And upon the nobles of the children of Israel he laid not his hand: also they saw God, and did eat and drink.

And upon the nobles of the children of Israel he laid not his hand: and they beheld God, and did eat and drink.

Neither did he lay his hand upon those of the children of Israel, that retired afar off, and they saw God, and they did eat and drink.

And on the nobles of the children of Israel he laid not his hand: they saw God, and ate and drank.

and unto those of the sons of Israel who are near He hath not put forth His hand, and they see God, and eat and drink.

And he put not his hand on the chiefs of the children of Israel: they saw God, and took food and drink.

Neither did he lay his hand upon those of the sons of Israel who were at a distance. And they saw God, and they ate and drank.

Et in principes filiorum Israel non extendit manum suam: et viderunt Deum, et comederunt, et biberunt.

And upon the nobles of the children of Israel. These words, as it seems to me, are violently distorted by those [1] who expound them, that the elders were not made participators of the prophetic gift, or that the virtue of God did not extend to them; for these clauses are to be taken connectedly thus: although they saw God, His hand was not laid upon them but they ate and drank. Hence we may gather that God's paternal favor towards them is pointed out in that He spared them; for we must bear in mind what is said elsewhere, "There shall no man see my face and live." (Exodus 33:20.) Thus, amongst the ancients, this was a kind of proverbial expression: We shall die, because we have seen God. So Jacob, in commendation of God's grace, says, "I have seen God face to face, and my life is preserved." (Genesis 32:30.) For if the mountains melt at the sight of Him, what must needs happen to a mortal man, than whom there is nothing more frail or feeble? Herein, then, does God's incomparable lenity betray itself, when, in manifesting Himself to His elect, He does not altogether absorb and reduce them to nothing; especially when some special vision is presented to them. In sum, therefore, Moses shews us that it was a miracle that the rulers of Israel remained safe and sound, although the terrible majesty of God had appeared to them. Now, this was the case, because they had not rashly thrust themselves forward, but had come near at the call of God. Hence we learn that our boldness never exceeds its due bounds, nor can be condemned as presumption, when it is founded on the command of God; whilst worse than any pride or self-confidence is timidity, which, under pretense of modesty, leads us to distrust the word of God. If any one of the people had attempted to do the same as the rulers, he would have experienced in his destruction what it is to advance beyond bounds. But the reason why their free and bold access turned out successfully to the elders, was because they obeyed the command of God. What follows, as to their eating, I interpret to mean a solemn banquet, which was a part or appendage of a sacrifice, as we have seen on Exodus 18 [2] and in many other places.

Footnotes

1 - So Aben-Ezra, in Willet; and Faigius and S. Munster in Poole. Boothroyal says, "This phrase evidently means, He slew them not;' compare Genesis 22:12; and 37:22; Nehemiah 12:21; Esther 2:21; Psalm 55:20."

2 - See ante, [42]vol. 1, pp. 300, 301.

He laid not his hand - i. e. He did not strike them. It was believed that a mortal could not survive the sight of God Exodus 33:20; Genesis 32:30; Judges 6:22; Judges 13:22 : but these rulers of Israel were permitted to eat and drink, while they were enjoying in an extraordinary degree the sense of the divine presence, and received no harm.

Upon the nobles of - Israel he laid not his hand - This laying on of the hand has been variously explained.
1. He did not conceal himself from the nobles of Israel by covering them with his hand, as he did Moses, Exodus 33:22.
2. He did not endue any of the nobles, i.e., the seventy elders, with the gift of prophecy; for so laying on of the hand has been understood.
3. He did not slay any of them; none of them received any injury; which is certainly one meaning of the phrase: see Nehemiah 13:21; Psalm 55:20. Also they saw God, i.e., although they had this discovery of his majesty, yet they did eat and drink, i.e., were preserved alive and unhurt.
Perhaps the eating and drinking here may refer to the peace-offerings on which they feasted, and the libations that were then offered on the ratification of the covenant. But they rejoiced the more because they had been so highly favored, and were still permitted to live; for it was generally apprehended that God never showed his glory in this signal manner but for the purpose of manifesting his justice; and therefore it appeared a strange thing that these should have seen God as it were face to face, and yet live. See Genesis 16:13; Genesis 33:10; and Judges 13:22, Judges 13:23.

And upon the nobles of the children of Israel he (f) laid not his hand: also they saw God, and (g) did eat and drink.
(f) He did not make them afraid, nor punish them.
(g) That is, rejoiced.

And upon the nobles of the children of Israel he laid not his hand,.... Which some interpret of his hand of prophecy, and of the measure of the Spirit, such an one as Moses had, and by virtue of which he lived forty days and nights without eating and drinking; but these not having such a measure of the Spirit, were obliged to eat and drink to support nature, as in the next clause: but it is rather to be understood of the hand of God; he did not inflict any disease or death upon them on their sight of him, it being a notion that no man could see God and live; but these men did live, not only Moses, and Aaron and his two sons, but the seventy elders, who were the principal choicest persons among the children of Israel; wherefore the Targum of Jonathan wrongly restrains this to Nadab and Abihu:
also they saw God, and did eat and drink: though they saw God, they continued alive and well, and in good health, of which their eating and drinking were a sign and evidence; or they ate, as Abendana, the sacrifices of the peace offerings, which were usually eaten by the priests and the people; and as a feast was common at covenant making, here was a feast kept by the elders, the representatives of the people, when they covenanted with God. Onkelos favours this sense,"and they rejoiced in their sacrifices, which were accepted with good will, as if they had ate and drank.''

upon the nobles of the children of Israel he laid not his hand--The "nobles," that is, the elders, after the sprinkling of the blood, were not inspired with terror in presence of the calm, benign, radiant symbol of the divine majesty; so different from the terrific exhibitions at the giving of the law. The report of so many competent witnesses would tend to confirm the people's faith in the divine mission of Moses.
eat and drink--feasted on the peace offering--on the remnants of the late sacrifices and libations. This feast had a prophetic bearing, intimating God's dwelling with men.

Upon the nobles or elders of Israel he laid not his hand - Though they were men, the splendour of his glory did not overwhelm them, but it was so moderated (Job 36:9,) and they were so strengthened (Daniel 10:19,) that they were able to bear it: nay, though they were sinful men, and obnoxious to God's justice, yet he did not lay his avenging hand upon them, as they feared he would. When we consider what a consuming fire God is, and what stubble we are before him, we shall have reason to say, in all our approaches to him, It is of the Lord's mercies we are not consumed. They saw God, and did eat and drink; They had not only their lives preserved, but their vigour, courage, and comfort; it cast no damp upon their joy, but rather increased it. They feasted upon the sacrifice before God, in token of their chearful consent to the covenant, their grateful acceptance of the benefits of it, and their communion with God in pursuance of that covenant.