Untitled Sermon (7)
Their action is very significant.
they appealed to God, the defender of the defenceless
This was not an incidental detail in Israel’s life.
The spiritual significance of this issue is immense.
Through the instruction which was to be gained here, men and women would enter the kingdom of God. Therefore, this was no trivial matter.
It was always his concern to defend his peoples’ right
“to stand before” usually connotes the formal stance of those appearing before God to await his judgment
sons may not be made to bear the punishment of their fathers’ sins (Deut 24:16, 2 Kings 14:6, Ezek 18:4, 20, 2 Chron 25:4).
In fact, the contention of Zelophehad’s daughters may revolve around this very point.
The daughters of Zelophehad consequently sought a new ruling that would allow daughters to inherit.
Thus, the daughters of Zelophehad insisted on receiving an ʾaḥuzzāh alongside the estates of their paternal uncles. One senses the forcefulness of their request.
In the first instance, the term ʾaḥuzzāh designates “acquired land,”
In other words, the daughters of Zelophehad did not want to be excluded from the apportionment process simply because their father had left no son to inherit his land.
The daughters of Zelophehad speak in truth. The idiom kēn … dōbēr “speaks correctly, in truth”
The dispensation to the daughters of Zelophehad is made the rule, and what follows in verses 8–11 is a statement of law permanently applicable to all Israelites.
Ṣelopheḥadʾs daughters plead that there was no moral reason why Ṣelopheḥadʾs name should perish
The case of Zelophehad’s daughters raises the issue of the status of women in Israelite society
The second census had been outlined in terms of patriarchal clans, without reference to the status of women within the system.
With regard to the perceptiveness of the women, Allen notes: “These were pious women with a sound understanding of the nature of the desert experience and a just claim for their family.”
Moses does not reply immediately because of a lack of legal precedent related to the women’s petition.
As a quality spiritual leader he seeks the Lord for an answer to the matter of women and land inheritance.
The response begins with the precedent-setting divine formula, “And the LORD said to him,”
The divine response was favorable on behalf of the women.
“Theologically the section presses the rights of women to a clear and recognized legal position within the sphere of property law. They are seen as a proper channel through which the threads of possession and inheritance may properly be traced.” Thus the children of Zelophehad’s daughters, as well as future generations of women, could receive landed property via familial inheritance, whether male or female.
It shows that in Hebrew law, as in Mesopotamian law, daughters did not usually have a share in the family estate. A father’s property was divided between his sons after his death, the eldest son receiving twice as much as his brothers (Deut. 21:15–17). Daughters were treated quite differently: they received a very substantial wedding present from their fathers, called a dowry. Typically this consisted of clothes, jewellery, money and furniture, but richer fathers gave their daughters slave-girls, land or even cities (Gen. 29:24, 29; Judg. 1:13–15; 1 Kgs 9:16). Having married off his daughter and given her a dowry, a father had no further financial responsibility for her. She became a member of her husband’s family and her sons inherited his estate. By this patrilineal system land was kept within the family, a fundamental principle of biblical law, which also underlies the jubilee legislation in Leviticus 25 (cf. 1 Kgs 21:3).
Alternatively Calvin’s suggestion34 has much to commend it: the request of Zelophehad’s daughters showed their faith in the divine promises.
Because of their piety their action is recorded for posterity (cf. Matt. 26:6–13).
The value placed on maintaining the fair distribution of the land among the twelve tribes was high in the tradition out of which the book of Numbers was written. But did that value of fairness and equity override the custom of only males inheriting property?
God agrees with the five women that the land must remain in the family’s possession, even if it means contradicting the custom that only men can inherit land
The daughters of Zelophehad remain faithful to the living God of the exodus and respectful of their dynamic tradition. They seek change by appealing to the basic values of the tradition that may override other less important customs of that same tradition. The motivation of the five women is not selfishness but advocacy on behalf of others. They act not so much for themselves as for the good of their whole community—family, tribe, nation, and the whole tradition of God’s people
Finally, the case of the five women in 27:1–11 raises issues of equity and gender.
The decision in favor of Mahlah, Noah, Hoglah, Milcah, and Tirzah may be seen as one small step toward enhancing the status of women in the world of the biblical narrative.
But the underlying system of patrilineal inheritance remains essentially intact even in this case
The land will revert to a male husband when one of the daughters marries, a point that will be raised in chapter 36.
However, these five sisters are able to take one small step toward greater justice for women by appealing to the core values of their shared Israelite tradition.
They may provide encouragement and direction for those in our own time concerned about issues of justice and gender. These five women teach us to dig deeply and argue persuasively from within a shared biblical tradition if we would overturn old customs and create new possibilities in the social and economic relationships between women and men. These women are models of boldness fueled by hope, models of advocacy fueled by a concern for the larger community, and models of faithfulness fueled by a dynamic relationship with their tradition and with their God.