sn The Book of Numbers is the fourth book of the Pentateuch, traditionally called the Law of Moses. It provides a record of the experience of the Israelites in the wilderness wanderings, and records the laws for the camp as it journey from place to place. The book focuses on the difficulties of the Israelites due to their lack of faith, rebellion, and apostasy. It also records God’s protection of his people from opposition from without. The book makes a fitting contribution to the collection of holy writings as it shows the spiritual and physical progression of the company of the redeemed towards the promised land. The book has to be studied in conjunction with the other books of the Pentateuch. It builds on the promises made to Abraham in Genesis and the redemption from bondage in Exodus; it completes the cultic instructions for Israel that were laid down in Leviticus, and it concerns the worship in and the movement of the shrine that was built in Exodus. But the information here, both legal and historical, was not the major concern in those books. The book gets its title from the two censuses taken of the numbers of the people, one at the beginning of the wanderings and the other at the end (although the Hebrew title is from the beginning of the book, bammidbar [rBd=M!B^] “in the wilderness”). In these lists particular emphasis is given to the leaders of the clans, a theme that will continue in the book as the focus is on how the leaders function in all the trials and temptations of the journey. The book is obviously a unity, tracing the progression of events generally through the wilderness experience. It follows events in the historical order. But down through the years biblical critical scholars have concluded that this book, like the rest of the Pentateuch, is a late, composite work. This issue is to large to discuss in a note here; but at least it can be said that a careful and objective look at the data, both the biblical text and the extra-biblical material (other texts and types of literature as well as archaeological data) supports the unity and the antiquity of the book. Scholars have always known that the writer of this material—whom conservatives hold to be Moses in accord with the biblical records and traditional interpretation—used sources in the composition. But this idea is vastly different than the idea that the entire work was made up on differing and sometimes contradicting sources that were dated far later. There are so many serious difficulties in the views that adopt source criticism as the explanation of the text that it should be rejected soundly. And the serious skepticism of many proponents of the critical view is simply unwarranted; historical details and records of supernatural intervention must not be jettisoned simply because they do not meet modern criteria of scholarship. The material in this book is essentially a theological interpretation of historical events, and as such it stands as an integral part of the revelation of God. In the study of the Book of Numbers, when these issues of the nature of the text are significant to the interpretation and acceptance of the text, the notes will comment on them briefly. The indication at the outset of the book is that Moses had a good number of people who were able to help him compile the statistics and the facts of the wandering community, so that one need not accept the liberal view that most of the material is fictitious. In Num 1:16-18 there is a group of leaders known as sot^erim [<yr!F=v)]. This term was used in Exod 5:16-19 to describe the officers or foremen of the Israelites. They were appointed supervisors of the clans by Moses, and by the time of Joshua (Josh 1:10) they were a literary guild. The Hebrew word, cognate with Akkadian sataru, means “to write.” These people were to Israel what the scribes and chroniclers were to the pagan nations. These folks assisted Moses and the priests in their keeping of records. So no matter what they were called from time to time, there was a group of literate people who could keep the records and preserve the information from the very beginning. There work matches the activities of scribes in the ancient world who used all the literary devices to preserve the material. There is no reason to doubt that the events recorded were attested to and preserved by such eye-witnesses. But their work would have been essentially to serve the leader, Moses. The book essentially follows the order of the events chronologically, more or less. Where it departs from that order it does so for literary or theological reasons. At the center of the theological concern is the tabernacle, its significance to the faith, and therefore the care in using it and in moving it. Its importance explains the presence and the arrangement of the ritual laws. With the records and statistics provided for him, Moses could then introduce into the record the great events in the wilderness experience of Israel, which were to become warnings and encouragements for all time. Most of this material comes from the two years at the beginning of the experience and the two years at the end. But this itself may be a literary device (merism) to show the nature of the wanderings throughout. The Hebrew text of the Book of Numbers has been preserved fairly well. It has not been preserved as well as Leviticus, which was most important to the ministry of the priests and Levites. But in comparison with some of the prophetic writings, Numbers is in good shape. The problems will be discussed as they come up in the passages. So Numbers is essentially a part of the unfolding revelation of the Torah, the Law. It shows God’s faithfulness to his covenant plan, and to his covenant people; but it also shows the problems incurred by the people’s lack of faith and obedience. The book then focuses frequently on the nature of the holy LORD God, for at the center of all this material is the person and the works of the LORD. This provided the standard for the faith and practice of the people. The principles found in the events of Numbers have been used in the NT for Christians, and therefore often emerge in Christian preaching and hymn-writing.
¹sn For this chapter, see W. F. Albright, “The Administrative Divisions of Israel and Judah, JPOS 5 (1925):17-54; A. Cody, A History of Old Testament Priesthood (Rome: PBI, 1969); A. Lucas, “The Number of the Israelites at the Time of the Exodus,” PEQ 76 (1944):351-364; G. E. Mendenhall, “The Census Lists of Numbers 1 and 26,” JBL 77 (1958):52-66; E. Nielsen, “The Levites in the Old Testament,” ASTI 3 (1964):16-27; L. A. Snijders, “The Meaning of ‘zar’ in the Old Testament,” OTS 10 (1954):1-154; and J. W. Wenham, “Large Numbers in the Old Testament,” TynBull 18 (1967):19-53.
²sn The holy name is “Yahweh.” This is the ancient name of the covenant community, used and worshiped from the very beginning. The name was explained or interpreted by Moses for the Israelites by the etymological connection to the verb”to be.” God said that its significance was “I AM that I AM” (‘ehyeh ‘aser ‘ehyeh [hy#h=o# rv#o& hy#h=o#] using the first person of the verb; the name, the third person of the verb, would therefore mean “He is.” The name indicates that God is the sovereign LORD of creation, the eternal God, the covenant Lord; he is sovereignly independent of all creation, but he is intimately involved with all his people. But most English translations do not use it, but follow the Jewish custom of using substitute words for the holy name, such as “the LORD,” or “the Eternal One,” and a number of others. The name Yahweh is his personal name, and there is no reason for believers not to use it. But some people do resist using it for pious or even superstitious reasons.
³tn The book begins with the grammatical form of the waw consecutive and the preterite, “and he spoke.” This does not indicate that the book is a continuation of the previous material, for in that case certain other books in the cannon would have to be linked with the writings of other people just because they followed them. This form is simply the narrative verb; the conjunction need not be translated. The verb should not be limited to a literary formula, but does indicate the divine source of the command for Moses. God was speaking to Moses throughout the wilderness wanderings from the tent, and so the ideas are from him, and not from the “will of man.”
⁴sn This was on of several names by which the tabernacle was known. This was the tent with its furnishings that the Israelites built according to the Book of Exodus. While that tabernacle was being built, the LORD met with Moses in a tent of meeting nearby (Exod 33:7); but when the project was finished, the title was transferred to the tabernacle. It may be that the expression “tent of meeting” refers to the inner tabernacle where God revealed himself to Moses and Aaron, and the word “tabernacle” refers to the whole shrine, the curtained structure with all its contents. This would mean that God addressed Moses from between the cherubim in the holy of holies (see R. A. Cole, Exodus, p. 191). The point is clear, though—the shrine was functioning now as the sign of God’s actual presence and leadership among his people.
⁵sn The exact location of Mount Sinai has been debated for some time. The traditional view from very early times is that located in the south, Jebel Musa, south of the monastery of St. Catherine. The other plausible suggestion is Ras es-Safsafeh, which is on the other end of the valley near the monastery. The mountain is also called Horeb in the Bible. The wilderness of Sinai would refer to the large plain that is at the base of the mountain. See further, A. P. Stanley, Sinai and Palestine (New York:A. C. Armstrong, 1905); G. E. Wright, IDB, 4:376-378; and G. I. Davies, The Way of the Wilderness (Cambridge, CUP, 1979).
⁶sn The English word “wilderness” is workable for the Hebrew term, because it describes land that is wild. The term “desert” works if one thinks of land deserted by people. But “desert” suggests the idea of an arid land without growth. The word must not be pressed to mean sand dunes; it describes land that has rocks, canyons, oases, shrubs and trees occasionally, some animal life, and of course sand.
⁷tn The construction uses the infinitive construct of yasa’ [oXy], “to go out,” with a suffix serving as the subjective genitive, and the lamed preposition providing the temporal indication: “according to the going out of them.” The Israelites are clearly intended as the subject.
⁸sn This means that the Israelites had spent nine months at Sinai, because they had arrived there in the third month following the exodus. This account does not follow a strict chronology (see Num 9:1), but the difference of one month in the narrative is not a critical difference, but a literary general reference. Here begins a new section of major importance to the future of the nation—the numbering for war and for settlement.
⁹tn The construction is literally “lift up the head[s],” s^e’u ‘et ro’s [vor) to@ WoC=]. This idiom for taking a census occurs elsewhere (Exod 30:12; Lev 5:24; Num 1:24; etc.). The idea is simply that of counting heads to arrive at the base for the standing army. This is a different event than the one recorded in Exodus 30:11-16, which was taken for a different purpose altogether. The verb is plural, indicating that Moses had help in taking the census.
¹⁰tn Heb “the congregation of Israel.”
¹¹tn The tribe (“matteh” [hF#m^] or “sebet” [Fb#v@] ) is the main category. The family groups or clans (“misp^ehot” [tO?P=v=m!]) and the household or families (“bet ‘abot” [tObo tyB@]) were sub-divisions of the tribe.
¹²tn This clause simply has “in/with the number of the names of every male with respect to their skulls [individually].” Counting heads, or every skull, simply meant that each person was to be numbered in the census. Except for the Levites, no male was exempt from the count.
¹³tn The verb paqad (dqP) means “to visit, appoint, muster, number.” The word is a common one in Scripture. It has as its basic meaning the idea of “determining the destiny” of someone, by appointing, mustering, or visiting. When God “visits,” it is a divine intervention for either blessing or cursing. Here it is the taking of a census for war (see Gunnel Andre, Determining the Destiny, PQD in the Old Testament).
¹⁴tn The construction uses the participle “going out” followed by the noun “army.” It describes everyone “going out in a military group,” meaning serving in the army. It was the duty of every able-bodied Israelite to serve in this “peoples” army. There were probably exemptions for the infirm or the crippled, but every male over twenty was chosen. For a discussion of warfare, see P. C. Craigie, The Problem of War in the Bible (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1978), and P. D. Miller, “The Divine Council and the Prophetic Call to War,” VT 18 (1968):100-107.
¹⁵tn The test simply has “from twenty years old and higher.”
¹⁶tn Heb “and up.”
¹⁷tn The noun saba’ [obX] means “army” or “military group.” But the word can also be used for non-military divisions of labor (Num 4:3).
¹⁸tn Heb “and with you”
¹⁹tn The construction uses the noun in a distributive sense: “a man, a man for a tribe,” meaning a man for each tribe.
²⁰tn The clause expresses a distributive function, “a man” means “each man.”
²¹sn See J. R. Bartlett, “The Use of the Word XXX as a Title in the Old Testament,” VT 19 (1969):1-10.
²²tn The verb is ‘amad (dmu) “to stand.” It literally then is, “who will stand with you.” They will help in the count, but they will also serve as leaders as the camp moves from place to place.
²³tn The preposition lamed (l=) prefixed to the name could be taken in the sense of “from,” but could also be “with regard to” (specification).
²⁴sn This name and Ammishadday below have the theophoric element sadday (yD^v^), “the Almighty.” It would mean “the Almighty is my rock”; the later name means “the Almighty is my kinsman.” Other theophoric elements in the passage are “father,” “brother,” and “God.”
²⁵sn Nahshon was an ancestor of Boaz and David, and therefore of Christ (Luke 3:32-33).
²⁶tc There is a textual difficulty with this verb. The Greek form uses r and not d, giving the name Ra‘oul. There is even some variation in the Hebrew traditions, but BHS has preferred the name Deuel.
²⁷tc The form has a k^etib-qere’ problem, but the sentence calls for the q^ere’, the passive participle in the construct—“the called of . . . .” These men were God’s choice, and not Moses’, or their own choice. He announced who they would be, and then named them. So they were truly “called” (qara’ [orq]). The other reading is probably due to a copyist’s error.
²⁸tn The word is nasi’ (oyC!n), “exalted one, prince, leader.” These were men apparently revered or respected in their tribes, and so the clear choice to assist Moses with the leadership. See further, E. A. Speiser, “Background and Function of the Biblical Nasi’,” CBQ 25 (1963):111-117.
²⁹tn Heb “exalted ones of the tribes of their fathers.” The earlier group of elders was chosen by Moses at the advice of his father-in-law. This group represents the few leaders of the tribes that were chosen by God, a more literate group apparently, who were the forerunners of the sot^erim (<yr!F=v)).
³⁰tc The text has ’alpe (yP@l=o^), “thousands of.” There is some question over this reading in the MT, however. The community groups that have these leaders were larger tribes; but there is little certainty about the size of the divisions.
³¹tn The verb is the hiphil of the root qahal (lhq), meaning “to call, assemble”; the related noun is an “assembly.”
³²tn The verb is the hithpael preterite form, wayyityaldu (WDl=y~t=Y!w~). The cognate noun tol^edot (tOdl=OT) is the word that means “genealogies, family records, records of ancestry.” The root is yalad (dly), “to bear, give birth to.” Here they were recording their family connections, and not, of course, producing children. The verbal stem seems to be both declarative and reflexive.
³³tn The verb is supplied. The text simply has “in/with the number of names of those who are twenty years old and higher according to their skulls.”
³⁴tn The form is p^equdehem (<h#yd@WqP=), the passive participle with the pronominal suffix. This indicates that the number came to 46,500, but it specifically refers to “those numbered.”
³⁵sn There has been much discussion about the numbers in the Israelite wilderness experience. The immediate difficulty for even the casual reader is the enormous number of the population. If indeed there were 603, 550 men twenty years of age and older who could fight, the total population of the exodus community counting women and children would have been well over a million, or even two million as some would calculate it. This is not a figure that the Bible ever gives, but given the sizes of families the estimate would not be far off. This is a staggering number to have cross the Sea, drink from the oases, or assemble in the plain by Sinai. It is not a question of whether or not God could provide for such a number; it is rather a problem of logistics for a population of that size in that period of time. The problem is not with the text itself, but with the interpretation of the word ‘elep ([l#o#) , traditionally translated “thousand.” The word certainly can be taken as “thousand,” and most of is. But in view of the problem of the large number here, some scholars have chosen one of the other meanings attested in literature for this word, perhaps “troop,” or “family,” or “tent group,” even though a word for “family” has already been used (see A. H. McNeile, Book of Numbers, p.7; J. Garstang, Joshua-Judges, p. 120; John Bright, History of Israel, p. 144). Another suggestion is to take the word as a “chief” or “captain” based on Ugaritic usage (see R. E. D. Clarke, “The Large Numbers of the Old Testament,” Journal of the Transactions of the Victory Institute 87 [1955]:82-92; and J. W. Wenham, “Large Numbers in the Old Testament,” Tyndale Bulletin 18 [1967]:19-53). This interpretation would reduce the size of the Israelite army to about 18,000 men from a population of about 72,000 people. That is a radical change from the traditional reading, and may be too arbitrary an estimate. A more unlikely calculation following the idea of a new meaning would attempt to divide the numbers, and use the first part to refer to the units, and the second the measurement (e.g., 65 thousand and four hundred would become 65 units of four hundred). Another approach has been to study the numbers rhetorically, analyzing the numerical values of letters and words. But this method, known as gematria, came in much later than the biblical period (see for it G. Fohrer, Introduction to the Old Testament p. 184; and A. Noordtzij, Numbers, p. 24). On this system the numbers for “the sons of Israel” would be 603. But the number of the people in the MT is 603,550. Another rhetorical approach is that which says the text used exaggerations in the numbers on an epic scale to make the point of God’s blessing. Allen’s view that the numbers have been magnified by a factor of ten, which would mean the army was only 60,000 men, seems every bit as arbitrary as Wenham’s view to get down to 18,000 (see Exodus, in The Expositor’s Bible Commentary, ed. by Gaebelein, pp. 680ff. Moreover, such views cannot be harmonized with the instructions in the chapter for them to count every individual skull—that seems very clear. This is not the same kind of general expression one finds in “Saul has killed his thousands, David his ten thousands” (1 Sam 18:7). There one expects the bragging and the exaggerations. But in a text of numbering each male, to argue that the numbers have been inflated ten-fold to form the rhetoric of praise for the way God has blessed the nation demands a much more convincing argument than has been given. On the surface it seems pleasing; but it raises a lot of questions. Everything in Exodus and Numbers attests to the fact that the Israelites were in a population explosion, that their numbers were greater than their Egyptian overlords. Pharaoh had attempted to counter their growth by killing males from the ranks. That only two midwives are named must be taken to mean that they were heads of the guilds, for two could not service a population—even of the smaller estimate given above. But even though the size had to have been great and seen as a threat, we are at a loss to know exactly how to determine it. There is clearly a problem with the word “thousand” here and in many places in the OT, as the literature will show; but the problem cannot really be solved without additional information. The suggestions proposed so far seem to be rather arbitrary attempts to reduce the number to a less-embarrassing total, one that would seem more workable in the light of contemporary populations and armies, as well as space and time for the people’s movement in the wilderness. An army of 10,000 or 20,000 men in those days would have been a large army; an army of 600,000 (albeit a people’s army, which may mean that only a portion of the males would actually fight at any time—as was true at Ai) is large even by today’s standards. But the count was literal, and the totals calculated accordingly, totals which match other passages in the text. If some formula is used to reduce the thousands in this army, then there is the problem of knowing what to do when a battle has only five thousand, or three thousand men. One can only conclude that on the basis of what we know the word should be left with the translation “thousand,” no matter what difficulties this might suggest to the reader. One should be cautious, though, in speaking of a population of two million, knowing that there are serious problems with the calculation of that number, if not with the word “thousand” itself. It is very doubtful that the population of the wilderness community was in the neighborhood of two million. Nevertheless, until a more convincing explanation of the word “thousand” or the calculation of the numbers is provided, one should retain the reading of the MT but note the difficulty with the large numbers.
³⁶tc Some texts have omitted “those that were numbered of them,” to preserve the literary pattern of the text. The omission is supported by the absence of the expression in the Greek as well as in some MT MSS. Most modern commentators follow this.
³⁷tc The verse does not have the preposition, only “the descendants of Naphtali.”
³⁸tn The construction uses both the passive participle happ^equdim (<yd!WqP=h^) and the verb paqad (dqP), giving a literal translation of “these were the numbered ones, whom Moses and Aaron numbered.”
³⁹tn Heb “they were one man for the house of his fathers.”
⁴⁰tn Literally the text has, “and all the numbered of the Israelites were according to their families.” The verb in the sentence is actually without a complement (see v. 46).
⁴¹tn The waw on this word indicates a disjunction with the previous sequence of reports. It may be taken as a contrastive clause, translated “but” or “however.”
⁴²tn The construction is unexpected, for Levites would be from the tribe of Levi. The note seems more likely to express that all these people were organized by tribal lineage, and so too the Levites, according to the tribe of their fathers—individual families of Levites.
⁴³tc The form in the text is hotpaq^edu (Wdq=Pt=h); if this is correct, then it is an isolated instance of the reflexive of the Qal of paqad (dqP). Some, however, explain the form as the hithpael without the doubling of the middle letter and with a compensatory lengthening of the vowel before it (Gray, Numbers, p. 10).
⁴⁴tn The infinitive construct of ‘amar (rmo) does not necessarily have to be translated, but could be taken simply as the indicator of direct discourse.
⁴⁵sn From the giving of the Law on the priesthood was the prerogative of the tribe of Levi. There were, however, members of other tribes who served as priests from time to time (see Judg 17:5).
⁴⁶tn The construction has literally, “only the tribe of Levi you shall not number.” The Greek text rendered the particle ‘ak (Eo^) forcefully with “see to it that” or “take care that.” For the uses of this form, see R. J. Williams, Hebrew Syntax, par. 388-389.
⁴⁷tn Heb “lift up their head.”
⁴⁸tn Heb “in the midst of the sons of Israel.”
⁴⁹tn The same verb translated “number” (paqad [dqP]) is now used to mean “appoint” (hapqed [dq@p=h^), which focuses more on the purpose of the verbal action of numbering people. Here the idea is that the Levites were appointed to take care of the tabernacle. On the use of this verb with the Levites’ appointment, see M. Gertner, “The Masorah and the Levites,” VT 10 (1960):252.
⁵⁰tn The Hebrew name used here is miskan ha‘edut (tWdu@h /K^v=m!) . The tabernacle or dwelling place of the LORD was given this name because it was here that the tablets of the Law were kept. The whole shrine was therefore a reminder (‘edut, a “warning sign” or “testimony”) of the stipulations of the covenant. For the ancient Near Eastern customs of storing the code in the sanctuaries, see M. Kline, The Treaty of the Great King, pp. 14-19; and The Structure of Biblical Authority, pp. 35,36. Other items were in the ark in the beginning, but by the days of Solomon only the tablets were there (1 Kgs 8:9).
⁵¹tn The imperfect tense here is an obligatory imperfect telling that they are bound to do this since they are appointed for this specific task.
⁵²tn The addition of the pronoun before the verb is emphatic—they are the ones who are to attend to the tabernacle. The verb used is sarat (trv) in the piel, indicating that they are to serve, minister to, attend to all the details about this shrine.
⁵³tn The construction uses the infinitive construct with the temporal preposition; the “tabernacle” is then the following genitive. Literally it is “and in the moving of the tabernacle,” meaning, “when the tabernacle is supposed to be moved,” i.e., when people are supposed to move it. The verb nasa‘ (usn) means “pull up the tent pegs and move,” or more simply, “journey.”
⁵⁴tn Here we have the parallel construction using the infinitive construct in a temporal adverbial clause.
⁵⁵tn Heb “raise it up.”
⁵⁶tn The word used here is zar (rz), normally translated “stranger” or “outsider.” It is most often used for a foreigner, an outsider, who does not belong in Israel, or who, although allowed in the land, may be viewed with suspicion. But here it seems to include even Israelites other than the tribe of Levi.
⁵⁷tc Instead of “wrath” the Greek text has “sin,” focusing the emphasis on the human error and not on the wrath of God. This may have been a conscious change to explain the divine wrath.
⁵⁸tn The main verb of the clause is the perfect tense with the waw consecutive, w^esam^eru (Wrm=vw+) meaning they “shall guard, protect, watch over, care for.” It may carry the same obligatory nuance as the preceding verbs because of the sequence. The object used with this is the cognate noun mismeret (tr#m#v=m!). “The Levites must care for the care of the tabernacle.” The cognate intensifies the construction to stress that they are responsible for this care.
¹sn For this chapter, see C. E. Douglas, “The Twelve Houses of Israel,” JTS 37 (1936):49-56; C. C. Roach, “The Camp in the Wilderness: A Sermon on Numbers 2:2,” Int 13 (1959):49-54; and G. St. Clair, “Israel in Camp: A Study,” JTS 8 (1907):185-217.
²tn The infinitive construct need not be translated in this kind of construction; it serves to introduce the direct discourse to follow.
³tn Heb “a man by his own standard . . . .”
⁴tn The imperfect tense is to be taken in the nuance of instruction.
⁵tn Heb “of/for the house of their fathers.”
⁶tn The Hebrew expression minneged (dg#N#m!) means “from before” or “opposite, facing” and “at some distance” or “away from the front of” (see BDB 617b).
⁷sn The Israelites were camping as a military camp, each tribe with the standards and emblems of the family. The standard was the symbol fastened to the end of a pole and carried to battle. It served to rally the tribe to the battle. The Bible nowhere describes these; but the serpent emblem of Numbers 21:8,9 may give a clue. But they probably did not have shapes of animals in view of the prohibition in the Decalogue. The standards may have been smaller for the families than the ones for the tribes. See further K. A. Kitchen, “Some Egyptian Background to the Old Testament,” TynBull 5,6 (1960):11; and T. W. Mann, Divine Presence and Guidance in Israelite Tradition (Baltimore: Johns Hopkins, 1969), pp. 169-173.
⁸tn The sentence begins with a waw on a word that is not a finite verb, indicating a new section begins here. The verbal form is a participle with the article used substantivally, with the meaning “and/now those camping.” Many modern translations simply smooth it out to form a finite verb, and render it “[the divisions of Judah] shall camp.”
⁹tc The two synonyms might seem to be tautological, but this is fairly common and therefore acceptable in Hebrew prose (cf. Exod 26:18; 38:13; etc.).
¹⁰tn The sentence actually has “[those camping . . . are] the standard of the camp of Judah according to their divisions.”
¹¹tn Or “will be.”
¹²tc The expression “and his divisions and those numbered of them” is somewhat tautological. The words are synonyms used for statistical purposes, and so neither should be simply deleted.
¹³tn Heb “by him” [i.e., Judah].
¹⁴tn This part has been supplied; the text simply has “the tribe of Zebulun.”
¹⁵tn The verb is nasa‘ (usn), “to journey, travel, set out,” and here, “to move camp.” Judah will go first, or, literally, at the head of the nation, when they begin to travel.
¹⁶tn Here and throughout the line is literally “[under] the standard of the camp of Reuben . . . according to their divisions.”
¹⁷tn The text simply has “and the tribe of Gad.”
¹⁸tc The Hebrew expression is ‘al-yado (Ody-lu^), “upon his hand.” This clearly refers to a specifically designated place for each man. The Hebrew text suggests relocating the expression to 2:2, but that is unwarranted.
¹⁹tn Here too the text simply has “and the tribe of Benjamin.”
²⁰tn The text has “and the tribe of Naphtali.”
²¹tn The Hebrew is ken (/K@ ), “thus, so.”
¹sn For significant literature for this chapter, see: M. Aberbach and L. Smolar, “Aaron, Jeroboam, and their Golden Calves,” JBL 86 (1967):129-140); G. Brin, “The First-born in Israel in the Biblical Period,” Dissertation, Tel Aviv, 1971; S. H. Hooke, “Theory and Practice of Substitution,” VT 2 (1952):2-17; and J. Morgenstern, “A Chapter in the History of the High Priesthood,” AJSL 55 (1938):1-24.
²tn The construction is w^e’elleh tol^edot (tOdl=OT hL#o@w+) was traditionally translated “now these are the generations,” much as it was translated throughout the book of Genesis. The noun can refer to records, stories, genealogies, names, and accounts of people. Here is is the recorded genealogical list with assigned posts included. Like Genesis, it is a heading of a section, and not a colophon as some have suggested (R. K. Harrison insists that it is a colophon and should end chapter 2. But if that is followed in the Pentateuch, it creates difficulty throughout the narratives [Numbers, p. 62; but see my discussion in the Introduction of Creation and Blessing). It is here similar to Exodus: “these are the names of.”
³tn The expression in the text (“in the day of”) is idiomatic for “when.”
⁴tn The verb masah (?vm) means “to anoint”; here the form modifies the “priests.” The service of consecration was carried out with anointing oil (Exod 30:30). The verb is used for the anointing of kings as well as priests in the OT, and so out of that derived the technical title “Messiah” for the coming ideal king—the “Anointed One.”
⁵tn The idiomatic expression used here is from Leviticus 8; it literally is “he filled their hand” (mille’ yadam [<dy oL@m!]). In the ordination service Moses placed some of the meat from the sacrifice in the hand of the ordinand, and this signified what he was going to be about—having his hand full, or being consecrated to the priesthood. There is some evidence that this practice or expression was also known in Mesopotamia. In modern ordination services a NT or a Bible may be placed in the ordinand’s hand—it is what the ministry will be about. In this verse the expression is in a relative clause: “who he filled their hand” means “whose hands he filled,” or “whom he consecrated.”
⁶tn The form is an infinitival construction for the word for the priest, showing the purpose for the filling of the hands.
⁷tn The verb form is the preterite with the waw consecutive, literally “and Nadab died.” Some commentators wish to make the verb a past perfect, rendering it “and Nadab had died,” but this is not necessary. In tracing through the line from Aaron it simply reports that the first two sons died. The reference is to the event recorded in Lev 10 where the sons brought “strange” or foreign” fire to the sanctuary.
⁸tc This initial clause is omitted in one Hebrew MS, the Samaritan Text, and the Vulgate.
⁹tn The form b^ehaqribam (<br!q=h^B=) is the hiphil infinitive construct functioning as a temporal clause: “when they brought near,” meaning, “when they offered.” The verb qarab (brq) is familiar to students of the NT because of “Qorban—its a gift.”
¹⁰sn The meaning of “strange” fire is probably foreign fire, that is, fire not brought from the main altar but from outside the camp. In view of the way that “strange” can be used in the Bible, it may be that the fire is pagan.
¹¹sn The two young priests had been cut down before they had children; the ranks of the family of Aaron were thereby cut in half in one judgment from God. The significance of the act of judgment was to show that the priests had to sanctify the LORD before the people—they were to be examples that the sanctuary and its contents were distinct.
¹²tn The verb is the piel preterite from the root kahan (/hK), “to function as a priest” or “to minister.”
¹³tn The expression “in the presence of” can also mean “during the lifetime of” (see Gen 11:28; see also BDB, #818b).
¹⁴sn The use of the verb qarab (brq) forms an interesting word play in the passage. The act of making an offering is described by this verb, as was the reference to the priests’ offering of strange fire. Now the ceremonial presentation of the priests is expressed by the same word—they are being offered to God.
¹⁵tn The verb literally means “make it [the tribe] stand” (w^e‘amadta ’oto [Oto) Td+m^u&h^w+]). The verb is the hiphil perfect with a waw consecutive; it will take the same imperative nuance as the form before it, but follow in sequence (“and then”). This refers to the ceremonial presentation in which the tribe would take its place before Aaron, that is, stand before him and await their assignments. The Levites will function more like a sacred guard than anything else, for the had to protect and care for the sanctuary when it was erected and when it was transported (see J. Milgrom, Studies in Levitical Terminology [Berkeley: U. of California, 1970]:1:8-10).
¹⁶tn The verb w^eser^etu (Wtr+v@w+) is the piel perfect with a waw consecutive; it carries the same volitional force as the preceding verb forms, but may here be subordinated in the sequence to express the purpose of result of the preceding action.
¹⁷tn The text uses the perfect tense of samar (rmv) with a waw consecutive to continue the instruction of the preceding verse. It may be translated “and they shall keep” or “they must/are to keep,” but in this context it refers to their appointed duties. The verb is followed by its cognate accusative—“they are to keep his keeping,” or as it is often translated, “his charge.” This would mean whatever Aaron needed them to do. But the noun is also used for the people in the next phrase, and so “charge” cannot be the meaning here. The verse is explaining that the Levites will have duties to perform to meet the needs of Aaron and the congregation.
¹⁸tn The form is the qal infinitive construct from ‘abad (dbu), “to serve, to work”; it is taken here as a verbal noun and means “by (or in) serving” (see R. J. Williams, Hebrew Syntax, #195). This explains the verb “keep [his charge}.” Here too the form is followed by a cognate accusative; they will be there to “serve the service” or “work the work.”
¹⁹tn The construction uses the infinitive construct (epexegetically) followed by its cognate accusative. It would convey “to serve the service of the tabernacle,” but more simply it may be rendered as “serving.” Their spiritual and practical service is to serve.
sn The Levites had the duty of taking care of all the tabernacle and its furnishings, especially in times when it was to be moved. But they were also appointed to be gate-keepers (2 Kgs 22:4; 1 Chr 9:19) in order to safeguard the purity of the place and the activities that went on there. Their offices seem to have then become hereditary in time (1 Sam 1:3); they even took on more priestly functions, such as pronouncing the benediction (Deut 10:8). See further R. de Vaux, Ancient Israel (London: Darton, Longman, and Todd, 1961), p. 348.
²⁰tn The verb w^enatattah (hTt^nw+) is normally “give.” Here, though, the context refers to the assignment of the Levites to the priests for their duties. The form is the perfect tense with the waw consecutive, continuing the sequence for the future/instruction.
²¹tn This emphasis is derived from the simple repetition of the passive participle, n^etunim n^etunim (<n!Wtn+ <n!Wtn+). See GKC, # 123e. The forms serve as the predicate with the subject pronoun.
²²tn The text simply has the preposition, “from the Israelites.”
²³tn The word is zar (rz), usually rendered “stranger, foreigner, pagan.” But in this context it simply refers to anyone who is not a Levite or a priest, an unauthorized person or intruder in the tabernacle. That person would be put to death.
²⁴tn The particle hinneh (hN@h!) here carries its deictic forcing, calling attention to the fact that is being declared. It is underscoring the fact that the LORD himself chose Levi.
²⁵tn Literally “in the place of.”
²⁶tn The form hakkoti (yt!K)h^) is the hiphil infinitive construct of the verb nakah (hkn), “to strike, smite, attack.” Here, after the idiomatic “in the day of,” the form functions in an adverbial clause of time—“when I destroyed.”
²⁷sn In the Exodus event of the Passover night the principle of substitution was presented. The firstborn child was redeemed by the blood of the Lamb and so belonged to God; but then God chose the Levites to serve in the place of the firstborn. The ritual of consecrating the firstborn son to the LORD was nevertheless carried out, even with Jesus, the firstborn son of Mary (Luke 2:22-23).
²⁸tn Heb “you are to/shall number them.”
²⁹tn The idiom is literally “at the mouth of the LORD.”
³⁰tn The pual perfect may be given the past perfect translation in this sentence because the act of commanding preceded the act of numbering.
³¹tn The word “sons of” does at the outset refer to the sons of Levi. But as the listing continues the expression refers more to the family groups of the various descendants.
³²tn The waw disjunctive on the noun at the beginning of the verse here signals a greater emphasis on the individual rather than another item in the numbering of the clans.
³³tn The disjunctive waw here introduces a new section, listing the various duties of the clan in the sanctuary. The Gershonites had a long tradition of service here. In the days of David Asaph and his family were prominent as musicians. Others in the clan controlled the Temple treasuries. But in the wilderness they had specific oversight concerning the tent structure, which included the holy place and the holy of holies.
³⁴tc The phrases in this verse seem to be direct objects without verbs. BHS suggests deleting the sign of the accusative (for which see P. P. Saydon, “Meanings and Uses of the Particle to@,” VT 14 [1964]:263-275).
³⁵tn Heb “for all the service of it [them].”
³⁶sn Both Moses and Aaron came from this line (6:16-20). During the Hebrew monarchy this branch of the line of Levi was exemplary in music (1 Chr 6:33-48). They were also helpful to Hezekiah in his reforms (1 Chr 29:12-14).
³⁷tn The construction here is a little different. The text uses the participle in construct plural, som^ere (yr@m=v)), literally “keepers of.” The form specifies the duties of the 8,600 Kohathites. The genitive that follows this participle is the cognate mismeret (tr#m#v=m!) that has been used before. So the expression indicates that they were responsible for the care of this part of the cult center. There is no reason to delete one of the forms (as J. A. Paterson, Numbers, p. 42), for the repetition stresses the central importance of their work.
³⁸tn The verb is y^esar^etu (Wtr+vy+), “they will serve/minister.” The imperfect tense in this place, however, probably describes what the priests would do, what they used to do. The verb is in a relative clause: “which they would serve with them,” which should be change to read “with which they would serve.”
³⁹tn The word is literally “its [their] service.” It describes all the implements that were there for the maintenance of these things.
⁴⁰tn The Hebrew construction has “the leader of the leaders of” (u-n^esi’ n^esi’e [yo@yC!n+ oyC!n+W]).
⁴¹tn Heb “the keepers of the responsibility” (som^ere mismeret [tr#m#v=m! yr@m=v)]). The participle is a genitive specifying the duty to which he was appointed (thing possessed); its cognate genitive emphasizes that their responsibility was over the holy place.
⁴²tn The text has “these they the families of Merari.” The independent personal pronoun has the anaphoric use, somewhat equivalent to the copula “and” (see Ronald J. Williams, Hebrew Syntax [Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 1967], par. 115).
⁴³tn This could be a hendiadys construction: “and all their working tools.”
⁴⁴tc In some Hebrew MSS and the Samaritan Pentateuch “and Aaron” is not in the verse. The omission arose probably by scribal error with such repetition material that could easily give rise to variant traditions.
⁴⁵tn Here again the verb and its cognate noun are used: keeping the keep, or keeping charge over, or taking responsibility for the care of, or the like.
⁴⁶tn Here again the Hebrew has “at the mouth of,” meaning in accordance with what the LORD said.
⁴⁷tn The total is a rounded off number; it does not duplicate the precise total of 22,300. Some modern scholars try to explain it by positing an error in v. 28, suggesting that “six” should be read as “three” (ses [vv@] as salos [vl)v]).
⁴⁸tn The verb “take” (nasa’ [oCn]) has here the sense of collect, take a census, or register the names.
⁴⁹tn The verb is the perfect tense with the waw consecutive; it carries forward the instructions from the preceding verse. The verb “take” now has the sense of appointing or designating the Levites.
⁵⁰tn The verb again is the perfect tense in sequence; the meaning of “take” may be interpreted here with the sense of “collect.”
⁵¹tn The idea is expressed simply by repetition: “take five, five, shekals according to the skull.” They were to collect five shekals for each individual.
⁵²tn The verb form now is the imperfect of instruction or legislation.
⁵³sn The sanctuary shekel was first mentioned in Exodus 30:13. The half-shekel of Exodus 38:26 would then be 10 gerahs. Consequently, the calculations would indicate that five shekels was about two ounces of silver for each person. See R. B. Y. Scott, “Weights and Measures of the Bible,” BA 22 (1951);22-40, and “The Scale-Weights from Ophel, 1963-1964,” PEQ 97 (1965):128-139.
⁵⁴sn The word used is “silver.” Coins were not in existence until after 700 B.C. (starting with Lydia).
¹sn The chapter has four main parts to it: Kohathites (1-20), Gershonites (21-28), Merarites (29-33) and the census of the Levites (34-49).
²tn Heb “lift up the head.” The form naso’ (oC)n) is the qal infinitive absolute functioning here as a pure verb form. This serves to emphasize the basic verbal root idea (see GKC, #113bb).
sn The census of chapter 3 was to register all male Levites from a month old and up. It arranged the general duties of each of the tribes. The second census of Levites now will focus on those between 30 and 50 years of age, those who were actually in service. These are the working Levites. The duties here will be more specific for each of the families. The Kohathites, although part of the ordinary ministry of Levites, were a special group chosen to handle the most holy furnishings. Milgrom shows three aspects of their service: (1) skilled labor (m^ela’kah [hkolm=]) or “work,” (2) physical labor (‘abodah [hdObu&]) or “service,” and (3) assisting the priests (saret [tr@v]) or “ministering” (see J. Milgrom, Studies in Levitical Terminology, I:60-70).
³tn The word “company” is literally “host, army” (saba’ [obX]). The repetition of similar expressions makes the translation difficult: it has “all [who] come to the host to do work in the tent.”
⁴tn The text simply has “the holy of holies,” or “the holy of the holy things” (qodes haqqodosim [<yv!dQ(h^ vd#q)]). The context indicates that this refers to all the sacred furnishings.
⁵tn The text uses the infinitive construct in an adverbial clause of time; literally it says “in the journeying of the camp.” The genitive in such constructions is usually the subject. Here the implication is that people would be preparing to transport the camp and its equipment.
⁶tn The exact meaning of the Hebrew word here is difficult to determine. The term tahas (v?^T^) has been translated “badger [skins]” by the KJV tradition. The RSV uses “goat” skin; the NEB and NASB have “porpoise” skin, and the NIV has “sea-cow” hide. This is close to “porpoise,” and seems influenced by the Arabic. The evidence is not strong for these, and some of the suggestions would be problematic. It may be the word simply is used for fine leather, based on Egyptian ths..
⁷sn The Hebrew actually has the “table of faces,” and this has been traditionally rendered “table of showbread.”
⁸tn The Greek has “violet” instead of blue. This will also be true in v. 8, v. 10, and v. 14.
⁹tn The “pole” or “bar” (mot [FOm]) is of a different style than the poles used for transporting the ark. It seems to be a flexible bar carried by two men with the implements being transported tied to the bar. The NEB suggests the items were put in a bag and slung over the bar, but there is no indication of the manner.
¹⁰tc The Greek text has “and he must place the cover upon the altar” instead of “and they must take away the ashes from the altar.” The verb is the piel form; its nuance seems to be privative, i.e., stating that the object is deprived of the material—the ashes are removed. This is the main altar in the courtyard.
¹¹tc For this passage the Greek and the Samaritan have a substantial addition concerning the purple cloth for the laver and its base, and a further covering of skin (see D. W. Gooding, “On the Use of the LXX for Dating Midrashic Elements in the Targums,” JTS 25 [1974]:1-11).
¹²tn The verb form is the piel perfect with a waw consecutive; it continues the future sequence, but in this verse forms a subordinate clause to the parallel sequential verb to follow.
¹³tn The piel infinitive construct with the preposition serves as the direct object of the preceding verbal form, answering the question of what it was that they finished.
¹⁴tn Heb “after this.”
¹⁵tn The form is the qal infinitive construct from nasa’ (oCn), “to lift, carry”; here it indicates the purpose clause after the verb “come.”
¹⁶tn The imperfect tense may be given the nuance of negated instruction (“they are not to”) or negated obligation (“they must not”).
¹⁷tn The article expressive the generic idea of any holy thing (Williams, #92).
¹⁸tn The verb is the perfect tense with a waw consecutive, following the imperfect tense warning against touching the holy thing. The form shows the consequence of touching the holy thing, and so could be translated “or they will die” or “lest they die.” The first is stronger.
¹⁹tn The word massa’ (oCm^) is normally rendered “burden,” especially in prophetic literature. It indicates the load that one must carry, whether an oracle, or hear the physical responsibility.
²⁰tn This is supplied to the line to clarify “appointed.”
²¹tn Heb “and.”
²²sn One would assume that he would prepare and wrap these items, but that the Kohathites would carry them to the next place.
²³sn The verb is simply the qal, “do not cut off.” The context calls for a permissive nuance—“do not let them be cut off.” It was a difficult task to be handling the holy things correctly; Moses and Aaron were to see to it that they did it right and not handle the objects, or, Moses and Aaron were to safeguard their lives.
²⁴tn The word order is different in the text: do this . . . and they will live. Consequently, the verb “and they will live” is a perfect tense with a waw consecutive to express the future consequence of “doing this” for them.
²⁵tn The perfect tense with the waw consecutive continues the instruction for Aaron.
²⁶tn The distributive sense is obtained by the repetition, “a man,” and “a man.”
²⁷tn The verse has as the subject “they,” but to avoid confusion this has been added,
²⁸tn The two forms are the infinitive construct and then the noun: “to serve and for the burden. They are to serve and they are to take the responsibility. The infinitive is explaining the verb.
²⁹tc This whole clause is not in the Greek text; it is likely missing due to homoeoteleuton.
³⁰tn The work of these folks would have been very demanding, since the size and weight of the various curtains and courtyard hangings would have been great. For a detailed discussion of these, see the notes in the Book of Exodus on the construction of the items.
³¹tn The expression is literally “upon/at the mouth of” (‘al-pi [yP!-lu^]); it means that the work of these men would be under the direct orders of Aaron and his sons.
³²tn The term “whether” is supplied to introduce the enumerated parts of the explanatory phrase.
³³tn Here again is the use of the noun “burden” in the sense of the loads they were to carry (see the use of carts in Num 7:7).
³⁴tn Or, “burden.”
³⁵tn Heb “under/by the hand of.” The word “hand” is often used idiomatically for “power” or “authority.”
³⁶sn The material here suggests that Eleazar had heavier responsibilities than Ithamar, Aaron’s fourth and youngest son. It is the first indication that the Zadokite Levites would take precedence over the Ithamar Levites (see 1 Chr 24:3-6).
³⁷sn More recent studies have concluded that these “boards” were made of two long uprights joined by cross-bars (like a ladder). They were frames rather than boards, meaning that the structure under the tent was not a solid building. It also meant that the “boards” would have been lighter to carry.
³⁸tn Heb “you shall assign by names the vessels of the responsibility of their burden.”
³⁹tn Heb “by the hand of.”
⁴⁰tn The text multiplies the vocabulary of service here in the summary. The line reads: “everyone who came to serve the service of serving, and the service of burden.” The Levites came into service in the shrine, and that involved working in the sanctuary as well as carrying it from one place to the next.
⁴¹tn The verb is the simple perfect tense—”he numbered them.” There is no expressed subject; therefore, the verb can be made a passive.
⁴²tn Or, “his burden.”
⁴³tn The passive form simply reads “those numbered by him”; because of the cryptic nature of the word, some suggest reading a preterite, “and they were numbered.” This is supported by the Greek, Syriac, Targum, and Vulgate. It would follow in the emendation that the relative pronoun be changed to “just as” (ka’aser [rv#o&K^]). The MT is impossible the way it stands; it can only be rendered into smooth English by adding something missing.
¹sn The fifth chapter falls into four main parts: separation of the unclean (1-4), restitution for sin (5-10), the jealousy ordeal (11-28), and the summary (29-31). There is a good deal of literature on the biblical theme of holiness (for which see the notes on Leviticus primarily). But with regard to this chapter, see (with caution), Mary Douglas, Purity and Danger, An Analysis of Concepts of Pollution and Taboo (London: Routledge and Kegan Paul, 1966); J. Neusner, The Idea of Purity in Ancient Judaism (Leiden: Brill, 1973); and K. Milgrom, “Two Kinds of hatta’at,” VT 26 (1976):333-337.
²tn The construction uses the piel imperative followed by this piel imperfect/jussive form; it is here subordinated to the preceding volitive, providing the content of the command. The verb salah (?lv) in this verbal stem is a strong word, meaning “expel, put out, send away, or release” (as in “let my people go”).
³sn The word sarua‘ (u^WrX), although translated “leper,” does not primarily refer to leprosy proper (i.e., Hansen’s disease). The RSV and the NASB continued the KJV tradition of using “leper” and “leprosy.” More recent studies have concluded it is a generic term covering all infectious skin diseases (including leprosy when that actually showed up). True leprosy was known and feared certainly by the time of Amos (ca. 760 B.C.). There is evidence that the disease was known in Egypt by 1500 B.C. So this term would include that disease in all probability. But in view of the diagnosis and healing described in Leviticus 13 and 14, the term must be broader. The whole basis for the laws of separation may be found in the Book of Leviticus. The holiness of the LORD who dwelt among his people meant that a high standard was imposed on them for their living arrangements as well as access to the sanctuary. Anything that was corrupted, diseased, dying, or contaminated was simply not compatible with the holiness of God and so excluded. This is not to say that it was treated as sin, or the afflicted as sinners. It simply was revealing—and safeguarding—the holiness of the LORD. It thus provided a revelation for all time that in the world to come nothing unclean will enter into the heavenly sanctuary. We will all be changed from this corruptible body into one that is incorruptible (1 Cor 15:53). So while the laws of purity and holiness were practical for the immediate audience, they have far-reaching implications for theology. The purity regulations have been done away with in Christ—the problem is dealt with differently in the new covenant. There is no earthly temple, and so the separation laws are not in force. Wisdom would instruct someone with an infectious disease to isolate, however. But just because the procedure is fulfilled in Christ does not mean that believers today are fit for glory just as they are. No, they must be changed before going into his presence. In like manner the sacrifices have been done away in Christ—not what they covered. Sin is still sin; it is dealt with differently on this side of the cross. But the ritual and the regulations of the old covenant at Sinai have been fulfilled in Christ.
⁴sn The rules of discharge (Lev 12 and 15) include everything from menstruation to chronic diseases (see G. Wyper, ISBE, I:947; as well as R. K. Harrison, Leviticus, pp. 158-166, and G. J. Wenham, Leviticus, pp. 217-225.
⁵tn The word is nepes (vp#n#), which usually simply means “[whole] life,” i.e., the soul in the body, the person. But here it must mean the corpse, the dead person, since that is what will defile (although it was also possible to become unclean by touching certain diseased people, such as a leper).
⁶tn The imperfect tense functions here as a final imperfect, expressing the purpose of putting such folks outside the camp. The two preceding imperfects (repeated for emphasis) are taken here as instruction or legislation.
⁷tn The perfect tense is here given a past perfect nuance to stress that the word of the LORD preceded the obedience.
⁸sn This type of law is known as casuistic. The law is introduced with “when/if” and then the procedure to be adopted follows it. The type of law was common in the Law Code of Hammurabi.
⁹tn The verse simply says “any sin of a man,” but the genitive could mean that it is any sin that a man would commit (subjective genitive), or one committed against a man (objective genitive). Because of the similarity with Lev 5:22, the subjective is better. The sin is essentially “missing the mark” which is the standard of the Law of the LORD. The sin is not in this case accidental or inadvertent. It means here simply failing to live up to the standard of the LORD.
¹⁰tn The verb is ma‘al (lu^m^), which means to “defraud, violate, trespass against,” or “to deal treacherously, do an act of treachery.” In doing any sin that people do, the guilty have been unfaithful to the LORD, and therefore must bring Him a sacrifice.
¹¹tn The word used here for this violation is ’asam (<vo). It can be translated “guilt, to be guilty”; it can also be used for the reparation offering. The basic assumption here is that the individual is in a state of sin—is guilty. In that state he or she feels remorse for the sin and seeks forgiveness through repentance. See further P. P. Saydon, “Sin Offering and Trespass Offering,” CBQ 8 (1946):393-398; H. C. Thompson, “The Significance of the Term ’Asham in the Old Testament,” TGUOS 14 (1953):20-26.
¹²tn The verb is the hithpael perfect tense with the waw consecutive from the verb yadah (hdy), which in this stem means “acknowledge, confess sin,” but in the hiphil (primarily) it means “praise, give thanks.” In both cases one is acknowledging something, either the sin, or the person and work of the LORD. Here the verb comes in the apodosis: “when . . . then he must confess.”
¹³tn The verb is the hiphil perfect of sub (bWv), “return.” Here it has the sense of “repay” with the word “reparation” (traditionally rendered “guilt offering,” but now is understood to refer to what was defrauded). The Levitical rulings called for the guilty to restore what was taken, if it could be made right, and pay a fifth more as a surcharge.
¹⁴tn This is now the third use of <vo; the first referred to “guilt,” the second to “reparation,” and now “wronged.” The idea of “guilt” lies behind the second two uses as well as the first. In the second “he must repay his guilt” (meaning what he is guilty of); and here it can also mean “the one against whom he is guilty of sinning.”
¹⁵sn For more information on the word, see A. R. Johnson, “The Primary Meaning of log,” VT Supp 1 (1953):67-77.
¹⁶tc Th editors of BHS wish to follow the Greek and not read “for the LORD” here, but read a verb “to be” instead. But the text makes more sense as it stands: the payment is to be made to the LORD for the benefit of the priests.
¹⁷tn The t^erumah (hmWrT=) seems to be a general word for any offering that goes to the priests (see Milgrom, Studies in Cultic Theology and Terminology, pp. 159-172).
¹⁸sn The “holy gifts” are described with the root of vdq to convey that they were separate. Such things had been taken out of the ordinary and normal activities of life.
¹⁹sn There is a good bit of bibliography here: J. M. Sasson, “Numbers 5 and the Waters of Judgment,” BZ 16 (1972):249-251; and M. Fishbane, “Accusation of Adultery: A Study of Law and Scribal Practice in Numbers 5:11-31,” HUCA 45 (1974):25-46.
²⁰tn Heb “and a man lies with her with the emission of semen.” This makes it clear that there was adultery involved, so that the going astray is going astray morally. The indication in the text is that if she had never behaved suspiciously the sin might not have been detected.
²¹tc The sign of the accusative ’otah (Hto)) is probably to be repointed to the preposition with the suffix, ’ittah (HTo!).
²²tn The noun clause beginning with the simple conjunction is here a circumstantial clause, explaining that there was no witness to the sin.
²³tn The text has the construct case, “spirit of jealousy.” The word “spirit” here has the sense of attitude, mood, feelings. The word qin’ah (hon=q!) is the genitive of attribute, modifying what kind of feelings they are. The word means either “zeal” or “jealousy,” depending on the context. It is a passionate feeling to guard or protect an institution or relationship. It can also express strong emotional possessiveness such as envy and coveting. Here there is a feeling of jealousy, but no proof of infidelity.
²⁴tn The word is now used in the piel stem; the connotation is certainly “suspicious,” for his jealousy seems now to have some basis, even if it is merely suspicion.
²⁵tn The noun clause begins with the conjunction and the pronoun; here it is forming a circumstantial clause, either temporal or causal.
²⁶tn All the conditions have been laid down now for the instruction to begin—if all this happened, then this is the procedure to follow.
²⁷tn The word is “jealousy,” which also would make a fine translation. But since the connotation is that suspicion has been raised about the other person, that seems to be a better rendering.
²⁸tn The word “remembering” is zikkaron (/OrKz!); the meaning of the word here is not so much “memorial,” which would not communicate much, but the idea of bearing witness before God concerning the charges. The truth would come to light through this ritual, and so the attestation would stand. This memorial would bring the truth to light. It was a somber occasion, and so no sweet smelling additives were placed on the altar.
²⁹tn The final verbal form, mazkeret (tr#K#z+m^), explains what the memorial was all about—it was causing iniquity to be remembered.
³⁰tn The verb is the hiphil of the word “to stand.” It could be rendered “station her,” but that sounds too unnatural. This is a meeting between an accused person and the Judge of the whole earth.
³¹tn This is probably water taken from the laver in the courtyard. It is water set apart for sacred service. The NEB’s “clean water” does not capture the sense very well, but it does have the support of the Greek that has “pure running water.” That pure water would no doubt be from the laver anyway.
³²sn The dust may have come from the sanctuary floor, but it is still dust, and therefore would have all the pollutants in it.
³³tn The expression has been challenged. The first part, “bitter water,” has been thought to mean “water of contention” (NEB), but this is not convincing. It has some support in the versions which read “contention” and “testing,” no doubt trying to fit the passage better. N. H. Snaith (Numbers) suggests from an Arabic word that it was designed to cause an abortion—but that would raise an entirely different question, one of who the father of a child was. And that has not been introduced here. The water was “bitter” in view of the consequences it held for her if she was proven to be guilty. That is then enforced by the word play with the last word, the piel participle ham’ar^erim (<yr!r+om=h^). The bitter water, if it convicted her, would pronounce a curse on her. So she was literally holding her life in her hands.
sn This ancient ritual seems to have functioned like a lie detector test, with all the stress and tension involved. It can be compared to water tests in the pagan world, with the exception that in Israel it was stacked more towards an innocent verdict. It seems to have been a temporary provision, for this is the only place that it appears, and no provision is made for its use later. It may have served as a didactic force, warning more than actually legislating. No provision is made in it for a similar charge to be brought against the man; but in the case of the suspicion of the woman the man would be very hesitant to demand this test given the harshness on false witnessing in Israel. The passage remains a rather strange section of the Law.
³⁴sn Although there would be stress involved, a woman who was innocent would have nothing to hide, and would be confident. The wording of the priest’s oath is actually designed to enable the potion to keep her from harm and not produce the physical effects it was designed to do.
³⁵tn The pronoun is emphatic—“but you, if you have gone astray.”
³⁶tn This is an example of the rhetorical device known as aposiopesis, or “sudden silence.” The sentence is broken off due to the intensity or emphasis of the moment. The reader is left to conclude what the sentence would have said.
³⁷sn For information on such curses, see M. R. Lehmann, “Biblical Oaths,” ZAW 81 (1969):74-92; A. C. Thiselton, “The Supposed Power of Words in the Biblical Writings,” JTS 25 (1974):283-299; and F. C. Fensham, “Malediction and Benediction in Ancient Vassal Treaties and the Old Testament,” ZAW 74 (1962):1-9.
³⁸tn This interpretation takes the two nouns as a hendiadys. The literal wording is “the LORD make you a curse and an oath among the people.” In what sense would she be an oath? The whole passage is that the priest is making her take an oath to see if she has been sinful and will be cursed.
³⁹sn The outcome of this would be that she would be quoted by people in such forms of expression as an oath or a curse (see Jer 29:22).
⁴⁰tn The construction uses the infinitive construct with the preposition to form an adverbial clause: “in the giving of the LORD . . . ,” meaning, “if and when the LORD makes such and such to happen.”
⁴¹sn Most commentators take the expressions to be euphemisms of miscarriage or still birth, meaning that there would be no fruit from an illegitimate union. The idea of the belly swelling has been re-interpreted by NEB to mean “fall away.” If this interpretation stands, then the idea is that the woman has become pregnant, and that has aroused the suspicion of the husband for some reason. R. K. Harrison discusses a variety of other explanations for diseases and conditions that might be described by these terms. He translates it with “miscarriage,” but leaves open what the description might actually be (see pp. 112,113).
⁴²tn The verb is the perfect tense with the waw consecutive. It could be taken as a jussive following the words of the priest in the previous section, but it is more likely to be a simple future.
⁴³tn The word “amen” carries the idea of “so be it,” or “truly.” The woman who submits to this test is willing to have the test demonstrate the examination of God.
⁴⁴sn The words written on the scroll were written with a combination of ingredients mixed into an ink. The idea is probably that they would have been washed or flaked off into the water, so that she drank the words of the curse—it became a part of her being.
⁴⁵tn Heb “law of jealousies.”
⁴⁶sn The text does not say what the consequences are. Presumably the punishment would come from God, and not from those administering the test.
⁴⁷tn The word “iniquity” can also mean the guilt for the iniquity as well as the punishment of consequences for the iniquity. These categories of meanings grew up through figurative usage (metonymies). Here the idea is that if she is guilty then she must “bear the consequences.”
¹sn This chapter can be divided into five sections: the vow is described in vv. 1-8, then the contingencies for defilement are enumerated in vv. 9-12, then there is a discussion of discharging the vows in vv. 13-20, and then a summary in v. 21; after this is the high priestly blessing (vv. 22-27). For information on the vow, see G. B. Gray, “The Nazirite,” JTS 1 (1899-1900):201-211; Z. Weisman, “The Biblical Nazirite, Its Types and Roots,” Tarbiz 36 (1967):207-220; and W. Eichrodt, Theology of the Old Testament, I:303-306.
²tn The formula is used here again: “a man or a woman—when he takes.” The vow is open to both men and women.
³tn The vow is considered special in view of the use of the verb yapli’ (ol!p=y~), the hiphil imperfect of the verb “to be wonderful, extraordinary.”
⁴tn The construction uses the infinitive construct followed by the cognate accusative: “to vow a vow.” This intensifies the idea that the vow is being taken carefully.
⁵tn The name of the vow is taken from the verb that follows; nazar (rzn) means “to consecrate oneself,” and so the Nazirite is a consecrated one. These are folks who would make a decision to take an oath for a time or for a lifetime to be committed to the LORD and show signs of separation from the world. Samuel was to be a Nazirite, as the fragment of the text from Qumran confirms—“he will be a nazir forever” (1 Sam 1:22).
⁶tn The form of the verb is an hiphil infinitive construct, forming the word play and explanation for the name Nazirite. The hiphil is here an internal causative, having the meaning of “consecrate oneself” or just “consecrate to the LORD.”
⁷tn The operative verb now will be the hiphil of rzn; the consecration to the LORD meant separation from certain things in the world. The first will be wine and strong drink—barley beer (from Akkadian sikaru, a fermented beer). But the second word may be somewhat wider in its application than beer. The Nazirite, then, was to avoid all intoxicants as a sign of his commitment to the LORD. The restriction may have proved a hardship in the daily diet of the one taking the vow; but it spoke a protest to the corrupt religious and social world that used alcohol to excess.
⁸tn The “vinegar” (homes [Jm#?)]) is some kind of drink preparation that has been allowed to go sour.
⁹tn This word occurs only here. It may come from the word “to water, to be moist,” and so refer to juice.
¹⁰tn Or “raisins.”
¹¹tn This word also is rare, occurring only here. Dillmann suggested “unripe grapes” (Numbers, p. 33).
¹²sn Here is another hapax legomenon, a word only found here. The word seems linked to the verb “to be clear,” and so may mean the thin skin of the grape. The reason for the strictness with these two words in this verse is uncertain. We know the actual meanings of the words, and the combination must form a merism here, meaning no part of the grape could be eaten. Abstaining from these common elements of food was to be a mark of commitment to the LORD. Hos 3:1 even denounces the raisin cakes as part of a pagan world, and eating them would be a violation of the oath.
¹³sn There is an interesting parallel between this prohibition and the planting of trees. They could not be pruned or trimmed for three years, but allowed to grow free (Lev 20:23). Then could the tree be cut and the fruit eaten. The natural condition was to be a sign that it was the LORD’s. It was to be undisturbed by humans. Since the Nazirite was to be consecrated to the LORD, that meant his whole person, hair included. In the pagan world the trimming of the beard and the cutting of the hair was often a sign of devotion to some deity (see W. R. Smith, The Religion of the Semites, pp. 327-335)..
¹⁴tn The word “holy” here has the sense of distinct, different, set apart.
¹⁵tn The piel infinitive absolute functions as a verb in this passage; the piel carries the sense of “grow lengthy” or “let grow long.”
¹⁶tn The verb is simply “enter, go,” no doubt with the sense of go near.
¹⁷tn The Hebrew has nepes met (tm@ vp#n#), literally a “dead person.” But since the word nepes can also be used for animals, the restriction would be for any kind of corpse. Death was very much a part of the fallen world, and so for one so committed to the LORD, avoiding all such contamination would be a witness to the greatest separation, even in a family.
¹⁸tn The waw conjunction at the beginning of the clause specifies the cases of corpses that are to be avoided, no matter how painful it might be.
¹⁹tn He would defile himself, i.e., ruin his vow, by contacting their corpses. Jesus’ hard aying in Matthew 8:22, “let the dead bury the dead,” makes sense in the light of this passage—Jesus was calling for commitment to himself.
²⁰tn The construction uses the infinitive construct with the preposition and the suffixed subjective genitive—“in the dying of them”—to form the adverbial clause of time.
²¹tn The word “separation” here is the metonymy of adjunct—what is on his head is long hair, that goes with the vow.
²²tn The genitive could be interpreted as possession, i.e., “the vow of his God,” but it seems more likely that a genitive expressing indirect object or advantage would be more to the point.
²³tn The construction uses the imperfect tense followed by the infinitive absolute, yamut met (tm@ tWmy). Because the verb is in a conditional clause, the emphasis that is to be given through the infinitive must stress the contingency. The point is “if someone dies—unexpectedly.” The next words underscore the suddenness of this.
²⁴tn The verb is the piel perfect with a waw consecutive; it continues the idea within the conditional clause.
²⁵sn The expression is figurative for the vow that he took; the figure is the metonymy because the reference to the head is a reference to the long hair that symbolizes the oath.
²⁶tn The imperfect tense in this verse is still instructional rather than a simple future. The translations can vary, but the point that it is directive must be caught.
²⁷tn The traditional translation of hatta’t (toF?^) is “sin offering”; but it is more precise to render it “purification offering” (as with the other names of sacrifices) to show the outcome, not the cause of the offering (see Lev 4). Besides, this offering was made for ritual defilements (for which there was no confession required) as well as certain sins (for which there was a required confession of sin). This offering restored the person to the ritual state of purity by purifying the area into which he would be going.
²⁸tn The repetition of “the one . . . and the one” forms the distributive sense of “the one . . . and the other.”
²⁹tn The burnt offering (Lev 1) reflects the essence of atonement: by this sacrifice the worshiper was completely surrendering to God, and God was completely accepting the worshiper.
³⁰tn The verb w^ekipper (rP#k!w+) is the piel perfect with the waw consecutive. The meaning of the verb is “to expiate, pacify, atone.” It refers to the complete removal of the barrier of fellowship between the person and God, and the total acceptance of that person into his presence. The idea of “to cover,” often linked to this meaning, is derived from a homonym, and not from this word and its usage.
³¹tn The verb “to sin” has a wide range of meanings, beginning with the idea of “missing the way or the goal.” In view of the nature of this case—the prescribed ritual without confession—the idea is more that he failed to keep the vow’s stipulations in this strange circumstance than that he committed intentional sin.
³²tn The verb simply means “to consecrate,” but because it refers to a vow that was interrupted, it must here mean to “re-consecrate.”
³³tn The same idea is to be found now in the use of the word nazar {rzn), which refers to a re-commitment after the vow was interrupted.
³⁴tn The necessity of bringing the reparation offering was due to the reinstatement into the vow that had been interrupted.
³⁵tn The text has “he/one shall bring him”; since there is no expressed subject, this verb should be taken in the passive sense—“he shall be brought.” Since the context suggests an obligatory nuance, the translation “he must be brought” has been used.
³⁶tn Heb “he shall offer his offering”—the object is a cognate accusative.
³⁷sn The peace offering (s^elamim [<ym!lv=]) is instructed in Leviticus 3 and 7. The form is always in the plural. It was a sacrifice that celebrated the fact that the worshiper was at peace with God, and was not offered in order to make peace with God. The peace offering was essentially a communal meal in the presence of God. Some have tried to equate this offering with similar sounding names in Akkadian and Ugaritic (see B. Levine, In the Presence of the LORD [Leiden: Brill, 1974], pp. 3-52), but the unique features of the Israelite sacrifice make this connection untenable.
³⁸tn The suffixes in the MT are plural in this verse, whereas in v. 17 they are singular. This seems to be a matter of stylistic choice, referring to whomever may be taking the vow.
³⁹sn The offerings for the termination of the Nazirite vow would not have been inexpensive. This indicates that the short term Nazir may have had income, if not come from a wealthier section of society. Short term vows had to be considered carefully as this ruling required a good amount of food to be brought.
⁴⁰tn “all these” is supplied as the object.
⁴¹tn Heb “make.”
⁴²tn The “peace offering” is usually written as “a sacrifice of peace” (zebah s^elamim [<ym!lv= ?b^z\]). The word “sacrifice” is related to the word “to slaughter,” and so indicates that this is a bloody offering in celebration of peace with God.
⁴³tn Some versions simply interpret this to say that he shaves his hair, for it is the hair that is the sign of the consecration to God. But the text says he shaves his consecrated head. The whole person is obviously consecrated to God—not just the head. But the symbolic act of cutting the hair shows that the vow has been completed (see Acts 21:23-24). The understanding of the importance of the hair in the ancient world has been the subject of considerable study over the years (see R. de Vaux, Ancient Israel, p. 436; and J. A. Thompson, New Bible Commentary Revised, p. 177).
⁴⁴sn Some commentators see this burning of the hair as an offering (McNeile, Numbers, p. 35; G. B. Gray, Numbers, p. 68). But others probably with more foundation see it as destroying something that has served a purpose, something that if left alone might be venerated (see de Vaux, Israel, p. 436).
⁴⁵tn The text literally says “which is under the peace offering.” The verse does not mean that the hair had to be put under that sacrifice and directly on the fire.
⁴⁶tn The line does not include the word “head”; it literally has “after the consecrating of himself his consecrated [head].” The infinitive construct is here functioning in the temporal clause with the suffix as the subject and the object following.
⁴⁷sn The ritual of lifting the hands filled with the offering and waving them in the presence of the LORD was designed to symbolize the transfer of the offering to God in the sight of all. This concludes the worshipers part; the offering now becomes the property of the priest—his priest’s due (or “raised/heave offering”).
⁴⁸sn The “wave offering” may be interpreted as a “special gift” to be transferred to the LORD, and the “heave offering” as a “special contribution” to God—the priest’s due. These two offerings have also inspired a good deal of study.
⁴⁹tn The imperfect tense here would then have the nuance of permission. It is not an instruction at this point; rather, the prohibition has been lifted and the person is free to drink wine.
⁵⁰tn Actually, “law” here means a whole set of laws, the basic rulings on this topic.
⁵¹tn The imperfect tense has the nuance of potential imperfect—“whatever he can provide.”
⁵²tn Heb “according to the vow that he vows, so he must do.”
⁵³sn This little section records the blessing of the priest, especially the high priest after he emerges from the holy of holies to bless the people (see Lev 9:22). The two main elements in the oracle are “grace and peace.” It is most likely that the Apostle Paul based his salutations on this oracle, because Christ our High Priest has guaranteed grace and peace to all who believe. For additional information, see L. J. Liebreich, “The Songs of Ascent and the Priestly Blessing,” JBL 74 (1955):33-36; P. D. Miller, “The Blessing of God: An Interpretation of Num 6:22-27,” Int 29 (1975):240-251; and A. Murtonen, “The Use and Meaning of the Words L^eBarek and B^erakah in the Old Testament,” VT 9 (1959):158-177.
⁵⁴tn The piel imperfect has the nuance of instruction. The particle “thus” explains that the following oracle is the form to use.
⁵⁵tn Here is the only use of the verb ’amar (rmo) as an infinitive absolute; it functions as a verb form, an imperative or an imperfect of instruction. Several commentators have attempted to emend the text to get around the difficulty, but such are unnecessary.
⁵⁶tn The short blessing uses the jussive throughout, here the piel jussive with a pronominal suffix. While the jussive has quite a range of nuances, including wish, desire, prayer, or greeting, the jussives here are stronger. The formal subject of the verb is the LORD, and the speaker pronouncing the blessing is the priest, notably after emerging from the holy of holies where atonement has been made. The LORD says in this passage that when the priest says this, then the LORD will bless them. The jussive then is an oracle, not a wish or a prayer. It is a declaration of what the LORD imparts. It is as binding and sure as a patriarchal blessing which once said officially could not be taken back. The priest here is then pronouncing the word of the LORD, declaring to the congregation the outcome of the atonement.
⁵⁷tn The verb “to keep” concerns the divine protection of the people; its basic meaning is “to exercise great care over,” “to guard,” or “to give attention to” (see TWOT, 2:939). No doubt the priestly blessing informed the prayer and promise that makes up Ps 121, for the verb occurs six times in the eight verses. So in addition to the divine provision (“bless” basically means “enrich” in a number of ways) there is the assurance of divine protection.
⁵⁸tn Whereas the first line of the blessing had three Hebrew words, the second has five, and the third will have seven. In this second line and the following third, the blessing takes the form of an emblem followed by the truth. For the LORD to make his face shine on them would mean to be gracious to them. M. Noth rightly calls this image of the shining face “a figure of speech for benevolence and favour” (Numbers, p. 59); see, for example, Pss 4:7; 31:17; 44:4; 67:2; 80:4, 8, 20; 119:135; and Dan 9:17). The image may have its inspiration in the theophanies. The picture is of divine favor—the beaming face of a parent for his beloved.
⁵⁹tn The last line of the blessing also has first the image and then the parallel interpretation—for God to lift up his face is for God to give peace. The idea of the fallen face is one of anger (see Gen 4:6,7); and the idea of the hidden face is that of withholding support, favor, or peace (see Deut 31:18; Ps 30:8; Ps 44:25). If God lifts his face toward his people, it means he has given them peace—peace, prosperity, completeness, health, safety, general well-being, and the like.
⁶⁰tn The idea of their putting the name of Yahweh on the people is somewhat problematic. The pronouncing of the name of Yahweh in this context over the people was taken to be the effectual means of blessings. “Putting the name on them” is an expression that emphasizes the truth that he is their God and they are his people, or, having his name is having his blessing.
¹sn This long and repetitious chapter has several parts to it: the introduction (1-3), the assigning of gifts (4-9), the time of presentation (10-11), and then the tribes (12-83), and then a summary (84-89).
²tn The construction of this line begins with the temporal indicator (traditionally translated “and it came to pass”) and then after the idiomatic “in the day of” (= “when”) uses the piel infinitive construct from kalah (hlK). The infinitive is governed by the subjective genitive, “Moses,” the formal subject of the clause. The object of the infinitive is the second infinitive, “to set up” (l^ehaqim [<yq!hl=]). This infinitive, the hiphil, serves as the direct object, answering the question of what it was that Moses completed. The entire clause is an adverbial clause of time.
sn This chapter belongs chronologically after Lev 8:11, because Aaron and his sons were not yet made the celebrants and officiants of the new shrine (completed in Exodus). Here then chapters 7-9 are actually earlier than chapters 1-6, and form a supplement be adding information not found in Exodus and Leviticus. The first verse here recapitulates the first act of Moses in consecrating the shrine (Exod 30:23-31).
³tn The form is the qal active participle from the verb “to stand” (‘amad [dmu]). The form describes these leaders as “the ones standing over [the ones numbered].” The expression, along with the clear indication of the first census in chapter 1, shows that this was a supervisory capacity.
⁴tn Heb “and they brought.”
⁵sn For a discussion and drawings, see W. S. McCullough, IDB, 1:540. But see also D. J. Wiseman, IBD, 1:254.
⁶tn The object is not in the Hebrew text, but has been supplied.
⁷tn The verb is the perfect tense with the waw consecutive; following the imperative, this could be given an independent volitive translation (“they shall be”), but more fittingly a subordinated translation expressing the purpose of receiving the gifts.
⁸tn The sentence uses the infinitive construct expressing purpose, followed by its cognate accusative: “[that they may be] for doing the work of” (literally, “serving the service of”).
⁹tn The noun ‘is (vyo!) is in apposition to the word “Levities,” and is to be taken in a distributive sense: “to the Levites, [to each] man according to his service.”
¹⁰tn The expression k^epi (yp!K=) Is “according to the mouth of.” Here, it would say “according to the mouth of his service,” which would mean “what his service calls for.”
¹¹tn Heb “upon them,” meaning “their duty.”
¹²tn The verb is the imperfect tense, but it describes their customary activity—they had to carry, they used to carry.
¹³tn The verse begins with the preterite and the waw consecutive: “and they offered.”
¹⁴tn The sign of the accusative here must indicate an adverbial accusative and not the direct object; they offered their gifts for the dedication of the altar.
¹⁵sn Some commentators take the word “dedication” in the sense of a dedication gift, and so make it the direct object. Modern critics assume that this is a late word, belonging only in P, the Chronicler, and the heading of Ps 30 (a Davidic psalm).
¹⁶tn The adverbial clause uses the niphal infinitive construct as the main verb. The word is the well-known masah (?vm), “to anoint, smear.”
¹⁷tn The distributive sense is achieved by repetition: one leader for the day, one leader for the day.
¹⁸sn The tribe of Judah is listed first. It seems that it had already achieved a place of prominence based on the patriarchal promise of the Messiahship in Judah (Gen 49:10).
¹⁹sn Even though the chapter seems wearisome and repetitious to the modern reader, it is a significant document. Anson Rainey shows how it matches the exact ledgers of ancient sanctuaries (see ZPEB, 5:202). The recording would have been done by the priestly scribes. Of the many points that can be observed here, it should not be missed that each tribe, regardless of its size or relative importance, was on equal footing before the LORD. Each tribe shared in the work of the LORD equally. Each tribe approached the sanctuary in precisely the same way on this memorable occasion. All such devotion to the work of the LORD was to receive the blessing of God.
²⁰tn The adverbial clause of time is constructed with the infinitive construct of the verb “to enter” (bo’ [oOB]) with the preposition and with the subjective genitive following serving as the subject of the clause. The verse is strategic in the structure of the book: at the completion of the dedication with the offerings Moses received more revelation from the LORD in the tent. This verse therefore lays the foundation for what follows.
²¹tc The MT is obscure here, simply giving the purpose infinitive and the prepositional phrase. But the following clause using the hithpael of the same verb, introducing a reflexive sense: “then he heard the voice speaking with him.” The Greek clarified it by inserting “Lord” after the word “voice.” The BHS text emended the form to make a piel participle and not the hithpael (reading rB@d^m= instead of rB@D^m!, the hithpael with assimilation). Most commentators agree with the change, assuming there was a mistaken pointing in the MT.
²²tn The Hebrew word kapporet (tr#P)K^) has been traditionally rendered “mercy seat”; but since the ark is the footstool (see Ps 132), this translation is not acceptable. The word is etymologically connect to the verb “to make atonement.” A technical translation would be “place of atonement” or “propitiatory”; a more common translation would be “cover, lid”—provided that the definition “to cover” does not get transferred to the verb “to atone,” for that idea belongs to a homonym.
²³tn The cherubim are the carved forms of the angels attached to the ark. They indicate the guarding role of this order of angels in the holy of holies. They were also embroidered on the curtains. For basic material see D. E. Acomb, ZPEB, 1:788-790, and R. K. Harrison, ISBE, 1:642-43.
¹sn This chapter has three main sections to it: the lighting of the lamps (1-4), the separation of the Levites (5-22), and the work of the Levites (23-26). Most critics assume that the chapter belongs to P and was added late. But the chapter reiterates some of the Mosaic material concerning the work of the Levites in the new sanctuary. For the chapter to make sense the historical setting must be accepted; if the historical setting is accepted, the chapter is necessary as part of that early legislation. For more reading, see M. Haran, “The Nature of the ‘’ohel mo‘edh’ in the Pentateuchal Sources, JSS 5 (1960):50-65, and “The Priestly Image of the tabernacle,” HUCA 36 (1965):191-226; and C. L. Meyers, The tabernacle Menorah. A Synthetic Study of a Symbol from the Biblical Cult. AASOR 2 Missoula: Scholars Press, 1976.
²tn The verb is ‘alah (hlu) in the hiphil infinitive construct in a temporal clause. The idea of arranging the lamps on the lampstand certainly involved raising the lamps and placing them on the tops of each shaft and branch. Some have take the idea to mean cause the flame to go up, or light the lamps.
³tn The imperfect tense forms part of the instruction, and so the translation has to indicate that. The instruction would seem obvious, but the light was to shine in the area immediately in front of the lampstand, so that it would illumine the way and illumine the table that was across the room (hence, “in front of”).
⁴tn The text literally has “and this is the work of the lampstand,” but that rendering does not convey the sense that it is describing how it was made.
⁵sn The idea is that it was all hammered from a single plate of gold.
⁶tn The verb tahar (rhF) means that Moses was “to purify” or “to make ritually clean” the Levites so that they could enter the sanctuary and do the work prescribed for them. Whatever is “unclean” is not permitted in the sanctuary at all.
⁷tn Or, more literally, “and thus you shall do.” The verb is the imperfect tense of instruction or legislation. Here it introduces the procedures to be followed.
⁸tn The genitive in this expression indicates the purpose of the water—it is for their purification. The expression is literally “the waters of sin.” The word “purification” is the same as for the “sin/purification offering”—hatta’at (toF?^). This water seems to have been taken from the main laver and is contrasted with the complete washing of the priests in Lev 8:6.
⁹tn The verb is the hiphil perfect with a waw of sequence. This verb, and those to follow, has the force of a jussive since it comes after the imperative. Here the instruction is for them to remove the hair from their bodies [flesh]). There is no indication that this was repeated (as the Egyptian priests did every few days). It seems to have been for this special occasion only. A similar requirement was for the leper (Lev 14:7-9).
¹⁰tn Or, “let/have them wash”; the priests were given new clothes (Lev 8:13), but the Levites simply washed their own.
¹¹tn The verb is a reflexive (or possibly passive) in this verse, indicating the summary of the process. The ritual steps that have been prescribed will lead to this conclusion. The verb could be treated as a final imperfect (being a perfect with the waw consecutive), and so translated “that they may . . . .” The big difference here is that the ritual made the Levites “clean,” whereas the ritual for the priests made them “holy” or “sanctified” (Lev 8:12).
¹²sn The first sacrifice was for the purification of the Levites. The second animal, which Moses was to take, would be used for the purification of the tabernacle from all pollution.
¹³sn The consecration ceremony was to be done in full view of the assembled people. In all probability the laying on of the hands was done through representatives of the tribes, and not all the people. This ritual of the imposition of hands showed that the people were taking part in the consecration, and that the Levites represented them in the service of the LORD.
¹⁴tn The text actually has that Aaron should “wave the Levites as a waved offering.” The waved offering was part of the ritual of the peace offering and indicated the priest’s portion being presented to God in a lifted, waving motion for all to see. The Levites were going to be in the sanctuary to serve the LORD and assist the priests. It is unclear how Moses would have presented them as wave offerings; but the intent is that they would be living sacrifices, as Paul would later say in Romans 12:1 for all Christians.
¹⁵tn The construction emphasizes the spiritual service of the Levites, using the infinitive construct of ‘abad (dbu) followed by its cognate accusative.
¹⁶tn The clause begins with a waw on the noun “the Levites,” indicating a disjunctive clause. Here it is clearly a subordinate clause prior to the instruction for Moses, and so translated as a circumstantial clause of time.
¹⁷tn The imperative is from the verb “do, make,” but in the sentence it clearly means to sacrifice the animals.
¹⁸sn The “purification offering” cleansed the tabernacle from impurity, and the burnt offering atoned by nullifying and removing the effects of sin in the Levites.
¹⁹tc The Greek text adds the LORD here: “before the LORD, before Aaron.”
²⁰tn The waw consecutive on the perfect tense not only carries the nuance of instruction forward to this clause, but also marks this clause out as a summary of what has taken place, i.e., by doing all this ritual Moses will have separated the Levites from the people for God’s own possession.
²¹tn The imperfect tense could also be given the nuance of the imperfect of permission: the Levites may go in.”
²²tn Heb “to serve.”
²³tn The two verbs in the rest of this verse are perfect tenses with waw consecutive constructions, making them equal to the imperfect. Some commentators try to get around the difficulty of repetition by making these future perfects, “and you will have cleansed,” as opposed to a summary statement, “for thus you will cleanse . . . .”
²⁴tc The Greek text adds “before the LORD.”
²⁵tn As before, the emphasis is obtained by repeating the passive participle: “given, given to me.”
²⁶tn Or, “as substitutes” for all the firstborn of the Israelites.
²⁷tn The idiomatic “on the day of” precedes the infinitive construct of nakah (hkn) to form the temporal clause: “in the day of my striking . . . “ becomes “when I struck.”
²⁸sn The firstborn were those that were essentially redeemed from death in Egypt when the blood was put on the doors. So in the very real sense they belonged to God (Exod 13:2,12). The firstborn was one who stood in special relationship to the father, being the successive offspring. Here, the Levites would stand in for the firstborn in that special role and special relationship. God also made it clear that the nation of Israel was his firstborn son (Exod 4:22-23), and so they stood in that relationship before all the nations. The tribe of Reuben was to have been the firstborn tribe, but in view of the presumptuous attempt to take over the leadership through pagan methods (Gen 35:22; 49:3-4), was passed over. The tribes of Levi and Simeon were also put down for their ancestors’ activities, but sanctuary service was still given to Levi.
²⁹tn The verb is the hithpael of hata’ (oF?). In this stem the meaning of the root “to sin” is likely to be connected to the noun “sin/purification” offering in a denominative sense, although some would take it as a privative usage, “to remove sin.” The idea is clear enough: they performed all the ritual in order to purify themselves ceremonially.
³⁰tn The text has “this [is that] which [pertains] to the Levites.” “This is what concerns the Levites, meaning, the following rulings are for them.
³¹tc The Greek version resolved the tension in the ages by reading 25 instead of 30 in 4:22, 30, and the present verse. The Greek may have been harmonizing, or it was influenced by emendations already in the MSS. See further G. J. Wenham, Numbers, pp. 97-98.
³²tn The infinitive is lisbo’ (ob)X=l!), related to the word for “host, army, company,” and so “to serve as a company.” The meaning is strengthened by the cognate accusative following it.
³³tn he verb is the piel perfect of sarat (trv), “to serve, minister.” Here the form has the waw consecutive, and so is equal to the imperfect tense stressing permission. After the Levites reach the age of retirement, they were permitted to assist the others, but were not permitted to do the work themselves.
³⁴tn Heb “you shall do, make.”
¹sn The chapter has just the two sections, the observance of the passover (1-14) and the cloud that led the Israelites in the wilderness (15-23). It must be remembered that the material in 7-9 is chronologically earlier than 1-6, as the notices in the text will make clear. The two main discussions here are the last major issues to be reiterated before dealing with the commencement of the journey.
²tn The temporal clause is formed with the infinitive construct of yasa’ (oXy), “to go out, leave.” This verse indicates that a full year had passed since the exodus, and the original passover; now a second ruling on the passover is included at the beginning of the second year. This would have occurred immediately after the consecration of the tabernacle, in the month before the census at Sinai.
³tn The verb is simply “do, make” (‘asah [hCu] in the jussive). It must have the idea here of “perform, keep, observe” the ritual of the passover.
⁴sn For a detailed study note on the passover, see the discussion with the original institution in Exod 12. The word pesah (?s^P#)—here in pause and with the article—has become the technical name for the spring festival of Israel. In Exod 12 the name is explained by the use of the verb “to pass over,” ‘abar (rbu), indicating that the angel of death would pass over the house with the blood applied. Many scholarly attempts have been made to supply the etymology of the word, but none has been compelling enough to be accepted by a large number of biblical scholars. For general literature on the passover, see J. B. Segal, The Hebrew Passover (London: S.P.C.K., 1963) as well as the Bible dictionaries and encyclopedias.
⁵tc The Greek text uses a plural here but the singular in vv. 7 and 13; the SP uses the plural in all three places.
⁶tn The literal expression is “between the evenings.” Sunset is certainly one evening; the other may refer to the change in the middle of the afternoon to the late afternoon, or the beginning of dusk. The idea is probably just at twilight, or dusk (see R. B. Allen, TWOT, 2:694).
⁷tn The two verbs in this verse are identical; they are imperfects of instruction. The English translation has been modified for stylistic variation.
⁸tn The two words in this last section are standard “Torah” words. The word hoq (q?)) is a binding statute, something engraved and monumental. The word mispat (FPv=m!) means “judgment, decision,” but with a more general idea of “custom” at its core. The verse is making it very clear that the passover had to follow the custom and form that was legislated in Egypt.
⁹tn Heb “spoke to.”
¹⁰tn The infinitive construct functions as the direct object of the preceding verb (a Hebrew complementary usage), answering the question of what he said.
¹¹tc The Greek omits this first clause; it also omits “at twilight.”
¹²tn The noun has no definite article, and so the noun signifies “some” or “certain” men.
¹³tn The meaning, of course, is to be ritually unclean, and therefore disqualified from entering the sanctuary.
¹⁴tn This clause begins with the waw conjunction and negative before the perfect tense. Here is the main verb of the sentence: and they were not able to observe the passover. The first part of the verse provides the explanation for their problem.
¹⁵tn The verb is simply “stand,” but in the more general sense of waiting to here the answer.
¹⁶tn The cohortative may be subordinated to the imperative: “stand . . . [that I] may hear.”
¹⁷tn This sense is conveyed by the repetition of “man”—“if a man, a man becomes unclean.”
¹⁸tn The perfect tense with the waw consecutive functions as the equivalent of an imperfect tense. In the apodosis of this conditional sentence, the permission nuance fits well.
¹⁹sn The delay of four weeks for such people would have permitted enough time for them to return from their journey, or to recover from any short termed defilement such as is mentioned here. Apart from this provision, the passover was to be kept precisely at the proper time.
²⁰tn The disjunctive waw signals a contrastive clause here: “but the man” on the other hand . . . .
²¹/ The verb hadal (ld?) means “to cease, leave off, fail.” The implication here is that it is a person who simply neglects to do it. It does not indicate that he forgot, but more likely that he made the decision to leave it undone.
²²sn The pronouncement of such a person’s penalty is that his life will be cut off from his people. There are at least three possible interpretations for this: physical death at the hand of the community (G. B. Gray, Numbers, pp. 84-85), physical and/or spiritual death at the hand of God (J. Milgrom, “A Prolegomenon to Lev 17:11,” JBL 90 [1971]:154-155), or excommunication or separation from the community (Cole, Exodus, p. 109). The direct intervention of God seem to be the most likely in view of the lack of directions for the community to follow. Excommunication from the camp in the wilderness would have been tantamount to a death sentence by the community, and so there really are just two views.
²³tn The word for “sin” here should be interpreted to mean the consequences of his sin (so a metonymy of effect). Whowever willingly violates the Law will have to pay the consequences.
²⁴tn The words translated “alien” and “live” are from the same Hebrew root, gur (rWG), traditionally translated “to sojourn.” The “sojourner” who “sojourns” is a foreigner, an alien, who lives in the land as a temporary resident with rights of land ownership.
²⁵tn The verb is the simple perfect tense with a waw consecutive. It is therefore the equivalent to the imperfect that comes before it. The desiderative imperfect fits this usage well, since the alien is not required to keep the feast, but may indeed desire to do so.
²⁶tn The text has “there will be to you,” which is the way of expressing possession in Hebrew. Since this is legal instruction, the imperfect tense must be instruction or legislation.
²⁷tn Or, “you must have one statute.”
²⁸tn The conjunction is used here to specify the application of the law: “and for the alien, and for the one . . . “ indicates “both for the alien and the one who . . . .”
²⁹sn This section (9:15-23) recapitulates the account in Exodus 40:34 but some greater detail about the cloud that signaled Israel’s journeys. Here again material from the Book of Exodus is used to explain more of the laws for the camp in motion.
³⁰tn Heb “and/now on the day.”
³¹tn The construction uses the temporal expression with the hiphil infinitive construct followed by the object, the tabernacle. “On the day of the setting up of the tabernacle” leaves the subject unstated, and so the entire clause may be expressed in the passive voice.
³²sn The explanation and identification of this cloud has been a subject of much debate. Some commentators have concluded that it was identical with the cloud that led the Israelites away from Egypt and through the sea; but others have made a more compelling case that this is a different phenomenon (see J. A. Thompson, ZPEB, 4:796). The more critical views see the description as a fabrication, a retrojection from later, perhaps Solomonic times (see G. H. Davies, IDB, 3:817). Others have tried to connect it with Ugaritic terminology, but unconvincingly (see T. W. Mann, “The Pillar of Cloud in the Reed Sea Narrative,” JBL 90 [1971]:15-30; G. E. Mendenhall, The tenth Generation [Baltimore: Johns Hopkins, 1973], pp. 32-66, 209-213; and R. Good, “Cloud Messengers?” UF 10 [1978]:436-437).
³³sn The cloud apparently was centered over the tent, over the spot of the ark of the covenant in the most holy place. It thereafter spread over the whole tabernacle.
³⁴tn The imperfect tense in this and the next line should be classified as a customary imperfect, stressing incomplete action but in the past time—something that used to happen, or would happen.
³⁵tn Heb “like the appearance of fire.”
³⁶tn The verb in this initial temporal clause is the niphal infinitive construct.
³⁷tn Heb “in the place where it settled there”; the relative clause modifies the noun “place,” and the resumptive adverb completes the related idea—“which it settled there” means “where it settled.”
³⁸tn Heb “at the mouth of.”
³⁹tn Heb “all the days of—that the cloud settled over the tabernacle.” “All” is the adverbial accusative of time telling how long they camped in one spot—all. The word is then qualified by the genitive of the thing measured—“all of the days”; and this in turn is qualified by a noun clause functioning as a genitive after “days of.”
⁴⁰tn This is the same Hebrew expression that was used earlier for the Levites “keeping their charge” or more clearly, “fulfilling their obligations” to take care of the needs of the people and the sanctuary. It is a general expression using samar (rmv) followed by its cognate noun mismeret (tr#m#v=m!).
⁴¹tn The sentence uses w^eyes (vy@w+) followed by a noun clause introduced with ’aser (rv#o&) to express an existing situation; it is best translated as an adverbial clause of time: “and it was when the cloud was . . . .”
⁴²tn The word “number” is in apposition to the word “days” to indicate that stay was prolonged for quite a few days, such that would be counted.
⁴³tn Heb “mouth of.”
⁴⁴tn The construction is the same is in the preceding verse.
⁴⁵tn “Only” is supplied to reflect the contrast between the two verses.
⁴⁶tn The construction in this half of the verse uses two waw consecutive clauses. The first is subordinated to the second as a temporal clause: “when . . . then . . . .”
⁴⁷tn The sentence has the temporal clause using the preposition with the hiphil infinitive construct of ’arak (Ero) followed by the subjective genitive, “the cloud.” But this infinitive is followed by the infinitive construct liskon (/K)v=l!), the two of them forming a verbal hendiadys: “the cloud made long to stay” becomes “the cloud stayed longer.”
⁴⁸tn The MT has ’o-yamim (<ym!y-Oo). Most translators use “or a year” to interpret this expression in view of the sequence of words leading up to it, as well as in comparison with passages like Judges 17:10 and 1 Samuel 1:3 and 27:7. The use in Genesis 40:4 and 1 Kings 17:15. For the view that it means four months, see F. S. North, “Four Month Season of the Hebrew Bible,” VT 11 (1961):446-448.
⁴⁹tn Heb “and they would not journey”; the clause can be taken adverbially, explaining the preceding verbal clause.
⁵⁰sn Here we have a short section (10:1-10) dealing with the regulations for blowing trumpets in times of war or in times of peace.
¹tn The text uses what is called the “ethical dative”—“make [for] you two trumpets.” It need not be translated, but simply taken to underscore the direct imperative.
²tn The imperfect tense is again instruction or legislation.
³sn The instructions are not clearly spelled out here. But the trumpets were to be made of silver ingots beaten out into a sheet of silver and then bent to form a trumpet. There is archaeological evidence of silver smelting as early as 3000 B.C. Making silver trumpets would have been a fairly easy thing for the Israelites to do. The trumpet would have been straight, with a tapered form, very unlike the “ram’s horn” (sopar [rpOv]). The trumpets were used by the priests in Israel from the outset, but later were used more widely. The sound would be sharp and piercing, but limited in scope to a few notes. See further C. Sachs, The History of Musical Instruments (New York: W. W. Norton, 1940).
⁴tn Heb “and they shall be for you for assembling,” which is the way of expressing possession. Here the intent concerns how Moses was to use them.
⁵tn The perfect tense with the waw consecutive is here subordinated as a temporal clause to the following similar verbal construction.
⁶tn The verb taqa‘ (uqt) means “to strike, drive, blow a trumpet.”
⁷tn Heb “the assembly shall assemble themselves.”
⁸tn Heb “they shall assemble themselves.”
⁹tn The word for an alarm is t^eru‘ah (huWrT=). The root verb of this word means “to give a blast on the trumpet.” It may also on occasion mean “give a shout” in battle (Josh 6:10). In this passage it must be the sound of the trumpet.
¹⁰tn Heb “the camps that are camping.”
¹¹tn The perfect tense with the waw consecutive functions as the equivalent of the imperfect tense. Here the emphasis is on the start of the journeying.
¹²tc The text in the MT does not mention the departures of the northerly and westerly tribes. The Greek text completes the description by adding them, making a full schedule of the departure of the groups of tribes. The Greek is not likely to be the original, since it carries all the signs of addition to complete the text, making a smooth, full reading. The MT is to be preferred; it apparently used two of the groups to give the idea.
¹³tn The text has “they shall blow an alarm”; the sentence without a formal subject should be taken as a passive idea.
¹⁴tn There is no expressed subject in the initial temporal clause. It simply says, “and in the assembling the assembly.” But since the next verb is the second person of the verb, that may be taken as the intended subject here.
¹⁵sn The signal for moving camp was apparently different in tone and may have been sharper notes.
¹⁶tn Both the “adversary” and “opposes” come from the same root, sarar (rrX), “to hem in, oppress, harrass,” or basically, “be an adversary.
¹⁷tn The niphal perfect in this passage has the passive nuance and not a reflexive idea—the Israelites would be spared because God remembered them.
¹⁸tn The conjunction may be taken as explicative or epexegetical , and so rendered “namely, even, that is,” or it may be taken as emphatic conjunction, and translated “especially.”
¹⁹tn The waw is now taken in its alternative use, and translated “or.”
²⁰tn The form is the perfect tense with the waw consecutive. After the instruction imperfects, this form could be given the same nuance, or more likely, subordinated as a purpose of result clause.
²¹tn The verb “to be” (hayah [hyh]) has the meaning “to become” when followed by the preposition lamed.
²²sn This section is somewhat mechanical: it begins with an introduction (11,12), and then begins with Judah (13-17), followed by the rest of the tribes (18-27), and finally closes with a summary (28). The last few verses (28-26) treat the departure of Hobab.
²³tc The Samaritan Pentateuch inserts a lengthy portion from Deut 1:6-8, expressing the command for Israel to take the land from the Amorites.
tn The expression is difficult; it is miskan ha‘edut (td%u@h /K^v=m!). The reference is to the sacred shrine that covered the ark with the commandments inside. The NEB tried “tabernacle of the Token”; the NAB has “dwelling of the testimony.”
²⁴sn The verb is the same as the noun: “they journeyed on their journeyings.” This underscores the point of their continual traveling.
²⁵sn The “standard” (degel [lg#D#]) was apparently some kind of a symbol put up on a pole to signify the tribal hosts. De Vaux thought it simply referred to a pole or a mast, but that would not distinguish tribes (Ancient Israel, pp. 226,7).
²⁶tn The verb is the third person plural form; without an expressed subject it is treated as a passive.
²⁷tn The MT uses a word that actually means “assembler”; so these three tribes made up a strong rear force recognized as the assembler of all the tribes.
²⁸tn Or, “journeyings of.”
²⁹tn The verb is the preterite with the waw consecutive. But in this sentence it should be subordinated as a temporal clause to the preceding statement, even though it follows it.
³⁰sn For additional bibliography for this short section, see W. F. Albright, “Jethro, Hobab, and Reuel in Early Hebrew Tradition,” CBQ 25 (1963):1-11; G. W. Coats, “Moses in Midian,” JBL 92 (1973):3-10; B. Mazar, “The Sanctuary of Arad and the Family of Hobab the Kenite,” JNES 24 (1965):297-303; and T. C. Mitchell, “The Meaning of the Noun HTN in the Old Testament,” VT 19 (1969):93-112.
³¹sn There is a real problem with the identity of Hobab. The MT says that he is the son of Reuel, making him the brother-in-law of Moses. But Judg 4:11 says he is the father-in-law. In Judg 1:16; 4:11 Hobab is traced to the Kenityes; but in Exod 3:1 and 18:1 Jethro (Reuel) is priest of Midian. Jethro is identified with Reuel on the basis of Exod 2:18 and 3:1, and so Hobab becomes Moses’ hoten (/t@?)), a relative by marriage and perhaps brother-in-law. There is not enough information to decide on the identity and relationships involved here. Some suggest that there is on person with the three names (Gray); others suggest Hobab is a family name (R. F. Johnson, IDB, 2:615), and some suggest that the expression “the son of Reuel the Midianite” had dropped out of the genealogy of Judges, leading to the conflict (Crichton, ISBE, 2:1055). If Hobab is the same as Jethro, then Exod 18:27 does not make much sense, for Jethro did go home. On this basis many conclude Hobab is a brother-in-law. This would mean that after Jethro returned home, Moses conversed with Hobab, his brother-in-law. For more discussion, see the articles and the commentaries.
³²tn The verb is the hiphil of the root “to be good” (yatab [bFy]); it may be translated “treat well, deal favorably, generously with.” Here it a perfect tense with waw following the imperative, showing a sequence in the verbal ideas.
³³tn The text simply has “has spoken good” for Israel.
³⁴tn The form with ’al-na’ (on-lo^) is a jussive; negated it stresses a more immediate request, as if Hobab is starting to leave, or at least determined to leave.
³⁵tn The expression is more graphic: you will be for us for eyes. Hobab was familiar with the entire Sinai region, and could certainly direct the people where they were to go. The text does not record Hobab’s response. But in view of the fact that Kenites are in Canaan as allies of Judah (Ju. 1:16) would indicate that he gave in and came with Moses. The first refusal may simply be the polite Semitic practice of declining first so that the appeal might be made more urgently.
³⁶tn Heb “and it shall be.”
³⁷tn The phrase “a journey of three days” is made up of the adverbial accusative qualified with the genitives.
³⁸tc The scribes sensed that there was a dislocation with vv. 34-36, and so they used the inverted letters nun as brackets to indicate this.
³⁹tn The adverbial clause of time is composed of the infinitive construct with a temporal preposition and a suffixed subjective genitive.
⁴⁰sn These two formulaic prayers were offered by Moses at the beginning and at the end of the journeys. They prayed for the LORD to fight ahead of the nation when it was on the move, and to protect them when they camped. The theme of the first is found in Ps 68:1. The prayers reflect the true mentality of holy war, that it was the LORD who fought for Israel and defended her. The prayers have been included in the prayer book for synagogue services.
⁴¹sn The first part records the burning of the camp, named Taberah. Here is one of the several naming narratives in the wilderness experience. The occasion for divine judgment is the complaining of the people. The passages warn believers of all ages not to murmur as they did, for such complaining is a lack of faith in the power and goodness of God. For some additional literature, see W. Brueggemann, “From Hurt to Joy, from Death to Life,” Interpretation 28 (1974):3-19; B. S. Childs, “The Etiological Tale Re-examined,” VT 24 (1974):387-397; G. W. Coats, Rebellion in the Wilderness (Nashville: Abingdon, 1968); and A. C. Tunyogi, “The Rebellions of Israel,” JBL 81 (1962):385-390.
¹sn The chapter includes the initial general complaints (1-3), the complaints about food (4-9), Moses’ own complaint to the LORD (10-15), God’s response to Moses (16-25), Eldad and Medad (26-29), and the quail (30-35).
²tn The temporal clause uses the hithpo’el infinitive construct from ’anan (/no). It is a rare word, occurring in Lamentations 3:39. With this blunt introduction the constant emphasis of obedience to the word of the LORD found throughout the first ten chapters suddenly comes to an end. It is probable that the people were tired of moving for several days, the excitement of the new beginning died out quickly in the “great and terrible wilderness.” Resentment, frustration, discomfort—whatever it all involved—led to complaining and not gratitude.
³tn The word ra‘ (ur^) is a much stronger word than “displeased” would suggest—it was evil in the ears of the LORD. The bold anthropomorphism shows that what the LORD heard was painful to him.
⁴tn The preterite with the waw consecutive is here subordinated to the next verb as a temporal clause.
⁵tn The common Hebrew expression uses the verb harah (hr?), “to be hot, to burn, to be kindled.” The subject is ‘appo (Opo^), “his anger,” or more literally, his nose, which in this anthropomorphic expression flares in rage. The emphasis is superlative—“his anger raged.”
⁶tn The waw consecutive does not simply show sequence in the verbs, but here expresses the result of the anger of the LORD for their complaining. With such a response to the complaining, one must conclude that it was unreasonable. There had been no long deprivation or endured suffering; the complaining was early and showed a rebellious spirit.
⁷sn The “fire of the LORD” is supernatural, for it is said to come from the LORD and not from a natural source. God gave them something to complain about—something to fear. The other significant place where this “fire of the LORD” destroyed was in the case of Nadab and Abihu who brought strange fire to the altar (Lev 10:2).
⁸sn Here is the pattern that will become in the wilderness experience so common—the complaining turns to a cry to Moses, which is then interpreted as a prayer to the LORD, and there is healing. The sequence presents a symbolic lesson, an illustration of the intercession of the Holt Spirit. The NT will say that in times of suffering Christians do not know how to pray, but the Spirit intercedes for them, changing their cries into the proper prayers (Rom 8).
⁹tn The name tab‘erah (hru@b=T^) is given to the spot as a commemorative of the wilderness experience. It is explained by the formula using the same verbal root, “to burn.” Such naming narratives are found dozens of times in the OT, and most frequently in the Pentateuch. The explanation is seldom an exact etymology, and so in the literature is called a popular etymology. It is best to explain the connection as a figure of speech, a paronomasia, which is a phonetic word play that may or may not be etymologically connected. Usually the name is connected to the explanation by a play on the verbal root—here the preterite explaining the noun. The significance of commemorating the place by such a device is to “burn” it into the memory of Israel. The narrative itself would be remembered more easily by the name and its motif. The namings in the wilderness wanderings remind the faithful of unbelief, and warn us all not to murmur as they murmured. See further Allen P. Ross, “Paronomasia and Popular Etymologies in the Naming Narrative of the Old Testament,” PhD Dissertation, University of Cambridge.
¹⁰sn The story of the sending of the quail is a good example of poetic justice, or talionic justice. God had provided for the people, but even in that provision they were not satisfied, for they remembered other foods they had in Egypt. No doubt there was not the variety of foods in the Sinai that might have been available in Egypt, but their life had been bitter bondage there as well. They had cried to the LORD for salvation, but now they forget, as they remember things they used to have. God will give them what they crave, but it will not do for them what they desire. For more information on this story, see B. J. Malina, The Palestinian Manna Tradition (Leiden: Brill, 1968). For the critical, and rather unconvincing, attempt to explain manna and the other foods by natural phenomena, see F. W. Bodenheimer, “The Manna of Sinai,” BA 10 (1947):1-6.
¹¹tn The mixed multitude, or “rabble” as the NIV has it, is the translation of an unusual word, ha’sapsup ([s%p=s^oh). It occurs only here. It may mean “a gathering of people” from the verb ’asap ([so), yielding the idea of a mixed multitude (in line with Exod 12:38). But the root is different, and so no clear connection can be established. Many commentators therefore think the word is stronger, showing contempt through a word that would be like “riff-raff.”
¹²tn The Hebrew simply uses the cognate accusative, saying “they craved a craving” (hit’awwu ta’wah [hwo&T^ Wwo^t=h!]), but the context shows that they had this strong craving for food. The verb describe a strong desire, which is not always negative (Ps 132:13-14). But the word is a significant one in the Torah; it was used in the garden story for Eve’s desire for the tree, and it is used in the Decalogue in the warning against coveting (Deut 5:21).
¹³tc The Greek and the Latin versions read “and they sat down” for “and they returned, involving just a change in vocalization (which they did not have). This may reflect the same expression in Judg 20:16. But the change does not improve this verse.
tn The text uses a verbal hendiadys here, one word serving as an adverb for the other. It literally reads “and they returned and they wept,” which means they wept again. Here the weeping is put for the complaint, showing how emotionally stirred up the people had become by the craving. The words throughout here are metonymies. The craving is a metonymy of cause, for it would have then led to expressions (otherwise the desires would not have been known). And the weeping is either a metonymy of effect, or of adjunct, for the actual complaints follow.
¹⁴tn The Hebrew expresses the strong wish or longing idiomatically: “Who will give us flesh to eat?” It is a rhetorical expression not intended to be taken literally, but merely to give expression to the longing they had. See GKC, #476.
¹⁵tn The perfect tense here expresses the experience of a state of mind.
sn As with all who complain in such situations, their memory was selective. It was their bitter cries to the LORD from the suffering in bondage that God heard and answered. And now, shortly after being set free, their memory of Egypt is for things they do not now have. It is also somewhat unlikely that they as slaves had such abundant foods in Egypt.
¹⁶tn The imperfect tense would here be the customary imperfect, showing continual or incomplete action in past time.
¹⁷tn The adverb “freely” is from the word hanan (/n^?), “to be gracious,” from which is derived the noun “grace.” The word underscores the idea of “free, without cost, for no reason, gratis.” Here the simple sense is “freely,” without any cost. But there may be more significance in the choice of the words in this passage, showing the ingratitude of the Israelites to God for His deliverance from bondage. To them now the bondage is preferable to the salvation—this is what angered the LORD.
¹⁸sn The Hebrews were complaining both about the bland taste of the manna and dehydration—they were parched in the wilderness.
¹⁹tn Heb “before our eyes,” meaning that “we see nothing except this manna.”
²⁰tn The text has “and its taste.”
²¹tn The temporal clauses is constructed of the infinitive construct from yarad (dry) with a temporal preposition, followed by the subjective genitive.
²²sn Moses begins to feel the burden of caring for this people, a stubborn and rebellious people. His complaint shows how contagious their complaining has been. It is one thing to cry out to God about the load of ministry; but it is quite another to do it in such a way as to reflect a lack of faith in God’s provision. God has to remind the leader Moses that he, the LORD, can do anything. This is a variation on the theme from Exodus—“who am I that I should lead . . . .”
²³tn The participle “weeping” is functioning here as the noun in the accusative case, an adverbial accusative of state. It is explicative of the object.
²⁴tn The text says, “it was evil in the eyes of Moses.
²⁵tn The verb is the hiphil of ra‘ (uur), “to be evil.” Moses laments (with the rhetorical question) that God seems to have caused him evil.
²⁶tn The infinitive construct with the preposition is expressing the result of not finding favor with God (see Williams, #57). What Moses is claiming is that because he has been given this burden God did not show him favor.
²⁷sn The questions Moses asks are rhetorical. He is actually affirming that they are not his people, that he did not produce them, but now is to support them. His point is that God produced this nation, but has put the burden of caring for their needs on him.
²⁸tn The verb means “to beget, give birth to.” The figurative image from procreation completes the parallel question, first the conceiving and second the giving birth to the nation.
²⁹tn The word ’omen (/m@o)) is often translated “nurse,” but the form is a masculine form and would better be rendered as a “foster parent.” This does not work as well, though, with the yoneq (qn@y)), the “sucking child.” The two metaphors are simply designed to portray the duty of a parent to a child as a picture of Moses’ duty for the nation. The idea that it portrays God as a mother pushes it too far (see M. Noth, Numbers, pp. 86-87).
³⁰tn The text simply has “from where to me flesh?” which means “from where will I have meat?”
³¹tn The cohortative coming after the imperative stresses purpose (it is an indirect volitive).
³²tn The word order shows the emphasis: “I am not able, I by myself, to bear all this people.” The infinitive lase’t (toC@l) serves as the direct object of the verb. The expression is figurative, for bearing or carrying the people means being responsible for all their needs and cares.
³³tn The subject of the verb “heavy” is unstated; in the context it probably refers to the people, or the burden of caring for the people. This responsibility was turning out to be a heavier responsibility than Moses anticipated. Alone he was totally inadequate.
³⁴tn The participle expresses the future idea of what God is doing, or going to be doing. Moses would rather be killed than given a totally impossible duty over a people that were not his.
³⁵tn The imperative of harag (grh) is followed by the infinitive absolute for emphasis. The point is more that the infinitive adds to the emphasis of the imperative mood, which would be immediate compliance.
³⁶tn The word “trouble” here probably refers to the stress and difficulty of caring for a complaining group of people. The suffix on the noun would be objective, perhaps stressing the indirect object of the noun—trouble for me.
³⁷sn The LORD provides Spirit-empowered assistance for Moses. Here is another variation on the theme of Moses faith. Just as he refused to lead alone and was given Aaron to share the work, so here he protests the burden and will share it with seventy elders. If God’s servant will not trust wholeheartedly, that individual will not be used by God as he or she might have. Others will share in the power and the work. Probably one could say that it was God’s will for others to shre this leadership—but not to receive it through these circumstances.
³⁸tn The “officials” (sot^erim [<yr!F=v)]) were a group of the elders who seem to have had some administrative capacities. The Greek translation used the word “scribes.” For further discussion, see Roland de Vaux, Ancient Israel, pp. 69-70.
³⁹tn The imperfect tense here is to be classified as a final imperfect, showing the result of this action by God. Moses would be relieved of some of the responsibility when these others were given the grace to understand and to resolve cases.
⁴⁰tn The hithpael is used to stress that they are to prepare for a holy appearance. The day was going to be special and so required their being set apart for it. But it is a holy day in the sense of the judgment that was to follow.
⁴¹tn Possibly this could be given an optative translation, to reflect the earlier one: “Oh that someone would give . . . .” But the verb is not the same; here it is the hiphil of the verb “to eat”—“who will make us eat” (i.e., provide meat for us to eat).
⁴²tn The word “life” is not in the text. The expression is simply “it was for us,” or, “we had good,” meaning “we had it good,” or “life was good.”
⁴³tn The expression l^ezara’ (hrzl=) Has been translated “ill” or “loathsome.” It occurs only here in the Bible. The Greek text interprets it as “sickness.” It could be nausea or vomiting (so Gray) from overeating.
⁴⁴sn The explanation is the interpretation of their behavior—it is in reality what they have done, even though they would not say they despised the LORD. They had complained and shown a lack of faith and a contempt for the program, which was in essence despising the LORD.
⁴⁵tn The use of the demonstrative pronoun here (“why is this we went out . . .”) is enclitic, providing emphasis to the sentence: “why in the world did we ever leave Egypt?”
⁴⁶tn Literally: “the people who I am in their midst,” i.e., among whom I am.
⁴⁷tn The Hebrew sentence stresses the number. The sentence begins “600,000 . . . .”
⁴⁸tn The word order places the object first here: “Meat I will give them.” This adds to the contrast between the number and the statement of the LORD.
⁴⁹tn The verb is the perfect tense with a waw consecutive, carrying the sequence from the preceding imperfect tense. However, this verb may be subordinated to the preceding to express a purpose clause.
⁵⁰sn This anthropomorphic expression concerns the power of God. The “hand of the LORD” is idiomatic for his power, what he is able to do. The question is rhetorical; it is affirming that his hand is not shortened, i.e., that his power is not limited. Moses should have known this, and so this is a rebuke for him at this point. God had provided the manna, among all the other powerful acts they had witnessed. Meat would be no problem. But the lack of faith by the people was infectious.
⁵¹tn I.e., “will come true.”
⁵²tn The temporal clause is introduced by the temporal indicator way^ehi (yh!y+w~), which need not be translated. It introduces the time of the infinitive as past time narrative. The infinitive construct is from nuah (?~Wn), “to rest.” The figurative expression of the Spirit resting upon them indicates the temporary indwelling and empowering by the Spirit in their lives.
⁵³tn The text may mean that these men gave ecstatic utterances, much like Saul did when the Spirit came upon him and he made the same prophetic utterances (see 1 Sam 10:10-13). But there is no strong evidence for this (see K. L. Barker, “Zechariah,” in EBC, pp. 605,6). In fact there is no consensus among scholars as to the origin and meaning of the verb “prophesy” or the noun “prophet.” It has something to do with speech, being God’s spokesman or spokeswoman or making predictions or authoritative utterances or ecstatic utterances. It certainly does mean that the same Holy Spirit, the same divine provision that was for Moses to enable him to do the things that God had commanded him to do, was now given to them. It would have included wisdom and power with what they were saying and doing—in a way that was visible and demonstrable to the people! The people needed to know that the same provision was given to these men, authenticating their leadership among the clans. And so it could not simply be a change in their understanding and wisdom.
⁵⁴tn The final verb of the clause stresses that this was not repeated: “they did not add” is the literal rendered of w^elo’ yasapu (Wpsy ol)w+). It was a one-time spiritual experience associated with their installation.
⁵⁵tn The form of the word is the passive participle k^etubim (<yb!t%K=), “written.” It is normally taken to means “among those registered,” but it is not clear if that means they were to be among the seventy or not. That seems unlikely since there is no mention of the seventy being registered, and vv. 24-25 says all seventy went out and prophesied. The registration may be to eldership, or the role of the officer.
⁵⁶tn The article indicates that the “young man” was definite in the mind of the writer, but indefinite in English.
⁵⁷tn The form is the piel participle m^esaret (tr@vm=), meaning “minister, servant, assistant.” The word has a loftier meaning than the ordinary word for slave.
⁵⁸tn The verb is bahar (r?B), “to choose”; here the form is the masculine plural participle with a suffix, serving as the object of the preposition min (/m!). It would therefore mean “[one of] his chosen men,” or “[one of] his choice men.”
⁵⁹sn The effort of Joshua is to protect Moses prerogative as leader by stopping these men in the camp from prophesying. Joshua did not understand the significance in the LORD’s plan to let other share the burden of leadership.
⁶⁰tn The piel participle m^eqanne’ (oN@q^m=) serves as a verb here in this interrogative sentence. The word means “to be jealous, envious.” That can be in a good sense, such as with the translation “zeal,” or it can be in a negative sense as here. Joshua’s apparent “zeal” is questioned by Moses—was he zealous/envious for Moses sake, or for some other reason?
⁶¹tn The optative is expressed by the interrogative clause in Hebrew, “who will give . . . .” Moses expresses here the wish that the whole nation would have that portion of the Spirit. The new covenant, of course, would turn Moses’ wish into a certainty.
⁶²sn The irony in this chapter is expressed in part by the use of the word ruah (?~Wr). In the last episode it clearly meant the Spirit of the LORD that empowered the men for their spritual service. But here the word is “wind.” Both the spiritual service and the judgment come from God.
⁶³tn The verb means “burst forth” or “sprang up.” See the ways it is used in Genesis 33:12, Judges 16:3, 14; Isaiah 33:20.
⁶⁴sn The “quail” ordinarily cross the Sinai at various times of the year; but what is described here is not the natural phenomenon. Biblical scholars looking for natural explanations usually note that these birds fly at a low height and can be swatted down easily. But the description here is more of a supernatural supply and provision (see J. Gray, “The Desert Sojourn of the Hebrews and the Sinai Horeb Tradition,” VT 4 [1954]:148-154).
⁶⁵tn Or, “left them fluttering.”
⁶⁶sn This would be about three feet high.
⁶⁷tn Heb “rose up, stood up.”
⁶⁸sn This is about two thousand liters.
⁶⁹tn The verb (a preterite) is followed by the infinitive absolute of the same root, to emphasize the action of spread out the quail. Although it is hard to translate the expression, it indicates that they spread these quail out all over the area. The vision of them spread all over was evidence of God’s abundant provision for their needs.
⁷⁰tn The verb is a prefixed conjugation, normally an imperfect tense. But coming after the adverb terem (<r#F#) it is treated as a preterite.
⁷¹sn The name “the graves of the ones who craved” is again explained by a word play, a popular etymology. In Hebrew qibrot hatta’awah (hwo&T^h^ tOrb=q!) is the technical name. It is the place that the people craved the meat, longing for the meat of Egypt, and basically rebelled against God. The naming marks another station in the wilderness where the people failed to accept God’s good gifts with grace and to pray for their other needs to be met.
⁷²sn In this short chapter we find a prime example of jealousy among leaders and how God dealt with it. Miriam and Aaron are envious of Moses’ leadership, but they use an occasion—his marriage—to criticize him. Often the immediate criticism is simply a surface issue for a deeper matter. God indicates very clearly he will speak through many people, including them, but Moses is different. Moses is the mediator of the covenant. The chapter is a lesson of what not to do. They should have fulfilled their duties before God and not try to compete or challenge the leader this way. There is a touch of divine irony here, for Miriam is turned white with leprosy. The chapter falls easily into the sections of the story: the accusation (1-3), the LORD’s response (4-10), the intercession of Moses (11-16). For further information, see J. S. Kselman, “A Note on Numbers 12:6-8,” VT 26 (1976):500-504.
¹tn The preposition b^e (B=) has the adversative sense here, “[speak] against” (see also its use for hostile speech in 21:5, 7). Speaking against is equal to the murmuring throughout the wilderness period. The verb of the sentence is watt^edabber (rB@d^T=w~), the feminine form of the verb. This indicates that Miriam was the main speaker for the two, the verb agreeing with the first of the compound subject.
sn It may be that Miriam was envious of the Cushite woman Moses married. And, in view of the previous chapter’s content about others being given a portion of the Spirit to share in the leadership role, she may have seen this as her chance finally to become just as important in the nation as her younger brother. After all, she safeguarded his birth and early years (Exod 2). But there are two issues here—the reason she gives (“does the LORD only speak through Moses?”), and the reason the text gives (the Cushite woman).
²tn The text has hakkusit (tyv!K%h^), the Cushite, as the modifier of “woman.” The Greek text interpreted this correctly as “Ethiopian.” The word Cush in the Bible can describe the Cassites, east of Babylon of the later period (Gen 10:18), or Ethiopia (Isa 20:3; Nah 3:5; et al). Another suggestion is that it would refer to Cushan of Hab 3:7, perhaps close to Midian, and so the area Moses had been. This would suggest it could be Zipporah—but the Bible does not identify the Cushite as Zipporah. The most natural understanding would be that it refers to an Egyptian/Ethiopian woman. The text does not say when Moses married this woman, or what Miriam’s problem with her was. It is clear that it was a racial issue, by virtue of the use of “Cushite.” Whether she was of darker skin than the Hebrews would be hard to say, since the Bible gives no further detail. Neither does it say if this is a second wife, or a woman Moses married since Zipporah went home (Exod 18:2). These do not seem to be the issues the text wishes to elaborate on; it is simply stating that this woman was the occasion for a deeper challenge.
³tn Heb “taken.”
⁴tn Now the text changes to use a plural form of the verb. The indication is that Miriam criticized the marriage, and then the two of them raised questions about his sole leadership of the nation.
⁵tn The use of both raq and ’ak (qr~ and Eo^) underscore the point that the issue is Moses’ uniqueness.
⁶tn There is irony in the construction in the text. The expression “speak through us” also uses dibber + b^e (B= + rB@D!). They ask if God has not also spoken through them, after thay have spoken against Moses. Shortly God will speak against them—their words are prophetic, but not as they imagined.
sn The questions are rhetorical. They are affirming that God does not only speak through Moses, but also speaks through them. They see themselves as equal with Moses. The question that was asked of the earlier presumptuous Moses— “who made you a ruler over us?”—could also be asked of them. God had not placed them as equals with Moses. The passage is relevant for today when so many clamor for equal authority and leadership with those whom God has legitimately called.
⁷sn The statement is striking. Obviously the LORD knows all things. But the statement of the obvious here is meant to indicate that the LORD was about to do something about this.
⁸tc The spelling of the word is a k^ethiv-q^ere’ reading with only a slight difference between the two.
tn The word ‘anaw (wnu) means “humble.” The word may reflect a trustful attitude (as in Pss 25:9, 37:11), but perhaps here the idea of “more tolerant” or “long-suffering.” The point is that Moses is not self-assertive. God singled out Moses and used him in such a way as to show that he was a unique leader. For a suggestion that the word means “miserable,” see C. Rogers, “Moses: Meek of Miserable?” JETS 29 (1986):257-263.
sn Humility is a quality missing today in most leaders. Far too many are self-promoting, or competitive, or pompous even. The statement in this passage would have been difficult for Moses to write—and indeed, it is not impossible that an editor might have added it. One might think that for someone to claim to be humble is an arrogant act. But the statement is one of fact—he was not self-assertive (until Num 20 when he strikes the rock).
⁹tn The form of this construction is rare: n^ebi’akem (<k#o&yo!n+) would normally be rendered “your prophet.” The singular noun is suffixed with a plural pronominal suffix. Some commentators think the MT has condensed “a prophet” with “to you.”
¹⁰sn The title “my servant” or “servant of the LORD” is reserved in the Bible for distinguished personages, people who are truly spiritual leaders, like Moses, David, Hezekiah, and also the Messiah. Here it underscores Moses’ obedience.
¹¹tn The word “faithful” is ne’eman (/mo$n\), the niphal participle of the verb ’aman (/mo). This basic word has the sense of “support, be firm.” In the niphal it describes something that is firm, reliable, dependable—what can be counted on. It could actually be translated “trustworthy.”
¹²tn The emphasis of the line is clear enough—it begins literally “mouth to mouth” I will speak with him. In human communication this would mean equality of rank; but Moses is certainly not equal in rank with the LORD. And yet God is here stating that Moses has an immediacy and directness with communication with God. It goes beyond the idea of friendship, almost to that of a king’s confidant.
¹³tn The word mar’eh (ho#r+m^) refers to what is seen, a vision, an appearance. Here it would have the idea of that which is clearly visible, open, obvious.
¹⁴tn The word “form” (t^emunah [hnWmT=]) means “shape, image, form.” The Greek text took it metaphorically and rendered it “the glory of the LORD.” This line expresses even more the uniqueness of Moses. The elders saw God on one special occasion (Exod 24:10), and the people never (Deut 4:12, 15). But Moses has direct and familiar contact with God.
¹⁵tn The disjunctive waw is here introducing a circumstantial clause of time.
¹⁶tn There is no verb “became in this line. The second half of the line is introduced with the particle hinneh (hn@h!), “look, behold” in its archaic sense. This deictic use is intended to make the reader focus on Miriam as well.
¹⁷sn The word “leprosy” and “leprous” covers a wide variety of skin diseases, and need not be limited to the actual disease of leprosy. The description of it here has to do with snow, either the whiteness or the wetness. If that is the case then there would be open wounds and sores—like Job’s illness (see Noth, Numbers, pp. 95,6).
¹⁸tn Heb “turned to.”
¹⁹tn The expression bi ‘adoni (yn!d)o& yB!), “Oh my lord,” shows a good deal of respect for Moses by Aaron. The expression is often used in addressing God.
²⁰tn The form is intensified by the infinitive absolute; but here the infinitive strengthens not simply the verbal idea, but the conditional cause construction as well.
²¹tn The clause has the niphal infinitive construct after a temporal preposition.
¹sn Chapter 13 provides the names of the spies sent into the land (1-16), their instructions (17-20), their activities (21-25), and their reports (26-33). It is a chapter that serves as a good lesson on faith, for some of the spies walked by faith, and some by sight.
²tn The verse starts with the waw consecutive on the verb: “and . . . .”
³tn The imperfect tense with the conjunction is here subordinated to the preceding imperative to form the purpose clause. It could be translated “send . . . to investigate.”
⁴tn The participle here should be given a future interpretation, meaning “which I am about to give, which I am going to give.”
⁵tn Heb “one man one man of the tribe of his fathers.”
⁶tn Heb “heads.”
⁷tn The difference in the names is slight, a change from “he saves” to “the LORD saves.” The Greek text used Iesoun, for Hebrew Yeshua‘.
⁸tn The preterite with the waw consecutive is here subordinated to the next verb of the same formation to express a temporal clause.
⁹tn The instructions had them first go up into the southern desert of the land, and after passing through that, into the hill country of the Canaanites. The text could be rendered “into the Negev” as well as “through the Negev.”
¹⁰tn The form is the perfect tense with the waw consecutive; the word therefore carries the volitional mood of the preceding imperatives. It may be either another imperative, or it may be subordinated as a purpose clause.
¹¹tn Heb “see the land, what it is.”
¹²tn The verb is the hithpael perfect with a waw consecutive, from the root hazaq qz?), “to be strong.” Here it could mean “strengthen yourselves” or “be courageous” or “determined.” See further uses in 2 Sam 10:12; 1 Kgs 20:22; 1 Chr 19:13).
¹³tn Heb “Now the days were the days of.”
¹⁴tn The reference to the first ripe grapes would put the time somewhere at the end of July.
¹⁵sn Zin is on the southern edge of the land, but Rehob is far north, near Mount Hermon. The spies covered all the land.
¹⁶tn The idiom uses the infinitive construct: “to enter Hamath,” meaning, “on the way that people go to Hamath.”
¹⁷tn The preterite with the waw consecutive is here subordinated to the following clause. The first verse gave the account of their journey over the whole land; this section focuses on what happened in the area of Hebron, which would be the basis for the false report.
¹⁸sn These names are thought to be three clans that were in the Hebron area (see Josh 15:14; Judg 1:20). To call them descendants of Anak is usually taken to mean that they were large, or tall people (2 Sam 21:18-22). They were ultimately driven out by Caleb.
¹⁹sn The text now provides a little historical aside for the readers. Zoan was probably the city of Tanis, although that is disputed today by some scholars. It was known in Egypt in the New Kingdom as “the fields of Tanis,” which corresponded to the “fields of Zoar” in the Hebrew Bible (Ps 78:12, 43).
²⁰tn The word is related etymologically to the verb for “slip, slide, bend, totter.” This would fit the use very well. A pole that would not bend would be hard to use to carry things; but a pole or stave that was flexible would serve well.
²¹tn The verb is rendered as a passive because there is no expressed subject.
²²tn The translation “brook” might be too generous; it refers to a river bed, a ravine or valley, through which torrents of rain would rush in the rainy season.
²³tn The word “Eshcol” is drawn from the Hebrew expression concerning the “cluster of grapes.” The word is probably retained in in the name Burj Haskeh, two miles north of Damascus.
²⁴tn The construction literally has “and they went and they entered,” which may be smoothed out as a verbal hendiadys, the one verb modifying the other.
²⁵tn This is Ain Qadeis, about 50 miles south of Beersheba. It is called Kadesh-barnea in Num 32:8.
²⁶tn It is literally, “They brought back word”; the verb is the hiphil preterite of sub (bWv).
²⁷tn Literally “him” for Moses.
²⁸tn The relative clause modifies “the land.” It is constructed with the relative and the verb: “where you sent us.”
²⁹sn This is the common expression for the material abundance of the land (see further, F. C. Fensham, “An Ancient Tradition of the Fertility of Palestine,” PEQ 98 [1966]:166-167).
³⁰tn The word ’epem (<p#o#) forms a very strong adversative. The land was indeed rich and fruitful, but . . . .”
³¹tn Heb “by the side [hand] of.”
³²sn For more discussion on these groups, see D. J. Wiseman, ed., Peoples of Old Testament Times (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1973).
³³tn The construction is emphatic, using the cohortative with the infinitive absolute to strengthen it: ‘aloh na‘aleh (hl#u&n~ hl)u), “let us go up” with the sense of certainty and immediacy.
³⁴tn The perfect tense with the waw consecutive brings the cohortative idea forward: “and let us possess it”; it may also be subordinated to form a purpose or result idea.
³⁵tn Here again the confidence of Caleb is expressed with the infinitive absolute and the imperfect tense: yakol nukal (lkWn lOky), “we are fully able” to do this. The verb yakal (lky) followed by the preposition lamed means “to prevail over, to conquer.”
³⁶tn The waw disjunctive on the noun at the beginning of the clause forms a strong adversative clause here.
³⁷tn Or, an evil report, i.e., one that was a defamation of the grace of God.
³⁸tn Heb “which we passed over in it”; the pronoun on the preposition serves as a resumptive pronoun for the relative, and need not be translated literally.
³⁹tn The verb is the feminine singular participle from ’akal (lko); it modifies the land as a “devouring land,” a bold figure for the difficulty of living in the place.
⁴⁰sn The expression has been interpreted in a number of ways, such as that the land was infertile (McNeile, Gray), that the Canaanites were cannibals (Binns), that it is a land filled with warlike dissensions (Noth), or that it denotes a land geared for battle (Coats, Rebellion . . . .). It may be that they intended the land to seem in fertile and insecure.
⁴¹tc The Greek version uses gigantes to translate “the Nephilim”; but it does not retain the clause “the sons of Anak are from the Nephilim.”
sn The Nephilim are the legendary giants of antiquity. They are first discussed in Gen 6:4. This forms part of the pessimism of their report.
¹sn This chapter forms part of the story already begun. There are three major sections here: dissatisfaction with the reports (1-10), the threat of divine punishment (11-38), and the defeat of the Israelites (39-45). See also, K. D. Sakenfeld, “The Problem of Divine Forgiveness in Num 14,” CBQ 37 (1975):317-330. See also J. R. Bartlett, “The Use of the Word vor) as a Title in the Old Testament,” VT 19 (1969):1-10.
²tn The two verbs form a hendiadys, and the idiom of raising the voice means that they cried aloud.
³tn There are a number of things that the verb “to weep, wail” can connote. It could reflect joy, grief, lamentation, repentance; but here it reflects fear, hopelessness, vexation at the thought of coming all this way and being defeated by the Canaanite armies. See Judges 20:23, 26.
⁴tn The verb “to murmur” is lun (/Wl). It is a strong word, signifying far more than complaining or grumbling, as some of the modern translations have it. The word is most often connected to the wilderness experience. It is paralleled in the literature with the word “to rebel.” The murmuring is like a parliamentary vote of no confidence, for they no longer trusted their leaders and wished to choose a new leader and return. This “return to Egypt” becomes a symbol of their lack of faith in the LORD.
⁵tn The optative is expressed by lu (Wl) and then the verb, here the perfect tense matnu (Wnt=m^)—“Oh that we had died . . . .” Had they wanted to die in Egypt they should not have cried out to the LORD to deliver them from bondage. Here the people become consumed with the fear and worry of what lay ahead, and in their panic reveal a lack of trust in God.
⁶tn Heb “a man to his brother.”
⁷tn The verb is natan (/tn), “to give,” but this verb has quite a wide range of meanings in the Bible. Here it must mean “make, choose, designate” or the like.
⁸tn The word “head” (ro’s [vor)]) probably refers to a tribal chief who was capable to judge and to lead to war (see J. R. Bartlett, “The Use of the Word ‘vor)’”).
⁹tn The form is a cohortative with a waw prefixed. After the preceding cohortative this could also be interpreted as a purpose or result clause—in order that we may return.
¹⁰sn his action of Moses and Aaron is typical of them in the wilderness with the Israelites. The act show self-abasement and deference before the sovereign LORD. They are not hear bowing before the people, but in front of the people they bow before God. According to Numbers 17:6-15 this prostration is for intercessory prayer. Here it prevents immediate wrath from God.
¹¹tn The repetition of the adverb m^e’od (do)m=) is used to express this: “very, very [good].”
¹²tn The objective genitives “milk and honey” are symbols of the wealth of the land, second only to bread. Milk was a sign of such abundance (Gen 49:12; Isa 7:21,22). Because of the climate the milk would thicken quickly and become curds, eaten with bread or turned into butter. The honey mentioned here is the wild honey (see Deut 32:13; Judg 14:8-9). It signified sweetness, or the finer things of life (Ezek 3:3).
¹³sn The expression must indicate that they could destroy the enemies as easily as they could eat bread.
¹⁴sn Heb “their shade.” The figure compares the shade from the sun with the protection from the enemy. It is also possible that the text is alluding to their deities here (see commentaries of Noth, Binn, and Sturdy).
¹⁵tn Heb “said to stone them with stones.” The verb and the object are not from the same root, but the combination nonetheless forms an emphasis equal to the cognate accusative.
¹⁶tn The waw on the noun “glory” indicates a strong contrast, one that interrupts their threatened attack.
¹⁷sn The “glory of the LORD” refers to the reality of the LORD’s presence in a manifestation of his power and splendor. It showed to all that God was a living God. The appearance of the glory indicated blessing for obedience folk, but disaster for the disobedient.
¹⁸tn The verb na’as (Jon) means “to condemn, spurn (BDB), despise, treat without respect” (KBL). Coats suggests that in some contexts the word means actual rejection or renunciation (Rebellion, 146,7). This would include the idea of distaste.
¹⁹tn The verb “to believe” (root ’aman [/mo]) has the basic idea of support, dependability for the root. The hihpil has a declarative sense, namely, to consider something reliable or dependable and to act on it. The people did not trust what the LORD said.
²⁰tc The Greek has “death.”
²¹tn The construction is unusual in that we have here a perfect tense with a waw consecutive with no verb before it to establish the time sequence. The context requires that this be taken as a waw consecutive. It actually forms the prodasis for the next verse, and would best be rendered “when . . . then they will say.”
²²tn The participle is to be taken here as a collective, representing all the inhabitants of the land.
²³tn “Face to face” is literally “eye to eye.” It only occurs elsewhere in Isaiah 52:8. This expresses the closest communication possible.
²⁴tn The verb is the hiphil perfect of mut (tWm), w^ehemattah (hTm^h@w+). The waw consecutive makes this also a future time sequence verb, but again in a conditional clause.
²⁵tn Heb “as one man.”
²⁶tc The form in the text is ‘adonay (ynd)o&), the word that is usually used in place of the tetragrammaton. It is the plural form with the pronominal suffix, and so must refer to God.
²⁷tn The expression is rab hesed (ds#?#-br~) means “much of loyal love,” or “faithful love.” Some have it “totally faithful,” but that omits the aspect of his love.
²⁸tn Or “rebellion.”
²⁹tn The infinitive absolute emphasizes the verbal activity of the imperfect tense, which here serves as a habitual imperfect. Negated it states what God does not do; and the infinitive makes that certain.
³⁰sn The Decalogue adds “to those who hate me.” The point of the line is that the effects of sin, if not the sinful traits themselves, are passed on to the next generation.
³¹tn The verb selah-na’ (on-?l^s=), the imperative form, means “forgive” (see Ps 130:4), pardon, excuse.” The imperative is of course a prayer, a desire, and not a command.
³²tn The construct unit is “the greatness of your loyal love.” This is the genitive of specification, the first word being the modifier.
³³sn This is the oath formula; but in the Pentateuch it occurs here and in v. 28.
³⁴tn The verb nasah (hsn) means “to test, tempt, prove.” It can be used in contexts to indicate things are tried or proven, or in contexts for testing in a good sense, or tempting in the bad sense, i.e., putting God to the test. In all uses there is uncertainty or doubt about the outcome. So if God tests Abraham in Genesis 22:1, it is because there is uncertainty whether he fears the LORD or not. If people like Gideon put out the fleece and test the LORD, it is done by faith but in order to be certain of the LORD’s presence. But here, when these people put God to the test ten times, it was because they doubted the goodness and ability of God, and this was a major weakness. They had proof to the contrary, but chose to challenge God.
³⁵tn “Ten” is here a round figure, emphasizing the complete testing. But see F. V. Winnett, The Mosaic Tradition (Toronto: TUP, 1949), pp. 121-154.
³⁶tn The word ’im (<o!) indicates a negative oath formula: “if” means “they will not.” It is elliptical. In a human oath on would be saying: “The LORD do to me if the see . . . ,” meaning, they will by no means see. Here God is swearing that they will not see the land.
³⁷tn Heb “seed.”
³⁸sn The judgment on Israel is that they turn back to the desert and not attack the tribes in the land. So a parenthetical clause is inserted to state who was living there. They would surely block the entrance to the land from the south—unless God removed them. And he is not going to do that for Israel.
³⁹tn The figure is aposiopesis, or sudden silence. The main verb is deleted from the line, “how long . . . this evil community.” The intensity of the emotion is the reason for the ellipsis.
⁴⁰sn It is worth mentioning in passing that this is one of the Rabbinic proof texts for having at least ten men to form a congregation and have prayer. If God called ten men (the bad spies) ten men, a congregation must have ten men. But of course, the word “community/congregation” refers to the people as a whole.
⁴¹sn Here again is the oath that God swore in his wrath, an oath he swore by himself, that they would not enter the land. “As the LORD lives,” or, “by the life of the LORD,” are ways to render it.
⁴²tn The word n^e’um (<o%n+) is an “oracle.” It is followed by the subjective genitive: “the oracle of the LORD” is equal to saying “the LORD says.”
⁴³sn They had expressed the longing to have died in the wilderness, and not in war. God will now give them that. They would not say to God “your will be done,” so he says to them, “your will be done” (to borrow from C. S. Lewis).
⁴⁴tn The relative pronoun “which” is joined with the resumptive pronoun “in it” to form a smoother reading “where.”
⁴⁵tn The text uses the anthropomorphic expression, “I raised my hand” in taking an oath.
⁴⁶tn Heb “to cause you to dwell, settle.”
⁴⁷tn The word is “shepherds.” It means that the people would be wilderness nomads, grazing their flock on available land.
⁴⁸tn Heb “you shall bear your whoredoms.” The imagery of prostitution is used throughout the Bible to reflect spiritual unfaithfulness, leaving the covenant relationship and following after false gods. Here it is used generally for their rebellion in the wilderness, but not for following other gods.
⁴⁹tn The infinitive is from tamam (<mT), which means “to be complete.” The word is often used to express completeness in a good sense—whole, blameless, or the like. Here and in v. 35 it seems to mean “until your deaths have been completed.” See also Gen 47:15; Deut 2:15.
⁵⁰tn Heb “you shall bear.”
⁵¹tn The phrase refers to the consequences of open hostility to God, or perhaps abandonment of God. The noun t^enu’ah (hoWnT=) occurs in Job 33:10 (perhaps). The related verb occurs in Num 30:6 and 32:7 with the sense of “disallow, discourage.” The sense of the expression adopted in this translation comes from the meticulous study of R. Loewe, “Divine Frustration Exegetically Frustrated,” in Words and Meanings, ed. by Peter Ackroyd and B. Lindars (Cambridge: CUP, 1968), pp. 137-158.
⁵²tn The verb is the hiphil infinitive construct with a lamed preposition from the root yasa’ (oXy), “to bring out.” The use of the infinitive here is epexegetical, that is, explaining how they caused the people to murmur.
⁵³tn The Hebrew uses the preposition “from, some of”—“from those men.” The relative pronoun is added to make a smoother reading.
⁵⁴tn The preterite here is subordinated to the next preterite to form a temporal clause.
⁵⁵tn The word ‘abal (lbo) is rare, used mostly for mourning over deaths, but it is used here of mourning over bad news (see also Exod 33:4; 1 Sam 15:35; 16:1; etc.).
⁵⁶tn The verb wayyaskimu (WmK!v=Y~w~) is often found in a verbal hendiadys construction: they rose early . . . and they went up” means “they went up early.”
⁵⁷tn The text says literally “the top of the hill,” but judging from the location and the terrain it probably means the heights of the hill country.
⁵⁸tn The verb is simply “said,” but it means the place that the LORD said to go up to in order to fight.
⁵⁹sn Their sin was unbelief. They could have gone and conquered the area if they had trusted the LORD for their victory. They did not, and so they were condemned to perish in the wilderness. Now, thinking that by going they can undo all that, they plan to go. But this is also disobedience, for the LORD said they would not now take the land, and yet they think they can. Here is their second sin, presumption.
⁶⁰tn The line literally has, “Why is this [that] you are transgressing . . . .” The demonstrative pronoun is enclitic; it brings the force of “why in the world are you doing this now?”
⁶¹tn This verb could also be subordinated to the preceding: “that you be no smitten.”
⁶²tn N. H. Snaith compares Arabic ‘afala, “to swell,” and gafala, “reckless, headstrong” (Numbers, p. 248). The word ‘opel (lp#u)) means a “rounded hill” or a “tumor.” The idea behind the verb may be that of “swelling,” and so “act presumptuously.”
⁶³tn The disjunctive waw here introduces a circumstantial clause; the most appropriate one here would be the concessive “although.”
⁶⁴tn Heb “came down.”
⁶⁵tn The verb used here means “crush by beating,” or “pounded” them. The Greek text used “cut them in pieces.”
⁶⁶tn The name “Hormah” means “destruction”; it is from the word that means “ban, devote” for either destruction or temple use.
⁶⁷sn The wilderness wandering officially having begun, these rules were then given for the people to be used when they finally entered the land. That they would be provided here would be of some encouragement to the nation after their great failure. God still spoke of a land that was to be their land, even though they had sinned greatly.
¹sn This chapter collects a number of religious rules. The first 16 verses deal with rulings for sacrifices. Then, vv. 17-36 concerns sins of omission. Finally, rules concerning tassels are covered (vv. 37-41). For additional reading, see G. B. Gray, Sacrifice in the Old Testament (Oxford: Clarendon, 1925); B. A. Levine, In the Presence of the LORD—A Study of Cult and Some Cultic Terms (Leiden: Brill, 1974); D. J. McCarthy, “The Symbolism of Blood and Sacrifice,” JBL 88 (1969):166-176; “Further Notes on the Symbolism of Blood and Sacrifice,” JBL 92 (1973):205-210; J. Milgrom, “Sin Offering or Purification Offering,” VT 21 (1971):237-239; N. H. Snaith, “Sacrifices in the Old Testament,” VT 7 (1957):308-317; R. J. Thompson, Penitence and Sacrifice in Early Israel (Leiden: E. J. Brill, 1960); Roland de Vaux, Studies in Old Testament Sacrifice (Cardiff: University of Wales, 1964).
²tn The text simply has “the land of your habitations.”
³tn The participle here has the futur use of the participle, expressing that something is going to take place. It is not imminent, but it is certain that God would give the land to Israel.
⁴tn The three words at the beginning of this verse are all etymologically related: “the one who offers his offering shall offer.”
⁵sn Obviously, as the wording of the text affirms, this kind of offering would be made after they were in the land and able to produce the grain and oil for the sacrifices. The instructions anticipated their ability to do this, and this would give hope to them. The amounts are difficult to determine, but it may be that they were to bring 4.5 litres of flour and 1.8 litres each of oil and wine.
⁶sn The drink-offering was an ancient custom, mentioned in the Ugaritic tablets of Ras Shamra (14^th century B.C.). The drink offering was poured out at the base of the altar (see Sir 50:15, and Josephus, Antiquities 3.9.4).
⁷tn Heb “for the one lamb,” but it clearly means “for each lamb.”
⁸tn The text changes from direct address here to the third person form of the verb. If the text is correct, then to make a smooth translation it would need to be made a passive (in view of the fact that no subject is expressed).
⁹tn Heb “according to thus shall it be done.”
¹⁰tn The word gur (rWG) was traditionally translated “to sojourn,” i.e., to live temporarily in a land. Here the two words are from the root: “if a sojourner sojourns.”
¹¹tn The text just says “to your generations,” but in means in the future.
¹²tn The imperfect tenses must reflect the responsibility to comply with the law, and so the classifications of instruction or obligation may be applied.
¹³tn The word “apply” is supplied in the translation.
¹⁴tn Or, “a statute forever.”
¹⁵tn Heb “as you, as [so] the alien.”
¹⁶tn The relative clause is literally, “which I am causing you to enter there.” The final adverb is resumptive, and must be joined with the relative pronoun.
¹⁷tn The verse has a temporal clause that actually continues or supplements the temporal clause of the preceding verse. It is made up of the temporal indicator, the infinitive construct with the preposition, and the suffixed subjective genitive: “and it shall be when you eat.” Here it is translated simply “and eat” since the temporal element was introduced in the last verse.
¹⁸tn This is the t^erumah (hmWrT=), the “raised offering” or “heave offering” as it has been rendered. It may simply be called a “contribution.” The verb of the sentence is from the same root: “you shall lift up/raise up.” It was to be an offering separated from the rest and raised up to the LORD in the sight of all. It was designed to remind the Israelites that the produce and the land belonged to God.
¹⁹tn Or, “the first of your dough.” The phrase is not very clear. Snaith thinks it means a batch of leaves from the kneading trough—the first batch of the baking (Numbers, p. 251).
²⁰sn These regulations supplement what was already ruled on in the Levitical code for the purification and reparation offerings. See those rulings in Lev 4-7 for all the details. The critical view is that the rules in Leviticus are more elaborate and therefore later. Such reasoning is based on a false presupposition of the text to begin with, and a misunderstanding of the purpose of each collection.
²¹tn The verb is the plural imperfect; the sin discussed here is a sin committed by the community, or the larger part of the community.
²²tn The idea of lisgagah (hggv=l!) seems to be that of “inadvertence” or “without intent.” The text gives no indication of how this offense might be committed, or what it might include. It probably describes any transgressions done in ignorance of the Law that involved a violation of tabernacle procedure or priestly protocol or social misdemeanor. Even though it was done unintentionally, it was still a violation and called for ritual purification.
²³tn Heb “[away] from the eyes of the community.”
²⁴tn The verb is the piel perfect with the waw consecutive, w^ekipper (rP#k!w+) to continue the instruction of the passage: “the priest shall make atonement,” meaning the priest is to make atonement for the sin (thus the present translation). This verb means “to expiate, atone for, pacify.” It describes the ritual events by which someone who was separated from the holy LORD God could find acceptance into his presence through the sacrificial blood of the substitutionary animal. See Lev 1, and Num 17:6-15.
²⁵tn Or, “they will be forgiven.”
²⁶tn Again, rather than translate literally “and it shall be forgiven [to] them” (all the community), one could say, “they (all the community) will be forgiven.” The meaning is the same.
²⁷tn The text has w^e’im-nepes ‘ahat (t?^o^ vp#n\-<o!w+), sometime translated “and if any soul.” But the word describes the whole person, the soul in the body; it refers here to the individual who sins.
²⁸tn The sin is described literally as acting with a high hand—b^eyad ramah (hmr dyB=). The expression is to be taken to mean that someone would do something with deliberate defiance, with an arrogance in spite of what the LORD said. It is as if the sinner was about to attack God, or at least lifting his hand against God. The implication of the expression is that it was done in full knowledge of the Law (especially since this contrasts throughout with the sins of ignorance). Blatant defiance of the word of the LORD is dealt with differently. For similar expressions, see Exod 14:8 and Num 33:3.
²⁹tn The verb occurs only in the piel; it means “to blaspheme, revile.”
³⁰tn The word order places “Yahweh” first for emphasis—it is the LORD such a person insults.
³¹tn The clause begins with “and” because the verb is the perfect tense with the waw consecutive. As discussed with Num 9:13, to be cut off could mean excommunication from the community, death by the community, or death by divine intervention.
³²tn The verb bazah (hzB), “to despise,” means to treat something as worthless, to treat it with contempt, to look down the nose at something as it were.
³³tn The verb parar (rrP), “to break,” can mean to nullify, break, violate a covenant.
³⁴tn The construction uses the niphal imperfect with the modifying niphal infinitive absolute. The infinitive makes the sentence more emphatic. If the imperfect tense is taken as an instruction imperfect, then the infinitive makes the instruction more binding. If it is a simple future, then the future is certain. In either case, there is no exclusion from being cut off.
³⁵sn The point is that his iniquity remains with him—he must pay for his sin. The judgment of God in such a case is both appropriate and unavoidable.
³⁶tn The preterite of the verb “to be” is here subordinated to the next, parallel verb form, to form a temporal clause.
³⁷sn For this brief passage, see A. Phillips, “The Case of the Woodgatherer Reconsidered,” VT 19 (1969):125-128; J. Weingreen, “The Case of the Woodgatherer (Numbers XV 32-36),” VT 16 (1966):361-364; and B. J. Bamberger, “Revelations of Torah after Sinai,” HUCA 16 (1941):97-113. Weingreen argues that there is something of the Rabbinic method of setting a fence around the Law here; in other words, if this sin was not punished, the Law would have been violated in greater ways. Gathering of wood, although seemingly harmless, is done with intent to kindle fire, and so reveals a culpable intent.
³⁸tn The sentence begins with the emphatic use of the infinitive absolute with the verb in the hophal imperfect: “he shall surely be put to death.” Then, a second infinitive absolute ragom (<Ogr) provides the explanatory activity—all the community is to stone him with stones. The punishment is consistent with other decrees from God (see Exod 31:14,15; 35:2). Moses had either forgotten such, or they had simply neglected to (or were hesitant to) enact them.
³⁹tn The construction uses the imperative followed by perfect tenses with waw consecutives. The first perfect tense may be translated as the imperative, but the second, being a third common plural form, has to be subordinated as a purpose clause, or as the object of the preceding verb: “speak . . . and say . . . that they make.”
⁴⁰tn Here we have the reference to the sisit (tX!yX!), the fringes on the borders of the robes. They were meant to hang from the corners of the upper garment (Deut 22:12), which was worn on top of the clothing. The tassel was probably made by twisting the overhanging threads of the garment into a knot that would hang down. This was a reminder of the covenant. The tassels were retained down through history, and today more elaborate prayer shawls with tassels are worn during prayer. For more information, see F. J. Stephens, “The Ancient Significance of Sisith,” JBL 50 (1931):59-70; and S. Bertman, “Tasselled Garments in the Ancient East Mediterranean,” BA 24 (1961):119-128.
⁴¹sn The blue may represent the heavenly origin of the Law, or perhaps being a royal color the majesty of the LORD.
⁴²tn Heb “seek out, look into.”
⁴³tn This last clause is a relative clause explaining the influence of of the human heart and physical sight. It literally says, “which you go whoring after them.” The verb for “whoring” may be interpreted to mean “act unfaithfully.” So, the idea is these influence lead to unfaithful activity: “after which you act unfaithfully.”
⁴⁴tn This clause also serves as a purpose/result clause of the preceding—“in order that you may remember . . . .” But because the line is so long, it is simpler to make this a separate sentence.
¹sn There are three main movements in the story of chapter 16. The first is the rebellion itself (1-19). The second is the judgment (20-35). Third is the atonement for the rebels (36-50). The whole chapter is a marvelous account of a massive rebellion against the leaders that concludes with reconciliation. For reading, see G. Hort, “The Death of Qorah,” ABR 7 (1959):2-26; and J. Liver, “Korah, Dathan and Abiram,” Studies in the Bible (ed. C. Rabid), Scripta Hierosolymitana 8 (Jerusalem: Magnes, 1961):189-217.
²tn There is no object in the text for “took.”
³tn These men must have been counselors or judges of some kind.
⁴tn Heb “men of name,” or “men of renown.”
⁵tn The meaning of rab-lakem (<k#l-br~) is something like “you have assumed far too much authority.” It simply means “much to you,” perhaps “you have gone to far,” or “you are overreaching yourselves (Noth). He is objecting to the exclusiveness of the system that Moses has been introducing.
⁶tn Heb “him.”
⁷tn Heb “his congregation” or “his community.” The expression is unusual, but what it signifies is that Korah had set up a rival “Israel” with himself as leader.
⁸tn The verb is the piel perfect. There is no imperfect tense before this, which makes the construction a little difficult. If the waw is classified as a consecutive, then the form would stand alone as an equivalent to the imperfect, and rendered as a modal nuance such as “would you [now] seek,” or as a progressive imperfect, “are you seeking.” This latter nuance can be obtained by treating it as a regular perfect tense, with an instantaneous nuance: “do you [now] seek.”
sn Moses discerned correctly the real motivation for the rebellion. Korah wanted to be the high priest because he saw how much power there was in the spiritual leadership in Israel. He wanted something like a general election with himself as the candidate and his supporters promoting him. The great privilege of being a Levite and serving in the sanctuary was not enough for him—the status did not satisfy him. Korah gave no rebuttal. It has often been the case that people called to one form of ministry have sought to seize the power of another, without God’s approval. The test would be one of ministering with incense. This would bring them into direct proximity with the LORD. If God honored Korah as a ministering priest, then it would be settled. But Moses accuses them of rebellion against the LORD, because the LORD had chosen Aaron to be the priest.
⁹sn The question indicates that they have been murmuring against Aaron, that is, expressing disloyalty and challenging his leadership. But it is against the LORD they have been murmuring, because the LORD has put Aaron in that position.
¹⁰tn The verb qara’ (orq) followed by the lamed preposition does not mean “call to” but “summon.” This is a command performance; for them to appear would be to submit to Moses’ authority. This they will not do.
¹¹tn The imperfect tense na‘aleh (hl#u&n~) expresses their unwillingness to report: we are not willing, or we will not.” The verb means “to go up.” It is used in the sense of appearing before an authority or a superior (see Gen 46:31; Deut 25:7; Judg 4:5).
¹²tn The question is rhetorical. It was not a small thing to them—it was a big thing, it was enough that Moses had brought them to die in the wilderness.
¹³tn The modern critic has no sense of the irony here. He is apt to see these words belonging to an earlier tradition about going up to the land of Canaan that flows with milk and honey. But what is happening is that the text is showing how twisted the thinking of the rebels is. They have turned things completely around. Egypt was the land flowing with milk and honey, not Canaan where they will die. The words of rebellion are seldom original, and always twisted.
¹⁴tn The verb histarer (rr@TC=h!) is the hithpael infinitive absolute that emphasizes the preceding tistarer (rr@TC=T!), the hithpael imperfect tense (both forms having metathesis). The verb means “to rule, act like a price, to make oneself a prince.” This is the only occurrence of the reflexive for this verb. The exact emphasis is difficult to translate into English. But they are accusing Moses of seizing princely power for himself, perhaps making a sarcastic reference to his former status in Egypt. The rebels here are telling Moses that they had discerned his scheme, and so he could not hoodwink (NEB) them.
¹⁵tn Here ’ap ([o^) has the sense of “in addition.” It is not a common use.
¹⁶tn The Hebrew expression says “will you bore out the eyes of these men?” The question is “Will you continue to mislead them?” (or “hoodwink” them). In Deut 16:19 it is used for taking a bribe; something like that kind of deception is intended here. They are simply stating that Moses is a deceiver who is misleading the people with false promises.
¹⁷tn The verb means “to turn toward”; it is a figurative expression that means “to pay attention to” or “to have regard for.” So this is a prayer against Dathan and Abiram.
¹⁸tn Literally “and take, a man, his censor.”
¹⁹tn This, and the next verb, are both perfect tenses with waw consecutives. Following the imperative they carry the same force, but in sequence.
²⁰tn This clause is clearly foundational for the clause that follows, the appearance of the LORD; therefore it should be subordinated to the next as a temporal clause (one preterite followed by another preterite may be so subordinated).
²¹tn The verb is hibbad^elu (Wld+Bh!), the niphal imperative of badal (ldB). This is the same word that was just used when Moses reminded the Levites that they had been separated from the community to serve the LORD.
²²sn The group of people siding with Korah is meant, and not the entire community of the people of Israel. They are an assembly of rebels, their “community” consisting in their common plot.
²³sn It is Moses and Aaron who prostrate themselves; they have the good of the people at heart.
²⁴tn The expression “the God of the spirits of all humanity [flesh]” is somewhat difficult. The text says ’elohe haruhot l^ekol-basar (rCB-lkl= t?)Wrh yh@l)o$). This expression occurs in Num 27:16 again. It also occurs on some post-biblical texts, which prompts the critical scholar to conclude that it is a late addition. The words clearly show that Moses is interceding for the congregation. The appeal in the verse is that it is better for one man to die for the whole nation than the whole nation for one man (see also John 11:50).
²⁵tn The verb is the qal imperfect yeheta’ (oF?$y\); it refers to the sinful rebellion of Korah, but Moses is stating something of a principle: one man sins, and will you be angry . . . .” A past tense translation would assume that this is a preterite use of the imperfect (without the waw consecutive).
²⁶tn The motif of “going up” is still present; here the text says “go up” (the niphal imperative—go up yourselves”) from their tents, meaning, move away from them.
²⁷tn Heb “rose up.”
²⁸tn The word rasa‘ (uvr) has the sense of a guilty criminal. The word “wicked” sometimes gives the wrong connotation. These men were opposing the LORD, and so were condemned as criminals—they were guilty. The idea of “wickedness” therefore applies in that sense.
²⁹tn The preposition b^e (B=) in this line is causal—“on account of their sins.”
³⁰sn The impression is that the people did not hear what the LORD said to Moses, but only what Moses said to the people as a result. They saw the brilliant cloud, and perhaps heard the sound of his voice; but the relaying of the instructions indicates they did not hear the actual instruction from the LORD himself.
³¹tn The verb nissabim (<yb!Xn!) suggests a defiant stance, for the word is often used in the sense of taking a stand for or against something. It can also be somewhat neutral, having the sense of positioning oneself for a purpose.
³²tn Heb “in this.”
³³tn The text simply has ki-lo’ millibbi (yB!L!m! ol-yK!), “for not from my heart.” The heart is the center of the will, the place decisions are made (see H. W. Wolf, Anthropology of the Old Testament). Moses is saying that the things he has done have not come “from the will of man” so to speak—and certainly not from some secret desire on his part to seize power.
³⁴tn Heb “if like the death of every man they die.”
³⁵tn The noun is “appointment, visitation” (p^equdah [hdWqP=). The expression refers to a natural death, parallel to the first expression.
³⁶tn The verb bara’ (orB) is normally translated “create” in the Bible. More specifically it means to fashion or make or do something new and fresh. Here the verb is joined with its cognate accusative to underscore that this will be so different everyone will know it is of God.
³⁷tn The figures are personifications. But they vividly describe the catastrophe to follow—which was very much like a mouth swallowing them.
³⁸tn The word is “life” or “lifetime”; it certainly means their lives—they themselves. But the presence of this word suggest more. It is an accusative specifying the state of the subject—they will go down alive to Sheol.
³⁹tn The word “Sheol” in the Bible can be used four different ways: the grave, the realm of the departed [wicked] spirits or Hell, death in general, or a place of extreme danger (that will lead to the grave if God does not do something). The usage here is certainly the first, and very likely the second as well. A translation of “pit” would not be inappropriate. Since they will go down there alive, it is likely that they will sense the deprivation and the separation from the land above. See H. W. Robinson, Inspiration and Revelation in the Old Testament (Oxford: Clarendon, 1946), N. J. Tromp, Primitive Conceptions of Death and the Netherworld in the Old Testament (Rome: Pontifical Biblical Institute, 1969), pp. 21-23; and Alexander Heidel, The Gilgamesh Epic . . . , especially chapter 3.
⁴⁰tn The initial temporal clause is standard: it begins with the temporal indicator “and it was,” followed by the (here piel) infinitive construct with the preposition and the subjective genitive suffix. “And it happened when he finished.”
⁴¹tn The infinitive construct with the preposition lamed functions here as the direct object of the preceding infinitive. It tells what he finished.
⁴²tn Heb “all Israel.”
⁴³tn Heb “lest.”
⁴⁴tn For a discussion of the fire of the LORD, see J. C. H. Laughlin, “The Strange Fire of Nadab and Abihu,” JBL 95 (1976):559-565.
⁴⁵sn Beginning with Num 16:36, the verse numbers through 17:13 in the English Bible differ from the verse numbers in the Hebrew text (BHS), with 16:36 ET = 17:1 HT, 16:37 ET = 17:2 HT, 17:1 ET = 17:16 HT, etc., through 17:13 ET = 17:28 HT. With 18:1 the verse numbers in the ET and HT are again the same. But in the English chap. 17 there are two parts: Aaron’s rod budding (1-9), and the rod preserved as a memorial (10-13). Both sections begin with the same formula.
⁴⁶tn Heb “say.”
⁴⁷tn The verb is the jussive with a waw coming after the imperative; it may be subordinated to form a purpose clause (“that he may pick up”) or the object of the imperative.
⁴⁸tn The text just has “fire,” but it would be hard to conceive of this action apart from the idea of coals of fire.
⁴⁹tn The expression is “in/by/against their life.” That they sinned against their life means that they brought ruin to themselves.
⁵⁰tn The form is the perfect tense with the waw consecutive. But there is no expressed subject for “and they shall make them,” and so it may be treated as a passive (“they shall [must] be made”).
⁵¹sn The whole congregation here is trying to project its guilt on Moses and Aaron. It was they and their rebellion that brought about the deaths, not Moses and Aaron. The LORD had punished the sinners. The fact that the leaders had organized a rebellion against the LORD was forgotten by these people. The point here is that the Israelites had learnt nothing of spiritual value from the event.
⁵²tn The temporal clause is constructed with the temporal indicator (“and it was”) followed by the niphal infinitive construct and preposition.
⁵³tn The verse uses “and behold” (w^ehinneh [hN@h!w+]). This is the deictic particle—it is used to point things out, suddenly calling attention to them, as if the reader were there. The people turned to look toward the tent—and there is the cloud!
⁵⁴tn Heb “took.”
¹sn Num 17:1 in the English Bible is 17:16 in the Hebrew text (BHS). See also the note on 16:36.
²tn Heb “receive from them a rod, a rod from the house of a father.”
³tn Heb “from every leader of them according to their fathers’ house.”
⁴tn Heb “one rod for the head of their fathers’ house.”
⁵tn The verb is the hiphil perfect of nuah (?Wn), “to rest,” and so “to set at rest, lay, place, put.” The form with the waw consecutive continues the instruction of the previous verse.
⁶tn The text just has “the covenant” or “the testimony.”
⁷tn The text has “a rod for one leader, a rod for one leader.”
⁸tn The name of the tent now attests to the centrality of the ark of the covenant. Instead of the “tent of meeting” (mo‘ed [du@Om]) we now find the “the tent of the testimony” (ha‘edut [td%u@h]).
⁹tn Here too the deictic particle (“and behold”) is added to draw attention to the sight in a vivid way.
¹⁰sn There is no clear answer why the tribe of Levi had used an almond staff. The almond tree is one of the first to bud in the spring, and its white blossoms are a beautiful sign that winter is over. Its name became a name for “watcher”; Jeremiah plays on this name for God’s watching over his people (1:11-12).
¹¹tn The verb means “to finish, complete” and here “bring to an end.” It is the imperfect following the imperative, and so introduces a purpose clause (as a final imperfect).
¹²tn This is another final imperfect in a purpose clause.
¹³tn The use of hen (/h@) and the perfect tense in the nuance of a prophetic perfect expresses their conviction that they were bound to die—it was certain (see GKC, #106n).
¹⁴sn Num 17:13 in the English Bible is 17:28 in the Hebrew text (BHS). See also the note on 16:36.
¹⁵tn The verse stresses the completeness of their death: “will we be consumed by dying” (Ha’im tamnu ligwoa‘ [u~Og=l! Wnm=T^ <o!h^).
¹sn This chapter and the next may have been inserted here to explain how the priests are to function because in the preceding chapter Aaron’s position was affirmed. The chapter seems to fall into four units: responsibilities of priests (1-7), their portions (8-19), responsibilities of Levites (20-24), and instructions for Levites (25-32).
²tn Heb “your father’s house.”
³sn The responsibility for the sanctuary included obligations relating to any violation of the sanctuary. This was stated to forestall any further violations of the sanctuary. The priests were to pay for any ritual errors, primarily if any came too near. Since the priests and Levites come near all the time, they risk violating ritual laws more than any. So, with the great privileges come great responsibilities. The bottom line is that they were responsible for the sanctuary.
⁴tn The verb forms a word play on the name Levi, and makes an allusion to the naming of the tribe Levi by Leah in the book of Genesis. There Leah hoped that with the birth of Levi her husband would be attached to her. Here, with the selection of the tribe to serve in the sanctuary, there is the word play again showing that the Levites will be attached to Aaron and the priests. The verb is yillawu (WwLy!), which forms a nice word play with Lewi (yw!l@). The tribe will now be attached to the sanctuary. The verb is the imperfect with a waw that shows volitive sequence after the imperative, here indicating a purpose clause.
⁵tn The clause is a circumstantial clause because the disjunctive waw is on a non-verb to start the clause.
⁶tn Now the sentence uses the niphal perfect with a waw consecutive from the same root lawah (hwl).
⁷tn The word is “stranger, alien”; but it can also mean Israelites here.
⁸tn The clause is a purpose clause, and the imperfect tense a final imperfect.
⁹tn Heb “taken.”
¹⁰tn The infinitive construct in this sentence is from ‘abad (dbu), and so is the noun that serves as its object: to serve the service.
¹¹tn This is an uncommon root. It may be connected to the word “anoint” as here (and see RSV). But it may also be seen as an intended parallel to “perpetual due” (see Gen 47:22; Exod 29:28; Lev 6:11 [Heb]).
¹²tn Heb “from the fire.” It probably refers to those parts that were not burned.
¹³tn This form man be classified as a perfect of resolve—he has decided to give them to them, even though this is a listing of what they will receive.
¹⁴tn The “ban” (herem [<r#?@) in Hebrew describes that which is exclusively the LORD’s, either for his sanctuary use, or for his destruction. It seems to refer to an individual’s devoting something freely to God.
¹⁵tn The construction uses the infinitive absolute and the imperfect tense of the verb “to redeem” in order to stress the point—they were to be redeemed. Snaith suggests that the verb means to get by payment what was not originally yours, whereas the other root ga’al means to get back what was originally yours (Numbers, p. 268).
¹⁶tn Or, “throw, toss.”
¹⁷sn Salt was used in all the offerings; its importance as a preservative made it a natural symbol for the covenant which was established by sacrifice. Even general agreements were attested by sacrifice, and the phrase “covenant of salt” speaks of such agreements as binding and irrevocable. Note the expression in Ezra 4:14, “we have been salted with the salt of the palace.” See further J. F. Ross, “Salt,” IDB, 4:167.
¹⁸tn The text uses the infinitive construct of the verb “to bear” with the lamed preposition to express the result of such an action. “To bear their sin” would mean that they would have to suffer the consequences of their sin.
¹⁹tn The verse begins with the perfect tense of ‘abad (dbu) with the waw consecutive, making the form equal to the instructions preceding it. As its object the verb has the cognate accusative “service.”
²⁰sn The Levites have the care of the tent of meeting, and so they are responsible for any transgressions against it.
²¹tn The text uses both the verb and the object from the same root to stress the point: they will not inherit an inheritance. The inheritance refers to land.
²²tn The verb has no expressed subject (although the “Israelites” is certainly intended), and so can be made a passive.
²³tn The classification of the perfect tense here too could be the perfect of resolve, since this law is declaring what will be their portion—“I have decided to give.”
²⁴tn The verb in this clause is the hiphil perfect with a waw consecutive; it has the same force as an imperfect of instruction: “when . . . then you are to offer up.”
²⁵tn The verb is hasab, “to reckon, count, think”; it is the same verb used for “crediting” Abram with righteousness. Here the tithe of the priests will be counted as if it were a regular tithe.
²⁶tn Heb “fulness,” meaning the fullness of the harvest, i.e., a full harvest.
²⁷tn The construction is “every raised offering of the LORD”; the genitive here is probably to be taken as a genitive of worth—the offering that is due the LORD.
²⁸tn Or, “its hallowed thing.”
²⁹tn The wording of this verse is confusing; it may be that it is addressed to the priests, telling them how to deal with the offerings of the Levites.
³⁰tn The clause begins with the infinitive construct with its preposition and suffixed subject serving to indicate the temporal clause.
³¹tn The verb is the perfect tense with the waw consecutive; it functions as the equivalent of the imperfect of permission.
³²tn The final clause could also be rendered “in order that you do not die.” The larger section can also be interpreted differently; rather than take it as a warning, it could be taken as an assurance that when they do all of this they will not be profaning it and so will not die (Harrison, Numbers, p. 253).
³³sn In the last chapter the needs of the priests and Levites were addressed. Now the concern is for the people. This provision from the sacrifice of the red heifer is a precaution to ensure that the purity of the tabernacle was not violated by pollutions of impurity or death.
¹sn This chapter has two main parts, both dealing with ceremonial purity: the ritual of the red heifer (1-10), and the purification from uncleanness (11-22). For further study see J. Milgrom, “The Paradox of the Red Cow (Num 19),” VT 31 (1981):62-72.
²tn The line literally reads, “speak to the Israelites that [and] they bring [will bring].” The imperfect [or jussive] is subordinated to the imperative either as a purpose clause, or as the object of the instruction—speak to them that they bring, or, tell them to bring.
³tn The color is designated as red, although the actual color would be a tanned red-brown color for the animal (see the usage in Isa 1:18 and Song 5:10). The reddish color suggested the blood of ritual purification (see J. Milgrom, VT 31 [1981]:62-72).
⁴sn Some modern commentators prefer “cow” to “heifer,” thinking that the latter came from the influence of the Greek. Young animals were usually prescribed for the ritual, especially here, and so “heifer” is the better translation. A bull could not be given for this purification ritual because that is what was given for the high priests or the community according to Lev 4.
⁵tn Heb “wherein there is no defect.”
⁶tc The clause is a little ambiguous. It reads “and he shall slaughter it before him.” It sounds as if someone else will kill the heifer in the priest’s presence. Since no one is named as the subject, it may be translated as a passive. Some commentators simply interpret that Eleazar was to kill the animal personally, but that is a little forced for “before him.” The Greek text gives a third person plural sense to the verb; the Vulgate follows that reading.
⁷tn The verb is the perfect tense with the waw consecutive; it functions here as the equivalent of the imperfect of instruction.
⁸sn Seven is a religious number; it is often required in sacrificial ritual for atonement or for purification.
⁹tn Again, the verb has no expressed subject, and so is given a passive translation.
¹⁰tn The imperfect tense is third masculine singular, and so again the verb is to be made passive.
¹¹sn In addition to the general references, see R. K. Harrison, “The Biblical Problem of Hyssop,” EvQ 26 (1954):218-224.
¹²sn There is no clear explanation available as to why these things were to be burnt with the heifer. Snaith suggests that in accordance with Babylonian sacrifices they would have enhanced the rites with an aroma (p. 272). In Lev 14 the wood and the hyssop may have been bound together by the scarlet wool to make a sprinkling device. It may be that the symbolism is what is important here. Cedar wood, for example, is durable; it may have symbolized resistance to future corruption and defilement, an early acquired immunity perhaps (Harrison, p. 256).
¹³tn The sequence continues with the perfect tense and the waw consecutive.
¹⁴tn Heb “his flesh.”
¹⁵tn This is the imperfect of permission.
¹⁶sn Here the text makes clear that he had at least one assistant.
¹⁷tn Heb “it will be.”
¹⁸tn The expression l^eme niddah (hDn! ym@l=) Is “for waters of impurity.” The genitive must designate the purpose of the waters—they are for cases of impurity, and so serve for cleansing or purifying. The word “impurity” can also mean “abhorrent,” because it refers to so many kinds of impurities. It is also called a purification offering; Milgrom notes that this is fitting because the sacrificial ritual involved transfers impurity from the purified to the purifier (pp. 62-72).
¹⁹sn The ashes were to be stored somewhere outside the camp to be used in a water portion for cleansing someone who was defiled. This is a ritual that was enacted in the wilderness; it is something of a restoring rite for people alienated from community.
²⁰tn The form is the participle with the article functioning as a substantive: “the one who touches.”
²¹tn Heb “the dead.”
²²tn The expression is full: l^ekol-nepes ‘adam (<do vp#n\-lkl=)—of any life of a man, i.e., of any person.
²³tn The verb is a perfect tense with waw consecutive; it follows only the participle used as the subject, but since the case is hypothetical and therefore future, this picks up the future time.
²⁴tn The verb is the hithpael of hata’ (oF?), a verb that normally means “to sin.” But the piel idea in many places is “cleanse, purify.” This may be explained as a privitive use (“to un-sin” someone, meaning cleanse) or denominative (“make a sin offering for someone”). It is surely connected to the purification offering, and so a sense of purify is what is wanted here.
²⁵sn It is in passages like this that the view that excision meant the death penalty is the hardest to support. Would the Law prescribe death for someone who touches a corpse and fails to follow the ritual? Besides, the statement in this section that his uncleanness remains with him suggests that he still lives on.
²⁶tn The word order gives the classification and then the condition: “a man, when he dies . . . .”
²⁷tn The expression for “in the open field” is literally “upon the face of the field” (‘al p^ene hassadeh [hd#Ch yn@P=-lu^]). This ruling is in contrast now to what was contacted in the tent.
²⁸sn See Matt 23:27 and Acts 23:3 for application of this by the time of Jesus.
²⁹tn The verb is the perfect tense, third masculine plural, with a waw consecutive. The verb may be worded as a passive, “ashes must be taken,” but that may be too awkward for this sentence. It may be best to render it with a generic “you” to fit the instruction of the text.
³⁰tn The word “heifer” is not in the Hebrew text, but is implied.
³¹tn Here too the verb is the perfect tense with the waw consecutive; rather than make this passive, it is here left as a direct instruction to follow the preceding one. For the use of the verb natan (/tn) in the sense of “pour,” see S. C. Reif, VT 20 (1970):114-116.
³²tn The expression is literally “living water.” Living water is the fresh, flowing spring water that is clear, life-giving, and not the collected pools of stagnant or dirty water.
³³tn The construction uses a simple piel of hata’ (oF?), “to purify,” with a pronominal suffix—“he shall purify him.” Some commentators take this to mean that after he sprinkles the unclean then he must purify himself. But that would not be the most natural way to read this form.
³⁴tn The form has the conjunction with it: u-mazzeh (hZ#m^W). The conjunction subordinates the following as the special law. It could literally be translated “and this shall be . . . that the one who sprinkles.”
³⁵sn This gives the indication of the weight of the matter, for “until the evening” is the shortest period of ritual uncleanness in the Law. The problem of contamination had to be taken seriously, but this was a relatively simple matter to deal with—if one were willing to obey the Law.
¹sn This chapter is the account of how Moses struck the rock in disobedience to the LORD, and thereby was prohibited from entering the land. For additional literature on this part, see E. Arden, “How Moses Failed God,” JBL 76 (1957):50-52; J. Gray, “The Desert Sojourn of the Hebrews and the Sinai Horeb Tradition,” VT 4 (1954):148-154; T. W. Mann, “Theological Reflections on the Denial of Moses,” JBL 98 (1979):481-494; and J. R. Porter, “The Role of Kadesh-Barnea in the Narrative of the Exodus,” JTS 44 (1943):130-143.
²tn The text stresses this idea by use of apposition: “the Israelites entered, the entire community, the wilderness.”
³sn The text does not indicate here what year this was; but from comparing the other passages about the itinerary, this is probably the end of the wanderings, the fortieth year, for Aaron died some forty years after the exodus. So in that year the people come through the wilderness of Zin and prepare for a journey through the Moabite plains.
⁴sn The Israelites stayed in Kadesh for some time during the wandering; here the stop at Kadesh Barnea may have lasted several months. See the commentaries for the general itinerary.
⁵sn The death of Miriam is recorded without any qualifications or epitaph. In her older age she had been self-willed and rebellious, and so no doubt humbled by the vivid rebuke from God. But she had made her contribution from the beginning.
⁶tn The verb is rib (byr!); it is often used in the Bible for a legal complaint, a law suit, at least in form. But it can also describe a quarrel, or strife, like that between Abram’s men and Lot’s men in Genesis 13. It will be the main verb behind the commemorative name Meribah, the place where the people strove with God. It is a far more serious thing than grumbling—it is directed, intentional, and well-argued. For further discussion, see J. Limburg, “The Root ‘rib’ and the Prophetic Lawsuit Speeches,” JBL 88 (1969):291-304.
⁷tn The text has “and they said, saying.”
⁸tn The particle lu (Wl) indicates the optative nuance of the line—the wishing or longing for death. It is certainly an absurdity to want to have died; but God took them at their word and they died in the wilderness.
⁹tn The text has “and why . . . .” The conjunction seems to be recording another thing that the people said in their complaint against Moses.
¹⁰tn The clause uses the infinitive construct with the lamed preposition. The clause would be a result clause in this sentence: why have you brought us here . . . with the result that we will all die.
¹¹tn Heb “and why.”
¹²tn Here also the infinitive construct (hiphil) forms the subordinate clause of the preceding interrogative clause.
¹³tn The verb is the piel perfect with the waw consecutive, following the two imperatives in the verse. Here is the focus of the instruction for Moses.
¹⁴tn The verb is the perfect tense with the waw consecutive, as are the next two in the verse. These are not now equal to the imperatives, but imperfects, showing the results of speaking to the rock: speak . . . and it will . . . and so you will . . . .
¹⁵tn The word is hammorim (<yr!M)h^), “the rebels,” but here as a vocative, “you rebels.” It was a harsh address, although well-earned.
¹⁶tn The word order and the emphasis of the tense are important to this passage. The word order is “from this rock must we bring out to you water?” The emphasis is clearly on “from this rock!” The verb is the imperfect tense; it has one of the modal nuances here, probably obligatory—“must we do this?”
¹⁷tn The verb is the main word for “believe, trust.” It is the verb that describes the faith in the Word of the LORD that leads to an appropriate action. Here God says that Moses did not believe him, meaning, what he did showed more of Moses than of what God said. Moses had taken a hostile stance toward the people, and then hit the rock twice. This should that Moses was not satisfied with what God said, but made it more forceful and terrifying, thus giving the wrong picture of God to the people. By doing this the full power and might of the LORD was not displayed to the people. It was a moment of lack of faith, but it had to be dealt with.
¹⁸sn Using the basic meaning of the word qadas (vdq), “to be separate, distinct, set apart,” we can understand better what Moses failed to do. He was supposed to have acted in a way that would have shown God to be distinct, different, holy. Instead, he gave the impression that God was capricious and hostile—very human. The leader has to be aware of what image he is conveying to the people.
¹⁹tn Commentators debate exactly what the sin of Moses was. Some think that the real sin might have been that he refused to do this at first, but that has been suppressed from the text (McNeile, Binns). Some think the text was deliberately vague to explain why they could not enter the land without demeaning them (Kapelrud). Others simply, and more likely, note that in Moses their was unbelief, pride, anger, impatience—disobedience.
²⁰tn The form is unusual—it is the niphal preterite, and not the normal use of the piel/pual stem for “sanctify/sanctified.” The basic idea of “he was holy” has to be the main idea, but in this context it refers to the fact that through judging Moses God was making sure people ensured his holiness among them. The word also forms a word play on the name Kadesh.
²¹sn For this particular section, see W. F. Albright, “From the Patriarchs to Moses: 2. Moses out of Egypt,” BA 36 (1973):57-58; J. R. Bartlett, “The Land of Seir and the Brotherhood of Edom,” JTS 20 (1969):1-20, and “The Rise and Fall of the Kingdom of Edom,” PEQ 104 (1972):22-37, and “The Brotherhood of Edom,” JSOT 4 (1977):2-7.
²²tn Heb “And Moses sent.”
²³sn The modern critical views of course look at these narratives with skepticism. They are convinced, largely through arguments from silence, that there were no unified kingdoms in Edom until the 9^th century, and no settlements there before the 12^th century, and so the story is late and largely fabricated. The evidence is beginning to point to the contrary. But the cities and residents of the region would largely be Bedouin, and so leave no real remains. See Merrill, Kingdom of Priests; and see R. K. Harrison, Numbers, for a comparison on this passage with the Amarna letters and the Habiru.
²⁴tn Heb “found.”
²⁵tn Heb “many days.”
²⁶tn The verb ra‘a‘ (uur) means “to act or do evil.” Evil here is in the sense of causing pain or trouble. So the causative stem in our passage means “to treat wickedly.”
²⁷tn The word could be rendered “angel” or “messenger.” Some ambiguity may be intended in this report.
²⁸tn The text uses hinneh (hN@h!) to emphasize the “here and now” aspect of the report to Edom.
²⁹tn Heb “your border.”
³⁰tn The request is expressed by the use of the cohortative, “let us pass through.” It is the proper way to seek permission.
³¹sn This a main highway running from Damascus in the north to the Gulf of Aqaba, along the ridge of the land. Critical scholars suggest that the name may have been given by the later Assyrians (see B. Obed, “Observations on Methods of Assyrian Rule in Transjordan after the Palestinian Campaign of Tiglathpileser III,” JNES 29 [1970]:177-186). Bronze Age fortresses have been discovered along this highway, attesting to its existence in the time of Moses. The original name came from the king who developed the highway, probably as a trading road (see S. Cohen in IDB, 3:35-36)
³²tn Heb “borders.”
³³tn The imperfect tense here has the nuance of prohibition.
³⁴tn The text uses singular pronouns, “I” and “my”; but it is the people of Israel that are intended, and so it may be rendered in the plural. Similarly, Edom speaks in the first person, probably from the king. But it too could be rendered “we.”
³⁵tn The text literally says “with many [heavy] people and with a strong hand.” The translation is interpretive, but that is what the line means. It was a show of force, numbers and weapons, to intimidate the Israelites.
³⁶tn Again the passage uses apposition: “the Israelites, the whole community.”
³⁷sn The traditional location for this is near Petra (Josephus, Antiq. 4.4.7). There is serious doubt about this location since it is well inside Edomite territory, and since it is awfully inaccessible for the transfer of the office. Another view places it not too far from Kadesh barnea, about 15 miles northeast at Jebel Madurah, on the northwest edge of Edom and so a suitable point of departure for approaching Canaan from the south (see J. L. Mihelec, IDB, 2:644; and J. de Vaulx, Nombres, p. 231). Others suggest it was at the foot of Mount Hor and not actually up in the mountains (see Deut 10:6).
³⁸sn This is the standard poetic expression for death. The bones would be buried, often with the bones of relatives in the same tomb, giving rise to the expression.
³⁹tn The verb is in the second person plural form, and so it is Moses and Aaron who rebelled, and so now because of that Aaron first and then Moses would die without going into the land.
⁴⁰sn For information, see D. M. Gunn, “The ‘Battle Report’: Oral or Scribal Convention.” JBL 93 (1974):513-518; and of the extensive literature on the archaeological site, see “Arad” in Encyclopedia of Archaeological Excavations in the Holy Land, ed. by m. Avi-Yonah (London: Oxford University Press, 1975).
¹sn This chapter has several events in it: the victory over Arad (1-3), the plague of serpents (4-9), the approach to Moab (10-20), and the victory over Sihon and Og (21-35).
²sn The name Arad probably refers to a place a number of miles away from Tel Arad in southern Israel. The name could also refer to the whole region (like Edom).
³sn Or, the south; Negev has become a technical name for the southern desert region.
⁴tn The text uses a cognate accusative with the verb: they vowed a vow. The Israelites were therefore determined with God’s help to defeat Arad.
⁵tn The text has the infinitive absolute and the imperfect tense of natan (/tn) to stress the point—if you will surely/indeed give.”
⁶tn On the surface this does not sound like much of a vow. But the key is in the use of the verb for “utterly destroy”—haram (<r?). Whatever was put to this “ban” or “devotion” belonged to God, either for his use, or for destruction. The oath was in fact saying that they would take nothing from this for themselves. It would simply be the removal of what was alien to the faith, or to God’s program.
⁷tn The verb has no expressed subject, and so here too is made passive. The name “Hormah” is etymologically connected to the verb “utterly destroy,” forming the popular etymology (or paronomasia, a phonetic word play capturing the significance of the event).
⁸tn The “Red Sea” is the general designation for the bodies of water on either side of the Sinai peninsula, even though they are technically gulfs from the Red Sea.
⁹tn Heb “the soul of the people,” expressing the innermost being of the people as they became frustrated.
¹⁰tn The Israelites’ opinion about the manna was clear enough—“worthless.” The word used is q^eloqel (lq@l)q=), “good for nothing, worthless, miserable.”
¹¹tn Heb “fiery.”
¹²tn The designation of the serpents/snakes is n^ehasim (<yv!?n=), which is similar to the word for “bronze,” n^ehoset (tv#?)n=). This has led some scholars to describe the serpents as bronze in color. The description of them as fiery indicates they were poisonous. Perhaps thesnake in question is a species of adder.
¹³tn The verb is the hiphil jussive with a waw consecutive from the verb sur (rWs); after the imperative this form may be subordinated to become a purpose clause.
¹⁴tn The word order is slightly different in Hebrew: “and it shall be anyone who is bitten when he looks at it he shall live.”
¹⁵sn The image of the snake was to be a symbol of the curse that the Israelites were experiencing; by lifting the snake up on a pole Moses was indicating that the curse would be drawn away from the people—if they looked to it, which was a sign of faith. This symbol was later stored in the temple, until it became an object of worship and had to be removed (2 Kings 18:4). Jesus, of course, alluded to it and used it as an illustration of his own mission. He would become the curse, and be lifted up, so that people who looked by faith to him would live (John 3:14). For further material, see D. J. Wiseman, “Flying Serpents,” TynBull 23 (1972):108-110; and K. R. Joines, “The Bronze Serpent in the Israelite Cult,” JBL 87 (1968):245-256.
¹⁶sn See further D. L. Christensen, “Numbers 21:14-15 and the Book of the Wars of Yahweh,” CBQ 36 (1974):359-360; G. W. Coats, “The Wilderness Itinerary,” CBQ 34 (1972):135-152; G. I. Davies, “The Wilderness Itinerary,” TB 25 (1974):46-81, and The Way of the Wilderness (Cambridge: CUP, 1979); G. E. Mendenhall, “The Hebrew Conquest of Palestine,” BA 25 (1962):66-87.
¹⁷sn These places are uncertain. Oboth may be some 15 miles from the south end of the Dead Sea at a place called ‘Ain el-Weiba. Iye Abarim may be the modern Mahay at the south eastern corner of Moab. See J. Simons, The Geographical and Topographical Texts of the Old Testament (Leiden: E. J. Brill, 1959).
¹⁸tn Heb “the rising of the sun.”
¹⁹tn Or, “border.”
²⁰tc The ancient versions show a wide variation here: the SP has “Waheb on the Sea of Reeds,” the Greek has “he has set Zoob on fire and the torrents of Arnon.” Several modern versions treat the first line literally, taking the two main words as place names: Waheb and Suphah. This seems most likely, but then here would then be no subject or verb. One would need something like “the Israelites marched through.” KJV following the Vulgate made the first word a verb and read the second as “Red Sea”—what he did in the Red Sea.” But the passage is about the terrain. D. L. Christensen proposed emending the first part from ‘et waheb to ‘atah Yahweh, “the LORD came.” But this is subjective (see “Num 21:14-15 and the Book of the Wars of Yahweh,” CBQ 36 [1974]:359-360).
²¹tc There are many variations in this text, but the MT reading of something like “the descent of the torrents/valleys” is preferable, since it is describing the topography.
²²sn The place is unknown; it is apparently an important city in the region.
²³sn Isa 15:8 mentions a Moabite Beerelim, which Simons suggests is Wadi ettemed.
²⁴tn After the adverb “then” the prefixed conjugation has the preterite force (see Williams, Hebrew Syntax, pp. 35-36. For the archaic constructions, see D. N. Freedman, “Archaic Forms in Early Hebrew Poetry,” ZAW 72 (1960):101-107. The poem shows all the marks of being ancient.
²⁵sn The little song is supposed to be an old workers song, and so the mention of leaders and princes is unusual. Some think they are given credit because they directed where the workers were to dig. The scepter and staff might have served some symbolic or divining custom.
²⁶sn This might be a place, “Jeshimon.”
²⁷sn For this section, see further J. R. Bartlett, “Sihon and Og of the Amorites,” VT 20 (1970):257-277, and “The Moabites and the Edomites,” in Peoples of Old Testament Times, ed. by D. J. Wiseman (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1973); S. H. Horn, “The Excavations at Tell Hesban, 1973,” ADAJ 18 (1973):87-88.
²⁸tn The text uses the singular in these verses to match the reference to “Israel.”
²⁹tn Heb “people.”
³⁰tn The clause begins with a preterite with the waw consecutive, but may be subordinated to the next preterite as a temporal clause.
³¹tn The text has “Israel,” but the verb is plural.
³²tn Heb “its daughters.”
³³sn There is a justice, always, in the divine plan for the conquest of the land. Modern students of the Bible often think that the conquest passages are crude and unjust. But an understanding of the ancient Near East is critical here. This Sihon was not a part of the original population of the land. He himself invaded the territory and destroyed the population of Moab that was there and established his own kingdom. The ancient history is filled with such events; it is the way of life they chose—conquer or be conquered. For Israel to defeat them was in part a turning of their own devices back on their heads—they that live by the sword will die by the sword. Sihon knows this, and he does not wait, but takes the war to Israel. Israel wanted to pass through, not fight. But now they would either fight or be pushed into the gorge. So God used Israel to defeat Sihon, who had no claim to the land, as part of divine judgment.
³⁴sn Proverbs of antiquity could include pithy sayings or longer songs, riddles, or poems composed to catch the significance or the irony of an event. This is a little poem to remember the event, like an Egyptian victory song. It may have originated as an Amorite war taunt song; it was sung to commemorate this victory. It was cited later by Jeremiah (48:45-46). The composer invites his victorious people to rebuild the conquered city as a new capital for Sihon. He then turns to address the other cities which his God(s) has/have given to him. See P. D. Hanson, “The Song of Heshbon and David’s Nir,” HTR 61 (1968):301.
³⁵tn Meaning, “rebuilt and restored.”
³⁶tc Some emend to hulb (instead of ylub, “its lords”) read “and devoured” (which is closer to the Greek, and makes a better parallelism).
³⁷sn The note of holy war emerges here as the victory is a victory over the local gods as well as over the people.
³⁸tc The first verb is difficult. MT has “we shot at them.” The Greek has “their posterity perished” (see GKC #76f).
³⁹tn Heb “Israel.”
⁴⁰tn Heb “people.”
⁴¹tn Heb “no remnant.”
⁴²sn There is a good bit of information available on this section of the book, as might be expected. Some that is most helpful would include H. C. Brichto, The Problem of “Curse” in the Hebrew Bible (Philadelphia: SBL, 1968); E. Burrows, The Oracles of Jacob and Balaam (London: Burns, Oates, and Washbourne, 1938); G. W. Coats, “Balaam, Sinner or Saint?” BR 18 (1973):21-29; P. C. Craigie, “The Conquest and Early Hebrew Poetry,” TB 20 (1969):76-94; I. Parker, “The Way of God and the Way of Balaam,” ExpT 17 (1905): 45; and J. A. Wharton, “The Command to Bless: An Exposition of Numbers 22:41—23:25,” Int 13 (1959):37-48. This first part introduces the characters and sets the stage for the oracles. It can be divided into four sections: the invitation declined (1-14), the second invitation extended (15-21), God opposes Balaam (22-35), and Balaam meets Balak (36-41).
¹tn The fifth section of the book (22:1-33:56) traces the Israelite activities in Transjordan. It is hard to determine how long they were in Transjordan, but a good amount of time must have elapsed for the number of moves they made and the wars they fought.
²tn The verse begins with the waw consecutive.
³tn Heb “and the Moabites.”
⁴tn The word is simply “company,” but in the context he must mean a vast company—a horde of people.
⁵sn There is much literature on pagan diviners and especially prophecy in places in the east like Mari (see, for example, H. B. Huffmon, “Prophecy in the Mari Letters,” BA 31 [1968]:101-124). Balaam seems to be a pagan diviner who was of some reputation; he was called to curse the Israelites, but God intervened and gave him blessings only. The passage forms a nice complement to texts that deal with blessings and curses. It shows that no one can curse whom God has blessed.
⁶tn Heb “by the river in the land of the sons of his people.”
⁷tn Heb “eye.”
⁸tn The two lines before this verse begin with the particle hinneh (hN@h!), and so they lay the foundation for these imperatives. In view of those circumstances, this is what should happen.
⁹tn The construction uses the imperfect tense ’ukal (lk^Wo), “I will be able,” followed by the imperfect tense nakkeh (hK#n~), “we will smite/attack/defeat.” The second verb is clearly the purpose or the result of the first, even though there is no conjunction or particle.
¹⁰tn The verb is the piel imperfect of barak (ErB), with the nuance of possibility: “whomever you may bless.” The pual participle m^eorak (Erb)m=) serves as the predicate.
¹¹tn The verb lin (/yl!) means “to lodge, spend the night.” The related noun is a lodge—a hotel of sorts. Balaam needed to consider the offer. And after darkness was considered the best time for diviners to consult with their deities. Balaam apparently knows of the LORD; he testifies to this affect in 22:18.
¹²tn In this passage the text differs slightly; here it is “the nation that comes out,” using the article on the noun, and the active participle in the attributive adjective usage.
¹³tn Here the infinitive construct is used to express the object or complement of the verb “to be able” (it answers the question of what he will be able to do).
¹⁴tn The verb is the piel perfect with the waw consecutive. It either carries the force of an imperfect tense, or it may be subordinated to the preceding verbs.
¹⁵tn The two verbs are negated imperfects; they have the nuance of prohibition: you must not go and you must not curse.
¹⁶tn he word baruk (EWrB) is the qal passive participle, serving here as the predicate adjective after the supplied verb “to be.” The verb means “enrich,” in any way, materially, spiritually, physically. But the indication here is that the blessing includes the promised blessing of the patriarchs, a blessing that gave Israel the land. See further, Caus Westermann, Blessing in the Bible and the Life of the Church (Fortress Press).
¹⁷tn The main verb is the piel perfect, “he has refused.” This is followed by two infinitives. The first, l^etitti (yT!t!l=), serves as a complement or direct object of the verb, answering the question of what he refused to do—“to give me.” The second infinitive, lahalok (Elh&l^), provides the object for the preceding infinitive: “to grant me to go.”
¹⁸tn The construction is a verbal hendiadys. It uses the hiphil preterite of the verb “to add” followed by the qal infinitive “to send.” The infinitive becomes the main verb, and the preterite an adverb: “he added to send” means “he sent again.”
¹⁹tn Heb “than these.”
²⁰tn The infinitive construct is the object of the preposition.
²¹tn The construction uses the piel infinitive kabbed (dB@k^) to intensify the verb, which is the piel imperfect/cohortative ’akabbedka (;d+B#k^o&). The great honor could have been wealth, prestige, or position.
²²sn In the light of subsequent events one should not take too seriously that Balaam referred to Yahweh as his God. He is referring properly to the deity for which he is acting as the agent.
²³tn In this case “lodge” is not used, but “remain, reside” (s^ebu [Wbv=]).
²⁴tn This clause is also a verbal hendiadys: what the LORD might add to speak,” meaning, “what more the LORD might say.”
²⁵sn God’s anger now seems to contradict the permission he gave Balaam just before this. Some commentators argue that God’s anger is a response to Balaam’s character in setting out—which the Bible does not explain. God saw in him greed and pleasure for the riches, which is why he was so willing to go.
²⁶tn The word is satan (/FC), “to be an adversary,” “to oppose.”
²⁷tn The word has the conjunction “and” on the noun, indicating this is a disjunctive waw, here serving as a circumstantial clause.
²⁸tn The word means a “narrow place,” having the root meaning “to be deep.” The Greek thought it was in a field in a narrow furrow.
²⁹tn The text has literally, “a wall on this side, and a wall on that side.”
³⁰tn Heb “he added to beat her,” another verbal hendiadys.
³¹tn The optative clause is introduced with the particle lu (Wl ).
³²tn Here we have the hiphil perfect preceded by the hiphil infinitive absolute for emphasis in the sentence.
³³tn Heb “to do thus to you.”
³⁴tn The hishtaphel verb hawah (hw?)—sahah (h?v) with metathesis according to BDB—has a basic idea of “bow oneself low to the ground,” and perhaps in some cases the idea of “coil up.” This is the normal posture of prayer and of deep humility in the ancient religious world.
³⁵tn Heb “your way.”
³⁶tn The verb yarat (Fry) occurs only here and in Job 16:11. Balaam is embarking on a foolish mission with base motives. The old rendering “perverse” is still acceptable.
³⁷tc Many commentators consider ’ulay (yl^Wo), “perhaps,” to be a misspelling in the MT mansucript, in place of lule (yl@Wl), “if not.”
³⁸sn Balaam is not here making a general confession of sin. What he is admitting to is a procedural mistake. The basic meaning of the word is “to miss the mark.” He now knows he took the wrong way, i.e., in coming to curse Israel.
³⁹sn The reference is to Balaam’s way. He is saying that if his way, if what he is doing is so perverse, so evil, he will turn around and go home. Of course, it did not appear that he had much of a chance of going forward.
⁴⁰tn The verb is the cohortative from “return”: I will return [me].
⁴¹tn The imperfect tense here can be given the nuance of permission.
⁴²tn The Hebrew word order is a little more emphatic than this: “but only the word which I speak to you, it you shall speak.”
⁴³tn The emphatic construction is made of the infinitive absolute and the perfect tense from the verb salah (?lv), “to send.” The idea must be more intense than something like, “Did I not certainly send.” Balak is showing frustration with Balaam for refusing him.
⁴⁴sn Balak again refers to his ability to “honor” the seer. This certainly meant payment for his service, usually gold ornaments, rings and jewelry, as well as some animals.
⁴⁵tn The verb is ‘ukal (lk^Wo) in a question—“am I able?” But emphasizing this is the infinitive absolute before it. So Balaam is saying something like, “Can I really say anything?”
⁴⁶tn The piel infinitive construct (without the preposition) serves as the object of the verb “to be able.” The whole question is rhetorical—he is saying that he will not be ablso to say anything God does not allow him to say.
⁴⁷tn The imperfect tense is here taken as an obligatory imperfect.
⁴⁸sn The understanding is that Balak was making a sacrifice for a covenant relationship, and so some of the meat he gave to the men and to the seer.
⁴⁹sn The first part of Balaam’s activity ends in disaster for Balak—he blesses Israel. The chapter falls into four units: the first prophecy (1-10), the relocation (11-17), the second prophecy (18-24), and a further location (25-30).
¹tn It begins “and he said.”
²tn The text has “on the altar,” but since there were seven of each animal and seven altars, the implication as that this means on each altar.
³tn The verb hityasseb (bX@y~t=h!) means “to take a stand, station oneself.” It is more intentional than simply standing by something. He was to position himself by the sacrifrice as Balaam withdrew to seek the oracle.
⁴tn Heb “and the word of what he shows me.” The noun is in construct, and so the clause that follows functions as a noun clause in the genitive. The point is that the word will consist of divine revelation.
⁵tn The verb is the perfect tense with the waw consecutive. This clause is dependent on the clause that precedes it.
⁶sn He went up to a bald spot, to a barren height. The statement underscores the general belief that such tops were the closest things to the gods. On such heights people built their shrines and temples.
⁷tn The relative is added here in place of the conjunction for a clarification of the text.
⁸tn Heb “and thus you shall speak.”
⁹tn The text draws the vividness of the scene with the deictic particle hinneh (hN@h!)—Balaam returned, and there he was, standing there.
¹⁰tn Heb “he”; the referent (Balaam) has been specified in the translation for clarity.
¹¹tn The passage calls for a past tense translation; since the verb form is a prefixed conjugation, this tense should be classified as a preterite without the waw. Such forms do occur in the ancient poetic passage.
¹²sn The opening lines seem to be a formula for the seer to identify himself and the occasion for the oracle. The tension is laid out early; Balak knows that God has intended to bless Israel, but he has been paid to curse them.
¹³tn The figure is erotesis, a rhetorical question. He is actually saying he cannot curse them because God has not cursed them.
¹⁴tn The imperfect tense should here be classified as a potential imperfect.
¹⁵tn Heb “him,” but it means the Israelites (Israel).
¹⁶sn Balaam reports his observation of the nation of Israel spread out below him in the valley. Based on that vision, and the LORD’s word, he announces the uniqueness of Israel—they are not just like one of the other nations. He was correct, of course; they were the only people linked with the living God by covenant.
¹⁷tn The verb could also be taken as a reflexive—Israel does not consider itself as among the nations, meaning, they consider themselves to be unique.
¹⁸tn The question is again rhetorical; it means no one can count them—they are innumerable.
¹⁹tn The perfect tense can also be classified as a potential nuance. It does not occur very often, but does occur several times.
²⁰sn The reference in the oracle is back to Genesis 13:16, which would not be clear to Balaam. But God had described their growth like the dust of the earth. Here it is part of the description of the vast numbers.
²¹tn The noun in the MT is not in the construct state, and so it should be taken as an adverbial accusative, forming a parallel with the verb “count.” The second object of the verse then follows, “the fourth part of Israel.”
²²tn The use of nepes (vp#n#) for the subject of the verb stresses the personal nature—me.
²³sn Here the seer’s words link with the promise of Gen 12:3, that whoever blesses Israel will be blessed. Since the blessing belongs to them, the upright (and not Balak), Balaam would like his lot to be with them.
²⁴tn Heb “his.”
²⁵tn The text uses hinneh (hN@h!) here to stress the contrast.
²⁶tn The construction is emphatic, using the perfect tense and the infinitive absolute to give it the emphasis. It would have the force of “you have done nothing but bless,” or “you have indeed blessed.” The construction is reminiscent of the call of Abram and the promise of the blessing in such elaborate terms.
²⁷tn The verb samar (rmv) means “to guard, watch, observe” and so here with a sense of “be careful” or even “take heed.” The nuance of the imperfect tense would be obligatory: “I must be careful”—to do what? to speak what the LORD has put in my mouth. The infinitive construct “to speak” is therefore serving as the direct object of samar.
²⁸tn The clause is a noun clause serving as the direct object of “to speak.” It begins with the sign of the accusative, and then the relative pronoun that indicates the whole clause is the accusative.
²⁹tn Some do not use “Pisgah,” but a “lookout post” or an “elevated place.”
³⁰tn Heb “and he built”
³¹tn The verse uses koh (hK)) twice: station yourself here . . . I will meet [the LORD] there.
³²tn The verb probably means “pay attention” in this verse.
³³tn The expression means a human being, or, a mortal.
³⁴tn The verb the hiphil of qum (<Wq), “cause to rise, make stand.” The meaning here is more of the sense of fulfilling the promises made.
³⁵tn The text simply has “I have received [to] bless.” The infinitive is the object of the verb, telling what he received. Balaam was not actually commanded to bless, but was given the word of blessing so that he was given a divine decree that would bless Israel.
³⁶sn The reference is to the first speech probably, where the LORD blessed Israel. Balaam knows that there is nothing he can do to reverse what God has said.
³⁷tn The verb is the hiphil of sub (bWv), meaning “cause to return.” He cannot return God’s word to him, for it has been given, and it will be fulfilled.
³⁸tn These could be understood as impersonal and so rendered “no one has discovered.”
³⁹sn The line could mean that God has regarded Israel as the ideal congregation without any blemish of flaw. But it could also mean that God has not looked on their iniquity, meaning, held it against them.
⁴⁰tn The word means “wrong, misery, trouble.” It can mean the idea of “disaster” as well, for that too is trouble. Here it is parallel to “iniquity” and so has the connotation of something that would give God reason to curse them.
⁴¹tn The people are blessed because God is their king. In fact, the shout of acclamation is among them—they are proclaiming the LORD God as their king. The word is used normally for the sound of the trumpet, but also of battle shouts, and then here acclamation. This would represent their conviction that Yahweh is king.
⁴²tn The form is the hiphil participle from yasa’ (oXy) with the object suffix. He is the one who brought them out.
⁴³sn The expression is “the horns of the wild ox” (KJV-unicorn). The point of the image is strength or power. Horns are also used in the Bible to represent kingship (see Pss 89, 132).
⁴⁴tn Or, “in Jacob.” But given the context the meaning “against” is preferable. The words describe two techniques of consulting God; the first has to do with observing omens in general (“enchantments”), and the second with casting lots or arrows of the like (“divinations” [Ezek 21:26]). See Snaith, Numbers, pp. 295,296.
⁴⁵tn The form is the preposition “like, as” and the word for “time”—according to the time, about this time, now.
⁴⁶tn The niphal imperfect here carries the nuance of obligation—one has to say in amazement that God has done something marvelous, or, “it must be said.”
⁴⁷tn The pronoun “their” has been supplied for clarity.
⁴⁸sn The oracle compares Israel first to a lion, or better, lioness, because she does the tracking and hunting of food while the lion moves up and down roaring and distracting the prey. But the lion is also the traditional emblem of Judah, Dan and Gad, as well as the symbol of royalty. So this also supports the motif of royalty as well as power for Israel.
⁴⁹tn The verb is preceded by the infinitive absolute: “you shall by no means curse” or “do not curse them at all.” He brought him to curse, and when he tries to curse there is a blessing. Balak can only say it would be better not to bother.
⁵⁰tn The same construction now works with “nor bless them at all.” The two together form a merism—“don’t say anything.” He does not want them blessed, so Balak is not to do that, but the curse isn’t working either.
⁵¹tn This first clause, “all that the LORD speaks”—is a noun clause functioning as the object of the verb that comes at the end of the verse. It is something of an independent accusative case, since it is picked up with the sign of the accusative: “all that the LORD speaks, it I must do.”
⁵²tn Heb “be pleasing in the eyes of God.”
⁵³sn Balak is stubborn, as indeed Balaam is persistent. But Balak still thinks that if aother location were used it just might work. Balaam had actually told Balak in the prophecy that other attempts would fail. But Balak will not give up so easily. So he insists they perform the ritual and try again. This time, however, Balaam will change his approach, and this will result in a dramatic outpouring of power on him.
¹sn For a thorough study of the arrangement of this passage, see E. B. Smick, “A Study of the Structure of the Third Balaam Oracle,” in The Law and the Prophets, ed. by J. H. Skilton (Nutley, N. J.: Presbyterian and Reformed Publishing Co., 1974), pp. 242-252. He sees the oracle as having an introductory strophe (3,4), followed by two stanzas (5,6) that introduce the body (7b-9b) before the final benediction (9b).
²tn Heb “it was good in the eyes of the LORD.”
³tn Heb “as time after time.”
⁴tn The word n^ehasim (<yv!?n+) means “omens,” or possibly auguries. He is not even making a pretense now of looking for such things, because they are not going to work. God has overruled them.
⁵tn The idiom signifies that he had a determination and resolution to look out over where the Israelites were, so that he could appreciate more their presence and use that as the basis for his expressing of the oracle.
⁶tn The text has “living according to their tribes.”
⁷tn The word n^e’um (<o%n+) is an “oracle.” It is usually followed by its subject (in the subjective genitive). The word could be rendered “says,” but this translations is more specific.
⁸tn The Greek text reads “the one who sees truly.” The word has been interpreted in both ways, “shut” or “open.”
⁹tn The word “prostrate” is added. The Greek interprets the line to mean “falling asleep.” It may mean falling into a trance.
¹⁰tn The last colon simply has “falling, but opened eyes.” The falling may simply refer to lying prone; and the opened eyes may refer to his receiving a vision. (see H. E. Freeman, An Introduction to the Old Testament Prophets (Chicago: Moody, 1968), pp. 37-41.
¹¹tn Here mah (hm) has an exclamatory sense, “How!” (see Genesis 28:17).
¹²tn Text only “as valleys they spread forth.”
¹³tn Or, “rows of palms.”
¹⁴sn The language seems to be more poetic than precise. Snaith notes that cedars do not grow beside water; he also connects “aloes” to the eaglewood that is more exotic, and capable of giving off an aroma (see Numbers, p. 298).
¹⁵sn These two lines are a little difficult, but the general sense is that of irrigation buckets and a well-watered land. The point is that Israel will be prosperous and fruitful.
¹⁶sn Many commentators see this as a reference to Agag of 1 Sam 15:32-33, the Amalekite king slain by Samuel, for that is the one we know. But that is by no means clear, for this text does not identify this Agag. If it is that king, then this poem, or this line in this poem would have to be later, unless one were to try to argue for a specific prophecy. Whoever this Agag is, he is a symbol of power.
¹⁷tn Heb “they will devour nations,” their adversaries.
¹⁸sn This is apparently a sign of contempt or derision (see Job 27:23; and Lam 2:15).
¹⁹tn The construction is emphatic, using thye infinitive absolute with the perfect tense for “bless.”
²⁰tn Heb “I am not able to go beyond.”
²¹tn The construction is the particle hinneh (hN@h!) suffixed followed by the active participle. This is the futur instans use of the participle, to express something that is about to happen: “I am about to go.”
²²tn Heb “in the latter days.” For more on this expression, see E. Lipinski, VT 20 (1970):445-450.
²³tn Heb “near.”
²⁴sn This is a figure for a king (see also Isa 14:12) not only in the Bible but in the ancient Near Eastern literature as a whole. The immediate reference of the prophecy seems to be to David, but the eschatalogical theme goes beyond him. There is to be a connection made between this passage and the sighting of a star in its ascendancy by the magi, who then journey to Bethlehem to see him born King of the Jews (Matt 2:2). The expression “son of a star” (Bar Kochba) became a title for a later claimant to kingship, but he was doomed by the Romans in 135 A.D.
²⁵tn The verb is the perfect tense with the waw consecutive; it is equal to the imperfect expressing the future. The verb darak (ErD), related to the noun “way, road,” seems to mean something like tread on, walk, march.”
²⁶sn The “scepter” is metonymical for a king who will rise to power. NEB strangely rendered this as “comet” to make a parallel with “star.”
²⁷tn The word is literally “corners,” but may refer to the corners of the head, and so “skull.”
²⁸tc The MT reads “shatter, devastate.” The SP read qodqod (dq)d=q), “head, crown, pate.” The SP reading follows Jer 48:45 which appears to reflect Num 24:17.
²⁹sn The prophecy begins to be fulfilled when David defeated Moab and Edom and established an empire including them. But the Messianic promise extends far beyond that to the end of the age and the inclusion of these defeated people in the program of the coming King.
³⁰sn Seir is the chief mountain range of Edom (Deut 33:2), and so the reference here is to the general area of Edom.
³¹sn This probably means that it held first place, or it thought that it was “the first of the nations.” It was not the first, either in order or greatness.
³²sn A pun is made on the name Kenite by using the word “your nest” (qinneka [;N#q!]); the location may be the rocky cliffs overlooking Petra.
³³tc The text literally reads “Nevertheless Cain will be wasted; how long will Asshur take you captive?” Cain was believed to be the ancestor of the Kenites. The NAB has it, “yet destined for burning, even as I watch, are your inhabitants.” Asshur may refer to a north Arabian group of people of Abrahamic stock (Gen 25:3), and not the Assyrian empire.
³⁴tc Because there is no parallel line, some have thought that it dropped out (see de Vaulx, Les Nombres, p. 296).
³⁵tc The MT is difficult. The Kittim refers normally to Cyprus, or any maritime people to the west. Albright proposed emending the line to “islands will gather in the north, ships from the distant sea” (JBL 63 [1944]:222-23). Some commentators, including R. K. Harrison accept that as the original state of the text, since the present MT makes little sense.
sn R. de Vaux sees this as a prophecy of the invasion of the Sea Peoples (Philistines) in the 13^th and 12^th centuries; he may be correct as far as the initial application. The prophets will have much more to say about such invasions.
³⁶tn Or, “it will end in utter destruction.”
¹sn Chapter 25 tells of Israel’s sins on the steppes of Moab, and God’s punishment. In the overall plan of the book, here we have another possible threat to God’s program, although here it comes from within the camp (Balaam was the threat from without). If the Moabites could not defeat them one way, they would try another. The chapter has three parts: fornication (1-3), God’s punishment (4-9), and aftermath (10-18). See further G. E. Mendenhall, “The Incident at Beth Baal Peor (Nu 25),” The tenth Generation (Baltimore: Johns Hopkins press, 1973), pp. 105-121; and S. C. Reif, “What Enraged Phinehas? A Study of Numbers 25:8,” JBL 90 (1974):100-106.
²tn This first preterite is subordinated to the next as a temporal clause; it is not giving a parallel action, but the setting for the event.
³sn The account apparently means that the men were fornicating with the Moabite women. Why the men submitted to such a temptation at this point is hard to say. It may be that as military heroes the men took liberties with the women of occupied territories.
⁴tn The verb simply says “they called,” but it is a feminine plural. And so the women who engaged in immoral acts with Hebrew men invited them to their temple ritual.
⁵sn So what Israel experienced here was some of the debased ritual practices of the Canaanitish people. The prostrating themselves before the pagan deities was probably participation in fertility ritual, nothing short of cult prostitution. This was a blatant disregard of the covenant and the Law. If something were not done, the nation would have destroyed itself.
⁶tn The verb is “yoked” to Baal-peor. The word is unusual, and may suggest the physical, ritual participation described below. It certainly shows that they acknowledge the reality of the local god.
sn The evidence indicates that Moab was part of the very corrupt Canaanite world, a world that was given over to the fertility ritual of the times.
⁷sn The meaning must be the leaders behind the apostasy, for they would now be arrested. They were responsible for the tribes’ conformity to the Law, but here they had not only failed in their duty, but had participated. The leaders were executed; the rest of the guilty died by the plague.
⁸sn The leaders who were guilty were commanded by God to be publicly exposed by hanging, probably a reference to impaling (the view of Keil and Delitzsch, and of Wenham), but some suggest it was some other form of harsh punishment (Plaut, Hallo). The point was that the swaying of their executed bodies would be a startling warning for any who so blatantly set the Law aside and indulged in apostasy through pagan sexual orgies.
⁹tn This means in broad daylight.
¹⁰tn Heb “slay—a man his men.” The imperative is plural, and so “man” is to be taken collectively as “each of you men.”
¹¹tn The verse begins with the deictic particle w^ehinneh (hN@h!w+), pointing out the action that was taking place. It stresses the immediacy of the action to the reader.
¹²tn Heb “before the eyes/sight of.”
¹³tn The waw at the beginning of the clause is a disjunctive because it is prefixed to the non-verbal form. In this context it is best interpreted as a circumstantial clause, stressing that this happened “while” people were weeping over the sin.
¹⁴tn The first clause is subordinated to the second because both begin with the preterite verbal form, and there is clearly a logical and/or chronological sequence involved.
¹⁵tn The word qubbah (hBq%) seems to refer to the innermost part of the family tent. Some suggest it was in the tabernacle area, but that is unlikely. S. C. Reif argues for a private tent shrine (see JBL 90 [10971]:100-106).
¹⁶tn The text has “and he thrust the two of them the Israelite man and the woman to her belly [lower abdomen].” Reif notes the similarity of the word with the previous “inner tent,” and suggests that it means Phinehas stabbed her in her shrine tent, where she was being set up as some sort of priestess or cult leader. Phinehas put a quick end to their sexual immorality while they were in the act.
¹⁷sn Phinehas saw all this as part of the pagan sexual ritual that was defiling the camp. He had seen that the LORD himself had had the guilty put to death. And there was already some plague breaking out in the camp that had to be stopped. And so in his zeal he dramatically put an end to this incident, that served to stop the rest and end the plague.
¹⁸tn The repetition of forms for “zeal” in the line stresses the passion of Phinehas. The word “zeal” means a passionate intensity to protect or preserve divine or social institutions.
¹⁹tn The word for “zeal” now occurs a third time. While some editions translate this word now as “jealousy,” it carries the force of God’s passionate determination to defend his rights and what is right about the covenant and the community.
²⁰tn Heb “say.”
²¹tn Here too the grammar expresses an imminent future by using the particle hin^eni (yn!n+h!) before the participle noten (/t@n))—“here I am giving,” or, “I am about to give.”
²²sn This is the designation of the leadership of the priestly ministry. The terminology is used again in the rebuke of the priests in Malachi 2.
²³tn The motif is reiterated here. Phinehas was passionately determined to maintain the rights of his God by stopping the gross sinful perversions.
²⁴sn The atonement that he made in this passage refers to the killing of the two obviously blatant sinners. By doing this he dispensed with any animal sacrifice, for the sinners themselves died. In Leviticus it was the life of the substitutionary animal that was taken in place of the sinners that made atonement. The point is that sin was punished by death, and so God was free to end the plague and pardon the people. God’s holiness and righteousness have always been every bit as important as God’s mercy and compassion, for without righteousness and holiness mercy and compassion mean nothing.
²⁵tn Heb “head.”
²⁶sn The passage makes it clear that this was a leader, one who was supposed to be preventing this thing from happening. The judgment was swift and severe, because the crime was so great, and the danger of it spreading was certain. Paul refers to this horrible incident when he reminds Christians not to do similar things (1 Cor 10:6-8).
²⁷tn The form is the infinitive absolute used in place of a verb here; it clearly is meant to be an instruction for Israel. The idea is that of causing trouble, harassing, vexing, Midian. The verb is repeated as the active participle in the line, and so the punishment is talionic.
²⁸tn This is the same word as that translated “treachery.”
²⁹sn Her father, Zur, was one of five Midianite kings who eventually succumbed to Israel (Num 31:8). When the text gives the name and family of a woman, it is asserting that she is important, at least for social reasons, in her people.
¹sn The breakdown of chapter 26 for outlining purposes will be essentially according to the tribes of Israel. The format and structure is similar to the first census, and so less comment is necessary here.
²tc The MT has also “saying.”
³tn Heb “everyone who goes out in the army in Israel.”
⁴tn “Number the people” is added here to the text for a smooth reading.
⁵sn The number of Reuben had dropped from 46,500 to 43,730.
⁶tn Heb “and the sons of Pallu.”
⁷tc This is “Zohar” in Exod 6:15 and Gen 46:10.
⁸sn Before entering Sinai the tribe numbered 59,300, the third largest. Now it was about one-third its original size.
⁹tc The MT of Gen 46:16 reads this as “Ezbon.”
¹⁰tc The Greek and SP have “Ad[d]i,” probably by confusion of letters.
¹¹tc Gen 46:16 and the LXX here read “Arodi.”
¹²sn The Gadites decreased from 45,650 to 40,500.
¹³tc The SP and Greek have “Hamuel.”
¹⁴sn The tribe of Judah increased from 74,600 to 76,500.
¹⁵sn The tribes of Issachar increased from 54,400 to 64,300.
¹⁶sn Zebulun showed a little increase from 57,400 to 60,500.
¹⁷sn The number of Manasseh increased from 32,200 to 52,700.
¹⁸sn This is a significant reduction from the first count of 40,500.
¹⁹tc “From Ard” is not in the text.
²⁰sn The number increased from 35,400 to 45,600. The Greek has here 35,500.
²¹sn Dan increased from 62,700 to 64,400.
²²sn They increased from 41,500.
²³sn This number fell from 53,400 to 45,400.
²⁴sn This number shows only a slightly smaller total in the second census; the first was 603,550.
²⁵tn Heb “to many you will multiply his inheritance.”
²⁶tn Heb “to a few you will lessen his inheritance.”
²⁷tn Heb “according to those that were numbered of him,” meaning, in accordance with the number of people in his clan.
²⁸tn Heb “divided.”
²⁹tn The text has “who she bore him to Levi.” The verb has no expressed subject. Either one could supply one, such as “her mother,” or treat it as a passive.
³⁰tn “who had been” is added to clarify the text.
¹sn For additional information on this section, see N. H. Snaith, “The Daughters of Zelophahad,” VT 16 (1966):124-127; and J. Weingreen, “The Case of the Daughters of Zelophahad,” VT 16 (1966):518-522.
²tn This clause begins with a waw on a pronoun, marking it out as a disjunctive waw. In this context it fits best to take it as a circumstantial clause introducing concession.
³tn Heb “in the midst of.”
⁴tn The word order is emphatic: “but in/on account of his own sins he died.”
⁵tn Of course, they mean land, property that they will possess in the land.
⁶tn The word is “brothers,” but this can be interpreted more loosely to relatives.
⁷tn Heb “[the daughters of Zelophahad] speak right” (using the participle dob^erot [tr)b=D)]) with ken (/K@).
⁸tn The text uses the infinitive absolute with the imperfect tense. The imperfect is functioning as the imperfect of instruction, and so the infinitive strengthens the force of the instruction.
⁹tn The verb is the hiphil perfect with a waw consecutive, from the root ‘abar (rbu), “to pass over.” Here it functions as the equivalent of the imperfect of instruction: “and you shall cause to pass,” meaning, “transfer.”
¹⁰tn Heb “a man, if he dies.”
¹¹tn The expression is huqqat mispat (FPv=m! tQ^?%), “a statute of judgment,” which means it is a fixed enactment that determines justice. It is one which is established by God.
¹²sn See further J. Lindblom, “Lot Casting in the Old Testament,” VT 12 (1962):164-178; E. Lipinski, “Urim and Thummim,” VT 20 (1970):495-6; and S. E. Loewenstamm, “The Death of Moses,” Tarbiz 27 (1957/58):142-157.
¹³tc The Greek translation adds “which is Mount Nebo.” This is a typical scribal change to harmonize two passages.
sn The area is in the mountains of Moab; Deut 34:1 more precisely identifies it as Mount Nebo.
¹⁴tn The imperative could be subordinated to the first to provide a purpose clause, although a second instruction fits well enough.
¹⁵tn This perfect tense would best be classified as a perfect of resolve: which I have decided to give. God had not yet given the land to them, but it was certain he would.
¹⁶tn The first verb is a perfect tense with a waw consecutive, and the second verb is also. In such parallel clauses, the first may be subordinated, here as a temporal clause.
¹⁷tn The preposition on the relative pronoun has the force of “because of the fact that.”
¹⁸tn The verb is the second masculine plural form.
¹⁹tn Heb “flesh.”
²⁰tn This is the same verb paqad (dqP) that is used throughout the book for the aspect of “numbering” the people.
²¹sn This is probably technical terminology for a military leader (Josh 14:11; 1 Sam 18:13-16; 1 Kgs 3:7; 2 Kgs 11:9). The image of a shepherd can also be military (1 Kgs 22:17).
²²tn The text has the conjunction with the negated imperfect tense, “and it will not be.” This clause should be subordinated to the preceding to form a result clause, and the imperfect then function as a final imperfect.
²³sn The word “spirit” probably refers to the Holy Spirit, in which case it would be rendered “in whom is the Spirit.” This would likely be a permanent endowment for Joshua. But it is also possible to take it to refer to a proper spirit to do all the things required of such a leader (which ultimately is a gift from the Spirit of God). The text simply says “in whom is a spirit.”
²⁴sn This symbolic act would indicate the transfer of leadership to Joshua.
²⁵tn This could be translated “position him,” or “have him stand,” since it is the causitive stem of the verb “to stand.”
²⁶tn The verb is the piel perfect of siwwah (hWX!), literally “to command.” The verb has a wide range of meanings, and so here in this context the idea of instructing gives way to a more general sense of commissioning for duty. The verb in sequence is equal to the imperfect of instruction.
²⁷tn The verb is simply “give,” but in this context giving some of Moses honor to Joshua in the presence of the people is essentially passing the leadership to him, or delegating the authority to him with the result that people would follow him.
²⁸tc The Greek, Syriac, and Vulgate read “glory” for this form that occurs only here in the Pentateuch. Elsewhere it is rendered “majesty, splendor” (see Ps 96:6). It could even be “vitality” here. The authority being transferred here is both spiritual and civil.
²⁹tn The passage simply has “and he will ask,” but Eleazar is clearly the subject now.
³⁰tn Heb “ask.”
³¹sn The new leader would not have the privilege that Moses had in speaking to God face to face. Rather, he would have to enquire of the LORD through the priest, and the priest would seek a decision in the Urim. The Urim and the Thummim were the sacred lots that the priest had in his pouch, the “breastplate” as it has been called. Since the Law had now been fully established, there would be fewer cases that the leader would need further rulings. Now it would simply be seeking the LORD’s word for matters such as whether to advance or not. The size, shape or substance of these lots is uncertain.
³²tn Heb “mouth,” meaning what he will say.
¹sn For additional reading on these chapters, see G. B. Gray, Sacrifice in the Old Testament (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1925); A. F. Rainey, “The Order of Sacrifices in the Old Testament Ritual Texts,” Bib 51 (1970):485-498; N. H. Snaith, The Jewish New Year Festival (London: SPCK, 1947).
²tn Th sentence begins with the accusative “my offering.” It is suspended at the beginning as an independent accusative to itemize the subject matter. The second accusative is the formal object of the verb. It could also be taken in apposition to the first accusative.
³tn The construction uses the imperfect tense expressing instruction, followed by the infinitive construct used to express the complement of direct object.
⁴sn See L. R. Fisher, “New Ritual Calendar from Ugarit,” HTR 63 (1970):485-501.
⁵sn The sacrifice was to be kept burning, but each morning the priests would have to clean the grill and put a new offering on the altar. So the idea of a continual burnt offering is more that of a regular offering.
⁶tn Heb “between the evenings” meaning between dusk and dark.
⁷sn That is about two quarts.
⁸sn That is about one quart.
⁹tn Heb “the one lamb,” but it is meant to indicate for “each lamb.”
¹⁰tn The word sekar (rkv@) is often translated “strong drink.” It can mean barley beer in the Akkadian cognate, and so in the Bible when joined with the word for wine. Most versions here would read “wine,” or perhaps a fermented “drink.”
¹¹sn That is about 4 quarts.
¹²tn Heb “the burnt offering of the sabbath by its sabbath.”
¹³tn Heb “of your months.”
¹⁴tn Heb “one kid of the goats.”
¹⁵tn The text has “any work [of] service”; this means any occupational work, that is, the ordinary service.
¹sn The verb seems to mean “humble yourself.” There is no explanation given for it. In the days of the prophets fasting seems to be associated with it (see Isa 58:35), and possibly the symbolic wearing of ashes.
²tn Heb “they shall be to you without blemish.”
³tn “you must offer” implied.
¹sn Num 30 deals with vows that are different than the vows discussed in Lev 27 and Num 6. The material is placed here after all the rulings of the offerings, but it could have been revealed to Moses at any time, such as the Nazirite vows, or the question of the daughters’ inheritance. The logic of placing it here may be that a festival was the ideal place for discharging a vow. For additional material on vows, see R. de Vaux, Ancient Israel, Its Life and Institutions (London: Darton, Longman and Todd, 1961), pp. 39-40, 465-66.
²tn Heb “heads.”
³tn The legal construction states the class to which the law applies, and then lays down the condition: men [man]—if . . . .”
⁴tn The text uses a cognate accusative construction to express this: “a man if he vows a vow.”
⁵tn The expression is “swear an oath,” hissaba‘ s^ebu‘ah (hub%v= ub^Vh!). The vow (neder [rd#n@]) was a promise to donate something of oneself or one’s substance to the LORD. The solemn oath seals the vow before the LORD, perhaps with sacrifice. The vocabulary recalls Abraham’s treaty with Abimelech and the naming of Beersheba with the word (see Gen 21).
⁶tn Now the text adds le’sor ‘issar (rSo! rs)o=l#), meaning “to take a binding obligation.” This is usually interpreted to mean a negative vow, i.e., the person attempts to abstain from something that is otherwise permissible. It might involve fasting, or abstaining from marital sex, but it might also involve some goal to be achieved, and the abstaining from distractions until the vow is fulfilled (see Ps 132). The neder may have been more for religious matters, and the ’issar more for social concerns, but this cannot be documented with certainty.
⁷tn Heb “according to all that goes out of his mouth.”
⁸tn The qualification comes at the end of the verse, and simply says “in her youth.”
⁹tn The text just has “in her father’s house” and not “who is still living,” but that is the meaning of the line.
¹⁰tn The intent of this expression is that he does not object to the vow.
¹¹tn The verb qum (<Wq) is best translated “stand” here; but the idea with it is that what she vows is established as a genuine oath with the father’s approval (or acquiescence).
¹²tn The idiom is “in the day of,” but it is used in place of a preposition before the infinitive construct with its suffixed subjective genitive. The clause is temporal.
¹³tn The Hebrew “all will not stand” is best rendered “none will stand.”
¹⁴tn The verb has been often translated “forgive,” but that would suggest a sin that needed forgiving. The idea of “absolve” is better; the idea is like that of having a debt “forgiven” or “retired.” In other words, she is free from the vow she had made. The LORD will not hold the woman responsible to do what she vowed.
¹⁵tn Heb “and her vows are upon her.” It may be that the woman gets married while her vows are still unfulfilled.
¹⁶tn The text indicates that this would be some impetuous vow that she uttered with her lips, a vow that her husband, whether new of existing, would not approve of. Several translate it “a binding obligation rashly uttered.”
¹⁷tn The verb is the hiphil perfect with a waw consecutive from the verb parar (rrP), “to annul.” The verb functions here as the equivalent of an imperfect tense; here it is the apodosis following the conditional clause—if this is the case, then this is what will happen.
¹⁸tn Heb “which [she is] under it.”
¹⁹tn The text says her vow “shall stand against her.” In other words, she must fulfill, or bear the consequences of, whatever she vowed.
²⁰tn The verb is the imperfect tense in the conditional clause. It is intensified with the infinitive absolute, which would have the force of saying that he nullified them unequivocally, or he made them null and void.
²¹tn Heb whatever proceeds from her lips.”
²²tn The sentence uses the infinitive construct l^e‘annot (tN)u^l=), “to afflict,” which is the same word used in the instructions for the day of atonement in which people are to afflict themselves (their souls). The case here may be that the woman would take a religious vow on such an occasion to humble herself, to mortify her flesh, to abstain from certain things, perhaps even the marriage bed (a subject Paul talks about in 1 Cor 7).
²³tn The sentence uses the infinitive absolute to strengthen the idea.
²⁴sn In other words, he will pay the penalty for making her break her vows if he makes her stop what she vowed. It will not be her responsibility.
²⁵tn Heb “between.”
¹sn This lengthy chapter records the mobilization of the troops (1-5), the war itself (6-13), the death of the captive women (14-18), the purification of the nations (19-24), and the distribution of the spoils (25-54). For more detail, see G. W. Coats, “Moses in Midian,” JBL 92 (1973):3-10; and W. J. Dumbrell, “Midian—a Land or a League?” VT 25 (1975):323-337.
²tn The imperative is followed by its cognate accusative to stress this vengeance. The Midianites had attempted to destroy Israel with their corrupt pagan practices, and now will be judged. The accounts indicate that the effort by Midian was calculated and evil.
³sn The war was commanded by the LORD and was to be divine vengeance on the Midianites. So it was holy war. No Israelites then could take booty or spoils in this—it was not a time for plunder and aggrandizement. It was part of the judgment of God opn those who would destroy or pervert his plan and his people.
⁴sn This would be the last major enterprise that Moses would have to undertake. He would soon die and “be gathered to his people” as Aaron was.
⁵tn The niphal imperative, literally “arm yourselves,” is the call to mobilize the nation for war. It will be followed by the jussive, “and they will be,” which would then be subordinated to say “that they may be.” The versions changed the verb to a hiphil, but that is unecessary: “arm some of myou yourselves.”
⁶tn Heb “to give.”
⁷sn Some commentators argue that given the size of the nation (which they reject) the small number for the army is a sign of the unrealistic character of the story. The number is a round number; but it is also a holy war, and God would give them the victory. They are beginning to learn that here, and at Jericho, and later against these Midianites under Gideon, God does not want a large army.
⁸tn he text uses the idiom that these “were in his hand,” meaning that he had the responsibility over them.
⁹sn The instruments no doubt included the ark of the covenant. Targum Pseudo Jonathan adds the Urim and Thummim.
¹⁰sn Many critical scholars again try to show that this passage is a fabrication. The text says that they killed every male, but Judges accounts for the Midianites. The texts can be harmonized rather simply—they killed every Midianite who was in the battle. Midianite tribes and cities dotted the whole region, but that does not mean Israel went and slew every one of them. There apparently was a core of Midianites whom Balaam had influence to pervert Israel.
¹¹sn Here again we see that there was no unified empire, but Midianite tribal groups.
¹²sn And what was Balaam doing among the Midianites? The implication is strong. This pagan diviner had to submit to the revealed will of God in the oracles, but he nonetheless could be hired. He had been a part of the attempt to destroy Israel that failed; he then apparently was part of the plan, if not the advisor, to destroy them with fornication and pagan ritual.
¹³tn The ban applied to the encampments and forts of this group of Midianite tribes living in the region of Moab.
¹⁴tn Again this expression, “the Jordan of Jericho,” is used. It is intended to describe the location of the Jordan intended, the Jordan next to or across from Jericho.
¹⁵tn The verb is the piel perfect of the word hayah (hy?), “to live.” In the piel stem it must here mean “preserve alive,” or “allow to live,” rather than make alive.
¹⁶tn Heb “every male among the little ones.”
sn The command in holy war to kill women and children seems in the modern times a terrible thing to have been done (and it was), and something they ought not to have done. But this criticism fails to understand the situation in the ancient world. The entire life of the ancient world was tribal warfare, necessitating warfare. God’s judgment is poured out on whole groups of people who act with moral abandonment and in sinful pursuit. See E. J. Young, My Servants the Prophets, p. 24; and G. Wenham, The Enigma of Evil (formerly called The Goodness of God).
¹⁷tn Heb “every woman who has known [a] man by lying with a man.”
¹⁸tn The Hebrew indicates they would be female children, making the selection easy.
¹⁹tn Heb “who have not known [a] man by lying with a man.”
²⁰sn The critical view generally sees this story as a “realistic” bit of story-telling by the Jews in the captivity. Accordingly, the spoils of war here indicate the wealth of the Jews in captivity, which were then to be given to the Levites and priests for the restoration of the sanctuary in Jerusalem. The returning Jews had the same problem as the earlier ones (if they existed!), and that was to gain a foot hold in the land. This kind of reconstruction of the account is contrived and subjective—there is not a shred of evidence for it. And if this was the intent of a later writer, he surely could have been clearer than making up such a story, which would create all kinds of moral questions among the community!
²¹sn These verses are a reminder that taking a life, even if justified through holy war, still separates one from the holiness of God. It is part of the violation of the fallen world, and only through the ritual of purification can one be once again made fit for the presence of the LORD.
²²sn Purification by fire is unique to this event. Making these metallic objects “pass through the fire” was not only a way of purifying (burning off impurities), but it seems to be a dedicatory rite as well to the LORD and his people. The aspect of passing through the fire is one used by these pagans for child sacrifice.
²³tn The idiom here is “take up the head,” meaning take a census, or count the totals.
²⁴tn The verb is the hiphil, “you shall cause to be taken up.” The perfect with the waw continues the sequence of the instructions. This raised offering was to be a tax of one-fifth of one percent for the LORD.
²⁵sn Here again we encounter one of the difficulties of the book, the use of the large numbers. Only twelve thousand soldiers fought the Midianites, but they brought back this amount of plunder, including 32,000 girls. Until a solution for numbers in the book can be found, or the current translation confirmed without a doubt, one must remain cautious in interpretation.
²⁶tn The word “numbered” has been supplied in the translation for clarity.
²⁷tn Heb “lifted up the head.”
²⁸tn Heb “in our hand.”
²⁹sn The expression here may include the idea of finding protection from divine wrath, which is so common to Leviticus; but it may also be a thank offering for the fact that their lives had been spared.
³⁰sn Or about 420 imperial pounds.
³¹tn The purpose of the offering was to remind the LORD to remember Israel. But it would also be an encouragement for Israel as they remembered the great victory.
¹sn While the tribes are on the other side of Jordan, the matter of which tribes would settle there has to be discussed. This chapter begins the settlement of Israel into the tribal territories, something to be continued in Joshua. The chapter has the petitions (1-5), the response by Moses (6-15), the proposal (16-27), and the conclusion of the matter (28-42). For literature non this subject, both critical and conservative, see S. E. Loewenstein, “The Relation of the Settlement of Gad and Reuben in Numbers 32:1-38, Its Background and Its Composition,” Tarbiz 42 (1972):12-26; Gilead and Gilgal, Some Reflections on the Israelite Occupation of Palestine,” VT 6 (1956):19-33; and A. Bergmann, “The Israelite Tribe of Half-Manasseh,” JPOS 16 (1936):224-254.
²tn Heb “the place was a place of/for cattle.”
³tn The verb is the hiphil perfect of nakah (hkn), a term that can mean “smite, strike, attack, destroy.”
⁴tn The verb is the hiphil jussive from ‘abar (rbu), “to cross over.” The idea of “cause to cross” or “make us cross” might be too harsh; but “take across” with the rest of the nation is what they are trying to avoid.
⁵tn The waw is a waw disjunctive prefixed to the pronoun; it fits best here as a circumstantial clause, “while you stay here.”
⁶tn Heb “the heart.”
⁷tn The preterite with the waw consecutive is here subordinated to the parallel yet chronologically later verb in the next clause.
⁸tn The infinitive construct here with lamed is functioning as a result clause.
⁹tn The LORD had not given it yet, but was going to give it. Hence, the perfect should be classified as a perfect of resolve.
¹⁰tn The sentence begins with “if they see . . . .” This is the normal way for Hebrew to express a negative oath—they will by no means see . . . . The sentence as elliptical; it is saying something like “[May God to so to me] if they see,” meaning they won’t see. Of course here God is taking the oath, which is an anthropomorphic act. He does not need to take an oath, and certainly could not swear by anyone greater; but it communicates to people His resolve.
¹¹tn The clause is difficult; it means essentially that “they have not made full [their coming] after” the LORD.
¹²tn The verb is a little difficult to translate, since it has the idea of “complete, finish” (tamam [<mT]). It could be translated “consumed” in this passage.
¹³tn The construction uses the verbal hendiadys with the verb “to add” serving to modify the main verb.
¹⁴ Heb “our little ones.”
¹⁵tn The word means “ready.” But some texts follow BHS and read it “fifty.” But the sense of armed men ready to fight is what the context calls for.
¹⁶tn Simply “from before.”
¹⁷tn The nuance of the perfect tense here has to be the future perfect.
¹⁸tn Heb “that which goes out/has gone out of your mouth.”
¹⁹tn Heb “called names.”
¹sn This material can be arranged into four sections: from Egypt to Sinai (1-15), the wilderness wanderings (16-36), from Kadesh to Moab (37-49), and final orders for Canaan (50-56).
²tn Heb “their goings out.”
³tn Heb “morrow.”
¹sn This chapter falls into several sections: the south (1-5), the west (6), the north (7-9), the east (10-15), and then a list of appointed officials (16-29).
²tn Or “command.”
³tn Literally “this is the land that will fall to you as an inheritance.”
⁴tn The expression refers to the corner or extremity of the Negev, the South.
⁵tn Heb “its going forth,” or, the way it runs.
⁶tn The word for west is simply “sea,” because the sea is west of Israel.
⁷sn That is, the Mediterranean Sea (also in the following verse).
⁸sn The word means “harp.” The lake, or sea, of Galilee was so named because it is somewhat shaped like a harp.
⁹tn The infinitive forms the direct object of what the LORD commanded. It actually means “to give,” but without an expressed subject may be made passive.
¹⁰tn The phrase “their inheritance” is not in the Hebrew text, but is implied.
¹¹tn The verb can be translated simply as “divide,” but it has more the idea of allocate as an inheritance, the related noun being “inheritance.”
¹²tn This sense is created by repetition: “one leader, one leader from the tribe.”
¹³tn The sentence simply uses linhol (l?)n=l!), “to divide, apportion.” It has been taken already to mean “allocate as an inheritance.” Here “assist” may be added since Joshua and Eleazar had the primary work.
¹sn This section has two main parts, the Levitical cities (1-8) and the Cities of Refuge (9-34).
²tn The verb is the perfect tense with the waw consecutive: “command . . . and they will give,” or, “that they give.”
³tn The verb is the qal perfect of madad (ddm), “to measure.” With its waw consecutive it carries the same instructional force as the imperfect.
⁴tn The “manslayer” is the verb “to kill” in a participial form, providing the subject of the clause. The verb means “to kill,” it can mean accidental killing, premeditated killing, or capital punishment. The clause uses the infinitive to express purpose or result: “to flee there the manslayer,” means “so that the manslayer may flee there.”
⁵sn Heb “towns of asylum.”
⁶tn the verb is the preterite of “die.” The sentence has :“if . . . he strikes him and he dies.” The waw consecutive is showing the natural result of the blow.
⁷tn The participle go’el (lo@G)) is the one who protects the family by seeking vengeance for a crime. This is the same verb used to levirate marriages, and other related customs.
⁸tn The text is more vivid: “by lying in wait.”
⁹tn Heb “ at the mouth of”; the metonymy stresses it is at their report.
¹⁰tn The verb should be given the nuance of imperfect of potentiality.
¹tn The expression is “the heads of the fathers by the family of the Gileadites.”
²tn Heb “heads of the fathers.”
³tn The infinitive construct “to give” serves here as the complement or object of the verb, answering what the LORD had commanded Moses.
⁴tn “Men” is understood; it says “to one from the sons of the tribes of the Israelites for a wife,” or, if he has her for a wife.
⁵tn Heb “which they will be to them,” meaning, to those who have them, i.e., the marriages.
⁶tn The verb hayah (hyh)is most often translated “to be,” but it can also mean “to happen, take place, come to pass” or the like.
⁷tn Heb “the tribe of our fathers.”
⁸tn Heb “commanded.”
⁹tn The idiom again is “let them be for wives for . . . .”
¹⁰tn Heb “to the one who is good in their eyes.”
¹¹tn Heb “turned aside.”
¹²tn The subject is “Israelites” and the verb is plural to agree with it; but the idea is collective as the word for “man” indicates: “so that the Israelites may possess—[each] man the inheritance of his fathers.”
¹³tn They married in the family as they were instructed. But the meaning of dod (dOD) is not necessarily restricted to “uncle.”