind of thing often happens, for our spiritual growth and our ability to enter into the mind of others and pity them- not simply as some kind of "measure for measure" justice.

The comment that "all the congregation are holy" alludes to the preceding statement in Num. 15:40, that all Israel were to wear tassels to remind them that they were holy to their God. Here we see again how the incidents and laws of Numbers are all interconnected and are not random events.

The congregation had "gathered themselves together against" Aaron at the time of the golden calf (Ex. 32:1), and he gave in to them. He appears to have progressed here, because he doesn't give in to them but rather intercedes for them. Circumstances repeat in our lives, so that we learn to respond better.

Num 16:4 When Moses heard it, he fell on his face-
We see here his humility. A challenge to power and status is usually met by anger and a show of force. But Moses falls on his face in humility and in pleading with them not to sin.

Num 16:5 and he spoke to Korah and to all his company, saying, In the morning Yahweh will show who are His, and who is holy, and will cause him to come near to Him. Even him whom He shall choose He will cause to come near to Him-
LXX implies that God had already made the choice of Moses: "And he spoke to Core and all his assembly, saying, God has visited and known those that are his and who are holy, and has brought them to himself; and whom he has chosen for himself, he has brought to himself". This is alluded to in 2 Tim. 2:19 "the Lord knows them that are His". Paul is therefore arguing that all God's people are now as Moses was personally. He often does this- for Moses was seen in Judaism as an unapproachable icon, whereas Paul wants every Christian convert to see Moses as a pattern to be realistically followed. 

Paul in 2 Tim. 2:24,25 makes a series of allusions to Moses, which climax in an invitation to pray like Moses for the salvation of others:
“The servant of the Lord [A very common title of Moses] must not strive [As Israel did with him (Num. 26:9)] but be gentle unto all [The spirit of Moses] apt to teach [As was Moses (Ex. 18:20; 24:12; Dt. 4:1,5,14; 6:1; 31:22)], patient [As was Moses], in meekness [Moses was the meekest man (Num. 12:3)] instructing those that oppose themselves [at the time of Aaron and Miriam’s self-opposing rebellion] if God peradventure will give them repentance [i.e. forgiveness] [“Peradventure I shall make an atonement for your sin” (Ex. 32:30)]"- and he prayed 40 days and nights for it. And note too: 2 Tim. 2:19 = Num. 16:5,26; 2 Tim. 2:20 = Num. 12:7; 2:21 = Num. 16:37; 2 Tim. 2:22 = Num. 12:2; 16:3; 2 Tim. 2:26 = Num. 16:33. This is quite something. The height of Moses’ devotion for His people, the passion of his praying, shadowing as it did the matchless intercession and self-giving of the Lord, really is our example. It isn’t just a height to be admired. It means that we will not half-heartedly ask our God to ‘be with’ brother x and sister y and the brethren in country z, as we lie half asleep in bed. This is a call to sustained, on our knees prayer and devotion to the salvation of others. For the Judaists, an appeal to be like Moses, to emulate him in teaching, was blasphemous; for they considered Moses at such a level that he could never be imitated. Yet Paul urges timid Timothy and all teachers to realistically be Moses to our audience.

Num 16:6 Do this: take censers, Korah, and all his company-
Surely they were supposed to see the similarity with what had happened in Lev. 10:1: "The sons of Aaron, Nadab and Abihu, each took his own firepan, and they
placed coals in them and they placed incense upon them, and they brought before Yahweh a foreign fire, which He did not command them”. Here and in Lev. 10, the rebellious incense offerers were destroyed by fire from Yahweh. Censers were for offering incense, which was exactly how Nadab and Abihu were slain (Lev. 10:2). So this was the kind of leading into temptation which we are to pray shall not happen to us (Mt. 6:13). Their path to repentance was being offered to them, but the consequences of refusing it were now higher. The intended response was 'No. We give in. To offer incense like that and come near to the incense altar in the holy place is not for us. We would rightly be slain for doing so. So, we give in and retreat from our position'. But human pride was in the way. And they took up the offer, leading to their justifiable destruction. For by knowingly doing what they knew would lead to destruction, they were committing the sin of presumption which forms a context to this account (Num. 15:30,31). Balaam was put in a similar position- he was told to go with the elders of Moab, but only speak God's word. The intention was that he fall down and repent, and refuse to go with them. But he went with them, ostensibly in obedience to God's word of command which was leading him to self destruction. See on :29.

Num 16:7 and put fire in them, and put incense on them before Yahweh tomorrow; and it shall be that the man whom Yahweh chooses, he shall be holy. You have gone too far, you sons of Levi!-
As explained on :6, they were being invited to either repent, or go forward to self destruction. The Hebrew seems to imply that Yahweh had already chosen a holy one, and it was not them. The command to "put fire in them" was because they had "gone too far". So that they were being led down the path to destruction, unless they dropped everything and repented. God likewise works with people today.

It has been suggested that the words "Enough you sons of Levi!" cannot be addressed to Korah’s company, since they are laymen who are objecting to the claims of the Levites. They must be addressed by Korah’s company to Moses and Aaron, and may have fallen out of their right place at the end of Num. 16:3.

Num 16:8 Moses said to Korah, Hear now, you sons of Levi!-
As discussed on :6,7, they were on a fast track to self destruction. And so Moses desperately appeals to them: "Hear now...", i.e. 'Be obedient to God's word'. For that is the sense of the word for "hear". And it was urgent- "now", because they had been commanded to offer incense when doing so would lead to their destruction. They needed to urgently repent.

Num 16:9 Is it a small thing to you, that the God of Israel has separated you from the congregation of Israel, to bring you near to Himself, to do the service of the tabernacle of Yahweh, and to stand before the congregation to minister to them-
They didn’t consider servanthood within the family of God to be a very great honour; they wanted leadership and personal honour from those they would be over. This is the great paradox, the acme of humility, that serving is actually an honour. But there are so few who really grasp this. Leadership, like respect, is something which can never be demanded nor sought after if we are truly God’s people. Notice that to serve others in God’s family is to come “near to [God] Himself”.

"Come near before Yahweh" is usually translated "offer [sacrifice] before Yahweh", and is translated that way multiple times. Although rarely (Ex. 16:9; Lev. 9:5) it is used of the congregation coming near before Yahweh. But the congregation didn't generally want to come before Yahweh, and so He chose just the Levites to come before Yahweh (Num. 8:10; 16:9 s.w.). It was God's intention that all Israel should be His servants, a nation of priests. But He changed and ammended His approach, and chose just the Levites for this. We see here how open God is to change, so that by all means He may have relationship with His people. Under the new covenant, all believers are part of a royal priesthood (1 Pet. 2:5) as He initially intended even under the old covenant. And yet there is always the tendency to leave the priestly work to specialists rather than perceiving our personal call to do it.

They didn't appreciate the wonder of the fact that the Levites had been taken by God as the firstborns instead of the firstborn of Israel. And this was in order to save Israel from destruction. Israel's salvation is presented as dependent upon them: "I have given the Levites as a gift to Aaron and to his sons from among the children of Israel, to do the service of the children of Israel in the Tent of Meeting, and to make atonement for the children of Israel that there be no plague among the children of Israel, when the children of Israel come near to the sanctuary" (Num. 8:19). Likewise "the Levites are the ones who will serve in the service of the tent of meeting; they are the ones who will bear their guilt” (Lev. 18:22,23). We too can fail to appreciate the hugely significant role we play in saving others. We should need nothing else.

Num 16:10 and that He has brought you near, and all your brothers the sons of Levi with you? Do you seek the priesthood also?-
Coming near to Yahweh was something which should have been done on will and initiative of the people. But just as God brought Israel out of Egypt when they wanted to remain there, so He caused the Levites to come near to Him. This is an example of how His Spirit works upon human lives, to bring people unto Him when otherwise they would not have made the required distance of movement towards Him.

Num 16:11 Therefore you and all your company are gathered together against Yahweh; and Aaron, who is he that you murmur against him?-
See on Num. 26:9. Israel’s rejection of Moses was a rejection of the God who was working through Moses to redeem them. Thus Korah and his followers “strove against Moses... when they strove against Yahweh” (Num. 26:9 cp. 16:11). Moses understood that when Israel murmured against him, they murmured against Yahweh (Ex. 16:2,7; Num. 17:5; 21:5). They thrust Moses away from them (Acts 7:27,39) - yet the same word is used in Rom. 11:2 concerning how God still has not cast away Israel; He has not treated them as they treated Him through their rejection of Moses and Jesus, who manifested Him.

Num 16:12 Moses sent to call Dathan and Abiram, the sons of Eliab; and they said, We won’t come up-
They perceived that by offering incense they were indeed on a path to self destruction, as Nadab and Abihu had been. See on :6,7. So they wanted to pull back from that, and yet wanted to save face. And so they twist the turn of their argument. But repentance in this case simply had to involve loss of face. And there was no way it could be compromised as they wished.

Num 16:13 Is it a small thing that you have brought us up out of a land flowing with milk and honey, to kill us in the wilderness, but you must also make yourself a prince over us?-
Stephen in Acts 7 stresses the way in which Moses was rejected by Israel as a type of Christ. At age 40, Moses was "thrust away" by one of the Hebrews; and on the wilderness journey the Jews “thrust him from them, and in their hearts turned back again into Egypt" (Acts 7:27,35,39). This suggests that there was far more antagonism between Moses and Israel than we gather from the Old Testament record- after the pattern of Israel's treatment of Jesus. It would seem from Acts 7:39 that after the golden calf incident, the majority of Israel cold shouldered Moses. Once the point sank in that they were not going to enter the land, this feelings must have turned into bitter resentment. They were probably unaware of how Moses had been willing to offer his eternal destiny for their salvation; they would not have entered into the intensity of Moses' prayers for their salvation. The record seems to place Moses and "the people" in juxtaposition around 100 times (e.g. Ex. 15:24; 17:2,3; 32:1 NIV; Num. 16:41 NIV; 20:2,3; 21:5). They accused Moses of being a cruel cult leader, bent on leading them out into the desert to kill them and steal their wealth from them (Num. 16:13,14)- when in fact Moses was delivering them from the house of bondage, and was willing to lay down his own salvation for theirs. The way Moses submerged his own pain is superb; both of their rejection of him and of God's rejection of him from entering the Kingdom. The style of Moses' writing in Num. 20:12-14 reveals this submerging of his own pain. He speaks of himself in the third person, omitting any personal reflection on his own feelings: "The Lord spake unto Moses... Because you believed me not... you shall not bring the congregation into the land... and Moses sent messengers from Kadesh unto the King of Edom...". Likewise all the references to “the Lord spake unto Moses” (Lev. 1:1). Moses submerged his own personality in writing his books. 

Num 16:14 Moreover you haven’t brought us into a land flowing with milk and honey, nor given us inheritance of fields and vineyards-
Israel came to describe the Egypt they had been called out from as the land flowing with milk and honey, and denied that they could experience this in God's Kingdom in Canaan. And so we have the same tendency to be deceived into thinking that the kingdoms of this world, the world around us, is effectively the Kingdom of God, the only thing worth striving after. We marvel at how quickly they adopted the narrative that Egypt was good and Canaan was bad. A complete change to the narrative they had held just a few years previously.

Will you put out the eyes of these men? We won’t come up-
GNB "And now you are trying to deceive us", understanding this as an idiom for covering the eyes of another in deception.

Num 16:15 Moses was very angry, and said to Yahweh, Don’t respect their offering-
Yet he was the humblest man on planet earth at the time (Num. 12:3). Anger isn’t advisable for us, as it can easily lead us into sin; but of itself, anger isn’t necessarily incompatible with humility. Yet later Moses' faith slipped for a moment; because his spirit was provoked by Israel, so that he spoke unadvisedly with his lips and was therefore barred from entering the land (although maybe such an apparently temporary slip was the reflection of deeper problems?). Yet it does seem uncharacteristic, a tragic slip down the graph of ever rising spirituality. There must have almost been tears in Heaven. Being easily provoked was one of Moses' characteristics; consider how he turned himself and stormed out from Pharaoh (Ex. 10:6; 11:8); how his anger waxed hot when he returned from the mount, how he went out from Pharaoh in great anger, how he first of all feared the wrath of Pharaoh and then stopped fearing it; how Moses was "very wroth" at Israel's suggestion that he was appropriating the sacrifices for himself; how he was "angry" with Eleazer (Ex. 32:19; 11:8; Num. 16:15; Lev. 10:16,17). This temperament explains his swings of faith. Was the Lord Jesus likewise afflicted?

I have not taken one donkey from them, neither have I hurt one of them-
Paul alludes to these words: "I have coveted no man's silver, or gold, or apparel" (Acts 20:33); and Paul maybe had these words in mind again in 2 Cor. 7:2: "We have hurt no man... we have defrauded no man". Always we are to be looking out for similarities between our experiences and those of Biblical characters. For it is in this way the we through patience and comfort of the scriptures have hope; and the Bible becomes a living word speaking to us directly. LXX "I have not taken away the desire of any one of them" could mean they were implying he had messed with their wives (Ez. 24:16). Sexual slander is always a cheap shot taken at any religious leader, and Moses was surely liable to it, seeing the people hated him so much and were always murmuring at him. 

The insistence Moses had not taken a donkey from them was effectively saying that he had not exercised the power of a ruler. Saul as king of Israel did just this (1 Sam. 12:3).

Num 16:16 Moses said to Korah, You and all your company go before Yahweh, you, and they, and Aaron, tomorrow-
As explained on :6,7 this was effectively a command which would lead them to their deaths. For there were many commands about the incense and who could offer it, warning that any who offered otherwise or who weren't priests, or came near to offer incense when they weren't qualified, were to die. Their path to repentance was being offered to them, but the consequences of refusing it were now higher. The intended response was 'No. We give in. To offer incense like that and come near to the incense altar in the holy place is not for us. We would rightly be slain for doing so. So, we give in and retreat from our position'. But human pride was in the way. And they took up the offer, leading to their justifiable destruction.

Num 16:17 and let each man take his censer, and put incense on them, and each man bring before Yahweh his censer, two hundred and fifty censers; you also and Aaron, each his censer-
Each prince offered 21 animals in total at the dedication of the altar in Num. 7, and there were 12 princes, making a total of 252 animals. When the princes rebelled, the 250 rebellious princes were asked to bring their censers before Yahweh, along with the censers of Moses and Aaron (Num. 16:17), making a total of 252 censers. That this number is again associated with the princes of Israel cannot surely be chance. There is the simple message that the hand of God was present throughout the whole narrative.

Num 16:18 They each took his censer, and put fire in them, and laid incense thereon, and stood at the door of the Tent of Meeting with Moses and Aaron-
As discussed on :6,7,16 they refused to back down and were now committing the sin of presumption, challenging God to strike them down.

Num 16:19 Korah assembled all the congregation against them to the door of the Tent of Meeting, and the glory of Yahweh appeared to all the congregation-
"The congregation" therefore refers to all Israel and it was therefore all of Israel who were to be slain (:21).

Num 16:20 Yahweh spoke to Moses and to Aaron, saying-
Moses and Aaron know Yahweh well enough to as it were disobey the command to separate themselves from the condemned sinners. They do not do so immediately, but instead beg Him not to destroy all the congregation.

Num 16:21 Separate yourselves from among this congregation that I may consume them in a moment!-
Twice in quick succession God wishes to do this and is talked out of it, as it were, by Moses' intercession (:21,45). We get the impression of a fast moving, intense relationship between God and Moses. "This congregation" apparently referred to all Israel (:19); because in :22-26 we see the intercession of Moses and Aaron, and their obtaining of deliverance for "this congregation" so long as they literally separated themselves from the rebels. God wished to destroy the entire congregation, as He wished to at the time of the golden calf and also at the time of their refusal to enter Canaan in Num. 14. But again, the intercession of Moses leads to a radical change of heart in God Almighty. Such is the power of prayer and intercession for others. The power of Moses' intercession contrasts with the far greater power of that of the Lord, whose intercession was not with words alone but backed up by His blood, His sacrifice.

If Yahweh had destroyed Israel, then it would have left just Moses and Aaron. Clearly He still has in mind what He did in Ex. 32:10 where He told Moses “I will
become furious with them and consume them, and I will make you into a great nation". We observe how God is willing to move down one track, but is persuadable to move down another even if that is not His ideal.

"In a moment" is literally 'in the twinkle of an eye'. God was a fraction of a second away from destroying all the people; the intercession of Moses was immediate, and was immediately effective. We see how intense was that mediation, and how immediate was God's response to Moses. And Moses' mediation is a dim shadow of the Lord's for us. At the time of the golden calf it had been the same: "I will come up in the midst of you in a moment" (Ex. 33:5 s.w.). The sons of Korah remembered this when they used the word in Ps. 73:19: "How are they brought into desolation, as in a moment they are utterly consumed". They perceived that this sudden destruction did come upon their family, although Israel as a whole, including themselves, were saved from it by grace.

Num 16:22 They fell on their faces, and said, God, the God of the spirits of all flesh-
Biblically, a man or woman is identified with their spirit in the sense of their mind or way of life. Heb. 12:23 speaks of the spirits of just men, with whom the believer ought to associate. This means that we ought to identify ourselves with the way of life, the spirit of life, of “just men” of the past. God is “the God of the spirits of all flesh” (Num. 16:22; 27:16) in the sense that He is the God of all humanity. So “spirits in prison” can refer to people who, in their spiritual lives, are imprisoned.

Moses is seeking to touch a Divine nerve by reminding Him of how all He intended destroying were in fact energized by His Spirit. So often David appeals to Yahweh as our creator and maker as the basis for Him to show grace and pity to man in his weakness. To this day He has a desire to the work of His hands in pity. We note that Moses had saved Aaron's life at the time of the golden calf, and now Aaron in turn intercedes for others. Our own experience of having been interceded for leads us to intercede for others.

Shall one man sin, and will You be angry with all the congregation?-
It’s clear from the record in this chapter that the architect of the rebellion was Korah, the “one man” whom Moses referred to (see too :40,49; Jude 11 "the gainsaying of Korah"). But he influenced others to sin, and they were still guilty for their sin. Although God doesn’t count people as guilty merely by association, He expects us not to identify ourselves with sinful behaviour- hence verses 23-25 are God’s response to Moses’ concern that God might be indiscriminately applying the unfair principle of ‘guilt by association’. Moses is pleading with God in the spirit of Abraham, who likewise pleaded for a change in the outworking of God's purpose and stated intentions- on the same basis, that the innocent should not perish with the righteous. But Moses here seems over generous in considering that Korah was the "one man" who had sinned; those who had followed him into the sin of presumption still had to be punished. The result of the amazing intercession was that only the rebels were punished, even though God judged the entire congregation as guilty for going along with them. 'Going along' with the sins of leaders is therefore here seen as a capital offence. The problem with religion and mere denominationalism is that the sins of leaders are ho-hummed and legitimized by the congregation. We note again that this amazing atonement was achieved without the shedding of blood, without which there was technically no remission of sins. Likewise Yahweh had noted in Num. 14 that he saved Israel from destruction and pardoned according to the mere word of Moses- without shedding of blood. For there was no time for an animal to be offered. It makes us reflect how much more powerful is the Lord's intercession for us, based upon His blood.

Num 16:23 Yahweh spoke to Moses, saying-
As at the time of the golden calf, God had likewise insisted that He would destroy the congregation of Israel and make a great nation from Moses. Situations at times repeat in our lives, and here Moses again is called to intense, immediate intercession in order to avert this. And Aaron joins in this time; it was God's intention that he should rise up to the intensity of Moses, and indeed Aaron saved Israel again when the plague broke out which would otherwise have destroyed the congregation. This is the power God is willing to give to the prayers of third parties for others' salvation. There is a gap between Yahweh's prophetic pronouncements, and their fulfillment. And in that gap there is the possibility for repentance. This is what gives intensity to our prayers and repentance, knowing we too live in such a gap. And here again, God 'repents' of His intention to destroy the entire congregation, and instead tells them to get away from the tabernacle of Korah and thereby be saved from the threatened destruction (:24). 

Num 16:24 Speak to the congregation, saying, ‘Get away from around the tent of Korah, Dathan, and Abiram!’-
The usage of the word "tent" here is misleading. The word mishkan is used, the usual term for the tabernacle, and a different word for ordinary dwelling tents is used in :26,27. It seems that Korah had his own religious system which he had established near to the tabernacle of Yahweh. The singular "tent / tabernacle" cannot refer to the ordinary tent of the three men, for they would not all have normally lived in the same tent. Acts 7:43 informs us that Israel carried the tabernacle of other gods with them through the wilderness, as well as Yahweh's tabernacle. So we see the extent of the apostacy. The desire to replace the leadership of Moses and Aaron was of the same spirit as the desire to appoint another "captain" who would lead them and their pagan tabernacle back to Egypt where they had taken it from. It could be that whilst this showdown was happening at the tabernacle of Yahweh, the "congregation" were worshipping idols at the apostate tabernacle of Korah. I will suggest on Num. 18:1; 19:7,11 that in fact the priests bowed to pressure and allowed some of the rebellious Levites and even other Israelites to enter the sanctuary at this time, and this required the red heifer ritual to be cleansed from. Perhaps they took part of the furnishings of the true tabernacle and erected them in their own tabernacle. 

Num 16:25 Moses rose up and went to Dathan and Abiram, and the elders of Israel followed him-
We note that Moses went to Dathan and Abiram, not Korah. Clearly this was one last desperate appeal to them; for as noted on :22, Moses had the impression that Dathan and Abiram had been drawn into the sin of "one man", Korah. But it seems they still didn't heed even the desperate appeals of Moses. Korah himself went to the tabernacle and was offering fake incense there.

Num 16:26 He spoke to the congregation, saying, Depart, I beg you, from the tents of these wicked men-
This is the normal word for "tents", as in tents which are lived in; hence the plural. And it is a different word to the word for "tabernacle", in the singular, used in :24. That word refers to some paganic, idolatrous mishkan, a fake tabernacle. "I beg you" shows Moses' earnest desire for the salvation of those who despised him, grumbled about him constantly, and at times sought to slay him and certainly depose him from leadership. 

And touch nothing of theirs, lest you be consumed in all their sins!-
"Touch" is better 'to lay the hand on'. The idea was that the others were not to grab hold of any of the idols in the tents of these men, associated with their paganic tabernacle discussed on :24. The idea is not of 'guilt by association' through touch, but rather of actual participation in idolatry. Especially since idols were often made from precious stones and metals, and would have been valuable. If they did, then they would "be consumed in [the coming judgment for] all their sins". We each stand in the position of that surrounding congregation; for 2 Cor. 6:17 alludes to this historical moment in bidding each believer to "touch not" idolatry and the things of the temple / tabernacle of idols. The later psalms of the sons of Korah, who were saved, often reflect upon the fallacy of materialism in the face of sheol, the word used here for the "pit" where their relatives were destroyed and into which they entered but were saved (:30). The materialism of Korah is also hinted at here in that people are warned not to touch the possessions of Korah, which presumably were significant. We note :32 also speaks of "their goods" being destroyed.

Num 16:27 So they went away from the tent of Korah, Dathan, and Abiram, on every side; and Dathan and Abiram came out, and stood at the door of their tents, and their wives, and their sons, and their little ones-
The genealogy of the sons of Korah, the gatekeepers of the temple, is recorded in 1 Chron. 9:17-19. It can be shown from the genealogies that they were brought up by their second cousin, Phinehas. They obeyed the command to leave the tents of their father Korah when he was consumed in the earthquake. Num. 16:27 mentions Dathan and Abiram's children standing outside their tents at this time, but there is the pointed omission of Korah's children; they had left the tents. We can therefore build up a picture of Phinehas as a zealot for the purity of God's Truth (Num. 25), yet mixed with compassion, as shown by the way he took those children of Korah under his wing, and brought them up soundly in the Truth, with the result that wrote at least 11 of the Psalms and protected the purity of temple worship. It should be noted that Samuel was a Korahite (1 Chron. 6:33-38).

Their standing in their tent doors could be seen as an example of the presumptuous sin of the preceding chapter, literally 'to uplift the hand'.

Num 16:28 Moses said, Hereby you shall know that Yahweh has sent me to do all these works; for they are not from my own mind-
Num. 16:28 LXX: “Moses said, Hereby ye shall know that the Lord hath sent me to do all these works; for I have not done them of myself”. The ideas of know, sent me, do these works, not of myself are so frequent in John's Gospel and are alluding here: Jn. 13:35; 8:28,42; 7:3,28; 5:30,36; 10:25,37; 14:10; 15:24; 17:4. “The works… The Son can do nothing of himself” recalls Moses' words: “All these works… I have not done them of my own mind” (Num. 16:28 AV). The Lord was claiming to be as Moses, and a prophet greater than Moses; but not God. This verse is the basis of  “I do nothing of myself, but as the Father taught me” (Jn. 8:28).

"They are not from my own mind" may mean that Moses is saying that He was propelled to leadership by God and not at all according to his own wish. Paul likewise writes of how his ministry was given to him against his own will. Any ministry is a gift from God, as the Lord's parables teach. There can be no room for any spirit of careerism in Christian ministry. The need is the call, and we are to follow it, having surrendered to the Lord's leading and not seeking any leadership position "from my own mind" as Moses here puts it. We are to aspire to serve, not to be masters.

 

Num 16:29 If these men die the common death of all men, or if they be visited after the visitation of all men; then Yahweh hasn’t sent me-
This describes "the common death of all men" as being "visited after the visitation of all men"; visiting is very much Angelic language, and thus indicates that an Angel consciously causes a man to die (by taking his breath away). This happened with Moses.

As discussed on :6,7, the idea was that these men had been challenged by God through Moses to offer incense with their censors, which was priestly work, to which these men claimed to be fitted. If they did, then they would be slain, according to the law. Their only alternative was to either go ahead and do so to their destruction; or fall on their faces and repent. And so Moses is alluding to this when he says that if they were slain by direct Divine action, then his whole position about them would be justified. If they weren't, then they were indeed qualified to be priests, even though Moses' law said they weren't. and Moses would have been a false prophet of God's words.

Ps. 106:18 says that God kindled a fire to destroy them, but in reality, they  kindled that fire themselves (Is. 9:18; Hos 7:6). Lev. 10:2 uses the same term for fire from Yahweh devouring Nadab and Abihu as in Num. 16:35 about the destruction of Korah's rebels. They were clearly aware of what had happened to those rebels, and were daring God to repeat it. It was truly the sin of presumption.

Clearly they didn't believe in Moses. But earlier they had been given signs "that they may believe you for ever" (Ex. 19:9). We see here the conditional nature of how God works with man. Reason to believe is given, but man must still exercise his choice. 

Num 16:30 But if Yahweh make a new thing, and the ground open its mouth, and swallow them up, with all that appertain to them, and they go down alive into Sheol-
"Make a new thing" is literally 'create a new creation'. Even in the destruction of the wicked, there is something of a new creation. So that others may emerge into His creation. Sin and condemnation thereby become positive, within the Divine ecology.

"The Angels that sinned" in 2 Pet. 2:4 allude to these men. “Angel” can mean “minister”, “messenger” (as John’s disciples were messengers or ministers to him, Lk. 7:24). Numbers 16:9 describes the rebels as “ministers” of the congregation. The Septuagint uses the word aggelos for “ministers”, which is the same Greek word translated “Angel” in 2 Peter 2:4. They left their first, or original, “principality” (Jude 6, A.V. margin); the rebels were princes, but wanted to be priests as well (Num. 16:2,10). Because of this, the ground opened and swallowed them (Num. 16:31–33), as a dramatic example to everyone of the fate of those who rebel against the Word of God. It was especially dramatic in that it is emphasized that this was the first time that such a thing had happened (Num. 16:30). Thus they are now dead, “in everlasting chains under darkness”, in the heart of the earth, to be resurrected and judged at “the judgment of the great day”. Jude 8 implies that “likewise”, i.e. like the angels that sinned, the Judaizers “speak evil of dignities”, e.g. Jesus and Paul. The rebels spoke evil of Moses and Aaron (Num. 16:11–14).

A case could be made that the whole record of Israel’s rejection from entering the land of Canaan is framed to adduce a reason for this as the fact they chose to believe that the land was inhabited by an evil dragon who would consume them there. This was a slander of the good land, and the whole point was that if they had believed in the power of God, then whatever ‘adversary’ was in the land, in whatever form, was ultimately of no real power (Num. 13:32; 14:36; Dt. 1:25). And yet it was not God’s way to specifically tell the people that there was no such dragon lurking in the land of Canaan – instead He worked with them according to their fears, by making the earth literally open and swallow up the apostate amongst them (Num. 16:30) – emphasizing that by doing this, He was doing “a new thing”, something that had never been done before – for there was no dragon lurking in any land able to swallow up people. And throughout the prophets it is emphasized that God and not any dragon swallowed up people – “The Lord [and not any dragon] was as an enemy; He has swallowed up Israel” (Lam. 2:5 and frequently in the prophets). The people of Israel who left Egypt actually failed to inherit Canaan because they believed that it was a land who swallowed up the inhabitants of the land (Num. 13:32), relating this to the presence of giants in the land (Num. 13:33). As Joshua and Caleb pleaded with them, they needed to believe that whatever myths there were going around, God was greater than whatever mythical beast was there. And because they would not believe that, they failed to enter the land, which in type symbolized those who fail to attain that great salvation which God has prepared.

Then you shall understand that these men have despised Yahweh-"Despised" as in Num. 14:11 is s.w. provoke or blaspheme. It is specifically associated with turning to other gods (Dt. 31:20; 32:19; Is. 1:4). And that appears to be the context. The Israelites decided not to enter the land and instead to follow the gods of Egypt back to Egypt (Num. 14:11,23). The language of 'despising' is that of the presumptuous sin spoken of in the previous chapter; it was the sin of Israel who wanted to enter Canaan without God's blessing.

Num 16:31 It happened, as he made an end of speaking all these words, that the ground split apart that was under them-
Mot, the god of death, was thought to have jaws encompassing the earth and swallowing up people at their death into the underworld. But Job rejected that myth – he saw God as the swallower, and death as a return to the dust, albeit in hope of bodily resurrection at the last day (Job 19:25–27). Perhaps Job is also alluding to the myths about Mot when he speaks of how “Sheol is naked before God, and Abaddon has no covering” (Job 26:6 R.S.V.); and in that context speaks as if God is the real attacker, not, therefore, Mot or any other such being. Note too how Num. 16:31–35 describes God as swallowing up Korah, Dathan and Abiram into death in the earth – as if to deconstruct the idea that Mot did things like this.

Num 16:32 and the earth opened its mouth, and swallowed them up, and their households, and all the men who appertained to Korah, and all their goods-
Korah’s sons didn’t die (Num. 26:11); they separated themselves from their father and his supporters in time. My suggestion is that they along with the others "went down alive into sheol" but were rescued out of it, possibly "in the morning" as one of their Psalms speaks of deliverance from sheol "in the morning". The double note that people "went down alive into sheol" may be intended to help us see this possibility. They were saved from condemnation, from sheol, by grace. No wonder they spent their lives writing Psalms praising God's grace in saving them from sheol. Their names were Assir, Elkanah and Abiasaph (Ex. 6:24)- 'Prisoner', 'God will obtain for me' and 'father of gatherers'. We could possibly see reflected here Korah's sense that his family were imprisoned by their inferior [as he saw it] position, but would obtain and gather more for themselves. And yet these sons of Korah separated from their bad background, they rose above the 'chip on a shoulder' mentality, and became the authors of many Psalms. Throughout the psalms of the sons of Korah, we can detect allusion to the events of Num. 16: "I would rather be a doorkeeper in the house of my God than dwell in the tents of wickedness” (Ps. 84:10); “Therefore we will not fear, even though the earth be removed” (Ps. 46:2). Many of these Psalms were clearly rewritten under inspiration and applied to crises such as the Assyrian invasion of Judah and the Babylonian exile; because the "sons of Korah" become programmatic for us all. They all have a theme of telling the Gentiles of Yahweh's grace, and this was how the historical sons of Korah would've felt after their deliverance from death.

The Psalms of the sons of Korah have 'deliverance from sheol' as a major theme, especially Ps. 49. Not only does this reference resurrection, but is a reflection of their own deliverance from the 'sheol' where their relatives died. They glory that God saved them from this- even though it was their own decision, they are glorifying the way in which even our own decisions for salvation are of Him and He is to be praised for them. And yet they perceive that the death of their families was in fact the death of all men. For all have sinned: "Like sheep dragged to Sheol, death shall graze on them; the upright shall rule them in the morning". And yet the sons of Korah realized that they were in essence no better than their rebellious ancestors who went to sheol; for they too would go to sheol, but be saved from it by the grace of resurrection: "But God will redeem my soul from the power of Sheol". The Korah Psalms often reflect that human wealth and ambition ends in sheol, along with man's wealth; therefore we can conclude that the desire for power and leadership was motivated by material ambition.

Psalm 88 is another psalm of the sons of Korah, whose father and relatives perished in sheol. But they recognize that this was their rightful end to, and they can only be saved from it by grace: "‘My soul has come to Sheol... I am reckoned with those [Korah and his rebellious family] that descend to the Pit...like the pierced-through [the rebels in the family of Korah] who lie in the grave... You have laid me in the Pit below, in darkness, in the depths... separated from my companions [family members]". They felt their death was in essence that of their rebellious relatives. They were no better, but saved by grace. We see here their humility in recognizing that as the Lord put it in Lk. 14, the dramatic death of some doesn't mean that we ourselves are not also sinners who shall also die. Only grace can save us, and they came to that conclusion.

Psalm 46 is a Korah Psalm, so we note the references to rebels falling alive into the depths with a roaring underworld beneath them (Ps. 46:2-7). The allusion is to what happened to the father, brothers, sisters and relatives of the "sons of Korah". But the Psalm goes on to talk of how "we" will not fear because ultimate salvation for "us" is certain. We have an insight into the mind of Korah's sons.

There is a notable stress in Num. 16:32 and :33 on their households, and "all the men who appertained to Korah". This surely includes the sons of Korah. But Num. 26:11 is clear that the sons didn't "perish". Perhaps this means the sons of Korah were swallowed into sheol but were redeemed from it immediately so they didn't perish. Redemption from sheol by grace is a big theme of the psalms written by the sons of Korah. This fits the theme developed in the preceding Num. 13-15- that condemned men can be saved. Israel were condemned to destruction and replacement by Moses, but were saved out of that. Then they were condemned to die without entering Canaan, as was Moses. But they were pardoned, and I have argued that this meant that although they died in the desert they could have the hope of resurrection to eternal inheritance of the land.

There are times when our loyalty to the Lord will result in us having to experience some kind of separation from family members who choose not to go the Lord’s way; Jesus foretold this would happen frequently (Mt. 10:34-37). The men who "appertained to Korah" were therefore his religious followers rather than his immediate sons and family. "Their goods" may well have involved idol worship paraphernalia; see on :26.

It seems likely that Korah was not present with his family when they were swallowed up into the earth. He and the 250 rebels were at the sanctuary offering their unacceptable incense, which is why other scriptures speak of Dathan and Abiram being swallowed up- but not Koran (Dt. 11:6; Ps. 106:16-18). Num. 26:10 RSV seems to make this clear: "The earth opened its mouth and swallowed them up together with Korah, when that company died, when the fire devoured two hundred and fifty men”.

Num 16:33 So they, and all that appertained to them, went down alive into Sheol; and the earth closed on them, and they perished from among the assembly-
“Chains of darkness” is rendered “pits of darkness” in 2 Pet. 2:4 R.V., which is a New Testament commentary upon this. The Greek word serius (pits) indicates an underground granary or prison, which corresponds with Dathan and Abiram’s destruction when they “went down alive into the pit, and the earth closed upon them; and they perished” (Num. 16:33). I suggested on :32 that "all that appertained to them" referred to their religious followers and idol worship paraphernalia; see on :26.

Num 16:34 All Israel that were around them fled at their cry; for they said, Lest the earth swallow us up!-
These people who “were around them” were saved by grace, considering the warning of :24-26, that whoever stood near those men would also perish. All the time in the Old Testament we are seeing examples of people breaking God’s law and yet being saved by grace.

Num 16:35 Fire came forth from Yahweh, and devoured the two hundred and fifty men who offered the incense-
Destruction by fire was an appropriate judgment for those who had offered strange fire. Judgment is related to the crime because men are self condemned more than being condemned by God. For saving, rather than destroying, is God's passion. Ps. 106:18 says that God kindled a fire to destroy them, but in reality, they  kindled that fire themselves (Is. 9:18; Hos 7:6). Lev. 10:2 uses the same term for fire from Yahweh devouring Nadab and Abihu as in Num. 16:35 about the destruction of Korah's rebels. They were clearly aware of what had happened to those rebels, and were daring God to repeat it. It was truly the sin of presumption. See on :6,7,29.

It could be argued that the destruction of the incense offerers vindicated Aaron as the high priest, and the destruction of Korah into the earth justified Moses as the political leader. But we recall how Aaron sinned at the time of the golden calf, and was only saved by Moses' intercession. The Levites went out to slay their brethren who were guilty of the apostacy, killing 3000. But Aaron was spared- because of Moses' intercession. That God would now go to such lengths to justify Aaron shows how he was truly forgiven and accepted again as the high priest.

We note the similarity with Elijah standing alone before 450 apostate priests: “A fire of Yahweh fell and consumed [the offering]” (1 Kings 18:38) just as here "Fire came forth from Yahweh, and devoured the two hundred and fifty men who offered the incense".

Num 16:36 Yahweh spoke to Moses, saying-
The command to Eleazar (:37) was presumably because Aaron as High Priest ought not to defile himself with dead bodies.

Num 16:37 Speak to Eleazar the son of Aaron the priest, that he take up the censers out of the burning, and scatter the fire yonder, for they are holy-
They were "holy" in the sense that they were dedicated or set apart for a specific purpose, i.e. plating upon the altar (:38). They were not to be taken by the people and used for secular purposes.

Num 16:38 even the censers of these sinners against their own lives-
Often the Spirit points out that the sinner is only harming himself by his actions- and yet he earnestly pursues his course, in the name of self-interest and self-benefit (Num. 16:38; Prov. 19:8; 20:2; Hab. 2:20; Lk. 7:30). Sin is therefore associated by God with utter and derisible foolishness (e.g. Num. 12:11; 2 Tim. 3:9); but this isn't how man in his unwisdom perceives it at all. Indeed, to him self-denial is inexplicable folly and blindness to the essentials of human existence. "This their way is their folly: yet their posterity approve their sayings. Selah (pause to meditate)" (Ps. 49:13). The folly of sin is only fully evident to God. Note that Ps. 49 is a psalm of the "sons of Korah".

Let them be made beaten plates for a covering of the altar; for they offered them before Yahweh, therefore they are holy; and they shall be a sign to the children of Israel-
That they were destroyed and were not left alive is shown by a comment on this incident in Psalm 73. Here Asaph describes how “my steps had well nigh slipped” (v. 2) because the wicked seemed to be prospering so much. Then, “I went into the sanctuary (tabernacle) of God; then understood I their end” (v. 17). This was because the brass censers of the 250 rebels were melted down after their death and beaten into plates with which the altar was covered – another example of the angels that sinned being publicly “set forth as an example” (Jude 7). Asaph would have seen these and reflected on the fate of the wicked men. Thus he reflects upon the rebels, the angels that sinned, “surely thou didst set them in slippery places: Thou castedst them down (by the earth swallowing them) into destruction” (v. 18) – therefore they are not alive, but in the same way as Sodom was destroyed with eternal fire, i.e. totally, so, too, were these “angels” (Jude 6,7). The example of sinners from previous generations ought to be a warning to us. Asaph in Psalm 73 explains how he struggled with the fact that sinners appear to have a blessed life and the righteous suffer; but when he entered the sanctuary, “then understood I their end” (Ps. 73:17), probably a reference to him beholding the plates on the altar made from the censers of these sinners.

 
Num 16:39 Eleazar the priest took the bronze censers, which those who were burnt had offered, and they beat them out for a covering of the altar-
It was a Divine principle that the altar should be made of earth and not of any human craftsmanship (Ex. 20:21). If the plates were fixed onto the sides of the altar, then every thoughtful Israelite would have wondered whether this was a contradiction of the spirit of the commandments about altars. And the answer would be that this was an exception in order to remind everyone of the sin of Korah and his followers. Or we can understand "covering" as referring not to plates on the sides of the altar, but a kind of canopy over the altar, perhaps to shield the sacrifices from wind and rain. So we see again how God's word and law is a progressive revelation; constantly there are exceptions made by Him to His own law, and this is to pave the way to understand His glorious grace in the Lord Jesus.

Num 16:40 to be a memorial to the children of Israel, to the end that no stranger, who isn’t of the seed of Aaron, comes near to burn incense before Yahweh; that he not be as Korah, and as his company - as Yahweh spoke to him by Moses-
Uzziah expressly ignored this warning and offered incense (2 Chron. 26:19). The lesson of the copper plates was lost on him; he saw them as mere history and refused to learn the intended lessons as he offered his incense. Uzziah is typical of so many. There is a deep sense in human beings that history is bunk, or at best of merely passing historico-cultural interest, which the hurrying man of modern life has little serious time for. This is where Biblical history is so different; and it's why God's word in the Bible is in a sense all history, a living word speaking to us. But it is history to live by, moment by moment. 

Num 16:41 But on the next day all the congregation of the children of Israel murmured against Moses and against Aaron, saying, You have killed Yahweh’s people!-
The Hebrew for "murmur" is the word for "stop", and is usually translated in that way. The idea is that they didn't want to go further on the journey; they wanted to return to Egypt. Korah's plan had been to lead the people back to Egypt, and they were angry that Moses had 'stopped' the people doing what they wanted to. Despite the wonder of the Red Sea deliverance. Their hearts truly were in Egypt. This sense of not wanting to go onwards towards the Kingdom, to put a brake on God's saving process, is the same temptation which in essence afflicts all God's people who have started the journey with Him.

Num 16:42 It happened, when the congregation was assembled against Moses and against Aaron, that they looked toward the Tent of Meeting; and behold, the cloud covered it, and the glory of Yahweh appeared-
LXX has: "And it came to pass when the congregation combined against Moses and Aaron, that they ran impetuously to the tabernacle of witness; and the cloud covered it, and the glory of the Lord appeared".

Num 16:43 Moses and Aaron came to the front of the Tent of Meeting-
The Angel stood there or just inside the veil of the tent. It was to this Angel that they returned after interceding; see on :50.

Num 16:44 Yahweh spoke to Moses, saying-
God again wants to destroy Israel and make of Moses' family a new people. Again, for the third time, Moses knows God well enough, he has enough faith, enough humility and enough true love for Israel... to again ask God- successfully- to relent from this. That God wanted to do this three times shows His great love for Moses.

Num 16:45 Get away from among this congregation, that I may consume them in a moment!-
Twice in quick succession God wishes to do this and is talked out of it, as it were, by Moses' intercession (:21,45). The same words were used at the time of the golden calf (Ex. 33:5), and Moses had learned from that that God was open to intercession and changing His expressed intentions. We get the impression of a fast moving, intense relationship between God and Moses.

They fell on their faces-
Moses was specifically told to go away from the congregation, and yet he ran towards them in order to make atonement for them (Num. 16:45,47). Moses was so close to God that he could apparently 'disobey' Him because Moses knew there was a chance of changing God's intentions. He was so close to God- and in this case, God did indeed change His intentions. He had only just changed them over another matter, in relenting from destroying all Israel due to Korah's rebellion- because Moses prayed for the people (Num. 16:21,22).

Num 16:46 Moses said to Aaron, Take your censer, and put fire from off the altar in it, and lay incense on it, and carry it quickly to the congregation, and make atonement for them; for wrath has gone out from Yahweh! The plague has begun-
The fire of the altar was ideally intended to be that kindled at the time of Lev. 9:24 when the tabernacle was consecrated. It was to be kept perpetually burning by the sacrifices being continually placed upon it, a lamb every morning and every evening. The fire which never went out or was 'quenched' (Lev. 6:13). Unquenched fire is a double symbol. The phrase is used multiple times with reference to the wrath of God in condemning sinners; it is the basis of the idea of eternal fire which will not be quenched. Rather like the cup of wine from the Lord being a symbol of either condemnation or blessing. So we have a choice- be consumed by the eternal fire now as living sacrifices, or be consumed by it anyway at the last day. Wrath, the command to destroy, had gone forth from Yahweh- but in the gap between the statement of destruction and the execution of it, God is open to persuasion to change. This points up the power and possibilities in intense mediation before Him.

Num 16:47 Aaron did as Moses said, and ran into the midst of the assembly; and behold, the plague has begun among the people: and he put on the incense, and made atonement for the people-
See on :45. The NT not only encourages us to all be priests; but we can even aspire to the High Priesthood, in a certain sense. The veil was torn down so that we might all enter in to the most holy, doing the work of the High Priest for others. James 5:16 speaks of the need to pray for one another, that we may be healed. This is an undoubted allusion back to mighty Moses praying for smitten Miriam, and to Aaron staying the plague by his offering of incense / prayer (Num. 16:47). Surely James is saying that every one of us can rise up to the spirit of the High Priest in this way. The provision for Naziriteship encouraged the average Israelite to enter into the spirit of the High Priest by imposing some of the regulations governing his behaviour upon them. We again note that atonement was made here by incense and not blood, without which there was to be no remission of sin. Likewise Yahweh pardoned merely according to Moses' word in Num. 14. How much more powerful is the intercession of our Lord, based upon His own blood.

"Atonement for the people" is the very phrase used in the preceding chapter, when there was the possibility for "atonement for all the congregation" if they had sinned in ignorance (Num. 15:27). As discussed on Numbers 15, we have here another example of a sin of presumption being treated as a sin of ignorance. And I suggest this is how we have to understand the Lord's plea for forgiveness of His crucifiers "for they know not what they do"; and Peter's appeal for repentance because he considers that "in ignorance" Israel had crucified their Messiah. This likewise can be our pattern; by seeing sins against us as sins of ignorance, we are not downgrading sin, but rather are seeking to forgive and cleanse those who sin against us as far as possible. For it is true that just as Israel on one hand knew what they were doing in crucifying the Lord, on another they had no perception of the magnitude of the crime. Those who sin against us may likewise have no real understanding of all the dimensions of the damage they do to us. And because of recognizing that, seeing their sin as one more of relative ignorance, our path towards forgiving them is eased.

Num 16:48 He stood between the dead and the living, and the plague was stayed-
Aaron ought to have died for his flouting of the first commandment in making the golden calf; but Moses’ intercession alone saved him. And afterwards, deeply conscious of his experience, Aaron made successful intercession for the salvation of others (Num. 14:5; 16:22). The way he holds the censer with fire from the altar of incense, representing his prayers, and “stood between the dead and the living [as a mediator]” (Num. 16:48) is a fine picture of the height to which he rose. We too are to intercede for others on the basis of our experience of the Lord's intercession for us.

Num 16:49 Now those who died by the plague were fourteen thousand and seven hundred, besides those who died about the matter of Korah-
We get the impression that these people died very quickly (:46,47). The plague must have been spreading fast and would indeed have consumed all Israel had not Aaron interceded. I have discussed elsewhere how the terms "thousand" and "hundred" may refer to groups of people, especially families, rather than being numerical values. 

Num 16:50 Aaron returned to Moses to the door of the Tent of Meeting, and the plague was stayed-
Again we see Moses acting on his own initiative to persuade God to change His intended plan. Moses and Aaron could only have brought about this change of mind in God by intense, fervent prayer and desire- and it was for people who had just tacitly supported a revolution against them. No matter how much we are slandered and manipulated against by our brethren, they are still God’s people and we should respect them and intercede for them as that.

We enquire why we read that "the plague was stayed" when Aaron and Moses were together again at the door of the tabernacle. For it was "stayed" by Aaron earlier. Perhaps the reference of "the plague" here is to the Angel of death who was in the tabernacle, who stood at the door of it in :43, and who now was finally restrained by Moses and Aaron. Such is the power God allows to the prayers and intercession of men.