Search the Bible
* powered by Bible Study Tools

Numbers 16:1

    Numbers 16:1 Translations

    King James Version (KJV)

    Now Korah, the son of Izhar, the son of Kohath, the son of Levi, and Dathan and Abiram, the sons of Eliab, and On, the son of Peleth, sons of Reuben, took men:

    American King James Version (AKJV)

    Now Korah, the son of Izhar, the son of Kohath, the son of Levi, and Dathan and Abiram, the sons of Eliab, and On, the son of Peleth, sons of Reuben, took men:

    American Standard Version (ASV)

    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 :

    Basic English Translation (BBE)

    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 Pallu, the son of Reuben, made themselves ready,

    Webster's Revision

    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 :

    World English Bible

    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]:

    English Revised Version (ERV)

    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:

    Clarke's Commentary on Numbers 16:1

    Now Korah - took men - Had not these been the most brutish of men, could they have possibly so soon forgotten the signal displeasure of God manifested against them so lately for their rebellion. The word men is not in the original; and the verb ויקח vaiyikkach, and he took, is not in the plural but the singular, hence it cannot be applied to the act of all these chiefs. In every part of the Scripture where this rebellion is referred to it is attributed to Korah, (see Numbers 26:3, and Jde 1:11), therefore the verb here belongs to him, and the whole verse should be translated thus: - Now Korah, son of Yitsar son of Kohath, son of Levi, He Took even Dathan and Abiram, the sons of Eliab, and On, son of Peleth, Son Of Reuben; and they rose up, etc. This makes a very regular and consistent sense, and spares all the learned labor of Father Houbigant, who translates יקח yikkach, by rebellionem fecerunt, they rebelled, which scarcely any rule of criticism can ever justify. Instead of בני ראובן beney Reuben, Sons of Reuben, some MSS. have בן ben, Son, in the singular; this reading, supported by the Septuagint and the Samaritan text, I have followed in the above translation. But as Eliab and Peleth were both Reubenites, the common reading, Sons, may be safely followed.

    Barnes' Notes on Numbers 16:1

    Amram and Izhar were brothers (compare Exodus 6:18), and thus Korah, the "son," i. e. descendant of Izhar, was connected by distant cousinship with Moses and Aaron. Though being a Kohathite, he was of that division of the Levites which had the most honorable charge, yet as Elizaphan, who had been made "chief of the families of the Kohathites" Numbers 3:30, belonged to the youngest branch descended from Uzziel Numbers 3:27, Korah probably regarded himself as injured; and therefore took the lead in this rebellion. Of the others, On is not again mentioned. He probably withdrew from the conspiracy. Dathan, Abiram, and On were Reubenites; and were probably discontented because the birthright had been taken away from their ancestor Genesis 49:3, and with it the primacy of their own tribe among the tribes of Israel. The Reubenites encamped near to the Kohathites (compare Numbers 2:25 and plan), and thus the two families were conveniently situated for taking counsel together. One pretext of the insurrection probably was to assert the rights of primogeniture - on the part of the Reubenites against Moses, on the part of Korah against the appointment of Uzziel.