NUMBERS<\/p>\n
INTRODUCTION<\/p>\n
\u201cNUMBERS\u201d? \u201cNumbers\u201d!! The very word has the potential to awaken unpleasant memories in many readers and thus to create a negative perception of this biblical book even prior to beginning to read it.
\nShould the intrepid reader nonetheless decided to proceed, the initial negative perception may soon turn to reality. One in fact encounters, in the introductory chapters, a profusion of \u201cnumbers.\u201d There are multiple instances of the utilization of enumeration: census data (1:20\u201346; 3:34\u201349), a list of tribal leaders (1:5\u201315), and rosters of the duties of various groups (2:1\u20133:39). It may appear that things are going \u201cfrom bad to worse,\u201d and especially so if one glances forward in the book and sees that more of the same type of information is in store (e.g., census at 26:5\u201351; leadership lists at 13:4\u201316; 34:17\u201329).
\nShould one decided to \u201cread around\u201d such arithmetic material, extended passages of cultic material will soon be encountered. The reaction at this point is likely to be that Numbers is \u201cLeviticus light,\u201d and especially if the commentary on Leviticus herein has not been read and one has not properly learned to appreciate that book. To be sure, the intervening narrative passages (seven of them) can be interesting and even amusing (especially when one encounters the RSV heading at ch. 22: \u201cBalaam\u2019s Ass Speaks\u201d), but it is not enough to carry the reader through the totality.
\nIt is hardly surprising, then, that the early and influential father of the church, Origen (third century AD), reported a potential popular evaluation of this book in the following terms:<\/p>\n
When the Gospels or the Apostle [Paul] or the Psalms are read, another person joyfully receives them, gladly embraces them.\u2026 But if the book of Numbers is read to him, and especially those passages we have now in hand, he will judge that there is nothing helpful, nothing as a remedy for his weakness or a benefit for the salvation of his soul. He will constantly spit them out as heavy and burdensome food.<\/p>\n
Nonetheless, the good father concluded, and rightly so, that this attitude toward the book of Numbers, while understandable as a surface and uneducated reading, was unfortunate and misguided. One of the purposes of the present commentary is to confirm his judgment.[Origen]<\/p>\n
Origen
\nThis brilliant and influential Christian scholar was born in Alexandria (Egypt) around AD 185. His father was beheaded during a Roman persecution when Origen was around the age of twelve. Origen was soon recognized for his keen intellect and dedicated Christian life and was appointed headmaster of a school in Alexandria and later in Caesarea (Palestine). He wrote over six thousand works, few of which have survived to the present. Biblical scholars will know him best for the Hexpla (a compilation of six texts that show the available versions of the Bible in his day). His primary focus was upon the allegorical meaning of scripture rather than its literal sense and thus he sought to avoid the grotesque interpretations that literalism could produce. He was imprisoned and persecuted under the Emperor Decius and died shortly after his release (AD 251).
\nImage Not Available
\ndue to lack of digital rights. Please view the published commentary or perform an Internet search using the credit below.
\nArtistic rendering of Origen
\nPortrait of Origen (c. 182\u2013251 BC), Greek church father. Engraving. Location not indicated. (Photo credit: Art Resource, NY)<\/p>\n
The title that has been given to the book is itself misleading and quite unfortunate for popular perception of it. It arose from the early Greek tradition of giving literary works a formal title that supposedly was a summary of their contents or an indication of their character. Thus there arose, in the early Greek translation of the Bible (the Septuagint, often abbreviated as LXX and adopted for use by the early church), the title Arithmoi (related to the word \u201carithmetic\u201d). Since this translation was, by and large, the Bible of early Christianity, that title then entered the vocabulary of the Western (Roman) Church through its Latin translation, Numeri.
\nIt is in the synagogue, by contrast, that one finds a more accurate and appropriate title: \u201cIn the Wilderness.\u201d This indicates that the book was intended to be a theological history of Israel\u2019s journey from Egypt across the wilderness to the land of Canaan. This title arose from the custom in the synagogue of referring to documents by their opening word (or words). Our book begin with \u201cAnd the LORD spoke to Moses in the wilderness of Sinai,\u201d and thus it was sometimes referred to as \u201cAnd the LORD spoke\u201d (way\u0115dabb\u0113r) but more usually as \u201cin the wilderness\u201d (b\u0115midb\u0101r, the word as it actually is spelled at 1:1, but popularly with a slight change, bam-midb\u0101r).
\nThe church\u2019s title even found its way into the Talmud, where Numbers is referred to as Hommesh ha-Pequdim (lit., \u201cthe one-fifth [concerning] the numbered\u201d). This title consists of h\u00f4me\u0161 (Pentateuch, derived from the number five, h\u0101m\u0113\u0161, Gk.: pente) plus the plural participle of the verb p\u0101qad (\u201cto count, muster\u201d). [Talmud]<\/p>\n
Talmud
\nThe term Talmud refers to two extended commentaries on the Mishnah (Oral Torah), formulated in the 5th\u20136th centuries AD. One is of Babylonian origin and the other Palestinian. The former became normative for Jewish life and remains so for the Orthodox until the present day. For the Oral Torah (Mishnah), see the discussion of Lev 12 and 23.<\/p>\n
While a modern aversion to enumeration in general must be acknowledged, it must also be pointed out that our book\u2019s dedication to enumeration is not utterly alien to the modern world. Readers of the morning newspaper will sometimes pore over the latest data from the stock market (more voluminous that the statistics in Numbers) with rabid interest. Vast accumulations of statistics from sports will be committed to memory by this-or-that individual (especially sports \u201cannouncers\u201d). Businesses find it necessary to keep details of inventory, expenses, and sales, and they must hire auditors to ensure accuracy. Anyone who has seen the accumulated data in the annual budget of the United States and who understands its necessity and importance, will acquire an understanding and perhaps an appreciation for Numbers and regard it as mere \u201cchild\u2019s play\u201d in comparison.<\/p>\n
Why English Translations of Numbers May Differ<\/p>\n
A more detailed discussion about this topic may be found in the \u201cIntroduction\u201d to the commentary on Leviticus.
\nIn its earliest written form, the text of the Hebrew Bible (Old Testament) consisted of a continuous string of consonants, without division into paragraphs, sentences, or even words. There was no punctuation, no vowels, no accents, and not even capital letters to indicate the beginning of a sentence. Later opinions about where and how to insert such items varied from one interpreter to another and thus found their way into ancient copies and translations of the text. Such differences can be found by comparing modern English translations of the Bible.
\nA consensus about the authoritative form of the text of the Hebrew Bible was brought about by the work of the Masoretes (eighth to tenth centuries AD). They added vowels, accents, musical notations, and punctuation to the text in an attempt to determine, fix in place, and hand down what they perceived to be its proper interpretation. The result of their work has come to be called the Masoretic Text, and is commonly abbreviated as \u201cMT.\u201d (See the brief discussion of their work in the commentary on Lev 10:18.)
\nModern English translators of the Old Testament, while usually beginning with this \u201ctraditional\u201d text, will sometimes diverge from it at brief points by accepting the wording of one of the Dead Sea Scrolls or of the ancient versions, e.g., the Greek Septuagint (LXX) or the Latin Vulgate (on which see below). Footnotes in English Bibles will sometimes call attention to places at which they have done this. [Footnotes in the English Bible]<\/p>\n
Footnotes in the English Bible
\nEditorial footnotes in the NRSV of Numbers sometimes (though not always) call attention to decisions about its textual base. Sometimes they indicate a departure from the Hebrew Text (MT) without stating the reason (e.g., 4:20; 7:89; 16:6; 19:8, 16; 20:26; 22:41; 23:6, 7; 27:14; 32:17). In some cases, NRSV translates in accordance with one of the ancient texts or versions without providing a note to inform the reader that this has happened. See, e.g., 10:10; 17:9; 33:8. In yet other cases, English version may vary from NRSV (where it reads with MT) because they have accepted the reading of an ancient version. For example, see NEB at 2:20 and 3:31, where it follows LXX.
\nThe complexity of the text of Numbers (especially of its vocabulary) may be gauged by the number of NRSV footnotes that indicate uncertainty as to meaning, e.g., at 4:6, 12, 14; 5:2; 10:36; 12:10; 21:15, 30; 22:32; 24:8.<\/p>\n
In the process of copying the text, across the centuries, scribal errors have been introduced into one copy or another of the text. This also poses problems for the modern translator: which ancient text should be used at a given point? Differences of opinion are often reflected in English Bibles. [Scribal Errors]<\/p>\n
Scribal Errors
\nFor a definition of various kinds of scribal errors, see J. A. Thompson, \u201cTextual Criticism, OT,\u201d in IDBSup, ed. Keith Crim (Nashville: Abingdon Press, 1976), 886\u201391. Illustrations from the book of Numbers include the following (with details to be found at the specific location):
\n1. Visual confusion of consonants, 1:14.
\n2. Auditory confusion of consonants, 11:23.
\n3. Alleged accidental omission of a consonant, word, or phrase by an ancient scribe, 9:2. This is a common type of scribal error known as haplography. NAB also departs from MT for the same type of reason at 8:15 and 22:32.
\n4. Alleged accidental repetition of a word or phrase by an ancient scribe, 15:15. This is a common type of scribal error known as dittography.
\n5. Accidental transposition of consonants in a word, 24:9.
\n6. Alleged confusion of word order, 24:18\u201319.
\n7. Verses in differing orders, chapter 26.
\n8. The book of Numbers contains two instances where the chapter divisions as decided by the church diverge from those in the Synagogue: NRSV\u2019s 16:36 is the same as 17:1 in the Hebrew Bible (MT), and NRSV\u2019s 29:31 was determined to be 30:1 in Hebrew (MT). In addition, there are places where the translators of NRSV did not think that the traditional chapter-divisions reflect a proper topical division (see, e.g., the format at 23:1; so also RSV and NEB, contrast KJV and NJV\/JPS).<\/p>\n
Biblical Scrolls from the Judean Desert<\/p>\n
The earliest surviving texts of the book of Numbers (or of the most books of the Hebrew Bible, for that matter) consist of a series of documents (some quite fragmentary) that were recovered in fairly recent times from the vicinity of Qumran on the shore to the Dead Sea. (For a general introduction to ancient biblical texts from the Judean Desert, at Qumran and elsewhere, see the Introduction to the commentary on Leviticus.)
\nOnly a few of the large number of deviations in these scrolls from the MT are textually significant. They largely consist of expansive clarifications, interpolations taken from elsewhere in Numbers and from Deuteronomy, clarification of or adjustment of pronouns, the addition of conjunctions, etc. [A Preferable Reading]<\/p>\n
A Preferable Reading
\nOne of the places where a scroll may have preserved a preferable reading to MT is at Numbers 25:16. MT reads: \u201cThe LORD said to Moses, \u2018Harass the Midianites and defeat them, for they have harassed you.\u2026\u2019 \u201d One might have expected this word to have been conveyed to the people of Israel since they were the ones previously harassed and who would need take the recommended action. This is clearly the implication and especially so since the verbs in the verse are plural: \u201cyou (-all) defeat them, for they have harassed you (-all).\u201d This sense of the passage (as well as the verbal number) is in keeping with the text of 4QNumb: \u201cThe LORD spoke to Moses saying, \u2018Speak to the Israelites saying, \u201cHarass the Midianites\u201d \u2026\u2019 \u201d (so also LXX). It appears, then, that MT has suffered haplography, with a scribe\u2019s eye skipping from the first instance of \u201csaying\u201d to the second, thus skipping everything in between. (On haplography, see the previous section on \u201cScribal Errors.\u201d)<\/p>\n
The Earliest Translation: The Greek Septuagint (LXX)<\/p>\n
For the origin of this Bible of the early church, as well as a list of its kinds of variations from MT, see the Introduction to the commentary on Leviticus. [Deviations of LXX from MT]<\/p>\n
Deviations of LXX from MT
\nThe following is an illustration of the various types and sample location.
\n1. Clarifications of MT, 9:16.
\n2. Assimilation of material from elsewhere to MT, 7:12.
\n3. Lexicography, derived, e.g., by supplying vowels at at ambiguous location, 21:30.
\n4. Conjectural modification, 21:24.
\n5. Homoeoteleuton, 5:26\u201327.<\/p>\n
Ancient Jewish Commentary on Numbers<\/p>\n
Sifrei (or Sifr\u00e9)<\/p>\n
Dating no earlier than the fifth century AD, Sifrei or Sifr\u00e9 consists of two independent and authoritative expositions on many of the chapters of the biblical books of Numbers and Deuteronomy. Although there are some narrative portions in each, they are mainly a verse-by-verse interpretation of the religious guidelines in those two books.
\nA basic supposition of the book, not explicitly stated, is that the written Torah (the Hebrew Bible\/Old Testament) is the ultimate source of divine knowledge. In this regard, it is similar to Sipra on Leviticus, and thus stands apart from the Mishnah. (For Sipra, see the commentary on Lev 19:15\u201316.) Human reason, acting apart from Scripture, is not a reliable guide, and thus it must operate within the authoritative confines set in the Pentateuch. A modern scholar has put the matter succinctly:<\/p>\n
By the very labor of explaining the meaning of verses of Scripture, the rabbinic exegetes laid claim to participate in the work of revelation. And by distinguishing their contribution from the received text of the Torah, they announced their presence within the process of revelation. In these two ways the exegetes who made up Sifra and the two Sifr\u00e9s announced not one but two fundamental propositions. The first is that God\u2019s revelation in the written Torah takes priority. The second is that man\u2019s reason in the exegesis of the written Torah enjoys a full and legitimate place in the unfolding of the lessons of Sinai.<\/p>\n
This sage approach to Scripture stands in contrast to two modern tendencies in the church: on the one hand, to a conservatism that espouses strict literalism and thus rejects modern main-line scholarship with its use of reason; on the other hand, the ultra-liberal proclamation that we now live in \u201cthe era of the Holy Spirit\u201d that is leading us beyond (and above) the confining restrictions of the text. [An Illustration from Sifre]<\/p>\n
An Illustration from Sifre
\nHere is a brief illustration of this work\u2019s exegetical conclusions, beginning with a quotation from Scripture at Numbers 15:32\u201336 (section no. 113, as translated by Paul P. Levertoff, Midrash Sifre on Numbers, 103\u2013104):
\nAnd while the children of Israel were in the wilderness they found a man gathering sticks upon the Sabbath Day. And they who found him gathering sticks brought him unto Moses. Why is it repeated [i.e., that he was gathering sticks]? It implies that the man had been warned beforehand concerning works of this kind that are prohibited on the Sabbath. Hence the rule concerning all these chief works, which, according to the Torah, are not to be done on the Sabbath, that warning must be given first [if the person breaking them is to be punished].
\nR. Isaac says: \u201cIt is not at all necessary [to deduce from this passage]. It stands to reason (we can deduce it by inference): if idolatry, which is such a grave sin, is only punished after due warning, much more so must it be with other transgressions.
\nA critical edition of the text of Sifre Numbers was published by Hayim Sha\u2019ul Horovitz, Sifre de-ve Rav (Yerushalayim: Sifre Varman, 1966\u201369; reprint of the Leipzig Edition of 1917). There is an English translation (incomplete) by Paul P. Levertoff, Midrash Sifre on Numbers (London: A. Golub, 1926). More recent and reliable is Jacob Neusner, Sifr\u00e9 to Numbers (Atlanta: Scholars Press, 1986).<\/p>\n
Numbers Rabba(h)\/Bemidbar Rabba(h)<\/p>\n
This work is part of a large collection of homiletical expositions on the Pentateuchal (and a few other) biblical books. It has two parts: Numbers Rabbah I, covering Numbers chapters 1\u20138, perhaps compiled in the twelfth century (AD); Numbers Rabbah II, covering chapters 9\u201335, perhaps compiled in the ninth century. Its applications (of both legalistic and narrative biblical materials) are often arranged according to the liturgical cycle of the synagogue and are often playful and imaginative. For example, see the comments on Numbers 6, concerning why it was placed in sequence with chapter 5. (For the cycle of liturgical readings (lectionary) in the Synagogue, see the commentary on Lev 5.)<\/p>\n
Numbers in Biblical Narrative Context<\/p>\n
What \u201cwilderness\u201d is referred to in the opening words of Numbers, and how did the subjects of our story come to be located in this inhospitable place? In order to answer those questions, a brief review of the biblical story to date may be helpful. The story-line in Genesis may be reviewed in the Introduction to Leviticus (\u201cLeviticus as Part of a Larger Story\u201d).
\nWhen the book of Exodus opens, the descendants of Jacob (who is by now also called \u201cIsrael\u201d) have been spared starvation from a famine in the \u201cpromised land\u201d of Canaan, through the availability of grain in Egypt, only to become enslaved to the Pharaoh of Egypt. After slavery for a period of 430 years [Duration of the Exodus] they escape eastward into the harsh wilderness toward a sacred mountain (variously called Horeb and Sinai). [Sinai and Horeb] There, they received guidance (directly from God to Moses) concerning their destiny as a sacred people. This includes both moral guidelines (such as the Ten Commandments) and cultic plans for a portable sanctuary that is to accompany the people through the remainder of their wilderness itinerary.<\/p>\n
Duration of the Exodus
\nHow long was Israel in Egypt? According to the traditional Hebrew text of Exod 12:40, the duration of slavery to the Egyptian Pharaoh was 430 years. This is in slight tension with Gen 15:13 where father Abram (Abraham) is told by God that his descendants will \u201cbe aliens in a land that is not theirs, and shall be slaves there, and they shall be oppressed for four hundred years.\u201d Apparently, in the latter case, the fuller figure in Exodus has been \u201crounded off.\u201d
\nA bit more complex is the reading of the traditional Greek Bible (the Septuagint, i.e., the LXX) at Exod 12:40. By means of an addition in its text (\u201cin the land of Egypt [and in the land of Canaan]\u201d) it understands the period of 430 years to include the duration of patriarchal residence in Canaan prior to the beginning of that in Egypt. According to other data (Gen 12:4 + 21:5 + 25:26 + 47:9), that prior time span was 215 years. This leaves a total of 215 for the time in Egypt according to the Septuagint.
\nThat 215 is exactly one-half of 430, and that the calculations involve such standard symbolic numbers as 60 (Gen 25:26) raises the possibility that the figures cannot be taken (and were not meant to be taken) literally for modern secular chronological reckoning. (On standard symbolic numbers such as 40, 60, and 70, see the discussions of Num 1.)<\/p>\n
Sinai and Horeb
\nIn two of the streams of tradition that the Pentateuch likely contains (J and P), the sacred mountain is called \u201cSinai.\u201d In the remaining two (E and D) it is referred to as \u201cHoreb.\u201d For these various traditions, see the Introduction to the commentary on Leviticus.
\nWhether these are alternative designations for a single location (compare Chicago and \u201cthe Windy City\u201d), or whether they are two separate elevations at which different tribes of Israel once worshiped, has sometimes been debated by modern scholars.<\/p>\n
It is in the book of Leviticus, set in the vicinity of the sacred mountain, that the Deity\u2019s cultic (chs. 1\u201316) and ethical (chs. 17\u201326) guidelines unfold in earnest. Sacrificial guidelines for occasions both spontaneous and mandatory are outlined, followed by the consecration of an Aaronide priesthood that is to inaugurate and officiate at the sanctuary services perpetually thereafter. Detailed cultic and ethical guidelines are disclosed whereby Israel is to become a holy people, in imitation of God\u2019s holiness.
\nOnce the disclosures and other preparations have been completed, the people are ready to resume their journey through the wilderness toward Canaan. Hence, as the book of Numbers opens, we find them \u201cin the wilderness\u201d of the Sinai Peninsulas, on the verge of continuing their march toward the land that was promised to the patriarchs and their descendants. The book of Numbers recites the itinerary (and related events) as the people depart the sacred mountain and continue their journey.
\nDeuteronomy, the next book after Numbers in biblical sequence, relates the final directives and advice of Moses, following which the people are to cross the River Jordan and at last realize fulfillment of the ancient promises to Abraham and his descendants.<\/p>\n
Theology, Literature, Origins, and Structure<\/p>\n
God\u2019s promise to the patriarchs of Israel (e.g., at Gen 12:1\u20133: numerous offspring and thus genealogical continuity, a land in which to settle down and dwell perpetually, and a source of blessing to others) began to actualize in Egypt (where the Israelite slaves became so numerous as to be a threat to the stability of public order). The promise of a land in which to dwell securely, however, remains to be realized at the beginning of Numbers. Thus, this narrative relates the journey of the former slaves toward that goal, complete with the attendant problems and limitations of the people.
\nStress is placed upon various negative attitudes that retard their geographical progress across the desert. Present and future generations are expected to accept correction and take instruction to heart (as Moses frequently points out in his farewell speech in Deuteronomy), lest the land (once attained) be subsequently lost. The matter is succinctly stated by a modern interpreter:<\/p>\n
The literary function of Numbers as part of Torah literature is to assure that future generations realize how certain habitual shortcomings have complicated Israel\u2019s relationship with God, ever since that relationship was initiated after the exodus from Egypt. From the start, the Israelites exhibited a lack of confidence in God\u2019s power to accomplish what he had promised\u2014to establish his people, Israel, in the land of Canaan.<\/p>\n
As was the case in Leviticus, the fundamentals of the writers\u2019 religious beliefs are not always boldly stated in a concentrated fashion. Nonetheless, some of its moral lessons are made quite clear, as St. Paul points out after a brief summary of Israel\u2019s wanderings in the desert:<\/p>\n
God was not pleased with most of them, and they were struck down in the wilderness. Now these things occurred as examples for us, so that we might not desire evil as they did. Do not become idolaters as some of them did.\u2026 We must not indulge in sexual immorality as some of them did.\u2026 We must not put Christ [or: the Lord] to the test as some of them did.\u2026 And do not complain as some of them did \u2026 These things happened to them to serve as an example, and they were written down to instruct us. (1 Cor 10:1\u201311)<\/p>\n
Since Numbers continues the story-line of the books of Genesis and Exodus, its religious understandings will have much in common with the preceding ones. One could hardly expect it to have a series of unique theological perspectives.<\/p>\n
Purpose and Theology<\/p>\n
Here are some of the \u201cfundamentals\u201d that form the background of theology in the book of Numbers.<\/p>\n
Ultimate causes<\/p>\n
While the book may seem, on the surface, to be intended as a straightforward factual account, it is far from what modern persons would designate as secular \u201chistory.\u201d The mere fact that it is part of the Jewish \u201ctorah\u201d alerts us quite to the contrary. That term (erroneously often translated as \u201claw\u201d in English Bibles) indicates a sacred story (in which the major actor is God) that revealed divine initiatives in history and teaches Israel the proper grateful response. As such, Numbers is a part of a theological history of Israel that runs from Genesis through Numbers (if not Deuteronomy). That is, it assumes the existence of a sole deity, creator of all things, who has chosen the descendants of Abraham for a special destiny and now works through history for the actualization of promises made to them. Such a theological assumption is, of course, often at odds with modern secular historians.<\/p>\n
God\u2019s dependability<\/p>\n
Just as slavery in the land of Egypt was no barrier to the realization of God\u2019s promise to the patriarchs, neither was the harshness of the wilderness nor the impending opposition of the present inhabitants of the \u201cpromised land.\u201d Thus it is upon God\u2019s dependability, God\u2019s fidelity to promises, that Moses relies when he intercedes upon the occasion of the people\u2019s doubts and complaints: \u201cForgive the iniquity of this people according to the greatness of your steadfast love \u2026\u201d (14:19). The term used here by NRSV (\u201csteadfast love\u201d) is more than affection: it basically denotes fidelity to one\u2019s formal word. [Steadfast Love]<\/p>\n
Steadfast Love
\nThe Hebrew word used here (\u1e25esed) derives from the language of international treaties and formal personal promises that were made binding by oath. It denotes one\u2019s determination to keep a formal pledge, the reliability to one\u2019s word, a measure of one constancy and fidelity. Ancient diplomatic instruments included specific pledges by all parties concerned, undergirded by formal oaths in the name of the deities of those parties. Such instruments were the model by which Israel\u2019s theologians sought to give expression to the formal relationship (covenant) between God and Israel.
\nBy appealing to God\u2019s \u201csteadfast love,\u201d therefore, Moses is relying upon God\u2019s basic integrity to keep a formal agreement.
\nAn easy to read introduction to this topic may be found in the article \u201cCovenant\u201d in vol. 1 of IDB, ed. George Arthur Buttrick (Nashville: Abingdon Press, 1962), 714\u201323.<\/p>\n
The clearest articulation of God\u2019s dependability has been placed in the mouth of a non-Israelite (Aramean) prophet named Balaam, hired by the king of Moab to utter a formal curse against the invading Israelites (ch. 22). Balaam, instead, blesses the incoming hoard and then gives this appraisal: \u201cGod is not a human being, that he should lie, or a mortal, that he should change his mind. He has promised, and will he not do it? He has spoken and will he not fulfill it?\u201d (23:19). Even a foreigner affirms God\u2019s dependability, and at the very time when the Israelites themselves are giving abundant evidence of their doubt!<\/p>\n
Omnipresence and guidance<\/p>\n
The usual perception in the ancient world is that deities are associated with (and often localized at) specific geographic places such as a sacred mountain or spring of water. Or, they may be associated with (and limited to) a specific phenomenon in nature, e.g., rainfall and disease. It would be futile, for example, for a Greek to pray to Poseidon, the god of the sea, for assistance in the remote desert.
\nBy contrast, Israel perceives there to be a single deity whose sovereignty ranges over all time, space, and forces of nature. Thus, as part of a single plan, Abraham is summoned from distant Mesopotamia and guided to the land of Canaan; his descendants are delivered from alien Egypt and guided through the wilderness of Sinai; and his descendants are presented a whole country as their possession (but it can just as easily be taken away in case of infidelity).
\nConstant guidance is provided to Israel during their desert pilgrimage, not only through the inspired leadership of Moses but also through the symbolic presence of God in the portable ark\/sanctuary and in a \u201ccloud \u2026 by day, and fire \u2026 by night\u201d (Exod 40:36\u201338; Num 9:15\u201316). Milgrom suggests that fashioning the ark with flanking winged cherubim was meant to present it as \u201ca flying chariot, a symbol that God is not confined to His Tabernacle-Ark.\u201d<\/p>\n
King Ahiram of Byblos sitting on a throne upheld by a winged cherub<\/p>\n
King sitting on his throne, table with offering, his son and courtiers. Relief on Sarcophagus of Ahiram, King of Byblos (Phoenicia). Beirut National Museum. (Credit: O. Mustafin \/ Wikimedia Commons, PD-US)<\/p>\n
The importance of obedience and trust<\/p>\n
During the period of desert wandering, the people of Israel frequently displayed ingratitude to God by complaint and disobedience, and so rebellion against their appointed leaders is a constant theme in the book of Numbers (chs. 11; 12; 14; 16; 20). They even deliberately disobeyed divine instructions as to the route that they should subsequently take. That is, following an unfavorable report by the spies that had been sent to evaluate the land of Canaan (Num 13), the people formulated their own initiative for entering the land rather than turning southward from the oasis at Kadesh as God suggested (14:25). Consequently, they suffered a crushing defeat (14:39\u201345).
\nWhile a few biblical writers idealize the period of wilderness wandering as one of obedience and close relationship between God and people (Jer 2:1\u20133; Hos 2:14\u201315 [Hebrew 2:16\u201317), others assign a typological significance to the people\u2019s disobedience as reported in Numbers. Thus the Deity instructs the prophet Ezekiel concerning the exiles of his own day:<\/p>\n
Then let them know the abominations of their ancestors \u2026 the house of Israel rebelled against me in the wilderness \u2026 Nevertheless my eye spared them.\u2026 Thus says the LORD God, \u2018Will you defile yourselves after the manner of your ancestors?\u2026 As I entered into judgment with your ancestors in the wilderness of the land of Egypt, so I will enter into judgment with you.\u2019 \u201d (20:4, 13, 17, 30, 36)<\/p>\n
The story of the divine provision of miraculous food (manna, Exod 16:13\u201320; Num 11:4\u20139) in the wilderness typifies the need (even necessity) for Israel to trust the Deity. The manna, quickly becoming stale, could not be stored up for future use. Thus, \u201cthis daily sustenance by God demanded a surrender without security: in dealing with God, we live from minute to minute.\u201d The book of Deuteronomy then spiritualizes story in order to get to the heart of the matter: \u201cHe (God) humbled you by letting you hunger, then by feeding you manna \u2026 in order to make you understand that one does not live by bread alone, but by every word that comes from the mouth of the LORD\u201d (8:3).<\/p>\n
The significance of cult<\/p>\n
On the priestly belief that public worship is essential for the maintenance of cosmic and public order, see the \u201cIntroduction\u201d to the commentary on Leviticus. For discussion of the terms \u201choly\u201d\/\u201cprofane\u201d and \u201cclean\u201d\/\u201cimpure\u201d (and their synonyms), see the Introduction to the commentary on Leviticus.)
\nThe book of Numbers, amidst its report of Israel\u2019s travails during the wilderness itinerary, contains massive sections of cultic regulations (chs. 7\u201310; 15; 18\u201319; 28\u201331).
\nAt first thought, it is somewhat puzzling that the tradition did not attach all of these cultic regulations to the sacred mountain (Sinai\/Horeb) and its vicinity, as was the case with material of such diverse origin as Exodus 20\u201340; Leviticus 1\u201327, and Numbers 1\u201310. In that way, all of it would have been perceived as torah that had been received at the most sacred of locations. At second thought, however, the need for subsequent updating and application is evidenced by the book of Deuteronomy, set on the border of the \u201cpromised land\u201d at the end of the entire wilderness journey. That guidelines are revealed in the meanwhile may be taken to mean (whether intended by Numbers or not!) that Israel (originally and in whatever expanded forms it may take in the future) will constantly encounter the ambiguities of history, betray its God, and be in need of both chastisement and encouragement. Israel is, in a sense, always in a difficult journey through the harsh wilderness, in hope of reaching that promised land of rest.<\/p>\n
The idea of the \u201choly\u201d<\/p>\n
On this central concept, see the commentary on Leviticus: overview of chapters 11\u201316.
\nNumbers continues the rigid understanding of a division between the sacred and the profane, the ritually \u201cclean\u201d (\u201cpure\u201d) and the \u201cunclean\u201d (\u201cimpure\u201d). In fact, Leviticus had maintained that the essence of the priestly task was observing and teaching that distinction (at 10:10). Not surprisingly then, the priests, as the first order of business in preparing the people for resuming their wilderness itinerary, established the proper tribal order for encampment and travel and then defined priestly duties (chs. 2\u20133). If Israel is to be a distinct people, living by life-giving values that set them apart from the madness and natural deathwardness of the world, then all encompassing guidelines must be observed.<\/p>\n
God\u2019s graciousness<\/p>\n
The Deity\u2019s fundamental nature, revealed at the sacred mountain as a consequence of Moses\u2019 request for clarity (\u201cShow me your glory,\u201d Exod 33:17\u201318), includes the following attributes: \u201cThe LORD, the LORD, a God merciful and gracious, slow to anger, and abounding in steadfast love and faithfulness \u2026 forgiving iniquity and transgression and sin\u201d (Exod 34:6\u20137). To this same litany of graciousness, revelation to the prophet Jonah adds: \u201cready to relent from punishment\u201d (4:2).
\nWhile repeated rebellions by Israel during the wilderness are sufficient to provoke God beyond the announced slowness to anger, still the fundamental foundation holds: \u201cmerciful and gracious \u2026 abounding in steadfast love \u2026 forgiving iniquity \u2026 ready to relent from punishment.\u201d
\nGod\u2019s graciousness is evident in the claim that chaos of cosmic dimension has been ended by the Deity\u2019s creative activity and that it can be controlled in history through a \u201choly\u201d community; purpose in history is evident in promises to the patriarchs and their fulfillment in Israel\u2019s population growth, deliverance from Egypt, and impending settlement in the land of Canaan; graciousness is evident in continued guidelines as the itinerary progresses; and there are repeated successful acts of intercessory prayer by Moses at crucial moments. Even though an entire sinful generation must die in the wilderness (14:20\u201323), the next generation is reminded that they will be guided to the land \u201cwhich I am giving you\u201d (15:1\u20132).
\nPrecisely at that point comes a new list of sacrificial regulations concerning offerings (grain and wine) that only an agricultural economy such as Canaan (the proverbial \u201cpromised land\u201d) can sufficiently provide. This serves not only to assure the people of God\u2019s fidelity, but it also alerts the modern reader to the purposeful integration of narrative and cultic materials.<\/p>\n
Literary Artistry<\/p>\n
The high literary artistry of the Priestly writer has been discussed in Introduction to Leviticus. The sophisticated literary structures that characterized the entirety of the book of Leviticus (both in P and in H) continue in the P-sections of Numbers. English Bible translators, however, have failed to recognize them, or at least to set them off in a format that allows the modern reader to appreciate them. As a consequence, the book of Numbers may be viewed as dull and tedious rather than interesting and skillful.
\nWhile such structures may have been intended to delight with their artistry, their fundamental purpose (underscored by repetition) surely was to reinforce memory of content and to demonstrate that guidelines for Israel\u2019s life must be carried out faithfully by the right person, at the right time and place, and in the proper manner.
\nIn addition to the single instances cited here, attention will be called to artistry throughout the commentary.
\nAn excellent example of panel writing may be found in chapter 6, detailing the offerings brought to the portable sanctuary by the various tribes. [Panel Writing]<\/p>\n
Panel Writing
\nSeldom can an illustration of repetition by means of panel writing be clearer than the one that consumes the near entirety of chapter 7. Once the portable sanctuary (\u201ctabernacle\u201d) has been completed and consecrated, we are told that leaders of each of the twelve tribes brought offerings to it. In separate paragraphs in NRSV, each tribal leader is named, followed in each instance by an identical list of offerings:
\n1 silver plate weighing 130 shekels, filled with flour and oil
\n1 silver basin weighing 70 shekels, filled with flour and oil
\n1 gold dish weighing 10 shekels, filled with incense
\n1 young bull, 1 ram, 1 male lamb, for burnt offering
\n1 male goat for sin offering
\n2 oxen, 5 rams, 5 male goats, 5 male lambs for well-being offering
\nAnother excellent example of parallel panels may be found in two complaint-narratives, one by the community as a whole (11:1\u20133) and the other by the siblings of Moses, Miriam and Aaron (12:1\u201315). In each case, the sequence of events is the same: articulation of a complaint, God hears the complaint with displeasure, divine retribution, and successful appeal for Moses to intercede whereupon God relinquishes.<\/p>\n
A fondness for repetition is to be found in chapters 1 and 9. [Repetition]<\/p>\n
Repetition
\nJust as was the case in Leviticus, God\u2019s instructions to Moses will be given in detail, followed by an account of obedience that is given with monotonous repetition. No room is allowed for half-measures and human self-serving shortcuts and innovations.
\nAn excellent example is to be found in ch. 1, where Moses is directed: \u201cTake a census of the whole congregation of Israelites, in their clans, by ancestral houses, according to the number of names, every male individually, from twenty years old and upward, everyone in Israel able to go to war\u201d (vv. 2\u20133). Thereafter comes the data (enumerated total) from each of the twelve tribes, but it is preceded in every case by the report (with only occasional slight variation) that it was done according to \u201ctheir lineage, in their clans, by their ancestral houses, according to the number of names, from twenty years old and upward, everyone able to go to war.\u201d
\nSeveral instances of seven-fold repetition are likewise to be found. A conspicuous instance is to be found in ch. 9 where Israel\u2019s travel-routine through the desert is outlined. It is emphasized that they journeyed only at God\u2019s specific direction, by means of the seven-fold description of it as happening only \u201cat the command of the LORD.\u201d A similar instance may be found in chs. 3\u20134, concerning the duties of the priests. Seven times we are told that obligations were carried out \u201caccording to the mouth of the LORD,\u201d although NRSV inadvertently disguises the seven-fold count by translating the phrase differently from place to place (\u201cat the commandment of the LORD\u201d; \u201caccording to the word of the LORD\u201d; \u201caccording to the commandment of the LORD\u201d).<\/p>\n
Chiastic (x-shaped) structures, both simple and complex, abound, e.g., 14:2. [Chiasm]<\/p>\n
Chiasm
\nChiastic constructions (simple and complex) abound but are not easily spotted in the English text. Note, for example, how the prose format and change of word-order has obscured this simple structure at 14:2, where the Israelites bemoan their difficult situation in the wilderness: \u201cWould that we had died in the land of Egypt! Or would that we had died in this wilderness!\u201d
\nThis rearrangement of word order obscures the chiastic structure. MT reads (and NAB alone so renders): \u201cWould that we had died in the land of Egypt, or that here in the desert we were dead.\u201d The chiastic structure thus is:
\nWould that we had died
\n*
\n*
\nin the land of Egypt;
\n*
\nOr in this wilderness
\n*
\n*
\nwould that we had died!<\/p>\n
Elegant larger structures such as palistrophe, are evident throughout, e.g., in chapters 13\u201315. [Palistrophe]<\/p>\n
Palistrophe
\nThe existence of larger literary structures in Numbers has been proposed, such as palistrophes. (Some of the illustrations that I have chosen are taken from Jacob Milgrom, The JPS Torah Commentary: Numbers [Philadelphia: The Jewish Publishing Society, 1990], xxii\u2013xxxi.)
\nObvious are ones in which there are compelling verbal similarities, such as those commonly found in Leviticus. For example, consider the fate of the man who was condemned for violating the Sabbath at 15:35\u201336 (following the word-order of the Hebrew text; the order of NRSV obscures the scheme):
\nA. Then the LORD said to Moses,
\nB. \u201cThe man shall be put to death; (v. 35)
\nC. stone him with stones (v. 35)
\nD. Shall all the community, outside the camp.\u201d
\nD\u2032. All the community brought him outside the camp
\nC\u2032. and stoned him with stones
\nB\u2032. and he died
\nA\u2032. just as the LORD had commanded Moses.
\nIn other instances, the proposed parallels between the structural members are topical rather than the more compelling verbal similarities. (From Milgrom, The JPS Torah Commentary: Numbers, xxiii\u2013xxix.) This means that the proposed structures are more subjective, less certain to have been intended by the biblical writer(s). Here is an example from the story of the spies that were sent to report on conditions in the land of Canaan (chs. 13\u201314):
\nA. The scouts\u2019 expedition (13:1\u201324)
\nB. The scouts\u2019 report (13:25\u201333)
\nC. The people\u2019s response (14:1\u201310a)
\nB\u2032. God\u2019s response (14:10b\u201338)
\nA\u2032. The people\u2019s expedition (14:39\u201345)<\/p>\n
Origins<\/p>\n
Should we think of the book of Numbers as the work of a single author, or as a collection of material by an editor (or perhaps even a series of editors)? The synagogue and church have traditionally assumed the former process of origin, with Moses as the single author of the totality in its present shape. In that case, one might expect a work that is written (at least sometimes) in the first person (\u201cI\u201d; \u201cwe\u201d), makes use of the present tense, has uniformity in grammar and vocabulary, evidences a continuous flow of narrative, and has a unified religious outlook.
\nBy contrast, most modern scholars have proposed an editor-model. In that case, one would expected to encounter a composite work, with a variety of literary styles and genres, shifts in vocabulary, evidence of once-independent and self-contained literary units, with differing theological perspectives, and having editorial connections between units that are in the third person (\u201che\u201d; \u201cthey\u201d) and the use of the past tense. [First and Third Person Narrative]<\/p>\n
First and Third Person Narrative
\nWhile most of the Bible is written in the third person (\u201che\/she\u201d; \u201cthey\u201d) and has been collected by an editor, occasional bits are preserved by an author in the first person (\u201cI\u201d; \u201cwe\u201d). A good example of the former may be found at Jer 26:12, \u201cThen Jeremiah spoke to all the officials and to all the people, saying, \u2018It is the LORD who sent me\u2019.\u2026\u201d For the latter type, see Isa 8:11, \u201cFor the LORD spoke thus to me.\u2026\u201d
\nThe so-called \u201cWe Sections\u201d of book of Acts are a conspicuous and telling illustration of the latter type. While the book almost always describes events in the third person, there are a few be brief references to what \u201cwe\u201d did (16:10\u201317; 20:5\u201315; 21:1\u201318; 27:1\u201328:16). Modern interpreters usually assume that these passages are from a travel-diary that the Evangelist Luke kept during his journeys with the Apostle Paul. They thus would constitute part of a separate source that the editor of Luke-Acts utilized.<\/p>\n
The second of these models would explain why Numbers not only evidences third person and past tense, but also why it has such diversity of literature and problematic order. These realities are so evident and troubling that one modern interpreter has said that Numbers deserves to be called \u201cthe junk room\u201d of early biblical material. [Range of Literary Types]<\/p>\n
Range of Literary Types
\nNote, for example, the range of literary types that Numbers contains, among them: census returns (e.g., 1:20\u201346), lists of duties (e.g., 1:5\u201315), various cultic regulations (e.g., chs. 5\u20136), formal blessings intended for repeated use (6:24\u201326), lists of dedicatory offerings (chapter 7), legal precedents (e.g., rules for land inheritance, 27:1\u201311), travel itineraries (e.g., 33:3\u201349), diplomatic correspondence (e.g., 20:14\u201317), victory songs (e.g., 21:14\u201315, 27\u201330), military reports (e.g., 21:23\u201325, 33\u201335), cultic calendars (chs. 28\u201329), and obituary notes (20:1; 20:23\u201329).<\/p>\n
The once-independent nature (i.e., separate origin) of some of the blocks of material is indicated by the repeated use of formal transitions or \u201cbreaks.\u201d For example, there are formal beginnings (such as, \u201cThe LORD spoke to Moses,\u201d e.g., at 1:1; 2:1; 4:1; 5:1; etc.), and there are formal conclusions (such as, \u201cThe Israelites did \u2026 just as the LORD had commanded Moses,\u201d e.g., 1:54; 2:34; cf. 3:51; 4:49; 9:23; \u201cThese are [have been] the commandments which the LORD commanded Moses,\u201d e.g., at 36:13).
\nEven if one could envision Moses as an editor, gathering material from various earlier sources (e.g., a census of this-or-that group in Israel), this would not explain the unfailing use of the third person and past tense to refer to himself.
\nWho, therefore, might the subsequent editor (or editors) have been? As discussed at some length in the Introduction to the commentary on Leviticus, modern scholars have proposed, with some plausibility, that the collection and editing may have taken place over several centuries. The four major proposed editorial collections are, in chronological order beginning with the earliest: the Yahwist (\u201cJ\u201d), the Elohist (\u201cE\u201d), the Deuteronomist (\u201cD\u201d) and the Priestly writer (\u201cP\u201d + \u201cH\u201d). Whereas Leviticus is entirely composed of \u201cP\u201d (+ \u201cH\u201d) materials, the usual modern understanding of Numbers is that it is largely a combination of \u201cJ\u201d and \u201cP.\u201d Slight amounts of \u201cE\u201d material are sometimes thought to occur in chapters 11\u201332, but often difficult to distinguish with precision. Many modern interpreters, therefore, will speak (in broad measure) of two sources in Numbers: JE (earlier) and P (later).<\/p>\n
Organization<\/p>\n
Is there any overall organization, any coherent progression of thought, as one proceeds through the book? Or, is it a random collection, a hodge-podge fully deserving the designation as a literary \u201cjunk room\u201d? About this there has been much scholarly frustration and few widely convincing results. One famous scholar has concluded that \u201cthe book lacks unity, and it is difficult to see any pattern in its construction.\u201d Nonetheless, the caution of another interpreter at this point is sage wisdom: \u201cIf the book has been revered by the Jewish people and admitted in this form to their canon of sacred writings, it has to be taken as a whole\u201d (i.e., not merely studied as a series of fragments).
\nSome of the proposals for organization (whether intended by the biblical writers or not) have been as follows. The reader will notice that the proposals get more sophisticated, and less obvious to the casual reader, as they go along.<\/p>\n
Chronology and geography<\/p>\n
The first proposal has been that the organization of the book is best understood in terms of chronology and geography. That is, the material clusters around three basic locations at which Israel sojourned on the way from slavery in Egypt to the borders of the \u201cpromised land\u201d: (1) Mount Sinai\/Horeb and its environs (chs. 1\u201310); (2) the oasis at Kadesh (chs. 13\u201319); and (3) the Plains of Moab (chs. 22\u201336).
\nGordon J. Wenham points out that biblical material elsewhere is made up of three extended cycles. The patriarchal stories in Genesis consist of extended sections on Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, each introduced by an identical formula that signals a new literary unit (11:27; 25:19; 37:2). Likewise, the book of Deuteronomy takes the form of extended speeches by Moses, each with a conspicuous opening statement (1:1; 5:1; 29:1). Consequently, Wenham plausibly remarks: \u201cThese parallels with Numbers suggest that casting material in triadic form was an established literary device for the biblical writers.\u201d
\nWhile a three-fold division of Numbers has biblical precedent (and geographical markers are a plausible method, at least to the modern western mind), there are problems with this approach. The geographical location of specific sites is imprecise and in some cases contradictory, and the route taken by the people varies according to whether one follows the narrative strand \u201cJ,\u201d \u201cE,\u201d or \u201cP.\u201d Furthermore, the literary transitions between locations are imprecise, with \u201cragged\u201d bridge passages, and thus there is modern disagreement about precisely where a biblical writer might have intended the transitions to be (e.g., is the first transition at 9:14, or 10:10, or 10:36? Is the second one at 20:13, or 21:9, or 22:1, or 25:18?).
\nNonetheless, one interpreter has noted similarities in the transition-passages in Numbers (from Sinai to Kadesh, 10:11\u201312:16; from Kadesh to the Plains of Moab, 20:1\u201322:1) to earlier transition-passages in the descriptions of the prior journey from Egypt to the sacred mountain (as related in Exod 13\u201319). The literary transitions, in both books, have in common the inclusion of songs of victory, complaints, intercession by Moses, and miraculous availability of food and water.<\/p>\n
Two generations<\/p>\n
A second proposal has been that a division of the book may be made in accordance with the two generations that participated in the wilderness journey. There is the initial generation that left Egypt, prone to complaint and faithlessness (chs. 1\u201325), and there is a generation that was born during the forty years of wandering in the desert, characterized by optimism and victory over enemies (chs. 26\u201336). The initiation of each section and generation is signaled by conducting a census of the twelve tribes and of the Levites in particular (chs. 1\u20134 and 26).
\nWhile such a two-fold structure may be aesthetically satisfying, it fails to account for the manifold \u201cragged\u201d details in between. Why should the historical narrative be constantly interrupted by the insertion of cultic materials? Why should the cultic materials have been cut into so many segments, and pasted hodge-podge here and there? Why should the book not end with Israel standing on the borders of Canaan, having been instructed as to its tribal divisions and boundaries (chs. 33\u201335), rather than continue (and conclude) with regulations about marriage of female heirs?<\/p>\n
Circular structure<\/p>\n
The third proposal has been that the book has been arranged in a circular (or ring-like) structure, in which legal sections alternate with narrative sections. This proposed structure is a very sophisticated one (with parallels in ancient Chinese literature), not recognized by the modest horizons of eighteenth and nineteenth century biblical scholarship.
\nOverall, says Mary Douglas of this third approach, Numbers intends to show that the expectations in the book of Genesis have been realized. Hence, \u201cThe beginning of Numbers starts with the end of Genesis and the ending of Numbers arrives by an inverted parallel at the beginning of Genesis.\u201d For example, Israel\u2019s story in Genesis really gets under way with the promises to Abraham, including numerous offspring and territory (Gen 12), and this is realized when the hoards of Israel partition out the land of Canaan prior to their entry (Num 33\u201335). Within that larger shell of repetition are many smaller concentric ones, forming a palistrophe:<\/p>\n
Genesis:<\/p>\n
A. The land is promised to Abraham
\nB. Canaan cursed at the time of Noah
\nC. Seduction of Lot produces Moabites & Ammonites
\nD. Esau, ancestor of Edom
\nE. Jacob\u2019s 12 tribal sons
\nF. Joseph confirms the promise of land<\/p>\n
Numbers:<\/p>\n
F\u2032. Census of Jacob\u2019s descendants
\nE\u2032. The 12 tribes surround the sanctuary
\nD\u2032. Encounters with Edom
\nC\u2032. Israel seduced by women of Moab
\nB\u2032. Canaanites destroyed by Israel
\nA\u2032. Partition of the \u201cpromised land\u201d<\/p>\n
Turning to the internal structure of Numbers, another ring-structure may be envisioned. Two strands, one narrative (seven instances) and one cultic (six instances) have been interspersed in matched pairs. This may be diagrammed as follows:<\/p>\n
A
\nchapters 1\u20134; 36
\nB
\nB\u2032
\nchapters 5\u20136
\nKeeping faith
\n33:50\u201335:34
\nC
\nC\u2032
\nchapters 7\u20139
\nOfferings
\n31:1\u201333:49
\nD
\nD\u2032
\n10:1\u201310
\nFeasts
\nchapters 28\u201330
\nE
\nE\u2032
\n10:11\u201314:45
\nIn the Wilderness
\nchapters 20\u201327
\nF
\nF\u2032
\nchapter 15
\nchapters 18\u201319
\nA\u2032
\nchapters 16\u201317<\/p>\n
An elegant scheme, indeed, if the parallels\u2019 members will bear it out! Unfortunately, this is not always the case, even to judge by many of the author\u2019s own characterizations of the alleged parallels. With such large segments of material from which to choose a matching topic in each instance (e.g., E [5 chapters] and E\u2032 [8 chapters]), some sort of limited parallel can be either discovered or contrived. For example: Segments of E and E\u2032 may seem striking at points: longing for Egypt: 11:4\u20139 and 20:5; 21:5; arriving at Paran (10:1) and arriving in the wilderness of Zin (20:1). However, who will not have doubts about F and F\u2032? Do the people\u2019s obligations for offerings to the Lord [15:1\u201316] really match the duties of the priests to officiate [ch. 18]? Does \u201cdefilement by unwitting breach of the commandments\u201d [ch. 15] really match the procedure for cleaning from corpse contamination [ch. 19]? [An Extended Palistrophe?]<\/p>\n
An Extended Palistrophe?
\nDouglas\u2019s proposal (as pointed out by Gordon Wenham, Numbers [OTG; Sheffield, England: Sheffield Academic Press, 1979], 21) amounts to an extended palistrophe, as follows:
\nA. chs. 1\u20134 (counting the tribes; danger of encroachment)
\nB. chs. 5\u20136 (keeping and breaking faith)
\nC. chs. 7\u20139 (gifts to the Lord, the Passover, setting out on the journey)
\nD. 10:1\u201310 (blowing trumpets and appointed feasts)
\nE. 10:11\u201314:45 (the Wilderness of Paran)
\nF. ch. 15 (offerings for priests, guild and innocence)
\nG. chs. 16\u201317 (encroachment punished; subjection to Aaron)
\nF\u2032. chs. 18\u201319 (offerings for priests, cleansing from blood)
\nE\u2032. chs. 20\u201327 (the Wilderness of Zin)
\nD\u2032. chs. 28\u201330 (appointed feasts and women\u2019s vows)
\nC\u2032. 31:1\u201333:49 (defeat of Midian, booty purified, offerings to the tabernacle, summary of journeys)
\nB\u2032. 33:50\u201335:34 (destroy images, partition land, cities of refuge)
\nA\u2032. ch. 36 (the sons of Joseph, and the land)<\/p>\n
Concerning this third proposed structure for the book of Numbers, G. J. Wenham observes:<\/p>\n
Ring structures and palistrophes are convincing only if the alleged pairs closely match each other.\u2026 But what constitutes a close match? Here opinions differ and interpretation becomes subjective, and those who think they have discovered a palistrophe or other structure must always ask themselves whether the structure is a creation of the reader or the author. Consensus about such structures is unlikely, but their plausibility does depend on there being a close match in size and content or phraseology between alleged pairs. By these criteria Douglas\u2019s analysis is not convincing.<\/p>\n
The present commentary will proceed in accordance with the first of these three suggestions. The text will be divided in accordance with the Israel\u2019s geographical progress across the wilderness: (1) preparation for the march (1:1\u201310:10); the journey from Mt. Sinai to the borders of the \u201cpromised land\u201d (10:11\u201322:1); events on the border of the \u201cpromised land\u201d (22:2\u201336:13).<\/p>\n
PREPARATION FOR THE MARCH TO CANAAN: AN OVERVIEW<\/p>\n
Numbers 1:1\u201310:10<\/p>\n
The units of material in this section have in common that they describe events at the sacred mountain (Sinai\/Horeb). They also disclose the careful preparation that must take place in order for the journey to the \u201cpromised land\u201d to resume.
\nThe following sub-topics, following the chapter divisions in NRSV, are contained in it:<\/p>\n
Chapter 1: Enumeration of available soldiery (census) in case of expected military opposition;
\nChapter 2: Geographical arrangement of the camp for the march;
\nChapters 3\u20135: Cultic readiness;
\nChapter 6: Concerning the Nazirites;
\nChapter 7: Tribal support for the sanctuary;
\nChapter 8: Dedication of the Levites;
\nChapter 9: Celebration of the Passover;
\nChapter 10 (vv. 1\u201310): Manufacture of trumpets to co-ordinate movement as the tribes set out.<\/p>\n
According to the chronology of the Priestly writer, this entire preparation took place in a mere twenty days (1:1; 10:11). Similar chronological markers are located at 20:1 and 33:3, using month-numbers (a Priestly innovation). The Priestly fondness for tying \u201cevents\u201d to a calendric date goes back to the book of Genesis and its introduction of chronology into the story of Noah\u2019s flood (beginning at 7:11). Thereby, stories that formerly would have been assigned to a vague primeval time are now historicized and tied into a chronological sequence that will lead to the call of Abraham (Gen 12) and the beginnings of Israel. [Priestly \u201cNumber Games\u201d Involving the Calendar]<\/p>\n
Priestly \u201cNumber Games\u201d Involving the Calendar
\nJust as the number 10 is a transition point in modern counting (decimal place notation in base-10, hence the sequence 1, 10, 100, 1000, etc.), the ancient Babylonians sometimes counted in units of 60 (base-60, the so-called sexigesimal system). This is still reflected, in modern calculations, in 60 seconds\/minute, 60 minutes\/hour, 360\u00b0 (6 \u00d7 60) in a circle, etc. This system was sometimes used in biblical materials (especially by the Priestly writers, who would have borrowed the system during exile to Babylonia in the 6th century BC). Dates cast in this system would be intended to imply regularity, divine control, and perfection. Thus, the flood is made to commence in Noah\u2019s 600th year (60 \u00d7 10, Gen 7:11), the maximum human life-span is set at 120 years (60 \u00d7 2, Gen 6:3), the number of provinces in the Persian Empire is set at 120 (60 \u00d7 2, Dan 6:1), almost all of the ages of the pre-flood generation (Gen 5) are multiples of 60 months (sometimes with the superlative number 7 added), elapsed time from the flood to the birth of Abraham is 367 years [(60 \u00d7 6) + 7, Gen 11:26].
\nAll of this serves to alert the modern reader that the priestly preoccupation with \u201cchronology\u201d sometimes reflects concerns that are alien to the modern reader. Their figures cannot always be used to establish dates in the modern calendar.
\nFor details on these matters, see Lloyd Bailey, Genesis, Creation, and Creationism (Mahwah NJ: Paulist Press, 1993), ch. 4, with appendix 7 and 12.<\/p>\n
UNIVERSAL MILITARY CONSCRIPTION: CENSUS OF SOLDIERY IN CASE OF MILITARY OPPOSITION<\/p>\n
Numbers 1:1\u201354<\/p>\n
Numbers opens with a census enumeration, i.e., with a clear illustration of why the book got its name. This is also a parade example of why it is often considered to be dull reading and spiritually unedifying. However, peering beneath its surface may reveal insights that are worth considering by synagogue and church in the present.
\nThe chapter may be artificially divided into the following sections:<\/p>\n
1. The call for a census and the naming of tribal overseers (vv. 1\u201319);
\n2. Results of the enumeration, tribe by tribe (vv. 20\u201344);
\n3. The grand total of males \u201cable to go to war\u201d (v. 3) and aged twenty and above (vv. 45\u201346);
\n4. Exclusion of the tribe of Levi (vv. 47\u201354).<\/p>\n
The primary difficulty that a modern reader will encounter in the census data is that of feasibility: Is it really possible that a relatively small group of people could so quickly generate a population of this magnitude? Is it possible that the intent of the surprisingly large figures is something else than mathematical data? If the totals are somehow symbolic, does that diminish the inspiration and value of the material for modern religious life?
\nThe commentary below will propose and support the interpretation that the census data is a pious exaggerated expression of belief in the fulfillment of God\u2019s promise to the patriarch Abraham. That promise was that the patriarch\u2019s descendants would be as numerous as \u201cthe dust of the earth\u201d (Gen 13:16) and as the stars of the heavens (Gen 15:5). Anyone of a contrary opinion should be aware that one cannot insist upon literalism in the census at Numbers 1 and then forsake it in the case of these texts in Genesis. Just how numerous are the dust particles of the earth, and how many are the visible stars? A mere two million Israelites, at the time of the resumption of the wilderness journey, is a mere infinitesimal fraction of what is \u201cliterally\u201d promised.<\/p>\n
Boundaries of the Unit<\/p>\n
The account of the great census is set apart (as a separate literary unit) by the usual formal beginning that was used throughout Leviticus (\u201cThe LORD spoke to Moses \u2026\u201d). It comes to a formal conclusion by relating that the Israelites did as Moses had instructed (v. 54). A similar beginning then is sounded thereafter (with formal conclusion at 2:34), thus justifying the later placement of the chapter divisions. Thereby, the editorial work (patching together of literary units) of the Priestly writer becomes clear.<\/p>\n
Matters of Chronology<\/p>\n
Previous Priestly chronological markers have reported that the construction of the portable sanctuary (\u201ctabernacle\u201d) at Mt. Sinai had been completed. That chronology is anchored in Israel\u2019s formative event, the beginning of the exodus from Egypt (Exod 12:40\u201341). A year later (i.e., \u201cin the second year\u201d), on the first day of the first month, with the great revelatory episode on the sacred mountain finished, the portable sanctuary that is to accompany Israel thereafter is completed (Exod 40:17). Numbers opens with events beginning in that same year, one month later (1:1). This means that the events and revelations that are reported in the book of Leviticus consumed only that short length of time. That both events (completion of the tabernacle and the beginning of the great census) fall exactly on the first day of the month again reflects the Priestly writer\u2019s determination to provide idealistic calendration (or, is it just a coincidence?).<\/p>\n
COMMENTARY<\/p>\n
Although it is not explicitly stated in the introduction (vv. 1\u20134), the purpose of the census relates to impending warfare with the population of Canaan. [Comment on Details of Numbers 1] After all, that land is the people\u2019s destination, and it is filled with fortified cities and a citizenry that will not relinquish it willingly. This purpose is confirmed by restriction to males above the age of twenty, \u201ceveryone able to go to war\u201d (v. 3). [Census]<\/p>\n
Comment on Details of Numbers 1
\nV. 2: \u201cTake a census.\u201d Interestingly, this command is literally, in Hebrew, \u201clift up the head.\u201d This calls to mind the modern expression, \u201ctake a head count.\u201d The Hebrew verb (imperative) is in the plural, a curiosity since Moses alone is addressed (singular; see also vv. 19, 54). This seems to anticipate the presence of Aaron at vv. 17, 44.
\nV. 2: \u201ccongregation.\u201d This designation, characteristic of P, has a slightly different nuance from \u201cIsraelites\u201d (lit.: \u201cchildren\/sons of Israel\u201d). The latter designation implies a national or ethnic group (such as the neighboring Moabites or Ammonites), whereas the former designation (derived from the verb \u201cto assemble\u201d) suggests a more inclusive community (without necessarily having geographical bounds or linguistic commonality).
\nV. 2: \u201c(by tribe), in their clans, by ancestral houses.\u201d These divisions suggest three successive generations and thus they set the span of Israel\u2019s residence in Egypt (agreeing with the fourth generation of Gen 15:16). Thus they are of great chronological significance in limiting the period of time in which the people can multiply.
\nV. 3: \u201c\u2026 twenty years of age and upward.\u201d Apparently there was no upper limit (none too old for the \u201cdraft\u201d?), given the seriousness of the situation in which Israel usually found herself. Contrast the limited span for Levitical service (8:24\u201327).
\nVv. 5\u201315, 20\u201343: sequences of tribal names. The list of assistants, by tribe (vv. 5\u201315), is grouped according to mother (i.e., the wives of Jacob the \u201cfather\u201d of Israel): Leah (the first wife) tribes (vv. 5\u20139), Rachel tribes (vv. 10\u201311), and \u201cconcubine\u201d tribes (vv. 12\u201315). The order of census taking itself (vv. 20\u201343), however, differs slightly (more so in MT than LXX). The reasons for the variations are unclear.
\nV. 14: \u201cDeuel\u201d (so also NJV, following MT). NEB, NAB, and JB have \u201cReuel\u201d (based on LXX). See the discussion above on \u201cWhy English Translations Differ\u201d (here, visual similarity in the Hebrew characters \u201cd\u201d and \u201cr\u201d).
\nV. 51: \u201cAnd any outsider who comes near shall be put to death.\u201d Such punishment may strike the modern reader as incredibly harsh for such a seemingly innocuous offense. Part of the point seems to be that when there is no respect for the sacred, there is no external criterion by which to make eternally valid judgments. The order of the universe thereby reverts to chaos.<\/p>\n
Census
\nCensus-taking for military purposes (\u201csword fodder\u201d rather than the more modern \u201ccannon fodder\u201d?) is well attested in Israel during the later monarchical period (e.g., 2 Sam 24:1\u20139; 2 Chr 14:8 [Heb. 14:7]; see also Josh 8:10). A census taken for the more usual purpose of taxation is related at Exod 30:12.
\nScribes of the Assyrian king Sennacherib
\nScribes of the Assyrian king Sennacherib (late 8th century BC), protected by soldiers, record captives of war (with their hands bound) while stationed beside a river. One scribe uses a wax-coated tablet book of the type found in an excavation at Nimrud. Hinged plates (made of wood or ivory) were coated with beeswax (hardened with arsenic sulfide) into which notation could be made with a stylus in cuneiform script. The scribe behind him uses a leather parchment (with ink-pen). The latter likely was the system assumed to be in use in recording the census data in Num 1 and 3.
\n(Illustration: Barclay Burns)<\/p>\n
The tribe of Levi is to be excluded from the census (vv. 48\u201353) because of their special duties with regard to the tabernacle. In addition, they form a zone of protection between the non-priestly tribes and the sacred shrine (note v. 51: \u201cany outsider who comes near shall be put to death\u201d).
\nIn order to maintain the traditional number of tribes (12, now reduced to 11 by the exclusion of Levi), the tribe of Joseph is divided into two parts, Ephraim and Manasseh. A separate census of the Levites is required by 3:14\u201339.<\/p>\n
Actual Data or Symbolic Mathematical Exercise?<\/p>\n
While the historical accuracy of the census enumeration is not so important theologically, some readers may nonetheless wonder about the feasibility of a troop of some two to three million persons trekking through the barren desert for a period of forty years. Can the small group of slaves in Egypt have increased to such an extent? If that entire generation died during the period of wandering (little more than a generation of forty years, Num 14:20\u201323), can a near-equal number of births have taken place (26:51)? Is the wilderness sufficient to support them in terms of food, water, and forage for animals?
\nThe modern interpreter who is concerned with the origin of the census figures in Numbers 1 has two basic options: either they are historical or they are symbolic. [Symbolic and Sacred Numbers]<\/p>\n
Symbolic and Sacred Numbers
\nThe world of the Bible abounds with numbers that have a symbolic, often sacred character. Among the Mesopotamians, for example, various of the deities were so associated with a given number that one of the ways of writing their names was merely to write the number, preceded by the word \u201cgod.\u201d For example, the moon god (named Sin by the Semites and Nannar by the Sumerians) could be designed by the number 30 because of the monthly cycle of his visible image (the lunar disc). The goddess Ishtar (Venus) was symbolized by the number 15 (indeed, the number alone could be used as a substitute for the word \u201cgoddess\u201d). The weather deity Adad (Hadad, Baal) was sometimes signaled by the number 10, the sun god (Shamash) by 20, the deity of wisdom and fertilizing waters (Ea) by 40, the storm god (Enlil) by 50, and the heavenly father deity (Anu) by 60.
\nIn the Bible, where such supposed deities are denied existence (the forces that they were thought to represent having been reduced to mere \u201cthings\u201d), their numbers sometimes retain a special significance. That may help to explain why a few numbers are used over and over again, rather than with the randomness that one might expect in an objective report of the secular \u201cfacts.\u201d I here speak of the amazing frequency with which one encounters the numbers 3, 7, 12, 40, 60, 70, and multiples thereof.<\/p>\n
If one wishes to explore (or uphold) the traditional position that the census numbers are historical, then the following concerns must be taken into consideration.<\/p>\n
Reproductive Feasibility<\/p>\n
We are told that 603,550 soldiers left the mountain (1:46; Exod 38:26), presupposing a total population of some two to three million persons. Is this biologically feasible under the best of conditions?
\nAt this point, endless speculation can begin: Suppose extreme longevity (of the type listed in Gen 5) and extended years of female fertility (as in the case of the patriarchal wives); suppose marriage at a very young age (twelve or so, as is practiced in the Near East); suppose polygamy and thus multiple wives (as in the case of the biblical patriarchs); suppose the duration of the exodus was 430 years (Exod 12:40); and so on. Certain serious problems arise for such an approach, however. Among them:
\na. The average longevity for Israelites, based upon clear biblical data for the monarchical period, was around 30 years.
\nb. Polygamy is rarely attested in the Old Testament.
\nc. The duration of the exodus as given in the Masoretic Text (430 years) is problematic. It is reduced to 215 years in the Septuagint and conflicts with multiple data elsewhere in the Bible (see below). Based upon biblical data, what might we expect the population of Israel to have been at the time of the exodus? Let us suppose that the following biblical data was meant to be taken literally:
\n(1) The number of persons (all ages and genders) who settled in Egypt, thus setting up the possibility of slavery to the Pharaoh, was 70 (Gen 46:27; Exod 1:5).
\n(2) The number of generations from Jacob (ancestor of the group that came to Egypt) to Moses (who was to deliver them from slavery) was four: Jacob is the father of Levi, he of Kohath, he of Amram, and he of Moses (Exod 1:2; 6:16, 18, 20). We cannot assume that any generations have been ignored (as has been proposed by the so-called \u201cmissing gap\u201d theory), since according to Gen 15:13 Abraham\u2019s descendants would become \u201caliens in a land that is not theirs\u201d and then \u201ccome back here [Canaan] in the fourth generation\u201d (v. 16). [Missing Gap Theory]<\/p>\n
Missing Gap Theory
\nIn order to solve problems, some modern conservative interpreters have proposed that certain periods of time have been compressed in biblical chronology. Thus, insignificant generations in a genealogy might be passed over and not mentioned by name. So-called \u201cOld Earth\u201d Creationists, for example, are willing to allow a number of such gaps in order to bring about an agreement between modern biologists and literal computation of the age of the human race based upon Genesis. (For detail, see Lloyd Bailey, Genesis, Creation, and Creationism [Mahwah and New York: Paulist Press, 1993], appendix 1 and 3.)<\/p>\n
(3) The size of the community at the birth of Moses was such that 2 midwives could care for it (Exod 1:15).
\n(4) The size of families was modest. Using Levi as an example, we read of three sons, eight grandsons, and thirteen great-grandsons that include Moses and Aaron (Exod 6:16\u201319; 1 Chr 23:21\u201323). Assuming that all were still alive at the time of the exodus, Levi and his descendants would have totaled twenty five males, an average of eight males per generation. Let us assume that the thirteen couples have the average number of sons, yielding 164 sons. If we assume similar statistics for each of the twelve tribes, the total is 1,248 males (only half of which would be of military age). This likely is in keeping with the capacity of two midwives.
\nLet us now be more generous, and assume (contrary to biblical evidence) that each generation had twelve sons, as Jacob is reported to have had. The second generation would produce 144 males, the third 1,728, and the fourth 20,736 (yielding 10,368 of fighting-age).
\nThis range of figure is supported by noting that, within a century after crossing the Jordan, the tribe of Dan mustered only 600 troops (Judg 18:11) and half of the tribes could muster only a total of 40,000 (Judg 5:8; note, however, that 600 (= 60 \u00d7 10) and 40,000 (40 \u00d7 1,000) are conspicuous as symbolic numbers (see the discussion titled \u201cMathematical Exercise?\u201d just below).<\/p>\n
Geographical feasibility<\/p>\n
The distance from the Nile delta (where the Israelites were held captive) to the border of Canaan is, \u201cas the crow flies,\u201d about 125 miles. Now, if 603,550 soldiers were arranged in rows that were 10 feet apart, each row containing 10 soldiers, the line would stretch for 114 miles, roughly the entire width of the Sinai Peninsula! If the total population (some two million) were taken into account and arranged in a mass of 50 people per row, each being 10 feet apart, the line would stretch for 76 miles! It is hard to imagine such a mass getting lost and wandering around for forty years!
\nCould the Sinai Peninsula supply sufficient food and water for such a multitude during such a sustained period of time? By contrast, the population of the area in the 1800s of the modern era is generally estimated to be from four to seven thousand. Generally, the population of an area is kept in check by what its natural resources can provide.
\nA \u201cconservative\u201d approach points out, of course, that the natural produce of the desert did not need sustain the multitude, since food and water were miraculously provided (Exod 16:1\u201332; 17:1\u20137; Num 11:4\u20139, 31\u201332; 20:2\u201311; 21:16\u201317). Furthermore, says this approach, the abundance of archaeological remains (e.g., monasteries) and inscriptions attests to the presence of a larger population in the area in antiquity than in recent times.
\nIs it feasible that the entire multitude crossed the river Jordan in a single day (Josh 3:7)? Assuming daylight of twelve hours and a population of three million, that would be at the rate of 250,000 per hour, 4,167 per minute, 69 per second.
\nIs it possible that a mistranslation has resulted in inflated census figures? That is, does the word \u02beelep (usually meaning \u201cthousand\u201d) mean \u201cclan\u201d here (as it seems to do at Micah 5:2 [Hebrew 5:1]; Judg 6:15; see also 1 Sam 23:23, where NRSV renders it as \u201c(all the) thousands (of Judah)\u201d; NJV, \u201cclans\u201d; NAB, \u201cfamilies\u201d)? If so, the enumeration of the tribe of Reuben, for example, would not be 46,500, but rather 46 clans\/families supplying a total of 500 men. Consequently, the grand total for the census would be 598 clans\/families supplying 5,550 soldiers (thus leaving unresolved that textual note that the total was 603,550). This would be entirely plausible in terms of expected rates of reproduction and of survivability in the wilderness. Modified versions of this type of interpretation have been offered in more recent times. However, since the word \u02beelep means an entire \u201cclan\u201d (rather than a more restrictive military unit), and since it occurs in Numbers 1 in the midst of (other) ciphers, scholars argue for the usual meaning \u201cthousand.\u201d<\/p>\n
Mathematical Exercise?<\/p>\n
One may wonder if the population enumerations were even meant to be taken literally, given that the data is given in traditional symbolic numbers. For example, given the prevalence of the number \u201c70\u201d in the Bible (i.e., that things do not happen in \u201c69s\u201d and \u201c71\u2019s\u201d) and in ancient Near Eastern literature, can one be certain that this is the exact number of Israelites who entered Egypt in the first place (Gen 46:27; Exod 1:5)? Given the constant use of the number \u201c40\u201d in the Bible, can one know the exact length of the wilderness journey? [Seventy as a Sacred and Symbolic Number] [Forty as a Symbolic Number]<\/p>\n
Seventy as a Sacred and Symbolic Number
\nThe most frequent of symbolic numbers in biblical usage is seven and its derivatives (e.g., 70). The number seven occurs about 397 times, sevenfold occurs 9 times, seventh occurs 113 times, for a grand total of 519 times. By contrast, the usages of the number eight total 88. The word seventy (7 \u00d7 10, all the better!) occurs 62 times in the Old Testament and four times in the New.
\nThe sacred character of \u201cseven\u201d may derive from its association with a group of deities called (in Akkadian) the Sibittu (literally: \u201cthe Seven\u201d). Even in Israel veneration of them is attested in such personal names as \u201cElizabeth\u201d (\u201cMy god is the Seven\u201d) and \u201cBathsheba\u201d (\u201cDaughter of the Seven\u201d) and in such place names as \u201cBeersheba\u201d (\u201cThe Well of the Seven,\u201d since these deities were thought to dwell in the underworld and to manifest themselves at openings in the earth such as springs and wells). The curiosity remains that one finds a heptad of deities rather than some other number. Correspondingly, why should there be, in semitic cosmology, a sevenfold heaven such that Paul could speak (of himself) as a person who \u201cwas caught up to the third heaven\u201d (2 Cor 12:2)? At the opposite cosmological pole, why should there be seven walls around the underworld city? Indeed, so fundamental was the concept of seven in relation to the world that the Babylonians could write the word for \u201cworld\u201d (\u201csky-earth\u201d) as seven cuneiform wedges. From the seven directions of the compass, each represented by a mountain that held up the sky, could emerge that heptad of deities known as the Sibittu, sometimes designated as \u201cthe seven gods of the universe.\u201d
\nThe Biblical Worldview
\nSuch concern for the number seven, especially in connection with deity, may have arisen from human observation of the major celestial bodies (deities): the visible planets (Mercury, Venus, Mars, Jupiter, and Saturn), plus the sun and moon. Hence, the realm of the sky-gods could be perceived to be a sevenfold heaven.
\nIn Israel\u2019s monotheistic faith, of course, this polytheistic world was radically transformed (de-polytheized, de-\u201cforeignized\u201d): the sole deity (Yahweh) inherits a sevenfold heaven, and the Sibittu and imagined divine forces are reduced to mere processes of nature at Yahweh\u2019s bidding. Thus it is that God threatens Israel with sevenfold punishment (Deut 28:22; cf. Job 5:19; Prov 24:16) and desires sacrificial animals in groups of seven (Num 28:11).
\nOne can now better understand how it is that this number has come to symbolize thoroughness or completeness.
\nKey to representation above: 1) waters above the firmament; 2) storehouses for snow; 3) storehouses for hail; 4) chambers of winds; 5) firmament; 6) sluice; 7) pillars of the sky; 8) pillars of the earth; 9) fountain of the deep; 10) navel of the earth; 11) waters under the earth; 12) rivers of the nether world.
\n(Illustration: Barclay Burns)<\/p>\n
Forty as a Symbolic Number
\nConsider a few instances of the widespread usage of the number forty: age at marriage (Gen 25:20; 26:34); the period of Israel\u2019s wandering in the Sinai wilderness (Exod 16:35); a period of peace (Judg 3:11; 8:28; 13:1); the length of various monarchs\u2019 reigns (2 Sam 5:4; 1 Kgs 11:42; 2 Chr 24:1); the length of the flood\u2019s downpour (Gen 7:4); the length of Elijah\u2019s journey to Mount Horeb (1 Kgs 19:8); the time remaining for the city of Nineveh to repent (Jonah 3:4); the duration of Jesus\u2019 temptation (Matt 4:2); and so on. Outside the Bible, mention might be made of the tale, \u201cAli Baba and the Forty Thieves.\u201d
\nApparently, the biblical writers considered this number to be an approximation for the duration of the average generation and thus did not intend it literally for secular chronological purposes. If one had wanted to know, for example, the chronological span from the exodus to the founding of the Solomonic temple, one might have noted that the list of priests within that span was set at eleven (from Aaron to Zadok, 1 Chr 6:38). When multiplied by forty, this yields 440 years, precisely the span given at 1 Kgs 6:1 in the Greek Bible (LXX; MT, however, has 480 years, apparently assuming twelve priests during that span, patterned after the number of tribes of Israel?).
\nThe massive usage of this number in the Bible (92 instances), as opposed to the much smaller usage of units between 40 and 50, supports its symbolic and non-literal status: only six instances of 41, fourteen instances of 42, three instances of 43, five instances of 44, fifteen instances of 45, three instances of 46, three instances of 47, four instances of 48, and one instance of 49.<\/p>\n
Even if the census enumerations are historical, a few curiosities may be noted. The data is as follows:<\/p>\n
Observation 1: The tribal totals in chapter 1 have been \u201crounded off\u201d to the nearest \u201chundred\u201d (with the exception of Gad, where it is to the nearest \u201cfifty\u201d). This is understandable if one only needed a rough approximation, but why there should be an exception for Gad is enigmatic.<\/p>\n
Even if the census enumerations are historical, a few curiosities may be noted. The data is as follows:
\nNumbers chapter 1
\nNumbers chapter 26
\nReuben:
\n46,500
\n43,730
\nSimeon:
\n59,300
\n22,200
\nGad:
\n45,650
\n40,500
\nJudah:
\n74,600
\n76,500
\nIssachar:
\n54,400
\n64,300
\nZebulun:
\n57,400
\n60,500
\nEphraim:
\n40,500
\n32,500
\nManasseh:
\n32,200
\n52,700
\nBenjamin:
\n35,400
\n45,600
\nDan:
\n62,700
\n64,400
\nAsher:
\n41,500
\n53,400
\nNaphtali:
\n53,400
\n45,400
\nTotal: 603,550
\nTotal: 601,730<\/p>\n
Observation 2: Statistically, with 12 tribes, each number from 1\u201310 should be represented in the \u201chundreds\u201d category. Actually occurring are 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, and 7; missing are 0, 1, 8, and 9. Perhaps this is only a matter of chance (?).
\nObservation 3: The census taken at the far end of the 40-year period of desert wandering (ch. 26) shows considerable deviation (as one might expect) from the initial one (ch. 1). Nonetheless, the total for Naphtali in chapter 1 (53,400) is the same as that for Asher in chapter 26; the total for Ephraim in chapter 1 (40,500) is the same as that for Gad in chapter 26; the total for Manasseh in chapter 1 (32,200) and for Simeon in chapter 26 (22,200) is the same as for Issachar in chapter 1 (54,400). In chapter 1, the total for Dan (62,700) minus the total for Ephraim (40,500) again yields 22,200 (which is the total for Simeon in the census of chapter 26). The total for Manasseh in chapter 1 (32,200) is exactly 1\/2 of that for Dan in chapter 26 (64,400). Are all of these remarkable coincidences, or are certain fundamental building-blocks being manipulated?
\nObservation 4: In chapter 1, when the sums for Issachar (54,400) and Ephraim (40,500) are added, the total is 94,900. Curiously, when the sums for Manasseh (32,200) and Dan (62,700) are added, the total is likewise 94,900! Coincidence? Well, just possibly! Then, when the sums of Naphtali (53,400) and Asher (41,500) are added, again the total is 94,900! Coincidence is no longer believable. The biblical writers seem to be \u201cplaying\u201d with numbers for some reason that was significant to them and to their audience.
\nObservation 5: One of the tribal totals is striking and may provide a key to (at least some of the) others: 35,400 for Benjamin. Note that 354 is the number of days in a lunar year (whereas the solar year of the modern calendar has 365 days). In ancient Israel, calendric reckoning seems to have shifted from a pentecontadal system to a solar year to (occasionally) a lunar year (and especially in the Priestly writings).
\nWe might consider the sameness of this census-figure and the days of a lunar year to be a mere coincidence, save for something that occurs at Gen 5:23. There, amidst the pre-flood ancestors of Israel, each of whom lived for several hundred years, we are told that Enoch lived a total of 365 years (which is identical with the number of days in a solar year!). Whereupon we are told concerning Enoch that \u201che walked with God; then he was no more, because God took him\u201d (v. 24). This seems to mean that he was taken directly to the celestial sphere (i.e., heaven), in contrast to the usual Old Testament idea that the surviving remnants of all deceased persons descend to the Underworld, called Sheol (Gen 37:35; Job 3:1\u201319). [Mesopotamian Parallel]<\/p>\n
Mesopotamian Parallel
\nIn the biblical genealogy of the pre-flood generations, 1 Enoch is the seventh generation (Gen 5:18) and lives for a total of 365 years (Gen 5:18\u201323). Concerning him we then read the extraordinary remark that he \u201cwalked with God; then he was no more, because God took him\u201d (v. 24). In later tradition (1 Enoch), he returns to earth in order to report details of his heavenly tour and to disclose future events in human history.
\nAn astonishing parallel is to be found in the Mesopotamian account of the kings who ruled there before a great flood. The monarch in the seventh generation is named Enmenduranna (Weld-Blundell Text 444, col. I, lines 25\u201329). We learn elsewhere that he was summoned to heaven in order to be taught the lore of a particular priesthood. Following this, he is allowed to return to earth in order to institute that specific cult. Curiously, Enmenduranna served as king in the city of Sippar, a major cult of the solar deity! That deity\u2019s complete tour across the heavens covers a period of 365 years, the exact age assigned to his biblical correspondent, Enoch!
\nOn the significance assigned to the seventh generation in ancient genealogies, see J. M. Sasson, \u201cGeneration, Seventh,\u201d in IDBSup, ed. Keith Crim (Nashville: Abingdon Press, 1976), 354\u201356. For Enmenduranna and the King List, see Lloyd Bailey, Genesis, Creation, and Creationism (Mahwah and New York: Paulist Press, 1993), 59\u201364, 234\u201338. For I (Ethiopic) Enoch, see M. Rist, \u201cEnoch, Book of,\u201d in vol. 2 of IDB (E-J), ed. George Arthur Buttrick (Nashville: Abingdon Press, 1962), 103\u2013105.<\/p>\n
So, if a celestial (astronomical) observation concerning a solar year played a role in assigning a symbolic (non-literal?) age to one of the pre-flood ancestors in the Bible, then the door is opened to explore that possibility in the census of Numbers 1. This is an appealing possibility in view of the Deity\u2019s promise to the patriarch Abraham. After the latter has lamented that he remains childless, the Deity responds: \u201cLook toward heaven and count the stars, if you are able to count them.\u2026 So shall your descendants be\u201d (Gen 15:5). Perhaps with this same idea in mind, the ancestor of the twelve zodiacal tribe of Joseph uses astronomical imagery (the \u201csigns\u201d or constellations) to describe himself and his eleven brothers. He said to them, \u201cI have had another dream: the sun, the moon, and eleven stars were bowing down to me\u201d (Gen 37:9). [Celestial Phenomena]<\/p>\n
Celestial Phenomena
\nThat ancient Israel paid close attention to celestial phenomena, including the repetition of their appearance, is extolled in the apocryphal book, The Wisdom of Solomon (7:17\u201319):
\nFor it is he [God] who gave me unerring
\nknowledge of what exists,
\nto know the structure of the world
\nand the activity of the elements;
\nthe beginning and end and middle of times;
\nthe alternations of the solstices and
\nthe changes of the seasons,
\nthe cycles of the year and the
\nconstellations of the stars.<\/p>\n
The plausible time for Jews to have become well schooled in such arts would have been during the period of exile in Babylonia (sixth century BC), as alluded to in Daniel 1:4; see also Isaiah 47:12\u201313. This is just the time when the Priestly writers were finalizing the Pentateuch.
\nThe possible role of a solar year in the census in Numbers 26 is evident in the enumeration of the tribes of Gad (40,500) and Ephraim (32,500) for a total of 73,000 (= 730 \u00d7 100). This is the same as the duration of two solar years (365 \u00d7 2 = 730).
\nIt is M. Barnouin who has developed this fruitful approach for understanding the census data of the book of Numbers and related ciphers. That is: If the cycle of the sun and moon have played a role in the Priestly writer\u2019s chronology, what about those of the five planets that were know at the time? They also go through a regular cycle in their position with respect to the earth and sun, called their synodic period. [Calculating the Synodic Period of Mars]<\/p>\n
Calculating the Synodic Period of Mars
\nThe Synodic Period of a planet is the average time between successive oppositions of sun, earth, and the planet. Such an opposition, when viewed from above, might look like this:
\nIn this configuration, Mars is exactly on the opposite side of the earth from the sun, and Mars would be at its highest point in the sky about midnight. Since both the earth and Mars are in motion in their orbits around the sun, Mars will not be at the same exact location at the same time on the following night. So, how long will it be before Mars returns to that exact location at midnight? Careful observation by Babylonians reckoned it to be after 780 days. The modern figure is 779.9 days.
\nIn terms of modern knowledge of celestial geometry and movement, we can visualize the Synodic Period of Mars as follows.
\n1. The earth revolves around the sun (360 degrees, a period of one year) in 365.26 days. In doing so, it travels an angular distance of .9855994 degrees\/day (360 divided by 365.26).
\n2. Mars, traveling a greater distance around sun, revolves (360 degrees) in 686.98 (earth) days. In doing so, it travels an angular distance of .5240327 degrees\/day.
\nOne year later than the configuration above, where will these planets be in relation to each other? Earth will have returned to the same location (360 degrees), while Mars has traveled 191.40818 degrees (and lag the earth by 168.59182 degrees). Thus:
\nHow long will it be before the earth catches Mars and they are \u201caligned\u201d as before (but not at the same point in their orbits)? The mathematical formula for calculation is:
\nwhere Sm=the Synodic period of Mars; Re=the time it takes for earth to revolve around the sun (its sidereal year); and Rm=the time it takes for Mars to revolve around the sun (its sidereal year). The calculated result is 780.03 days. The ancient projection can be tested as follows. How far has the earth revolved in 780 day? Result: 768 degrees (780 X 985), which is 48 degrees beyond the starting point shown in the first diagram above (i.e., 48 = 780 \u2212 [360 \u00d7 2]). Meanwhile, how far has Mars moved in those 780 days? Result: 408 degrees (780 \u00d7 .524), which is 48 degrees beyond the starting point (i.e., 48 = 408 \u2212 360). So, the alignment again takes place, thus:<\/p>\n
Specifically, the synodic periods of the five planets then known are as follows: Mercury, 116 days; Venus, 584 days; Mars, 780 days; Jupiter, 399 days; and Saturn, 378 days. When these periods are compared with the census enumerations, some of the interesting results are as follows:
\n1. Twice the synodic period of Saturn is 756. This is the same as the sum of the census enumerations for Simeon and Asher ([222 + 534] \u00d7 1,000) in chapter 26.
\n2. The sum of the synodic periods of Mercury and Mars is 896. This is the same as the sum of the census enumerations for Manasseh and Zebulun ([322 + 574] \u00d7 1000) in chapter 1.
\n3. As stated above, three sets of census data in chapter 1 each yields the same total, 949: Issachar (544) + Ephraim (405); Manasseh (322) + Dan (627); Naphtali (534) + Asher (415). This is identical with a solar year (365) + the synodic period of Venus (584).
\n4. In chapter 1, the total for Zebulun (574) and Simeon (593) is 1167, which is the sum of the synodic periods of Jupiter (399), Saturn (378), and 1\/2 that of Mars (390).<\/p>\n
Gematria?<\/p>\n
An interesting possibility of mathematical exercise in Numbers 1 arises when one considers the census total in chapter 1: 603, 550. Did that number originate from adding the prior individual tribal figures, or instead, was the total the first datum to be derived in the exercise, in which case the individual figures would have then been contrived to \u201cfit\u201d?
\nThe latter option arises from an application of gematria. (For this technique of deriving a coded meaning from texts, see the Introduction to the commentary on Leviticus.) Thereby, each letter of the Hebrew alphabet, sequentially, is assigned a numerical value and the total of a given word is assumed to have a deliberately intended (divinely revealed) significance. Thus, if one wants to know how many individual guidelines there are in torah, one derives the answer from the gematria of that word: 613.
\nJust so, one might use the same procedure if one wanted to know how many soldiers were available for service as Israel set out from the sacred mountain to face opposition from the military of Canaanite city-states. The answer would be: \u201cThe sons of Israel, each (adult) male.\u201d In Hebrew that would be: b\u0115n\u00ea-yisr\u0101\u2019\u0113l, kol- r\u014d\u02be\u0161. Assignment of numerical value to the consonants produces the following results:<\/p>\n
b (=2) + n (=50) + y (=10) \/\/y (=10) + s (=300) + r (=200) +\u02be (=1) + l (=30). Total: 603.
\nk (=20) + l (=30) + r (=200) + \u02be (=1) + \u0161 (=300). Total: 551.<\/p>\n
Combining the two in numerical sequence (rather than the more usual addition of the two) yields 603,551. \u201cRounding\u201d this figure to the nearest \u201chundred\u201d (as has obviously been done with the individual tribal totals) produces the total of the census at Num 1:46, namely 603,550. This explains very nicely why the individual figure for the tribe of Gad alone has been \u201crounded\u201d to fifty, whereas all of the others are \u201crounded\u201d to the nearest hundred. In short, the tribal figures seemingly were composed with a predetermined total in view!
\nBarnouin (see above), by contrast, thinks that the total, as the earlier of the calculations, was derived from astronomical observation: twice the total of all of the planetary synodic periods (2 \u00d7 2257) + twice the period of Saturn (2 \u00d7 378) + two solar years (2 \u00d7 365) = 6,000. The remaining 3,350 he derives from congregations contributions in Exod 38:24\u201331.
\nIt is also interesting to note that a previous enumeration, taken on the way from Egypt to the sacred mountain, puts the total of males (\u201cbesides children\u201d) at an even 600,000 (Exod 12:37). Does this involved a standard calculation in base-60: 60 \u00d7 10,000 (the biblical \u201cmyriad\u201d), i.e., the fundamental\/perfect number, the thousand times over? Does the extension of this to 603,550 (by adding 3,550) in Numbers 1 somehow involve 355 as the number of days in an extended lunar year?<\/p>\n
Conclusion<\/p>\n
What theological message did the Priestly writers wish to convey in this display of the inter-relation of census and celestial movement? With an eye toward God\u2019s promise to the patriarch Abraham that his descendants will be as numerous as the stars, the Priestly writer seeks to express divine fulfillment, control, guidance, eternality, and perfection. God has arranged both the skies above and Israel below \u201cby measure and number and weight\u201d (Wis 11:20). \u201cTo use numbers that measured celestial movements admirably conveyed the sacred description of the tribes of the \u2018children of Israel\u2019 who had become \u2018Yahweh\u2019s armies\u2019 (Exod 12:37, 41) marching around his Presence in the wilderness.\u201d
\nWhether the extended ages in the census reflect actual population figures or whether they are symbolic mathematical calculations, their purpose is the same. They are expressions of the fulfillment of the promise to Abraham. God\u2019s sovereignty, God\u2019s fidelity to promise, have been abundantly demonstrated by the events of history (regardless of numerical particulars). This would be a much needed and welcomed message to an audience in the exilic and early post-exilic age, if that be the time of the final editing of the Priestly writings. If symbolic (rather than factual) figures help to make that point, then truth is indeed being expressed.<\/p>\n
CONNECTIONS<\/p>\n
The chronology of the Priestly writer(s), as reflected in the book of Numbers, is anchored in the astonishing event of the exodus from Egypt (1:1). During whatever travails may befall the community in its subsequent journey, this is the event that is to be kept in mind for purposes of establishing and maintaining its identity. The memory of what God has done for Israel forms the matrix into which the motivation for obedience and action is ever thereafter to be embedded. This is clearly stated at the beginning of the covenant ceremony in Exodus: \u201cI am the LORD your God, who brought you out of the land of Egypt, out of the house of slavery; (therefore) you shall have no other gods before me\u201d (20:2\u20133).
\nJust so, the calendar of the church is anchored in its formative event, the story of Jesus\u2019 appearance in human history. The liturgical year thus begins with the anticipation of his birth (the season of Advent). It might assist modern Christians in maintaining their identity, keep them more ethically on-track, if they learned to reckon time by the liturgical calendar as well as by the secular one.
\nSt. Paul constantly reminds his readers to be motivated in all of their actions by the memory of what God in Jesus has done for them (e.g., Phil 2:1\u201311; Rom 14:15).
\nIn view of the mortal threat to biblical Israel\u2019s future that will be posed by the inhabitants of \u201cthe promised land,\u201d a threat well actualized by future conflicts (13:31\u201333; 14:39\u201345; 22:1\u20136; 31:1\u201312), it was deemed prudent (if not in accordance with God\u2019s will) to take steps toward military preparation. The role of the people of God is not to be one of pessimism or surrender to the threats posed by enemies without. The modern concept of a \u201cjust war\u201d is well grounded in the theology of both Testaments and in Christian tradition (contrary to the pacifist stance of some theologians in the present).<\/p>\n
MARCHING ORDERS: GEOGRAPHICAL ARRANGEMENT OF THE CAMP<\/p>\n
Numbers 2:1\u201334<\/p>\n
The previous chapter enumerated the fighting-age males, tribe by tribe. Now, we have a geographical description of encampment near the sacred mountain (Sinai\/Horeb), tribe by tribe, naming the leader and repeating the enrollment total of each.
\nThe chapter may be divided into the following sections:<\/p>\n
1. Introductory instructions (vv. 1\u20132);
\n2. Details of tribal arrangement (vv. 3\u201331);
\n3. Summary of enrollment; exclusion of the Levites (vv. 32\u201334).<\/p>\n
The chapter divisions in NRSV are solidly in conformity with the formal clues provided by MT (= Masoretic Text, the present Hebrew Bible). That a new unit of material clearly begins at v. 1 a is indicated by the formal opening, \u201cThe LORD spoke to Moses and Aaron.\u2026\u201d The conclusion is indicated by the traditional formula of closing, \u201cThe Israelites did just as the LORD had commanded \u2026\u201d (v. 34).<\/p>\n
COMMENTARY<\/p>\n
Now that account has been taken of available military might (ch. 1), the Israelite encampment has reason to be confident of success. There remains, however, the thorny matter of proper organization of the multiple tribes and teeming masses so that chaos will not result. For example, during encampment for the night, are tribal units to settle intact in a given order or may they do so at random? Who is to lead the advance? How should they protect the holy shrine from improper encroachment, as it is surrounded by the masses and surging animals? [Comment on Details of Numbers 2]<\/p>\n
Comment on Details of Numbers 2
\nV. 2: \u201cregiments.\u201d NEB and NJV, \u201cstandard.\u201d Although the Hebrew noun used here (degel, related to the verb \u201cto gaze at\u201d) ordinarily means something like \u201cstandard,\u201d post-exilic texts from outside the Bible use it to describe a military unit. For example, Aramaic texts from Elephantine Island in Egypt use it to describe units of the Persian army. (See B. A. Levine, Numbers 1\u201320 [AB 4; New York: Doubleday, 1993], 147\u201348.) Hence the reading of NRSV is to be preferred. Is this an important clue as to the final date of traditions in P?
\nRegardless of the meaning of the word degel (NRSV, \u201cregiments\u201d), military units in the ancient Near East did arrange themselves under flags by units. For example, when the Pharaoh Rameses II fought against the Hittites at the Battle of Kadesh (1288 BC), his four divisions (named for the deities Amun, Ra, Ptah,?) fought under divine standards. The sectarians at Qumran (preservers of the Dead Sea Scrolls) envisioned a final battle against the forces of evil (primarily Rome) in which various of their troops would have inscribed battle standards. The great standard at the head of the entire army would read, \u201cPeople of God.\u201d (See the so-called War Scroll, 1QM, iii.12\u2013iv.2.)
\nV. 2: \u201censigns.\u201d NEB, \u201cemblems\u201d; NJV, \u201cbanners.\u201d
\nVv. 3, 5, 7. etc. The names of tribal leaders are the same as those who conducted the census in chapter 1. Things have shifted a bit, however, by time of chapters 13 and 34.
\nVv. 4, 6, 8, etc. Enumeration of the tribes (with subtotals for each side of the sanctuary) totals the same as the census in chapter 1 (v. 32).
\nV. 18: \u201cOn the west side.\u201d The Hebrew text has, literally, \u201ctoward the sea,\u201d i.e., the Mediterranean (indeed the western boundary of Canaan, but not exactly so from the Sinai Peninsula where the story is set). Note a similar designation for \u201cthe east\u201d in v. 3, \u201ctoward the sunrise.\u201d
\nImage Not Available
\ndue to lack of digital rights. Please view the published commentary or perform an Internet search using the credit below.
\nThe Egyptian Army on the March
\nRelief from the main temple of Ramses III, north wall of the outside temple walls. 20th dynasty. Temple of Ramses III, Medinet Habu, Thebes, Egypt.
\n(Photo credit: Erich Lessing \/ Art Resource, NY)<\/p>\n
The favored position was apparently to the east, heading the movement toward Canaan. The three tribes on this side then led the advancement when the camp began its march each day: Judah, followed by Issachar and Zebulun. The others then followed in a predetermined order: east encampment, then the Levites with the portable sanctuary, the south encampment, the west encampment, and finally the north encampment. The Levitical groups, bearing the dismantled sanctuary, are interspersed (10:11\u201328) and thereby the sacred structure is centrally located while the group is in motion (just as it was during encampment). [Shape of the Encampment]<\/p>\n
Shape of the Encampment
\nThe shape of the total encampment, essentially a square, follows an otherwise known military arrangement. For example, when the great Egyptian Pharaoh Rameses II campaigned against the Hittites in Asia Minor (13th century BC), he settled his four divisions in just this fashion (whereas the Assyrians often encamped in a circular formation. The same model is used by the writer of the New Testament book of Revelation in a description of the heavenly Jerusalem (21:9\u201314).<\/p>\n
Is there a principle behind the particulars of arrangement? That Leah-tribes should lead the procession may result from the fact that Leah was Jacob\u2019s first wife (Gen 28). However, there were six such sons, and geographical arrangement allows only three tribes per side of the camp. When the east side is taken, priority apparently then shifts to the south side (see the line of march at 10:18\u201320). Since the tribe of Levi has a special function and has been drawn inside the outer ring of tribes in order to guard the sanctuary, there are not enough remaining Leah-tribes to fill the southern quota. The remaining spot is filled by the tribe of Gad, he being the firstborn of Leah\u2019s maid, Zilpah (Gen 30:9\u201310). A geographical factor from the later period of settlement in Canaan may be at work as well: Gad and Reuben share a common border. In general, descendants of Jacob\u2019s wives form at the ends (advance and rear guard), with those of the maids on the flanks.
\nWithin the four-fold directional organization there seems to be a hierarchy: mention is made of the \u201cregimental encampment of Judah \u2026 of Reuben \u2026 of Ephraim \u2026 of Dan\u201d (vv. 3, 10, 18, 25). These priorities seem to be partly genealogical and partly political.
\n1. Genealogical. Reuben was Jacob\u2019s first-born son (Gen 29:31\u201332) and Dan is the first-born of Rachel\u2019s maid (Gen 30:6).
\n2. Political. Although Manasseh was Joseph\u2019s first-born, it was his brother Ephraim whom Jacob blessed out-of-turn (Gen 48:8\u201320). This likely reflects the reality that Ephraim became the predominant tribe of the ten that made up the Northern Kingdom during the monarchical period. This dominance is reflected, among other ways, in the fact that the prophet Hosea designates that entire kingdom as \u201cEphraim\u201d (4:17; 5:3, 5, 11; etc.; see also Isa 7:9).<\/p>\n
An Indication of Date?<\/p>\n
Especially interesting is the priority given to Judah on the east side, although Judah was only the fourth-born son of Jacob (Gen 29:35). This likely reflects the fact that Judah became, de facto, the Southern Kingdom during the monarchical period, being as well the tribe from which the royal line of King David sprang (1 Sam 16). Following the return from exile in Babylonia (sixth century BC), Judah became the focus of rebuilding the religious community, and this may be the reality that is reflected in the military leadership of the encampment: Judah foremost! This may lend support to an exilic or early post-exilic date for the finalization of the Priestly writings.<\/p>\n
CONNECTIONS<\/p>\n
Verse 2 captures the spirit of the chapter nicely when it states that all of the groups are to encamp \u201cfacing the tent of meeting.\u201d This orientation (rather than facing outward toward potential threat) was intended to keep the community \u201ccentered\u201d on its foundation, guidelines, and goals. It is an inward focus that intends to energize an outward mission. A modern interpreter has expressed the point as follows:<\/p>\n
The Priestly writers provide a continuing paradigm for Christian community. Identity without mission is self-indulgent religion. Mission without identity is not religion at all. Healthy Christian community requires a constant interrelationship of the two.<\/p>\n
There are religious communities in the present that organize themselves architecturally in this same way, e.g., Mount Olive College (an Original Free Will Baptist institution) in Mount Olive, North Carolina. All building \u201cface\u201d the central chapel and thus all entrances to the campus encounter the rear of buildings. This serves as a constant reminder that this college is not a secular institution.<\/p>\n
\u201cTHE CHAPLAINCY\u201d: PRIESTLY AND LEVITICAL DUTIES<\/p>\n
Numbers 3:1\u20134:49<\/p>\n
An understandable focus upon enumeration and organization, characteristic of the book of Numbers, now continues. The tribe of Levi, having been exempted from the military census of chapter 1, now become the focus of attention (but with limitations because of prerogatives reserved for the descendants of Aaron). Furthermore, the fact that they have been arranged as a buffer around the sanctuary (ch. 2) signals that their functions (briefly mentioned there) must now be specified in detail.
\nThe prior extensive instructions in the book of Leviticus dealt only with the duties of a small fraction of the Levites: those descended from Levi\u2019s great-grandson, Aaron. Those duties pertained primarily to cultic activity within the sanctuary itself when it was at rest. Now the issue becomes that of the function and duties of the larger Levitical group, especially when the camp is in motion.
\nThe material in these two chapters may be viewed according to the following sections:<\/p>\n
1. Aaron\u2019s priestly genealogy (3:1\u20134);
\n2. Enumeration of the tribe of Levi for redemptive function (3:5\u201351);
\n3. Enumeration for purposes of physical duty (4:1\u201345);
\n4. Concluding summary (4:46\u201349).<\/p>\n
The presence of new material is signaled by the formal opening, \u201cThis is the lineage of \u2026\u201d (3:1). This is exactly the wording that the Priestly writer has used elsewhere for a new story (e.g., Gen 5:1; 11:27; 25:19; 37:2).
\nThereafter, one finds a loosely joined series of literary units, topically similar, that stretches through chapter 4. The units often begin with the traditional \u201cThen the LORD spoke to Moses \u2026\u201d and conclude with the report that \u201cthus (these things happened) as the LORD commanded Moses\u201d (4:49). At the latter point there is a transition. Rather than instructions to Moses and Aaron concerning Levitical duties, now it is the congregation that is addressed: \u201cCommand the Israelites \u2026\u201d (5:1). The subject matter now becomes that of dealing with ritual impurities.<\/p>\n
COMMENTARY<\/p>\n
Genealogy and Priestly Prerogative, 3:1\u20134<\/p>\n
Since there are several Levitical groups, we should not be surprised to find the development of a hierarchy. Whereas in Israel\u2019s early literature (JE), there was no tribal\/genealogical restriction upon whom may serve as a priest, the book of Deuteronomy restricts such service to the tribe of Levi and then the Priestly writer(s) limits it to those Levites who descend from Aaron. As a consequence, the masses of non-Aaronide Levites become mere assistants to \u201cAaron the priest\u201d (3:6). This latest stratification must now be emphasized and its duties specified for the duration of the march. An unsuccessful challenge by the disenfranchised non-Aaronide Levites to this final claim of priestly stratification will be reported in chapter 16. [Comment on Details of Numbers 3\u20134]<\/p>\n
Comment on Details of Numbers 3\u20134
\n3:39, \u201ctwenty-two thousand.\u201d This represents the total for the three groups of Levites: Gershonites, 7,500; Kohathites, 8,600; and Merarites, 6,200; for a grand total of 22,300! Is the total figure possibly \u201crounded off\u201d to 22,000? Another resolution of the discrepancy presents itself, however. The total for the Kohathites is 8,600 in MT (3:28), but some manuscripts of LXX (the Lucianic recension thereof) read 8,300. Although the recension may have been intended to bring the grand total into line with v. 39, an interesting possibility of textual corruption (scribal error) may have taken place. In Hebrew, the word \u201csix\u201d is \u0161\u0113\u0161 (sh-sh), whereas the word \u201cthree\u201d is \u0161\u0101l\u014d\u0161 (sh-l-sh). So, if we assume that the Hebrew original from which LXX was translated read \u201cthree\u201d while a scribe in the MT tradition carelessly dropped a consonant (resulting in \u201csix\u201d), then the sum of the three groups would equal the total (i.e., 7,500 + 8,300 + 6,200 = 22,000). This is precisely what NAB and JB presumed to have happened (reading 8,300 at 3:28)! (See Preliminary and Interim Report on the Hebrew Old Testament Text Project, volume to the Pentateuch [London: United Bible Societies, 1973], 213.)
\n4:5, \u201c\u2026 cover the ark.\u201d For the construction of this most sacred object, see the commissioning at Exod 25:10\u201322 and the actual construction at 37:1\u20139. 4:6, \u201cfine leather\u201d (NRSV note: \u201cmeaning uncertain\u201d). NEB: \u201cporpoise-hide\u201d; JPS: \u201cdolphin skin\u201d; NAB: \u201ctahash skin\u201d (thus merely transliterating the mysterious Hebrew word). Although dolphin skin was sometimes used with cultic implements in the ancient Near East, it is hard to imagine its availability in the Sinai Desert! This likely is a backward projection of its use in the Jerusalem temple.
\nThere is some evidence that the word in question (ta\u1e25ash) is of foreign origin (from Hurrian), designating leather that has been stained with a yellowish-red pigment.
\n4:6, \u201c\u2026 a cloth all blue.\u201d This dye (thought to be purple-blue or violet) was extracted from a gland of the murex snail. Large mounds of the shells of these sea creatures have been found around the Mediterranean (one just south of the Phoenician city of Sidon was several yards in height). Slight variations in color could be extracted from related species. Indeed, so well known was Phoenicia for producing this dye that it derived its name from it: the Greeks derived their designation for the country from their word for \u201cred purple\u201d (phoinx).
\n4:16, Eleazar. As the eldest of Aaron\u2019s two surviving sons (Exod 6:23; note Lev 10 where the two older ones lose their lives), he is heir to the high priestly office. The youngest son was named Ithamar, concerning whom scant mention is otherwise made in Scripture. See, however, his supervisory role in v. 28.<\/p>\n
Levitical Enumeration for their Redemptive Function, 3:5\u201351<\/p>\n
The male descendants of Levi are given at Exod 6:16\u201325 and repeated at Num 3:17, beginning with the first generation: sons named Gershon, Kohath, and Merari. (See the commentary on ch. 16.) The clans of these three are to form (on three sides) the inner circle of protection for the portable sanctuary: Gershon on the west (Num 3:21\u201326), Kohath on the south (vv. 27\u201332), and Merari on the north (vv. 33\u201337).
\nThere remains the guardianship of the sanctuary at the front (east). That small contingent is to be taken from a specific section of the descendants of Kohath (he of the south side), namely from the descendants of his grandsons (through son Amram) named Moses and Aaron (vv. 38\u201339).
\nWhile brief specific duties were assigned to the ordinary Levites during the daily march and encampment (specifically, porterage of the sanctuary and its contents, with details to come in ch. 4), no such external duties are here assigned to the Aaronides: their service is to be conduct of \u201cthe rites within the sanctuary\u201d (3:38) as outlined in the book of Leviticus. In chapter 4, however, their duties for the inner contents (\u201cthe most holy things\u201d) of the sanctuary will be given (vv. 5\u201315).
\nThe reading of NRSV at 3:10 (\u201cmake a register of Aaron and his descendants \u2026\u201d) poses an interesting question: If the exclusive Aaronide priests are to be \u201cregistered\u201d (i.e., enumerated?) why is there no report of the total? NEB has, instead, \u201cTo Aaron and his line you shall commit the priestly office\u201d (similarly, NAB, JPS, and JB). Although the Hebrew verb used here (p\u0101qad) ordinarily does mean \u201cenumerate\u201d (as at 1:2, 3, \u201cTake a census \u2026 enroll them\u201d; 3:15), the context here suggests the meaning \u201ccommission\u201d (so AB and the versions just cited). That is: the Aaronides are to be commissioned to their tasks for the journey, just as are the various factions of (other) Levites in the verses that follow: 25\u201326, 31, 36\u201337.
\nThe number of the Aaronide priest at the front (east) is inconsequential and thus is not called for. Of Aaron\u2019s four sons, two died as the result of cultic impropriety (3:1\u20134; see Lev 10:1\u20132) and the eldest of the remaining two (Eleazar, who became Aaron\u2019s successor) has a son (Exod 6:25). (The genealogy thereafter, for both of Aaron\u2019s surviving sons, is recited at 1 Chr 24.) Moses has two sons (Exod 2:15\u201322; 18:1\u20136; see also 1 Chr 23:15\u201317).
\nAn enumeration is then ordered for Levitical clans on their three sides, to include males from the age of one month upward (3:14\u201316). Why a concern with that young age? In any case, this is in contrast to the census of the other tribes, focusing as it did upon males aged twenty and upward (1:3). The purpose of the Levitical census was not one of ascertaining military resources or even of availability for cultic service, since that began either at age twenty-five (8:24) or thirty (4:3). While military service must begin at age twenty (1:3), a Levite was not considered ready for cultic service until a decade later. Apparently, extensive training was required prior to the assumption of this critical task.
\nQualification for this Levitical census was not one of ability but a matter of birth; mere hereditary existence is qualification for an astonishing function: the Levites are to be \u201csubstitutes for all the firstborn \u2026 among the Israelites \u2026 for all the firstborn are mine.\u201d A strange analogy is made (by the Deity) between accepting the lives (i.e., through their death) of all the firstborn of the Egyptians (by hand of the death-angel) and accepting the lives of all the firstborn of Israel (through consecration to cultic duty). Deity has the right to do such things: \u201cI am the LORD\u201d (3:12\u201313; see also 8:14\u201318 where this is clarified somewhat).
\nSuch consecration may originally have reflected the role of the firstborn son to serve as the family\u2019s cultic official in matters of caring for the deceased ancestors (remembering the deceased in prayers and offering food and drink at the family tomb). Normative Yahwism, however, brought the \u201ccult of the dead\u201d (ancestor worship) to an end. (See the commentary on Leviticus at chapters 18\u201320 and 21.) The firstborn in Israel were later released from all duties of special dedication when an inherited professional priestly class arose, and then (say the Priestly writers) God accepted the entire tribe of Levi as a replacement for the firstborn.
\nIf a Levite is to serve as a substitute for a firstborn Israelite, then the number of the latter must be determined. It turns out that the 22,000 Levites (3:39) fall short of the number of firstborn in the general population (22,273 at 3:43). How is the Deity to be compensated for the loss of the service of that number of persons? By monetary compensation in the amount of five shekels each (v. 47) whereby the sanctuary accumulates funds for operation. [Shekel]<\/p>\n
Shekel
\nInitially, in the ancient Near East, commerce was conducted by means of barter (exchange of goods and services for others of similar value). Thus King Solomon of Israel exchanged wheat and olive oil with King Hiram of Tyre for timber of cedar wood with which to construct the temple in Jerusalem (1 Kgs 5:10\u201311). A common means of payment was livestock, reflected in the fact that the Latin word for money (pecunia) is derived from the word for cattle (pecus).
\nAn additional means of exchange began with the ability to smelt metals such as gold, silver, copper, tin, and ultimately iron. These useful products had the virtue of being easily transportable in the form of lumps, ingots, and jewelry. Thus did Abimelek pay Abraham \u201ca thousand pieces of silver\u201d (Gen 20:16). Standard weights then developed in multiples of 60:1 talent = 60 minas = 3600 shekels. The monetary value, of course, depended upon the medium of each weight: gold being more valuable than silver, and so on.
\nCasting precious metals in the form of coins apparently began in Asia Minor around the beginning of the 6th century BC, and then became the standard means of payment throughout the region. Differing regional standards of weight and value were common until Alexander the Great (4th century) established a single standard throughout his empire.
\nIt is near the end of the 4th century when Jewish authorities first struck coins, under the administration of the Persian Empire.
\nIn the ancient world no less than the modern, systems and standards of measure differed. An ancient Sumerian text, for example, complains of those \u201cwho substituted a small weight for a large weight, who substituted a small measure for a large measure.\u201d Actual physical weights from ancient Israel, although inscribed with identical indicators, are not exactly the same. In any case, the Bible speaks of both a royal standard (e.g., 2 Sam 14:26) and \u201ca skekel of the sanctuary\u201d (3:47). For details, see the commentary on Leviticus at chapter 19 (\u201cDirective Fourteen\u201d) and 27:3, with the bibliography cited there.
\nSilver shekel from the first century AD
\nImage of a silver shekel from Judaea of about the 4th year of Simon the Hasmonaean (c. 70 AD\u2014the year of the Jewish revolt).
\nIt says \u201cyear 4, Jerusalem-the-Holy\u201d, and weighs 220 grms. It depicts a chalice and a \u201clily\u201d.
\n(Credit: Wikimedia Commons, PD-US)<\/p>\n
Sanctuary
\nArtist\u2019s reconstruction of the appearance of the sanctuary (tabernacle) and its enclosure that are to be transported through the wilderness. The courtyard contains the sacrificial altar and behind it the \u201cbasin of bronze\u201d (Exod 38:8).<\/p>\n
(Illustration: Barclay Burns)<\/p>\n
The form (silver) and amount of such compensation (ever enlarging with each passing generation), reflects the later realities of life in the land of Canaan and the presence of the temple in Jerusalem. In short, it likely is a projection of the financial realities of the monarchical period that has been placed backward into that of the wilderness wandering.<\/p>\n
Levitical Enumeration for Purposes of Physical Duty, 4:1\u201349<\/p>\n
The previous Levitical census (ch. 3) concerned the redemptive function of the tribe of Levi and thus it included all males from the age of one month upward. Such data, however, provided no estimate of ability to carry out the physical duties of protecting and transporting the sanctuary through the wilderness. Furthermore, such duties as were mentioned in chapter 3 were presented too briefly to be useful. An additional enumeration must now be taken (for ages 30 to 50, repeated for each of the three divisions), with an expanded list of obligations.
\nIn the ancient Near East, colors were not always chosen for their subjective aesthetic appeal. Often they had a symbolic significance, sometimes in connection with the cults of particular deities (just as did certain numbers and geometric shapes). Among the Assyrians, for example, black was often associated with the cult of the planet Saturn (the god Ninurta), red with the planet Mars (the god Nergal), and blue with the planet Venus (the goddess Ishtar). Pyramid-like temple towers in Babylonia could have a particular color of glazed brick assigned to each level, thus symbolizing multiple divine cults.
\nThere is some evidence that in Israel\u2019s pre-Yahwistic environment the color blue was thought to offer protection against demons. The revered Church Father Theodoret of Cyrus (fifth century AD) was of the following opinion:<\/p>\n
Why did God command that some of the sacred vessels should be covered with blue veils and others with purple veils? Only the veils of the more precious vessels were of blue. The color suggests the sky. For this reason God commanded the objects behind the veil to be covered with blue tapestry but the objects outside it with purple and colors like it.<\/p>\n
Attention is given to each of the three Levitical divisions (descended from the sons of Levi), Kohathites (duties at vv. 1\u201320, enumeration at vv. 34\u201337), Gershomites (vv. 21\u201328, 38\u201341), and Merarites (vv. 29\u201333, 42\u201345). Nonetheless, perhaps the crucial duties are outlined in vv. 5\u201316: those of the Aaronide faction of the Kohathites. This is the group that has emerged as the \u201chigh\u201d priestly line, and whose exclusive privileges and duties are outlined in the book of Leviticus. It is they alone who can prepare, package, and color-code the \u201cmost sacred things\u201d that reside in the interior of the sanctuary. Once they are covered, they may be carried by the (rest of the) Kohathites. Should the latter actually touch them, however, \u201cthey will die\u201d (4:15).
\nSince even the Aaronic priests could enter the innermost sanctuary wherein resided the ark only once per year (Lev 16:2), daily dismantlement during the wilderness journey likely involved holding the curtains before their faces until the ark was safely covered by them. This means that dismantlement of the sanctuary began with this most sacred object. The ark, having the highest degree of sacredness, was shielded by a three-fold wrapping (as was \u201cthe table of the bread of the Presence\u201d), whereas the remaining ones of less sacredness had two.
\nThe enumerated sum for the qualifying Levites is 8,580 (v. 48), a far more reasonable sum than that for the other eleven tribes. (Had the figures for the other eleven tribes been comparable, the total would have been around 94,380, rather than the 603, 550 that was reported at 1:46). It is also in good agreement with the data from the census in chapter 3. No discernable mathematical \u201cexercise\u201d appears to have been at work here.
\nNote that the order of enumeration has shifted from that of the first census of the Levites (chapter 3), with the result that the Kohathites are now given priority of mention. This probably reflects the genealogical location of the Aaronides in their line, plus the fact that their duties involve the \u201cmost sacred\u201d objects with which carelessness could cost them their lives.<\/p>\n
CONNECTIONS<\/p>\n
Sanctity of the Church<\/p>\n
The function of Israel\u2019s priests was, in part, to buffer the \u201choly\u201d from the onslaught of the surrounding \u201csecular.\u201d This is a clear reminder to readers in the present that the moral and ritual realms are, while related, not always identical. Instruction by a pastor, therefore, should consist of more than ethical guidelines and example. At the same time, when there is no sense of ritual propriety, the deterioration of morals is likely to follow. A sense of the sacredness of places, things, persons, and seasons is an essential part of religion. A laudatory combination of these two realms is evident in the description of Noah: \u201cNoah was a righteous man, blameless in his generation\u201d (Gen 6:7). The former term is moral, the latter cultic.
\nThe prophet Ezekiel, acutely aware of the devastating effects of the loss of a sense of the sacred, outlined an extensive program for restoring such awareness among the returning exiles from Babylonia (sixth century BC). Among his suggestions were the following innovative restrictions: On whom may lead a service of worship (44:1\u201316); who may enter the sanctuary (44:9); and how closely secular structures may encroach upon the location of the sanctuary (45:1\u20138; 48:8\u201322). [Sanctity]<\/p>\n
Sanctity
\nWith a proper sense of sanctity in mind, the legislature of the State of North Carolina has, from time to time, passed enactments forbidding certain activities (e.g., discharge of firearms, gambling, consumption of alcoholic beverage) to take place within a specified distance of a church during hours of worship.<\/p>\n
In the present, children who have not been taught the sanctity of a church building will do such things as the following, all of which I have observed during a service of worship: running up and down the aisles and chattering, sailing paper airplanes from the balcony, sticking chewing gum under pews, drawing on the pages of hymnals, and punching each-other in the ribs and giggling. Sometimes the parents observed such behavior and tolerated it, showing their own lack of sensitivity to the holiness of the place (after all, \u201cIt\u2019s just a building!\u201d).
\nAre pastors protecting sanctity of the place from which the holy Word is proclaimed when they allow the pulpit to be moved to accommodate a non-worship situation? Do pastors diminish in the mind of their congregation a sense of sacredness when they lower the bar of behavior in order to \u201cfit in\u201d with those around them?
\nInsensitivity to (even contempt for) the sacred in our society has reached such a low level that a media organization sent a couple, complete with photographer, to have sexual intercourse in the sanctuary of a famous cathedral.<\/p>\n
New Testament Connections<\/p>\n
Texts from Numbers 1\u20134 are not quoted in the New Testament. Nonetheless, it is possible to cite parallels between the two canonical sections, and there may be allusions to this section of Numbers in the book of Revelation.
\nCensus data was often required within ancient Israel for such purposes as economics resources (Exod 30:13\u201316), military power (Num 1; 26; 2 Sam 24), and available labor force (Num 3). The requests were internal, by Israel\u2019s own leadership, for purposes of security and progress.
\nIn the New Testament period, by contrast, such data was imposed from without by the necessary for maintaining the Roman Empire. One such occasion is mentioned in passing at Acts 5:37. The other plays a central role in Christianity: when Caesar Augustus required that the entire Roman Empire (\u201call the world\u201d) should be \u201cregistered.\u201d Consequently, Joseph and Mary of the city of Nazareth, journeyed to their tribal ancestral home in Bethlehem of Judea where Jesus was subsequently born (Luke 2:1\u20137).
\nSuch seemingly tedious materials as census and genealogy are not entirely limited to the Old Testament, however. The gospels of Matthew (ch. 1) and Luke (ch. 3) likewise contain sustained genealogical materials. The former, in a structure that would have made the Priestly writer proud, is arranged in three groups of fourteen (7 \u00d7 2) generations each (see Matt 3:17).
\nFascination with (and instruction by means of) symbolic numbers, perhaps evident in Numbers 1, continues in the New Testament. Mention has been made (just above) to the genealogy in Matthew where the generations from Abraham to Jesus are made to conform to multiples of the sacred number \u201cseven\u201d (in violation of the actual genealogy in 1 Chr 1:34; 2:1\u201315; 3:10\u201316; 3:17\u201319, from which three generations have been deleted by Matthew).
\nThe famous New Testament cases, however, involving both sacred numbers \u201cseven\u201d and \u201csixty\u201d plus a millennium (1,000 years) are in the book of Revelation. There, we read of seven churches (1:4), seven \u201cspirits\u201d in God\u2019s presence (1:4), a scroll with seven seals (5:1; 6:1), seven angels with seven trumpets (8:2), a beast with seven heads (12:3), seven angels with seven plagues (15:1). In addition, there are time periods of forty-two months (11:2; 13:5; equals 7 \u00d7 6) and 1,260 days (11:3; equals 60 \u00d7 [7 \u00d7 3]). An earthquake claims 7,000 people (11:13; equals 7 \u00d7 1,000). The woman who flees from the beast is nourished for 3.5 \u201ctimes\u201d (equals 7\/2). Those with God\u2019s name on their foreheads number 144,000 (14:1; equals either (a) 12 [tribes] \u00d7 12 \u00d7 1000, or less likely (b) (60 \u00d7 2) \u00d7 2 \u00d7 100. Evil is subdued for a millennium (20:2). The new Jerusalem is 12,000 units of measure per side (21:16; equals 60 \u00d7 200) and 144 units high (21:17; equals 12 \u00d7 12).
\nThe necessity for a hierarchical structure if Israel is to be successfully in reaching its promised destination (Num 2) was clearly expressed by the Priestly writer. Just so, the early Christians, once their expectation of an early return of Christ began to fade, turned their attention to matters of Church structure. For example, in the first century (in the Gospels and the letters of Paul), attention was focused upon eschatology (the return of Christ and the destruction of the Roman Empire). In the early second century came the realization that careful organization would now be necessary for survival and effective functioning in the continuing Roman Empire. Thus, the writer of the so-called Pastoral Epistles (1 and 2 Tim, Titus) began to formulate guidelines for a three-fold means of preserving the faith: creedal summaries, shaping of a canon, and perpetuation of an ordained ministry.
\nWe repeatedly read that the Israelites strictly obeyed the instructions that Moses conveyed to them (1:54; 2:34; 3:51; 4:49). Just so, Christians of the New Testament Era are encouraged to \u201cObey your leaders and submit to them\u201d (Heb 13:17), to \u201caccept the authority of the elders\u201d (1 Pet 5:5).
\nThe shape of Israel\u2019s four-sided encampment in the wilderness, with three tribes on each side (Num 2) is echoed in the shape of the holy city that descends from heaven with the names of three tribes inscribed on each side (Rev 21:12\u201314). One may suspect that the author of Revelation had the description in Numbers 2 in mind.<\/p>\n
CULTIC READINESS OF THE CAMP<\/p>\n
Numbers 5:1\u20136:27<\/p>\n
The narrative of Israel\u2019s preparation for departure from the vicinity of Mount Sinai has continued apace since the opening of the book of Numbers. Instructions from God to Moses concerning physical preparation for the march have been laconically been given and carried out (\u201c \u2018Do so-and-so\u2019 \u2026 and they did it\u201d).
\nNow comes a radical transition in subject matter and form, probably signaling a once-independent unit of material: the first of six cultic insertions into the narrative sequence. By stringing them out, the impression of continuing revelation and divine guidance is created. Israel, as it travels through space and time, is ever in need of reminders of its particularities, its status as a \u201choly\u201d people.
\nRather than a historical chronicle, we encounter the literary form of case law: \u201cWhen a man or woman (does so-and-so) \u2026 that person \u2026\u201d (5:6\u20137; 6:2\u20133); \u201cIf someone (does so-and-so) \u2026 then \u2026\u201d (5:12\u201315; 6:9).
\nAt the conclusion of these various regulations, Aaron blesses the people (6:22\u201327) and then the narrative account resumes (at 7:1).
\nThese two chapters (5 and 6) contain a loose collection of seemingly unrelated regulations, part of an attempt to complete the legislative agenda of the Priestly writer(s):<\/p>\n
1. Ritual uncleanness (5:1\u20134);
\n2. An extension on restitution (5:5\u201310);
\n3. Suspected marital infidelity (5:11\u201331);
\n4. The Nazirite (6:1\u201321);
\n5. The priestly benediction (6:22\u201327).<\/p>\n
A common (uniting) thread is not easily discernable in the various topics here presented, but it probably lies in the theme of safeguarding the camp during its wilderness journey. For example, just as defrauding one\u2019s neighbor in an economic transaction breaks faith with God (5:6), so does the unfaithfulness of a spouse (5:18, 30).<\/p>\n
COMMENTARY (CHAPTER 5)<\/p>\n
Three Serious Types of Ritual \u201cUncleanness,\u201d 5:1\u20134<\/p>\n
Ritual purity is to be maintained not merely in the vicinity of the sacred mountain but also thereafter as the community moves through geography and history. It is to be a perpetual daily concern.
\nFrom the vast accumulation of problematic conditions that were discussed in Leviticus, three conditions are here singled out perhaps because of special severity: abnormal skin conditions (Lev 13\u201314), abnormal sexual discharges (Lev 15:2\u201315, 25\u201330), and contact with a corpse (Lev 21:1\u201312). Whereas some problematic conditions might be remedied easily within a single day (e.g., a nocturnal emission of semen, Lev 15:16\u201318), the ones mentioned here must result in isolation from the community for a seven-day period and the performance of prolonged ritual. (For details and rationale, see the commentary on Leviticus at the locations cited.)
\nThe regulation of sexual discharges, requiring complete removal from the community, is more restrictive than is Leviticus. In Leviticus, regulation concerning corpse contamination applied only to priests but here in Numbers it is extended to all Israel. Since death was such a common occurrence, this obviously posed a major problem that is taken up in chapter 19.
\nIt is important to notice that menstruation, although requiring a similar seven-day restriction (Lev 15:19\u201324), is not mentioned here. It is a regular, natural function and thus subject to lesser regulation.<\/p>\n
Restitution: An Extension, 5:5\u201310<\/p>\n
An important piece of legislation for harmonious communal life has been recorded at Leviticus 6:1\u20137 (Hebrew 5:20\u201326). In order to make reparation for such offenses as fraud, the guilty party must restore the neighbor\u2019s embezzled property and then pay an additional penalty in the amount of twenty percent.
\nSuppose, however, suggests Numbers, that the wronged party has died without heirs before restitution can be made. Is the offender thereby \u201coff the hook\u201d? By no means, since the offense was not only against the neighbor but also against God in whose name an oath may have been taken in the case. Thus, in the absence of heirs (to whom the penalty would ordinarily be paid), the fine resorts to the priesthood (as representative of the Deity). [Unclaimed Estates]<\/p>\n
Unclaimed Estates
\nThis regulation likely influenced later civil legislation by which unclaimed estates became the property of the state (or its designates). In North Carolina, for example, unclaimed bank accounts are (by statute) to be used to fund the state university. Here, however, the fine falls only to the priesthood (in contrast to monarchical attempts to seize property, e.g., 1 Kgs 21, where king Ahab appropriates the vineyard of the executed Naboth).<\/p>\n
The regulation here contains another possible innovation: the graciousness that the Deity offers as a consequence of confession (which is not explicitly called for in Lev 5). A false oath, taken in God\u2019s name, might qualify as a case of sinning \u201chigh-handedly\u201d as opposed to sinning unintentionally (15:27\u201331). Indeed, the prophets will vigorously condemn those who have taken false oaths that invoke the Deity (e.g., Jer 5:2; Zech 5:4; Mal 3:5). Jacob Milgrom sums up the matter succinctly: \u201cThis background projects the true magnitude of the priestly innovation: For the sake of the repentant sinner, God will compromise His justice by reducing the crime from a deliberate act of punishment by death to an inadvertency, expiable by sacrifice.\u201d It thus should be noted that a general confession, in behalf of all Israel, was made by the presiding priest on the annual Day of Atonement (Lev 16:21).<\/p>\n
Suspected Marital Infidelity, 5:11\u201331<\/p>\n
The procedure outlined here allows a husband who suspects his wife of infidelity to humiliate her by putting her \u201cto the test,\u201d even in the absence of prior proof. The wife, conversely, has no such right concerning a husband whose attitudes and actions arouse her suspicions. It is a text, therefore, that is apt to raise the ire of readers who are accustomed to modern standards of fair play and equality of the sexes.
\nIt is difficult to know why regulations for the procedure were listed just here (i.e., what it has in common with the remainder of chs. 5\u20136). The point might be that a case of moral defilement (as here, if the woman is guilty) is just as serious as the previous illustrations of cultic defilement.
\nThere is, however, a linguistic connection between vv. 5\u201310 (concerning extension of restitution) and vv. 11\u201331. Both situations are referred to in Hebrew as involving ma\u02bfal. In the former instance, the word occurs in the phrase \u201cbreaking faith with the LORD\u201d by wronging another (v. 6); in the present instance, it occurs in the phrase \u201cand is unfaithful to him,\u201d i.e., the husband (v. 12). Perhaps this conceptual identity is related to the prophetic comparison between marital infidelity and Israel\u2019s \u201cwhoring\u201d after the gods of Canaan. It was the prophet Hosea (chs. 2\u20133), followed by (his disciple?) Jeremiah (2:2\u20133) who first used the analogy of marriage in order to illustrate the relationship between God and community.
\nNo grounds for the husband\u2019s suspicion are listed. One modern interpreter has suggested that one \u201ctrigger\u201d for the test might have been a case of pregnancy for which the husband has reason to believe that he was not responsible. That motivation for the test, if true, would at least relieve the husband of being considered (in modern opinion, at least) overly suspicious and capricious. This interpretation is possibly supported by the consequence of failing the ritual test: \u201cher womb shall discharge, her uterus drops\u201d (v. 27, a reference to miscarriage? so NEB). This raises, of course, the specter of abortion (at least in the modern mind). In any case, she will no longer be able to conceive children (v. 28).
\nSuch a tangible reason for suspicion is not the only possibility, however. In addition to the case were \u201ca man has had intercourse with her\u201d (v. 13), there may be cases where a husband \u201cis jealous of his wife, though she has not defiled herself\u201d (v. 14). Perhaps she has merely acted in such a way as to arouse valid suspicion, or perhaps her husband is neurotic. Thus the Rabbis, as a safeguard for an accused wife, required that she must have had prior warning to desist from certain behavior, done in the presence of two witnesses, and have ignored the warning before the husband could require that she endure the ordeal.
\nThe announcement that the holy water will \u201center your bowels\u201d (v. 22) seems strange for an overall consequence of infertility (and possible miscarriage?). However, the word can rarely mean \u201cwomb\u201d (as at Gen 25:23, where NRSV renders it evasively as \u201cborn of you\u201d), and that meaning admirably suits the context here. NAB and NEB use the neutral term \u201cbody.\u201d
\nNRSV states \u201cmake your uterus drop,\u201d whereas RSV and KJV have, more literally with MT, \u201cthigh fall away.\u201d The writers of the Bible were reticent to use language that was sexually explicit (although there are rare exceptions, usually disguised in English translations). Thus male genitals are often indirectly referred to as \u201chand\u201d or \u201cfoot.\u201d The word \u201cthigh\u201d can be used for both male and female genitals. A clear reference to male physiology may be found at Gen 24:2 (also 47:29), where Abraham instructs his servant, \u201cPut your hand under my thigh and I will make you swear.\u2026\u201d Although the symbolism of touching the generative organ while taking an oath is not clear, it possibly involves a threat of sterility if the accompanying oath is taken in bad faith. It likely was an ancient custom that venerated reproductive organs as the seat of life, but by now in ancient Israel has become a ritualized formality. Note that the word \u201ctestament\u201d (as in \u201clast will and testament\u201d) is derived from the Latin word testis (\u201cwitness [to virility]\u201d), the diminutive of which is testiculus (\u201ctesticle\u201d).
\nThe trial procedure (called \u201cthe law in case of jealousy,\u201d v. 29) for the test was as follows. The priest prepares a potion of \u201choly water\u201d in which is mixed dust from the floor of the sacred sanctuary and ink washed from a parchment on which a formal curse has been written. The resulting potion is to be consumed, after the woman has acknowledged that if she is guilty the curse should become actualized. If the result is negative (i.e., the curse has no effect), the woman is innocent and \u201cable to have children.\u201d [Dust and Oaths]<\/p>\n
Dust and Oaths
\nCuneiform texts from outside the Bible (e.g., from the vast Babylonian city of Mari on the middle Euphrates River) mention a similar procedure: dirt from the area of the city gate was mixed with water and consumed by the patron deities of the city (?) as part of an oath to protect the place. Thus the deities, like the accused wife in Israel, will have internalized a sacred substance and were thereby more closely bound to their oaths.
\nFor quotation of the particular text under discussion (from Archives royales de Mari, Vol. X), see Baruch B. A. Levine, Numbers 1\u201320 (AB 4; New York: Doubleday, 1993), 210\u201311.<\/p>\n
Presumably, this procedure might be psychologically effective: fear not merely because of the curse, but also because of: (1) the elaborate ritual; (2) the consumption of a beverage that contains a substance (\u201cdust\u201d) from the holy shrine itself; (3) being brought before the altar (\u201cbefore the LORD,\u201d v. 16); and (4) the curse, written in ink that is then dissolved in the water, contains the divine name (v. 21). All of these factors might increase the woman\u2019s uneasiness about false statements. [Trial by Ordeal]<\/p>\n
Trial by Ordeal
\nOld Babylonian law (18th century BC) was both more lenient and more stringent that the biblical regulation. A suspicious husband, without proof, could only require his wife to take an oath of fidelity (no fearsome ordeal, as in the Bible). If, however, an accusation was made by a neighbor (in the absence of actual witnesses), then she must undergo the \u201criver ordeal\u201d: leap into the waters of a river, whose controlling gods would either demonstrate her innocence (by her survival) or her guilt (by drowning). In the latter case, death was more severe than the biblical penalty.
\nSee the Code of King Hammurabi, statutes 131\u2013132. For discussion of this code, with photo, see the commentary on Leviticus at 13:1\u201346 and 24:19\u201320.
\nAnthropological parallels abound, especially from Africa and Asia. An extensive collection may be found in Theodor H. Gaster, Myth, Legend, and Custom in the Old Testament (New York: Harper & Row, 1969), 280\u2013300. For similar ordeals in the Greco-roman and Muslim worlds, see William Robertson Smith, Lectures on the Religion of the Semites (KTAV Publishing House, 1969; reprint of the 3rd ed. of 1927), 179\u201381.<\/p>\n
What can be said in defense of this \u201cordeal\u201d that will make it more intelligible and tolerable to the modern reader?
\n1. There is no recorded case of this \u201cordeal\u201d being carried out in ancient Israel. Moreover, the Rabbis (unjustly maligned in Christianity for being inflexible legalists but who were instead ever willing to negate the seeming harshness of biblical regulations when there were other biblical grounds for doing so), mandated several limitations and extensions that would have made the procedure difficult to actualize. The most interesting is the utilization of a text from the prophet Hosea: \u201cI will not punish your daughters when they play the harlot \u2026 for the men themselves go aside with whores \u2026\u201d (4:14). Therefore, reasoned the famous Rabbi Akiba, a woman convicted by the ordeal in Numbers 5 should be punished only if her husband were similarly \u201cfree from [the same type of] iniquity.\u201d
\n2. By allowing the husband to take the initiative and bring the case to be adjudicated by the priesthood, the matter is prevented from becoming an ugly public issue that might result in the woman\u2019s death (Lev 20:10), especially with no concrete evidence against her. Instead, the worst possible outcome (upon being declared \u201cguilty\u201d) was sterility (or possibly, miscarriage). The former consequence would have filled Israelite women with a sadness (and sense of failure) that modern women can scarcely conceptualize (see, e.g., 1 Sam 1:1\u201320), and thus the punishment was far more severe than appears to the contemporary readers.
\n3. Consumption of the beverage would not produce the biological signs of guilt. Consequently, all wives who underwent the procedure, even if guilty and did not confess, would have been found innocent. In the last analysis, then, it served to protect all pregnant women from vengeance. It even ensured that those who were unjustly suspected would not suffer from social stigma. In either case, the humiliation of undergoing the ordeal might well have been worth enduring since it could remove all suspicion of wrongdoing. [Comment on Details of Numbers 5]<\/p>\n
Comment on Details of Numbers 5
\n5:13, \u201c\u2026 and there is no witness \u2026\u201d Conviction of capital crimes required the testimony of witnesses (35:30; Deut 17:6).
\n5:15, \u201cfrankincense.\u201d A resin produced by trees of the genus Boswellia that grow in the Arabian Peninsula. It was exported throughout the Mediterranean basin because, when ground into a powder and ignited, it burns with a pleasant aroma. Its use in connection with sacrifice is also mentioned at Lev 2:1\u20132, 15\u201316; etc.<\/p>\n
Attaining a Greater Measure of Holiness: The Nazirite, 6:1\u201321<\/p>\n
Following the typical Priestly introduction to a literary unit (\u201cThe LORD spoke to Moses,\u201d v. 1), the account runs harmoniously to the similarly expected formal conclusion (\u201cThis is [= has been] the law for, \u2026\u201d v. 21).
\nWhy the unit should have been placed precisely here (amidst regulations for resuming the wilderness itinerary) is unclear. Rabbinic opinion, rather imaginative, proposed an intended contrast between the virtue of the Nazirite in chapter 6 and its lack in the accused (and guilty) party in chapter 5: the former abstain from wine, and the latter may have acted under its influence (Numbers Rabbah, 10:1\u20134). Since the impending journey was toward the land of Canaan, a location that was well known for its viticulture, such an implication would be well merited. Perhaps equally speculative is the modern suggestion that the linkage is one of verbal association: the role of the woman\u2019s hair at 5:18 and of the Nazirite at 6:5.
\nThis regulation may be divided into the following sub-sections:<\/p>\n
1. Signs of the Nazirite status (avoidance of wine; uncut hair; avoidance of corpses) (vv. 1\u20138);
\n2. Disruption of the status by corpse contamination, necessitating beginning anew (vv. 9\u201312);
\n3. Ritual ceremonies upon completion of the vow (vv. 13\u201321).<\/p>\n
Signs of the Nazirite status, vv. 1\u20138<\/p>\n
The rules pertaining to the state of holiness (as outlined by the Priestly writer(s), primarily in Leviticus) were intended to apply to (and be attainable by) all Israel. Higher states could, of course, be attained. One was in the priesthood, but that was restricted by genealogy (membership in the tribe of Levi, and especially those descended from Aaron). For the non-Levite, the route lay through the vows of a Nazirite.
\nThe title \u201cNazirite\u201d is derived from the Hebrew verb n\u0101zar, \u201cto separate; passive,\u201d devote oneself to\u201d (often by means of a religious ceremony or taking a vow). Hence the derived noun n\u0101zir meant \u201cconsecrated one; Nazirite.\u201d The idea was that by abstaining from certain acts that were allowable for others, by further separation of oneself from the ordinary, one could attain a state of holiness that was pleasing to the Deity. The separation was in refusal to participate in certain stated activities and not in physical removal from associations with ordinary society. In short, the status was not that of an ascetic monk who withdraws to a monastery, and least of all was it that of a hermit who retreats to solitary isolation.
\nThis special status could be assumed permanently or temporarily. Cases of the former sort include Samson and Samuel, whose infertile mothers prayed fervently for their birth. Dedication as a Nazirite was an angel\u2019s prior condition in the former case (Judg 13:2\u20137; see also Luke 1:5\u201315, concerning John the Baptist) and was spontaneously promised by a thankful mother in the latter (1 Sam 1:1\u201311).<\/p>\n
Disruption of the status by corpse contamination, vv. 9\u201312<\/p>\n
It is the temporary option, activated by a vow of the candidate himself, which is the subject of Numbers 6. Apparently it is the more restrictive of the two. Whereas corpse contamination was to be avoided by the temporary Nazirite, that likely was too impractical for life-long dedication. Whereas such contact could re-set the duration of the temporary vow (v. 12), it scarcely could do so for one\u2019s entire lifetime! Consequently, when the angels demand permanent Nazirite status for the soon-to-be-born Samson and Samuel, they require (among other things) avoidance of wine and razor but make no mention of avoidance of contact with corpses. That fortunately was the case for Samson, since he was often \u201cup to his neck\u201d in corpses (e.g., Judg 14:19; 15:8, 15\u201316; 16:30; for a case involving the prophet Samuel, see 1 Sam 15:33). [Invalidation]<\/p>\n
Invalidation
\nAn interesting story of invalidation of vows (necessitating starting the period of the vow anew, v. 12) concerns Queen Helena of Adiabene: \u201c\u2026 she was a Nazirite for seven years. At the end of the seven years she came up to the land [of Israel], and the school of Hillel taught her that she must be a Nazirite for yet another seven years; and at the end of this seven years she contracted uncleanness. Thus she continued a Nazirite for twenty-one years\u201d (Mishnah, Nazir, 3.6).<\/p>\n
Curiously, this status, although at times popular, does not seem to have been one to which the average Israelite aspired. Nor were they urged to it by the Priestly writers. One modern interpreter has discerningly argued that, in fact, the Priestly writer sought to reduce the number of \u201cpermanent\u201d Nazirites by allowing for (establishing?) the temporary status. Entrance was thereby limited to the discretion of the discerning person, as opposed to prior emotional and binding commitment by parents. The basis for priestly limitation would be that, whereas ordinary holiness included a moral dimension that benefited society (as in the Holiness Code, Lev 17\u201326), attainment of the Nazirite status may have been done in order to \u201csatisfy his emotional needs\u201d and \u201care of benefit to no one else.\u201d
\nIs the apparent new-found popularity of the Nazirite status during the post-exilic age thus an indication of the final date of the composition of the Priestly writer(s)? [Comment on Details of Numbers 6]<\/p>\n
Comment on Details of Numbers 6
\nV. 2, \u201c\u2026 or woman.\u201d Subject to the limitation imposed in 30:3\u201315. The specific mention of women in this status probably indicates its popularity among them. An instance is reported in the case of Bernice (daughter of the Jewish King Agrippa I; see Acts 25:13, 23; 26:30). According to the Jewish historian Josephus, she took a similar vow during a period of sickness, to be activated upon her recovery (Wars of the Jews, II.xv.1).
\nV. 4, \u201c\u2026 nothing that is produced by the grapevine \u2026\u201d This restriction is more severe than even that for the priest, who was only forbidden to consume in the sanctuary precinct (Ezek 44:21; see also Lev 10:9 and the comments there as to rationale). For a similar restriction among the Rechabites, see Jer 35. Apparently, this reflects a deep-seated antipathy toward a common lifestyle in the land of Canaan. A mild cultural parallel may be found in the case of the wine-drinking Romans who disdained the \u201cbarbarian\u201d Germans for their consumption of beer.
\nV. 5, \u201c\u2026 no razor shall come upon the head.\u201d See the discussion of Lev 19:27. Having achieved a sacred status, the hair, when subsequently cut at the end of the vowed period, cannot be carelessly discarded: it must be burned as part of a sacrificial ritual (v. 18). This is more restrictive than priestly status: although a priest must trim his hair, he cannot shave his head (Ezek 44:20). The remainder of the person\u2019s body carries no such permanent sanctification (i.e., it ends with the vow).
\nThe unique phenomenon concerning hair of the human head is that it continues to grow throughout one\u2019s life. Consequently, it could be viewed as especially connected to the source of vitality. (See J. Milgrom, The JPS Torah Commentary: Numbers [Philadelphia: The Jewish Publication Society, 1990], 356.) Note, therefore, how Samson\u2019s physical strength ebbs and flows with the cropping and regrowth of his locks (Judg 16:17\u201322). Various extra-biblical sources attest to the practice of offering human hair at a sanctuary. Was the Israelite restriction upon those who sought an especially \u201choly\u201d status a reaction to this \u201cpagan\u201d practice?
\nV. 6, \u201c\u2026 shall not go near a corpse \u2026\u201d This is more restrictive than the regulations for a priest that allowed contact with the body of one\u2019s closest relatives (Lev 21:1\u20134). Presumably, the rule for a priest under such circumstances would have been the same as for laypersons (at Lev 22:4\u20137).
\nV. 14, \u201c\u2026 burnt offering \u2026 sin offering \u2026 offering of well being \u2026\u201d For the proper translation of these terms and their function, see the commentary on Leviticus, ch. 7.
\nV. 15, \u201cgrain offering.\u201d See the discussion of this rite at Leviticus ch. 2.
\nV. 15, \u201cdrink offerings.\u201d Procedures for such libations are outlined in Num 15.<\/p>\n
The Priestly Benediction, 6:22\u201327<\/p>\n
Now comes one of the best-known and oft recited passages in the Hebrew Bible, surviving in regular use in the synagogue and church to the present day. Its first recitation in the Bible may be referred to at Leviticus 9:22 (\u201cAaron lifted his hands toward the people and blessed them\u201d), but only now do we learn its actual wording. In the post-exilic age (the Second Temple Period), it was to be recited daily at the temple by the high priest.
\nThe literary artistry of this little text is superb. In Hebrew, it has 3 lines with 3, 5, and 7 words respectively (i.e., a regular sequence of odd numbers); the number of consonants is, respectively, 15, 20, 25 (obvious sequence by 5); the number of syllables for the successive lines is 12, 14, 16; and the first and last clauses (\u201cthe LORD bless you\u201d\/\/\u201cand give you peace\u201d) have the same number of syllables (the perfect \u201cseven\u201d each).
\nThe pronouns used throughout the blessing are singular, raising the suspicion that the prayer was originally used for blessing individuals at a cultic ceremony (and has been placed here by the Priestly writer(s) for collective use). However, Hebrew can use the singular in a collective sense (as, for example, in the Ten Commandments).
\nOne of the more interpretations (extensions in meaning?) is found in Sifrei Numbers (section 40) where the Rabbis, discussing the phrase \u201cand keep you,\u201d propose, \u201c(This also means): Keep your soul in the hour of death\u201d; \u201c(This also means): Keep you in the world to come.\u201d Such an application may not have entirely been an innovative rabbinic imagination, since there is hints (or perhaps yearnings?) for it as old as the Priestly writings themselves. Two small, tightly-rolled silver amulets, resembling women\u2019s jewelry and inscribed with the Aaronic Blessing, have recently (1980) been found in a burial cave near Jerusalem that dates to the seventh\/sixth centuries BC. The amulets had apparently had been threaded on string and placed around the necks of the deceased as part of the burial procedure. They are the oldest known fragments of the text of the Bible.
\nThis blessing, pronounced as the people are about to begin their journey, sums up God\u2019s ultimate will and goal for Israel, behind the totality of cultic and ethical regulations in P: life (in all aspects: social, economic, psychological, spiritual) to the full potential. The Lord is explicitly mentioned as the source of blessing at the beginning of each line, and this is reinforced with an emphatic pronoun (not visible in English translation): \u201cI (myself!) will bless them.\u201d Hope for the future is thus centered upon God\u2019s presence in the midst of the people (and therein lies the importance of maintaining a sense of that presence through obedience to the regulations that have been and are being revealed).
\nThe opening mood of this petition, \u201cmay the LORD \u2026\u201d acknowledges that blessing does not come automatically, since God is a free agent. Rather, it is grounded in hope of a continuation of the graciousness that has been evident in Israel\u2019s prior history. Most recently, it would involve the memory of deliverance from Egypt and the granting of torah at the sacred mountain.
\nThis benediction opens by beseeching the Deity for continued \u201cblessing.\u201d In modern usage, this may be a vague concept, but in the Bible its focus is quite specific. In Deuteronomy 28, for example, there is a full catalogue of the blessings that the Deity may bestow upon a servant community, centering upon offspring, land, health, and physical security. In sum it may be said to include all of those things that make possible life to the full, life as God intended it at creation. (See also Gen 12:1\u20133.)
\nThe statement \u201ckeep you\u201d (more accurately, \u201cguard you\u201d) acknowledges that ultimate security resides in God\u2019s oversight alone. In the context in which the blessing was pronounced by Aaron, Israel found itself in the barren wilderness where there was no existing social structures to provide security. In the uncertain political climate of the ancient Near East in general (and of Syro-Palestine in particular), there was constant danger to the traveler. (See, e.g., Josh 24:16\u201318.)
\nThe expression \u201cmake his face to shine\u201d envisions a favorable reception. Such an expression for positive reception (both by other humans and deity) is attested in literature throughout the biblical world. It is an acknowledgment that God has created a world in which deliverance and mercy are possible. We still use the idiom that so-and-so\u2019s face \u201clit up\u201d to express extreme pleasure. Conversely, a negative reception by the Deity can be expressed by \u201chiding the face\u201d (e.g., Deut 31:18).
\nThe expressions \u201clift up his countenance\u201d and \u201cmake his face to shine\u201d may originally be derived from the language of worship of celestial deities (sun and moon).<\/p>\n
CONNECTIONS<\/p>\n
Trial by Ordeal<\/p>\n
Modern readers are inclined to react negatively to biblical procedures that seem unjust or discriminatory, without taking time to understand them within their time and social context. The regulation concerning suspected marital infidelity is a good illustration. Since females alone can produce biological grounds for suspicion of infidelity (i.e., pregnancy), it is obvious why this procedure was applicable to them alone. Furthermore, in a society where more than one wife (at least formerly) was allowable and where barren wives encouraged taking others (Gen 16:1\u20133; 30:1\u201310), women were likely not as susceptible to jealousy and suspicion as were males. The regulation, then, is not so clearly grounded in gender discrimination as might first appear. In comparison with modern societies (primarily in the Middle East) where wives are killed by their spouse with impunity for \u201cdishonoring\u201d the family, the \u201cordeal\u201d outlined in chapter 5 may be seen as an enlightened source of protection.
\nAs a consequence of trial by ordeal, marital relationships could be maintained when they otherwise would have dissolved. By contrast, modern divorces may be triggered by mere suspicion of infidelity. An underlying assumption of the ritual is shared by the legal system in the United States: \u201cinnocent until proven guilty.\u201d<\/p>\n
Clergy<\/p>\n
In ancient Israel, the status of \u201cclergy\u201d (priests) was available to the tribe of Levi alone. The Nazirite\u2019s vow alone was the route of choice, therefore, by which the ordinary person could seek and attain a special state of holiness. Note that this special status did not take them into solitary (monastic) retreat from public life. This is perhaps a parallel to various semi-clerical roles in churches at present that allow persons to deepen their spiritual life and to affect more than ordinary service to the community.<\/p>\n
Priestly Benediction<\/p>\n
Concerning the Priestly benediction, it might be helpful to think of it, not as a mere perfunctory termination of worship, but as an expression of hope (and perhaps a pledge on our part to remember our identity) in the week to come.<\/p>\n
The benediction serves as a bridge from the sacral act of worship in the sanctuary to the life outside. Too often \u201cbenediction\u201d means for us the end of worship service, when in fact it is meant to connect the service to the ongoing life of the worshiping people beyond the sanctuary.\u2026 In benediction we are saying that the one from whom we move apart [from the secular world?] to worship is the one who goes with us from the sacral gathering, to guide our life and provide its context. The final prayer of the service moves us out in the confidence and hope that God will care for our lives in all the basic dimensions.<\/p>\n
New Testament Connections<\/p>\n
Concerning the heavenly city the author of Revelation says: \u201cNothing unclean shall enter it\u201d (21:27). This surely echoes the concept of Israel\u2019s encampment in the wilderness (Num 5:1\u20134). There, however, the specified cases of exclusion are cultic, whereas in Revelation there is a moral dimension as well.
\nThe guidelines concerning restitution (5:5\u201310) are echoed by Jesus (at Matt 5:23\u201324) and cited in self-defense by Zaccheus (at Luke 19:8).
\nAlthough no case of trial by ordeal for a suspected adulteress (Num 5:11\u201331) is reported in the New Testament (nor in the Old Testament for that matter), there is a parallel between the attitude of the famous Rabbi Akiba (second century AD) and that of Jesus. The former reasoned that if a woman were convicted under the regulations in Numbers 5 she should be punished only if her husband were similarly \u201cfree from [the same type of] iniquity.\u201d One is thereby reminded of Jesus\u2019 more general reaction to the woman accused of adultery at John 8:7, \u201cLet anyone among you who is without sin be the first to throw a stone at her.\u201d
\nNonetheless, this does not signal a New Testament relaxation of traditional (Old Testament) stances toward sexual immorality, as such passages as Romans 1:18\u201327; 1 Corinthians 5:9\u201313; Revelation 21:8; 22:15 make clear.
\nTrials by ordeal were part of the medieval legal system, although voices in the church were sometimes raised against the practice. In AD 816 Pope Stephen V issued a decree against the practice, but it nonetheless continued. It was formally condemned and abolished by the Lateran Council of 1215. Thomas Aquinas (thirteenth century) was of the opinion that secret sins could be known only to God and thus should be left to divine judgment. Nonetheless, the practice survived.<\/p>\n
Image Not Available
\ndue to lack of digital rights. Please view the published commentary or perform an Internet search using the credit below.<\/p>\n
Jesus defending the woman taken in adultery
\nAnonymous. 19th C. Lithograph.<\/p>\n
Private Collection. (Credit: Image Select \/ Art Resource, NY)<\/p>\n
The grain-offering that the husband brings in connection with his wife\u2019s ordeal serves to bring \u201ciniquity to remembrance\u201d (5:15). The author of Hebrews alludes to that phrase in his rejection of the entire cultic service in the Jerusalem temple. Whereas Jesus as a true sacrifice cleanses worshipers \u201conce for all,\u201d the temple sacrifices, offered repeatedly, can only serve as a \u201creminder of sin year after year\u201d (10:1\u20133).
\nTemporary vows as a Nazirite (Num 6:2\u201321) may have been taken by St. Paul, to judge from Acts (18:18), as well as by other early followers of Jesus (Acts 21:23\u201324). The life-long status apparently was assumed by James the Just, brother of Jesus, of whom it was reported soon thereafter by the church historian Eusebius: \u201cThis apostle was consecrated from his mother\u2019s womb. He drank neither wine nor fermented liquors, and abstained from animal food. A razor never came upon his head.\u201d [Eusebius]<\/p>\n
Eusebius
\nEusebius of Caesarea (c. AD 260\u2013340) is the major source for the history of early Christianity. He is sometimes known as Eusebius \u201cPamphilius\u201d and was bishop of Caesarea from around AD 313 until his death.
\nWorking in the great library at Caesarea, he narrated to history of the faith to his own day (Ecclesiastical History), sought to relate the church to its pagan antecedents (Preparation for the Gospel), compiled an important geographical work on the Holy Land (Onomasticon, upon which the famous mosaic Madaba map likely depends), and numerous other works.<\/p>\n
PROVISION FOR INITIATION OF CULTIC SERVICE<\/p>\n
Numbers 7:1\u20138:26<\/p>\n
The narrative account of Israel\u2019s preparation for departure from the area of Mount Sinai, interrupted at the end of chapter 4, now resumes. An account has been taken of available military might (ch. 1), arrangement has been made for the order of march and of encampment (ch. 2), the redemptive function of the Levites has been established (ch. 3), and the duties of the Levites during the march have been assigned (ch. 4).
\nNow that the portable sanctuary is nearing readiness for the journey through the wilderness to the \u201cpromised land,\u201d provision must be made for its provisions and porterage and for final ritual cleansing of the priests. This material may be studied in topical sections as follows:<\/p>\n
1. The Transportation Needs of the Sanctuary (7:1\u20139);
\n2. Gifts to the Sanctuary by Tribe (7:10\u201389);
\n3. Care of the Sanctuary Lamp (8:1\u20134);
\n4. Purification of the Levites (8:5\u201326).<\/p>\n
COMMENTARY<\/p>\n
The Transportation Needs of the Sanctuary, 7:1\u20139<\/p>\n
The Levites, whose duty it is to transport the massive sanctuary and its furnishing, need to be provided with the necessary mechanisms for doing so.
\nThis need was met by the tribal chiefs who supplied six wagons (pulled by two oxen each). Since the Merarites had been assigned to transport the heavier equipment, namely the sanctuary framing and hardware (3:36; 4:29\u201333), they were given four of the wagons. The remaining two go to the Gershonites who were responsible for the fabrics of the structure (3:25\u201326; 4:25\u201327). The remaining Kohathites are not assigned wagons since their more sacred items (ark, table, light, altars) are to be transported on platforms supported by poles and carried by hand (4:15), or more specifically, on their shoulders (7:9).<\/p>\n
Gifts to the Sanctuary by Tribe, 7:10\u201389<\/p>\n
The priests now need to be provided with the utensils, grain, incense, and the sacrificial animals that will be necessary for dedication of the sanctuary (7:10\u201384, with a summary at vv. 85\u201388).
\nThis need is also met by the tribal leaders, having brought the aforementioned necessary items on the wagons. The twelve contributions, presented by tribal leaders in the same order as in chapter 2, are assigned a day each and are itemized in detail.
\nThe particulars for each tribe are virtually identical. That each is repeated in detail, as well as the repetitive summary at vv. 85\u201388, evidences the Priestly focus upon precision and repetition (for which see the Introduction to the commentary on Leviticus). The verbal format can be reconstructed into that of ancient Near Eastern numerical tabulation by separate columns and lines.
\nCertain details of the text seem to presuppose authorship after the settlement in the land of Canaan, and that later situation seems to have been projected backward into the wilderness period. Would oxen, for example (7:3), survive in the sparseness of the Sinai Desert? Would former slaves from Egypt be in possession of vessels made of gold and silver (vv. 13\u201314, a dozen times over)? Would there have been an abundance of cereals, such that \u201cchoice flour\u201d (v. 14, etc.) could be provided? Would the \u201cshekel of the sanctuary\u201d (v. 14, etc.) already have been defined, presumably in distinction from other standards (e.g., that of the later monarchy)? [Comment on Details of Numbers 7]<\/p>\n
Comment on Details of Numbers 7
\n7:13\u201314, \u201c\u2026 plate \u2026 basin \u2026 dish.\u201d The uncertainty of vocabulary here is reflected in the following alternatives: JPS, \u201cbowl, basin, ladle\u201d; NEB, \u201cdish, tossing-bowl, saucer\u201d; NAB, \u201cplate, basin, cup.\u201d Careful study of these terms by root-meaning and usage elsewhere in the Bible suggests a preference for the JPS renderings (and that \u201cplate\u201d is the least likely to be accurate).
\nPresumably, the first of these items would be for objects of dry-measure (e.g., flour) and the second is almost certainly for liquids.
\nSince a silver shekel weighed around .403 ounces (see the \u201cTable of Weights\u201d at the commentary on Lev 19:35\u201336), the first item would weigh about 51 ounces, the second about 28 ounces, and the third about 4 ounces. Since the latter weight is so light, it seems more likely that \u201cladle\u201d (so JPS) is meant rather than dish, saucer, or cup.
\nEach tribe\u2019s gift totals around 83 ounces and the total for all the tribes around 1,000 ounces, yielding a value (by modern standards) of about $5,000.
\n7:17, \u201ctwo oxen.\u201d According to Lev 22:21, animals for the \u201cwell-being\u201d sacrifice (as for all others) must be \u201cwithout blemish\u201d (which would exclude castrated oxen). Thus, the word used here (b\u0101q\u0101r), generically meaning \u201ccattle,\u201d should be seen as a synonym for \u201cbull\u201d (par, as in v. 15). Hence NEB, \u201ctwo bulls.\u201d<\/p>\n
Care of the Sanctuary Lamp, 8:1\u20134<\/p>\n
Aaron is now instructed concerning the seven lamps that are to illuminate the sanctuary. This sacred item was commissioned at Exodus 25:31\u201340 and fashioned at 37:17\u201324. The concern in Numbers 8 is with its placement in the shrine.<\/p>\n
Purification of the Levites, 8:5\u201326<\/p>\n
The Levites as a whole, having been distinguished from their Aaronide cousins by genealogy (3:5\u201310) and their duties assigned (4:15\u201333), must be ritually prepared for their duties (8:5\u201322). [Literary Artistry in Numbers 8]<\/p>\n
Literary Artistry in Numbers 8
\nThe literary unit 8:5\u201322 joins 7:10\u201388 in being parade-examples of the literary style of the
\nPriestly writer. That is, vv. 5\u201319 lay out, in great detail, the procedure that the Levites are to take in preparation for consecration. Then, vv. 20\u201322 report, step by step, that the prescribed regulations were followed. Jacob Milgrom has illustrated this in the following grand panel structure (The JPS Torah Commentary: Numbers [Philadelphia: The Jewish Publication Society, 1990], 368):
\nA. Introduction (v. 5)
\nB. Prescriptive Procedure (vv. 7b\u201313)
\n1. The Levites (v. 7)
\na. lustral water
\nb. shaving
\nc. laundering
\nd. bathing
\n2. The Sacrificial Procedure (vv. 8\u201312)
\na. hand leaning by Israel on Levites
\nb. tenufah of Levites
\nc. hand leaning of Levites on bulls
\n3. Levites subordinated to priest s (v. 13)
\nC. The Rationale (vv. 14\u201319)
\n1. Separate Levites for God
\n2. Qualify Levites for sanctuary labor
\n3. Replace first-born with Levites
\n4. Ransom Israelites from sacrilege of encroachment
\nB\u2032 Descriptive Procedure (vv. 20\u201322a)
\n1. The Levites
\na. lustral water (shaving)
\nb. laundering (bathing)
\n2. The Sacrificial Procedure
\ntenufa of Levites (by Aaron, v. 1)
\n(presupposes hand leaning)
\n3. Levites subordinated to priests
\nA\u2032. Conclusion (v. 22b)
\nThe word tenufa indicates an elevated presentation of the offering (NRSV, \u201celevation offering\u201d).<\/p>\n
Priests transporting Ark
\nTransportation of the Ark of the Covenant containing the Tablets of the Law.<\/p>\n
Luigi Ademollo (1764\u20131849). Galleria Palatina, Palazzo Pitti, Florence, Italy. (Credit: Wikimedia Commons, PD-US)<\/p>\n
First, they are to be cleansed: sprinkled with special water, their entire body shaved, and their clothing laundered (vv. 6\u20137). Following this, sacrificial rites are to be performed and the Levites themselves are to presented as an \u201coffering\u201d to the Lord and to be acknowledged as such by the Deity (vv. 8\u201319). Once this dedicatory rite is completed, the Levites began their duties in assistance of the Aaronide priests (vv. 20\u201326). [Comment on Details of Numbers 8]<\/p>\n
Comment on Details of Numbers 8
\n8:7, \u201cWater of purification.\u201d This unique term has been equated with the \u201cwater for cleansing\u201d that are formulated at 19:9, 21, but other interpreters disagree. In any case, it should be distinguished from the \u201choly water\u201d (of 5:17) which is mentioned only in connection with priestly (Aaronide) activity.
\n8:7, \u201cwash their clothes.\u201d Presumably, then don them again, in contrast to their superiors, the Aaronide priests, who are vested with special garments (Exod 28:1\u201343; 39:1; Lev 8:6\u20139). No anointing oil was applied to them, in contrast to the Aaronides (Lev 8:10\u201313).
\n8:10, \u201c\u2026 the Israelites shall lay their hands on the Levites.\u2026\u201d Such an act was a symbolic transfer to the Levites to God\u2019s service, as if it were a sacrificial act (as at v. 12). (See the commentary on Lev 16:20\u201322.)
\n8:17\u201318, \u201c\u2026 in place of all the firstborn \u2026\u201d An extension and clarification of 3:40\u201341. When the destroying-angel went throughout the land of Egypt, he slew the firstborn of the Egyptians but spared those of the Israelites. Now, in compensation or as a substitute, the Deity accepts the lives of the Levites through service in the cult.
\n8:23, \u201c\u2026 from twenty-five years old and upward \u2026\u201d This minimal age for Levitical service differs from that of 4:3, 23, 30) where the minimum is aged 30. The Septuagint (LXX) may have solved the problem by harmonizing the instances in chapter 4 with that of 8:23. Alternatively, these may be two original, independent textual variants (traditions) that cannot be harmonized.<\/p>\n
CONNECTIONS<\/p>\n
Meeting Church Expenses<\/p>\n
Providing and maintaining a religious establishment is not cheap. The benefits of the cult, provided by God\u2019s graciousness, are available to all and so all should respond economically and do so with gratitude. Thus the tribes spontaneously bring the gifts; there is no coercive command from the mouth of Moses. Nothing is said about a consequent material blessing for those who contribute; no such modern self-serving encouragement to donate as is sometimes heard from the traveling evangelist: \u201cGod will bless you real good.\u201d
\nThus chapter 7 alludes to some of the extensive needs of Israel\u2019s cult: means of transportation; utensils of various sorts; sacrificial animals, grain offerings, and incense; sanctuary lamps and a perpetual source of fuel; facilities for laundry and food. Consequently, not only do all of the people (tribal groups) have an obligation to support the sanctuary, but they are to do so in equal measure: no exceptions and no excesses. This sense of equality explains the monotonous repetition of the tribal contributions.
\nModern church members, whose contact with the congregation is often limited to occasional presence in the sanctuary for an hour or so, have scarcely an inkling of the full range of expenses. They may be aware of nothing more than a pastoral salary and perhaps the provision of housing (and think that possibly too much!). They may assume that they have little or no obligation when it comes time for an annual pledge. They may even resent that they are asked to specify at least an approximate figure for annual donation. Only those who struggle with formulating and meeting the budget will be fully aware of the magnitude of the overall undertaking.
\nIt is well to remember the services and facilities that the local church provides to families in cases of baptism, marriage, and death; visitation and comfort in crises of health; the Christian education and values that its teachers instill in children; food and shelter to the needy that it provides in behalf of its members; and (as the ad-men say), \u201cmuch, much more.\u201d<\/p>\n
New Testament Connections<\/p>\n
When Saint Paul writes to the Christians at Rome, he encourages them to full dedication to God: \u201cpresent your bodies as a living sacrifice, holy and acceptable to God \u2026\u201d (12:1). Such a concept he likely derived from the book of Numbers, where the tribe of Levi is set aside for divine service. The Levites, living human beings, become in effect an offering to God: they are to be totally dedicated to the Deity, who says of them, they \u201care mine\u201d (8:13\u201317). This is made very clear by the verb that Paul uses (NRSV, \u201cto present\u201d), since it is used in cultic (sacrificial) contexts. The concept of dedication that Numbers presents is here expanded in two ways: (1) from a restriction concerning Levites alone to one applicable to all Christians, and (2) from the cultic sphere to focus upon the entirety of one\u2019s everyday life as a Christian. While formal worship is not thereby to be neglected, nonetheless true worship is here radically redefined. In thinking along these lines, Paul follows the lead both of Hellenistic Judaism and of the sectarians at Qumran. For example: \u201cOfferings of the lips are accounted as a sweet fragrance of righteousness and blamelessness of conduct as an acceptable freewill offering.\u201d
\nA modern interpreter puts the matter clearly:<\/p>\n
Christian worship does not consist of what is practiced at sacred sites, at sacred times, and with sacred acts (Schlatter). It is the offering of bodily existence in the otherwise profane sphere. As something constantly demanded this takes place in daily life, whereby every Christian is simultaneously sacrifice and priest. Here the universal priesthood of all believers is proclaimed.\u2026\u201d<\/p>\n
The contemporary Christian hymn \u201cSanctuary\u201d says it thusly:<\/p>\n
Lord, prepare me
\nto be a sanctuary,
\npure and holy, tried and true.
\nWith thanksgiving,
\nI\u2019ll be a living
\nsanctuary for you.<\/p>\n
FINAL PREPARATION FOR DEPARTURE<\/p>\n
Numbers 9:1\u201310:10<\/p>\n
Three requirements remain to be clarified before the camp can at last begin its journey toward \u201cthe promised land.\u201d By content, the materials concerning them are unrelated, save that they must be resolved within the chronological confines to which the Priestly writer has assigned them. The material is framed by temporal references at 9:1 (\u201c\u2026 in the first month \u2026\u201d) and 10:11 (\u201cIn the second year \u2026\u201d) when the march is to begin.
\nThe three sections are as follows:<\/p>\n
1. A look backward: celebration of the Passover is reaffirmed as a memorial of the departure from Egypt, with some new regulations governing its observance (9:1\u201314);
\n2. A look forward: scheduling the times of march under divine control (i.e., when to march and how long to remain in camp) (9:15\u201323);
\n3. Audible signals for various events: to assemble in order to march, to sequence the groups, to warn of military emergency, and to announce the appointed festivals (10:1\u201310).<\/p>\n
COMMENTARY<\/p>\n
A Look Backward: The Passover Reaffirmed, 9:1\u201314<\/p>\n
Immediately upon entering this section we encounter a chronological difficulty. The episode is set in the second year after the exodus from Egypt, the first month thereof. The book of Numbers began, however, with events on the first day of the second month of that year! In short, we have moved forward through eight chapters (taking time for gathering census data, outlines of duties, disclosure of cultic regulations, presentation of tribal gifts to the sanctuary, and rites of consecration), and yet, have moved backward in time!
\nThe Priestly writer, sensing the gravity of the moment when Israel leaves the vicinity of the sacred mountain (thus beginning the march toward its geographical destiny), apparently wants to have it coincide with the date of the Passover celebration. The departure is, in effect, to be ranked with that from Egypt. However, since the celebration would be in the first month of the year, that would place the event before the initiation of the census (and subsequent events) at 1:1. The Priestly writer possibly resolved this problem by intending the verb at 9:1 to be a pluperfect tense: \u201cThe LORD had spoken to Moses \u2026 in the first month.\u2026\u201d Thus the instructions for the Passover serve as a \u201cflashback\u201d to Exodus 40:17 which is likewise set in \u201cthe first month in the second year.\u201d [Glitches]<\/p>\n
Glitches
\nChronological \u201cglitches\u201d in the Bible, if that is the case here (and they are by no means rare), serve to remind us that accuracy in the sequence of events was not always of great concern to its authors and editors. For example, we read of the death of Jacob\u2019s wife Rachel at Gen 35:19\u201320. Yet, at 37:9\u201310, she seems to be alive and well! Such discrepancies are only to be expected from material that was gathered and edited in independent stages (according to the traditional \u201cDocumentary Hypothesis\u201d these would be J, E, D, and P). Thus we are reminded by the Bible itself that chronological accuracy was not always necessary for the articulation of theological truth.
\nSuch a reminder can be therapeutic for at least two audiences in the present: (1) \u201cliteralists,\u201d who cannot see past the words to the meaning (beyond the \u201claw\u201d to its \u201cspirit\u201d), and (2) sophomoric critics of the Bible who think that by pointing to such problems in the text they have somehow undermined its validity.<\/p>\n
So important is the Passover celebration for reaffirming the community\u2019s identity that everyone (including resident aliens who desire to do so, v. 14) must observe it. If circumstances prevent observance (such as ritual impurity caused by touching a corpse, or if anyone is away on a trip, v. 10), then a \u201cmake-up\u201d celebration is to be observed one month later (v. 11). This is an interesting and instructive deviation from the stress by the Priestly writer that religious duties must be carried out with precision by the correct personnel, at the right time and place. Beyond the merits of such obedience and regimentation there are deeper goals and values, as both the Pharisees and Jesus would later point out. (For illustrations of Pharisaic leniency in interpreting torah, see the discussions of Lev 12; 17; 18, and 27.)<\/p>\n
A Look Forward: Scheduling the Times of March (9:15\u201323)<\/p>\n
The continuing presence of God with Israel during the wilderness itinerary is an important theme for the Priestly writer: the deliverance from Egypt (Exod 1\u201315), provision of food and water (Exod 16), deliverance from enemies (Exod 17), and the great theophany at Sinai and its resultant guidelines (Exod 17\u2013Num 9). It is paramount that assurance be given to the people that the Divine Presence will now accompany them as they leave the sacred mountain and enter \u201cthe great and terrible wilderness\u201d (Deut 1:19).
\nIn addition, future generations must have a reminder that Israel did not reach \u201cthe promised land\u201d as the mere result of capable human leadership or good fortune from random events. God\u2019s presence is expressed through visible means: a cloud by day and a pillar of fire by night. No movement of the camp was made, not even by Moses and not even if it necessitates pausing for a month or longer, without a cue from the Deity. No doubt is to remain about whose agenda is unfolding here.
\nIt has been noted by modern interpreters that the language of this section is distinctive. It is more than prose, and not quite poetry, resulting in an elevated prose that is meant to express the anticipation and excitement as the camp cues up for departure.<\/p>\n
Audible Signals for Various Events, 10:1\u201310<\/p>\n
This small section is a catch-all regulation for the means of announcing preparation for and the onset of significant events: mustering for war, appointed festivals, the new moon that begins each month, and parts of liturgical celebrations. The origin of the instruments to be used on such occasions (two silver trumpets) is now traced back to the wilderness. Moses is instructed to make the trumpets and to use them as a means of coordinating the line of march.
\nAll has now been made ready. The first great episode of the book of Numbers (1:1\u201310:10) is complete. Thus, upon God\u2019s signal, the great journey toward \u201cthe promised land\u201d will finally begin. [Comment on Details of Numbers 9\u201310]<\/p>\n
Comment on Details of Numbers 9\u201310
\n9:6, \u201c\u2026 touching a corpse \u2026\u201d This near-necessity (in case of the death of family members at a minimum) was absolutely forbidden only to those who had taken temporary vows as a Nazirite (6:6\u20137) and the high priest (Lev 21:11). For all others, it necessitated a period of ritual purification during which one would be disqualified from participation in the Passover.
\n9:10, \u201c\u2026 is away on a journey \u2026\u201d The Hebrew text has \u201cdistant journey,\u201d a circumstance scarcely fitting the encampment during the wilderness generation. Rather, it presupposes settlement in the land of Canaan and required celebration at a central sanctuary (see Deut 12:5\u20136). This suggests that the Priestly writings became canonical only after the enactment of Deuteronomic law by King Josiah in 621 BC (2 Kgs 22\u201323). (For Josiah\u2019s reform, see the discussion of Num 35.)
\n9:11, \u201c\u2026 in the second month \u2026 they shall keep it \u2026\u201d Such a make-up celebration of Passover, on a national scale, is reported in 2 Chr 30.
\n9:13, \u201c\u2026 shall be cut off from the people.\u201d For the meaning of this enigmatic phrase, see the discussion of Lev 7:20.
\n9:14, \u201c\u2026 alien \u2026 who wishes to keep the Passover.\u201d This participation did, however, require circumcision (Exod 12:48).
\n9:15\u201323. The central word \u201ctabernacle\u201d and the crucial term \u201ccommand of the LORD\u201d occur seven times each in this section. This is a common numerical device by the Priestly writer. (On literary artistry, see the introduction to the commentary on Leviticus.)
\n9:15, When \u201cthe tabernacle was set up.\u201d This happened in \u201cthe first month in the second year\u201d (Exod 40:17), further supporting the idea that the event narrated at 9:1 is a \u201cflashback.\u201d At that time the \u201ccloud covered the tent,\u201d where it has remained until the day of departure from the vicinity of Sinai (Num 10:11).
\n9:15, \u201c\u2026 appearance of fire.\u201d According to Exod 40:34, this was part of God\u2019s \u201cglory\u201d (for discussion, see the Introduction to the commentary on Leviticus.)
\n10:2, \u201ctrumpets.\u201d For discussion of such instruments, see commentary on Lev 25:8\u201324. One of the Dead Sea Scrolls (the so-called War Scroll, 1QM, at ii.9\u201314) outlines the use of trumpets for various kinds of assembly (e.g., entire assembly, marshalling for battle, pursuit of the enemy, etc.).
\n10:5\u20136. MT (followed by most English translations) mentions only the first two trumpet blasts, signals for the east and south encampments to move forward. That they should lead the way is logical, since they consist of the Aaronide priests (east) and their closest relatives, the Kohathites (south). By implication, the others would then follow: west and north. LXX, however, \u201cspells out\u201d the command for these two remaining groups to assume the line of march. This is accepted as the preferable text by NAB under the assumption that the textual tradition represented by MT has accidentally dropped it. The error would have been causes by homoeoarchton (\u201csimilar ending\u201d) whereby a copyist\u2019s eye skipped the mention of the remaining two groups.
\n10:10, \u201cyour appointed festivals.\u201d Those assigned to specific dates on the calendar, as outlined in Lev 23.<\/p>\n
CONNECTIONS<\/p>\n
Evidence of God\u2019s Power to Save<\/p>\n
Compelling evidence of God\u2019s power to save has now been given to the former slaves from Egypt (Exod 1\u201315). Ethical and ritual guidelines sufficient to establish identity as the people of God have been granted at Mt. Sinai (Exod 20\u2013Num 10). The absolute necessity for all members of the community to celebrate the Passover annually, as a reminder of God\u2019s graciousness, has been reaffirmed (9:1\u201314). This alone, however, is insufficient to guarantee survival amidst the trials of history that lie ahead and thus to ensure safe arrival in the \u201cpromised land.\u201d The necessity for God\u2019s continuing presence and guidance is now recognized and this is symbolically represented by the cloud that will go before them by day and by night (9:15\u201323).
\nChristians sense a reaffirmation and expansion of these realities through the saving event of Jesus\u2019 death and resurrection; they receive divine guidance through the expanded canon (New Testament); and they recognize the absolute necessity for liturgical reminders at regular calendric intervals (e.g., Easter as an extension of Passover). Nonetheless, the community would scarcely have sustained itself apart from an outpouring of the Holy Spirit (Acts 2:1\u20134) and the granting of an \u201cAdvocate to be with you forever\u201d (John 14:16\u201317).
\nSuch reassurance is needed at present, when the human leadership of the churches displays fallibility, when teachers betray the historic faith in pursuit of theological trendiness, when members becomes antagonists concerning matters that are trivial. When one\u2019s faith in the effectiveness of the church is undermined by the growing influence of secularism, it may be comforting to remember that its viability really resides in the sovereignty and commitment of God. One\u2019s dedication to the church must face the future with confidence that ultimately it will be said that \u201cThe kingdom of the world has become the kingdom of our LORD and of his Messiah, and he will reign forever and ever\u201d (Rev 11:15).<\/p>\n
Connections with the New Testament<\/p>\n
The Gospel of John records that \u201cthe Jews\u201d requested that the bodies of Jesus and the two men who were crucified with him be taken down from the cross so that they (whether alive or dead) not remain there during a double religious holiday (Passover and the Sabbath). Ordinarily, the Romans liked to keep such bodies on display for long periods of time as a warning to viewers to be law-abiding. When occasional concession was made for reasons such as were requested here (19:31\u201333), a heavy mallet was used in order to crush the leg-bones and hasten death (lest someone might escape yet alive). However, since Jesus appeared to be already dead, \u201cthey did not break his legs.\u201d
\nThis apparently was an important detail for John (who alone reports it), since he depicts Jesus as slain as a Passover lamb. According to Num 9:12 (so also Exod 12:46), the Passover sacrifice was not to remain until morning and one was not to \u201cbreak a bone of it.\u201d Thus in John\u2019s view, Jesus qualified as the Passover lamb to the very end.<\/p>\n
THE JOURNEY FROM MT. SINAI TO THE BORDERS OF THE \u201cPROMISED LAND\u201d: AN OVERVIEW<\/p>\n
Numbers 10:11\u201322:1<\/p>\n
Preparation for departure from the sacred mountain (Sinai\/Horeb) has been completed, and Israel is now ready to resume its journey toward the land that had been promised to Abraham and his descendants (Gen 12:1\u20133; 13:14\u201317; 15:18\u201321; and many other locations). That promise is specifically called to mind as Moses prepares set the camp in motion (Num 10:29).
\nAccording to the chronology of the Priestly writer, this prior extensive preparation, both military and cultic, has been completed in a mere twenty days (Num 1:1; 10:11). Now begins the narration of the well-known journey of forty years through the wilderness of the Sinai Peninsula. Attention to chronological detail is quite uneven, however, and the major focus is primarily upon the beginning and the end of the itinerary.
\nIt should be noted, at the outset, that movement of the camp (both in direction and duration) is strictly controlled by the Deity. God\u2019s plan for a worshiping community to be situated in the land of Canaan, first articulated at the time of the Patriarchs and then initially inaugurated by Abraham\u2019s journey, moves inexorably onward. There can be no doubt that the itinerary and its destination are part of an unfolding divine plan. Consequently, the resultant community is not to be regarded as the result of historical accident, not as if it were an inconsequential society among others in the ancient world, and not merely as the pragmatic product of its able human leaders.
\nFor the first time in the exodus itinerary, we meet the geographical designation \u201cthe wilderness of Paran\u201d (10:12). The Priestly writer tends to apply this to the northern part of the Sinai Peninsula.<\/p>\n
Map 1: Traditional Roads through Sinai<\/p>\n
The Route Taken<\/p>\n
Charting specifics of the route of the journey is a maddening exercise in uncertainty that has resulted in conflicting opinions by modern interpreters. This wealth of opinion has resulted from at least the following factors:<\/p>\n
Map 2: The Southern Route of the Exodus<\/p>\n
1. There are numerous traditional routes across the Sinai Peninsula, providing multiple options for ancient travelers and for modern speculation. (See Map 1.)
\n2. The location of some of the sites that are mentioned in the biblical text cannot be determined with precision (foremost among them being that of the sacred mountain itself).
\n3. The various literary sources in the Pentateuch (J, E, D, P), from which the present biblical account has been composed, apparently survives only in fragmentary form and seemingly are not in agreement about specifics of the route. Consequently, some modern interpreters think that the route, as sketched by the J (Yahwist) Source, for example, took the Israelites on a looping course to the southern end of the Peninsula. This southerly route accepts the traditional identification of the sacred mountain with Jebel Musa, at the foot of which is the well known Monastery of Saint Catherine. (See Map 2.)
\nOther scholars propose that the J-Route led directly across the Sinai Peninsula toward Canaan, following \u201cthe way to the Hill Country of the Amorites.\u201d This would identify the sacred mountain as Jebel Hilal. (See Map 3.<\/p>\n
Map 3: The Exodus Route According to J (Alternative)<\/p>\n
A few scholars have proposed a northern route along the coast of the Mediterranean approximating \u201cThe Way of Egypt\u201d (\u201cThe Way to the Land of the Philistines\u201d).
\n4. It is possible that the route attributed to Moses is, at least in part, composed of various annual tribal seasonal migrations. These may have been inserted into the Bible\u2019s present route.
\nIt will not be the task of the present volume to venture an opinion on these competing geographical claims.<\/p>\n
Destination<\/p>\n
Although there is mention of various smaller encampments along the way (e.g., at 11:3, 34\u201335), the first major stop appears to have been at Kadesh (13:26). Departure therefrom is related at 20:22.
\nThe location of this site (identified with Kadesh-barnea at 32:8) is relatively certain: a series of oases at a junction of traditional routes across the Sinai Peninsula. (See Map 1.) One of the oases apparently preserves the biblical name to this day: (\u2018Ain) Qadesh. Another, (\u2018Ain) el-Qudeirat, nearby, is more extensive and thus is sometimes supposed to be the biblical site.
\nOases, in an otherwise barren desert, were viewed as a special location of divine activity (by gods of fertility). It is not surprising, then, that this location (and others like it) were given the name Kadesh\/Qadesh (\u201csanctuary\u201d or \u201choly [place]\u201d) and that travelers would long linger near it.
\nHow long Israel remained at this site is not explicitly stated, but the traditional understanding of \u201cin the first month\u201d (20:1) is that it refers to the fortieth year after the departure from Egypt and thus that the stay was for thirty-eight years. Support for this may be found in the statement that Aaron died shortly thereafter (20:22\u201324), in the fortieth year \u201cafter the Israelites had come out of the land of Egypt\u201d (33:38).<\/p>\n
GETTING UNDER WAY<\/p>\n
Numbers 10:11\u201336<\/p>\n
The group now begins its journey toward the Land of Canaan, departing from the vicinity of the sacred mountain.
\nThis portion of text may be divided into the following thematic sections:<\/p>\n
1. The time of departure (vv. 11\u201313);
\n2. The sequence of tribes as they march (vv. 14\u201328);
\n3. Securing a local guide (vv. 29\u201332);
\n4. The initial segment of the journey (vv. 33\u201336).<\/p>\n
COMMENTARY<\/p>\n
The Time of Departure, 10:11\u201313<\/p>\n
A cloud, symbolizing the divine presence, had begun to lead the people upon their departure from Egypt (Exod 13:17) and had settled over the sanctuary upon its completion (Exod 40:34). It will now guide the people across the wilderness toward their destination in the land of Canaan (9:17\u201322). By night, it was replaced by a column of fire.<\/p>\n
The Sequence of Tribes as They March, 10:14\u201328<\/p>\n
The arrangement for the march generally follows that of the encampment in chapters 1\u20132. A slight adjustment is made so that the Levitical Gershonites and Meranites (who encamp behind and beside the sanctuary\/tabernacle and who transport the dismantled structure) now are allowed to precede the Levitical Kohathites who transport the sacred objects that are to be placed inside it (10:17, 21). In this fashion, the sanctuary structure, at the next encampment, will have been set up and be ready to receive its contents upon their arrival.<\/p>\n
Image Not Available
\ndue to lack of digital rights. Please view the published commentary or perform an Internet search using the credit below.<\/p>\n
Moses and the column of fire<\/p>\n
Raphael (1483\u20131520) (school of). The Pillar of Smoke from The Story of Moses. Fresco. Logge, Vatican Palace, Vatican State. (Photo Credit: Scala \/ Art Resource, NY)<\/p>\n
Securing a Local Guide, 10:29\u201332<\/p>\n
Realizing the value of having a guide who knows the local terrain and the location of sources of water, Moses asks Hobab, his father-in-law, to serve in that capacity. His initial inducement is one of kinship and reward: that Hobab be available to share in the bright future that lies ahead. Only when Hobab modestly declines does Moses express the deeper and more realistic need for his services. Moses\u2019 entreaty apparently was successful (Judg 4:11).
\nA problem of identity now emerges. Although Hobab is also identified as Moses\u2019 father-in-law at Judg 4:11, that role is assigned to Reuel at Exod 2:18 and to Jethro at Exod 18:1. Some translations (e.g., TEV, NEB, NAB; contrast, in addition to NRSV, JPS\/NJV and JB) propose that the crucial word (\u1e25oten) can mean both father-in-law and brother-in-law, and choose the latter in order to relieve the difficulty. According to Exod 3:1, Moses\u2019 father-in-law was a resident of the Sinai Peninsula, living in the vicinity of the sacred mountain.<\/p>\n
The Initial Segment of the Journey, 10:33\u201336<\/p>\n
Verses 35\u201336 are commonly referred to as \u201cThe Song of the Ark.\u201d The context into which it has been placed here anticipates military opposition from tribes that will be encountered in the wilderness. Hence the former verb (\u201carise\u201d) contextually means something like, \u201cadvance (into battle),\u201d and the latter (\u201creturn\u201d) implores the invisible Deity to come back to the cherubic seat inside the sanctuary [for these mythological creatures, see the Introduction to Numbers, with photo]. The \u201cten thousand thousands\u201d refers either to (a) the angelic hosts who supposedly will fight for Israel, or (b) the human warriors of Israel (in view of the military census in ch. 1). [Inverted Consonants] [Comment on Details of Numbers 10:11, 14]<\/p>\n
Inverted Consonants
\nVv. 35\u201336 are bracketed in the Hebrew text, using a form that looks like an inverted consonantal \u201cn\u201d [nun]. This ancient scribal marking, occurring a total of nine times in the Old Testament, seems to indicate a passage that has been dislocated and is thus out of place. It is interesting, therefore, that the Septuagint has v. 34 after this passage rather than before it. B. A. Levine (Numbers 1\u201320 [AB 4; New York: Doubleday, 1993], 317\u201318, and the sources cited there) suggests that the markers, in this case, are a scribal indication that the verses have been borrowed \u201cfrom an independent source\u201d (for Rabbinic antecedents of this position, see J. Milgrom, The JPS Torah Commentary: Numbers [Philadelphia: The Jewish Publication Society, 1990], 375\u201376).
\nFor a brief mention of this phenomenon (called \u201cinverted nuns\u201d), see B. J. Roberts, \u201cText, OT,\u201d in vol. 4 of IDB (R-Z), ed. George Arthur Buttrick (Nashville: Abingdon Press, 1962), 580\u201394, at 585-a. For detail, see Christian D. Ginsburg, Introduction to the Massoretico-Critical Edition of the Hebrew Bible, reprinted with Prolegomenon by Harry Orlinsky (New York: KTAV Publishing House, 1966), 341\u201345.<\/p>\n
Comment on Details of Numbers 10:11, 14
\nV. 11, \u201c\u2026 of the covenant.\u201d Footnotes (in NRSV) equate the term with \u201ctreaty or testimony,\u201d thereby referring to the loyalty-oath that Israel had taken at the sacred mountain to obey the Deity. This covenant has parallels with ancient diplomatic treaties that great kings made with their subjects. The expression is apparently an abbreviated form of \u201ctablets of the covenant,\u201d thereby referring to documents that were kept in the sanctuary.
\nV. 14, \u201cstandard.\u201d See the discussion of 2:2.<\/p>\n
A New Literary Source<\/p>\n
Careful readers may notice a dramatic shift in focus that begins at 10:29. It is distinctive enough to lead readers to suspect that a new literary source now makes its appearance. If so, we are no longer reading material from the Priestly writer. Among the reasons for suspecting such a transition are the following:
\n1. We suddenly are reminded of Moses\u2019 father-in-law, whom we first encountered at Exodus 3 and about whom we have not heard since Exodus 18.
\n2. Concern with cultic matters, which began in earnest at Exodus 35 and has continued scarcely without interruption until Numbers 10:28, now temporarily ceases. The High Priest Aaron and his descendants, who have been the focus of attention previously (in such matters as ordination, dress, duties, structure and function of the portable sanctuary, etc.), now recede into the background. The focus of leadership now shifts entirely to Moses. When God\u2019s judgment is stayed, it is not Aaron\u2019s cultic intermediation that affects it, but solely the prayer of Moses (11:1\u20132). When the burden of leadership becomes so demanding that Moses needs assistance, it is shared with the elders of Israel rather than with the priesthood (11:16). When Aaron finally makes an appearance in this new literary source (at 12:1), it is in the role of challenger to the authority of Moses, reminiscent of his reprehensible role in the worship of the golden calf (Exod 32). The priest who, in another tradition (Exod 40:34\u201335), alone can enter the sanctuary (whereas Moses cannot!) must now address Moses as \u201cmy lord,\u201d and plead with him mercy (12:11).
\n3. There is a sudden transition in the tone and pace of the narrative as well. The tranquility of Israel\u2019s existence in the previous chapters is now abruptly shattered. The spontaneous and immediate obedience that is evident in the previous material is brought to a sudden end. The story-line, previously static and monotonous while the people are stalled in camp, suddenly breaks into a rapid sequence of reports of rebellion as they begin to move forward.
\n4. Formerly, the community in the wilderness has been referred to as the \u201ccongregation\u201d and the \u201cIsraelites.\u201d Now we encounter the designation \u201cthe people.\u201d
\nThis new source continues unabated through chapter 12 and it is then conflated with Priestly writings throughout chapters 13 and 14. The latter source, with its cultic concerns, returns with full vigor at chapter 15. Thereafter in the book there is often a mixture of the two sources in which the chronologically later Priestly writings predominate.
\nTraditionally, modern scholars have linked this new source in Numbers with two old epic traditions that they have designated as the Yahwist (\u201cJ\u201d) and the Elohist (\u201cE\u201d). Those sources made their appearance early in Genesis and continued, interspersed with the Priestly writer (P\u201d), until Exodus 35. (See the introduction to the commentary on Leviticus and introduction to the commentary on Numbers.
\nLittle attempt will be made in the present volume to distinguish the contribution of one of these sources from the other. Indeed, they will usually be lumped together as \u201cthe JE Source\u201d or as \u201cthe early source.\u201d
\nWhat are the emphases of this segment of the old JE tradition? At least the following might be mentioned:
\n1. The people of God, from their very beginning, had a tendency toward ingratitude and rebellion. This portrait of humanity begins to be sketched by this tradition even in the early chapters of Genesis (e.g., the story of the Garden of Eden, the murder of Cain, the wickedness of the pre-flood generations). As pertains to the first generation after deliverance from Egyptian bondage, we not only read of it here in Numbers but also in the prophet Ezekiel: \u201cYet she (Israel) increased her whorings, remembering the days of her youth, when she played the whore in land of Egypt\u201d (23:19).
\nIn such a seemingly helpless situation, where is ultimate hope to be found? Only in a deity who answers intercession for the contrite (11:2), who has a history of miraculous provision for physical need (11:7) and does so again (11:18\u201322, 31), who inspires leadership in time of need (11:16, 25), and indeed whose power is unlimited (11:23).
\n2. Ultimate authority for the people of God is to reside in a single leader, although that authority might be delegated to subordinates throughout society (ch. 12). That leadership must follow a Mosaic model and especially must it not be challenged by: (1) prophets who claimed a special revelation as the result of charismatic infusion of God\u2019s spirit; (2) the priesthood (personified as Aaron); and (3) charismatic female liturgical leaders (typified by Miriam).
\nExactly when challenges began to arise from these quarters (either in the wilderness itself, or later in the monarchical period when the JE traditions were assembled and edited) is difficult to determine. Nonetheless, tensions began to develop early in the monarchical period, at least from two of these groups.
\n1. Elements of prophetic groups did challenge the policies of individual monarchs and even work for their removal from office, although they seem not to have challenged the institution it self. Conspicuous in this regard are the activities of the prophets Ahijah (1 Kgs 11) and Elisha (2 Kgs 9).
\n2. Priestly groups tried to play the role of king-maker, sometimes with success and sometimes not (1 Kgs 1).<\/p>\n
The Song of Miriam<\/p>\n
James Jacques Joseph Tissot (1836\u20131902).The Songs of Joy. Gouche. Gift of the Heirs of Jacob Schiff. (Credit: Wikimedia Commons, PD-US)<\/p>\n
Miriam had played a conspicuous leadership role in worship in the past (Exod 15:20\u201321), but it is difficult to determine when those citing her as a role model later surfaced in a competition for leadership.
\nOne modern interpreter has suggested that the JE tradition has deliberately cast the role of Moses in such fashion that the later monarchy can be understood within its parameters. For example, Moses, like the later monarchs, while retaining ultimate power, appoints subordinates from among the people with military precision and jurisdiction (Exod 18:13\u201323). God\u2019s spirit \u201crests upon\u201d Moses and can be transferred to his delegates (Num 11:25), just as that spirit \u201crests upon\u201d members of the monarchical line (Isa 11:2). God speaks of Moses as \u201cmy servant \u2026 entrusted with all my house\u201d (Num 12:7), words similar to those used elsewhere to describe king David (1 Sam 22:14). Consequently, \u201cThe theory of government projected here accommodates the monarchy, and would appear to endorse the Davidic dynasty.\u201d<\/p>\n
CONNECTIONS<\/p>\n
Waiting with Hopeful Expectation<\/p>\n
It is important to note that the people do not initiate their long anticipated journey at their own whim and initiative. However desirous they may have been to realize their promised destiny, they do not move toward the land that God had promised to give them until they received \u201cthe command of the LORD\u201d (v. 13). The Deity\u2019s schedule, here and elsewhere in Scripture, does not always accord with what worshipers may deem appropriate, desirable or timely.
\nBoth ancient community and individuals frequently had to be advised to wait with patience and hopeful expectation until, in the Lord\u2019s own time, the divine agenda unfolded (Gen 49:18; Pss 27:14; 37:7; Acts 1:1\u20135). The plaintive plea, \u201cHow long, O LORD\u201d is well attested in prayer (Pss 13:1; 35:17; 74:10). Nonetheless, such prayers are grounded in belief in God\u2019s sovereignty and righteousness.
\nIt should be noted that the order of march follows the guidelines previously given at 2:1\u201334. This indicates a willingness by the people to take instruction, to be obedient, and to undertake tasks with a seriousness that transcended ordinary day-to-day activities. A disciplined religious life may rule out the frivolity, self-assertiveness, capriciousness, and laxity that sometimes characterizes \u201csecular\u201d activities.
\nIt is clear that Moses has an ulterior motive when he invites a Midianite clan to come along on the journey. Thus he says, \u201cyou will serve as eyes for us,\u201d (v. 31). Nonetheless, he also acknowledges that God\u2019s goodness, evident in the formation of Israel, has a much wider potential: \u201cWe will treat you well; for the LORD has promised good to Israel.\u2026 whatever good the LORD does for us, the same we will do for you\u201d (vv. 29, 32). This echoes the promise given long previously to the patriarch Abraham: \u201c\u2026 in you all the families of the earth shall be blessed\u201d (Gen 12:3). This expectation reflects an optimism about the future for humans, one that is sometimes hard to maintain in the modern secular, fractious, and brutal world.
\nOn the individual level, such optimism, grounded in divine assurance, is reflected in a stanza from the well known hymn, \u201cAmazing Grace\u201d:<\/p>\n
The Lord has promised good to me.
\nhis word my hope secures;
\nhe will my shield and portion be,
\nas long as life endures.<\/p>\n
COMPLAINTS AND STRIFE ALONG THE WAY<\/p>\n
Numbers 11:1\u201312:16<\/p>\n
A crucial moment in Israel\u2019s history has now been reached, and this is true in two regards:
\n1. Previously (and in Leviticus in particular), the focus has been upon the transmission of God\u2019s guidelines for daily life. Now, it is time to test Israel\u2019s acceptance of those guidelines in the context of the \u201creal world.\u201d How well will the people be able to function under the covenantal regulations in a world of culture conflict? Should they struggle (or even fail), wherein does hope ultimately lie?
\nThe text thus relates a series of complaints that the people make about hardships that they are enduring, leading to expression of consequent dissatisfaction with the leadership of Moses (and ultimately with divine providence). This is a theme that has been voiced previously (e.g., at Exod 16 and 17), and which modern scholars have designated as \u201cmurmuring in the wilderness\u201d (or \u201crebellion in the wilderness\u201d).
\nThere may be an intended contrast between the way that these episodes are introduced and the way that the previous chapter has ended. That is, no sooner has Moses confidently set the people on their way than they, constant recipients of God\u2019s guidance and graciousness, begin to complain. It is important to notice that, despite divine anger at such ingratitude, the people\u2019s needs are miraculously met. Rightly has a modern interpreter observed, concerning this generation in the wilderness, that \u201cIt is the only age in the Bible in which miracle is a daily fact of life.\u201d
\n2. The transmission of guidelines (torah) to the former slaves who have escaped from Egypt and their formal acceptance of them at Mt. Sinai, marks the emergence of Israel as a religious entity. It is understandable, then, that there be a change in the way that the Deity is depicted as responding to the people\u2019s complaints and failures. Now that the covenant stipulations have been accepted, they become the normative guidelines to which the Deity will hold self-aware subjects accountable.
\nThis is clearly evident when episodes that are near duplicates are compared. In a pre-Sinai episode, the people complain bitterly about lack of food in the harsh wilderness. God acknowledges the complaint and responds to it with \u201cbread from heaven\u201d: flocks of quail by evening and layers of manna by morning. The divine response is depicted as one of easy-going graciousness (Exod 16). However, when the same complaint arises after the departure from Sinai, we are told not only that Moses was displeased but also that \u201cthe LORD became very angry\u201d (Num 11:4\u201310).
\nA similar contrast may be found in the complain about the lack of water. In the pre-Sinai account, while Moses is disappointed by the complaint, the Deity quickly responds without irritation (Exod 17:1\u20137). Not so in the post-Sinai report, where divine displeasure is clear (Num 20:2\u201313).
\nThree episodes of rebellion against leaders and deity are now reported. They happened (or have been editorially arranged) in a sequence that reveals a natural deepening of the mood of dissatisfaction and rebellion and thereby discloses the perverseness of the human spirit:<\/p>\n
1. A brief and vague complaint (11:1\u20133);
\n2. Complaint about lack of food (11:4\u201335);
\n3. A challenge to Moses\u2019 leadership (12:1\u201316).<\/p>\n
COMMENTARY<\/p>\n
A Brief and Vague Complaint, 11:1\u20133<\/p>\n
In this initial episode, no basis for complaint is stated. The report thus serves as an editorial introduction to a general tendency of the wilderness generation: ingratitude toward leaders and the Deity on the part of the congregation that has been delivered from slavery.<\/p>\n
Complaint about Lack of Food, 11:4\u201335<\/p>\n
Now comes a reality-based complaint to which the modern reader can relate: the bodily need for food. This is certainly understandable amidst the harsh wilderness in which the people now find themselves. Such protest is made reprehensible only by the fact that ingratitude is being voiced for the food that has already been miraculously provided. From one end of the camp to the other (11:10), the cry arises: \u201cThere is nothing at all but this manna to look at\u201d (11:6). Worse still is the comparison made with the variety of food that had been available to them in Egypt (11:5), as if, under the circumstances, they would have preferred to remain in slavery there (11:18).<\/p>\n
Fertility of Marshes along the Nile
\nNakht with his family hunting in the Nile Marshes. Detail of a wallpainting in the tomb of Nakht, scribe and priest under Pharaoh Tuthmosis IV (18th Dynasty, 16th\u201314th C. BC), in the cemetery of Sheikh Abd al-Qurnah.<\/p>\n
(Credit: Norman de Garis Davies, Nina Davies \/ Wikimedia Commons, PD-US)<\/p>\n
Such comparison is perhaps understandable, given the natural and proverbial fertility of the land that borders the river Nile. It likely was the prototype for the biblical projection of the \u201cpromised land\u201d as one that \u201cflowed with milk and honey\u201d (Exod 3:8). Numerous artistic depictions by Egyptians reinforce this portrait of their land.
\nLittle information is given here concerning the food-substance \u201cmanna,\u201d since the reader would be familiar with it from its initial appearance at Exodus 16. It has been the staple of diet for so long that it has grown unappealing to the taste. Apparently a natural substance secreted by an insect that sucks the sap from the tamarisk tree, it is still gathered in limited amounts the Sinai Peninsula. The former Israelite slaves, unfamiliar with the substance, asked, \u201cWhat is it?\u201d (lit., man h\u00fb\u02be). That then became its name (Heb.: man; manna in the Greek Bible [LXX].)
\nThe NRSV description of Moses\u2019 response to the complaints (\u201cdispleased,\u201d v. 10) suggests that his displeasure was with the Israelites. The wording of JPS\/NJV (\u201cdistressed\u201d) may be more accurate, allowing the possibility that Moses sided with the people and was perhaps troubled by the divine reaction (\u201cbecame very angry,\u201d v. 10). In any case, Moses cannot supply the needs that are directed to him by the people and so despairs of the burden of his office. It is God who called this community into existence, but Moses who bears the brunt of the situation. It is the Deity who assumed the role of parenting them and who thus should \u201cstep up to the plate.\u201d [Emendations of the Scribes]<\/p>\n
Emendations of the Scribes
\nScribal tradition is that the text of v. 15 originally read, \u201cyour [i.e., God\u2019s] misery,\u201d but that such an inappropriate statement about God (i.e., that the Deity could feel miserable) led the scribes to change the reading to \u201cmy [i.e., Moses\u2019] misery.\u201d
\nOn this fascinating type of scribal notation (of which there are eighteen in the Bible), see C. McCarthy, \u201cEmendations of the Scribes,\u201d in IDBSup, ed. Keith Crim (Nashville: Abingdon Press, 1976), 263\u201364.<\/p>\n
God\u2019s subsequent gracious response to the desire for meat takes the form of a miraculous supply of quail. This has a parallel at Exodus 16:13 and is referred to elsewhere in Scripture (e.g., Pss 78:26\u201329; 105:40). This is an otherwise natural phenomenon, since quail migrate across from Europe to Africa in the fall and return in the spring. When they stop to rest in the Sinai Peninsula, residents of the area are easily able to catch them.<\/p>\n
A Challenge to Moses\u2019 Leadership, 12:1\u201316<\/p>\n
Finally the tendency to complain has reached full voice and social acceptance. The people feel verbally free to attack the very leader who has led them from centuries of oppression. Moreover, it is an opportune time for a few such persons to voice (long-held?) ambition that they should share the leadership role. Their point of departure is indirect, however, so as to gather popular support and to avoid suspicion of their true motives: they begin to object to the foreign origin of Moses\u2019 wife (12:1).
\nThe wife\u2019s place of origin is not precisely fixed by the designation \u201ca Cushite woman\u201d (12:1). Cush, a place name, is used in the Bible to designate three locations: (1) A vague area \u201cin the east\u201d from which four rivers (including the Tigris and Euphrates of Mesopotamia) flow into the Garden in Eden (Gen 2:8\u201314). The Greek Bible (LXX), possibly in error, identifies this Cush with Ethiopia (followed here by KJV!). This translation, done in Egypt, may have been influenced by Egyptian designation of an area to the south as kash. (2) An area of upper Mesopotamia, homeland of the Kassites (Gen 10:6; likely the designation of 2:8\u201314 as well). (3) An area in the territory of the Midianites of the Sinai Peninsula known as Cushan (Hab 3:7). The last of these locations would allow the wife to be Zipporah, daughter of the priest of Midian (Exod 2:15\u201321). Otherwise, it is a second wife of whom we know nothing. The basis for objection by Aaron and Miriam is not stated and it is idle to speculate about it as is often done by modern interpreters. For example: Was it racial\/ethnic (in case the woman is a second wife, an Ethiopian; or in case it refers to Zipporah as a Midianite whom the Israelites now met for the first time)? Was it a second wife who would be an affront to Zipporah whose heirs it would jeopardize (compare Gen 31:50)? In the literary context, it is just as likely that the charge is a flimsy pretext from which to attack the suitability of Moses for sole leadership.
\nMoses\u2019 response to this personal attack is one of humility (NRSV, \u201chumble\u201d). This is more accurate than KJV\u2019s \u201cmeek,\u201d since Moses is far from meek when he confronts God at 11:10\u201315! The usage of the word in Psalm 22:26 [Hebrew 22:27] suggests that the meaning includes \u201cdevoutness\u201d (although NRSV there renders it \u201cthe poor\u201d; JPS\/NJV, \u201cthe lowly\u201d).
\nWhy did the rebels not all receive the same punishment? While Miriam \u201cbecame leprous\u201d (v. 10), co-conspirator Aaron apparently escapes with impunity (although he apparently expected punishment [v. 11, \u201cdo not punish us\u201d]). Could the storyteller not bring himself to relate that a high priest was rendered ritually impure? It is idle to speculate about the matter, and least of all is it proper to attribute it to male prejudice.
\nFor the inappropriateness of this term (Hanson\u2019s Disease) to describe the biblical condition, see the discussion of Leviticus 13. [Comment on Details of Numbers 11\u201312]<\/p>\n
Comment on Details of Numbers 11\u201312
\n11:1, \u201cfire of the LORD.\u201d Fire, a frightening destructive force, is often used in the biblical narrative to characterize divine punishment. The most conspicuous example concerns the wicked cities of Sodom and Gomorrah (Gen 18\u201319).
\n11:16, \u201cseventy of the elders.\u201d See also Exod 24:1, 9. This is a standard \u201cround\u201d number. For other instances, see Gen 46:27; Judg 9:5; 1 Sam 6:19; 2 Kgs 10:6. For greater detail, see the discussion of Num 1.
\n11:16, \u201cofficers.\u201d Since the word is cognate to a verb meaning \u201cto write,\u201d and since scribes are unlikely among these former slaves, it is plausible that this reflects the monarchical organizational context in which the JE tradition was compiled.
\n11:17, \u201ctalk with you there.\u201d The pronoun is singular in Hebrew, indicating that God\u2019s conversation with be with Moses as leader, not with the assembly of elders.
\n11:17, \u201ctake some of the spirit that is upon you.\u201d For other instances of the transfer of the charisma and power of a leader to others, see 2 Kgs 2:9\u201310 (from Elijah to Elisha).
\n11:25, \u201cthey prophesied. But they did not do so again.\u201d To render the verb used here as \u201cprophesied\u201d can be misleading since it does not refer to proclamation. Preferable is \u201cspoke in ecstasy\u201d (NJV\/JPS), indicating a highly emotion and contagious utterance that characterized groups in early Israel (see, e.g., 1 Sam 10:10\u201313). The later \u201cnamed\u201d prophets in the Bible apparently did not act in this fashion. The present text understands the phenomenon to be a sign of authority only and places a strict limit upon it lest later groups seek to use it in support their competing claim to authority. (For discussion of prophetic ecstasy, see the commentary on Lev 10:8\u201320.)
\n11:26, \u201camong those registered.\u201d They are part of the official list of seventy (v. 16) and have, for some unexplained reason, detached themselves from the group.
\n11:28, \u201cJoshua \u2026 assistant of Moses.\u201d This is in keeping with the hierarchical structure of the JE tradition (as opposed to Aaron\u2019s leadership in the Priestly writings). This is quite clear from Exod 24:12\u201314.
\n11:32, 22, \u201ccubit \u2026 homer.\u201d A cubit is a linear measure, approximately 18 inches. A homer is a measure of capacity, approximately 5.2 bushels.
\n12:6, \u201cin visions \u2026 in dreams.\u201d This is precisely the means of revelation that the ancient E tradition depicts the Deity as using (e.g., Gen 15:1).
\n12:7, \u201centrusted with all my household.\u201d Context suggests that NEB is preferable: \u201che alone is faithful in all my household.\u201d The poetic section (vv. 6\u20138, possibly a once-independent fragment) is rife with translation problems. For discussion (and a radical understanding of v. 7: the household is God\u2019s heavenly entourage), see B. A. Levine, Numbers 1\u201320 (AB 4; New York: Doubleday, 1993), 329\u201332.<\/p>\n
CONNECTIONS<\/p>\n
Continuing Need for God<\/p>\n
In wide perspective, the portrait of Israel\u2019s spiritual nature now becomes mixed and complicated. Unquestioned obedience to God is now disturbed by the reality of physical need, internal strife, jealousy, and personal ambition. Otherwise put: In the conflated material as it now stands, not even the disciplined spiritual life that previous regulations have sought to foster, not even the repeated acts of divine graciousness that have previously taken place, are sufficient to guarantee a calm and enduring faith. Any hope for the better future that God has envisioned for humanity, for a people who will \u201cbe a blessing to all the families of the earth\u201d (Gen 12:1\u20133), clearly does not reside in innate human capacity. Only in the reality of God\u2019s continuing involvement in history, only in the action of a Deity whose judgment is redemptive, is hope to be found.<\/p>\n
The Hardships of Faith<\/p>\n
Concerning 11:4\u20136. The hardships of the wilderness, despite the miraculous provision of food, are sufficient to cause the Israelites to long for their former existence as slaves. Just so, modern persons who have pledged to pattern their lives after Christ\u2019s example will often find that their new faith and morals are causing them no end of trouble. Consequently, they sometime find it advantageous to return to their former sinful status. The fifth-century Christian writer John Cassianus describes this unfortunate reality quite nicely in a comment on the wilderness generation:<\/p>\n
Although this manner of speaking first referred to that people [in the wilderness], nonetheless we see it now daily fulfilled in our life and profession. For everyone who has first renounced this world and then returns to his former pursuits and his erstwhile duties proclaims that in deed and in intention he is the same as they were, and he says, \u201cIt was well with me in Egypt.\u201d<\/p>\n
Hidden Agendas<\/p>\n
Miriam and Aaron\u2019s apparent use of pretext (attacking Moses\u2019 Cushite wife as a cover for their ambitions to leadership) is a paradigm illustration of human nature and a common mode of operation. When we criticize others, very often our true agenda is masked by the surface issues that we may initially raise. I have observed this reality during three decades of listening to debates by theological faculty: the speakers\u2019 true intention was frequently hidden beneath the agenda that was formally being advanced. In that devious fashion, our selfishness and vindictiveness are kept from public perception. As one of my colleagues wryly observed: \u201cAbout all that you do when you train a Ph. D. in religion is to create a very clever sinner!\u201d<\/p>\n
The Desire for Deserved Punishment<\/p>\n
Concerning 12:3: according to a Father of the church, this admirable attribute of Moses receives content from the context of the story. Although Miriam has conspired against him, he not only begs God that she not be punished but also makes no remark about his case being avenged. And then the Father adds: \u201cBut not so we. On the contrary, this is what we most desire; to have everyone know that they have not passed unpunished.\u201d The modern reader will know how strong is the desire to say, \u201cI told you so\u201d or \u201cYou got what you deserved!\u201d<\/p>\n
RECONNAISSANCE IN THE LAND OF CANAAN<\/p>\n
Numbers 13:1\u201314:45<\/p>\n
Thematically, this chapter is linked to the previous two by the motif of rebellion. Two episodes, listed in the order of increasing severity, have been related in chapter 11. Although Moses takes the second of them personally (vv. 10\u201315), it is only in the third that the attack against him is overt (12:1).
\nNow, in the present chapter, comes an escalation: a rebellion so severe that the people not only consider choosing a new leader, but also rejecting their destiny as the covenant community (\u201cLet us \u2026 go back to Egypt,\u201d 14:4). The magnitude of the crisis is unparalleled, as is the response of the Deity. Not even the episode of the golden calf (Exod 32) is in a comparable category. There, while the tablets of the covenant are shattered by Moses (only to be reissued, ch. 34) and the rebels are punished, the people nonetheless are directed to continue on their way. Now, however, with the entire exodus agenda rejected by the people, the Deity brings the march to a halt. A entire generation is so regarded as an impediment God\u2019s plan that progress cannot be made until death removes them from the scene.
\nThe following topical sections emerge from scanning this material:<\/p>\n
1. Spies sent into the land of Canaan (13:1\u201324);
\n2. The spies return with a negative report (13:25\u201333);
\n3. Public reaction to the report (14:1\u20134);
\n4. Joshua and Caleb propose to go forward (14:5\u20139);
\n5. God\u2019s response to the people\u2019s negativity (14:10\u201338);
\n6. An initiative that failed (14:39\u201345).[A Composite Account: JE and P]<\/p>\n
A Composite Account: JE and P
\nThe basic story-line is that of the old JE tradition. The Priestly writer has then made certain additions and adjustments that do not affect the overall meaning, roughly as follows:
\n1. At 13:1\u201317, by supplying the list of tribal leaders, in keeping with a \u201cP\u201d tendency to list inventories, dates, and personnel);
\n2. At 13:21, by extending the scope of the mission beyond the south (\u201cthe Negeb\u201d) and central hill country (explicitly stated in v. 17) to the northern border of Canaan (Lebo-hamat), perhaps to be in keeping with the later actual boundaries of Israel (Num 34); note the repetitive \u201cthey went up,\u201d at vv. 21 and 22, suggesting stories of once-independent origin;
\n3. At 14:1\u20134, 10, part of the report of protest by the people, easy recognizable as \u201cP\u201d by the terms \u201ccongregation\u201d and \u201cthe glory of the LORD\u201d;
\n4. At 14:26\u201338, a repetition and intensification of the divine judgment that had been given at 14:20\u201325), now recognizable as \u201cP\u201d by the inclusion of Aaron (not mentioned in v. 20) and the use of the word \u201ccongregation.\u201d Note that the JE expression, \u201cWhen Moses told these words to all the Israelites\u201d (v. 39), does not presuppose the \u201cP\u201d narrative in vv. 26\u201338, but rather God\u2019s word to Moses in JE at vv. 20\u201325!<\/p>\n
COMMENTARY<\/p>\n
Spies Sent into the Land of Canaan, 13:1\u201324<\/p>\n
Although settlement in the Land of Canaan was understood to be the Israel\u2019s divinely ordained destiny and was so announced by Moses at the outset of the journey (10:29), nonetheless it seemed prudent to gain information in advance concerning conditions that might be encountered there. Thus Moses would like to have some idea of the fertility of the soil, the density of population, and the strength of fortifications. He consequently dispatches tribal leaders to survey and report on such matters.
\nThe purpose of the expedition was not so much surreptitious spying (modern literature on the subject to the contrary!) as it was to bring a trustworthy report that might meet with public approval and attendant motivation to move forward. The plan goes awry when the leaders make a negative report, their authority making it convincing to the community.
\nMany of the names are unattested elsewhere and certainly differ from the list of leaders in chapters 1\u20132. Did this group need to be younger in order to withstand the rigors of the journey? Or, does it derive from a separate list of tribal leaders?
\nHistorically, the narrative intends to answer a perplexing question: Why did Israel not enter the Land of Canaan directly from the south? Why did it, instead, circle the country and enter from the east (beginning at 20:22)? The question is answered, not in pragmatic terms (overwhelming resistance by the inhabitants of Canaan) but in theological ones: lack of faith in God\u2019s promises.<\/p>\n
Fruit from the Promised Land
\nThe portrayal of the size of the cluster may be an exaggeration meant to emphasize the productivity and thus the desirability of the land.<\/p>\n
Nicolas Poussin, (1594\u20131665). Autumn or the Grapes brought from the Promised Land. 1660\u20131664. Oil on canvas. Louvre, Paris, France. (Credit: aiwaz \/ Wikimedia Commons, PB-US)<\/p>\n
The Spies Return with a Negative Report, 13:25\u201333<\/p>\n
Overall, the report was pessimistic (either one or two of the leaders excepting). On the one hand, the land is highly desirable in terms of fertility, as evidenced by specimens of produce that were brought back (e.g., \u201ca single cluster of grapes, and they carried it on a pole between two of them,\u201d v. 23). On the other hand, it is strongly fortified and will be fiercely defended by its inhabitants (\u201cthe towns are fortified and very large,\u201d v. 28).
\nThe report of might fortifications was hardly an exaggeration. Archaeological excavation even at a modest village such as Mizpah have revealed, in the monarchical period, stone walls that were sometimes 13 feet in thickness and reached an estimated height of 46 feet. [Elevated Cities]<\/p>\n
Elevated Cities
\nWhen situated atop the accumulated debris of earlier occupations that could reach a height of 50 feet or more, the cities that the spies saw might indeed a daunting challenge to a potential conqueror. Little wonder, then, that the returning Israelite leaders felt like grasshoppers from the perspective of defenders standing atop city walls (13:33).<\/p>\n
Public Reaction to the Report, 14:1\u20134<\/p>\n
The response among the people is predictable: They object to the apparent reality that they have journeyed through the harsh wilderness only to be slaughtered in battle. It would now be better to choose new leadership, reverse their course, and return to slavery in Egypt.<\/p>\n
Joshua and Caleb Propose to Go Forward, 14:5\u20139<\/p>\n
It is interesting to note that in the JE account, Caleb is the sole persons who encourages the people to continue toward Canaan (see also 14:23\u201324; Josh 14:7\u20139). In the Priestly account, however, he is joined by Joshua (14:6\u20139, 30, 38). Was Joshua not one of the delegation that was sent to Canaan, despite the note that makes him so at 13:16?<\/p>\n
God\u2019s Response to the People\u2019s Negativity, 14:10\u201338<\/p>\n
The response of the Deity to such persistent negativism is harsh: it will be necessary to delay the advance until the entire adult generation has died in the wilderness. The next generation can then embrace and enact the promises that have been made to Israel.
\nFor a human to argue with God by appealing to the Deity\u2019s self-interest and by correcting the divine short-sightedness (as Moses does here) may strike the modern reader as bold, if not arrogant. Yet, that sort of candor is characteristic of biblical prayer. See, e.g., Psalm 30, where the writer points out that, were the Deity to allow him to die, there would be one less person to sing the divine praise!
\nMoses\u2019 argument is four-fold, brief and succinct: Consider the opinion of (a) the Egyptians and (b) of other nations; consider (c) your sworn promise concerning the land and (d) your self-disclosure of a forgiving nature.
\nThe affirmation of God\u2019s nature at 14:18 recalls God\u2019s self-disclosure to Moses at the sacred mountain (Exod 34:6\u20137). Thus Moses uses God to testify against God.<\/p>\n
An Initiative That Failed, 14:39\u201345<\/p>\n
The contrite hearers now decide to go forward, but it is too late. Once again reminded that they are refusing to accept God\u2019s decision (to delay), the people nonetheless advance toward Canaan only to be defeated by its inhabitants. [Comment on Details of Numbers 13\u201314]<\/p>\n
Comment on Details of Numbers 13\u201314
\n13:17, \u201cNegeb.\u201d The semi-desert region between the Sinai Peninsula and the hill country of Judah.
\n13:21, \u201cthe wilderness of Zin.\u201d Apparently north-east of the wilderness of Paran, directly south of the Negeb
\n13:21, \u201cLebo-hamat.\u201d A location at the northern edge of the later borders of the Israelite state (1 Kgs 8:65).
\n13:22, \u201cHebron was built \u2026\u201d This seemingly intrusive note apparently means that Hebron (earlier burial place of the biblical patriarchs) is even more ancient than the capital of Egypt.
\n13:22, \u201cThe Anakites.\u201d A people of gigantic stature, feared because of size and strength (Deut 2:21; 9:2). They were given legendary status by tracing their ancestry to the Nephilim, a race that reportedly resulted from intercourse between gods and humans (Gen 6:4). They were encountered during the conquest of the land (Josh 11:21\u201322). Egyptian records mention a group in Palestine by this name. They were also known as Rephaim (Deut 2:11) and king David\u2019s challenger, Goliath (1 Sam 17), belonged to their ranks (2 Sam 21:18\u201322, where the word Raphah is translated as \u201cgiant\u201d).
\n13:23, \u201cwadi.\u201d This Arabic term is used by modern scholars to translate the Hebrew word for \u201cbrook.\u201d Technically, it indicates a seasonal flow of water, dry during the summer months.
\n13:27, \u201cthey told him.\u201d This refers to Moses who has commissioned them (13:17) in the JE tradition. In the P tradition, by contrast, they report to Moses and Aaron (v. 26). This is in keeping with the priestly focus upon the father of the priesthood.
\n14:5, \u201cfell on their faces.\u201d Such an action is usually a prelude to worship of God or subordination to a superior, but here results from despair and grief (as at 16:4).
\n14:9, \u201cbread for us.\u201d A unique expression, meaning that we will be able to consume (defeat) them.
\n14:12, \u201cA nation \u2026 greater than they.\u201d God\u2019s ultimate threat, echoing Exod 32:10. That a new Israel is said to be possible from descendants of Moses alone (rather than Aaron as well) indicates that this is the JE tradition. The restriction may have been too much for the Greek Bible (LXX), aware of the central role of Aaron in \u201cP,\u201d and so it may have added (intending to clarify?), \u201cand your father\u2019s house.\u201d Alternatively, the phrase may have been accidentally dropped from MT by haplography (but preserved in the Hebrew text from which LXX was translated). So R. E. Friedman, Commentary on the Torah (San Francisco: Harper, 2001), 474. This type of scribal error has been encountered previously in Leviticus and Numbers.
\n14:25, \u201cto the Red Sea.\u201d This refers to the modern Gulf of Aqabah\/Elat, thus beginning a circling movement toward the east rather than direct entry into the land from the south. (See Map 1 above.)
\n14:28, \u201cthe very things I heard you say.\u201d This refers back to what the people feared would happen if they moved forward on their itinerary (vv. 2\u20133).
\n14:31, \u201cwould become booty.\u201d A reference to the people\u2019s expectation at 14:3.<\/p>\n
CONNECTIONS<\/p>\n
Deriving theological insight and moral direction is far more difficult from historical narrative than it is from overt formal instruction (such as the Ten Commandments or the Sermon on the Mount). For example: Is the message of the narrative under consideration all that clear? Does it overtly (or even subtly) encourage the reader to believe or act, or is it merely a mentally detached report of what happened? Is more than one interpretation possible? With whose morals in the story does one identify? Concerning Numbers 11\u201314, nonetheless, we may select examples of behavior for purposes of imitation, while realizing that they are not overtly put forward for that purpose. [Narrative Insight]<\/p>\n
Narrative Insight
\nJudaism, realizing the difficulty of deriving ethical direction from narrative, distinguishes between biblical (and related) material that overtly encourages behavior (calling it halakah, from the verb \u201cto walk\u201d) and material that narrates events (calling it haggadah, from the verb \u201cto tell\u201d). Although the latter may be edifying, it is to the former that priority as a source for guidance is to be assigned. Christianity, however, has tended to be more positive about the use of narrative for moral guidance.<\/p>\n
\u201cWhy Me?\u201d<\/p>\n
The tendency of the Israelites to complain at any misfortune is again paradigmatic. Many modern persons could acknowledge, upon careful reflection, multiple good things that have befallen them constantly since birth. Yet, at the point of sudden difficulty, we will ask, \u201cWhy me?\u201d as if we thought we were entitled to endless good fortune, and may even consider the misfortune as evidence of God\u2019s non-existence.<\/p>\n
Acting on God\u2019s Grace<\/p>\n
It is sometimes necessary for God\u2019s beneficiaries to act, at least in response to God\u2019s graciousness in their behalf. From Egypt to Kadesh, God had miraculously provided for the people\u2019s every need. It is only now, in the face of possible danger, that they must risk themselves in actualizing the divine agenda.
\nBut why the delay by wandering in the wilderness? \u201cWhat was true when they left Egypt is still true: They are still slaves in their hearts. They are not yet capable of independence, responsibility, or action.\u201d Again, paradigmatic of members of the church. Learning to trust and obey is sometimes a lengthy process, and indeed wisdom is often with the aged. Much good that could be actualized is delayed by fear and self-interest. Sometimes negativism and sinfulness are so entrenched that an entire generation needs to die and get out of the way in order for a new day of justice and right to take place. Mortality, therefore, becomes a means of hope for a better future.<\/p>\n
Mercy<\/p>\n
\u201cMoses suggests that it is more powerful to be merciful than to punish.\u201d Many readers will agree, from their own experience, that this response (mercy) is more difficult and more contrary to human nature. Thus the sometime appeal to the narrow and vindictive, \u201cTry to be big about this.\u201d<\/p>\n
\u201cSlow to Anger\u201d<\/p>\n
Of the reality that God is indeed \u201cslow to anger,\u201d all believers should be perpetually aware and grateful, else they would be the recipients of what strict divine justice demands.<\/p>\n
Prayer<\/p>\n
Many modern persons, if they are theists at all, may doubt the effectiveness of prayer: either the \u201claws of nature\u201d are inflexible (and outside divine intervention) or the Deity is not going to be swayed by the requests of mere mortals. Nonetheless, the witness of Scripture is to the contrary, and Jesus encourages it.<\/p>\n
Numbers 11\u201314 and New Testament Connections<\/p>\n
1. The manna that God provides (11:7) has earlier been described by the Deity as \u201cbread from heaven\u201d (Exod 16:4). In the Gospel of John, Jesus is asked to provide a self-authenticating sign, comparable to the provision of manna in the wilderness. Jesus\u2019 response is that he is \u201cthe true bread from heaven.\u201d Unlike the consumption of manna in the wilderness whereby one remained in the grip of mortality, the \u201cliving bread\u201d confers eternal life (6:25\u201351). It is in the context of this announcement that Jesus says no one \u201chas seen the Father except the one who is from God,\u201d namely himself (6:45). This perhaps is an allusion to the claim in the Numbers text that Moses had seen God \u201cface to face\u2014clearly\u201d (12:8).
\n2. The seventy elders who will assist Moses in leadership (11:16) become the model for an assembly of Pharisees whose task, by the time of the New Testament, was to decide matters of ethics. That assembly was called the Bet-din (\u201ccourt\u201d), and only later (in post-New Testament times) did it assume the duties of a Sanhedrin.
\nIt was the latter group, made up of Sadducees and other \u201cleading citizens,\u201d who, as designated agents of Rome, placed Jesus on trial for his life. Failure to realize this distinction has led the church to place blame for Jesus\u2019 death at the hands of Pharisaic religious leadership rather than (properly) at the hands of a few Sadducean priests and the Roman political machine.
\nWhen Jesus delegates authority to a group of workers who are to go out ahead of him, they are seventy in number (Luke 10:1).
\n3. Ecstatic speech (\u201cdivided tongues, as of fire\u201d) as a sign of authorization (by analogy with Num 11:25), is attested among the followers of the resurrected Christ on the day of Pentecost (Acts 2). A shift in meaning of the phenomenon is reflected at 1 Corinthians 14, where it is regarded with caution as a form of language that necessitates translation.
\n4. Numbers 12:7 is discussed briefly at Hebrews 3:1\u20136. Christians, we are told, are to be participants in a \u201cheavenly calling.\u201d It is important, therefore, that one be secure in the reliability of that invitation. Jesus is not just one intermediary among others, but one \u201cworthy of more glory than Moses.\u201d This perspective may have in mind Jewish views of Moses as a sufficient intermediary between God and humanity. Nonetheless, while Moses \u201cwas faithful in all God\u2019s house,\u201d he was only a servant within it. Jesus, by contrast, as the Son who is set over God\u2019s house is superior to him in fidelity and reliability. Christians may have full confidence, therefore, and should \u201chold firm\u201d to their hope of final victory.
\nThe writer of Hebrews continues by urging his readers not to refuse his message (\u201charden your hearts\u201d) by means of a poetic recitation of Israel\u2019s rebellions in the wilderness (3:7\u201311), concluding with a reference to their punishment of forty years: \u201cThey will not enter my rest\u201d (v. 11). His audience, he hopes, will not \u201chave an evil, unbelieving heart\u201d (v. 12). A series of allusions to Numbers 14 then follows in vv. 12\u201319.
\n5. The theme of wandering in the wilderness for forty years is mentioned by St. Paul in his summary of the exodus journey when he speaks at Antioch of Pisidia (Acts 13:18). Therein, the Apostle seeks to show how God\u2019s saving activity with Israel has led to the coming of Jesus as savior.<\/p>\n
CULTIC SUPPLEMENTS AND REMINDERS<\/p>\n
Numbers 15:1\u201341<\/p>\n
The disturbing theme of Israel\u2019s deepening rebellion in the wilderness (outlined in chs. 11\u201314) is now interrupted, only to be resumed in chapter 16. The narrative sequence is thus broken by the insertion of a substantial section of cultic regulations. Similar insertions may be found at chapters 18\u201319; 28\u201330, and 33:50\u201335:34.
\nWhy would the Priestly writer have inserted this material exactly here, amidst the JE tradition in chapters 14 and 16, rather than place it with topically similar material in the book of Leviticus? No easy answer is at hand. Was it, as medieval Jewish commentators suggested, to break up the seemingly endless tide of rebellion by giving a glimmer of assurance about the future? After all, God\u2019s most recent statement on the matter (in the P tradition) was that the present generation (those above the age of twenty, according to 14:29\u201330) would never enter the land of Canaan (14:34\u201335). The insertion now seems to reinforce the promise that God\u2019s agenda will continue, even without that rebellious generation, since the insertion begins with, \u201cWhen you come into the land \u2026\u201d (15:2). A prosperous future is also implied, it has been argued, by the nature of the material that will be required for worship: grain, flour, olive oil, and wine, that could only be supplied by location in an agricultural land such as Canaan.
\nTopically, the material may be divided into the following sections:<\/p>\n
1. Supplementary offerings (vv. 1\u201316);
\n2. Expansion of the grain offering (vv. 17\u201321);
\n3. Cases of unintended violation (vv. 22\u201329);
\n4. Cases of deliberate violation (vv. 30\u201336);
\n5. A method for remembering (vv. 37\u201340).<\/p>\n
COMMENTARY<\/p>\n
The material is presented as three separate formal instructions, each of which has the heading, \u201cThe LORD spoke to Moses \u2026\u201d (vv. 1, 17, 37). The second of these speeches covers three topics (vv. 17\u201321; 22\u201331; 32\u201336), thus providing five topical sections. The overall coherence of these sections may be understood as follows: Amended cultic regulations that might easily be forgotten (vv. 1\u201321) necessitate remedies in case of unintentional or deliberate violation (vv. 22\u201331); a concrete illustration of deliberate violation, though not of the previous regulations (vv. 32\u201336); and finally a tangible means of remembrance so that one\u2019s identity and duties will not be easily forgotten (vv. 37\u201341). The chapter closes with an emphasis on holiness and imitation of the Deity that is reminiscent of the Holiness Code (H) and the editing of the book of Leviticus.<\/p>\n
Supplementary Offerings, 15:1\u201316<\/p>\n
Sacrifices that are discussed in Leviticus 1\u20133 and 6\u20137 are (upon arrival in Canaan) to be supplemented with offerings of grain, olive oil, and wine (items that were not available during the wanderings in the desert). Such items were in fact later incorporated into sacrificial practice (e.g., 1 Sam 1:24; Ezek 45:17). This was not an innovation on Israel\u2019s part, since such items (and especially wine) were a standard part of worship by earlier societies in the ancient Near East.
\nThe sacrificial system in its final form then, reflects the realities of the two great stages of Israel\u2019s growth: \u201cthe desert and the sown\u201d (i.e., Sinai and Canaan). Regardless of when (and why) the supplementations began, their authorization is traced (or projected?) back to the formative (authority-giving) Sinai\/wilderness period.<\/p>\n
Expansion of the Grain Offering, 15:17\u201321<\/p>\n
Earlier sacrificial regulations concerning grain have applied to occasions that were spontaneous, as when farmers might feel gratitude to God when the harvest began (Lev 2, or as the text here puts it, \u201cfrom the threshing floor\u201d). Now the focus shifts to the home owner, whether farmer or not, \u201cwhenever you eat of the bread of the land\u201d (v. 19). It is not raw grain that is now the substance of priestly levy, but rather dough that has been prepared for food.<\/p>\n
Cases of Unintended Violation, 15:22\u201329<\/p>\n
Additional components to traditional sacrifice, consisting of grain and libation, are to be enacted upon realization of unintentional violation of covenantal requirements. This is to involve both community (vv. 24\u201326) and individuals (vv. 27\u201328), and is to apply to resident-aliens as well as natives (v. 29).<\/p>\n
Cases of Deliberate Violation, 15:30\u201336<\/p>\n
Articulation of the penalty for deliberate violation is now given, followed by a concrete example (although it does not involve the regulations in the immediately preceding section). The contrast with inadvertent transgression is now drawn as strongly as possible, using vocabulary that occurs nowhere else in the Pentateuch: the person \u201cafronts\u201d (more accurately, brazenly \u201creviles\u201d) the Deity and \u201cdespises\u201d God\u2019s word. Concerning such hardened offenders the Deity will have no mercy. (For the meaning of the term \u201cutterly cut off,\u201d i.e., premature death or childlessness, see the discussion of Lev 7:20.)
\nThe cited instance of brazen desecration of the Sabbath is met with even greater severity. Now the entire community is involved in applying the penalty: he is to be executed.<\/p>\n
A Method of Remembering<\/p>\n
By wearing garments that are decorated in a specific way, those who wear them will be reminded (from the moment of donning them onward throughout the day) of special identity and responsibilities. This is well in keeping with other kinds of practical daily reminders that the Priestly writers have mandated in the book of Leviticus (e.g., special diet and circumcision). Consequently, one could not get dressed, or consume food, or go to the bathroom, and be oblivious to one\u2019s membership in a special people. Such specificity would have been especially important during the period of Israel\u2019s exile to Babylonia (587\u2013539 BC), roughly the time when the Priestly writings took their final canonical shape.
\nWhy a blue thread in particular? The ancient Rabbis explained it in the following way: Blue is the color of the sky, and this is the location of God\u2019s abode. This reminds the wearer of the garment, then, of God\u2019s abiding presence and awareness of events.
\nIt is possible, however, that the origin is much older and non-biblical. Some residents of Mesopotamia consider the color blue to be effective in warding off demons, and Etruscan tomb-paintings show \u201cthe demons of hell with their bright blue faces and serpentine hair.\u201d When monotheism was introduced into ancient Israel (and hence there was no longer a belief in demons against whom one could be protected by the blue thread), the color nonetheless retained its special role and its purpose was redefined. [Murex] [Comment on Details of Numbers 15]<\/p>\n
Murex
\nIn the ancient Near East, a greenish-blue dye was made from a gland in a small mollusk (Murex trunculus or Murex brandaris) that is commonly found in the Mediterranean Sea off the coast of Phoenicia. Vast numbers were needed to produce even a small amount of dye extract. Milgrom reports that it took 12,000 of the mollusks to produce 1.4 grams of dye (The JPS Torah Commentary: Numbers [Philadelphia: The Jewish Publication Society, 1990], 127). Garments of this color were restricted to royalty (hence the term \u201croyal blue\u201d\/\u201croyal purple\u201d). Since the product was very costly, only a single thread was required for the biblical fringe. Archaeological sites and literary sources are given in B. A. Levine, Numbers 1\u201320 (AB 4; New York: Doubleday, 1993), 400\u2013401.<\/p>\n
Comment on Details of Numbers 15
\nV. 4: \u201cshall present also.\u201d The word \u201calso,\u201d supplied only by the English translators of NRSV, helps to clarify the regulation as an extension of previous ones.
\nVv. 4, 7, 9\u201310: \u201cephah \u2026 hin.\u201d For these \u201cdry\u201d measurements, see the discussion and at Lev 19:36.
\nV. 22, \u201call these commandments.\u201d Reference is thereby made to the entirety of previous Mosaic teaching and not merely to those in the present chapter. This is a deviation from Lev 4 which is concerned only with prescriptive\/restrictive\/prohibitive violations (i.e., doing what was forbidden to be done, sometimes called \u201csins of commission\u201d). However, \u201ceverything which he gave you\u201d (v. 23) would cover performative commandments as well (failing to do what is required, sometimes called \u201csins of omission\u201d).
\nOn this exceedingly difficult section and its relationship with Lev 4, see J. Milgrom, The JPS Torah Commentary: Numbers (Philadelphia: The Jewish Publication Society, 1990), 402\u201345. He concludes that Num 15 is not a modification of Lev 4, but rather that \u201cwe are dealing with two independent traditions concerning the purification [NRSV, \u201csin\u201c] offering.\u201d
\nV. 24, \u201cbull for a burnt offering \u2026 male goat for a sin offering.\u201d This is a shift from Lev 4:14 where the requirement is a \u201cbull \u2026 for a sin offering.\u201d In the case of infraction by an individual (v. 27), the sacrificial animal is the same as Lev 4:28.
\nV. 32, \u201cgathering sticks on the sabbath day.\u201d The exact nature of the offense, in any case a deliberate activity, is not stated (gathering sticks, within itself, is not prohibited), but it likely was considered \u201cdoing work\u201d (Exod 20:10). Something as relatively light as gathering manna was prohibited (Exod 16:22\u201326).
\nDoing work on this day was a capital offense (Exod 31:14, where, however, the means of execution is not stated). Moses and Aaron were apparently initially uncertain about how the sentence was to be carried out and thus awaited clarification by the Deity (by means of oracular decision?).
\nVv. 37\u201338, \u201cfringes.\u201d Background information on this practice and its purpose has been presented in the commentary on Leviticus at the section titled \u201cFinal Thoughts on Leviticus 1\u20137.\u201d For details of how the fringes are constructed on modern garments, as well as how the gematria of the term becomes \u201c613\u201d (reportedly the total number of the biblical commandments), see J. Milgrom, The JPS Torah Commentary: Numbers, 127.<\/p>\n
CONNECTIONS<\/p>\n
Awareness of Transgression<\/p>\n
The distinction between unintentional (unwitting) and deliberate (high-handed) transgression is one that recognizes the fallibility of human nature and the realities of life. Although the former is nearly inevitable and not as serious as the latter, the person who has so acted cannot ignore the situation when it comes to awareness. Sensitive worshipers will not (and can not) glibly excuse themselves by saying, \u201cI didn\u2019t know.\u201d Thereby, one learns to be more diligent in the study of Scripture, more thoughtful and less spontaneous about actions before they are taken, and more responsible after-thefact. For the contemporary Jew and Christian, therefore, self-awareness and discipline are never to be neglected.
\nThe reality of human callousness is then illustrated by the case of the man who has violated the Sabbath. This, in turn, necessitates the type of constant reminder for which the fringes and blue thread function. Contemporary worshipers will have little trouble in proposing and activating a range of similar reminders.
\nIt can be observed that the status of the hardened offender is one that is increasingly common in modern times. Whereas formerly there were those who did not accept the most fundamental claims of the Bible, now there are militant atheists who actively oppose, even despise, the church and its entire agenda. It could be argued that insofar as atheism undermines morality (it need not, but does it not often do so?) it is not in the best interest of society.<\/p>\n
New Testament Connections<\/p>\n
At Matthew 9:20 Jesus is described as a pious Jew of the time, wearing a cloak with fringes (for Jewish custom, see 23:5). Emphasis is placed upon the healing miracle that results when a woman suffering from a lingering hemorrhage touches the hem of the garment (similarly, see 14:36). (On the motif of the hem of garments, see the discussion of Lev 13:47\u201359 and photo.)
\nThe author of Hebrews, ever a close reader of Scripture, in the midst of a series of exhortations to his Christian readers, warns of deliberate sins for which \u201cthere no longer remains a sacrifice \u2026 but a fearful prospect of judgment\u201d (10:26\u201327). If rejection of God\u2019s instructions merited death in ancient Israel, how much more so will be the divine judgment upon those who \u201chave spurned the Son of God, profaned the blood of the covenant \u2026 and outraged the Spirit of grace?\u201d Their fate will be \u201ca fury of fire.\u2026 It is a fearful thing to fall into the hands of the living God\u201d (vv. 27, 31).
\nThe author of 1 John speaks of \u201csin that is mortal,\u201d for which communal petitionary prayer for the guilty will not prevail (5:16\u201317). See also Matthew 12:31\u201332; Mark 3:28\u201329 (concerning what has come to be called \u201cthe unpardonable sin\u201d).<\/p>\n
A REBELLION CO-OPTED<\/p>\n
Numbers 16:1\u201317:13 (Hebrew: 16:1\u201317:28)<\/p>\n
A series of rebellions against the leadership of Moses and Aaron (11:1\u20133; 11:4\u201330; 12:1\u201315; 14:1\u201310) has resulted in a thunderous divine judgment: the entire adult generation must die in the wilderness in order to make way for a faithful and obedient community (14:26\u201335). The modern reader might assume that a sentence of that decisiveness and severity, tempered with renewed and revised guidelines that assured God\u2019s guidance for the next generation (ch. 15), would have been sufficient to assure harmony for the remainder of the wilderness itinerary. Not so, according to the text! Does this nearly unbelievable continuation suggests that it is not new historical and chronological confrontations that are being described, but rather that later struggles have been projected back into the wilderness period?
\nThis material can be divided into two large thematic sections:<\/p>\n
1. Challenges to Moses and Aaron (16:1\u201350);
\n2. Assertion of Aaron\u2019s leadership (17:1\u201313).<\/p>\n
COMMENTARY<\/p>\n
Challenges to Moses and Aaron, 16:1\u201350<\/p>\n
The text now relates a new rebellion, two-pronged in nature, supported by a wide spectrum of tribal leadership. One of the challenges, headed by leaders of the tribe of Reuben (Dathan, Abiram, and On), is directed again Moses on the basis of unexpected hardships that have had to be endured in the wilderness (16:12\u201314). They voice no complaint about Aaron. The other challenge however, brought by Korah and other leaders of the tribe of Levi, is directed against Aaron because of his claim to exclusive priestly duties and authority (16:5\u201311). [Comment on Details of Numbers 16\u201317]<\/p>\n
Comment on Details of Numbers 16\u201317
\n16:1, \u201cKorah son of Izhar \u2026\u201d The genealogical line of the Levites is given in Exod 6:16\u201322.
\n16:9, \u201cto perform the duties.\u201d While the priests (descendants of Aaron) conducted sacrificial duties, the Levites (in the status to which our text demotes them) are to serve as assistants, porters, gatekeepers, musicians, maintenance, etc.
\n16:11, \u201cWhat is Aaron that \u2026\u201d Meaning, \u201cWhat has he done that \u2026\u201d Since he has been appointed to office by God through Moses, why blame him? Moses thus seems to admit to responsibility.
\n16:13, \u201cout of a land \u2026\u201d With heavy sarcasm, the former land of slavery (Egypt) is now designated as the proverbial \u201cland flowing with milk and honey\u201d (rather than the land of Canaan).
\n16:14, \u201cput out the eyes of these men.\u201d An idiom approximating the modern \u201cpull the wool over our eyes.\u201d
\n16:30, \u201cSheol.\u201d The Hebrew name for the Underworld, a cavernous location to which all \u201cspirits\u201d of the dead descended after death; sometimes translated as \u201cgrave\u201d (KJV here, \u201cthe pit\u201d). On the cosmology of the Bible, see discussion of 11:16.
\n16:36 [Hebrew 17:1], \u201cEleazar.\u201d Thus anticipating the eventual transfer of the priestly office to the next generation.
\n16:38 [Hebrew 17:3], \u201cplates \u2026 covering.\u201d Metal plates that covered the altar are now given a new explanation: they are the incense shovels of the rebellious Korah and company. This was a heavy-handed attempt by the Aaronides to prevent future Levitical aspiration. That is: When a Levite, smarting at his menial status, sees the altar at which he aspires to serve, he will be reminded of predecessors who were \u201cterminated\u201d for such desires!
\n16:46 [Hebrew 17:11], \u201cTake your censer \u2026 and make atonement \u2026\u201d In this priestly account, it is not Moses\u2019 intercessory prayer that affects deliverance in contrast to JE at 11:2; 11:10\u201314; 12:11\u201313; 14:13\u201319. Rather, it is the ritual act of the priest Aaron! Clearly, there has been a shift in power structures comparable to the one that is evident at Exod 40:34\u201335! This sets the stage for the people\u2019s question at the end of chapter 17, and the response that is provided in chapter 18.
\n16:49 [Hebrew 17:14], \u201cfourteen thousand seven hundred.\u201d An illustration of P\u2019s use of symbolic numbers (and of seven in particular). It can be written as: [(7 \u00d7 2) \u00d7 1,000] + [7 \u00d7 100].
\n17:2 [Hebrew 17:17], \u201cstaffs \u2026 one for each ancestral house.\u201d Apparently, this item was a badge of office (Gen 49:10).
\n17:4 [Hebrew 17:19], \u201cbefore the covenant.\u201d See see 10:11.
\n17:8 [Hebrew 17:23], \u201cthe staff of Aaron had sprouted.\u201d The use of wands to determine the will of the gods is a form of divination. For other forms, see discussion of Lev 3:1\u201317 and 8:1\u201336, and general discussion by I. Mendelsohn, \u201cDivination,\u201d in vol. 1 of IDB (A-D), ed. George Arthur Buttrick (Nashville: Abingdon Press, 1962), 856\u201358. Such use is attested in classical and early Christian literature. (See Theodor H. Gaster, Myth, Legend, and Custom in the Old Testament [New York: Harper & Row, 1969], 301.) Such instruments were also used in imitative magic, as is attested in the Bible when Jacob produces spotted sheep and goats (Gen 30).<\/p>\n
Are these two separate historical incidences that took place during the wilderness journey but have been conflated in later memory? Or, was there only a single event during that journey, a joint dissatisfaction with leadership, just as the text reads? Or, was there an original story involving the tribe of Reuben, put forward in the JE tradition, that was later expanded by the Priestly tradition so as to include the Levites? Modern biblical scholarship is not quite unanimous on this matter, although most \u201cmain line\u201d interpreters have preferred the third option.
\nAmong the relevant data for making a decision is the following:
\n1. When Moses, on the border of the \u201cpromised land,\u201d reviews the history of the recent wilderness events, he mentions the revolt led by the Reubenites (Dathan and Abiram), but makes no mention of the Levitical protest against Aaron\u2019s leadership (Deut 11:6; so also Ps 106:16\u201317). Does this suggest that, at the time of the recovery of the scroll of Deuteronomy from the hidden vault in the temple in Jerusalem in 621 BC (2 Kgs 22), the story of Levitical protest had not yet been added? (On the discovery of the book of Deuteronomy in the temple in Jerusalem at the time of King Josiah, see the discussion of 35:1\u201334.)<\/p>\n
Death of Korah, Dathan, and Abiram<\/p>\n
Gustave Dor\u00e9. Death of Korah, Dathan, and Abiram from the illustrated Bible. 19th C. Engraving. (Credit: www.creationism.org\/images\/DoreBibleIllus\/)<\/p>\n
It has been argued that this omission of the Levites is insignificant, since the tradition in Deuteronomy could have arbitrarily selected the Reubenites as representative rebels rather than list both components. However, in the Numbers account as it now stands, the pro-Levitical revolt appears to be the more serious. It is to that group that Moses directs his initial response (vv. 4\u20137). It is that revolt that continues even after the Reubenites have been destroyed (v. 41, \u201con the next day \u2026\u201d), leading to divine punishment in the form of a deadly plague. Moreover, the account contains a perpetual warning against challenge to the leadership of Aaron\u2019s descendants (vv. 36\u201338).<\/p>\n
Image Not Available
\ndue to lack of digital rights. Please view the published commentary or perform an Internet search using the credit below.<\/p>\n
Almond tree, with flowers and fruit
\nIt was a staff from this species that sprouted in indication of Aaron\u2019s leadership.<\/p>\n
Almond. Medicinal flora described by Chaumeton and painted by Turpin and Mme Panckoucke. 1814. Engraving on copper. Private Collection. (Credit: Snark \/ Art Resource, NY)<\/p>\n
It is not unreasonable to suppose, therefore, that had the Deuteronomic account been selective (rather than comprehensive) in naming the rebel groups, it would have focused upon the challenge of Korah the Levite.
\n2. In the aftermath of struggle, it is the challenge to Aaron alone that is discussed (chs. 17 and 18). There is no mention of the Reubenite confrontation with Moses.
\n3. The account shows evidence of being composite (i.e., a mixture of JE and P, just has been the case in 10:29\u201314:45), but is so tightly interwoven that it is sometimes difficult to discover the exact points of transition. Nonetheless, note that the challenge to Moses is on the basis of inadequate leadership, precisely the same issue that had been raised previously in a JE account (ch. 12). Those detractors are dispatched in a separate punishment (vv. 12\u201315, 25\u201334). On the other hand, the attack against Aaron hinges on the claim of suitability to lead the community in worship (\u201cAll the congregation are holy, every one of them,\u201d and not Aaron alone, v. 3). That Levitical faction, having performed a priestly function at the inner incense altar in protest against Aaron (vv. 16\u201335), is destroyed in a distinct punishment (v. 35). The means is the same as it was for previous rebels against Aaron who (in a \u201cP\u201d account) had performed an illegal cultic act (Lev 10:2).
\nThere is, furthermore, the presence of distinctive \u201cP\u201d terminology, including: \u201ccongregation,\u201d \u201cleaders (of the congregation),\u201d \u201call flesh,\u201d \u201cfire came out,\u201d \u201cbecame holy.\u201d<\/p>\n
Assertion of Aaron\u2019s Leadership, 17:1\u201313<\/p>\n
Any lingering opposition to priestly leadership by Aaron and his descendants is addressed and resolved (by the P tradition) by chapter 17. One final test should resolve the matter to everyone\u2019s satisfaction. Leaders of each of the twelve tribes are to bring a staff, inscribe one of their names upon it as representative, and deposit it in the sanctuary. Aaron is to inscribe his name as the representative of the tribe of Levi. God then choose among then by means of an indisputable miracle: Aaron\u2019s staff sprouted, bloomed, and produced almonds within a single day! For the awe-struck people the case is closed!
\nThe chapter ends with a clear bridge to the next one. Since it is now clear from the fate of Korah and his supporters that encroachment upon the sacred can be fatal, how are priests to worship in security?<\/p>\n
A Possible Historical Setting for the Two Narratives<\/p>\n
Once the people reached the borders of the \u201cpromised land\u201d and were repulsed on the south by its inhabitants, they circled the border and planned to enter from the east through Transjordan. However, the Reubenites liked the territory in which they now found themselves and thus entered into a disputation with Moses about whether they needed to continue across the Jordan with the main body (ch. 32). May we \u201cperceive in the JE narratives of Numbers 16\u201317 allusions to real disputes among the Israelite tribes on this very policy\u201d?
\nThe setting for the P account is perhaps clearer. Regardless of when that material began to be assembled (even if in the pre-exilic age), it did not reach canonical status (and thus attest the ascendancy of the Aaronides over their Levitical brothers) until the early post-exilic age. Deuteronomy had placed the priesthood into the hands of the Levites in their entirety (33:8\u201311), and they thus would not surrender it (and be demoted to menial sanctuary duties) without a fierce struggle. The disruption of temple service at the hands of the Babylonian conquerors (2 Kgs 25:9, 13\u201315), as well as the exile of Levites (2 Kgs 25:18; Ezra 1:5; 2:40\u201354), provided ample opportunity for rival claims to come to fruition (and thus for the Aarondies to disenfranchise their Levitical cousins).<\/p>\n
CONNECTIONS<\/p>\n
Arguments against Moses and Aaron<\/p>\n
The arguments used by the rebels against Moses and Aaron are a paradigm of modern devious behavior in which one might see oneself. Here are some illustrations.
\nA. When the rebels argue that \u201call the congregation are holy\u201d (16:3) and therefore are qualified for priestly service, they take the word \u201choly\u201d and ignore its distinctions in grade (i.e., that there are levels of holiness, and that those for priests are far more stringent that for ordinary members of the community). Abuse of vocabulary and straining the meanings of words is a common human practice. Politicians are often masters of this trade in their evasive responses to questions concerning public policy and personal behavior. Consider, for example, the recent (Spring 2003) discussion of President George W. Bush\u2019s tax cut and rebate. The opposing party denounced it as \u201ca gift to the rich.\u201d However, when collected taxes are the citizens\u2019 own money in the first place, is it a \u201cgift\u201d when it is returned to them, or is a clever self-serving verbal distortion being used by the president\u2019s opponents?
\nB. The rebels distort Moses\u2019 words and use them against him, so that the liberator becomes the cause of present problems. For example, when they refer to Egypt, the land of their former enslavement, as \u201ca land flowing with milk and honey\u201d (16:12), they reverse the term from its proper usage as a description of the land that God has promised to Israel.
\nC. The rebels turn the truth on its head in order to escape the consequences of their own actions and in order to vilify their opponents. For example, as a consequence of divine punishment, they state that Moses and Aaron have \u201ckilled the people of the LORD\u201d (16:41). Modern politicians often use this tactic, accusing the possibly well intended policies of their opponents as being a deliberate and self-serving attempt to harm this-or-that constituency.
\nIn sum: Every modern reader will be familiar with the use of \u201cweasel words\u201d and double-meanings as a means of distorting the truth, justifying ourselves, and escaping the consequences of our deeds. Such techniques are often considered clever and \u201cslick of tongue,\u201d rather than as the basic dishonesty that they are.
\nJesus\u2019 advice to his followers was that they should so speak the truth that they could be believed without taking an oath in order to add weight to their words (Matt 5:33\u201337; see also Jas 5:12): One\u2019s \u201cyes\u201d and \u201cno\u201d should mean exactly what they say. The matter is put even more exactly and demandingly by the author of 1 Peter: \u201cWhoever speaks must do so as one speaking the very words of God\u201d (4:11).
\nD. The repeated rebellions by members of the community indicate an inability (or unwillingness) to come to terms with divine reality. They simply refuse to accept the theological interpretation that has been placed on the events by the biblical narrators. Perhaps, rather than literally being \u201cacts of God,\u201d the events were, as the Philistines later wondered about their own misfortunes, merely acts of chance (1 Sam 6:9)! Perhaps the manna (Exod 16) was nothing other than a product of nature, in evidence year after year, be Israel there or not! Perhaps the quail (Num 11) were part of an annual migration, and they had simply grown tired and fallen to the ground! Perhaps, when the earth \u201cswallowed up\u201d the followers of Dathan and Abiram (Num 16:31\u201334), part of the community had camped over a deep mud-flat where the surface appeared to be completely dry! In short, all of the rational explanations that might occur to the modern mind might have \u201chardened the heart\u201d of the actors in the biblical events.
\nConcerning divine activity in the present, the modern reaction may be aptly described in the words of the prophet Isaiah: they have eyes, but do not see; they have ears, but do not hear; they have minds, but do not comprehend; and so they do not turn and be healed (6:9\u201310).<\/p>\n
Extended Divine Punishment<\/p>\n
Modern readers are likely to be incensed upon hearing the claim of the text that divine punishment of the rebels extended beyond the active individuals to their entire households (16:32; also v. 27). This is a penal policy that was carried out elsewhere in the Bible (e.g., Josh 7:24\u201325) and is clearly articulated in Deuteronomy (5:9).
\nThe modern negative reaction results from acceptance of such contemporary social values as equality, fairness, and individual accountability. Nonetheless, it is true that individual actions often have a social consequence, and thus \u201cprivate sin\u201d can seldom be considered in isolation. For example, withdrawing money from one\u2019s retirement account and losing it at a gambling casino may financially affect one\u2019s spouse and children for years to come. Not without reason did departments of public health, years ago, produce films on venereal disease that pointed out how syphilis, transmitted to children yet unborn, is a perfect illustration of \u201cpunishing children for the iniquity of parents\u201d (Deut 5:9). One may well de-theologize the concept, but the reality of it remains: innocent persons do often suffer as a consequence of the actions of others.
\nThus, like it or not, the biblical accounts merely reflect a reality that is sociologically and historically true. We are influenced by the attitudes and activities of those around us, for good or ill (in which case we become part of a larger problem). \u201cSin\u201d has a social dimension and, like a virus, is spread by contact.
\n1. Certain values and actions, formerly opposed, may become so commonplace in the society around us that we simply come to accept them as normal. Deviousness may so become an automatic response to our problems, aided by \u201cenlightened self-interest,\u201d that we are no longer conscious of the problematic nature of our thoughts and deeds.
\n2. The desire to become loved and accepted is an ever-present and powerful incentive to conform. Persons will thoughtlessly participate in hazing and hurtful name-calling in order to feel that they are part of a community. When we support such actions by our presence and verbal assurance, we encourage those who act overtly and thus share in responsibility.
\nHas it not been felt necessary, from time to time, to root out evil \u201croot and branch\u201d? Modern persons who are committed to \u201cpolitical correctness,\u201d for example, will sometimes sanction preventative measures to an extreme in the pursuit of a larger \u201cgood\u201d: complementing a woman\u2019s appearance may be considered a form of sexual harassment; value-judgmental words such as as \u201cblack and white\u201d may become racially insensitive; not even artistic depiction of a weapon may be allowed in public school art classes; \u201cfreedom of speech\u201d may be denied; no reading of scripture lessons in church other than those from an approved lectionary, lest it use gender specific pronouns for God, describe someone as a \u201cwhore,\u201d and so on.
\nPersons guilty of first-time infractions, even if minor, may be cold-heartedly dismissed from employment. They may then be hounded (\u201cblack-listed\u201d) when they seek employment elsewhere, regardless of the resultant injury to innocent members of their family.
\nMy basic point here is not approval or disapproval of \u201cpolitical correctness,\u201d but to point out that when such values, agendas, and remedies are proposed in the present, we understand and inadvertently sanction the severe judgments of the Bible at a level far deeper than we might care to admit!<\/p>\n
New Testament Connections<\/p>\n
The author of Hebrews, amidst his description of the sanctuary in the wilderness, mentions that it contained \u201cAaron\u2019s rod that budded\u201d (9:4). The overall context is a comparison between the old order (Judaism) and the new (Christianity). In the former, there is limited access to the inner sanctuary (which the Aaronides alone could approach). Christ, by contrast, has opened the way to the heavenly sanctuary (9:11\u201314).
\nThe concept that \u201call the congregation are holy\u201d (16:3) is echoed in the New Testament idea that the followers of Jesus are to be a \u201choly priesthood\u201d (1 Pet 2:5, 9). It was on this basis that the doctrine of \u201cThe Priesthood of all Believers\u201d was put forward by Martin Luther. Nonetheless, the early Church found it necessary to develop an organized hierarchy of leadership (ordained clergy, deacons, elders, bishops), just as Moses stressed in ancient Israel.<\/p>\n
REVIEW OF DUTIES FOR PRIESTS AND LEVITES<\/p>\n
Numbers 18:1\u201319:22<\/p>\n
By the end of chapter 17, the various rebellious factions that have shaken the community since chapter 11 have been brought to a catastrophic end. The instrument for doing so (in the P tradition, which now continues in ch. 18) was a consuming fire sent forth by the Deity from the holy sanctuary (16:35).
\nSolutions sometimes bring new problems with them, however. How are the people now to avoid the type of catastrophe that was caused by proximity of the tangibly \u201choly\u201d (the sanctuary) in their midst (17:12\u201313)? How is the entire clerical class to be economically supported? How does one deal with the presence of the corpses of the rebels, raising the issue of ritual purity? Answers are now provided by a series of regulations that sum up the duties of cultic officials, be they the officiating Aaronides or the wider group of Levites.
\nThe material may be divided into the following topical categories, generally following the paragraphs in NRSV:<\/p>\n
1. Clarification of the status of the priestly descendants of Aaron (the Aaronides) versus that of the Levites in general (18:1\u20137);
\n2. Sacrificial portions that are to be reserved as food exclusively for the Aaronides (18:8\u201320);
\n3. A general tithes for support of the Levites (18:21\u201324);
\n4. A Levitical apportionment for use by the Aaronides (18:25\u201332).
\n5. Regulations governing contamination by corpses (19:1\u201322).<\/p>\n
COMMENTARY<\/p>\n
Much of chapter 18 is a summary of previously known guidelines for preserving the purity of the sanctuary and its officials. They now need reiteration in view of the crises just past. Thus, J. Milgrom aptly titles 17:12\u201318:7 (Heb.: 17:27\u201318:7) \u201cThe Panic and the Remedy.\u201d New ground is covered in vv. 25\u201332, however.<\/p>\n
Clarification of Status, 18:1\u20137<\/p>\n
That which the unsuccessful revolt of the Levite Korah had indicated (chapter 16) is now unambiguously articulated: the Levites in general are to be subservient to those descended from Aaron. The responsibilities of Aaronide Priests (as in Lev 8\u201310) and of the Levites (as in Num 3\u20134) for maintaining the sanctity\/ritual purity of the shrine and its contents are spelled out. The geographical area and duties of each are defined, and access by all others to specific areas is strictly forbidden. Consequently, a fear of the people (\u201cAre we all to perish?\u201d 17:13 [Heb.: 17:28]) is allayed: \u201cso that wrath may never again come upon the Israelites\u201d (18:5).<\/p>\n
Image Not Available
\ndue to lack of digital rights. Please view the published commentary or perform an Internet search using the credit below.<\/p>\n
Shalom of Safed<\/p>\n
Levites Playing Music. 1972. Acrylic on canvas, Photo: John Parnell. The Jewish Museum, New York, NY, U.S.A. (Credit: The Jewish Museum, NY \/ Art Resource, NY)<\/p>\n
Sacrificial Portions for the Aaronides, 18:8\u201320<\/p>\n
The nature and sources of physical support (mostly food) for the Aaronide priests and their families are enumerated. These include portions of sacrificial animals; grain, wine, and oil; \u201cfirst fruits\u201d of the harvest; \u201cdevoted things\u201d; and firstborn males of humans and beast (with the monetarily value of the former to be substituted). Similar provision is outlined in Leviticus 6. Such support is due the Aaronides in view of their full-time duties and in lieu of the fact that the Levites are not to be given a tribal area in which to settle (and derive sustenance) when the land of Canaan is later apportioned among the incoming tribes of Israel (vv. 20, 24; Josh 13:14). Their inheritance is, instead, the realization that they have been chosen by God for their special duties (\u201cI am your share and your possession,\u201d v. 20). [Devoted Things]<\/p>\n
Devoted Things
\nThe Hebrew word ordinarily thus translated (commonly pronounced \u201cherem\u201d) indicates a state of separation and exclusion (i.e., forbidden for common use), and thus achievement of a state of holiness when dedicated to a deity. The concept is well known in English from the Arabic word \u201charem,\u201d an area set aside for women members of a Muslim household (or used to describe the women themselves).
\nIn the Bible, the word can indicate either (a) items that have been irretrievably dedicated for use by the temple, land for temple cultivation, and animals that have been set aside by their owners for a sacrificial offering (or temple use), or (b) items (animals and human population included) that belong to an enemy and are, in times of war, pledged to be destroyed if victory over that enemy is achieved.
\nPrime applications of the latter usage of the term take place at the destruction of the city of Jericho (Josh 6:17\u201319) and after victory over the Amalekites (1 Sam 15).
\nFor brief discussion of the term, see M. H. Pope, \u201cDevoted,\u201d in vol. 1 of IDB (A-D), ed. George Arthur Buttrick (Nashville: Abingdon Press, 1962), 838\u201339. For detail, see J. Milgrom, The JPS Torah Commentary: Numbers (Philadelphia: The Jewish Publication Society, 1990), 152, 428\u201330.<\/p>\n
A General Tithe for Support of the Levites, 18:21\u201324<\/p>\n
Earlier, Deuteronomy had envisioned such support to come from a tithe of produce every third year (14:28). The Priestly writer, perhaps in compensation for the demotion of the Levites that it envisions, now presents the tithe as an annual obligation by the population, and elsewhere extends it to herd and flock (Lev 27:32). [Tithe]<\/p>\n
Tithe
\nThe term \u201ctithe\u201d is derived from a Hebrew verb meaning \u201cto give (or take) the tenth part of,\u201d usually of produce or property for the support of a religious institution. It is a concept that was widely recognized in the ancient world. Early in the Bible, it is mentioned in connection with the patriarchs Abraham (Gen 14:20) and Jacob (Gen 28:22). The pre-exilic prophet Amos mentions it as a customary practice (4:4) and the post-exilic prophet Malachi urges its full observance (3:10). See H. H. Guthrie, Jr., \u201cTithe,\u201d in vol. 4 of IDB (R-Z), ed. George Arthur Buttrick (Nashville: Abingdon Press, 1962), 654\u201355.<\/p>\n
The statement that \u201cthe Israelites shall no longer approach\u201d (v. 22) provides an answer to the concern expressed by the community at 17:12\u201313, \u201cAre we all to perish?\u201d The Levites are now to prevent public encroachment upon the sacred precinct. Logically, it would include foreigners as well, and this is made explicit by the prophet Ezekiel (44:9). Thus, by the time of the New Testament, a sign in the temple warned non-Jews to remain in the outermost court.<\/p>\n
A Levitical Apportionment, 18:25\u201332<\/p>\n
This new regulation requires the Levites contribute to maintenance of the Aaronide priests. The Levites were \u201conly auxiliary personnel, and for this reason were not exempt from supporting the cultic establishment. This requirement epitomized their subservience to the Aaronide priests.\u201d<\/p>\n
Contamination by Corpses, 19:1\u201322<\/p>\n
The focus now shifts to procedures concerning the most serious form of ritual impurity: contact with corpses and the paraphernalia related thereto. Since such contact would likely happen somewhere in the camp on a daily basis, the proper procedures were a vital concern. Warnings against such contamination have been given previously (e.g., in Lev 21), but only now are particulars outlined for the remedy and its preparation.
\nThere are two major sections of the chapter, each set off by a standard formal introduction.
\nThe first section (vv. 1\u201313) is introduced by the standard formula, \u201cThe LORD spoke to Moses.\u201d It focuses upon the complex preparation of a mixture of water and ashes (from a red heifer) whereby persons or objects that have corpse-contaminated may be purified (vv. 1\u201310). The remainder of the section concerns application of the mixture and thus it anticipates the next section.<\/p>\n
Image Not Available
\ndue to lack of digital rights. Please view the published commentary or perform an Internet search using the credit below.<\/p>\n
Inscription from Herodian Temple
\nInscription from the Herodian Temple, now in a museum in Istanbul: \u201cNo foreigner is allowed to enter the enclosed area and the forecourt around the temple; anyone who does so is guilty, and will be punished with death.\u201d<\/p>\n
Archeological Museum, Istanbul, Turkey. (Credit: Erich Lessing \/ Art Resource, NY)<\/p>\n
The second section (vv. 14\u201322) has the traditional opening of a collection of regulations, \u201cThis is the law \u2026,\u201d commonly used by the P tradition in Leviticus. Its concern is to define the conditions under which such contamination (of person, place, or object) can have taken place and then the procedure for applying the purifying compound.
\nFailure to perform the cleansing ritual on schedule contaminates the sanctuary (v. 13), even if the person does not come anywhere near it. So severe is this type of ritual impurity that it contaminates at a distance and imposes the severest of sanctions. Thus, this type of ritual condition is to be avoided except in cases of burial, thus making it highly unlikely that one would go to a tomb (19:16) to participate in a \u201ccult of the dead.\u201d
\nThe urgency with which these regulations are put forward, their severity, and the astonishing ease with which it is claimed that the impurity can be transmitted (e.g., merely being in the same room with a corpse), suggest that a determined polemic is being mounted against a competing belief system. The logical candidate is the so-called \u201cCult of the Dead,\u201d a well known phenomenon among Israel\u2019s neighbors. It seems to be the focus of denunciations in Leviticus as well, concerning, e.g., worship of Molech (18:21; 20:2\u20136) and rites of mourning by priests (21:1\u201315). [The Cult of the Dead and Ancestor Worship]<\/p>\n
The Cult of the Dead and Ancestor Worship
\nAmong Israel\u2019s neighbors, the dead (regardless of their previous morality) were thought to descend to the Underworld, a realm of perpetual silence and darkness. Their form was a vague images of the living, reduced to the weakest possible state. They retained memory of their earthly existence, desired food and drink (provided for them at the tomb by descendants, lest they leave the tomb and be a menace to the living), and could be consulted by the living for knowledge of future events (through a form of divination known as necromancy, concerning which see the discussion of Lev 17). Special cultic attention was paid to the \u201cspirits\u201d of heroes and kings who were sometimes thought to reside in a separate and more pleasant environment.
\nIsrael\u2019s normative monotheistic thought ruled out such belief, and led to open rejection by such writers as the author of the book of Ecclesiastes: \u201cThe living know that they will die, but the dead know nothing; they have no more reward, and even the memory of them is lost.\u2026 never again will they have any share in all that happens under the sun\u201d (9:5\u20136).
\nNonetheless, remnants of the older \u201cpagan\u201d belief surfaced from time to time. King Saul, having banished necromancers, nonetheless desired to consult one in a moment of crisis (1 Sam 28). Other monarchs occasionally did this as well (2 Kgs 21:6; 23:24). When King Josiah destroyed the sanctuary at Bethel (where \u201cpagan\u201d deities had been worshiped by a king of Israel, 1 Kgs 11), he desecrated as well tombs that were nearby as if they had been the focus of a form of worship (2 Kgs 23:15\u201316). The book of Isaiah not only condemns the idea of communication with the dead (8:19), but also, in a cryptic remark, condemns those who are \u201csacrificing in gardens \u2026 who sit inside tombs\u201d (65:3\u20134). Evidence of such practice is provided by vigorous condemnation in the book of Leviticus (19:26, 31; 20:27).
\nBibliography: A brief overview of biblical and non-biblical evidence may be found in B. A. Levine, Numbers 1\u201320 (AB 4; New York: Doubleday, 1993), 468\u201379. For an interesting (and possibly overextended?) search for evidence in the Old Testament, see H. C. Brichto, \u201cKin, Cult, Land and Afterlife\u2014A Biblical Complex,\u201d HUCA 44 (1973): 1\u201354.
\nFor Josiah\u2019s reform, see the discussion of Num 35.<\/p>\n
The regulations in Numbers recognize that contact with corpses is necessary (e.g., in burial). Nonetheless, it defines the pervasiveness of the resultant impurity in such ominous terms and the penalty for ignoring it with such severity, that no \u201ctrue believer\u201d would go beyond the bare initial and practical necessities. That is: Since bones and tombs (19:16), ever thereafter, retain the power to transmit ritual impurity, persons would not want to approach them for purposes of ancestor worship or oracular consultation. [Comment on Details of Numbers 18\u201319]<\/p>\n
Comment on Details of Numbers 18\u201319
\n18:1, \u201cand your ancestral house.\u201d Care of the sanctuary involves not merely the Aaronides but the entirety of the Levites.
\n18:4, \u201cno outsider.\u201d That is, no one outside the tribe of Levi. The division of duties is outlined in chapter 4.
\n18:6, \u201cyours as a gift.\u201d Preferable is the JPS\/NJV translation, \u201cassigned to you.\u201d Likewise, RSV\u2019s \u201cto perform the service\u201d (possibly suggesting officiation) is better rendered by JPS as \u201cto do the work.\u201d
\n18:7, \u201cthe curtain.\u201d On this partition within the sanctuary, see Lev 4:17 and the comment above on Lev 16:2. For its dismantlement, see Num 4:5.
\n18:9, \u201cmost holy.\u201d This category of dues, to be shared by the priest with his male descendants, is outlined in vv. 9\u201310; another category (designated merely as \u201choly,\u201d v. 19, and to be shared with the entire household) is listed in vv. 11\u201319.
\n18:14, \u201cdevoted thing.\u201d See Lev 27:28, and the discussion of vows, oaths, and pledges at Num 30.
\n19:2, \u201cstatute of the law.\u201d This terminology signals that the following material comes from the Priestly tradition.
\n19:2, \u201cred heifer.\u201d The color possibly was chosen as a symbol for blood. Indeed, the two words may be derived from the same verbal root. It is not mandatory that the Hebrew word mean \u201cheifer\u201d; some translations thus have \u201ccow\u201d (e.g., JPS\/NJV).
\n19:2, \u201cno blemish.\u201d This requirement was announced at Lev 22:21. It may refer to a uniform color, but this is unclear.
\n19:2, \u201cno yoke.\u201d Possibly meaning that it should not have been used for secular purposes (i.e., as a work-animal).
\n19:3, \u201cEleazar.\u201d Aaron\u2019s son and successor to the priestly office, mentioned previously at 16:36 [Hebrew 17:11] and likely here in view of his impending transition to that office at Aaron\u2019s death (20:24\u201329).
\n19:6, \u201ccedarwood, hysop, and crimson material.\u201d For parallel and explanation, see the discussion of Lev 14:1\u201332.
\n19:15, \u201cevery open vessel.\u201d In earlier semitic societies, vessels might be the hiding place of a death-demon after it had dispatched its victim, hence providing opportunity to strike again. In Israel\u2019s monotheistic setting where the demonic had been denied existence, the idea may have been that \u201cimpurity\u201d could spread like a vapor (supported by the reality that death was soon detectable by the sense of smell).
\nOn the idea of death-demons, see Miriam Seligson in Studia Orientalia 16:2 (Helsinki: Societas Orientalis Fennica, 1951); R. Campbell Thompson, Devils and Evil Spirits of Babylonia, 2 vols. (London: Luzac & Co., 1904\u20131905). More available but brief, is Lloyd Bailey, Biblical Perspectives on Death (Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1979).<\/p>\n
CONNECTIONS<\/p>\n
The Duty to Support the Church<\/p>\n
In my nearly thirty years of instructing seminarians and others about the biblical faith, it never ceased to impress me when I saw the financial sacrifice that some of them were making in order to obtain basic knowledge and skills for ministry. Many of them did so well aware that their remuneration would be minimal and their housing marginal. Some of them had given up their former career and thus experienced a dramatic reduction in earning power. This they did willingly and almost joyfully, trusting that they would find at least minimal support from the faithful while at the same time knowing full well the condescension with which a secular, materialistic world would view them.
\nOthers I saw (including students, graduates, teachers, and hierarchy) whose ultimate concerns were made clear when the \u201cchips were down\u201d: upward mobility, \u201clooking out for number one,\u201d institutional maintenance, all with a sly willingness to betray the gospel and church when it was convenient (preferably if it could remain cloaked under some form of pseudo-piety).
\nGiven this \u201cmixed bag,\u201d what is the duty of the Christian to support the church and its programs? The bottom line is that, apart from the church, there is little hope for a better future for humanity. This was recognized by the authors of Scripture, almost from beginning to end: It was a matter of Israel vs. the nations; the humble child in the manger vs. the tyrannical king Herod; the fledgling church vs. the brutal power of Rome; the kingdom of God vs. the power of Satan. Thus, my denomination (the United Methodist Church) asks those who come seeking membership: \u201cwill you faithfully participate in its ministries by your prayers, your presence, your gifts, and your service?\u201d Nonetheless, such commitment need not be a barrier to scrutiny, debate, designated giving, and (in a crisis) even temporary withholding.<\/p>\n
New Testament Connections<\/p>\n
The focus of Numbers 18 is primarily on the care and feeding of the temple staff. The tribe of Levi was to serve the LORD, even in the absence of a geographical territory from which it might derive at least some measure of security. It is to rely, instead, upon public support in the form of dues and tithes. Even so, the resultant sense of security must have seemed strong in comparison what Jesus asked of his followers. \u201cDo not worry about your life, what you will eat or what you will drink.\u2026 But strive first for the kingdom of God,\u201d he said (Matt 6:25, 33). His advice was taken by the disciples, to judge by the remark (not without some concern!) of Peter: \u201cLook, we have left everything and followed you. What then will we have?\u201d The response of Jesus was not in terms of the wealth of this world, but of the next (Matt 19:27\u201329).
\nThe welfare of those who dedicate themselves to the proclamation of the Gospel was a concern of the Apostle Paul. Thus, he informs the followers of Jesus at Corinth of the need to support those who \u201cproclaim the gospel\u201d (1 Cor 9:13\u201314). He explicitly call to mind the support that was mandated for \u201cthose who are employed in the temple service\u201d (i.e., Levites) and \u201cthose who serve at the altar\u201d (i.e., Aaronides). He then caps the argument by pointing out that \u201cthe LORD commanded\u201d such support, perhaps referring thereby to a saying that would later be preserved in the Gospel of Luke (10:3\u20137). The same sentiment, in support of the elders of the emerging Church, is repeated at 1 Tim 5:17\u201318.
\nIn Hebrews 9:11\u201314 there is a discussion of Numbers 19. The author, ever eager to compare the new covenant to the detriment of the old, now speaks of Christ as the high priest of the heavenly cult. The former covenant featured blood (including that of a heifer) that was repeatedly used and externally applied to a material tent or a human body. The exalted Christ, however, has entered the heavenly temple, once for all, and with his own blood offered an atoning sacrifice that touches the inner being (\u201cpurifying our conscience\u201d). If the former procedure was effective, how much more so the latter!<\/p>\n
DIFFICULTIES IN THE WILDERNESS OF ZIN<\/p>\n
Numbers 20:1\u201321<\/p>\n
The historical narrative, interrupted at the end of chapter 17 by the insertion of cultic guidelines (chs. 18\u201319), now resumes. However, no sooner do the people, having been punished and then reassured after their repeated rebellions, move forward on the wilderness trek toward Canaan than multiple problems begin to arise. Quickly there are deaths of leaders, complaints of physical hardship, and military opposition from a nation through whose territory they need to cross. However, since the adult generation has been told that they will not live to settle in \u201cthe promised land\u201d (14:29\u201332), it is only to be expected that impediments and delays will continue to be narrated.
\nThis time the complaint concerns the lack of water, described in terms that are comparable to an episode that is related at Exodus 17:1\u20137. The complaint seems entirely justified, but the modern reader has become so conditioned by the previous litany of rebellions that the first inclination is to place this complaint in the same category. However, the Deity (unlike Moses and Aaron!) does not \u201ctake it personally,\u201d and relief is miraculously to be provided at God\u2019s direction.
\nIn carrying out the divine command, Moses and Aaron commit an offense of some sort and consequently (like the entire generation that has previously rebelled) are forbidden access to the \u201cpromised land.\u201d
\nThe chapter may be divided into three sections or episodes:<\/p>\n
1. Complaints at Meribah Concerning Water (vv. 1\u201313);
\n2. Permission to Cross through Edom (vv. 14\u201321);
\n3. Resumption of the Journey (vv. 22\u201329).<\/p>\n
COMMENTARY<\/p>\n
Complaints at Meribah Concerning Water, 20:1\u201313<\/p>\n
This story is basically from the Priestly tradition (with some remnants preserved from the older JE account), as evident by: concern with chronology (v. 1), (2) complaints against Aaron (v. 2), and (3) the use of such vocabulary as \u201ccongregation\u201d (v. 8) and \u201cbefore the LORD\u201d (v. 3).
\nThe wilderness of Zin apparently is an area NE of the wilderness of Paran, just south of the land of Canaan.<\/p>\n
Moses drawing water from the rock.<\/p>\n
Jacopo Robusti Tintoretto (1518\u20131594). Moses schl\u00e4gt Wasser aus dem Felsen [Credit: Wikimedia Commons, PD-Art (PD-old-100)]<\/p>\n
The statement that \u201cthe people stayed at Kadesh\u201d (v. 1) presents a much discussed geographical puzzle, since the people had already arrived there by 13:26. Does this mean that the route has been circuitous and they have returned to the site? Is it a different location with the same name? Is there a difference between the JE tradition (a year or so after the exodus, in ch. 13) and the P tradition (near the end of the wilderness wandering, in the present text) about the time of arrival at this site? Resolving that difficult problem need not detain us here.
\nMiriam, the sister of Moses, is part of the wilderness generation that must die before Israel can enter the \u201cpromised land\u201d (14:33). Thus it is appropriate that her death be recorded here, prior to arrival at that location. [Miriam]<\/p>\n
Miriam
\nThis older sister of Moses has played a significant role in Israel\u2019s story (Exod 2:1\u201310; 15:20\u201321; Num 12:1\u201316). While the book of Deuteronomy cites her in a warning against skin disease (24:9), the prophet Micah lauds her as one of the leaders sent by God (6:4).
\nThe early Christian historian Eusebius of Caesarea (on whom see the discussion of Num 5\u20136 and the New Testament), in his geographical work titled Onomasticon, says that Miriam\u2019s tomb could still be seen near Petra (in modern Jordan). The Jewish historian Josephus (for whom see the Introduction to the commentary on Leviticus), in his Antiquities of the Jews (at IV, iv, 6), also mentions the place of her burial and reports that her husband was named Hur (III.ii.4).
\nBy the time of the New Testament, the name has been modified (in Greek) to Mariamme (so Josephus), Mariam (e.g., Matt 13:55), and Maria (e.g., Matt 1:16). In the latter two cases, reference is to the mother of Jesus, rendered into English as \u201cMary.\u201d<\/p>\n
The nature of the offense against God that was committed by Moses and Aaron is not plainly explained (\u201cyou did not trust me,\u201d v. 12) and identifying it has troubled interpreters for centuries. Two clues in the text should be noted: (1) Was the \u201clack of trust\u201d that Moses and Aaron had felt it necessary to remind God of the need to act (v. 6), rather than automatically assuming that God would graciously meet the clearly demonstrable physical need of the people? (2) Was the failure to \u201cshow my [God\u2019s] holiness\u201d that Moses and Aaron spoke of their own action and ability (\u201cwe,\u201d v. 10), and then merely struck the rock (v. 11), rather than announcing that what was about to happen was a gracious act of God?
\nIn any case, Moses and Aaron are now destined to share the same fate as the entire generation that had departed from Egypt. Curiously, the book of Deuteronomy has a different explanation for this fate (1:37). (For Aaron\u2019s death, see 33:38\u201339 and for that of Moses, see 27:12\u201315; Deut 34:1\u20138.) The two exceptions are Joshua and Caleb (26:65) on account of their prior meritorious attitude (13:30; 14:6\u201310).
\nThe NRSV footnote at the place-name \u201cthe waters of Meribah\u201d (v. 13) explains what is only implicit in the main text: that the Hebrew word behind the place-name can be taken to mean \u201cquarrel.\u201d According to 27:14, it is to be identified with Kadesh. The expression \u201cby which he showed his holiness\u201d is a play on words as well, since the name \u201cKadesh\u201d is based upon the word \u201choly.\u201d
\nMatters become historically complicated when we remember a previous episode that is similar to the present one. On the way from Egypt to the sacred mountain, the people craved water, it was miraculously provided when Moses struck a rock at God\u2019s direction, and the place came to be called \u201cMeribah\u201d (Exod 17:1\u20137). Many modern interpreters suppose that the two stories are duplicates of the same event, with the JE tradition having placed it before arrival at Sinai and the P tradition after. In more \u201ctraditional\u201d interpretation, one would suggest separate events at places with the same name.
\nThe text suggests that the location derived its name from the event that is now narrated. It is equally (if not more) likely that the name is pre-Israelite and that it derived from a location where nomadic shepherds traditionally gathered to settle their quarrels. The biblical story-tellers, knowing of the place-name, then set their stories of Israel\u2019s quarrels in the wilderness at this \u201cquarrelsville.\u201d<\/p>\n
Permission to Cross through Edom, 20:14\u201321<\/p>\n
Moses requests that his people to be allowed to cross through the territory of Edom on the way to their ultimate destination. He anticipates opposition to this proposal when he promises the king of Edom that there will be no resultant injury to local fields or utilization of wells.
\nCrops and wells\/spring were a scarce commodity in the wilderness and were zealously protected by those in whose territory they were located. The king of Edom thus fears damage to his resources, and justifiably so, if the number of Israelites is in accordance with the census data in chapter 1! [Water Rights]<\/p>\n
Water Rights
\nIn the semitic world, \u201cproperty in water is older and more important than property in land. In nomadic Arabia there is no property, strictly so called, in desert pastures, but certain families or tribes hold the watering places without which the right of pasture is useless. Or, again, if a man digs a well he has a preferential right to water his camels at it before other camels are admitted; and he has an absolute right to prevent others from using the water for agricultural purposes unless they buy it from him. This is Moslem law \u2026\u201d (William Robertson Smith, Lectures on the Religion of the Semites [New York: KTAV Publishing House, 1969; reprint of the 1927 ed.], 104).
\nFor disputes about water rights in the Bible, see Gen 21:25\u201327; 26:17\u201322<\/p>\n
Modern scholars have traditionally assigned this episode to the JE tradition (hence notice how Aaron, who would be at the center of the P tradition, recedes from the scene).<\/p>\n
Resumption of the Journey, 20:22\u201329<\/p>\n
The route continues by means the Kings Highway (v. 17), a very long detour across the Wadi Arabah into Transjordan. The Priestly writer here resumes the task of narration. [Comment on Details of Numbers 20]<\/p>\n
Comment on Details of Numbers 20:1\u201317
\nV. 1, \u201cin the first month.\u201d It is unusual for the year not to be specified, but it likely refers to the fortieth year after the departure from Egypt. [See 1:1 for that event as the chronological anchor of the Priestly writer (see also 10:11).] Note that Aaron died shortly thereafter (20:22\u201324), in the fortieth year \u201cafter the Israelites had come out of the land of Egypt\u201d (33:38). [The possibility that it might refer, instead, to the third year after the exodus is outlined by J. Milgrom, Numbers, 164. For the proposal that the majority of time (thirty-eight years) may not have been spent at Kadesh but rather \u201celsewhere\u201d (namely, between Kadesh and the Nahal Zered, in keeping with Deut 2:14), see B. A. Levine, Numbers 1\u201320 (AB 4; New York: Doubleday, 1993), 55.]
\nV. 8, \u201ctake the staff.\u201d That it is not more specifically described (\u201cthe,\u201d not \u201cyour\u201d) indicates that it is a well known object. Some modern commentators suggest that it may be Aaron\u2019s staff that had been placed in the sanctuary (17:2\u20134 [Hebrew 17:17\u201319]), and this is supported by v. 9. This would help to explain why Aaron shares blame although it is Moses who does the speaking and acting. Others propose that it is the famous staff that Moses had used to perform miracles in Egypt (Exod 14:16; but see the use of Aaron\u2019s rod at that location, Exod 7:9). Although Moses is not explicitly told to strike the rock, that seems to be the implication, especially in view of the previous report that he used his staff to produce water in the Sinai wilderness (Exod 17:5\u20136).
\nV. 12, \u201cyou shall not bring \u2026 into the land.\u201d Thus Moses\u2019 fate is that of the entire generation that had previously been denied entrance into Canaan (14:26\u201334). Curiously, the book of Deuteronomy has a different explanation for this fate (1:37).
\nV. 14, \u201cyour brother.\u201d This relationship is derived from the story of the twin brothers, Jacob (ancestor of Israel) and Esau (ancestor of Edom, Gen 25:30). Nonetheless, the term can be used in diplomatic correspondence to indicate covenant-partners.
\nV. 16, \u201csent an angel.\u201d At the exodus from Egypt, a guardian angel first led and then protected Israel from the rear (Exod 14:19); an angelic presence was to continue to guide them when they left the sacred mountain (Exod 23:20\u201323; 33:2).
\nV. 16, \u201ca town on the edge of your territory.\u201d The classic location of the kingdom of Edom was east of the Wadi Arabah and thus at some distance from Kadesh. The present text, therefore, refers to a time when the border ran farther west, along the southern part of Palestine.
\nV. 17, \u201cthe King\u2019s Highway.\u201d This refers to a major route connecting at Damascus with a road to Mesopotamia, then southward through Transjordan to the Red Sea, where it branched either westward to Egypt or continued southward into Arabia. The term is also used for roads of royal usage in the ancient Near East. [For commerce and stations along it, see B. A. Levine, Numbers 1\u201320, 492\u201393.]<\/p>\n
CONNECTIONS<\/p>\n
No One Is Above the Law<\/p>\n
The difficulty of deriving theological insight and moral direction from historical narrative (as opposed to overt formal instructional literature) has been mentioned in the Connections discussion of Numbers 11\u201314. Concerning Numbers 20, therefore, we may select examples of behavior for purposes of imitation, while realizing that they may not have been put forward overtly for that purpose.
\nMoses and Aaron, having been confronted by repeated disobedience (rebellion) on the part of their followers, now themselves (and Moses in particular) fall to the same human assertiveness (v. 24, \u201crebelled against my command\u201d).
\nThe lesson to be learned is that \u201cLeaders of a congregation cannot violate the very instructions that they uphold and teach to others.\u201d To use an analogous idiom from the secular realm, \u201cNo one is above the law.\u201d Clerical examples from the modern world are legion and need not be singled out here. In general, the problem usually arises when pastors (or other leaders) suppose that their allegedly superior understanding of the gospel allows them to take liberties that they would condemn in others. The problem was no less the case in the early church, to judge from the warning of the book of Jude concerning antinomianism. The claim of such persons was that one\u2019s spiritual \u201cmaturity\u201d allowed one to rise above such petty things as \u201crules\u201d and absolute restrictions. [Antinomianism]<\/p>\n
Antinomianism
\nThe belief that one\u2019s spiritual maturity has reached a stage that allows freedom from scrupulous observation of traditional moral guidelines or from such petty things as rules. This view arose in early Christianity in the idea that faith in God\/Jesus alone was sufficient for salvation (a view condemned at Jas 2:14). The term is a combination of two Greek words: anti (\u201cagainst, opposite\u201d) and nomos (\u201ccustom, usage, law\u201d). See B. H. Throckmorton, Jr., \u201cAntinomianism,\u201d in vol. 1 of IDB (A-D), ed. George Arthur Buttrick (Nashville: Abingdon Press, 1962), 143\u201344.<\/p>\n
The Bible displays a deep realization of the egocentric nature of human beings, including the fallibility of the leadership of Israel (and ultimately of synagogue and church). Nonetheless, it never allows us to lose sight of wherein ultimate trust is to be placed and who (namely, God) is the only ground for enduring hope. Fallible Aaron is replaced by Eleazar, and God moves the agenda inexorably forward.<\/p>\n
New Testament Connections<\/p>\n
I. In his first letter to the Christians at Corinth (at 10:1\u201313), Paul recites events from Israel\u2019s wilderness journey as a source of instruction for his readers. That earlier history, properly read, is (he says) God\u2019s word to contemporary Christians. Thus, those ancient events serve both to warn Christians concerning their behavior and to prefigure the sacraments of baptism and the Eucharist (the Lord\u2019s Supper). For example, Israel\u2019s passage through the waters of the Red Sea, at the time of Moses, anticipates the Christian rite of baptism. Again, the provision of manna and water, in the wilderness, symbolize the spiritual food and drink that Christ initiated at the Last Supper with his disciples.
\nIn the context of the latter point, Paul introduces a connection that cannot be understood apart from Rabbinic interpretation. In v. 4 he says, \u201cFor they [Israel] drank from the spiritual rock that followed them, and the rock was Christ.\u201d He thus indicates knowledge of the Rabbinic proposal that God\u2019s nurture, by means of the rock that Moses had struck with his staff (in Num 20), was not provision for a mere local, one-time need alone. Rather, the rock had miraculously rolled after them during their subsequent travels, serving as an ever-present source of refreshment. [The \u201cbottom line\u201d message here does not concern \u201crolling stones,\u201d but that God\u2019s care was constant.] Just so, the risen Christ is perpetually present in the eucharistic elements, ever-refreshing the faithful.
\nII. By the time of Jesus, the Feast of Tabernacles (Booths), originally a celebration of the grape harvest, had come to include prayers for the beginning of the fall rains. Daily, a liturgical procession went to the Spring of Gihon. There, a priest filled a pitcher of water that was to be poured upon the temple\u2019s outer altar. [The Gihon Spring]<\/p>\n
The Gihon Spring
\nThis copious spring is located south of the temple mount in Jerusalem, on the west side of the Kidron Valley. It was the major source of water for the city during the period of the Bible. Faced with the possibility of invasion and siege by the Assyrians, in which case access the spring would be cut off, King Hezekiah (727\u2013698 BC) ordered the construction of a tunnel (1,750 feet long) through which water could flow into the city. It is now generally known as the Siloam Tunnel, into the walls of which Hezekiah\u2019s workmen carved a famous inscription describing its construction (now housed in the Museum of the Ancient Orient in Istanbul).
\nImage Not Available
\ndue to lack of digital rights. Please view the published commentary or perform an Internet search using the credit below.
\nEntrance to the Tunnel of Siloam
\nThe tunnel brings water from the spring of Gihon to the Pool of Siloam built under King Hezekiah (716\u2013687 BC), to insure Jerusalem\u2019s water supply when under siege.
\nSiloam, Jerusalem, Israel. (Credit: Erich Lessing \/ Art Resource, NY)<\/p>\n
Jesus, while observing the celebration on its final day, announces, \u201cLet anyone who is thirty come to me\u201d \u2026 and then refers to the \u201cliving water\u201d that is mentioned in Scripture (John 7:37\u201338). There has been considerable scholarly debate as to the location of his citation in the Old Testament (e.g., Pss 78:15\u201316; Isa 43:20\u201321; Zech 14:8). Numbers 20 is often considered among them and is cited in the NRSV notes to the text in John.
\nJesus thus proposes to those then present that the ritual prayers that they are offering have been heard. The \u201cliving water\u201d (apparently Jesus\u2019 teaching as a replacement for torah) now flows, not from the temple building, but from himself as a replacement for that structure and its teaching (2:21).<\/p>\n
FROM KADESH TO THE PLAINS OF MOAB<\/p>\n
Numbers 20:22\u201322:1<\/p>\n
The seemingly endless sequence of internal troubles (complaints and rebellions) that have thus far been associated with the trip to and stay at the oasis of Kadesh (10:11\u201320:21) have come to an end. The wilderness itinerary continues from Kadesh (20:22) to the vicinity of the border of the \u201cpromised land\u201d: \u201cin the plains of Moab across the Jordan from Jericho\u201d (22:1). The narrative now focuses upon a series of problems of a relatively new sort: military opposition to Israel (with rebellion nonetheless reappearing shortly thereafter, at 21:4\u20139). This material may be studied under the following sections:<\/p>\n
1. Priestly succession (20:22\u201329);
\n2. Defeat of the King of Arad (21:1\u20133);
\n3. The bronze serpent (21:4\u20139);
\n4. Journey to the east of Moab (21:10\u201320);
\n5. Victory over the Ammonites (21:21\u201331);
\n6. Victory over Bashan (21:32\u201335).<\/p>\n
The rapid pace of the narrative throughout chapter 21 perhaps means to imply an assurance of the conquest of, and ultimate settlement in, the entire land of Canaan. Now that the period of complaints in the wilderness is behind the Israelites and the entire rebellious generation is passing away, it is inevitable that God\u2019s promise to the patriarchs will now be quickly realized.<\/p>\n
COMMENTARY<\/p>\n
Priestly Succession, 20:22\u201329<\/p>\n
This account, from the Priestly tradition, relates a significant change in priestly leadership. Aaron is part of the generation that must die in the wilderness (14:20\u201323) and he also has participated in Moses\u2019 act of bad faith (20:12). The Deity directs that he, along with his son and successor Eleazar, are to accompany Moses to the top of Mount Hor. There, Aaron is stripped of his priestly vestments and they are transferred to Eleazar. There he dies, following which the people mourned for thirty days. [Comment on Details of Numbers 20:22\u201329]<\/p>\n
Comment on Details of Numbers 20:22\u201329
\nV. 24, \u201crebelled against my command.\u201d An expression that is laced with extreme irony, given that \u201crebels\u201d is a term that Moses (accompanied by Aaron) had used to describe the people (v. 10). Moses and Aaron are now identified with the very attitude that they previously have denounced.
\nV. 26, \u201cstrip Aaron of his vestments.\u201d His priestly garments are described at Exod 28 and Lev 8:7\u20139; the rite of transfer at Exod 29:29\u201330.
\nVv. 27\u201328, \u201c\u2026 went up Mount Hor \u2026 and Aaron died here.\u201d This is the location specified as well at 33:38 and Deut 32:50. That there was some uncertainty about the location, however, is clear from Deut 10:6 where Aaron\u2019s place of death is identified as Moserah. According to Num 33:30\u201337, Moseroth [plural of Moserah] was six camping sites prior to arrival at Mount Hor!
\nV. 29, \u201cmourned for Aaron thirty days.\u201d This departure from the norm of seven days (to judge from Gen 50:10; 1 Sam 31:13; Judith 16:24) was later to be accorded to Moses (Deut 34:8).<\/p>\n
Location of Mt. Hor
\nThe traditional location of Mount Hor where Aaron died and was buried is the present Jabal Harun (\u201cthe Mountain of Aaron\u201d), the highest peak in Edom. However, since Israel\u2019s itinerary took the people along the border (rather than through central Edom, Num 20:21\u201322), and since the nearly inaccessible heights of this mountain would not permit events to transpire \u201cin the sight of the whole congregation\u201d (20:27), it is doubtful that this is the proper location. A modern alternative is Jabal Madurah near Kadesh in the Sinai. Brief discussion may be found in J. L. Mihelic, \u201cHor,\u201d in vol. 2 of IDB II (E-J) ed. George A. Buttrick (Nashville: Abingdon Press, 1962), 644.<\/p>\n
Mt. Hor, Jordan. (Credit: Mlynn927 \/ Wikimedia Commons, CC-BY-SA-3.0)<\/p>\n
Defeat of the King of Arad, 21:1\u20133<\/p>\n
Now come accounts (from the JE tradition) of military opposition to Israel\u2019s entry into Canaan, first by an unnamed king of the Canaanite city of Arad.
\nThis initial encounter marks a change of military fortune for the Israelites. Previously, not only had they been discouraged by the report that their scouts had brought back from the land of Canaan (ch. 13), but also they had been forcibly repulsed during a probe from the south into the central hill country (14:39\u201345). Now, at last, fortune begins to smile upon them. The king of Arad, who has mustered a force to impede their journey, is soundly defeated. A new era of success is opening up during which there will be a succession of victories in battle.
\nThis literary change in focus and tone is entirely appropriate and likely deliberate. The former sinful generation, having been sentenced to die in the wilderness (14:35), is now rapidly coming to an end (20:1, implying the 40th year). God\u2019s ultimate agenda can now begin to move forward.
\nAt this point, however, the story line presents a geographical and chronological problem for the reader. As a result of destruction in the process of victory, the location of the battle came to be named Hormah (meaning, according to the NRSV footnote, \u201cDestruction\u201d). Yet, the people previously have been at a place already named Hormah, where they were defeated by a coalition of Amalekites and Canaanites (14:40\u201345). Why would Israel now attempt re-entry to the north at the same location, and especially so when they had subsequently intended to skirt eastward around Canaan and then turn north through Transjordan and enter central Canaan from the east (19:14\u201321)?
\n1. Is this an illustration of the axiom, \u201cIf at first you don\u2019t succeed \u2026,\u201d especially in view of the fact that their journey eastward had been blocked by the king of Edom (20:20\u201321)? With the long period of wandering in the wilderness separating the two events and thus the former generation passing away, is a new attempt now more feasible? Or,
\n2. Is this merely an alternative version of the account in 14:40\u201345, i.e., a fragment of tradition that has been placed out of its proper literary context? This would mean that the attempt to penetrate Canaan from the south was initially successful, leading to the destruction of (what came to be called) Hormah (21:1\u20133). The Canaanites farther north would then have rallied and driven the invaders out (14:45). These two resolutions of the problem both assume that the conveyed information is not only historically true but also that the event(s) happened during the period of wilderness wandering (i.e., the late thirteenth century BC). However, to this supposition a difficulty has been posed by modern archaeologists. Surveys and excavations have failed to produce evidence of city life at this time in the southern desert (Negeb) where our story is placed. Thus, there were no cities to be confronted and conquered, and hence no substantial armies to offer opposition. Nonetheless, there may have been a nomadic and semi-nomadic presence there that was sufficient to offer resistance to an Israelite incursion. Such presence in neighboring Edom is attested in extra-biblical (Egyptian) textual sources at the time.
\nA different historical locus for the event has been put forward. It presupposes the modern scholarly view that the various tribes of Israel, rather than all coming from Egypt and settling in the \u201cpromised land\u201d at one time in a massive invasion, in fact had independent origins and settled individually over several centuries. The event described in 21:1\u20133 may involve a tribe that lived in the Sinai, tried to enter Canaan from the south about 300 years before the arrival of tribes from Egypt, and was later merged into Israel. [Comment on Details of Numbers 21:1\u20132] [Individual Tribal History]<\/p>\n
Comment on Details of Numbers 21:1\u20132
\nV. 1, \u201cArad.\u201d Its exact location is problematic. There was a large and prosperous city of this name in the third millennium BC some fifty miles north of Kadesh. This location, the present Tell Arad, extensively excavated in the 1960s, had long been abandoned by the time of the Israelite exodus from Egypt. Its citizens thus could not have offered massive opposition to invading Israelites at the time of Moses. The site was re-settled and fortified in the 12th\/11th century, only to be conquered by the Israelites (Josh 12:14). See Y. Aharoni, \u201cArad,\u201d IDBSup, ed. Keith Crim (Nashville: Abingdon Press, 1976), 38\u201339. Where, then, was the site mentioned in Num 21? A later Egyptian pharaoh mentions two sites of this name, one of them \u201cgreat Arad,\u201d likely the present Tell Arad. The other has been identified as one of two sites located a few miles southwest of Tell Arad: either Tell Malhata or Tell Masos, both occupied at the time of the exodus.
\nV. 1, \u201cNegeb.\u201d See the explanation at 13:7.
\nV. 2, \u201cutterly destroy.\u201d See the discussion of \u201cdevoted\u201d at 18:14.<\/p>\n
Individual Tribal History
\nAccording to the book of Joshua and related materials, the emergence of Israel as a nation in the land of Canaan was a straight-forward and monolithic affair: a dozen tribes, genealogically related through a common ancestor (Jacob), invaded the land of Canaan and quickly overran it (totally exterminating entire cities: Josh 10:28\u201343; 11:6\u201323).
\nNonetheless, the text contains evidence that a number of other groups than Israel may have been incorporated in the settlement. For example, various groups had been enslaved in Egypt and a \u201cmixed crowd\u201d went out of Egypt with the Israelites (Exod 12:38). Again, the Midianite clan, dwellers in the Sinai Peninsula and related to Moses by marriage (Exod 2:15\u201322), joined the Israelites (Num 10:29\u201332). Entire cities in Canaan were incorporated without harm into Israel (Josh 9:3\u201321; 15:63; 16:10; 17:12\u201313).
\nSome modern scholars have suggested that Israel was an amalgam, a great ethnic \u201cmelting pot\u201d of at least twelve unrelated groups (not all descended from persons named Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob) who had arrived in Canaan over a span of at least six hundred years (19th\u201313th centuries BC), each with its own religion (hence references to Yahweh, God, God Almighty, the God of the Fathers, etc.) and prior history. They note evidence of an Amorite migration from Mesopotamia to Canaan in the 18th century, of which Abraham might have been a part. Jacob, on the other hand, is called an Aramean (Deut 26:5), and there was an influx of Arameans into Canaan in the 14th century. Thus Abraham the Amorite could scarcely have been the grandfather of Jacob the Aramean. Note also that the Abraham stories are centered in southern Canaan (at Hebron and Beersheba in particular) while those of Jacob are in the north (and around Shechem in particular), as if this represented two independent settlements.
\nThus, some groups that would later be a part of \u201cIsrael\u201d had been enslaved in Egypt, other not; some had worshiped at a sacred mountain named Sinai (others at Horeb?), others not; some had long wandered in the Sinai Peninsula, others not; etc.
\nSuch individual settlements would solve a number of historical problems in addition to that of the conquest of the city of Arad. For example, how could Joshua (in the 13th century) have fought a prolonged battle against the mighty fortified city of Jericho (Josh 5\u20136) when, at the time, the city had long been an uninhabited ruin as the result of a prior destruction (as archaeological excavation has shown)? Does this account really reflect the destruction of the site by the \u201ctribe\u201d of Benjamin alone, at an earlier time?
\nWas Israel really the result of the gradual infiltration of Canaan by a number of unrelated semi-nomadic groups, motivated by a desire for a land in which to settle? Did the resultant political unity result in a pseudo-genealogy in which the various tribal ancestors were made into \u201cone happy family\u201d?
\nFor a brief presentation of this view (usually associated with the names Albrecht Alt and Martin Noth), see M. Weippert, \u201cCanaan, Conquest And Settlement Of,\u201d IDBSup, ed. Keith Crim (Nashville: Abingdon Press, 1976), 125\u201330. For detail, see Martin Noth, The History of Israel (2d ed.; New York: Harper & Row, 1958).<\/p>\n
The Bronze Serpent, 21:4\u20139<\/p>\n
The episode just previous, involving victory over the Canaanites (vv. 1\u20133), apparently has made the Israelites eager to conclude their journey and has given them the false expectation of a trouble-free future. Hence when they contemplate an indirect route that will take them around the land of Edom (where they have already encountered opposition (20:14\u201321), they become impatient and begin to complain. The content of the litany of woes (lack of food and water) is very similar to previous ones (11:4\u20136; 14:1\u20134; 16:12\u201314; 20:2\u20135; see also Exod 16:2\u20134). What is striking about it is the fact that now, for the first time, the complaint is directed not merely against Moses and Aaron, but \u201cagainst God\u201d as well (v. 5). Previously, the complaint had been that the miraculously supplied manna needed supplementation with meat (11:6, 13); now the people have become so bold as to state which \u201cwe detest this miserable food\u201d (v. 5).<\/p>\n
God Sends Fiery Serpents Among the People<\/p>\n
Julius Schnorr von Carolsfeld. God Sends Fiery Serpents Among the People. 19th C. Woodcut for \u201cDie Bibel in Bildern\u201d, 1860. (Credit: Wikimedia Commons, PD-US)<\/p>\n
In response to ingratitude that has reached a new low, divine punishment takes the form of a rash of poisonous serpents. Indeed, there are areas nearby that teem with venomous snakes to the present day. As a consequence, \u201cmany Israelites died\u201d (v. 6). The people, by now conditioned by memory of previous mistakes, quickly confess their wrongdoing and ask Moses for intercessory prayer. At God\u2019s direction a remedy is provided: Moses is to place a bronze image of a serpent atop a pole. Gazing upon it will negate the venomous bite of the serpents. Is this an illustration of the ancient belief in \u201csympathetic magic\u201d? [Poisonous Snakes] [Sympathetic Magic]<\/p>\n
Poisonous Snakes
\nOf the some thirty species of serpent found in modem Israel, three are poisonous: (1) Vipera palaestina (the
\nPalestinian Viper; NRSV, \u201cadder\u201d), commonly found in valleys and often found close to human settlement, which makes a strong hissing sound and bites only when trodden upon; (2) the especially dangerous Echis colorata and Echis carinatus (the Carpet Viper; NRSV, \u201cviper\u201d), usually found in desolate rocky regions to the south; and (3) the less dangerous Cerastes cerastes (the Cerastes Viper; NRSV, \u201cviper\u201d), characterized by horn-like protrusions on its head and is fond of burrowing in the sand and lunging at its prey.
\nIn nearby areas (Egypt and Transjordan) the cobra (Naja haje) is found and may occasionally be referred to in the Bible (e.g., Deut 32:33 according to NAB; NRSV, NEB, \u201casp\u201d). Speaking of his residence in the Wadi Sirhan in the eastern part of the modern Kingdom of Jordan, T. E. Lawrence (\u201cLawrence of Arabia\u201d) reports that the area was \u201ccreeping with homed vipers and puff-adders, cobras and black snakes. By night movement was dangerous \u2026\u201d (quoted by Milgrom, The JPS Torah Commentary: Numbers [Philadelphia: The Jewish Publication Society, 1990], 174).
\nFor the various Hebrew names and occurrence in the Bible, see W. S. McCullogh, \u201cSerpent,\u201d in vol. 4 of IDB (R-Z), ed. George Arthur Buttrick (Nashville: Abingdon Press, 1962), 289\u201390.<\/p>\n
Sympathetic Magic
\nThe presupposition of \u201csympathetic magic\u201d was that an object (personal or impersonal) could be manipulated through the creation of a model or by replication of activity. A \u201crain maker,\u201d for example, in order to induce rainfall, might simulate thunder and lightning and sprinkle water about, in order to set nature an example to follow.
\nIllustrations may be found in T. H. Gaster, The New Golden Bough (New York: Mentor Books, 1959), 70\u201381.<\/p>\n
Apparently the need for such an antidote was ongoing, and the bronze serpent is said to have found its way into the temple in Jerusalem many years later. King Josiah, as part of his reform of worship, destroyed the object because \u201cthe people of Israel had made offerings to it\u201d (2 Kgs 18:4). [Serpent Worship]<\/p>\n
Serpent Worship
\nTwo things about serpents deeply impressed observers in the world of the Bible:
\n1. They were often found in rock-hewn tombs and thus seems to be associated with the realm of the sapient (\u201cwise; knowing\u201d) dead who could be consulted for oracles about the future. (For the classical sources of this belief, see T. H. Gaster, Myth, Legend, and Custom in the Old Testament, 33\u201334.) Not surprisingly, then, the serpent in the Garden of Eden is described as \u201cmore crafty than any other wild animal that the LORD God had made\u201d (Gen 3:1). Jesus advises his disciples to be \u201cwise as serpents\u201d (Matt 10:16). (Note: The serpent was not identified with Satan until the period between the Testaments (e.g., Wisdom of Solomon 2:24), and in Gen 3 is only one of the \u201cwild animals.\u201d The biblical story-teller chose it as the tempter because of its alleged craftiness.
\n2. Serpents shed their skin and thus seemed to defy death by being reborn. This perception was enhanced by the fact that they were seldom observed to die, since they usually did so in some secluded place. Little wonder, then, the serpent in Gen 3 lives in proximity to the \u201ctree of life.\u201d
\nConsequently, the serpent was often considered to be sacred. It was associated with the divine powers of healing and fertility (and hence of the Earth Mother Goddess), and thought to be a guardian spirit at sanctuaries. Archaeological evidence of serpent worship has been found throughout Syro-Palestine.
\nFor attestation of the belief that the serpent is wise, see T. H. Gaster, Myth, Legend, and Custom in the Old Testament (New York: Harper & Row, 1969), 33\u201334.
\nThe ancient idea of a connection between serpents and the power to heal is carried down to modern times in the caduceus emblem (a staff entwined by two serpents). In classical mythology it is depicted on a staff carried by the god Hermes. In modern times, it has become the symbol of the medical profession. Mention should be made of the Greek god of healing, Asclepias, who sometimes assumed the form of a serpent.
\nThe idea of a connection between serpents and fertility possibility arose because of the close connection of the serpent to the ground, because it was frequently found near sources of water (and hence fertility), and because of its anatomical similarity to the male sexual organ (hence a slang term for it, derived from the German word schlange, \u201csnake\u201d).
\nA brief summary of the archaeological evidence for serpent worship may be found in William Foxwell Albright, Archaeology and the Religion of Israel (Baltimore: The Johns Hopkins Press, 1956), 189 (n. 51). More detail may be found in K. R. Joines, \u201cThe Bronze Serpent in the Israelite Cult,\u201d JBL 87 (September 1968): 245\u201356.
\nImage Not Available
\ndue to lack of digital rights. Please view the published commentary or perform an Internet search using the credit below.
\nIncense stand decorated with coiling serpents
\nThe air flowing through the holes in the stand facilitated the burning of the incense in a bowl set on top of the stand. Pottery, from Beit Shan.
\nIsrael Museum (IDAM), Jerusalem, Israel. (Photo Credit: Erich Lessing \/ Art Resource, NY)<\/p>\n
Can the modern reader view such a claim with other than amusement at its \u201cprimitive\u201d mentality? Would Israel\u2019s monotheistic theologians really have proposed the efficacy of a mechanical, automatically functioning act of magic? One modern interpreter has correctly explained the dynamics of magic in ancient near eastern thought: an act of magic was effective only because a deity had authorized it and worked through it. Otherwise put: \u201cThe efficacy of magic is basically a function of the divine will, though its practice is a human endeavor.\u201d By coming to gaze upon the bronze artifact one evidences a willingness to trust God\u2019s promise, and the gaze itself focuses the sight and mind upon the possibility of the Deity\u2019s saving activity. The author of the intertestamental book, the Wisdom of Solomon, put the matter exactly (at 16:7), \u201cFor the one who turned toward it was saved, not by the thing that was beheld, but by you, the Savior of all.\u201d [Comment on Details of Numbers 21:4\u20139]<\/p>\n
Comment on Details of Numbers 21:4\u20139
\nV. 6, \u201cpoisonous.\u201d The NRSV footnote points out that the Hebrew word used here (\u015b\u0101r\u0101p) means \u201cfiery\u201d (so rendered in KJV). The reference is likely to the burning sensation at the injection of venom and from the subsequent inflammation. The same word is used for the fiery angelic figures in Isaiah\u2019s vision (\u201cSeraphs,\u201d 6:3). In other contexts, the word itself means \u201cserpent,\u201d in contexts that give it the power of flight (e.g., Isa 14:29; 30:6, \u201cflying fiery serpent\u201d). Such a creature was envisioned by other societies as well. This idea may have arisen in Egypt from observation of cobras that were able to leap from tree to tree. On the desert of Arabia as a place overrun with \u201cflying serpents,\u201d see the Greek historian Herodotus, The Histories, II 73; III 109.
\nV. 9, \u201cwould look at \u2026 and live.\u201d The use of a metal replica to ward off a source of harm is attested in the Bible (mice at 1 Sam 6:4\u20136; see 5:6 in LXX) and in the Near East (e.g., scorpions: see Sir James Frazer in \u201cSpirits of the Corn and Wild,\u201d part 5 of The Golden Bough, as quoted in T. H. Gaster, The New Golden Bough [New York: Criterion Books, 1959], 557). In the present case, however, the bronze serpent that Moses put in place is not protective but curative.
\nV. 9, \u201ca serpent of bronze.\u201d The KJV renders the metal as \u201cbrass,\u201d but this alloy of copper and zinc likely was not known this early. Bronze, on the other hand, is an alloy of copper and tin, the latter being known and used since antiquity.
\nAt this point, the biblical writer indulges in a wordplay. The word for \u201cserpent\u201d is n\u0101h\u0101\u0161 and \u201cbronze\u201d is n\u011bh\u014d\u0161et.<\/p>\n
The Journey to the East of Moab, 21:10\u201320<\/p>\n
The Israelite camp now lurches into forward motion and, no longer impeded by internal dissent, makes rapid progress toward its geographical destination [The Transjordanian Itinerary]. After passing through the uncertain Edomite locations named Oboth and Iyeabarim, the reach the southern boundary of Moab at the Wadi Zered (the modern Wadi Hesa). In order to avoid confrontation, they march through desolate terrain to the east of Moab until they reach its northern boundary at the mighty canyon of the River Arnon (the modern Wadi Mujib).<\/p>\n
The Transjordanian Itinerary
\nInformation concerning Israel\u2019s route through the lands of Edom and Moab may also be found at Num 33:41\u201349; Deut 2:1\u201337; and Judg 11:12\u201322. Unfortunately, there are differences among them. For example, Num 33:48 extends the territory of Moab all the way to the valley of the River Jordan near Jericho (and making no mention of an intervening kingdom of the Amorites), while 21:13 sets the northern boundary of Moab considerably farther to the south (inserting an Amorite kingdom). Again, according to Judg 11:18 (also Num 21:11), Israel did not travel through the heartland of Edom and Moab but rather skirted both to the east, while according to Num 33:44, they camped \u201cin the territory of Moab.\u201d
\nThe biblical writers\u2019 relative unfamiliarity with southern Transjordan has led a modern expert on the geography and archaeology of Moab to state, \u201cThe result of all this, of course, is a geographical hodgepodge totally incomprehensible in terms of the geographical realities of southern Transjordan\u201d (J. M. Miller, \u201cThe Israelite Journey Through (Around) Moab and Moabite Toponymy,\u201d JBL 108 [Winter 1989]: 577\u201395).
\nModern scholars have spent much time trying to decide which of the itinerary accounts is the more reliable, and who has copied from whom.<\/p>\n
By v. 20, the narrative has leapt ahead, in a \u201cquickie\u201d fast-forward, to a point that overlooks the land of Canaan. This means that the events of vv. 21\u201335 are chronologically out of place. Otherwise put: the negotiations with King Sihon of the Amorites (beginning at v. 21) logically would have preceded crossing into his territory (v. 13).
\nWhen the narrative reaches the point defining the boundary between the Moabites and the Amorites (namely, the River Arnon), part of a traditional epic poem is cited in confirmation of the longstanding established border (vv. 14\u201315). It comes from an otherwise unknown work titled the \u201cBook of the Wars of the Lord.\u201d [\u201cLost\u201d Biblical Traditions]<\/p>\n
\u201cLost\u201d Biblical Traditions
\nIt is clear that the content of the present Hebrew Bible was selected, in several stages (e.g., the JE and the P traditions) and over a considerable period of time, from a larger body of material then (but no longer) available. In addition to the \u201cBook of the Wars of the Lord\u201d that is cited here, we learn of:
\n1. The \u201cBook of Jasher\u201d (at Josh 10:13; 2 Sam 1:18) concerning a miraculous victory in the valley of Aijalon, and containing \u201cThe Song of the Bow\u201d that David recited; and
\n2\u201312. Multiple chronicles titled the \u201cBook of the Annals of the Kings of Israel\u201d (e.g., at 1 Kgs 14:19), the \u201cBook of the Annals of the Kings of Judah\u201d (e.g., at 1 Kgs 14:29), the \u201cAnnals of King David\u201d (1 Chr 27:24), \u201cthe records of the seer Samuel, and in the records of the prophet Nathan, and in the records of the seer Gad\u201d (1 Chr 29:29), \u201cthe records of the prophet Shemaiah and of the seer Iddo\u201d (2 Chr 12:15); the \u201cAnnals of Jehu the son of Hanani\u201d (2 Chr 20:34); the \u201crecords of the seers\u201d (2 Chr 33:19); the \u201cBook of the Annals until the days of Johanan son of Eliashib\u201d (Neh 12:23).<\/p>\n
When the people arrived at Beer (pronounced Be-er and meaning \u201cthe well\u201d), they sang a (previously known?) song titled \u201cSpring up, O well.\u201d The words (other than the opening line that is the title) may not be recorded here, since v. 18 could be part of a subsequent poetic description of how the well came to be. [Song to the Well] [Comment on Details of 21:10\u201320]<\/p>\n
Song to the Well
\nA verse to a modern Near Eastern well-song is as follows:
\nFlow, water, spread abundantly!
\nWood, camel, do not scorn it!
\nWith sticks we have dug it!
\n[Cited by John Sturdy, Numbers (New York: Cambridge University Press, 1976), 151.]<\/p>\n
Comment on Details of Numbers 21:10\u201320
\nV. 12, \u201cthe Wadi Zered.\u201d For the nature of a \u201cwadi.\u201d see the note to Num 13:23. The Zered is likely the modern Wadi el-Hesa, a deep gorge that runs through an ancient volcanic region from the highlands of Transjordan to the southern extremity of the Dead Sea. It forms the natural frontier between Moab to the north and Edom to the south.
\nVv. 14\u201315. The poem is filled with grammatical difficulties and thus modern translations differ. See the NRSV footnote, \u201cMeaning of Heb. uncertain.\u201d The NEB, for example, removes the first line from the poem: \u201cThat is why the Book of the Wars of the Lord speaks of Vaheb in Suphah and the gorges: \u2018Arnon and the watershed of the gorges.\u2026\u2019 \u201d
\nThe locations of Waheb, Suphah, and Ar are uncertain. The conquest of Ar by the king of the Amorites is mentioned at v. 28. Some modern interpreters think that it was the capitol city of Moab, since its name means \u201ccity.\u201d
\nV. 17. It is understandable that a thirsty traveler in the wilderness, upon finding a source of water, might break into an a song of praise. Music and dancing are still used by bedouin in order to induce the flow of a failing well. (See W. R. Smith, Lectures on the Religion of the Semites [New York: KTAV Publishing House, 1969; reprint of the 1927 edition], 183, note 2.)
\nVv. 18\u201319. This is a superb example of misplacement of verse division, since it places the beginning of the itinerary back with the poem about the well!
\nV. 20, \u201cregion of Moab.\u201d This, like 22:1, is a jarring geographical discontinuity, since Moab was left behind when the River Arnon was crossed (v. 13). This mean that the area had formerly belonged to Moab, as is stated at v. 26. Hence the kingdom of King Sihon is sometimes described by modern cartographers as \u201cNorthern Moab,\u201d wherein lie most of the Moabite place names that are mentioned in the Bible (e.g., see Isa 15\u201316; Jer 48). In the period of the Bible, this was an area contested, at one time or another, by Amorites, Ammonites, Moabites, and Israelites.
\nImage Not Available
\ndue to lack of digital rights. Please view the published commentary or perform an Internet search using the credit below.
\nModern ruins of the ancient city of Dibon (modern Dhiban), situated on the King\u2019s Highway in Moab. Its destruction is mentioned at 21:20.
\n(Credit: Erich Lessing \/ Art Resource, NY)<\/p>\n
Victory over the Amorites, 21:21\u201331<\/p>\n
When Israel reached the northern border of Moab proper, at the River Arnon, they petitioned the king of the Amorites for permission to pass through his territory, in words reminiscent of those to the king of Moab (20:17). King Sihon refuses (as had the king of Moab), leading to massive military confrontation that results in complete victory for Israel. The Israelite itinerary thus advances to the northern boundary of Amorite territory at the River Jabbok (v. 24).
\nThis area lies outside the \u201cPromised Land\u201d (Canaan, on the other side of the River Jordan), and hence Moses had no prior plans for any settlement here. Nonetheless, the tribes of Reuben and Gad, impressed by the terrain, desired to settle there and northward (chapter 32). Thus, the current narrative seeks to supports the legitimate claim of these tribes to settle in Transjordan, in view the facts that: (a) the Amorites had only recently taken this territory by force from the Moabites, as attested by the Ammonite ballad that is now quoted (vv. 27\u201330), and (b) there was a tradition that God had forbidden Israel to possess territory held by the Moabites (Deut 2:9).
\nAt this point, the narrator quotes (what apparently was) a well-known ballad about how Sihon, the Amorite king, had captured the territory (now claimed by Israel) from the king of Moab (vv. 27\u201330). It is a piece of poetry that is grammatically very difficult and the origin of which has been much debated. [The Deity Chemosh] [Comment on Details of Numbers 21:21\u201331]<\/p>\n
The Deity Chemosh
\nChemosh, mentioned at 21:29, was the chief god of Moab. This is clear from the inscription of King Mesha of Moab (the Moabite Stone). He says that \u201cChemosh was angry with his land,\u201d and that thousands of captives from a campaign against Israel were sacrificed to him. This was in retaliation for the conquest of northern Moab by king Omri of Israel in the 9th century BC (2 Kgs 3:4\u201327).
\nThe cult of this deity had been sanctioned near Jerusalem by King Solomon, so that his wives could worship their native deity. The biblical writer describes this cult as an \u201cabomination\u201d (1 Kgs 11:7). Little wonder, then, that the later King Josiah, as part of his religious reform, destroyed the place (2 Kgs 23:13). There is some evidence that Chemosh may have been an astral deity. In the aforementioned Moabite Stone, sacrifice is offered to \u201cAshtar-Chemosh,\u201d the first element of which was identified by the Canaanites as the morning manifestation of the planet Venus. This is supported by the report that Solomon built a \u201chigh place\u201d for the worship of Chemosh, the purpose apparently being to place the worshiper as close as possible to the realm where the astral image of the deity appeared.
\nHuman sacrifice to this deity is attested, not only by the Moabite Stone, but is implied by 2 Kgs 3:26\u201327. The king of Moab, in order to express devotion to his deity and thereby possibly gain favor in battle, \u201ctook his firstborn son \u2026 and offered him as a burnt offering.\u2026\u201d Human sacrifice to the morning star among nomadic Arabs is recorded as late as the 5th century AD (See W. F. Albright, Yahweh and the Gods of Canaan [Garden City: Doubleday & Company, 1969], 239\u201340.)
\nThe name of this deity also appears in Moabite personal names, comparable to biblical usage of the divine name there. Thus, for example, the name of the prophet Isaiah means, \u201cYahweh saves.\u201d In the Moabite stone, King Mesha identifies himself as the son of Chemosh-[\u2026], where the verbal part has been broken away.
\nWhen the Amorites took over the former territory of Moab, they accepted, in typical fashion of the time, the worship of Chemosh. Thus the Israelite Jephthah can say to the Amorite king, \u201cShould you not possess what your god Chemosh gives you to possess?\u201d (Judg 11:24).
\nMoabite Stone & Translation
\nStele of Mesha, King of Moab, related to the victory over the Kingdom of Israel shortly before 842 BCE, the pillage of the town of Nebe and of the Temple of Yahwe, the construction of a \u201chigh location of relief\u201d for the god Chemosh.
\nMesha Stele: stele of Mesha, king of Moab, recording his victories against the Kingdom of Israel. Basalt, ca. 800 BCE. From Dhiban, now in Jordan. (Credit: Neithsabes \/ Wikimedia Commons, CC-BY-SA-3.0,2.5,2.0,1.0)<\/p>\n
Comment on Details of Numbers 21:21\u201331
\nV. 21, \u201cAmorites.\u201d The name is used in cuneiform (Mesopotamian) sources both for the geographical \u201cwest\u201d (Amurru) and for semitic nomads who lived westward in the area of Syria and perhaps northern Palestine. (See A. Haldar, \u201cAmorites,\u201d in vol. 1 of IDB [A-D], ed. George Arthur Buttrick [Nashville: Abingdon Press, 1962], 115\u201316.) The author of Genesis regards them as a branch of the Canaanites (10:16), who were already present in Canaan at the time of Abraham (14:13). Indeed, it becomes a near-designation for Canaan itself (Deut 1:27).
\nV. 22, \u201cthe King\u2019s Highway.\u201d See comments at 20:17.
\nV. 23, \u201cJahaz.\u201d This location, apparently of the major battle, is uncertain. Sources outside the Bible (The Moabite Stone\/The Mesha Stone, for which see note to v. 29) place it in the vicinity of Dibon.
\nV. 24, \u201cas far as to the Ammonites.\u201d For this strongly fortified kingdom, east of that of the Amorites
\nThe king of Ammon later claimed that the Amorite area had once belonged to him, and he asked the Israelite leader Jephthah to return it. Jephthah then recited the story of how Moses had asked for nothing other than peaceful transit, only to be refused with resultant warfare. Consequently, there was no reason to return it, because \u201cthe LORD, the God of Israel, has conquered the Amorites for the benefit of his people Israel (Judg 11:12\u201323).
\nV. 26, \u201cHeshbon.\u201d For the location of this major city.
\nV 26, \u201cAmorites, who had fought against the former king of Moab.\u201d When had this happened? Possibly when the Egyptians loosened their control of Canaan following a battle with the Hittites (from Asia Minor) and their allies (likely including Amorites) at the battle of Kedesh (c. 1290 BC; briefly mentioned in J. A. Wilson, \u201cEgypt,\u201d in vol. 2 of IDB [E-J], ed. George Arthur Buttrick [Nashville: Abingdon Press, 1962], 39\u201366, at section 2.e. A bit more detail may be found in J. Bright, A History of Israel [Philadelphia: The Westminster Press, 1972], 111\u201312).<\/p>\n
Victory over Bashan, 21:33\u201335 (see also Deut 3:1\u20137)<\/p>\n
Having crossed the northern boundary of the Amorite kingdom at the River Jabbok, Israel now enters northern Transjordan, a vast area that extends through Gilead to Bashan. Transit through at least part of it was necessary in order to reach a point where the Jordan River could be crossed to the west.
\nBy and large, Bashan was a wooded table-land, suitable for grazing and grain, that extends far north as Mount Hermon.
\nPermission to pass through this area was not sought from its monarch, in contrast to the previous realms to the south (Edom, 20:14\u201321; Amorite Kingdom, 21:21\u201325). The reason may have been that northern Transjordan was sometimes considered to be part of Canaan, (i.e., the \u201cpromised land\u201d).
\nThe monarch of the realm, named Og, opposition to it. He was defeated, all the citadels destroyed, and sixty towns captured. Although few details are given here, later generations memorialized these events as great victories for which God was to be praised (Pss 135:10\u201312; 136:17\u201323; Neh 9:22).
\nThis area became the possession of part of the tribe of Manasseh (see 32:33\u201342). During the monarchical period, the Arameans of Damascus often sought possession of it and thus entered into warfare with the kings of Israel (1 Kgs 22:3; 2 Kgs 8:28; 10:32\u201333). [Comment on Details of Numbers 21:33\u201335]<\/p>\n
Comment on Details of Numbers 21:33\u201335
\nV. 33, \u201cKing Og.\u201d He is remembered elsewhere as the last of a race of giants (Deut 3:10\u201311). See comments on Num 13:22.
\nV. 35, \u201cuntil there was no survivor left.\u201d On this policy of total destruction, see the discussion of opposed Israel\u2019s transit and presented military \u201cDevoted\u201d at 18:14.<\/p>\n
CONNECTIONS<\/p>\n
In God\u2019s Agenda<\/p>\n
Previous complaints about the difficulties encountered during the wilderness itinerary have been directed only at the community\u2019s leaders: Moses (11:10\u201315; 20:2), Moses and Aaron (14:2; 16:1\u20133, 41; 20:2). Now, for the first time, God overtly becomes co-defendant in a complaint (21:5). Nonetheless, the Deity has been depicted previously as taking the complaints against Moses and Aaron personally (14:27).
\nThis more inclusive charge may be taken to mean (although it is not overtly implied by the text) that the people have at last come face-to-face with a basic reality: it is the Deity\u2019s agenda that is driving them and upon whom they are ultimately dependent. Blame cannot be shifted entirely to misjudgment on the part of their human leaders. If their previous acknowledgements of divine guidance have been superficial, by now the events of history have confronted them with stark reality. They are indeed God\u2019s chosen community and this will inevitably bring hardship. There is no escaping this reality.
\nBoth synagogue and church, corporate bodies and individuals, have experienced opposition (even persecution) throughout history and will continue to do so for the indefinite future. Their values, so often opposed to those of the prevailing cultures and to the way that the world naturally wants to be, will inevitably lead to rejection. Christians may indeed hear Jesus\u2019 call to \u201ctake up the cross and follow me\u201d (Matt 10:38) but they will not inevitable find that his \u201cyoke is easy\u201d and his burden \u201clight\u201d (Matt 11:30).<\/p>\n
Christ and Nicodemus<\/p>\n
Jacob Jordaens, (1593\u20131678). Jesus, on the left, instructing Nicodemus, on the right. (Credit: Wikimedia Commons, PD-US)<\/p>\n
The attitude of Israel\u2019s neighbors, through whose territory they wish to pass, is characteristic of human nature. Their objection has no basis in reality, since Israel\u2019s intention is merely to pass through and do no harm. \u201cIt is a strange human characteristic, taking the very existence of someone who is different and strong to be a threat.\u201d<\/p>\n
New Testament Connections<\/p>\n
Jesus, in his conversation with a Pharisaic leader named Nicodemus, refers obliquely either to his impending crucifixion or to his ascension to heaven. \u201cJust as Moses lifted up the serpent in the wilderness, so must the Son of Man be lifted up.\u2026\u201d Just as viewing the bronze object in faith brought deliverance from the poisonous bite of serpents, so will that same attitude of faith in the Christ bring salvation from the poison of sin and death: \u201c\u2026 that whoever believes in him may have eternal life\u201d (John 3:13\u201314).<\/p>\n
EVENTS AT THE BORDER OF THE \u201cPROMISED LAND\u201d: AN OVERVIEW<\/p>\n
Numbers 22:2\u201336:13<\/p>\n
Israel\u2019s search for easy entrance into the land of Canaan, having been repulsed after attempting a direct entry from the south (14:39\u201345), has led them on an indirect and flanking route. From the Sinai Desert (the Negeb) they have journeyed in an easterly direction toward Transjordan, passing south of the Dead Sea (21:4). Then, after strenuous military opposition from Edomites (20:14\u201321), Amorites (21:21\u201331), and the king of Bashan (21:33\u201335), the people are now concentrated \u201cin the plains of Moab across the Jordan from Jericho\u201d (22:1).
\nThere is now a pause in the geographical progress of the journey. The actual command to begin the march westward across the river will not be given until Moses has died (Deut 34) and been succeeded by Joshua (Josh 3). In the meanwhile, much final preparation remains to be done. Local military difficulties must be overcome (chs. 22\u201324), a religious purge suddenly becomes necessary (chapter 25), a new enumeration of the people must be taken (ch. 26), anticipated property rights for women must be settled (ch. 27), cultic issues need further definition (chs. 28\u201330), regulations for disposal of captured persons and property remain to be clarified (ch. 31), apportionment of land in Transjordan must be determined (ch. 32), a review of the wilderness itinerary presented (33:1\u201349), and matters related to apportionment of land west of the Jordan must be considered (33:50\u201336:13), Moses feels it necessary to give final exhortations and instructions (Deut 1:1\u201334:12), and Joshua\u2019s preparation for invasion must be put into place (Josh 1\u20132).
\nIn short, the story now reaches the stage where the previous sinful generation is passing away in the wilderness (as God had required at 14:28\u201333). The community, thus being reconstituted by a new generation, plans in detail for its entry into the \u201cpromised land.\u201d Furthermore, God\u2019s continuing guidance now results in the revelation of new guidelines, just as had been done at each stage of the previous itinerary.
\nThis overall conceptual unity of this final massive section of the book of Numbers is suggested by a similarity in its formal opening and close: \u201c\u2026 in the plains of Moab across [by] the Jordan from [at] Jericho (22:1; 36:13).<\/p>\n
PREMONITIONS OF SUCCESS: THE ORACLES OF BALAAM<\/p>\n
Numbers 22:1\u201324:25<\/p>\n
The reader who ponders this material carefully will detect an unusual shift in perspective.
\n1. While the book of Numbers is written from the point of view of the Israelites, these so-called Oracles of Balaam were written from the perspective of Balak, king of Moab. Israel is \u201cout there,\u201d external to the cast of characters, with no mention of Moses to be found.
\n2. There is a jarring geographical discontinuity: As the total story now stands, Israel formerly had passed through Moab-proper (from the Wadi Zered to the River Arnon, 21:10\u201313), through former Moabite territory that had been subsequently conquered by the Amorites (as far north as the River Jabbok, 21:14\u201331), and well beyond that (into upper Transjordan as far as Bashan, 21:33\u201335).
\n3. Balaam, in reporting his contacts with the divine realm, uses several designations: God (23:8), the Lord (23:21), the Almighty (24:4), and the Most High (24:16). While it is possible that these are mere alternative designations for Israel\u2019s deity, it is also possible that Balaam, from Mesopotamia, is depicted as a polytheist who speaks of separate and distinct deities, a perspective that would not have been shared by the rest of the material in Numbers. This may reflect a religious openness and pluralism among the tribes of Israel who settled in Transjordan where the Balaam material likely was composed.
\nFor these and other reasons, many modern interpreters have proposed that chapters 22\u201324 were once an independent, self contained literary unit, perhaps composed by the tribes of Israel who settled in Transjordan. This does not necessarily mean, however, that this material was composed \u201cfrom day one\u201d as a single unified document, as opposed to an editorially arranged union of several earlier parts. While recent interpreters have grown skeptical of an earlier view that these chapters can be separated into J and E traditions, they are more confident that the prose and the poetic components have separate origins.
\nThis section of material interrupts the historiography of JE at 22:1, which does not resume until 25:1.
\nThe material may be divided into the following topical sections:<\/p>\n
1. Balak plots with Balaam against Israel (22:2\u201321);
\n2. Donkey trouble: Divine anger at Balaam\u2019s acceptance (22:22\u201335);
\n3. Balak and Balaam make their plans (22:36\u201323:6);
\n4. Balaam\u2019s first oracle (23:7\u201310);
\n5. Balak proposes another attempt (23:11\u201317);
\n6. Balaam tries again: the second oracle (23:18\u201324);
\n7. A change of location: the third oracle (23:25\u201324:9);
\n8. One last attempt: the fourth oracle (24:10\u201319);
\n9. Miscellaneous oracles (24:20\u201325).<\/p>\n
The overall perspective of the material seem to be: even a non-Israelite and non-Yahwist realizes that God\u2019s agenda for Israel, revealed long ago, is now to proceed inevitably toward its realization. There may be hardships ahead in terms of military opposition across the Jordan in Canaan, but nonetheless the stated end is certain. We have it on the authority of Balaam (the one whose eye is said to be clear, whose hearing is attuned to divine realities, and who has knowledge of the divine agenda, 24:3\u20134), that God does not lie and that promises to Israel will not be broken. The four-fold repetition of his oracles merely serves to reinforce that certainty.<\/p>\n
COMMENTARY<\/p>\n
Balak Plots with Balaam against Israel, 22:2\u201321<\/p>\n
Balak, the king of Moab, uneasy about the massive infusion of Israelites that have entered (or: are about to enter) his territory, turns to a professional diviner for help in being rid of them by means of a formal curse. [Divination]<\/p>\n
Divination
\nThis technique for gaining insight into the present and future by means of omens has been discussed previously. See the note to 17:8; the discussion of the \u201cCult of the Dead\u201d at 19:14\u201322; and the discussion of \u201cLiver Omens\u201d at the commentary on Lev 3.
\nThere has been considerable discussion as to whether Balaam was a sorcerer (one who attempts to alter the future) or a diviner (one who merely attempts to disclose the fixed future). For the distinction and discussion, see Milgrom, The JPS Torah Commentary: Numbers (Philadelphia: The Jewish Publication Society, 1990), excursus 59. He rightly concludes that (1) sorcery was incompatible with normative biblical religion while divination (although sometimes condemned, as at 1 Sam 15:23) was at least marginally allowable, and that (2) while the King of Moab hired Balaam as a sorcerer, the latter functioned as a diviner.<\/p>\n
Balak has in mind the application of a kind of magic known as \u201cexecration\u201d (see Lev 20:10\u201321). The idea was that curses or blessings, once uttered, inevitably had their intended effect (Gen 27:33). In this case, it will so weaken the Israelites that the king of Moab can defeat them. [Execration Texts] [Comment on Details of Numbers 22:2\u20139]<\/p>\n
Execration Texts
\nThe Egyptians, during the Middle Kingdom Period, unleashed formal curses upon their enemies, foreign and domestic, present and potential. Pottery bowls or figurines were inscribed with the names of foes and were then smashed in a symbolic blow to those named. Here is part of a representative specimen: \u201cAll men \u2026 all women, and all officials, who may rebel, who may plot, who may fight, who may talk of lighting \u2026 in this entire land.\u2026 Ameni, born of Hetep and the son of Sen-Uset, shall die.\u201d In one case, various city-states in Syro-Palestine are listed (e.g., with the Biblical names Shechem, Hazor, Beth-Shemesh, and Tyre), along with their ruler. [The quotation is from J. B. Pritchard, ANET (2d ed.; Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1955), 329.]<\/p>\n
Comment on Details of Numbers 22:2\u20139
\n22:2, \u201cdone to the Amorites.\u201d See the discussion of that kingdom at 21:21\u201331.
\n22:4, \u201celders of Midian.\u201d The nomadic Midianite population seems to have been concentrated in the Sinai Peninsula (to which Moses had fled from the pharaoh, Exod 2:15\u201316; 3:1), but elements extended eastward into Moabite territory (Gen 36:35). Only here and in v. 7 are the Midianites mentioned in the Balaam Oracles, and many modern interpreters suspect that they have been inserted here by the Priestly writers as part of a larger agenda (for which see chapter 31).
\n22:4, \u201click up all that is around us.\u201d The damage done to the countryside by foraging armies is well known. Hence the assurances previously given by Israel that they would not veer from the King\u2019s Highway (20:17; 21:21\u201322).
\n22:5, \u201con the Euphrates.\u201d The Hebrew text merely has \u201cthe river,\u201d and this is the reading of KJV. However, in the world of the Bible the river par-excellence was the Euphrates (see Exod 23:31; Josh 24:2), and most modern translations so render it. Mesopotamians, living east of that boundary, were especially addicted to divination (for which purpose Balaam was summoned). Specifically, Balaam is said to be \u201cfrom the eastern mountains\u201d (23:7), which would put his place of origin in northeastern Syria (Aram). For the idea of a Transjordanian origin for Balaam, see B. A. Levine, Numbers 21\u201336 (AB 4A; New York: Doubleday, 2000), 145\u201349.
\n22:7, \u201cfees for divination.\u201d Similarly, NEB, NAB, JB; contrast NJV\/JPS, \u201cversed in divination\u201d (lit., \u201c[with] divinations in their hand,\u201d i.e., they were themselves versed in the art). In support of the latter translation, Milgrom correctly notes that Balaam\u2019s pay was to come after performance, not in advance (22:37), and that King Balak sent him away empty-handed (24:11). The Hebrew word involved means \u201cdivination\u201d and has no monetary implication within itself. NRSV has simply supplied its meaning from context.
\n22:8, \u201cstay the night.\u201d Balaam thus anticipates receiving divine guidance through a dream (as in v. 20).
\n22:9, \u201cwho are these men \u2026?\u201d This does not imply a lack of knowledge on God\u2019s part, but rather is a normal way to initiate conversation (as at Gen 3:9; 4:9).<\/p>\n
Donkey Trouble: Divine Anger at Balaam\u2019s Acceptance, 22:22\u201335<\/p>\n
The statement that \u201cGod\u2019s anger was kindled because he [Balaam] was going\u201d (to meet with Balak) is puzzling in view of verse 20, where the Deity sanctions Balaam\u2019s journey with the king\u2019s messengers. Thus, it is generally agreed by modern interpreters that this unit of material (vv. 22\u201335) forms a once-separate composition. Its purpose is to depict Balaam in a negative light by denigrating his ability as a spiritual observer (three times!) to less than that of his donkey! Not only is her insight greater, but she easily outdid him in verbal exchange! He who boasts that he is wide-eyed during divine revelation (24:4, 15\u201317) now must have his eyes uncovered (v. 31). Editorially, then, verse 22 became necessary as a transition.
\nThe Judaeo-Christian tradition has been ambiguous in its evaluation of Balaam. On the one hand, he admirably refuses to disobey the Lord despite pressure to do so (22:13, 18, 39; 23:12, 26) and thus he came to be viewed neutrally (as at Mic 6:5) or quite favorably as a superior to Moses in wisdom (Seder Eliyahu Rabba, 26:142). The Church Father Ambrose lauds Baalam for his prayer to \u201cdie the death of the upright\u201d (23:10). On the other hand, because he incurred God\u2019s anger (22:22), had less perception than his beast of burden (22:22\u201335), introduced idolatry (31:16) and was later executed (Josh 13:22), he consequently came to be regarded in a very negative light (Deut 23:5 [Hebrew v. 6]; Josephus, Antiquities, IV.vi.6\u20137; 2 Pet 2:15; Jude 11; Rev 2:14).
\nBalaam is one of those relatively rare figures who is mentioned in sources outside the Bible. A series of fragmentary inscriptions on plaster walls from the ninth\/eighth century BC quote oracles of a visionary (\u201ca divine seer\u201d), Balaam son of Beor, just as he is named in the book of Numbers. A delegation has sought his opinion, and he relates to them what a council of gods (some named as they are in Numbers, but not including \u201cthe Lord\u201d) has disclosed to him in a wild mythological scene. There is also a description of the realm of the dead, quite similar to that presented in the Hebrew Bible.<\/p>\n
Image Not Available
\ndue to lack of digital rights. Please view the published commentary or perform an Internet search using the credit below.<\/p>\n
Balaam\u2019s talking ass<\/p>\n
Nuremberg Bible (Biblia Sacra Germanaica). Printed book. 1493. Victoria and Albert Museum, London. (Credit: Art Resource, NY)<\/p>\n
The inscriptions were found at Tell Deir \u2018Allah, near the River Jabbok, in 1967, and are now in the museum in Amman, Jordan. [Comment on Details of Numbers 22:22\u201335]<\/p>\n
Comment on Details of Numbers 22:22\u201335
\n22:23, \u201cwith a drawn sword.\u201d The idea of an angelic being guarding a path with this weapon unsheathed is attested elsewhere (e.g., Gen 3:24).<\/p>\n
Balak and Balaam Make Their Plans, 22:36\u201323:6<\/p>\n
In preparation for seeking insight into Israel\u2019s future, Balaam directs that seven altars be built. Such structures were thought to be helpful in establishing contact with the divine realm, a concentrated point of entry. Furthermore, the ascending smoke of the sacrifice (v. 2) would attract the Deity\u2019s attention (as at Gen 8:21). The symbolic significance of the number \u201cseven\u201d (comprehensiveness) has been discussed previously; Balaam is \u201ccovering all the bases.\u201d [Comment on Details of Numbers 22:36\u201323:6]<\/p>\n
Comment on Details of Numbers 22:36\u201323:6
\n23:3, \u201cwhile I go aside \u2026 whatever he shows me.\u201d Apparently Balaam will look for omens of some sort (as at 24:1).
\n23:3, \u201che went to a bare height.\u201d There is an uncertainty of word-meaning here. Contrast JPS (\u201che went off alone\u201d) and NEB (\u201clet me go off by myself\u201d).<\/p>\n
Balaam\u2019s First Oracle, 23:7\u201310<\/p>\n
One may assume that Balaam had an international reputation for uttering effective pronouncement of doom upon individuals or groups. He has previously announced, however, that he cannot do this capriciously or willfully: he must rely upon divine inspiration and \u201cspeak only the word God puts in my mouth\u201d (22:38).
\nBalak\u2019s plan back-fires when Balaam, rather than carrying out his commission, blesses the Israelite masses. Right in the beginning, he alludes to the ancient divine promise to the patriarch Abraham (v. 10): \u201cI will make your offspring like the dust of the earth\u201d (Gen 13:16). Thus that which God has promised cannot be denounced (v. 8). [Comment on Details of 23:7\u201310]<\/p>\n
Comment on Details of Numbers 23:7\u201310
\nV. 9, \u201cliving alone.\u201d The idea is not so much geographical isolation as it is being set apart in a secure future.
\nV. 9, \u201ca people.\u201d This political term distinguishes Israel from the religio-social term \u201cnation.\u201d The former entity is usually defined in terms of specific borders, governance by kingship, and ethnic homogeneity. Israel, as a \u201cpeople,\u201d is defined in terms of focus upon its god and its destiny. In the Bible, Israel is always referred to as \u201cGod\u2019s people,\u201d not \u201cGod\u2019s nation.\u201d The rise of monarchy, of course, changed that focus.
\nV. 10, \u201cdust-cloud.\u201d Thereby reference is made not merely to the fulfillment of the promise to Abraham but also to the dust raised by the masses as they march through the desert.
\nV. 10, \u201cmy end be like his.\u201d This possibly is another allusion to the promise made to Abraham: that others will be blessed (or desire to be blessed) like the patriarch\u2019s descendants.<\/p>\n
Balak Proposes Another Attempt, 23:11\u201317<\/p>\n
Balak believes that Balaam has been overwhelmed and negatively influenced by sheer size of the Israelite encampment. Perhaps another location, where only part of the Israelite masses can be seen, will enable the diviner to carry out the desired execration on at least part of Israel (v. 13). Perhaps a new location and round of sacrificial activity will sway the divine disposition. Obviously, Balak did not believe what Balaam has said previously (vv. 8, 12; cf. 22:38). [Comment on Details of Numbers 23:11\u201317]<\/p>\n
Comment on Details of Numbers 23:11\u201317
\nV. 11, \u201cdone nothing but bless.\u201d Balak exaggerates (also at 24:10), since Balaam has praised Israel but not blessed them (and does not until his third oracle).
\nV. 14, \u201cthe field of Zophim, to the top of [Mount] Pisgah.\u201d The former designation means \u201ca lookout post\u201d (NEB: \u201cfield of Watchers\u201d), entirely appropriate for a high mountain top, perhaps an observation point for seeking astrological omens. NRSV\u2019s \u201cwhile I meet the LORD over there\u201d has supplied the divine name (the Hebrew text does not contain it). NAB is closer to the original, \u201cwhile I seek a meeting over there.\u201d JPS\/NJV may best capture the meaning: \u201cwhile I seek a manifestation yonder\u201d (thus suggesting a search for an omen).<\/p>\n
Balaam Tries Again: The Second Oracle, 23:18\u201324<\/p>\n
When Balak asks, \u201cWhat has the LORD said\u201d (v. 18), he begins to suspect that his fate, and that of Israel, hinges only upon God\u2019s decree and not the oral skills of a diviner.
\nBalaam\u2019s response is in terms of God\u2019s consistency; the divine, unlike the human, is not given to flighty change of mind. God\u2019s promises to the patriarchs of Israel, once issued, will not be revoked. Such counter-techniques as \u201cenchantment\u201d and divination are to no avail, nor are they needed in Israel in order to be secure about the future. Such techniques, although possible, are not needed in Israel: God has made the future clear through direct revelation to its leaders (\u201cJacob is told at once\u201d).<\/p>\n
A Change of Location: The Third Oracle, 23:25\u201324:9<\/p>\n
Since Balaam has moved from inability to curse (oracle one) to hints of blessing (oracle two, 23:20), Balak now decided that it is best to cancel the entire project. He says, in effect, \u201cIf you can\u2019t curse them, for heaven\u2019s sake, don\u2019t bless them!\u201d (v. 25). Balaam, however, insists upon continuing, and so Balak can only trust in the efficacy of another change of venue (v. 27).
\nBalaam, by how sure of the divine perspective on the matter, no longer seeks for omens. Now, with \u201cthe spirit of God\u201d upon him, he launches into a full-scale blessing (vv. 3\u20139). He assures the king that his senses are now finely attuned to the divine will. \u201cNo longer a pagan diviner, he has become a prophet.\u201d
\nBalaam\u2019s concluding words (\u201cBlessed is everyone who blesses you\u201d) echo God\u2019s blessing upon Abraham before he sets out for the land of Canaan (Gen 12:3) and directly mirror old blind Isaac\u2019s final blessing of his son Jacob (Gen 27:29). Thus the actualization of that ancient promise now at hand. A second phase of in the realization of the divine plan for Israel is now opening. [Comment on Details of Numbers 23:25\u201324:9]<\/p>\n
Comment on Details of Numbers 23:25\u201324:9
\n24:4, \u201cwho falls down.\u201d The implication is prostration as a part of worship, and not necessarily having fallen in a trance.
\n24:7, \u201cAgag.\u201d A king of the Amalekites at the time of King Saul (1 Sam 15:7\u20139), later to be executed by the prophet Samuel (vv. 32\u201333). (This has implications, of course, for assigning a date of authorship to the oracle: in Israel\u2019s monarchical period.)
\n24:8, \u201cthe horns of a wild ox.\u201d This animal (bos primigenius, the aurochs) and the lion (v. 9) were two of the most dangerous creatures known in the area. Renowned for its wildness and strength (Job 39:9\u201312), it was associated with Transjordan in particular (Isa 34:7). Sometimes it served as a model for the power of God (Ps 92:10 [Hebrew v. 11]).
\nImage Not Available
\ndue to lack of digital rights. Please view the published commentary or perform an Internet search using the credit below.
\nWinged bull from the base of the south wall of the West palace, Guzana (Tell Halaf), Syria
\nAramaean, 9th C. BC. National Museum, Aleppo, Syria. (Credit: Erich Lessing \/ Art Resource, NY)<\/p>\n
One Last Attempt: The Fourth Oracle, 24:10\u201319<\/p>\n
Balak can no longer tolerate his plan that backfired and so dismisses Balaam from his service. Balaam, in turn, has his own parting shot: he now directs his final oracle at the county of his former employer, Moab. \u201cIn days to come\u201d (v. 14) a leader will arise in Israel and will conquer much of Transjordan. Things have now come full circle: the king who hired a professional curser is now cursed by his own instrument.
\nThis oracle seems to reflect knowledge of what actually happened at the time of David and Solomon (2 Sam 8:1\u20132, 13\u201314; 1 Kgs 11:14\u201316). [Comment on Details of Numbers 24:10\u201319]<\/p>\n
Comment on Details of Numbers 24:10\u201319
\nV. 10, \u201cstruck his hands together.\u201d A sign of scoffing or ridicule (see Lam 2:15; Job 27:23).
\nV. 17, \u201cI see him [= the star\/leader of Israel], but not now.\u201d The Hebrew form is ambiguous, allowing the preferable \u201cWhat I see for them [= Israel] is not yet\u201d (so NJV\/JPS). The event foreseen lies in the distant future.
\nV. 17, \u201ca star will come from Jacob.\u201d This indicates a ruler, as the parallel with \u201cscepter\u201d proves. The remainder of the verse anticipates Israelite military conquests in Transjordan.
\nV. 17, \u201cShethites.\u201d Literally, \u201cthe Sons of Seth,\u201d an ethnic designation otherwise unattested in the Bible, but identical with the name of Adam\u2019s son (Gen 4:25). The immediate literary context identifies it with Moab. However, a text from a local ruler in Canaan to the Pharaoh in Egypt (a so-called Amarna Text) mentions a local group known as the Sutu. (The text is quoted in J. B. Pritchard, ANET [2d ed.; Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1955], 490 [EA No. 297]). Egyptian Execration Texts (see mention at 22:6) mention a nomadic group called Shutu, apparently located in Canaan. (See Pritchard, ANET, 329.)
\nOn Ugaritic, the language in which the Amarna Texts were written, see the commentary on Lev 20.
\nImage Not Available
\ndue to lack of digital rights. Please view the published commentary or perform an Internet search using the credit below.
\nLetter of the ruler Aziru to the pharaoh
\nCuneiform script, from Egypt, Tell el Amarna, c. 1365 BC. Terracotta. Photo: Juergen Liepe. Vorderasiatisches Museum, Staatliche Museen zu Berlin, Berlin, Germany. (Credit: Bildarchiv Preussischer Kulturbesitz \/ Art Resource, NY)<\/p>\n
Miscellaneous Oracles, 24:20\u201325<\/p>\n
To the previous four oracles have been appended three smaller ones, not against Israel as the larger context might demand, but against Amalekites, Kenites, and a combination of Assyrians and Eberites. This may have been done in order to expand Balaam\u2019s scope of insight and thus his reputation, not unlike the biblical prophets whose oracles sometimes extend to surrounding nations (e.g., Isa 13\u201323; Jer 46\u201351). [Comment on Details of Numbers 24:20\u201325]<\/p>\n
Comment on Details of Numbers 24:20\u201325
\nV. 20, \u201cAmalek.\u201d The Amalekite clan is associated with the Edomites (Gen 36:16), ranging from the Sinai Desert eastward to Transjordan and northward into the hill country of Canaan (Judg 12:15). They attacked the Israelites on their way from Egypt (Exod 17:8\u20139), helped repulsed Israel\u2019s entrance into Canaan from the south (Num 13:29; 14:25, 41\u201345), and thus earned the perpetual hostility of Israel (Deut 25:17\u201319; 1 Sam 15:2\u20133).
\nV. 21, \u201cthe Kenite.\u201d An itinerant tribe of metallurgists in southern Canaan and south of the Dead Sea and apparently a sub-group of the Midianites. Their ancestry is traced back to Kain (v. 22, denoting a blacksmith). Although Israel had been promised to dispossess them (Gen 15:19) and their destruction is anticipated here by Balaam, they formed a friendly relationship with the wandering Israelites (1 Sam 15:6) and entered Canaan with them (Judg 1:16). More detail may be found in G. M. Landes, \u201cKenites,\u201d in vol. 3 of IDB (K-Q), ed. George Arthur Buttrick (Nashville: Abingdon Press, 1962), 6\u20137.
\nVv. 22, 24, \u201cAsshur.\u201d Ordinarily, this is the designation for Assyria in the Bible, and NEB so renders it in v. 24 (but not in v. 22). NRSV and others (e.g., JB, NJV\/JPS), perhaps unsure of the referent since the Assyrians did not impact southern Canaan until the eighth century BC merely transliterate the name. A few modern interpreters suppose that it might refer to the otherwise unknown tribe known as the Asshurim (Gen 25:3, 18; 2 Sam 2:9; Ps 83:9 [NRSV rendering only two of them as Assyria]. NAB slightly revocalizes the first instance, resulting in \u201c(even as) I watch.\u201d
\nV. 24, \u201cKittim.\u201d The island of Cyprus (Jer 2:10), from which mercenaries served in Judea during the monarchical period. Balaam anticipates that an invasion from this source will impact both Asshur and Eber.
\nV. 24, \u201cEber.\u201d According to Gen 11:14, this is an ancestor of Israel, and the Septuagint seems to so understand it here in Numbers. Some modern scholars think this is a variation in spelling for Heber, a clan of the Kenites (Judg 4:17). Other authorities, ancient and modern, understand it to be the word \u201cacross,\u201d a shortened form of the designation for Mesopotamia, \u201c(the land) across the River\u201d (as does B. A. Levine, Numbers 21\u201336 [AB 4A; New York: Doubleday, 2000], 206). For a similar expression, see Josh 24:2.<\/p>\n
When all is said and done, what message does the Balaam material seek to convey? Standing alone, the oracles support Israel\u2019s territorial claims in Transjordan, perhaps at a time when those claims were being challenged by the Moabites under King Mesha (ninth century BC; see the discussion of the Mesha Stone at 21:29). The entire west-semitic pantheon (see 24:16, \u201cGod,\u201d \u201cthe Most High,\u201d and \u201cthe Almighty\u201d) and not merely Israel\u2019s deity, is supportive of that claim!
\nIn the larger editorial context of the book of Numbers where the oracles of Balaam are placed during the period of Israel\u2019s wilderness itinerary, a wider message emerges. Balaam speaks only for the Lord God of Israel, and not for a council of deities. In the first oracle, Balaam observes that Israel is as numerous as the dust (23:10), echoing the promise to Abraham at Genesis 13:16. In the second oracle, he reminds the king of Moab that God has made and irrevocable promises to bless Israel, a reaffirmation of Genesis 12:1\u20133. The third oracles describes Israel\u2019s future in terms of an idyllic paradise, in keeping with the \u201cpromised land\u201d as one \u201cflowing with milk and honey\u201d (Exod 3:8). The fourth oracles speaks of a future ruler of Israel whose power will impact the territories in Transjordan, thus affirming Genesis 17:6, 16.<\/p>\n
CONNECTIONS<\/p>\n
The Varying Sources of Truth<\/p>\n
God\u2019s word is not always confined to spokespersons within the community. Neither Balak nor Baalam is \u201cone of us.\u201d This is often the situation, past and present, and it is an unsettling reality. Consider the fact that the first lecture on ethics in the Bible comes from an outsider: the Pharaoh in Egypt lectures Abraham, \u201cthe father of the faith,\u201d concerning the latter\u2019s deception in the \u201cwife-sister\u201d affair. Just so, it is Balaam, a practitioner of divination and apparently a polytheist, who perceives the truth about Israel\u2019s destiny, blesses the entire enterprise, and refuses to budge from the truth when pressure is applied for him to do so.
\nThe church has been and is now filled with leaders who have failed in similar circumstances. Verily, truth does not depend upon its source of expression! The reverse is also true: a speaker of truth, of little status, will usually be ignored when contradicted by a facile and popular public figure.<\/p>\n
Following Cult Leaders<\/p>\n
Balak\u2019s faith in the reputation of a religious functionary is so strong that it blinds him to ultimate reality. He seemingly wants to relate to the prophet more than with the Deity. This tendency has been evident in human behavior. The \u201cfaithful\u201d will follow cult leaders to great extremes, and then will have their trust in God shattered when the leader turns out to be fallible or perverse.<\/p>\n
Very Clever Sinners<\/p>\n
Balaam, despite offers of handsome remuneration and the possibility of being held in high honor by the ruler of an entire country, resolutely \u201cstuck to his guns.\u201d From beginning to end, he spoke only the truth and not what the mighty wanted to hear (22:18, 38; 23:3, 12, 26; 24:13). By contrast, many are those whom I have observed in the present (laity, clergy, bishops, and theological faculty alike), who like Esau with his birthright at Genesis 25:29\u201334, will betray the church in a split-second when it produces monetary gain and public accolades or when pressure is placed upon them. Such betrayal, of course, will be wrapped in the cleverest of self-justification and the most evasive of language.<\/p>\n
New Testament Connections<\/p>\n
Luke 1:57\u201380 concerns the birth of John the Baptist. His father, Zechariah, lauds him in a poetic composition that the church as designated as \u201cBenedictus\u201d (from the first word of v. 68 in the Latin Bible). It is a typical messianic hymn in which John is depicted as the forerunner of the Messiah at whose appearance \u201cthe dawn from on high will break\u201d (v. 78). Some interpreters think that this is an allusion to Numbers 24:17 (\u201ca star shall come out of Jacob\u201d).
\nThe early church father Eusebius thought that the Magi knew that the \u201cstar of Bethlehem\u201d foretold the birth of \u201cthe king of the Jews\u201d because they had read the oracles of Balaam.
\nSome Fathers of the church (e.g., Eusebius, Jerome, Ambrose) routinely state that Balaam foresaw the coming of Christ.
\nThe author of 2 Peter, in a discussion of hindrances to the faith (2:1\u20133:13), mentions false teachers and other examples of the object of divine displeasure. Among them is Balaam, \u201cwho loved the wages of doing wrong \u2026 a speechless donkey spoke with a human voice and restrained the prophet\u2019s madness\u201d (2:15\u201316). The same charge is made in Jude 11, although that is not quite \u201cthe whole truth\u201d as reflected in Numbers. Deuteronomy 23:5 states that Balaam was \u201chired,\u201d supported by the NRSV translation (if correct!) that the Moabites who sought his help came \u201cwith the fees for divination in their hand\u201d (22:7). When Balaam refused to accompany them, presumably the fee was likewise declined. Indeed, says Balaam, not even a \u201chouse full of silver and gold\u201d would entice him to \u201cgo beyond the command of the LORD my God\u201d (22:18). He subsequently goes with those sent to invite him (v. 21), and thus may, at that point, have accepted a fee (although the text does not state that he did so). Nonetheless, he never does what he was hired to do.<\/p>\n
ONE LAST FLING IN THE WILDERNESS<\/p>\n
Numbers 25:1\u201318<\/p>\n
The narrative sequence seems now to resume from 22:1. At that point, the Israelites have reached \u201cthe plains of Moab across the Jordan from Jericho.\u201d The intervening Balaam oracles (chs. 22\u201324), therefore, seem to be a once-separate source that has been inserted into the narrative sequence.<\/p>\n
Image Not Available
\ndue to lack of digital rights. Please view the published commentary or perform an Internet search using the credit below.<\/p>\n
Desert of Judah, Israel
\nThe desert of Judah between Jerusalem and Jericho. In the far background the mountains of Moab in Transjordan.<\/p>\n
(Credit: Erich Lessing \/ Art Resource, NY)<\/p>\n
Specifically, we now learn that the Israelites had settled at Shittim (pronounced with the accent on the final syllable: She-t\u00edm). Here they remained for some time as is indicated by the verb that NRSV has rendered as \u201cstaying\u201d (v. 1). It was from this location that Joshua, as the successor of Moses, sent spies across the Jordan to access the situation at Jericho (Josh 2:1) and from which the entire community subsequently set out (Josh 3:1). It was at this location, apparently, that Moses gave parting advice to the community (Deut 29:1 [Hebrew 28:69]). [Shittim]<\/p>\n
Shittim
\nThe name indicates the abundant presence of Acacia trees. The fuller name, Abel-shittim (\u201cmeadow of the Acacias\u201d), is given at 33:49. It is referred to elsewhere in Scripture (e.g., Mic 6:5; Hos 5:2). It has been tentatively identified with Tell el-Hammam in modern Jordan, near the mouth of the Wadi el-Kefrein. (For details, see E. D. Grohman, \u201cShittim,\u201d in vol. 4 of IDB [R-Z], ed. George Arthur Buttrick [Nashville: Abingdon Press, 1962], 339.) The town was located in a relatively fertile plain from whence the Egyptians sometimes purchased grain (so Zeno in 259 BC). Later references mention its fields of grain and groves of date trees. It was still populated during the period of the early church.
\nAcacia tree in the Sinai desert. (The ark of the covenant was of acacia wood.) One of few trees adaptable to desert climate. The Israelites passed here during exodus on the way to Mount Sinai.
\nA tree of an unidentified species of Acacia (possibly Acacia tortilis), growing in a wadi on the Sinai Peninsula. (Credit: Florian Prischl \/ Wikimedia Commons, CC-BY-SA-3.0)<\/p>\n
The careful reader of the present chapter will soon experience perplexity at its shifts and transitions. For example:
\n1. As the result of Israel\u2019s religious infidelity, God commands Moses to arrange the execution of \u201call the chiefs of the people\u201d (v. 4). Moses, in turn, seems to change this into an order for the \u201cjudges of Israel\u201d to execute \u201cany of the people\u201d who have indulged in the forbidden practice (v. 5). We do not subsequently read that either command was carried out. Has an original ending that related the consequence of these commands been lost or obscured in the present text?
\n2. We suddenly are told that \u201cthe plague was stopped\u201d (v. 8), an additional form of divine punishment of which nothing has previously been mentioned. Was this once related in an earlier version of the story?
\n3. A priestly concern suddenly asserts itself when there was none previously (v. 7). Phinehas, a descendant of Aaron, appears to save the day. By means of the execution of a single offending couple, the entire horrendous episode is brought to a conclusion that is satisfactory to the Deity (i.e., no massive executions as previously had been ordered, v. 11).
\n4. A problem originally arose between elements of the population of Israel and Moab (v. 1), but the account suddenly switches to one concerning Israel and Midian (v. 6). Thereafter, the entire focus becomes one of enduring antipathy against the Midianites (vv. 16\u201318).
\nConsequently, many modern interpreters have supposed that the present text is composite: An introduction to the Baal-peor episode from the JE tradition (vv. 1\u20135) has been truncated and expanded by the Priestly tradition (vv. 6\u201318). This is clear from the fact that the initial designation for those involved, \u201cthe people\u201d (v. 2, a JE term), suddenly shifts to \u201cthe whole congregation\u201d (v. 6, a classic P term).
\nThis chapter, taken as a whole, illustrates an enduring reality of individual and corporate life. That is, times of progress and good fortune will likely alternate with periods of regression or misfortune. That is, the current tragic episode involving the worship of the Baal Peor immediately follows the enthusiastic oracles of Balaam concerning Israel\u2019s impending success (chs. 22\u201324), and prior to that the series of military victories against the Moabites and Amorites (ch. 21). Just at the moment, then, when the older sinful generation is passing away and the new generation is beginning to emerge, just when a clear road to the realization of God\u2019s promise to the patriarchs seems to be at last attainable, the reality of fallible human nature and unpredictable history assert itself. [When Did the Wilderness Generation Come to an End?]<\/p>\n
When Did the Wilderness Generation Come to an End?
\nBecause of repeated rebellions in the Sinai Wilderness, God decreed that the present adult generation must die before Israel can enter the land of Canaan (14:20\u201335). Exception was made for Caleb and Joshua (14:24; 26:65) because of their unflagging faith in God\u2019s promise (13:30; 14:7, 36\u201338). Consequently, even Miriam (20:1), Aaron (20:28), and Moses himself (Deut 34:5) fail to reach the \u201cpromised land.\u201d
\nWith the exception of Moses (who is granted exceptional longevity (Deut 34:7), when does the biblical tradition mark the point of transition from the old generation to the new? About that there seems to be a difference in the traditions.
\n1. According to the book of Deuteronomy, thirty-eight years passed from the time that the people encamped at Kadesh-barnea until they reached the Wadi Zered. At this point, \u201cthe entire generation of warriors had perished from the camp, as the LORD has sworn concerning them\u201d (2:14). In the travel itinerary as related in the book of Numbers, this location was reached at 21:12, where no comment is made about it (JE tradition?).
\n2. According to Num 26 (and the Priestly tradition), a new census of Israel was undertaken just after the Baal Peor episode. It did not include a single person \u201cof those enrolled \u2026 in the wilderness of Sinai\u201d (ch. 1) of whom the Lord had said \u201cThey shall die in the wilderness\u201d (vv. 63\u201365). Presumably, the 24,000 who were destroyed by the plague (25:9) belonged to that former generation.<\/p>\n
Alternation in fortune is an illustration of plot retardation, a literary technique that occurs throughout the Pentateuch. For example, the Deity\u2019s promise to Abraham that he will have an heir is not actualized until the last moment, as a consequence of the infertility of Sarah his wife. The same situation pertains to his descendants Isaac and Jacob. Again, no sooner does Jacob have twelve sons who become ancestors of the tribes of Israel than they go down to Egypt in search of food and become enslaved to the Pharaoh for 430 years.
\nIsrael\u2019s sudden reversion to old habits was noted by the Prophet Hosea:<\/p>\n
Like grapes in the wilderness,
\nI found Israel.
\nLike the first fruit of the fig tree,
\nin its first season,
\nI saw your ancestors.
\nBut they came to Baal-peor,
\nand consecrated themselves to a
\nthing of shame,
\nand became detestable like the
\nthing they loved. (9:10)<\/p>\n
This reversion to old habits is especially perplexing in view of a previous parallel. Despite the previous rebellions in the wilderness, only once before has the community embraced an \u201calternative\u201d religion (namely, the worship of the golden calf as related at Exod 32). The two episodes almost seem to frame the wilderness experience: one upon reaching the sacred mountain, just before Moses returns from his theophany atop it; the other upon reaching the border of their geographical destination. Moses previously had warned them against making covenants with \u201cthe inhabitants of the land,\u201d participating in their worship, and intermarriage with them (Exod 34:11\u201316). Just at the high-lights of their journey they deteriorate to their lowest moments and thus it appears that they have learned nothing from their past.
\nThe chapter may be divided into the following topical sections:<\/p>\n
1. Sex and idolatry at Baal-Peor (vv. 1\u20139);
\n2. Phinehas attains the priesthood (vv. 10\u201313);
\n3. Enduring antipathy toward the Midianites (vv. 14\u201318).<\/p>\n
Sex and Idolatry at Baal-Peor, 25:1\u20139<\/p>\n
In the earlier part of the account (JE, vv. 1\u20135), a problem arises as a consequence of sexual contact between Israelite males and the local Moabite women. The problem seems not to have been that kind of physical interaction within itself, but rather two resultant complications.<\/p>\n
1. \u201cSexual relations,\u201d at least in some cases, will lead to marriage (v. 6). However, the book of Deuteronomy warns Israelites against intermarriage with the inhabitants of Canaan on the grounds that the resultant offspring would \u201cturn away\u201d from the worship of the Lord and \u201cserve other gods\u201d (7:3\u20134; see also Exod 34:15\u201316). Historical experience from the monarchical period was soon to prove the wisdom of that warning (1 Kgs 11:1\u20136) and so it was repeated in the post-exilic age (Ezra 9:1\u20134; 10:1\u20135, 10\u201317; Neh 13:23\u201327).
\n2. The women involved in such relationships will understandably invite the men to participate in local worship activities. This would involve sacrifice, cultic meals, and bowing down to their gods. The result would be a violation of the entire covenant between the Lord and Israel and of the first two of the Ten Commandments in particular. To make matters worse, it would not merely be an isolated instance whereby the Israelites pretended to be interested and politely \u201cwent through the (cultic) motions,\u201d but rather that they would became addicted (they \u201cyoked\u201d themselves to it). The resultant anger of the Deity was rightly \u201ckindled against Israel\u201d (v. 3).
\nWhat was the nature of the cultic activity that provoked the divine wrath? About this there has been much scholarly debate, and JE may diverge from P in this regard.
\n1. Our earliest comment comes from the Bible itself, at Psalm 106:28, where we read: \u201cThen they attached themselves to the Baal of Peor, and ate sacrifices offered to the dead.\u201d Such so-called \u201cancestor cults\u201d (also called \u201ccults of the dead\u201d and \u201cfunerary cults\u201d) were widely practiced in the ancient world and are thoroughly condemned in the Bible. (See the discussion of ch. 19.) Would the goal thus have been to placate the spirits of the dead who might be the agents of the plague that struck the people (v. 8)? However, this seems unlikely, since \u201cBaal\u201d is ordinarily the title of a sky\/weather god and not one of plague and death (who ordinarily would reside in the Underworld).
\n2. \u201cBaal,\u201d as a divine title, means \u201cowner, lord\u201d and was commonly (although not exclusively; e.g., at 1 Kgs 18) applied to the weather deity who was sometimes also known as Hadad, \u201cthe Thunderer.\u201d This type of deity was often identified by a specific location, as here, comparable to Baal-zephon (33:7) and Baal-meon (Josh 13:17).
\nConsequently, the predominant modern interpretation of the Baal of Peor episode has been that fertility rites were involved, whereby cultic personnel (\u201csacred prostitutes\u201d) sought to initiate the powers of nature (i.e., the rain-god impregnates \u201cmother earth\u201d) by sympathetic magic. (See the note to 21:9.) Although this is possible, the evidence for this specific cultic activity is slight.
\n3. At least in the Priestly account (vv. 6\u20139), it may have been a ritual infringement of some sort, such as bringing the Midianite woman into the sacred precinct of the sanctuary. This possibility is supported by the suddenness of the punishment (no trial or hearing of any sort) and that it was carried out by a priest whose task it was to guard the sanctuary from improper trespass (1:51; 3:10).
\nIn the monarchical age in which the JE account may have taken shape, problems for Israel constantly arose from Transjordan. To cite but two instances: (1) King Solomon imported pagan wives from Moab, Ammon, and Edom \u201cwho turned away his heart\u201d from Israel\u2019s religion (1 Kgs 11:1\u20138). (2) The King of Moab rebelled against Israelite control with resultant warfare (2 Kgs 3:4\u201327). Is it possible, then, that the problems that Transjordan influence presented for Israel in the early monarchical period (9th\u20138th centuries BC) led the JE tradition to include the Baal of Peor episode as a negative model for contemporary society? Thus, matrimonial affiliations, religious toleration, and cultic borrowing are to be avoided, at least as far as Moab as a source is concerned! [Comment on Details of Numbers 25]<\/p>\n
Comment on Details of Numbers 25
\nV. 3, \u201cBaal of Peor.\u201d Peor is an elevated height nearby, according to 23:28 (\u201cto the top of Peor, which overlooks the wasteland\u201d). At Deut 3:29, it is referred to as Bethpeor, where the word \u201cbeth\u201d (lit., \u201chouse\u201d) likely indicates a sanctuary. Mountains were often the location of altars to astral and weather deities because it placed the worshiper closer to the realm where such deities manifested themselves. The prophets constantly condemn worship \u201con every high hill and under every green tree\u201d (1 Kgs 14:23; 2 Kgs 17:10; Jer 3:6).
\nV. 4, \u201call the chiefs.\u201d Is this an exaggeration, since it is unlikely that all were guilty of participation in pagan worship, or is each tribal chieftain culpable merely for allowing the practice to have taken place? Or, does the word \u201cchiefs\u201d here merely indicate \u201cringleaders\u201d (so JPS\/NJV) rather than a tribal office?
\nV. 4, \u201cimpale.\u201d In the possibly parallel case of Saul and his sons, only after they had died in battle were their corpses hung for display on the city walls (1 Sam 31:2, 4, 10, 12). Does this mean that the corpses of those who were condemned and executed at Peor were only then placed on public display? The Assyrians, by contract, used impalement on a sharpened stake as a means of execution.
\nV. 4, \u201cin the sun,\u201d literally, \u201cin front of the sun,\u201d i.e., publicly. Was this done in order to provide a deterrent? It is more likely that the phrase that immediately follows, \u201cbefore the LORD,\u201d often used as a ritual expression, indicate that justice had to be done as a result of ritual transgression.
\nV. 6, \u201cweeping.\u201d Is this because of the executions that presumably have taken place (or are to take place) as a consequence of the divine command in v. 4 (in the JE account)? Or, is it because of the plague that P introduces at v. 9?
\nV. 8, \u201cthe tent.\u201d NJV\/JPS uses the word \u201cchamber\u201d here (Heb.: qubb\u00e2, a word not used elsewhere) perhaps to distinguish the structure from main sanctuary, \u201cthe tent of meeting\u201d (v. 6). J. Milgrom considers it to be a marriage canopy (The JPS Torah Commentary: Numbers [Philadelphia: The Jewish Publication Society, 1990], 215). This would signal the couple\u2019s intentions and account for their apparent position when they were killed. Less likely does it refer to a portable shrine (of a type well attested in the ancient Near East) that the woman had brought along for purpose of worship (as proposed by B. A. Levine, Numbers 21\u201336 [AB 4A; New York: Doubleday, 2000], 287\u201388).
\nV. 8, \u201cthrough the belly.\u201d A pun is involved, since the words \u201ctent\u201d and \u201cbelly\u201d are similar in spelling. Sexual imagery may also be involved, since the spear penetrates through the man\u2019s body into the woman\u2019s, she thus getting more of a \u201cthrust\u201d than she bargained for!
\nV. 9, \u201ctwenty-four thousand.\u201d A typical \u201cround\u201d number: 2 \u00d7 12 (for the twelve tribes) \u00d7 1,000.
\nImage Not Available
\ndue to lack of digital rights. Please view the published commentary or perform an Internet search using the credit below.
\nExecution by impalement
\nAssyrian warriors impaling Jewish prisoners after conquering Jewish fortress of Lachish in 701 BC.
\nPart of a relief from the palace of Sennacherib, Nineveh, Mesopotamia (Iraq). Assyrian, 8th C. BC. British Museum, London. (Credit: Erich Lessing \/ Art Resource, NY)<\/p>\n
The Storm God
\nThe storm-god Adad standing on a bull, brandishing a flash of lightning.<\/p>\n
Stele of god Adad on a bull with a thunderbolt in hand. (Credit: Rama \/ Wikimedia Commons, CC-BY-SA-2.0-FR)<\/p>\n
Phinehas Attains the Priesthood, 25:10\u201313<\/p>\n
For the Priestly writer the matter of genealogy is of the highest importance: ritual must always be carried out by the proper person in the correct manner. Thus, the ascendancy of the descendants of Aaron over their Levitical cousins is reported and justified (chs. 16\u201317) and succession through Aaron\u2019s son Eleazar is duly noted (20:22\u201329). How is the line then to descend, and why? The Priestly writer (vv. 6\u201318) is of the opinion that it is the descendants of Eleazar\u2019s son Phinehas who have been chosen for perpetual priesthood (vv. 12\u201314). [Genealogy of the Tribe of Levi]<\/p>\n
Genealogy of the tribe of Levi
\nPart of the first five generations of the tribe of Levi, according to Exod 6:16\u201325. Thus Korah, who raised the revolt in Num 16, is Aaron\u2019s first-cousin. Aaron\u2019s oldest sons, Nabab and Abihu had perished in the episode related in Lev 10. According to priestly reckoning, the priestly line then descended to Eleazar (Lev 10:6) and his son Phinehas (Num 25:10\u201313).<\/p>\n
In the older (JE) account, it would have been Moses who resolved this problem. Note that it is he who gave orders to the \u201cjudges of Israel\u201d (v. 5), just as he had done at an earlier and similar episode at Mt. Sinai (Exod 32:25\u201327). Now, however, in the expanded (P) episode, it is the priestly line through Aaron\u2019s grandson Phinehas that assumes the role of savior, and consequently it s given a \u201ccovenant of perpetual priesthood (v. 13).
\nOf Aaron\u2019s four sons, two of them (Nadab and Abihu) have died as the result of cultic indiscretion (Lev 10:1\u20132). The remaining two, Eleazar and Ithamar, have duties assigned in connection with the portable shrine (Num 3:4). It is Eleazar who is placed in overall charge (3:32) and who will succeed his father to the high office (Num 20:22\u201329). If a challenge to his office is to arise, therefore, it could only legitimately come from the line of Ithamar. Although such challenge is not recorded, it might have been the basis of the story now at hand: Eleazar\u2019s son Phinehas is affirmed as the proper future successor to the high priestly office (although father Eleazar\u2019s service continues to be mentioned for some time, 32:28; 34:17).
\nThe book of 1 Chronicles, in outlining the recently returned inhabitants of Jerusalem from exile in Babylonia, lists the gatekeepers of the temple. The family is traced back to Phinehas, guardian of the threshold of the wilderness tent (9:17\u201320). As such, he would have been authorized to protect the sanctity of the area by whatever force might be necessary. Hence it is no surprise that he is said to have been armed with a spear (v. 7).
\nOne wonders what so enraged Phinehas that he killed the man and woman (vv. 6\u20138). Surely not that he merely brought the woman into the larger camp, but possibly because he had married (or intended to marry) her. Whatever it was, the fact that it was done \u201cin sight of the whole congregation\u201d apparently added to its significance. Since the verb used here sometimes occurs in a ritual context (e.g., bringing a sacrificial offering to the altar), is it possible that the intention was to engage in pagan worship of some sort? The activity of the couple, whatever it was, took place in \u201cthe tent\u201d (v. 8), which is not necessarily to be identified with the central Israelite shrine, \u201cthe tent of meeting\u201d (v. 6).<\/p>\n
Enduring Antipathy Toward the Midianites, 25:14\u201318<\/p>\n
The directive at verse 16 sets the stage for actualization of the command in chapter 31.<\/p>\n
CONNECTIONS<\/p>\n
At least the following lessons can be drawn from this section of Scripture, whether intended or not by the original author(s). That is, what the authors of the Bible intended for a text to mean to the original audience is not necessarily what it may be taken to mean for an audience today.<\/p>\n
Continuing the Story<\/p>\n
The story can be seen as a paradigm of the life of a religious community. No matter how clear the goals of the synagogue and church may be, no matter how firm the divine promises that have been given to it, no matter how evident the miracles that have been reported and observed, and regardless of the extent of the exhortation to be obedient, there will likely be periods of doubt, regression, and apparent divine displeasure. Nonetheless, God\u2019s commitment to the enterprise does not waver. At the individual level, human fallibility may also take the form of forgetfulness. God\u2019s gracious acts may fade and cease to play a formative role in shaping ethical behavior. Only what \u201cGod has done for me lately\u201d may matter, and that may not seem to have been anything.
\nAt this point, the importance of a devotional life and of corporate worship becomes evident. The sacred story must continue to be told from generation to generation.<\/p>\n
Interfaith Marriage<\/p>\n
However intolerant the biblical distrust of interfaith marriage may seem to modern \u201cenlightened\u201d persons, it is not a relationship to be undertaken lightly. The reasons outlined above are as cogent today as then. Couples, in the romantic glow of courtship, may convince themselves that they can accommodate to the religion of the other, but it frequently does not work out in practice (especially in the subsequent matter of deciding where to take children to worship). Alternating in attendance from one denomination to the other may signal to children a casual attitude (\u201cwe are not really totally committed to either one\u201d) and this lack of parental commitment is likely to diminish that of children.<\/p>\n
Influential Associations<\/p>\n
The Israelites\u2019 rigid antipathy to certain social groups (here, and continued in ch. 31, the Midianites) may again strike the modern reader as too narrow. Nonetheless, it is well to remember that antipathy can sometimes be justified by repeated negative experiences. Hence there are modern proverbs, not totally devoid of reality, to the effect that \u201ca leopard cannot change its spots,\u201d and that \u201cone cannot go to bed with dogs and not get up with fleas.\u201d Those with whom we constantly associate may indeed adversely affect our theology and our ethical values.<\/p>\n
New Testament Connections<\/p>\n
The author of the Apocalypse (the book of Revelation), writing from a Roman penal colony on the island of Patmos in the first century (AD) in order to encourage or condemn his congregations in Asia Minor, has some harsh words for the people at Pergamum. He says that some of them \u201chold to the teaching of Balaam\u201d (i.e., eating food that had been sacrificed to idols and practicing fornication) and also to the \u201cteaching of the Nicolaitans\u201d (Rev 2:14\u201315). The same charge is level against the congregation at Thyatria (2:18\u201320). Mention is also made of the Nicolaitans at Ephesus (2:6). Thereby the author of the Apocalypse seems to allude to the events of Numbers 25.
\nVery little can be said in detail about the identity and beliefs of the Nicolaitans. The early Fathers of the church (Irenaeus, Tertullian, Clement of Alexandria) rail against them, with the last of these calling them \u201clascivious goats.\u201d<\/p>\n
LIKE THE STARS OF HEAVEN<\/p>\n
Numbers 26:1\u201365<\/p>\n
Now that the old rebellious generation has passed away (v. 64), it is time for the new generation to cross the Jordan and at last to reach its destination. The theological message of the exilic Priestly writer in this section is clear: With an eye toward God\u2019s promise to the patriarch Abraham, the writer seeks to express divine fulfillment, control, guidance, eternality, and perfection.
\nEssential preparation for that final step, entry into the \u201cpromised land,\u201d is outlined in the text as follows:<\/p>\n
1. Directions for the task (vv. 1\u20134);
\n2. A new enumeration of the people (vv. 5\u201351);
\n3. Apportionment of the land of Canaan among the tribes (vv. 52\u201356);
\n4. A separate census for the Levites, to whom a geographical area of settlement is not to be assigned (vv. 57\u201362);
\n5. A concluding summary (vv. 63\u201365).<\/p>\n
The wilderness itinerary is thus framed by two great census enumerations: one just prior to departure from the sacred mountain (ch. 1) and the other in preparation for entry into the \u201cpromised land\u201d (ch. 26). The former was done in preparation for war: what is the fighting-strength of the camp, in view of opposition along the way. The latter was necessary in view of further military opposition and of impending tribal settlement in the land of Canaan: how the land is to be allocated \u201caccording to the number of names\u201d (vv. 52\u201353). In each case, the tally of human resources is to be only of males (\u201cable to go to war\u201d) who are \u201cfrom twenty years old and upward\u201d (1:2; 26:2).
\nThe former list, while mentioning clans within the tribes, does not specify them by name. The latter does, apparently in anticipation of subdivision of tribal territory. How this actually was worked out is related in chapters 32 and 34, in Joshua 12:19, and with further detail in 1 Chronicles 2:8.<\/p>\n
COMMENTARY<\/p>\n
A New Enumeration of the People, 26:5\u201351<\/p>\n
In terms of change (in comparison with the former census in chapter 1), the enrollments of seven tribes have increased while five have decreased. The overall change is a decrease of only 1,820, with the largest loss being for Simeon and the largest increase for Manasseh. This likely reflects the subsequent absorption of Simeon into Judah (Josh 19:1) and the expansion of Manasseh (Josh 17:11, 16\u201318).
\nIn two case, the number of clans is less than the list of descendants given elsewhere (Ohad of Simeon is found at Gen 46:10 and Exod 6:15; Becher, Gera, Ehi, Rosh, and Muppim of Benjamin at Gen 46:21). Sometimes the clans consist only of sons of the patriarch Jacob (e.g., in the case of Simeon, Gad, Issachar, Dan, Naphtali), sometimes clans of grandsons are included (e.g., for Judah, Ephraim, Benjamin, Asher), and sometimes for great-grandsons and beyond (e.g., Manasseh). In the case of Reuben, grandsons and great-grandsons are listed but not designated as clans. It is hard to escape the suspicion that an ideal number is being contrived (e.g., 49 = 7 \u00d7 7), but 50 are actually listed.
\nAs in the case of the prior census, the question of numerical historicity versus symbolic use of numbers asserts itself. It is clear that the latter system of thought must be at work here and that the two enumerations must be taken as a single concept in that regard. Consider, for example, the following data that support this conclusion:<\/p>\n
1. The total for Naphtali in chapter 1 (53,400) is the same as that for Asher in chapter 26;
\n2. The total for Ephraim in chapter 1 (40,500) is the same as that for Gad in chapter 26;
\n3. The total for Manasseh in chapter 1 (32,200) and for Simeon in chapter 26 (22,200) is the same as for Issachar in chapter 1 (54,400).
\n4. In chapter 1, the total for Dan (62,700) minus the total for Ephraim (40,500) again yields 22, 200 (which is the total for Simeon in the census of ch. 26).
\n5. The total for Manasseh in chapter 1 (32,200) is exactly one-half of that for Dan in chapter 26 (64,400).
\nAs also stated in connection with chapter 1, astronomical observations played a role in assigning a symbolic total to the individual census numbers. This was done in view of the deity\u2019s promise to the patriarch Abraham after the latter has lamented that he remained childless. Whereupon the deity responds: \u201cLook toward heaven and count the stars, if you are able to count them \u2026 So shall your descendants be\u201d (Gen 15:5; see also 26:4). [Numbering the Stars]<\/p>\n
Numbering the Stars
\nThe average viewer of the sky is apt to overestimate the number of visible stars, as the author of Genesis apparently did. The number that are visible to the unaided eye on a given night (less than one-half of the total sky) is only about 3,000. Hipparchus of Nicaea (2d century BC) could only catalogue 850 of them in terms of their location and brightness. The total number in the entire galaxy in which we live (\u201cthe Milky Way\u201d), now estimated from telescopic images, is perhaps 400 billion. Far beyond, in deep space, are a billion similarly sized galaxies.<\/p>\n
The astronomical connections with the census data include at least the following instances:<\/p>\n
1. The enumeration of the tribes of Gad (40,500) and Ephraim (32,500) is a total of 73,000, this being the duration of two solar years (365 \u00d7 2 \u00d7 1,000).
\n2. Twice the synodic period of Saturn is 756. This is the same as the sum of the census enumerations for Simeon and Asher ([222 + 534] \u00d7 1,000).
\n3. The total for the synodic periods of the planets Mercury (116), Venus (584), Mars (780) and Jupiter (399) = 1879 = the census numbers for Naphtali (454), Benjamin (456), Dan (644), and Ephraim (325).
\n4. The total of Naphtali (53,400 in census 1) and Simeon (22,200 in census 2) is 75,600, and this is twice the synodic period of Saturn (378).
\n5. The total for Gad (40,500), Judah (76,500), Issachar (64,300) and Manasseh (52,700) = 234,000, which is thee times the synodic period of Mars (3 \u00d7 780) \u00d7 1,000).
\n6. The number 65 is 1\/12 the synodic period of the planet Mars (780) and is found in the number of days in a solar year (365). It occurs with more frequency than chance would dictate in the census data and elsewhere in the Priestly writings. For example, note its presence in the figures for Reuben in chapter 1 (46,500) and Judah in chapter 26 (76,500). The total for Ephraim (32,500) is 5 \u00d7 65 \u00d7 100. The total for Benjamin (45,600) and Naphtali (45,400) = 91,000 = 14 \u00d7 65 \u00d7 100. The total for Gad (40,500) and Judah (75,500) is 117,000 (= 18 \u00d7 65 \u00d7 100).<\/p>\n
The only female mentioned in the clan lists is Serah (v. 46). Why she is listed is uncertain. [Serah] [Comment on Details of Numbers 26]<\/p>\n
Serah
\nSerah (KJV: Sarah) is a daughter of tribal ancestor Asher (1 Chr 7:30) who descended into Egypt with her grandfather Jacob (Gen 46:17). According to Jewish tradition, her father had died without male heir (thus placing her in the same category as the daughters of Zelophehad, 27:1\u201311; 36:1\u201312), and her mother then became the wife of Asher. She may have been listed along with her half-brothers as the ancestress of a great clan among the Asherites. Because mention of a woman in this capacity was so unusual, she became the subject of several legends.<\/p>\n
Comment on Details of Numbers 26
\nVv. 5\u201351: The meaning of the individual names and their occurrence elsewhere in genealogies (e.g., Gen 46:8\u201327; Exod 6:14\u201325; 1 Chr 2\u20138) is discussed by B. A. Levine, Numbers 21\u201336 (AB 4A; New York: Doubleday, 2000), 315\u201324.
\nV. 11, \u201cthe sons of Korah did not die.\u201d The clan of Korah later became liturgical composers (see the headings of Pss 44\u201349, among others) and gatekeepers in the Solomonic Temple (1 Chr 9:19). It was helpful to state, therefore, that his entire family did not die along with him as a result of the rebellion in Num 16.
\nV. 33, \u201cZelophehad \u2026 had no sons.\u201d This anticipates the problem of inheritance that is resolved in chapter 27.<\/p>\n
Apportionment of the Land of Canaan among the Tribes, 26:52\u201356<\/p>\n
Division of the land of Canaan among the tribes and clans of Israel was done \u201caccording to the number of names \u2026 by lot.\u201d The actual procedure, involving two factors, has given rise to extended discussion. Apparently, the initial step was to divide the land into rough geographical areas in accordance with the number of tribes. Then, in order to eliminate quarrels and claim of injustice, individual tribal assignments were committed to the will of God as determined by the drawing of lots. Finally, based upon actual spacial need (as indicated by census data), boundaries were adjusted in order to increase or decrease the surface area.
\nA similar procedure for allocation of land was followed in the United States in relatively recent times. If a landowner with several heirs died intestate, the county court would order the land to be surveyed and divided into a number of portions of relatively equal value in accordance with the number of heirs. Each heir then made a blind choice by drawing one of the printed surveys from a container.<\/p>\n
A Separate Census for the Levites, 26:57\u201362<\/p>\n
The census of the Levites shows a significant gain: 7,500 in the first census (3:22) and 23,000 in the second (v. 62). They are not to be assigned a sustained geographical territory in view of the need for the priesthood to be dispersed throughout the entire land (18:20; 35:1\u20138). Hence provision for their physical needs is otherwise provided in a number of regulations for tithing (e.g., 18:21\u201332).
\nThis is to be a true enumeration (\u201cone month old and up,\u201d as at 3:15), in contrast to males in the other tribes who were needed for military service and thus enumeration of them began only at age twenty (1:3).<\/p>\n
CONNECTIONS<\/p>\n
The Hope of the Future<\/p>\n
The final word of the chapter articulates the background theme that began in chapter 14: Although it is necessary for an entire generation to die in the wilderness, the \u201clittle ones\u201d (14:31) of the next generation will live to see God\u2019s promises actualized by entering the \u201cpromised land.\u201d The Deity, not subject to mortality, has an agenda that can be extended across the generations. God\u2019s eternal sovereignty, coupled with justifiable human mortality, provides both hope and the possibility of an open and different future. Therefore, discouraged parents can die with the hope that their children will have a better future; downtrodden generations may rest assured that every tyrannical leader or oppressive generation inevitably will pass away.<\/p>\n
The Guarantee of the Future<\/p>\n
It is not merely that the future is \u201copen,\u201d but that a particular future is guaranteed. That there will be an Israel, a blessing to all the families of the earth (Gen 12:3), is not only a divine promise but also one whose coming-to-be inevitably approaches despite the faithlessness and open failures of the present generation. Perhaps, then, the daughter-communities of ancient Israel (the present synagogue and church), therefore, are not like other transient institutions but are worthy of one\u2019s dedication and support. They are, like the stars of heaven (Gen 15:5), built into the fabric of existence.<\/p>\n
SUCCESSION IN PROPERTY AND LEADERSHIP<\/p>\n
Numbers 27:1\u201311<\/p>\n
The Priestly source continues in this chapter as is evident by: (1) anticipation in the previous chapter at 26:33; (2) continuation of the theme of distribution of the land of Canaan; (3) reference to all the people as \u201cthe congregation\u201d (vv. 2, 17, 19, 20, 22); (4) subservience of political leadership (Joshua) to priestly approval (Eleazer, vv. 19, 21); and (5) designation of the material as \u201ca statute and ordinance\u201d (v. 11).
\nThis chapter discusses two distinct subjects, although they are topically related. Each is concerned with a problem of succession that is vital for Israel\u2019s future:<\/p>\n
1. Modification of the law of inheritance: the possibility of the succession of ownership (inheritance) of ancestral property by woman (vv. 1\u201311, clarified in ch. 36 and actualized at Josh 17:3\u20134);
\n2. Succession in leadership from Moses to Joshua (vv. 12\u201323, an event that is not actualized until Deut 34:5\u20139; Josh 1:1).<\/p>\n
COMMENTARY<\/p>\n
Modification of the Law of Inheritance, 27:1\u201311<\/p>\n
This subject naturally arises from the procedures that were outlined in the previous chapter. The census there was undertaken in view of the impending apportionment of the land of Canaan: how the \u201cpromised land\u201d is to be divided among the tribes and clans of Israel; how does one avoid the charge of unfairness as to location; and how does one ensure an area large enough to accommodate the needs each tribal population?
\nSince each assignment is to be done by named clans (each headed by a male descendant), what is to be the procedure when daughters alone are heirs? A hint that the issue would soon arise has been provided at 26:33, \u201cNow Zelophehad \u2026 had no sons, but [only] daughters.\u201d Traditional regulations concerning inheritance are briefly outlined in vv. 8\u201311, into which the new guideline concerning the daughters of Zelophehad has been embedded.
\nThe governing background concepts, designed to protect the integrity of tribal holdings and boundaries (see 36:7), have been as follows:
\n1. The \u201cpromised land\u201d belongs only to the Deity and not to humans (Lev 25:2, \u201cthe land that I am giving you\u201d);
\n2. Although the land has not been granted outright to Israel, the people thereof may live on it as tenants (Lev 25:23) as long as their disobedience does not necessitate reclamation of it by the Deity (Lev 26:27\u201339);
\n3. Consequently, allocations of land cannot be bought and sold absolutely (and thus it was that Naboth refused to sell his vineyard to King Ahab, 1 Kgs 21:1\u20133). They can, however, be leased in case of financial need for a defined maximum period of time, following which \u201c\u2026 you shall return, every one of you, to your property\u201d (see Lev 25 and the discussion of the Jubilee Year). Brief regulations governing inheritance, as applied to the real estate entrusted to \u201cMr. X,\u201d are as follows:
\n1. The real estate of Mr. X is to be inherited by his sons, with the first-born getting a double share (Deut 21:15\u201317). This explains Jacob\u2019s desire to secure the \u201cbirthright\u201d from his older brother Esau (Gen 25:29\u201334) and Joseph\u2019s determination that his aged and blind father bless the grandsons in proper order (Gen 48:8\u201320). Daughters, expected to become married, were given a dowry in keeping with family wealth (clothing, jewelry, slaves, etc.). Thereafter, their physical support was to be provided for by the clan of their husband. [Primogeniture]<\/p>\n
Primogeniture
\nAn ancient English principle of common law, operative in Colonial America, was that of primogeniture (the rights of a first born son). Accordingly, the real property of an intestate person was entirely inherited by the oldest son. Not until after the Revolution (AD 1784) did the State of North Carolina direct that male heirs should share equally. Daughters, if they had living brothers, could not so inherit. Only in 1808 did the statute change so that daughters could become co-heirs.<\/p>\n
At this point, a special procedure might come into play, although it is not mentioned in Numbers 27. That is: Should Mr. X have died without sons but with a widow still of child-bearing age, then the practice of Levirate Marriage might be exercised. It was the duty of a brother (or even the father) of Mr. X to provide the widow with a child (hopefully male!) who would then inherit the ancestral property and care for his mother. (See the discussion of Levirate Marriage at Lev 18:16.)
\n2. In the absence of sons (or the application of Levirate Marriage), the property of Mr. X became the inheritance of his brothers (v. 9). It is to these unnamed sons of Hepher, the other clans of Hepheries (26:32) that the estate of Zelophehad would have fallen.
\n3. In the absence of brothers, the property of Mr. X fell to his father\u2019s brothers (v. 10), if any. (The father would already be dead, since the property had descended to Mr. X.)
\n4. If all of the previous regulations failed to apply, then the property was transferred to the closest male cousin (\u201ckinsman,\u201d v. 11).
\nOther societies in the ancient Near East allowed daughters the right of inheritance, especially (although not exclusively) in the absence of brothers. Why, then, was Israel initially different in this regard? Plausible conjectures may be offered.
\n1. Was it because of unique emphases upon equality and security, grounded in Israel\u2019s historical experience? For example, is not one more secure in a pastoral and agricultural economy if one controls a portion of real estate? To become landless is to become homeless and at the mercy of others. Was not one powerless in Egypt, where Pharaoh and the temples controlled land and thus the economy? However, if daughters marry outside their clan and tribe, taking with them an inheritance, they fracture the wealth of their ancestral home and diminish the power of their tribe. This very issue is raised in chapter 36.
\n2. Was it because the law-codes of Israel\u2019s neighbors reflect a time of urban settlement and moneyed economy in which inalienable property ownership would serve as a hindrance to commercial development? Israel\u2019s regulations reflect an older rural clan structure, although one can see the strain that this begins to produces in the case of property that is located within a \u201cwalled city\u201d (Lev 25:29\u201334).<\/p>\n
Succession in Leadership, 27:12\u201323<\/p>\n
Previous events have signaled that the necessity for change was close at hand. Because of previous instances of Israel\u2019s faithlessness, God had said, the entire adult generation must die in the wilderness. Only Joshua and Caleb will be allowed to enter the land (14:38; 26:65).
\nEven Moses and his siblings (Aaron and Miriam) committed acts that disqualified them from seeing the journey to its completion. Miriam and Aaron had criticized Moses and challenged his sole leadership (12:1\u20132), and both Moses and Aaron had acted improp erly at Meribah with the result that the Deity forbade them to enter Canaan (20:9\u201313). Consequently, Miriam (20:1) and Aaron (20:23\u201329) have already died. Now that the border of Canaan has been reached (22:1) and final preparation is being made to cross the River Jordan, Moses\u2019 death is impending and thus the matter of succession must be settled. [Comment on Details of Numbers 27]<\/p>\n
Comment on Details of Numbers 27
\nV. 3, \u201cOur father \u2026 was not among the \u2026 company of Korah.\u201d Presumably the point is that certain types of activity lead to forfeiture of property rights and that this was the case with Korah\u2019s descendants. This seems explicitly to have been the case with Naboth when he was convicted (on false evidence) of a crime against God and king (1 Kgs 21:15\u201316).
\nV. 3, \u201cdied of his own sin.\u201d That is, he was part of the entire rebellious generation that had been denied access to the \u201cpromised land\u201d (14:29\u201330) and thus his heirs are not disqualified from a portion thereof.
\nV. 4, \u201camong our father\u2019s brothers.\u201d The daughters do not ask for, and would not be given, the totality of Zelophehad\u2019s allocation. They merely wish to share with his lawful heirs.
\nV. 4, \u201cthe name of our father.\u201d It is difficult to know whether their concern was merely property, or whether it also included the desire to perpetuate their father\u2019s memory. To have one\u2019s name or memory \u201cblotted out\u201d was a terrible threat (Exod 17:14; Deut 9:14).
\nV. 5, \u201cbrought their case before the LORD.\u201d Ordinarily, this presumably would be done by oracular decision (such as drawing lots; see 26:55) although it is not specifically so stated. We are merely told that \u201cthe LORD spoke to Moses\u201d (so also in response to other problems, 9:9; 15:35).
\nV. 12, \u201cthe Abarim range.\u201d This includes Mt. Nebo (33:47) from which Moses was allowed to glimpse the \u201cpromised land\u201d (Deut 32:49\u201350; 34:1).
\nV. 13, \u201cgathered to your people.\u201d Not a reference to immortality or dwelling in heaven, but rather residing in the Underworld with one\u2019s bones deposited in the family tomb (see the discussion of \u201cThe Cult of the Dead and Ancestor Worship\u201d at 19:14\u201322).
\nV. 16, \u201cthe God of the spirits of all flesh.\u201d That is, the Lord of all humans in whom the divine life-giving breath resides (as at Gen 6:17).
\nV. \u201cin whom is the spirit [of God].\u201d In contrast to v. 16, (where it merely indicates \u201clife\u201d) the word \u201cspirit\u201d here indicates an extra portion of power and vitality (as at Judg 14:6, 19).
\nV. 21, \u201cUrim.\u201d See the discussion of \u201cPriestly Use of Oracular Devices\u201d at Lev 8.<\/p>\n
The Appointment of Joshua<\/p>\n
Julius Schnorr von Carolsfeld (1794\u20131872). The Appointment of Joshua. 19th C. Woodcut. Die Bibel in Bildern. (Credit: Wikimedia Commons, PD-US)<\/p>\n
CONNECTIONS<\/p>\n
Interpreting Scripture in the Present<\/p>\n
The problem posed by the daughters of Zelophehad (and several others, e.g., the \u201cblasphemer\u201d at Lev 24:10\u201322; the \u201cman gathering sticks on the sabbath\u201d at Num 15:32\u201336) illustrate that the Torah, having been expressed at a given time and place, does not anticipate (and provide direct guidance or precedent for) every problem that will arise in subsequent history. Thus it will always be necessary for individuals and the community to struggle, not only with the meaning of Torah, but also with how it can provide guidance amidst the ever increasing perplexities of the present.
\nConsider, for example, the brevity and non-specificity of the first commandment: \u201cYou shall have no other gods before me\u201d (Exod 20:3; Deut 5:6). In the polytheistic environment in which Israel had its beginnings, the major implication of that simple directive was clear enough: Yahwists cannot honor (worship) and cannot be guided by the alien principles that are espoused by the cults of Egyptian, Canaanite, and Mesopotamian deities.<\/p>\n
Mt. Nebo
\nMount Nebo, from where Moses is said to have seen the promised land.<\/p>\n
Mt. Nebo, Jordan. (Credit: Vyacheslav Argenberg \/ Wikimedia Commons, CC-BY-2.0)<\/p>\n
At the time of the New Testament, the implication for Christians was also clear: In the last analysis, one must either embrace the agenda of the Roman Empire (including participation in the cult of emperor worship, enjoyment of the spectacles in the arena, etc.), or that of the child born in a manger in Bethlehem. Are the issues so clearly drawn in today\u2019s world? Provided that one believes in deity at all, are there multiple ones among whom one must choose? Is the commandment rendered null-and-void if one is, in intellectual perception, a monotheist? Is the total dedication of one\u2019s life to the acquisition of material possessions a form of religion (comparable the worship of the Canaanite god of fertility, Baal?), and thus a violation of the commandment? Is a preoccupation with the pursuit of sexual pleasure (comparable to the worship of the Greek goddess Aphrodite), an act of subordination to (or abandonment of) the agenda of the \u201cone true God\u201d? Is the biblical religion really all that different from the cafeteria of options among \u201cworld religions\u201d? Cannot one be \u201cenlightened,\u201d tolerant, and eclectic so as to choose what seems to be best from each of them?
\nBoth the community and its members must constantly contemplate such matters and ever strive to actualize the essence of the commandment in their lives. Many denominations, therefore, have canonized subsequent reflections into authoritative \u201ctradition.\u201d
\nA modern interpreter has expressed this reality quite well, as follows:<\/p>\n
The people of Israel in Numbers are a people on the move, and God and God\u2019s law moves with them. The tent of meeting stands as a symbol of the openness of revelation, the dynamic flexibility of Israel\u2019s tradition, the invitation for ongoing dialogue between God and God\u2019s people. God\u2019s word is not a sterile and entrenched legalism but a robust and living tradition that leans toward the future in hope and anticipation.<\/p>\n
Modern readers, sensitized by the values of the Enlightenment (e.g., equality and fairness), may be tempted to raise the issue of gender-equality while reading the story of Zelophehad\u2019s daughters. Another modern scholar has given sage advice about this tendency:<\/p>\n
There is little point in debating whether this step means that the Torah is supportive of women, on the grounds that it provides for them to inherit, or whether it means that Torah is unfair to women, on the grounds that sons still precede daughters. The fact is that social transformations take time.\u2026 The Torah does not command a revolution in the status of women. It provides for steps such as this one \u2026 which ultimately participated in the development of women\u2019s rights more generally. We can praise the Bible for how far it went, or we can be critical that it did not go farther. But we would do better to examine how far it went in its age, and how much this contributed to the transformation in the balance between men and women in the Millennia that followed.<\/p>\n
Humble acceptance of one\u2019s creaturehood (abandonment of ego) and the sincere desire to live in accordance with God\u2019s will should lead to an eagerness to study the Torah, to listen to new perspectives on its origins and intentions, and to obey what it may imply for the present. This is in deep contrast to a modern tendency to read the Bible on the surface, to react quickly, to criticize writers who do not go as far as we would like, and to denounce vehemently anything therein that challenges our dearest agendas in the present.<\/p>\n
New Testament Connections<\/p>\n
Jesus, Matthew tells us, had compassion for the crowds to whom he spoke, because they were beaten down with the problems of everyday life, \u201clike sheep without a shepherd\u201d (9:36). That characterization occurs several times in the Old Testament, among them Numbers 27:17 (see also 2 Chr 18:16; cf. Ezek 34:5). This is not so much a polemic against contemporary Jewish leadership classes as it is an attempt to put Jesus forward as the proper shepherd for Israel.
\nThe author of 1 Peter refers to the same source in Scripture (Num 27:17) when he observes that his readers formerly \u201cwere going astray like sheep, but now you have returned to the shepherd and guardian of your souls\u201d (2:25). He then encourages \u201cthe elders\u201d in the community \u201cto tend the flock of God that is in your charge\u201d (5:2).<\/p>\n
AN ANNUAL LITURGICAL CALENDAR<\/p>\n
Numbers 28:1\u201329:40<\/p>\n
In logical progression, a formal calendar for public worship immediately follows the determination of land allocation in chapters 26\u201327. It displays the same sequence and priority of activity that has been observed previously (e.g., at Lev 23:9, \u201cWhen you enter the land \u2026 you shall bring \u2026 to the priest \u2026\u201d; see also Num 15:1\u20132; and cf. Ezek 45:1\u20132, 13\u201325). Thus there was a keen sense of the need for formal worship and a means of contact with the Deity.
\nLiturgical events have been previously cataloged, the most sustained being the following: (1) spontaneous, non-scheduled sacrifices (Lev 1\u20137); (2) mandated major communal events that are to be observed annually, meant to prompt lay persons (Lev 23). There has been, in addition, a list of offerings of grain, olive oil, and wine that are to accompany various sacrifices (Num 15:1\u201329). Now comes a list of the annual minimal requirement that are to be performed by the priests on behalf of the nation, some of them on a daily basis.
\nWhile many of these regulations have been presented previously, there are new aspects and emphases among them: (a) the Sabbath as a sacrificial occasion; (b) the New Moon as a sacrificial occasion; (c) a two-phased daily sacrifice. It may be argued that Numbers 28\u201329, therefore, is later than the guidelines in Leviticus 23. Not only is the compiler of the Numbers material aware of the Levitical, but modifies it in subtle ways. It is entirely appropriate, then, that this material, \u201cthe final statement of the Priestly school of Torah,\u201d has been placed far later than the guidelines given in the vicinity of Mt. Sinai.
\nSuch an elaborate and finalized cultic concept likely reflects the situation of the postexilic age (the Second Temple Period) when the Priestly writings were taking their final shape). This perhaps is supported by the observation that nowhere in chapters 28\u201329 do we hear of the portable shrine (tent of meeting) that had accompanied Israel on its wilderness itinerary. Before it, presumably, these various sacrificial acts would have been carried out (at least temporarily). We only have (one) mention of activity to be conducted \u201cin the sanctuary\u201d (28:7). However, this late date would not prevent some of the rites from having originated at an earlier period.<\/p>\n
Ritual sacrifice<\/p>\n
Alessandro Franchi (1838\u20131914). Duomo, Prato, Italy. (Credit: Sailko \/ Wikimedia Commons, CC-BY-SA-3.0)<\/p>\n
The modern reader likely will not be enthralled by the seemingly endless and monotonous lists of sacrificial requirements. It is important, therefore, to keep the overall concern in mind, as expressed nicely by a modern interpreter: \u201cThe ordered structure of time provides regular opportunities for refocusing priorities, rededicating commitments, and reentering the biblical story of God and God\u2019s people as a means of finding meaning and order in the midst of the chaos of life.\u201d
\nThe overall organizational principle of the regulations is based upon decreasing frequency of observance:<\/p>\n
1. The daily offering (28:3\u20138);
\n2. The weekly offering on the sabbath (28:9\u201310);
\n3. The offering on the first day of the month, i.e., at the new moon (28:11\u201315);
\n4. Annually occasions, arranged chronologically (28:16\u201329:38).
\nA. Passover and Unleavened Bread (28:16\u201325);
\nB. The wheat harvest: the Feast of Weeks (28:26\u201331);
\nC. First day of the seventh month (29:1\u20136);
\nD. Tenth day of the seventh month (29:7\u201311);
\nE. Fifteenth to twenty-first of seventh month: the Festival of Booths\/Sukkot (29:12\u201334);
\nF. The day after Booths\/Sukkot (29:35\u201338).<\/p>\n
COMMENTARY<\/p>\n
It should be noted that some events overlap and thus compound the number of sacrificial acts. For example, every Sabbath would also require the Daily sacrifices; the first day of the seventh month (the Old New Year) would also require New Moon sacrifices and might fall on a Sabbath. In all, the annual requirement has been calculated to be 113 bulls, 32 rams, and 1,086 lambs, accompanied by more than a ton of flour and a thousand bottles of oil and wine.<\/p>\n
The Daily Offering, 28:3\u20138<\/p>\n
A mandatory twice-daily sacrifice has not previously been required in Israel. It is a ritual innovation by the Priestly writer (mentioned elsewhere only at Exod 29:38\u201346, also \u201cP\u201d). It is to become the basic stratum of Israel\u2019s public worship, a constant reminder of God\u2019s presence and of the honor thus due. The entire population is reminded (v. 2, \u201cCommand the Israelites\u201d) of their obligations to this and to the other ritual occasions. The entire population will be required to make financial contribution in order to make this possible (Neh 10:32\u201334; Ezek 45:13\u201316).
\nThe importance of regular daily worship and its attendant motivation is expressed by the prophet Isaiah\u2019s assessment of the people of his day (58:2): \u201cTo be sure, they seek Me daily, eager to learn My ways\u201d (NJV\/JPS). The need to praise God daily is likewise expressed by the writers of the psalms.<\/p>\n
The Weekly Offering on the Sabbath, 28:9\u201310<\/p>\n
After the regular daily rite has been completed, an additional one is to be performed on the morning of the Sabbath. (For the pivotal role of the Sabbath in the overall thought of \u201cP,\u201d including the placing of Gen 1:1\u20132:4a as a new preface to the entire Pentateuch, see discussion of Lev 11 and 19.)
\nConspicuously absent is the requirement for a purification\/purgation offering (NRSV, \u201csin offering\u201d), in contrast to all of the occasions that follow. Perhaps the idea was this: Since the focus of the Sabbath is to be upon joyous rest in commemoration of the goodness of God\u2019s creation, formal reminders of ritual failure should temporarily be put aside. Jacob Milgrom points out that such mentality is still retained in the Synagogue: prayers on the Sabbath should concentrate upon praise of God and not upon petitions.<\/p>\n
The Offering on the First Day of the Month, 28:11\u201315<\/p>\n
Since, in ancient Israel, the boundaries of the month were determined by the lunar cycle, this observance is also called \u201cthe new moon\u201d festival. Its observance is at least as old as the Sumerians of the third millennium BC where it is grounded in lunar worship.
\nThe regularity of the lunar cycle, with the reappearance of the moon (after a period of decline in size) at the beginning of each month, reminded the Israelites of the dependability of God\u2019s creation and of the reality of renewal and new birth.<\/p>\n
Passover and Unleavened Bread, 28:16\u201325<\/p>\n
The first day of Passover and the seven-day feast of Unleavened Bread are to be held at the spring equinox (the month of Nisan = March-April). They were once separate celebrations, the former for shepherds at the lambing season and the latter for farmers in order to ensure fertility of crops. They have, by the time of \u201cP,\u201d been fused into a single continuous occasion and given a new rationale by tying their origins to the story of the exodus from Egypt. (See Exod 12, and the discussion of Lev 23:5\u20138.)<\/p>\n
The Feast of Weeks, 28:26\u201331<\/p>\n
This celebration was also called the \u201cFestival of Harvest\u201d (Exod 23:16), \u201cFirst Fruits\u201d (Num 28:26), and (in Greek), \u201cPentecost\u201d (2 Macc 12:32; Josephus, Antiquities, III.x.6; XIII.viii.4; meaning \u201cfiftieth, since it fell fifty days after the barley harvest). Originally meant to celebrate the wheat harvest (Lev 23:15\u201321) it was later (in the post-biblical period) redefined as a commemoration of the reception of torah at Mount Sinai (Babylonian Talmud, Pesach, 68b). Christians, of course, gave it a new basis for celebration (Acts 2:1\u20134).<\/p>\n
The First Day of the Seventh Month, 29:1\u20136<\/p>\n
This occasion was apparently reckoned as the New Year in the older agricultural calendar of Israel and is still celebrated as Rosh Hashannah (\u201cbeginning of the year\u201d) in the Synagogue. (See the discussion of Lev 23.)<\/p>\n
The Tenth Day of the Seventh Month, 29:7\u201311<\/p>\n
This observance is ordinarily referred to as the \u201cDay of Atonement.\u201d Originally a time for purgation of the temple (Lev 16), it is here described as a day of self-denial and refrain from work.<\/p>\n
Fifteenth to Twenty-first Days of the Seventh Month, 29:12\u201334<\/p>\n
Best knows as the \u201cFeast of Booths\u201d (Lev 23:34; 2 Chr 8:13), this observance is also called \u201cTabernacles,\u201d the \u201cFeast of Ingathering\u201d (Exod 23:16), and the \u201cFestival of the Lord\u201d (Lev 23:39). Originally, it was a time when farmers dwelled in a lean-to in the field in order to protect and harvest the olive crop. Later, it was redefined as a symbol for Israel\u2019s temporary dwellings during the wilderness itinerary from Egypt to the land of Canaan. In post-exilic Judaism, this was the major time when Jews from the Diaspora made pilgrimage to Jerusalem, bringing with them offerings for the temple and city. (For definition of the Diaspora, see the commentary on Leviticus at ch. 11.) [Comment on Details of Numbers 28\u201329]<\/p>\n
Comment on Details of Numbers 28\u201329
\n28:2, \u201ctake care \u2026 at its appointed time.\u201d The ceremonies must be done not merely in the correct way but at the proper time.
\n28:3, \u201cdaily \u2026 in the morning \u2026 at twilight.\u201d These two occasions being the mealtime of humans suggests the ancient idea that daily sacrifice is food for the gods (note the word \u201cfood\u201d in v. 2). However, this is merely \u201ctraditional\u201d language that ancient Israel did not take literally. Such daily officiating took place in temples throughout the ancient Near East, e.g., at the city of Ugarit on the Mediterranean Coast and in Mesopotamia. The following is a partial description of the daily sacrifice offered to the gods Anu and Antu and the household gods of the temple in the city of Uruk in Mesopotamia.
\nThe daily total, throughout the year, for the four meals per day: twenty-one first class, fat, clean rams which have been fed barley for two years; two large bulls; one milk-fed bullock; eight lambs; thirty marratu-birds; thirty \u2026 -birds; three cranes which have been fed \u2026 -grain; five ducks which have been fed \u2026 -flour; two ducks of a lower quality than those just mentioned; four wild boars; three ostrich eggs; three duck eggs. (From James B. Pritchard, ANET [2d ed.; Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1955], 344, tablet reverse, lines 24\u201328.)
\nThis daily sacrifice in Israel came to be called the tamid (\u201cregular,\u201d as it is designated at vv. 6, 15). It is not the only sacrifice, however, concerning which this description is used (see. e.g., \u201cregular incense offering\u201d at Exod 30:8).
\n28:5, \u201cephah \u2026 hin.\u201d These units of measure have been discussed at Lev 19:25\u201336.
\n28:5, \u201cbeaten oil.\u201d The verb (k-t-t) indicates a crushing process used in extraction oil from olives. The idea is a level of refinement that is not ordinarily necessary.
\n28:7, \u201cdrink offering.\u201d Specification of this libation as \u201cwine\u201d (so NAB, NEB) is based ancient versions (the Septuagint and Samaritan Pentateuch) and by analogy with Exod 29:40.
\nMilgrom, perhaps not meaning to be a humorous as it turns out to be, describes the two daily offerings as \u201ca \u2018main course\u2019 of lamb with a meal offering and a libation as \u2018side dishes\u2019 \u201d (The JPS Torah Commentary: Numbers [Philadelphia: The Jewish Publication Society, 1990], 487).
\n29:39, \u201cin addition to \u2026\u201d The previous regulations have outlined procedures for \u201cappointed\u201d (calendric) festivals. Reminder is now made of the non-scheduled sacrificial events that were defined in Lev 1\u20137.
\n29:39, \u201cvotive offerings.\u201d Sacrificial events that could take place to mark the fulfillment of a vow (Prov 7:14). They have been mentioned previously at Lev 7:16.<\/p>\n
CONNECTIONS<\/p>\n
Carrying the Duties of Church and Synagogue<\/p>\n
It may be difficult for the modern \u201cBible believing\u201d person to believe that the Deity is concerned that ritual activity be carried out \u201cat its appointed time\u201d (28:2) and that differences in quantity as small as 2\/3 of a pint of wine (28:14, 1\/3 of a hin with a sacrificed ram vs. 1\/4 of a hin with a lamb) are of cosmic consequence. After all, hasn\u2019t the Lord of the Universe anything better to do than to be legalistic about such minutiae?
\nNonetheless, on the one hand, it may be argued that punctuality and particularity has consequences for religious life. Duties that are carried out properly as part of a disciplined life can deepen one\u2019s spiritual awareness, as monks throughout the history of the church have known. Tasks that might otherwise be considered pointless and wearisome can, with practice, become automatic and satisfying.
\nConsider the case of my small sons who were taken to Sunday school with near unfailing regularity. Preparation for doing so, after breakfast on Sunday morning, was automatically and unthinkingly carried out. However, if (for reasons of vacation, illness, etc.) we skipped two Sundays in a row, one of them would ask (as if there were an option), \u201cAre we going to church today?\u201d One more \u201cmiss\u201d and it might become, in a hopeful tone, \u201cWe aren\u2019t going to church today, are we?\u201d
\nIs such discipline different from the practice of \u201choly habits\u201d that caused John Wesley and his followers to be known as \u201cMethodists\u201d? (On Wesley\u2019s thoughts about religious discipline, see the \u201cIntroduction\u201d to the commentary on Leviticus, and the discussion of Lev 9.)
\nOn the other hand, inflexibility in such matters can become very problematic. For example:
\na. It can cause undue physical hardship, as Jesus reasoned in the case of a charge of Sabbath violation at Matthew 12 (discussed just above, where Rabbinic leniency is cited as well). My own experience along these lines took the following form. On a very cold Saturday night in Durham, the electric heat in my house failed, and this in a dwelling with small children. When I sought to purchase firewood nearby the next day, sale was refused on the grounds that commerce on the Sabbath Day was not proper.
\nb. As St. Paul reasoned, aspects of ritual (such rigid requirements for circumcision and special diet) can stand in the way of the acceptance of both Judaism and emerging Christianity by Greeks and Romans (Acts 10:9\u201315; 11:1\u201318; 15:1\u201329). Some Rabbinic leadership realized the problem as well, and concluded: \u201cIt is better that a regulation (lit., \u201cletter\u201d) of the Torah be negated than that the (entire) Torah be rejected instead.\u201d
\nThe danger with extensions and exceptions, given human pride, is that supposition of one\u2019s own exceptional spiritual maturity may lead to exclusion for the self, i.e., to the belief that one has risen above such petty things as \u201crules\u201d and absolute restrictions. (See the mention of Antinomianism in the discussion of Num 20.)<\/p>\n
Animal Slaughter<\/p>\n
Perhaps something need be said about the revulsion that modern persons (and especially advocates of \u201canimal rights\u201d) may feel when reading the litany of animal slaughter that took place in ancient Israelite worship. Can it be put more aptly than in the following words?<\/p>\n
What do moderns consider \u201cprimitive\u201d about such rituals? Doubtless, the pre-biblical origins of sacrifice go back to beliefs that the gods desired the food for their consumption. But the Torah itself no longer gives any warrant for the continuation of such beliefs, and Ps. 50:8ff. expressly disavows them.
\nMost likely it is the public nature of the ancient slaughtering process that is repellent to current tastes. We prefer to hide the procedure behind the walls of abattoirs where the animals are killed in a fashion no less bloody, but without making it necessary for the consumer to witness the life-and-death cycle which goes into his pleasurable nourishment.
\nMoreover, even when we share with others in the eating process, we do not generally experience any of the genuinely worthy emotions which were usually engendered by the sacrifices of old. In the root meaning of the English word, we do not \u201csacrifice\u201d (i.e., render holy) anything when we eat. This does not mean that our age ought to be ready for any reconsideration of cultic sacrifice. It does suggest that when seen in its own context, the biblical order of animal offerings was a genuine form of worship that cannot be quickly dismissed with prejudicial contemporary judgments.<\/p>\n
The Church Calendar<\/p>\n
Note must be made of the fact that the calendar of the church has deep antecedents in the ones outlined for Israel\u2019 shrines. For example, morning and evening worship (especially in monastic orders), observation of the Sabbath, Easter (tied to the Passover and thus likewise related in time of celebration to the Spring Equinox), special service for the New Year, annual \u201crevival\u201d meetings as means of atonement and rededication, and Thanksgiving Day (tied to the agricultural calendar as is the Feast of Booths).<\/p>\n
Prayer<\/p>\n
In ancient Israel, prayer could be offered either spontaneously by the individual regardless of location (as did Abraham\u2019s servant when he reached his destination, Gen 24:12\u201313), or at a sacred site either individually (as did the barren Hannah, 1 Sam 1:9\u201310) or communally (e.g., the psalms, recited in the temple in Jerusalem). Since there was a liturgical link between sacrifice and prayer (Gen 26:25), it is hardly surprising that the temple in Jerusalem could be called a \u201chouse of prayer\u201d (Isa 56:7). Laity in ancient Israel, often unable to attend the rites of the temple, would sometimes gather in their home villages at the appointed hours in order to read the Torah and offer prayers. Consequently, it became customary to offer private prayers twice (1 Chr 23:30) or thrice (Ps 55:17 [Hebrew v. 18]; Dan 6:10 [Hebrew v. 11]) daily. With the destruction of the temple, prayer, three times daily (Talmud Berakot 4.1), morning, noon, and evening, became the regular substitute for sacrificial activity.
\nThe modern person who does a \u201cdevotional\u201d reading and prayer before bed thus follows a practice whose antecedents go back to the sacrificial cult of ancient Israel. Prayer, upon awakening in the morning, follows the same custom. At the same time, such modern persons well understand the motivation of worship in ancient Israel: praise to God as Creator and Sustainer. I well understand the words of a pious person who recently said to me: \u201cMy first impulse upon awakening, and my last at night, is to praise God.\u201d<\/p>\n
New Testament Connections<\/p>\n
In Matthew 12:1\u20138 we read of a disagreement between Jesus and the Pharisees concerning observance of the Sabbath, since his disciples are accused of violating it. Jesus responds by citing two instances from Torah where violation was justified.
\n1. The hungry disciples had plucked and eaten ears of grain, which could be considered harvesting and thus forbidden in Rabbinic interpretation (e.g., Mishnah Shabbat 7.2). Jesus responds by citing the precedent of David\u2019s servant who did a similar thing at 1 Samuel 21:1\u20137 (by consuming \u201choly bread\u201d which would have been prepared in anticipation of the Sabbath, according to Lev 24:8). He was not condemned because of the threat to bodily welfare from hunger. In Rabbinic thought, necessary actions in life-threatening situations take precedence over Sabbath regulations.
\n2. The priests, in performing sacrificial acts (e.g., manipulating animals and grain for offerings) on the Sabbath, violate it. The Rabbis had already recognized this problem and ruled that other calendric commands of worship overrode the Sabbath ones. Now, reasons Jesus (in good Rabbinic fashion), that if temple service can supersede Sabbath duties, how much more so in the case of \u201csomething greater than the temple\u201d (by which he may mean concerns of human mercy toward those in physical need of food). It is not that Torah has been negated but rather that its basic requirements (e.g., mercy) are deeper and more demanding than are those of calendric adherence. (See the \u201cConnections\u201d for Lev 23.)<\/p>\n
The disciples plucking corn on the Sabbath<\/p>\n
Gustave Dor\u00e9. The Disciples Plucking Corn on the Sabbath. 19th C. Engraving. (Credit: www.creationism.org\/images\/DoreBibleIllus\/)<\/p>\n
REGULATIONS CONCERNING VOWS, AND ESPECIALLY BY WOMEN<\/p>\n
Numbers 30:1\u201316 (Hebrew 30:1\u201317)<\/p>\n
The immediately previous regulations concerning appointed (calendric) festivals has ended with a reminder about non-scheduled sacrificial events that might be felt necessary by the worshiper (29:39). Since among the latter there was mention of \u201cvotive offerings,\u201d it seemed an opportune time for the Priestly writer to continue with guidelines for such vows and their related offerings (as well as promissory actions), especially as they pertained to women.
\nWhy would the Priestly writers feel it necessary to introduce regulations concerning binding obligations into matters of family law? In the absence of firm evidence, perhaps speculation is allowable. The Priestly writings seem to have reached their final editorial level during and shortly after the exile, the latter context placing them during the period of Persian control of the province of Judea. The political desperation and economic uncertainty of the times might encourage both the making of formal promises and a willingness (if not necessity) to break them. Women, who remained under the legal guardianship of their father or husband and knew that they could rely upon the head of the household to \u201cmake good\u201d on their obligations, might be less than cautious in such matters. Consequently, religious leaders would feel the need to reinforce the sanctity of vows and oaths, and the use of written instruments for binding agreements would become normal (following the practice of the new Persian administration).
\nThe chapter may be outlined as follows.<\/p>\n
1. Sanctity of vows, oaths and pledges (vv. 1\u20132 [Hebrew vv. 2\u20133]);
\n2. Regulations governing women (vv. 3\u201315 [Hebrew vv. 4\u201316]);
\n3. Summary (v. 16 [Hebrew v. 17]).<\/p>\n
COMMENTARY<\/p>\n
Sanctity of Vows, Oaths, and Pledges, 30:1\u20132<\/p>\n
As a preface to the regulations governing adult females, a reminder is given to adult males concerning the inviolability of vows and oaths that they may have taken. That is, once the crisis that had given rise to such expressions had passed, humans might conveniently (or even inadvertently) \u201cforget\u201d to make good on their promises. Hence it was necessary to encourage and warn them to carry through in such matters lest they incur guilt in God\u2019s sight (Deut 23:21\u201322).
\nSeveral kinds of promissory obligations are covered by the regulations.
\n1. A \u201cvow\u201d (neder) is a conditional promise of future action of the following type: \u201cif so-and-so happens, then I will do so-and-so.\u201d In the Bible, the beneficiary is always the Deity (usually resulting in a gift of gratitude to the Deity\/sanctuary). That is, if the Deity complies with a request, then the worshiper will respond as promised. [Vows]<\/p>\n
Vows
\nA good illustration of a vow may be found at Gen 28:20\u201321, when Jacob is setting out on the long journey to visit his mother\u2019s relatives: \u201cIf God will be with me \u2026 then the LORD shall be my God \u2026 (and) I will surely give one tenth to you.\u201d At the successful conclusion of such vows, sacrifices (\u201cvotive offerings\u201d) might be appropriate (as at Jonah 2:9).<\/p>\n
2. An \u201coath\u201d (\u0161\u011bbu \u02be\u00e2h) is slightly different and is not to be identified with modern use of the term to indicate profanity. It usually was an unconditional promise to God or human, sworn in the name of the Deity, to carry out the named action. Consider the instance when Jonathan, son of King Saul, pleads for the life of his friend David. \u201cSaul heeded the voice of Jonathan; Saul swore, \u2018As the LORD lives, he shall not be put to death\u2019 \u201d (1 Sam 19:6).
\nSometimes vows and oaths pertained to matters of abstention. This might consist of such matters as fasting, sexual abstinence, or such self-denials as were mandated by the Day of Atonement (29:7) and by the obligations of a Nazirite (6:1\u20138). Such possibilities seems to be implied by v. 13, \u201cany binding oath to deny herself.\u201d
\n3. A \u201cpledge\u201d (\u02beiss\u0101r; NEB, \u201cbinding obligation\u201d) is an absolute, unconditional pledge (either of a gift to the sanctuary or to abstain from specific activities) and, as such, becomes effective immediately. It may be expressed in writing, whereas the other two are usually oral. Although it is not required, it may be accompanied by an oath, as in our text: \u201c\u2026 swears an oath to bind himself by a pledge\u201d (v. 2 [Hebrew v. 3]). Examples of arrangements of this type include \u201cfirst-fruits\u201d of the harvest in support of the priests (Lev 18:12\u201313), \u201ctitles from the land\u201d (Lev 27:30), and items which, in times of war, are pledged to be destroyed if victory over the enemy is achieved. [Pledges]<\/p>\n
Pledges
\nA conspicuous example of a pledge is Joshua\u2019s promise concerning the fate of the city of Jericho: \u201cThe city and all that is in it shall be devoted to the LORD for destruction\u201d (Josh 6:17). See the discussions of \u201cbanned\u201d items at Lev 27:28 and Num 18:14.<\/p>\n
Regulation Governing Women, 30:3\u201315<\/p>\n
That biblical law might distinguish between genders in this regard is understandable, given the sociology of that time and place. Adult males were considered to be autonomous heads of households, whereas most females were legally dependent members of the family of a father or husband. Consequently, since the householder would be responsible for any inconvenience and expenditure that resulted from the vows, oaths, and pledges of his family members, he might understandably want to exercise veto-power over them. In that case, the Deity regards the obligations as validly cancelled and then pardons the woman (vv. 5, 8, 12).
\nNonetheless, since such declarations usually had a religious dimension, i.e., the expectation of divine retribution for misuse (\u201cprofaning\u201d) of the divine name in case of default. Consequently, obligations should not be tampered-with in a cavalier fashion, and the householder\u2019s reservations had to be expressed immediately (the same day) upon hearing what had taken place. Failure to do so signaled irretrievably the householder\u2019s willingness to accept and become responsible for any commitments that family members had made. Any subsequent interference by the householder then transferred divine displeasure from the woman to him (v. 15). [Comment on Details of Numbers 30]<\/p>\n
Comment on Details of Numbers 30
\nV. 4 [Hebrew v. 5], \u201cwithin her father\u2019s house.\u201d The implication is that she is a girl of marriageable age, around twelve years or so.
\nV. 9 [Hebrew v. 10], \u201cwidow \u2026 divorced.\u201d This brief exclusion from the general rules is set off in parentheses in NRSV. Women in this category are responsible for all of their commitments.
\nV. 15 [Hebrew v. 16], \u201cbear her guilt,\u201d i.e, receive the divine retribution that would have befallen her. See the discussion of Lev 7:18\u201320.<\/p>\n
CONNECTIONS<\/p>\n
Oaths<\/p>\n
Sensitivity to Christians who desired to take seriously Jesus\u2019 reservations about oaths (Matt 5:33\u201337) has led modern judicial systems to make a modification. Witnesses may now exercise an option: \u201cI do solemnly swear (or affirm) to tell the truth.\u2026\u201d<\/p>\n
Legal Responsibility for Obligations<\/p>\n
It is important, in the public life of any society, to have clarity about whom is legally responsible for meeting formal obligations and about how one is to go about doing so. Criminal and civil codes, both ancient and modern, are abundantly concerned with such matters.
\nModern secular society has a tendency toward leniency in such matters, and I will here mention but indications. (1) Promises (devoid of oaths) are often but social formalities, mere pleasantries spoken with no determination or expectation that they will be acted upon (e.g., \u201cSee you soon\u201d; \u201cI\u2019ll call you\u201d; \u201cI\u2019ll do so-and-so for you\u201d; etc.). (2) Politicians, in order to enhance their poll numbers, make promises that astute persons know very well that they cannot keep, or they make promises with no allowance for changing circumstances. (Remember the President who said, \u201cRead my lips! No new taxes!\u201d) (3) More serious still is the fact that perjury is only to be expected amidst conflicting legal testimony.
\nAlthough Numbers 30 is explicitly concerned with obligations that are in the service of God, its writers would understand and support two pieces of secular advice that I often heard as a child: \u201cLet your word be your bond,\u201d and \u201cPersons are only as good as their word.\u201d<\/p>\n
Fulfilling Your Commitment to the Church<\/p>\n
New members of the United Methodist Church are asked the following question (a de facto oath) that anticipates an affirmative answer: \u201cWill you be loyal to the United Methodist Church, and uphold it with your prayers, your presence, your gifts, and your service?\u201d Such members might well ponder the following (as I now do with lack of comfort):
\na. When was the last time that you prayed for the church Universal and for the local congregation of which you are a member?
\nb. If you have not attended church regularly (or, say, in the last month), have you had at least a fleeting feeling of violation of your oath?
\nc. When the family budget becomes \u201ctight,\u201d is weekly contribution to your congregation the first or the last obligation to relinquish? (Will God \u201cunderstand,\u201d do you think?)
\nd. When there is opportunity and invitation to serve in some capacity in the life of the church, do you immediately think of all of the more pressing obligations that you have?<\/p>\n
New Testament Connections<\/p>\n
The possibility of tension between the inviolability of vows and other commandments in Torah became subjects of discussion between Jesus and religious leaders (Matt 15:1\u20136). When the Pharisees object that the disciples of Jesus have violated the \u201ctradition of the elders,\u201d Jesus responds in kind. He points out that they allow children to neglect their parents financially on the grounds that the available means of support has been vowed to divine service. \u201cSo, for the sake of your tradition, you make void the word of God (to honor your father and your mother).\u201d [\u201cTradition of the Elders\u201c]<\/p>\n
\u201cTradition of the Elders\u201d
\nThis is an alternative designation for the Oral Torah. The Rabbis believed that this material had been communicated to Moses at Mt. Sinai. During the day, Moses had copied down a \u201cwritten torah\u201d (much of the Pentateuch) and at night had memorized an \u201coral torah.\u201d The latter was later codified and committed to writing as the Mishnah (on which see discussion at Lev 12 and 23). It then formed the core of the Talmud (on which see the \u201cIntroduction\u201d to the book of Numbers).<\/p>\n
In all fairness, it must be pointed out that the conflict did not arise between the \u201ctradition of the elders\u201d and the Old Testament. It resided, rather, within the latter source itself. The Rabbis were fully aware of this tension in the regulations, i.e., that vows and oaths might be taken in a moment of rashness so as to avoid parental or other obligations. Consequently, they struggled to find ways to invalidate those vows that they perceived to be immoral. They argued, for example, that unforeseen circumstances might validly annul a vow (Babylonian Talmud, Nedarim [meaning \u201cvows\u201d], 64b). They surely would have been influenced in this regard by the tragic story of Jephthah (Judg 11:29\u201340).
\nCompetent understanding of the massive body of Rabbinic literature, with its subtle and complex discussions, requires much time and training and few Christian scholars (to say nothing of clergy) have devoted themselves to it. Much harm has been done to Jewish-Christian relations by zealous and well-intentioned persons who are innocent of the facts. Informed awareness of Rabbinic thought on the matter of vows \u201cshould prohibit ugly Christian feelings of superiority toward Judaism that, unfortunately, appear repeatedly in connection with this passage.\u201d There are many other texts concerning which this could be said.
\nIn the matter of taking oaths, Jesus has a very clear opinion: When persons are truthful (as they should be!) oaths are unnecessary (Matt 5:33\u201337; see also Jas 5:12). That oaths were regarded as necessary merely attests to the untrustworthiness of humans in their natural condition. In the ethical perspective that Jesus is advocating, truth is guaranteed by an inner integrity and not by a verbal formulation. In the society that Jesus envisions, evil is not to be assumed as a matter of course.
\nIn his discussion of marriage and celibacy (1 Cor 7:1\u201340), St. Paul mentions periods of sexual abstinence that married couples might observe (vv. 3\u20135). He specifically mentions doing so to in order to \u201cdevote yourselves to prayer.\u201d In any case, thinks Paul, this is only to be done by mutual agreement and to be of strictly limited duration.<\/p>\n
THE WAR WITH MIDIAN<\/p>\n
Numbers 31:1\u201354<\/p>\n
The previous chapter has ended with the usual formulaic summary of the Priestly writer: \u201cThese are [= have been] the statutes?.\u2026\u201d The reader should not be surprised, therefore, to find a new topic unfolding when the next chapter opens.
\nThe previous material has been cultic in nature, and now the Priestly writer continues the narrative sequence from 25:16\u201318. There, the Israelites were encouraged to \u201cHarass the Midianites, and defeat them?.\u2026\u201d An account of the actualization of that dramatic call now opens with, \u201cAvenge the Israelites on the Midianites.\u201d
\nThree related topics are presented in the chapter (only partially indicated by the paragraphs in NRSV):<\/p>\n
1. A successful war against Midian (vv. 1\u201312);
\n2. Criticism of conduct during the campaign (vv. 13\u201320);
\n3. Disposition of the spoils of war (vv. 21\u201354).<\/p>\n
COMMENTARY<\/p>\n
A Successful War Against Midian, 31:1\u201312<\/p>\n
The Midianites have played an increasing role as story the wilderness itinerary unfolds, but only in the Priestly account. Beginning at 10:29\u201333 (JE), a small clan of them (or are they Kenites?), headed by Moses\u2019 father-in-law, sets out on the journey toward the \u201cpromised land\u201d with Israel at Moses\u2019 urging. No hostility toward them is evident in the JE account.
\nThen, in the Oracles of Balaam (chs. 22\u201324), a small hint of trouble is sounded when some Midianites are mentioned as having joined the King of Moab in uneasiness about the arrival of Israel (22:4, 7). Since the Midianites play no role otherwise in this extensive section concerning Moab, it is suspected by modern scholars that mention of them is an insertion by the Priestly writers in order to preface major problems \u201cdown the road.\u201d Those problems begin to surface during the period of Israel\u2019s settlement in the land of Canaan (Judg 6\u20138).
\nThen, in 25:6\u201318, in what is clearly a Priestly addition to an older story about more trouble with the Moabites (vv. 1\u20135), the Midianites appear as a major source of trouble. The episode concludes with God\u2019s instruction to \u201cHarass the Midianites and defeat them\u201d (v. 16), a concern that re-emerges in Priestly Material in the present chapter. Action of such extreme nature is now taken against them as to trouble the conscience of modern readers.
\nWhat events between Israel and Midian could have provoked such an extreme reaction as that depicted in chapter 31: the indiscriminate slaughter of men, women, and male children? Was it nothing more than a single episode of \u201cforbidden love\u201d (25:6), or even a more widespread \u201clove in\u201d (25:1) on the borders of the \u201cpromised land\u201d back in the thirteenth century? By contrast, note that, much later in a more widespread crisis, Nehemiah (13:23\u201327) and Ezra (9:1\u20132; 10:1\u20135) had only insisted upon a modest (and non-violent) solution: avoiding mixed marriages and divorcing the wives of foreign origin.
\nAlternatively, is it not likely that something more menacing to Israel and of great national significance has transpired in the much later period when the Priestly Writings were taking final shape? At this point, it is well to remember the tendency of the Priestly writers to project problems of their own time back into the wilderness. This they did so as to provide a precedent and model for contemporary action. Consider, as the most conspicuous example, the projection of the entire monarchical temple cult, complete with Aaronide leadership, back into the Sinai Desert.
\nAfter the Judean exile to Babylonia had ended (following the edict of King Cyrus of Persia in 539 BC), the land of Judea was incorporated into the Persian Empire. The subsequent emergence of nationalism and any attempts to re-fortify Jerusalem (Neh 2:11\u201318; 3:1\u201332; 4:15\u201323) met with resistance by neighboring peoples. Their activities were fueled by old enmities and by the desire to ingratiate themselves to their Persian rulers. Abundant evidence of this may be found in the book of Nehemiah (2:19\u201320; 4:1\u20135, 7\u20138; 6:1\u20139, 16\u201319). The intended consequence was that the garrison of Persian troops, stationed nearby, would interrupt the rebuilding process. It has been proposed that such a violent suppression actually took place in 485 BC.
\nAmong those hated and hateful opponents of the returning Judean exiles were \u201cArab\u201d tribes who were headed by a king named Gershem (Neh 2:19; 6:1\u20132). Sources outside the Bible refer to a Gershem who was king of the Kedarites, an Arab enemy who is denounced in a late (post-exilic) passage in Isaiah (21:10\u201316). Consequently, it has been suggested that among the post-exilic enemies of Israel are clans of Midianites and that the Priestly account in Numbers 31 is intended as \u201ca retrojection of contemporary hostility into the prehistory of Israel.\u201d<\/p>\n
Criticism of Conduct During the Campaign, 31:13\u201320<\/p>\n
The triumphant army has now returned, complete with the usual spoils of war: goods, livestock, women and children (v. 9). Moses\u2019 appreciation for what has happened is marred by the realization that the Midianite women have been spared (possibly for reasons other than compassion). He points out that these are the very instruments whereby Israelite men were enticed into the worship of a Midianite deity (the Baal of Peor, 25:1\u20135). Therefore, those who have had sexual experience and thus might have been involved in that damning episode are to be executed (along with all male children, since they might grow up to be troublesome rebels).
\nIt is interesting (if not significant) that this command is not attributed to the Deity but to Moses. It can only have come from the deepest outrage at what has transpired during the Baal of Peor episode (or, alternatively, from the hostile acts of the Midianites in the post-exilic age). Nonetheless, that these women were Midianites must have been extremely painful to him in view of the tribal identity of his wife (Exod 2:16\u201321). It is also interesting that there is no report that Moses\u2019 wishes were carried out.
\nHow were the potentially guilty women to be identified, in the absence of a wholesale (and fallible!) gynecological exam?
\nThe rabbis later pondered the matter and suggested a solution: only virgins would have blushed when the question of sexual experience was posed to them!
\nTermination of condemned captives then necessitates ritual purification from contamination by corpses (vv. 19\u201320; see 5:1\u20134).<\/p>\n
Disposition of the Spoils of War, 31:21\u201354<\/p>\n
The Priestly writer uses this occasion to present a code of regulations for the disposition of plunder that has been taken in battle. Since such items may have been subject to ritual contamination, appropriate steps must be taken before they can be utilized in the sacred space of Israel. Once available for usage, it is to be apportioned in accordance with strict guidelines: one half for the soldiers, the other for the larger congregation; then, from the soldiers\u2019 part, 1\/500th for the temple staff, and from the congregation\u2019s part 1\/50th for the Levites.<\/p>\n
Nehemiah viewing secretly the ruins of the walls of Jerusalem<\/p>\n
Gustave Dor\u00e9. Nehemiah Viewing Secretly the Ruins of the Walls of Jerusalem. 19th C. Engraving. (Credit: www.creationism.org\/images\/DoreBibleIllus\/)<\/p>\n
The numbers of animals and persons are so astonishingly large as to defy probability. They likely are in keeping with the tendency of the Priestly writer to play numerical games. In this case, however, neither multiples of traditional symbolic numbers (e.g., 3, 7, 12, 40, 60), nor astronomical data (as in chs. 1 and 26) suffice to explain the particulars. Nonetheless, it may be observed that the number 72,000 (here, for the captured oxen) occurs elsewhere in Scripture (Ezra 2:3, 4; Neh 7:8, 9; 11:19) and this is nicely divisible among the 12,000 soldiers involved (v. 5); 32,000 unmarried females is 40 \u00d7 40 \u00d7 20; and the numerical total of all items, 840,000, is 40 \u00d7 7 \u00d7 3 \u00d7 1,000.<\/p>\n
Cyrus Cylinder
\nCyrus Cylinder, Babylonian, from Babylon, southern Iraq, c. 539\u2013530 BC. This clay cylinder represents a declaration of good kingship. It is inscribed in Babylonian cuneiform with an account by Cyrus, king of Persia (559\u2013530 BC), of his conquest of Babylon in 539 BC and capture of Nabonidus, the last Babylonian king.<\/p>\n
(Credit: Prioryman \/ Wikimedia Commons, CC-BY-SA-3.0)<\/p>\n
The statement that not one soldier was lost in battle (v. 49) certainly seems extraordinary and may fall in the well-attested biblical category of exaggeration. However, classical writers do report that the Romans had captured \u201ca Parthian castle without loss, and a battle in which 1,000 Arabs fell but only two Romans\u201d (so G. J. Wenham, Numbers: An Introduction and Commentary, 209). Nonetheless, the wholesale surrender of a castle is not to be equated so easily with an open land-battle. [Comment on Details of Numbers 31]<\/p>\n
Comment on Details of Numbers 31
\nV. 5, \u201cthousand from each of the tribes \u2026\u201d This seems to be another of those standard \u201cround\u201d numbers (12 \u00d7 1000) of which the biblical writers were fond (see the discussion of chapter 1). For some of the other instances of 12,000 see Josh 8:25; Judg 21:10; 2 Sam 10:6; 17:1; 1 Kgs 4:26; 10:26.
\nV. 6: \u201cwith the vessels of the sanctuary.\u201d Carrying sacred items into battle (as a sign of God\u2019s presence and as a means of oracular consultation) is well attested elsewhere (e.g., 1 Sam 4:1\u201311).
\nV. 7, \u201ckilled every male.\u201d If the account is to be assigned to the time of Moses (i.e., is historical), this sweeping statement likely does not refer to the entirety of the Midianite population of the Near East but only to those in the immediate vicinity of the Israelites. It is just possible that the remark concerns only those who had been captured (an analogy with the status of women and children in vv. 9, 15\u201317).
\nThe Midianites seem to have been geographically distributed rather widely and in possible confederation with other groups such as Ishmaelites (Gen 37:28), Moabites (Num 22:4, 7), and Amalekites (Judg 6:3, 33). That other groups survived and later confronted Israel is related at Judg 6\u20138.
\nV. 8, \u201cthey also killed Balaam\u201d (see also v. 16). A surprising turn of events, given his prior blessings of Israel (chs. 22\u201324). On the shifting biblical view of this Seer, see the discussion of chs. 22\u201324.
\nV. 9, \u201ctook \u2026 captive.\u201d Under the rules of war as outlined at Deut 20:14, this was allowable.
\nV. 23, \u201cthe water of purification.\u201d To be applied in cases of contamination by a corpse. The procedure for producing it, involving the ashes of the red heifer, is outlined in chapter 19. However, that precious metals should be \u201cpassed through the fire\u201d is an innovation.
\nVv. 40\u201341, \u201cthirty-two persons \u2026 to Eleazar the priest.\u201d Presumably, these young females would become support-staff for the sanctuary (as per Exod 38:8; 1 Sam 2:22).
\nV. 50, \u201cto make atonement for ourselves.\u201d Since this statement immediately follows upon the report that a census has been taken, there likely is a connection. Divine displeasure at census-taking is reported at 2 Sam 24. Apparently, David had violated a limitation on royal power that the prophet Samuel had imposed at the institution of monarchy (i.e., a census is a means of determining the amount of \u201csword fodder\u201d that is available for going to war). The priesthood then devised a means whereby divine displeasure for a census might be assuaged: a cultic offering as a substitute for lives that would otherwise be taken (Exod 30:11\u201316).<\/p>\n
CONNECTIONS<\/p>\n
This God of Wrath<\/p>\n
The primary task here is not so much the derivation of spiritual and ethical insight for modern life as it is to overcome the negative impressions that may be gathered when the account is read. How does one incorporate such wrath as is here directed toward the Midianites into a larger biblical scheme of universal concern (as expressed, for example, in Isa 2)? Perhaps it is a matter of \u201clistening to the hours and not to the minutes\u201d (i.e., \u201choly war\u201d was a temporary measure, concerned with the conquest of Canaan, and not a stance toward the world for all eternity). At the same time, lest one succumb to the common temptation of Christians to compare a \u201cjudgmental\u201d God in the Old Testament with a \u201cloving\u201d God in the New (an ancient Gnostic heresy, well attested in later ages), the virulent hatred of Rome in the book of Revelation should be kept in mind. Sometimes a source of evil in the world is so destructive to humanity that it cannot be allowed to function even under modern norms of diversity and toleration. Modern examples of such regimes might include Nazi Germany and Iraq under Saddam Hussein.
\nIt is interesting to note the religious context into which the distribution of plunder has been placed (vv. 25\u201330). Everyone in the story is aware of this as an expression of God\u2019s continuing graciousness and of faithfulness to the promise to the Patriarchs (Gen 12:1\u20133). Let its contrast to modern secular values, based largely upon greed, be noted.<\/p>\n
The Intention of the Text<\/p>\n
Of course, the question of \u201cfactual\u201d history must be raised. Whatever the nucleus of actual conflict between Israel and Midian at this time may be, it is clear that the Priestly writers have \u201cfleshed it out\u201d in their characteristic way with wonderful exaggeration and \u201cstandard\u201d numbers. They are more concerned to suggest the faithfulness of the new generation (in contrast to that which died in the wilderness) than they are to report merely \u201cwhat happened\u201d as an end in itself. Is that the implied significance of the statement that \u201cnot one of us is missing\u201d (v. 49)? Otherwise put: Is it not more important to listen to what the text \u201cintends\u201d rather than to what it literally says?<\/p>\n
Balaam<\/p>\n
The changing role of Balaam in this chapter (from hero by his words to villain in his actions) has prompted one modern interpreter to observe: \u201cAnd so we should be circumspect in judging and admiring persons whom we think, by their words, to be great benefactors of humankind.\u201d My own observations in this regard are that the most egregious offenders are to be found in the hierarchy of the church.<\/p>\n
A SQUABBLE ABOUT TRIBAL ALLOCATION<\/p>\n
Numbers 32:1\u201342<\/p>\n
The preliminary plans for settlement in the \u201cpromised land\u201d (chs. 22\u201331) have now been completed and the story now enters its final phase. The tribes are now ready to enter the land and settle in their allotted territories.
\nThe old JE tradition, conspicuous by its concern with settlement in Transjordan and last encountered at 25:1\u20135, now reappears for the last time in Numbers. However, it is so thoroughly mixed with \u201cP\u201d and so heavily edited that convincing demarcation of sources is difficult. The resultant combination produces discrepancies such as: (1) the reversal of order in which the tribes are named (vv. 1\u20132); (2) the desired land is sometimes \u201cJazer and Gilead\u201d (v. 1) and sometimes \u201cGilead\u201d only (vv. 26, 29); (3) at first, only Reuben and Gad are involved (vv. 1\u201332), and then Manasseh suddenly is inserted (vv. 33\u201342); (4) the statement that Moses already \u201cgave to them \u2026\u201d (while the matter is still under discussion and the promise of Reuben and Gad not yet carried out), suggests that vv. 33\u201342 are an attachment; etc. In addition, vv. 33\u201342 introduce a confusion in geography (see the \u201cComment on Particulars\u201d at v. 3).
\nWhile the basic stratum seems to be JE, the hand of the Priestly writer is evident from (1) the idea of subservience to Eleazar the priest (v. 2; note order of his priority before Joshua in v. 28); (2) designation of the people as the \u201ccongregation\u201d (v. 2) and the leaders as \u201cheads of ancestral houses\u201d (v. 28); (3) reference to the census of those \u201ctwenty years old and upward\u201d (vv. 11\u201313); (4) description of the land as a \u201cpossession\u201d (v. 22); (5) fondness for lists (vv. 34\u201342); and traces of influence by materials in the book of Deuteronomy.
\nThe material may be divided into the following scences, usually following the paragraphs in NRSV:<\/p>\n
1. Proposal by the descendants of Reuben and Gad (vv. 1\u20135);
\n2. Moses\u2019 negative response (vv. 6\u201315);
\n3. Counter-proposal by Reuben and Gad (vv. 16\u201319);
\n4. Acceptance by all parties (vv. 20\u201338);
\n5. Settlement by descendants of Manasseh (vv. 39\u201342).<\/p>\n
COMMENTARY<\/p>\n
Proposal by the Descendants of Reuben and Gad, 32:1\u20135<\/p>\n
The Priestly materials, running in a near-solid block from 25:6\u201331:54, has been focused entirely upon preparation for getting all of the Israelites across the River Jordan into their long awaited \u201cpromised land.\u201d The necessary detour through Transjordan and the troubles encountered there has been little more than an irritating delay.
\nNow, suddenly, progress toward the true goal comes to an unexpected halt for a nearly unbelievable reason. Two of the tribes, Reuben and Gad (apparently then joined by part of Manasseh) do not want to settle in the land west of the river Jordan for which they have for so long striven! Otherwise put: The question of the propriety of settlement in Transjordan now takes center-stage.
\nIn early tradition (JE) an enduring Israelite presence in Transjordan presents no conceptual problem. See, for example, the ballads concerning victory and settlement there in chapter 21. Furthermore, the very early Song of Deborah (Judg 5; eleventh century?) considers elements in Transjordan to be part of the Israelite confederation (vv. 14\u201317). Even as late as the prophet Amos (eighth century), conquest there is lauded as a gift from the Deity (2:9).
\nAt some time in the history of Israel, however, Israelite Transjordan must have arisen as a \u201cproblem.\u201d Apparent dissatisfaction with those who had settled here is evident at places in the book of Joshua. For example, the tribes there express mistrust of the majority that has gone across the river into the land of Canaan. They could anticipate a time when the other tribes would denounce them as \u201chaving no portion in the LORD.\u201d Consequently, they had built an altar in their own territory (Josh 22:9), in apparent violation of the rule that there must be only one such structure within all Israel (Deut 12:1\u20137). When chastened, the Transjordanians respond that the altar had not been constructed for sacrifice but only \u201cto be a witness between us and you\u201d (Josh 22:21\u201329).
\nSince centralization of the cult (at least in Jerusalem), whenever first proposed, did not have the force of government behind it until the reform of King Josiah (621 BC), a charge that the Transjordanians were in danger of illegitimate worship (and might not come to the aid of those west of the River in a crisis?) was likely made late in the monarchical period, and possibly not until the early post-exilic period (when the Priestly material was finalized).
\nIn the complex source structure of Numbers 32, the issue of proper settlement in Transjordan is viewed from two perspectives. On the one hand (early?) it is sanctioned (vv. 16\u201332), and accordingly Joshua complimented these tribes on their fidelity to their oath, encouraged them to observe the Commandments, and dismissed them to their territories (Josh 22:1\u20136). On the other hand (late?) it is radically questioned (vv. 2\u201315).<\/p>\n
Moses\u2019 Negative Response, 32:6\u201315<\/p>\n
In a blistering verbal attack, Moses interrupts the petitioners by comparing them to the former rebellious generation in the wilderness. Specifically, he calls to mind the negative report of the scouts (an unwillingness to take possession of the land of Canaan) and the divisiveness that it caused (chs. 13\u201314). He accuses them of selfishness and with utter disregard for the fate of the other tribes who, without their help, must face opposition from the Canaanites across the river Jordan. Rabbinic tradition long remembered the economic focus of these two tribes and proposed that divine judgment was later at work when they were the first of the tribes to be exiled (1 Chr 5:26) to a foreign land.
\nA similar charge of disloyalty is lodged against these same tribes at Joshua 22:10\u201312.<\/p>\n
Counter-proposal by Reuben and Gad, 32:16\u201319<\/p>\n
The dissenting tribes then state that their intention now is (or was all along?) to participate in the military campaign with their brothers across the River Jordan, following which Moses might allow them to settle in the place they now desire. In compensation for being allowed this concession, they will serve in the front ranks of the battles (\u201cvanguard,\u201d v. 17).
\nRabbinic tradition, still incensed at these two tribes, points to the order in which they speak of construction in their proposed settlement: \u201csheepfolds here for our flocks, and towns for our little ones\u201d (v. 16) Moses, in turn, reverses it: \u201cBuild towns for your little ones, and folds for your flocks\u201d (v. 24). They see this as a rebuke by Moses for placing economic concerns (flocks) ahead of family security. Milgrom rightly points to the real cause of the reversal: the literary creation of a chiastic structure.
\n(For rabbinic commentaries [and Numbers Rabbah in particular], as well as literary artistry in the formation of chiasms, see the introduction to the commentary on Numbers.)<\/p>\n
Acceptance by All Parties, 32:20\u201338<\/p>\n
It is interesting to note that when Moses reiterates the proposal by Reuben and Gad (vv. 20\u201324), he includes a party to the agreement of which the tribes have made no mention, thus in effect creating an oath in the name of God: \u201cIf you \u2026 go before the LORD \u2026\u201d (v. 20; cf. v. 23). The tribal response acknowledges this context of the agreement (vv. 31\u201332).
\nVerse 23 contains a phrase that was near proverbial in sermons that I heard as a child, concerning inevitability of divine justice: \u201c\u2026 be sure your sins will find you out.\u201d That is, be assured that they will bring recompense.<\/p>\n
Settlement by Descendants of Manasseh, 32:39\u201342<\/p>\n
This fragment of tradition seems out of place in its present context. Only three clans of Manasseh are mentioned (Machir, Jair, and Nobah, vv. 39\u201342), hence their designation as \u201cthe half-tribe of Manasseh\u201d (v. 33). The remainder of the clans, who settled west of the Jordan, are listed at Joshua 17:1\u20132. The allocation of tribal territory is outlined there as well. The settlement of the tribe of Manasseh is historically obscure and too complex to be described here. [Comment on Details of Numbers 32]<\/p>\n
Comment on Details of Numbers 32
\nV. 1, \u201csaw that the land \u2026 was a good place for cattle.\u201d For supporting description of its appropriateness, see Mic 7:14; Song 4:1; and the discussion of 21:33.
\nV. 3. Of these nine named sites, some are assigned to the tribe of Gad and others to Reuben at vv. 33\u201338. However, the geography does not always agree, and some listed Gadite towns seem actually to be in the territory of Reuben (e.g., Ataroth, Dibon, Aroer). Some modern scholars think that this reflects a subsequent weakening of Reuben and an expansion of Gad.
\nV. 3, \u201cAtaroth.\u201d Mentioned later in the Mesha (Moabite) Inscription as an Israelite location. (See the discussion of the Moabite Stone in chapter 21.)
\nV. 3, \u201cDibon.\u201d For a photo of the site, see the discussion of 21:33\u201335. Archaeological excavation has show that the site was occupied intermittently from the Early Bronze Age through the Roman Period. (See the discussion of King Mesha of Moab in chapter 21.)
\nV. 3, \u201cNimrah.\u201d At v. 36 it is referred to as Beth-nimrah.
\nV. 3, \u201cHeshbon.\u201d See the so-called \u201cBallad of Heshbon\u201d at 21:27\u201330.
\nV. 4, \u201cthe land that the LORD subdued.\u201d Reference is thereby made to the conquests as related in chapter 21. Is this observation an attempt to legitimize settlement there as well as west of the Jordan?
\nV. 33, \u201cKing Sihon \u2026 King Og.\u201d The previous struggles with their kingdoms are related in chapter 21.
\nVv. 34\u201338. The list of towns requested by Reuben and Gad (v. 3) is now expanded to include five more. Apparently, the lists are meant to be representative, not comprehensive.
\nV. 38, \u201c(some names being changed),\u201d a unique expression. The parentheses have been placed in the text by the English translators in order to indicate their belief that the enclosed phrases is an editorial expansion and explanation. The purpose of the editorial remark would be to indicate that some of the listed place-names have since been changed, possibly in order to avoid mention of foreign deities. Note, for example, the occurrence of the Canaanite fertility god, Baal, in \u201cBaal-meon\u201d and the Mesopotamian astral deity Nabu in \u201cNebo.\u201d<\/p>\n
CONNECTIONS<\/p>\n
The Support of the Few<\/p>\n
The Fathers of the church sometimes used the Transjordanian tribes as a negative example. Paternius, speaking of them, makes the following analogy:<\/p>\n
Those who have many entanglements in this world do not seek a dwelling in the heavenly fatherland.\u2026 They serve perishable things with their whole minds and all their desires.\u2026 Outside the land of promise they pasture brute animals, because they work to pasture the irrational movements of the soul with empty desires.<\/p>\n
On the contrary, it could be pointed out that the old stratum of the tradition seeks to legitimize the settlement in Transjordan. Furthermore, those tribes were willing not only to act in behalf of their brother-tribes (with no greater economic gain in doing so), but also to place themselves in the most dangerous physical position by serving as the \u201cvanguard\u201d (v. 17). It is an example of dedication to a larger cause that runs contrary to the self-serving individualism of modern western societies.
\nMany are the helpful projects that might have been undertaken by a modern congregation, had not a small group or even an individual failed to support them. Similarly, how important has been the encouragement and support of the few amidst the uncertainties of the many.<\/p>\n
What\u2019s In It for Me?<\/p>\n
The proposal of the tribes of Reuben and Gad manifests a common tendency of human beings: Beneath whatever laudable public service banner we may be operating, there is often a scheming preoccupation with a self-serving agenda: \u201cWhat\u2019s in this for me?\u201d \u201cHow can I \u2018get the best\u2019 of them?\u201d Alas, however, unlike those two ancient tribes who were \u201cup front\u201d about their agenda, modern craftiness does not often manifest itself openly. A friend and I, during faculty meetings, had learned enough about many of our colleagues to be able to peer beneath the veneer and understand what was \u201creally going on\u201d in their minds when they took a certain stance on an issue.<\/p>\n
Preparing for the Next Generation<\/p>\n
The following lesson may not have been intended by the author (authors) of this chapter of Numbers, but it can be proposed from it.
\nMoses\u2019 concern in this episode is about events that will not transpire until after he is dead (as later will his stance in the book of Deuteronomy). Thus, as was the case with the appointment of his successor (27:12\u201323), he has calmly accepted his mortality, provided for someone to take his place in orderly transition, and given wise direction that is in the best interest of the next generation.
\nMoses\u2019 model behavior is not always an easy example to follow. Modern persons may rage against death and may even view the world as meaningless as a consequence of universal mortality. They may not even be able to articulate their impending demise in words or actions, and thus as part of their denial they may fail to make preparation for the next generation.<\/p>\n
A REVIEW OF THE WILDERNESS ITINERARY<\/p>\n
Numbers 33:1\u201356<\/p>\n
The Priestly writer now reiterates the stages of the forty-year sojourn in the wilderness, beginning with the departure from Egypt and ending with encampment in the plains of Moab across the Jordan River from Jericho. The format that is used is not haphazard, but follows a standard form: \u201cset out from A and camped at B; set out from B and camped at C,\u201d just as one finds in records of Assyrian military campaigns. Following this, there is a reminder of tasks that lie ahead: destruction of Canaanite cultic sites and apportionment of the land among the tribes of Israel (vv. 50\u201356).<\/p>\n
COMMENTARY<\/p>\n
From Egypt to Moab, 33:1\u201349<\/p>\n
The itinerary can be divided into three geographical sections, although the text itself does not formally indicate this: (1) from Egypt to the Sinai Desert in the vicinity of the sacred mountain (vv. 3\u201314; see Exod 19:1\u20132); (2) from the wilderness at Sinai to the oasis at Kadesh (vv. 15\u201336; see Num 13:26); and (3) from Kadesh to the plains of Moab (vv. 37\u201349). There are differences between the itinerary here and in Exodus 12:37\u201319:1; Numbers 10\u201322:1, and Deuteronomy 2:1\u201337; 10:6\u20137 (see the chart, \u201cComparison of Stages in the Wilderness Itinerary\u201d; on the Transjordanian itinerary, see the discussion of 21:10\u201311, and the note on 21:27\u201328). Modern scholars have often assumed that the present list has been patched together from fragments elsewhere, but in actuality there is no reason to doubt that it is a unified source. This opinion can be supported by noting that it contains forty-two locations, likely contrived so as to total six multiples of the symbolic number seven. (For this number, signaling totality, completion, see the discussion of sacred numbers at ch. 1.)<\/p>\n
COMPARISON OF STAGES IN THE WILDERNESS ITINERARY<\/p>\n
Numbers 33
\nExodus 12:37\u201319:1; Numbers 10:11\u201322:1<\/p>\n
1. Rameses
\nRameses
\n2. Succoth
\nSuccoth
\n3. Etham
\nEtham
\n4. Migdol
\nMigdol
\n5. Marah
\nMarah
\n6. Elim
\nElim
\n7. Red Sea
\n8. Wilderness of Sin
\nWilderness of Sin
\n9. Dophkah
\n10. Alush
\n11. Rephidim
\nRephidim\/Massah\/Meribah
\n12. Wilderness of Sinai
\nWilderness of Sinai
\n13. Kibroth-hattaavah
\nWilderness of Paran\/Kibroth-hattaavah
\n14. Hazeroth
\nHazeroth
\n15. Rithmah
\n16. Rimmon-perez
\n17. Libnah
\n18. Rissah
\n19. Kehelathan
\n20. Mount Shepher
\n21. Haradah
\n22. Makheloth
\n23. Tahath
\n24. Terah
\n25. Mithkah
\n26. Hashmonah
\n27. Moseroth
\n28. Bene-jaakan
\n29. Hor-haggidgad
\n30. Jotbathah
\n31. Abronah
\n32. Ezion-geber
\n33. Wilderness of Zin\/Kadesh
\nKadesh
\n34. Mt. Hor
\nMt. Hor
\n35. Zalmonah
\n36. Punon
\n37. Oboth
\nOboth
\n38. Iye-abarim\/Iyim
\nIye-abarim
\n39. Dibon-gad
\n40. Almon-diblathaim
\n41. Abarim
\nWadi Zered
\nother side of Arnon in wilderness
\nBeer
\nMattanah
\nNahaliel
\nBamoth
\nvalley in Moab near Pisgah
\ntowns of Amorites
\nland of King Og of Bashan
\n42. Plains of Moab
\nPlains of Moab<\/p>\n
Why should this long and repetitive section have been included by the Priestly writer? The text itself provides not a clue, but this has not prevented a range of speculation!
\n1. Rabbinic opinion has tended to be that the list served as a concentrated and needed reminder to future generation. Either the miracles by which God had made provision for the people, or the rebellions in which the people had participated needed to be kept in mind.
\n2. The Fathers of the church (a) sometimes professed their ignorance of the matter (Jerome), or (b) sometimes suggested that the list might be illustrative of the difficulties of the individual human\u2019s spiritual journey. (Origen in particular interpreted the place-names in a way that suggested spiritual growth).
\n3. Modern scholar Gordon Wenham regards this backward-glance, focusing upon God\u2019s sustaining power thus far, as an encouragement to implement the regulations that are to be revealed in the subsequent section (chs. 34\u201336).
\n4. Modern scholar Richard Friedman points out that the book of Numbers is basically a sequence of events in Israel\u2019s journey through the wilderness, with those events related by a chain of cause and effect. Thus he says:<\/p>\n
Various lines of action and law run as threads that bind the episodes together and now converge in the concluding chapters of the book.\u2026 To bring it together, the list of Israel\u2019s itinerary in Numbers 33 formally shows the sequence of the journey to be the unifying line of the book.<\/p>\n
Advice for the Days Ahead, 33:50\u201356<\/p>\n
Israel\u2019s journey across and travails in the wilderness are now past (chs. 1\u201331); a few of the tribes have arranged for settlement in Transjordan (ch. 32); and a review of the entire itinerary has been presented (ch. 33:1\u201349). It is time to give the remaining tribes a quick reminder of the tasks that lie ahead: disposition of the present inhabitants of Canaan and a methodology for allocation of that land among themselves. Specific directions for the latter task will be the subject of chapters 34\u201336. A narrative account of actualization of the former task will must await the book of Joshua. [Comment on Details of Numbers 33]<\/p>\n
Comment on Details of Numbers 33
\nV. 3, \u201cMoses wrote down.\u201d A rare instance of such activity by Moses, contrary to the traditional belief that he wrote the entirety of the Pentateuch in its present form. See Exod 24:4; Deut 31:9, 22.
\nVv. 5\u201349. For modern identification of the sites, often uncertain, see the commentaries of J. Milgrom and B. A. Levine, and under each place-name as an article in IDB.
\nV. 35, \u201cEzion-geber.\u201d A port heavily used for international commerce by Solomon and later kings of Judah (1 Kgs 22:48\u201349; 2 Chr 8:17\u201318; 20:35\u201337). For modern excavation, see S. Cohen, \u201cEziongeber,\u201d in vol. 2 of IDB (E-J), ed. George Arthur Buttrick (Nashville: Abingdon Press, 1962), 213\u201314.
\nV. 40, \u201cthe king of Arad.\u201d Reference is made to 21:1\u20133.
\nV. 52, \u201cyou shall drive out all the inhabitants.\u201d The utility of doing this is stressed: so as to avoid perpetual conflict with them thereafter. Deut 7:17\u201326 has a similar command, with encouragement to endure in view of the fact that success will not be instantaneous.
\nV. 54, \u201capportion the land by lot.\u201d Thus repeating 26:52\u201356 and anticipating chs. 33\u201336.<\/p>\n
CONNECTIONS<\/p>\n
Church History<\/p>\n
As a consequence of the endless details and perplexities of history and its narration, it is often helpful to \u201cget to the nub of things\u201d with an abbreviated and over-arching account. The retrospect and prospect of chapter 33 serves just that function. The entirety of Israel\u2019s itinerary, from slavery in Egypt (Exod 12) to the border of the \u201cpromised land\u201d (Num 22:1) during which an entire generation has passed away, quickly passes before the eyes of the reader.
\nThe context within which that journey was undertaken should not be overlooked, and this likely was the point being made: this all took place, we are told at the outset, under the leadership of Moses and Aaron \u201cby command of the LORD\u201d (v. 2). Once that divine graciousness and reminder of divine guidance is re-emphasized and absorbed, the difficult task that lies ahead can placed into proper context and motivation as well (vv. 50\u201356).
\nThe history of the church is likewise of long duration, filled with sudden developments whose motivations are sometimes obscure, whose policies are sometimes less than admirable, and with leaders whose personal lives occasionally conflict egregiously with basic ethical teachings. Amidst all of that, as well as vicious attacks upon it by this-or-that group with a personal \u201caxe to grind,\u201d it is helpful to remember the immensely positive role that the church has played throughout western history: opposition to the brutality of the Roman Empire and succeeding governments; the preservation of classical learning; the fostering of institutions dedicated to moral instruction, education and healing during the \u201cdark ages\u201d and the medieval period; opposition to slavery in the nineteenth century; missionary activity with humanitarian assistance around the world; etc. All such endeavors were not basically motivated by a secular humanitarian concern for the downtrodden, but in response to the example of Jesus\u2019 life and teachings.
\nWhen I reflect upon church history in this fashion, I am motivated to honor and renew the pledges taken at church membership (to attend, to pray for, to serve in, and to provide financial support for).
\nThere is a model at the individual level here as well. I sometimes get a bit irritated at some physical deterioration, economic limitation, disappointment in others, etc. I have learned at such moments to reflect upon (and actually recite) my blessings and accomplishments during a relatively long life and especially in view of many small cousins who were deceased before their tenth year. I then conclude that I am \u201cbetter off\u201d than 99 percent of the people who have ever inhabited the earth and that prayerful gratitude might be in order. It is therapeutic to think about what one does have, rather than what one does not.<\/p>\n
FINAL REGULATIONS CONCERNING ALLOCATION OF LAND<\/p>\n
Numbers 34:1\u201336:13<\/p>\n
Careful planning for Israel\u2019s entry into the land of Canaan, as narrated by the Priestly writer, now continues.
\nTo date, preparation has consisted of the following actions: an enumeration (census) of the various tribes, with the understanding that the geographical allocation of each will be in proportion to population (ch. 26); provision for maintaining the independence of clans in case of women has heirs, and confirmation of succession of leadership (ch. 27); the annual cultic calendar that is soon to become operative (chs. 28\u201329); guidelines concerning vows and oaths that might be taken (ch. 30); military success against a traditional enemy, and distribution of captives and booty that might result from the coming conflict (ch. 31); conditions that must be met in case of tribal desire to settle in Transjordan (ch. 32); and a review of the long road from slavery to realization of the promise of a homeland (ch. 33).
\nOnce the people cross the River Jordan into that long awaited \u201cpromised land,\u201d major problems will arise for which planning remains to be done. (1) What are the external boundaries to be (34:1\u201315)? (2) Who is to decide how the territory is to be divided among the nine and one-half constituent tribes (34:16\u201329; remember that two and one-half tribes have already settled in Transjordan, according to ch. 32). (3) What about the Levites, who stand outside the integrated tribal allocations so that special provision must be made for them (35:1\u20138; see Lev 25:32\u201334)? (4) What is to be done in case of murder and the desire for revenge (35:9\u201334)? (5) Do females heirs who marry outside their tribe transfer their property rights to the tribe of their husband (36:1\u201313)?
\nFor purposes of the present commentary, the material will be divided as along NRSV chapter divisions as follows:<\/p>\n
1. Boundaries and personnel (34:1\u201329);
\n2. Cities for Levites and for refuge (35:1\u201334);
\n3. Inheritance of property: an afterthought (36:1\u201313).<\/p>\n
Salt formations near the shore of the Dead Sea
\nThe Dead Sea, Israel, with crests of salt. With 398 m below sea level, the Dead Sea is the lowest point on earth. It is one of the locations of Israel\u2019s boundaries.<\/p>\n
Dead Sea Salt Formation. (Credit: Godot13 \/ Wikimedia Commons, CC-BY-SA-3.0)<\/p>\n
COMMENTARY<\/p>\n
Boundaries and Personnel, 34:1\u201329<\/p>\n
It is now time for specifics, in advance, as regards overall boundaries and internal allocation of territory among the tribes. Only in this way can future confusion and strife be avoided. Such a crucial matter must be undergirded with divine sanction (\u201cThe LORD spoke to Moses,\u201d v. 1), and the people must be \u201ccommanded\u201d concerning obedience (v. 2). Ordinarily, Moses in told, \u201cSpeak to the Israelites,\u201d but now we read, \u201cCommand the Israelites\u201d (v. 2).
\nThe material can be divided into two distinct sections: (a) the external borders (vv. 1\u201312, with vv. 13\u201315 serving as a postscript), and (b) appointment of the tribal representatives who will decide the internal apportionments (vv. 16\u201329). The actual choice of the tribal representatives is to be made, not by Moses himself, but by Joshua (as military leader) and by Eleazar (the priestly leader).
\nThe boundaries that are given here roughly follow the route of the men who had been sent to assess the land (chs. 13\u201314). God\u2019s commission was that they \u201cspy out the land of Canaan, which I am giving to the Israelites\u201d (13:2). Consequently, to reiterate the boundaries here is to affirm to the new generation that the divine promise holds true (even though, as stated below, expectation exceeded reality).
\nOutlining the southern boundary (vv. 3\u20135) would have awakened bitter memories and yet rendered the greatest satisfaction. This was the area through which access had previously been blocked (14:39\u201345; 20:18\u201321). It is to stretch westward from the rift valley of the Salt Sea (NRSV, \u201cDead Sea\u201d) across the Sinai Desert to the \u201cWadi of Egypt\u201d (the modern Wadi el-Arish).
\nThe boundaries outlined here are not those of Israel during any period of its history. Note, for example, that the eastern boundary excludes the territory of the tribes of Reuben, Gad, and half-Manasseh. Furthermore, locations along the northern border (e.g., Lebo-hamath) are well into Phoenicia (even north of the city of Sidon). Joshua 13:5 reports that this area \u201cremains to be possessed\u201d (v. 1) and Judges 3:3 suggests this as well. The actual much smaller boundaries are summed up in the traditional geographical designation of the country as extending \u201cfrom Dan to Beersheba\u201d (Josh 20:1; 1 Sam 3:20; 2 Sam 3:10; 17:11; and many others).
\nThe stated boundaries are, however, similar to those of Canaan as a vassal-state of Egypt in the fifteenth century BC, and following. This description must somehow have survived as a traditional boundary, so that the Priestly writer could then utilize it as an ideal for the post-exilic restoration of Judah. The listing of Persian names such as Parnach (v. 25) may point to the Post-exilic Age as the time when the account reached its final stage.
\nThat the list of tribal leaders begins with Judah, rather than with the first-born Reuben (Gen 29:32; 46:8; 49:3; Num 1:5; etc.), likely reflects the rise to preeminence of the Kingdom of Judah after the fall of the Northern Kingdom (721 BC) and its re-emergence after the Exile (539 BC). Similarly, 1 Chronicles, a post-exilic work, starts out with the traditional first-born (2:1), and then jumps past Simeon and Levi to Judah (2:3). [Comment on Details of Numbers 34]<\/p>\n
Comment on Details of Numbers 34
\nV. 3, \u201cDead Sea.\u201d As the NRSV footnote explains, it is here referred to in the Hebrew text as the \u201cSalt Sea,\u201d as it most commonly is in the Pentateuch. Its concentration of minerals (calcium, magnesium, potassium, and sodium, five times the concentration of the world\u2019s oceans) make it uninhabitable by marine life.
\nIt is also called: (a) \u201cthe sea of the Arabah (Deut 3:17; 4:49; Josh 3:16), from the dry river bed (the wadi Arabah) that enters it from the north; (b) \u201cthe Eastern Sea\u201d (Ezek 47:18; Zech 14:8), in contrast to the Mediterranean that lies to the west; (c) \u201cthe Sea of Sodom\u201d (2 Esd 5:7; the Jewish historian Josephus), for the famous city on its SE margin; and (d) \u201cthe sea of asphalt\u201d (Josephus; Pliny) from the chunks of such material that float to its surface. The more familiar term, \u201cDead Sea,\u201d was introduced by Greek and Latin sources in the 2nd century AD.
\nV. 5, the Southern Boundary: \u201cthe Wadi of Egypt\u201d (RSV, \u201cBrook of Egypt\u201d; KJV, \u201criver of Egypt\u201d [and clearly not the Nile]); referred to in Assyrian records. Generally considered to be the Wadi el`Arish, a conspicuous natural boundary between southwestern Canaan and the Sinai Peninsula. During the rainy season (winter and spring), it has a considerable flow but it dries up in the summer. Other references to it include Josh 15:4; 1 Kgs 8:65; Ezek 47:19.)
\nV. 6, the Western Boundary: \u201cthe Great Sea.\u201d The Mediterranean.
\nV. 7, the Northern Boundary: \u201cMount Hor.\u201d Since this is along the northern border (located in modern Lebanon), this cannot be the site of the same name where Aaron died (20:22\u201329), far to the southeast near the border of Edom.
\nVv. 10\u201311, the Eastern Boundary. The sites are uncertain until one reaches \u201cthe sea of Chinnereth\u201d (the Sea of Galilee, also known in the Bible as Genesar\/Gennesaret [Matt 14:34] and later as Tiberias).
\nV, 18, \u201cYou shall take \u2026\u201d In terms of English grammar, the antecedent is Moses. However, in Hebrew the verb is plural, possibly implying direct address to Joshua and Eleazar.
\nVv. 19\u201328. The names will not have been mentioned previously, since they come from the new generation that was in its youth during the forty years of \u201cwandering in the wilderness.\u201d<\/p>\n
Cities for Levites and for Refuge, 35:1\u201334<\/p>\n
Regulations governing the duties and rights of the Levites typically are listed separately and only after those that apply to the other tribes. Just so here. Previously, we have read that the Levites are not to receive a proportional share of the land of Canaan as the other tribes are to do. Rather, their economic support will derive from the tithes that they receive for their service in the cult (18:21\u201324; see also 26:62).
\nNonetheless, forty-eight towns are to be assigned to the Levites, along with the surrounding pasture lands. These locations are to be distributed throughout the tribal territories with the provision that the larger tribes are to contribute more towns than the smaller ones. Actual details of the allocation are presented in Joshua 21.
\nThis geographical dispersal of the Levites was made necessary by the fact that sanctuaries would be scattered throughout the land. Multiple shrines would need be present in every tribal area and at each of these a priestly staff would be necessary. This was indeed the case until the reform of King Josiah in 621 BC, when steps were taken to close the other sanctuaries and enforce a single cultic center in Jerusalem. [King Josiah\u2019s Reform]<\/p>\n
King Josiah\u2019s Reform
\nIn the year 621 BC, King Josiah\u2019s workmen found a scroll (\u201cthe book of the law\u201d) during the process of temple restoration in Jerusalem (2 Kgs 22). It was written in the tone and style of torah that tradition claimed had been revealed to Moses at Mt. Sinai. Some of its directives were revolutionary, including the total destruction of Canaanite sanctuaries (rather than rededication of them to the one true God), and the establishment of a single location for worship (Deut 12:1\u20137). After assuring himself of the likely authenticity of the scroll, the king then conducted a thorough cultic reform on its basis (2 Kgs 23). This included, among many other things, the termination of other places of worship within his realm. As for the location of the one true sanctuary, the king assumed that this must mean the temple in Jerusalem (2 Kgs 23).
\nThe reforms that the king enacted are so similar to the requirements of Deut 12\u201326 that modern scholars are confident that the scroll found in the temple must have been that portion of the book. Additions were then made to it, including collections of Levitical sermons that were delivered in support of the reform (chs. 1\u201311).
\nKing Josiah listens to the newly found scroll
\nJulius Schnorr von Carolsfeld. King Josiah listens to the newly found scrol. Woodcut for \u201cDie Bibel in Bildern\u201d, 1860. Josiah Hears the Torah. (Credit: Wikimedia Commons, PD-US)<\/p>\n
In the period of the Judges, prior to the rise of monarchy and centralized government, it was necessary to adjudicate disputes and to punish criminal behavior at the local level. In cases of homicide, cities of refuge were established to function as judicial instruments.
\nThe need for such destinations was intensified when King Josiah, acting under the authority of the newly found book of Deuteronomy, closed all sanctuaries in the land save for the temple in Jerusalem and thereby eliminated the possibility of asylum at altars throughout the land (Deut 19:1\u201313).
\nSince the Priestly writers accept the Deuteronomic doctrine of cult centralization, the need for cities of refuge will be, in their eyes, an ongoing one.
\nSix of the Levitical cities are to be set aside and designated as \u201ccities of refuge\u201d (v. 6), i.e., places of asylum (at least temporary) for those who have committed homicide. To these havens the slayer may flee, provided he can evade the \u201cavenger\u201d (v. 12) prior to arrival there. Once safely inside the city, an investigation will be conducted. In case of inadvertency (manslaughter), the slayer will be protected from clan vengeance but must remain in the city ever thereafter. Should he venture outside, he becomes \u201cfair game\u201d for the avenger. However, should the conclusion be reached that it has been a case of premeditated murder, then the slayer is to be turned over to the \u201cavenger\u201d for execution. [Clan Vengeance]<\/p>\n
Clan Vengeance
\nThis procedure, sometimes known as \u201cBlood Vengeance\u201d, was widespread in the ancient Near East and continues in some ares to the present. (A good overview of the general concept may be found in R. C. Dentan, \u201cRedeem, Redeemer, Redemption,\u201d in vol. 4 of IDB [R-Z], ed. George Arthur Buttrick [Nashville: Abingdon Press, 1962], 21\u201322. For particulars concerning the text in Numbers, see Excursus 75 and 76 in Milgrom, The JPS Torah Commentary: Numbers [Philadelphia: The Jewish Publication Society, 1990].)
\nTribes, and clans within them, existed long before Israel\u2019s settlement in the land of Canaan. They thus pre-date the establishment of monarchy (at the time of King Saul in the 11th century BC) and with it, the beginnings of centralized government. Consequently, it was necessary to adjudicate disputes and to punish criminal behavior at the local level. Such legal structures might remain in place long after a centralized national governance was established. Parallels may be found in societies throughout the modern world. In the United States, for example, the constitutionally established doctrine of \u201cstate\u2019s rights\u201d allows for both federal and state criminal statutes. Cases of murder, for example, are tried in state court (not a \u201cfederal case\u201d). Similarly, in the Islamic World, local courts may be guided by ancient precedents that are not operative at the national level.
\nIn cases of homicide (whether deliberate or inadvertent), it was the duty of the nearest kinsman of the deceased (called the g\u014d\u2019\u0113l hadd\u0101m, \u201cblood avenger\u201d) to avenge the death by taking the life of the slayer (or even of a family member). Whatever other motivation that may have been at work, this custom had the practical purpose of maintaining the balance of power between groups.
\nThe role of the g\u014d\u2019\u0113l (often translated as \u201credeemer\u201d or \u201cnext of kin\u201d in English Bibles) was not limited to cases of \u201cblood vengeance,\u201d however. It also refers, for example, to the kinsman whose duty it was, in the realm of finance, to repurchase real estate that might be lost to the family in cases of indebtedness. This regulation is outlined in Lev 25:25\u201328 and is in the background of the book of Ruth (where Boaz has the role of the g\u014d\u2019\u0113l). Another case involving land is reported at Jer 32:6\u201312. Regulation concerning release from debt-servitude is found at Lev 25:47\u201349.
\nThe Deity, in delivering Israel from slavery in Egypt, is described as a g\u014d\u2019\u0113l (Exod 6:6; 15:13). The title is also used to describe God\u2019s deliverance of the exiles from captivity in Babylonia (Isa 43:1; 44:22\u201323). The idea seems to be that the Deity has adopted Israel as a son (see Hos 11:1) and thus serves as next-of-kin to redeem him\/them.
\nThe identity of the g\u014d\u2019\u0113l follows an established genealogical order, grounded in the paternal side of the family: brother, uncle, and cousin (Lev 25:48\u201349).<\/p>\n
Israel\u2019s laws concerning homicide (and the issue of asylum) are distinct from those of neighboring societies, and in the following ways.
\n1. In Israel alone must the murderer inevitably pay with his life.
\n2. Vengeance for murder cannot be extended beyond killing the slayer. It must not include family members (or wider associates) of the guilty one; rather, it can only be directed toward the person who committed the act. Note the contrast here with the boast of Lamech: \u201cIf Cain in avenged sevenfold, truly Lamech seventy-seven fold\u201d (Gen 4:24).
\n3. Culpability depends upon intention; a distinction is to be made between premeditated murder and involuntary manslaughter. Nonetheless, the taking of human life is, in either case, an intrinsic offense against the Deity and must involve sanctions. The related category of inadvertent offense in cultic matters is discussed at Leviticus 4:1\u20135:13.
\n4. Monetary compensation cannot be paid in order to relieve the responsibility and thereby settle the case. [Monetary Compensation]<\/p>\n
Monetary Compensation
\nThis regulation in Numbers is in the strongest contrast to the famous law code of King Hammurabi of Babylonia, where punishment is scaled according to the status of the offender and the offended. See the discussion of lex talionis at Lev 24:19\u201320. Monetary compensation in cultic matters is discussed at Lev 5:14\u201316.<\/p>\n
5. Determination of the degree of guilt is to be made by an independent party (\u201cthe congregation,\u201d v. 24), once the slayer reaches one of the \u201ccities of refuge.\u201d That is, no executable verdict is to be rendered by the clan either of the slayer or of the slain. (By contrast, note the story told by the \u201cwise woman\u201d from Tekoa: a cry for blood revenge and its instant satisfaction has automatically arisen in the case of a slain brother, 2 Sam 14:1\u201311.)
\n6. The right of asylum is limited to case of involuntary manslaughter, while the deliberate murderer is turned over to the g\u014d\u2019\u0113l hadd\u0101m. [Asylum] [Comment on Details of Numbers 35]<\/p>\n
Asylum
\nIn earlier (pre-Priestly) narrative accounts, as in much of the ancient (and even medieval) world, it appears that asylum was automatically granted to anyone who entered a sanctuary and \u201cgrasped the horns of the altar\u201d (1 Kgs 1:49\u201353). \u201cThe basic premise is that those who touch the altar absorb its sanctity and are removed from and immune to the jurisdiction of the profane world\u201d (J. Milgrom, The JPS Torah Commentary: Numbers [Philadelphia: The Jewish Publication Society, 1990], 504). This likely is the basis for the claim of the Medieval Church that its personnel could not be tried in secular courts, a reflex that survives to the present in the protection of errant priests. However, this right was sometimes violated by monarchs, ancient and modern, who perceived it as a threat to their security (1 Kgs 2:28\u201335; cf. Exod 21:13\u201314).
\nThe Priestly writer substitutes cities of refuge for altars in view of Josiah\u2019s centralizing reform as a consequence of which there were no sanctuaries and altars outside Jerusalem. Moreover, according to Priestly regulations, non-priests (to say nothing of murderers!) were not to have access to the altar and thereby ritually pollute it.<\/p>\n
Comment on Details of Numbers 35
\nV. 4, \u201ca thousand cubits all around.\u201d Thus the minimum surrounding area, considering the town to be a mere \u201cdot,\u201d would be a square that is 2,000 cubits on each side. That is, it is 3,000 feet per side, for an area of 9,000,000 square feet or approximately 207 acres.
\nV. 12, \u201cbefore the congregation.\u201d The text is not specific about the constitution of this group, and it clearly cannot mean the entirety of Israel (as it usually does elsewhere in Leviticus and Numbers). Is this a representative group of leaders? Is it a court in Jerusalem, as Deut 17:8\u20139 might imply? In any case the tribunal seemingly sits for the trial outside the city of refuge (v. 25, \u201cshall send the slayer back to the original city of refuge\u201d; see also Josh 20:6).
\nVv. 16\u201319: Illustrated cases of premeditated murder by use of a weapon; see Deut 19:11.
\nVv. 20\u201321: Illustrative cases of malicious intent, without use of weapons, that result in death. The blood-avenger may act in such cases no less than in the previous category.
\nVv. 22\u201323: Illustrative cases of accidental death; see Deut 19:4\u20135. This type of slayer is also \u201cfair game\u201d for the blood-avenger, until he reaches a city of refuge or if he leaves it thereafter.
\nV. 27, \u201cno bloodguilt.\u201d The blood-avenger has not himself committed murder in such case.
\nV. 28, \u201cuntil the death of the high priest.\u201d Although cleared of a charge of murder, the inadvertent manslayer has taken a human life (created in the \u201cimage of God,\u201d Gen 1:27). There are almost always consequences of such action in Israel\u2019s law (even for animals! See Exod 21:28\u201329). Thus the innocent manslayer, should he escape the blood-avenger, must suffer exile in the city of refuge \u201cuntil the death of the high priest.\u201d After that, should the blood-avenger kill the manslayer, it would be an act of murder.
\nMoreover, since bloodshed ritually pollutes the land (vv. 33\u201334) and can lead to the expulsion of Israel from it (Lev 25:18; Ezek 36:16\u201321), preventive ritual action must be taken. The High Priest, whose task is to make atonement by means of sacrificial action, apparently was perceived to do so by his death.
\nVv. 30\u201334. This apparent attachment to the main text (note the formal conclusion to the previous section at v. 29) specifies what is to constitute allowable evidence. In its deliberations about murder versus unintentional manslaughter, the judicial body (\u201ccongregation,\u201d v. 24) must have the testimony of at least two witnesses: \u201cno one shall be put to death (i.e., turned over to the blood-avenger) on the testimony of a single witness\u201d (v. 30).<\/p>\n
Inheritance of Property: An Afterthought, 36:1\u201313<\/p>\n
It is a curiosity that this extension of the regulation in chapter 27 has been separated from that context and placed at the end of the book. Why is this so? It is likely that the regulation arose from the experience at least a generation later than that of chapter 27, i.e., when marriages outside the tribe were actually taking place). The present chapter, then, with its unique vocabulary, and slip-of-the-tongue in using the expression \u201cinheritance of our ancestors\u201d (see comment to v. 3), may be an editorial addition.
\nIt is sometimes the case that a judicial remedy creates an unforeseen problem with which future generations must come to terms. Such was the case with the ground-breaking decision made by Moses in chapter 27. The legal issue there had been: Should the economic base of a given clan (i.e., its allocation of land, located in a geographically separate area) be lost to daughters simply because their father had died without a male heir? Such was the legal reality that had faced the five daughters of Mr. Zelophehad, a member of the Transjordanian division of the tribe of Manasseh.
\nIt had been the decision of Moses, grounded in a divinely ordained \u201cstatute and ordinance,\u201d that \u201cyou shall pass his (i.e., the deceased father\u2019s) inheritance on to his daughter\u201d (27:8, 11). The land would then pass from the daughter to her sons, with the practical consequence that the woman served as a bridge between generations of male heirs.
\nThis solution presented an even deeper problem, however, as the leaders of the tribe of Manasseh (v. 1) soon came to realize. The possibility of a threat to the integrity of fixed tribal boundaries might arise from it. Tribal inheritance had been divinely ordained (v. 2; see 34:1\u20132) and thus the resultant assignments should remain perpetually intact. This ideal would begin to unravel, however, if daughters who had become heirs to ancestral property should then marry an Israelite from one of the other tribes. Should that happen, the real estate would become the property of the husband\u2019s clan and this would breach the integrity of tribal boundaries. Former tribal areas would quickly become a patchwork of claims by \u201coutsiders.\u201d Not even the regulations of the Jubilee Year (Lev 25), covering leased (\u201csold\u201d) but not inherited land, would restore it to the original allocation (vv. 3\u20134).
\nMoses quickly grasps the issues involved, consults the Deity for a decision, and announces the result: Daughters who have inherited property must marry within their own clan. By doing so, \u201cNo inheritance shall be transferred from one tribe to another\u201d (v. 9).
\nSince, apart from the ground-breaking decision concerning inheritance by daughters in chapter 27, the property of the deceased would have been inherited by his brothers (27:9), the decision is that the daughters of Zelophehad should marry the sons of the brothers, namely, their first-cousins (v. 11). Should they marry outside their tribe, they their inheritance would be forfeited to their uncles.
\nThe final verse of chapter 36 does not have the comprehensive sweep that one might expect as the conclusion of the entire book. It makes reference only to the material that has originated \u201cin the plains of Moab by the Jordan at Jericho.\u201d At most, this refers back only to 22:1 (where Israel arrives at this location); as a minimum, it has only 35:1 in view, where the Deity is said to have begun a legislative discourse at this location.
\nFurthermore, nothing is said about the death of Moses; nothing of the succession in military leadership by Joshua, provision for which had been outlined at 27:12\u201323. Those matters are only taken up near the end of the book of Deuteronomy (32:48\u201334:12). Consequently, some scholars have proposed that at least some of this material was once the conclusion of the book of Numbers. Into it would have been inserted the scroll of Deuteronomy (chs. 12\u201326 thereof) that was found in the temple at Jerusalem at the time of King Josiah (and its attendant sermonic materials). [Comment on Details of Numbers 36]<\/p>\n
Comment on Details of Numbers 36
\nV. 5, \u201cconcerning the word of the LORD.\u201d For the procedure of derivation of the divine word, see note to 25:5.
\nV. 2, \u201cmy lord.\u201d A term of respect for Moses (attested elsewhere, e.g., at 11:28; 12:11).
\nV. 3, \u201cthe inheritance of our ancestors.\u201d Since, in the literary context, the apportionment (\u201cinheritance\u201d) had only been made to the generation of the leaders who are speaking, this expression betrays that it comes from a later period.<\/p>\n
CONNECTIONS<\/p>\n
Geography of the Promised Land<\/p>\n
Careful readers of the Bible who desire to take it seriously will stop to ponder the fact that the geographical boundaries of the \u201cpromised land,\u201d as outlined in chapter 34 (and especially in Gen 15:18), do not correspond exactly with subsequent historical reality.
\n\u201cLiteralists\u201d will strive to reconcile the textual projection with reality at some point in Israel\u2019s history. Or, skeptics will see here evidence of the unreliability of the Bible in part or as a whole. By contrast, the informed reader will view this as an allowable (and otherwise attested) example of approximation, over-statement, or exaggeration (a literary reality that was discussed concerning chapter 31).
\nIt should be remembered that generations within ancient Israel itself (likely including the Priestly writer!) will have been aware of this small discrepancy (i.e., a promise that was not totally fulfilled), and that they \u201cblinked not an eye\u201d as a consequence. (Other such tensions are mentioned above in the discussion of Lev 9; Num 3:39; and of ch. 30 as viewed in the New Testament.)<\/p>\n
A Sense of Belonging<\/p>\n
The book of Numbers articulates a fundamental and universal human desire to \u201cbelong\u201d somewhere. It is a desire that many modern persons, living amidst strangers in massive urban complexes and disoriented by change, will well understand. In Israel\u2019s case, the desire had been honed by generations of grinding and brutal slavery in the land of Egypt. The result was a sense of displacement and powerlessness that could only be remedied by a land of their own, a land that would provide independence and economic security. Indeed, \u201cLand is a central, if not the central theme of biblical faith.\u201d Acquisition of it preoccupies the Pentateuchal writers, as does maintenance of it in the message of the Prophets and the loss and restoration of it in the literature of the Post-exilic Age.
\nOne can thus understand the massive population shifts to the \u201cNew World\u201d in the seventeenth through nineteenth centuries in order to escape the political and religious tyrannies of Europe, as well as the Zionist movement of the late nineteenth century that resulted in the formation of the modern State of Israel.
\nThe book of Numbers depicts the determination of God to provide a land of rest for a homeless people, and thus it becomes the chronicle of a people in transit and in search of a \u201cbetter place.\u201d When the shifting powers of history result in the loss of the land (successively to the Assyrians, Babylonians, Persians, Greeks, and finally the Romans), this also was understood to be an \u201cact of God\u201d in order to demonstrate to the powerful and self-reliant that land and security were not intrinsically theirs.
\nThe followers of Jesus came to regard themselves as \u201cstrangers and foreigners on the earth \u2026 seeking a homeland \u2026 a better country, that is, a heavenly one\u201d (Heb 11:13\u201316). In the meanwhile, the church sought to provide a location, a community, thus providing the sense of belonging that is crucial to the human spirit in an otherwise meaningless world.<\/p>\n
Culpability of the Executioner<\/p>\n
If an act of murder (deliberate homicide) triggers the death penalty (35:16\u201321) and even inadvertent manslaughter mandates lifelong exile (house arrest?) in one of the cities of refuge (until the death of the high priest [v. 25]), does similar culpability arise for the executioner (the g\u014d\u2019\u0113l hadd\u0101m)?
\nSuch a line of reasoning finds a modern equivalent that I have heard argued in courts of law: \u201cIf the Bible says, \u2018Thou shalt not kill,\u2019 is not the state doing that very thing in exercising the death-penalty?\u201d However, such an argument is invalid since the Bible is very clear about the distinction between murder and socially (or divinely) sanctioned execution. Non-culpable exception to the taking of human life (not listed in ch. 35) include (1) cases of self-defense (Exod 22:2 [Hebrew 22:1], where a homeowner kills a burglar out of fear for his own life), (2) judicial execution (often signalled by the expression \u201cshall be put to death,\u201d e.g., multiple situations at Exod 21:12\u201316; Lev 20:9\u201316), and (3) warfare (e.g., Num 31:1\u20138, which however results in corpse pollution, vv. 19\u201320; see Lev 21:1; Num 19:11\u201313).
\nConsequently, no valid opposition to capital punishment can be mounted on biblical grounds (in either of the Testaments). For those who desire to bring a theological perspective to the contemporary debate about capital punishment for murder, there is a large amount of biblical data (both descriptive and legislative) to which one may turn for information or guidance. That evidence uniformly authorizes the penalty of death for murder in Israel, throughout the period of the Bible, but it is within the context of the certainty of guilt and of equality before the law. No evidence to the contrary can be found when the texts are studied carefully, contrary to much writing by modern theologians and to proclamations by ecclesiastical structures. Nonetheless, those who would make a direct transfer from then to now, from what the Bible said to what it says concerning this topic, will be faced with great difficulties.
\nAmong the issues to be pondered in this regard are the following:
\n1. Israel\u2019s canonical regulations concerning execution were formulated within and for a theocratic society. That is, norms for behavior and sanctions in case of violation were understood to derive from the divine will.
\nCitizens of the United States, by contrast, live in a secular society. Although they may recite (in the \u201cPledge of Allegiance\u201d) a belief in \u201cone nation, under God,\u201d it is a perspective with no legal consequence or definition of \u201cGod.\u201d Indeed, the U. S. Constitution does not even mention God, and it forbids any \u201cestablishment of religion.\u201d Consequently, many of the capital offenses of the Bible are not crimes in our society and some of them are not even frowned upon by the population at large. So far is from reality is our self-image of being a \u201creligious\u201d nation that (according to a national survey about a decade ago) scarcely a majority of those who identified themselves as \u201cborn-again Christians\u201d could even name the four Gospels!
\nIn view of the pluralism of our society, guaranteed by the Constitution, should those who would take the Bible seriously seek to impose its norms by force upon the whole? In particular, should they seek biblical sanctions (including execution) against those who never accepted the Bible\u2019s covenant relationship in the first place?
\n2. Our society, in contrast to that of ancient Israel, makes a distinction between church and state. Only the latter can legally execute a murderer, and it does so for non-biblical reasons. Furthermore, the executioner is an agent of the state and not of the church. Should the religious community nonetheless support the State in this matter, with the justification that \u201cthe state\u2019s motive and goal may be non-biblical, but the end result is the same\u201d? If so, could such support also be given for execution in case of theft or arson, which were once capital crimes (but are not in the Bible)?
\n3. Israel\u2019s willingness to take a human life presupposed certainty as to guilt. Thus, in case of murder, testimony of two witnesses was required for conviction. Building upon this foundation, and aware of the frailties of human nature and the power of observation, the Rabbis of the Tannaitic period (first to third centuries AD) and of the Talmudic period (fourth to fifth centuries AD) examined witnesses so minutely that conviction was exceedingly difficult.
\nWhereas biblical and rabbinic courts would not allow circumstantial evidence in the trial of one accused of murder, modern technology has now made it, in some instances, more reliable than eyewitness testimony. Fidelity to the ancient demand for certainty, therefore, might require, for the modern Christian or Jew, some reversal of the kind of evidence that is adequate (witnesses being notoriously fallible). Nonetheless, fidelity to the Bible would require certitude, and not merely \u201cguilt beyond a reasonable doubt,\u201d since erroneous execution is beyond remedy.
\nShould one sanction execution on biblical grounds, without concern (indeed, demand) for its attendant safeguards?
\n4. It is a fundamental assumption of biblical jurisprudence that the socioeconomic status of the accused will have no bearing upon the verdict. The inequities that had been built into the codes of Israel\u2019s neighbors (advantages for the powerful and affluent) were well known to those who, under divine inspiration, formulated and edited Israel\u2019s sacred literature, and deliberate steps were apparently taken to eliminate them.
\nWhile inequity is not necessarily built into our modern judicial codes (tax law being an exception?), it nevertheless has resulted from a number of factors, among them: (a) discretion by judges and district attorneys; (b) illogic, prejudice, and sentiment on the part of jurors; and (c) the setting of attorney fees by free market standards (i.e., the ablest attorneys may charge the highest fees and thus justice may be de facto for sale to the highest bidder). Thus, the inequities of our system, statues of \u201cBlind Justice\u201d on courthouse facades to the contrary, are glaringly evident. One\u2019s chances of being convicted, sentenced to die, and actually executed are apparently related to one\u2019s sex, race, and income. Indeed, in 1972 the U. S. Supreme Court ruled that under existing laws execution was so \u201charsh, freakish, and arbitrary\u201d that it constituted \u201ccruel and unusual punishment in violation of the Eighth and Fourteenth Amendments\u201d (Furman v. Georgia, 408 U. S. 238). The opinion of Justice William O. Douglas in that case contained the following statement: \u201cOne searches our chronicles in vain for the execution of any member of the affluent strata of this society.\u201d State legislatures then enacted new statutes that were designed to meet the Court\u2019s objections, and one type (mandatory execution for specified crimes) has subsequently been ruled unconstitutional under the same amendments (Woodson v. North Carolina, 428 U. S. 280).
\nAs long as glaring inequities in conviction and sentencing remain in our modern secular society, should conscientious Jews and Christians appeal to the jurists of ancient Israel in support of the death penalty? Should such conscientious persons work for the abolition of the penalty, or for the elimination of the inequity?
\nIn sum: Although there is no biblical basis for objection to the death penalty per se (and indeed there is a mandate to carry it out within an autonomous community whose ultimate authority is the Bible), the divergences between Israelite society and our own raise very serious questions with which Church and Synagogue must struggle.<\/p>\n
series Smyth & Helwys Bible Commentary
\ntitle Leviticus\u2013Numbers
\nyear 2005<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
NUMBERS INTRODUCTION \u201cNUMBERS\u201d? \u201cNumbers\u201d!! The very word has the potential to awaken unpleasant memories in many readers and thus to create a negative perception of this biblical book even prior to beginning to read it. Should the intrepid reader nonetheless decided to proceed, the initial negative perception may soon turn to reality. One in fact … <\/p>\n