Part 13
2. God announces a disastrous judgement (14:12), comparable to that visited upon Egypt (Ex. 9:15). God will disown Israel and start over with Moses. Given what follows, this is a preliminary announcement, a point for debate with Moses (cf. 16:20-1; Ex 32:9-14). Yet, such a judgement would be deserved.
Twelve scouts, one from each tribe, are sent to spy out the land of Canaan at God's command (cf. 32:6-13; Deut 1:22-45). Moses gives instructions regarding destination (the Negeb and the hill country) and observations to be made regarding military readiness and the character of the land (13:17-20). According to 13:21 they scout the entire length of the country, from the wilderness of Zin in the south to Rehob in the north; 13:22—4 (from the epic tradition) reports only on the Negeb and Judah, from which they bring back fruit; especially noted is a cluster of grapes (hence the name Eshcol), the season for which is July/August. After some forty days the scouts bring back a mixed report. The initial report (13:28-9) is realistic; the land is bountiful but filled with strong people and fortified cities. The identity and placement of indigenous peoples is not always clear (cf. 13:29 with 14:25, 45), reflecting different traditions. The Amalekites are a perennial enemy of Israel (see EX 17:8-16). The Anakites (13:22, 29, 33) are a people remembered as giant in stature and associated with the Nephilim (see GEN 6:1—4); they are later defeated (Josh 15:14). For the other peoples, see GEN 15:19-21. Unrest among the people at the report (13:30) occasions a division among the spies. Caleb responds by expressing confidence in Israel's ability to overcome all obstacles. The other scouts (Joshua is not separated out until 14:6-9, 30) give 'an unfavourable report of the land' (13:32), voicing alarm at the size and strength of its inhabitants and their cities and expressing a belief that Israel would be defeated (so 'devours' in 13:32). This report is exaggerated for effect; it succeeds. The people are seduced by the negative report (14:36), despise God's promise of land (14:31), and complain against Moses and Aaron out of fear for their lives and the fate of their dependants (cf. 31:13-18). They plot to choose a new leader and reverse the Exodus (14:4)! They persist in spite of the leaders' urgent pleas ('fell on their faces'; 16:4, 22), expressions of distress ('tore their clothes'; Gen 37:34), and assurances that the indigenous peoples are 'bread' (that is, we will 'devour' them, not they us, contrary to 13:32; cf. Ps 14:4) and their gods will provide no protection (lit. 'shadow'; cf. Ps 91:1), for 'the LORD is with us'. Rather than rejoice in the report of 'an exceedingly good land' and trust that God will see to the promise, the people 'rebel against the LORD' and threaten to stone Joshua and Caleb to death.
3. God engages Moses in conversation (14:13-35). Moses argues (cf. EX 32:11-14; Deut 32:26-7) that God's reputation among the nations (the Egyptians and, remarkably, the Canaanites) is at stake; they will conclude that God failed in his promise to give them the land. Their opinion should count with God; God agrees that it does, for God's goal is that his glory fill the earth (14:21). Moses also appeals to God's promise from that previous interaction (see EX 34:6—7), pleading for God to act according to his steadfast love: to forgive the people as he had done 'ten times' (frequently, Gen 31:7). Such intercession is reported elsewhere as prayer (11:2; 21:7) or action that 'turned back my wrath' (25:11) and diminished the effects of a plague (16:46—50).
4. God responds favourably to Moses and forgives Israel (14:20); but forgiveness, while it ameliorates the effects of sin (Israel is not annihilated), does not cut off all consequences. This is true for all acts of forgiveness; the consequences of sin, which can catch up the innocent (as here), need ongoing salvific attention (e.g. abuse in its various forms). In this case, the build-up of the effects of sin means that the old generation will die in the wilderness and their children suffer the fall-out of the adults' infidelity (14:33; 26:64-5; 32:10-12). Those who brought the bad report die off early (14:37). Yet, the consequences are not total: the children, ages 1—19 (14:29, 31; cf. 1:3), and the dans (see Josh 14:6—14) of Caleb (14:14) and Joshua (14:30) will enter the land. So, finally, God does not disinherit this people, and a new generation will possess the land. But the entire community is now to turn away and continue their wandering for a generation (14:25, 34).
5. God announces the judgement (14:21-35), this time as a solemn oath, made as certain as God's own life (14:21,28), and details that judgement in moral order terms, i.e. what goes around comes around (14:28—35). They have sinned, they will bear (the effects of) their sin (14:34). Akey verse is 14:28, T will do to you the very things I heard you say'. In effect: your will be done, not mine. Their desire for death in the wilderness (14:2) is granted (14:32—3); their rejection of the land (14:3) is agreed to (14:30); their desire for a return to Egypt (14:3-4) is brought close to hand (14:25); their claim that the children would become booty (14:3) causes the children to suffer that fate at their own hands (14:33) rather than in the land (14:31); they want different leaders (14:4), they will get them (14:30). They
To these developments God responds (on 'glory' see 9:15— 23). This response has several dimensions. If this kind of
121 NUMBERS
(15:22—36) Various sacrifices for atonement for unintentional sins (cf. LEV 4:13—21; for detail see Milgrom 1990: 402—5), for the 'whole people' (w. 22—6) and for the individual (w. 27—9), and penalties for individuals who commit 'high-handed' sins, i.e. who are defiant and unrepentant (w. 30—1; see Milgrom 1990:122—5). In 5:5~8 (cf LEV 6:7) even intentional sins can be atoned for, apparently because the persons are repentant (though see 16:46). The priests are those who make atonement for both congregation and individual (w. 25,28). This is the means God has established in and through which to effect both corporate and individual forgiveness.
do not believe that God is with them (14:8-9); they discover he is not (14:43—4). The forty days of scouting become forty years of wandering (14:34). Judgement is intrinsic to the deed ('you
shall bear your iniquity', 14:34; cf. 32:23); God does not introduce it into the situation. God is not arbitrary, but facilitates a consequence that correlates with the deed. One might speak of a wearing down of the divine patience in view of 14:22; the other side of the coin is that persistent negative human conduct will in time take its toll, and God will see to the proper functioning of the moral order.
Having heard these words of judgement, the people mourn at what has been lost, confess their sin, and seek to make things right by taking the land on their own (14:39-45; cf. Deut 1:41—5). Moses sees that it is too late. God has now issued anew command (14:25) and they will be defeated, for God will not be with them (cf. 14:9). The die has been cast, and God's word about their future is certain. Moses' word proves to be correct; God (the ark) does not go with them and they are defeated. God's presence, not human strength, is what finally will count in Israel's life.
Those who sin defiantly (the old generation of chs. 11-14 is
in view) will be 'cut off from the people (see 9:13). The following incident of intentional sabbath-breaking (w. 32—6) illustrates such defiance. The sabbath-breaker's labour did carry the death penalty (see EX 31:14-15; 35:2-3); yet it was not clear what to do with him (15:34). Though much disputed (see Milgrom 1990: 408—10), this may mean (cf. LEV 24:12) that, though the death penalty was clear, the community awaited a word from God either regarding the means of execution or before proceeding to such a severe punishment (gang stoning).
(15:1-41) Statutes for Life in the Land The wilderness narrative is interrupted by a series of statutes—probably late Priestly additions—pertaining to the time 'when you come into the land' (w. 2,18) 'throughout your generations' (w. 15, 21, 23, 37). For the coherence of this chapter in its context, see Olson (1996: 90—101). Such laws, following upon rebellion and judgement, function to assure the community in a concrete way that God still intends a future for them; hence, law essentially functions as promise, at least for the new generation. For the old generation, however, the laws would function only as threat, for they would not live to obey them. Such an interweaving of law and narrative is common in the Pentateuch, and is revealing of the dynamic relationship of law and changing life circumstances.
(15:37—41) (cf. Deut 22:12) pertains to clothing. Tassels are to be attached to each corner of the garments of all Israelites, with a blue(-purple) cord on each (still worn on prayer shawls by Orthodox Jewish men). This cord was a public sign of Israel's status as a holy people and a reminder of what that entailed. The call to be holy (v. 40; see EX 19:6; LEV 19:2) is a call to exemplify that holiness in daily life, to be true to the relationship in which they already stand. The fundamental way in which the people do justice to this relationship is by obedience to the commandments. Israel's holiness is not simply an internal disposition; it is to be expressed in every sphere of life. The fundamental grounding for this is the fact that God is YHWH, the Lord who brought them out of Egypt.
One such matter pertains to the non-Israelites in the camp. The statutes in w. 1-31 apply equally to outsiders (w. 14-16, 26, 29, 30; cf. 9:14). They are given equal status before God: 'you and the alien shall be alike before the LORD' (v. 15; cf. Lev 19:33—4, 'you shall love the alien as yourself). Other changes are evident.
(16:1-50) The Rebellions of Korah and Others Num 16-18 focuses on issues relating to the value and legitimacy of leadership within Israel, especially priestly leadership as it relates to service at the tabernacle.
This passage in its present form portrays two major rebellions, one by Korah, Dathan, Abiram, and 250 lay leaders
(15:1—16) prescribes that a grain offering (flour mixed with oil) and a drink offering (wine)—agricultural products—are to accompany each animal (w. 11-12) presented for the 'offerings by fire' listed in v. 3 (for detail, see LEV 1-7). What was previously required only for the offering of first fruits and the festival of Weeks (Lev 23:12—18) and for the nazirite consecration (6:14-17) now applies to all offerings. The amount of these offerings increases with the size of the animal (lamb, w. 4—5; ram, w. 6—7; bull, w. 8—10). The repeated reference to 'a pleasing odour to the LORD' (w. 3, 7,10,13,14, 24) is a vivid way of speaking of that which brings pleasure to God (see GEN 8:21-2) because it signifies a healthy relationship.
(w. 1—40) and, in response to their deaths, a second rebellion by 'the whole congregation' (w. 41-50). The role of Korah, one of the Levites (about whom the narratives have been silent heretofore), draws the entire community into a rebellious stance. The conflict between the Levites and the Aaronides may reflect later controversies between rival priestly groups (cf. 12:1-16; 17:1-13).
Issues of coherence make it likely that at least two major traditions have been interwoven. The epic tradition centred on a revolt led by the Reubenites (Dathan and Abiram, w. 12-15); it has been overlaid by a Priestly tradition, wherein Korah leads the rebellion (w. 3—11, 16—24, 35)- Omer expansions may be evident, e.g. the role of the 250 lay leaders, but it is possible to read the whole as an (awkwardly ordered) unity.
(15:17—21) prescribes, on the occasion of baking bread (in the land), a donation of one loaf from the first batch of dough. A donation is any gift for the service of the sanctuary, given to acknowledge that all such gifts come from God. In this case the bread would be food for the priests. This statute broadens earlier statutes regarding first fruits to include that produced by humans (see Ex 23:19; Lev 23:9-14; cf. 18:13-18).
Korah, a son of Kohath, belonged to the Levite clan responsible for the tabernacle's 'most holy things' (4:4), but they were not to touch or see them (4:15, 20). Korah is the eponymous ancestor of a later group of temple singers (i Chr 6:31-48;
N U M B E R S i:
of the congregation (v. 22), for not all should bear the consequences for the 'one person' (an exaggeration for Korah is representative of the rebellious group; cf. GEN 18:22-33). Th£
his name occurs in eleven Psalm superscriptions, e.g., 44-9). Dathan and Abiram (and On, not mentioned again) were members of the tribe of Reuben, the firstborn son of Jacob (the demotion of the tribe may be due to this rebellion, 26:9n). These persons (probably with different agendas) make common cause against Moses and Aaron. They are joined by 250 lay leaders and confront Moses and Aaron with the charge that they 'have gone too far' in 'exalting' themselves above other members of the community (w. 3,13). While this charge may have been sparked by their prominence in 15:1—41, it may also be related to their harsh words about the old generation (14:26-35), among whom the rebels would be numbered.
'God of the spirits of all flesh' (cf. 27:16) is an appeal to God as Creator, who gives breath (i.e. spirit) to all.
God responds positively to the intercession and separates the congregation from the 'dwelling' (sing, here and v. 27; since sing, is used only for God's dwelling, does it refer to their 'tents', v. 26, ironically?) of the rebels and their families. Dathan and Abiram had refused to leave their homes (16:14) and Korah had apparently joined them. The 250 men remain at the tent to offer incense, and are later consumed by fire (v. 35; cf. 3:4; 11:1; LEV 10:1—2). The inclusion ofthe families and the command not even to touch (v. 26) suggests their sins have polluted all that is theirs (on corporate guilt, see JOSH 7:24-6). When the separation occurs, Moses sets up a test to demonstrate that this is God's decision not his own. If these people die a natural death, then he is wrong; if God 'creates something new' (a creation for this moment) and the ground opens up and swallows them, and they descend prematurely to
The claim (v. 3) that 'everyone' in the camp is holy is not incorrect (as just noted in 15:40, and perhaps prompted by it); the problem is the implication drawn, namely, that Aaron and Moses have no special prerogatives for leadership. The claim for the holiness of everyone is not simply related to a move to gain priestly prerogatives for all Levites (as Moses interprets it, v. 10), though this is primary. The presence of Reubenites and 250 laymen reveals another interest, namely, extending 'secular' leadership prerogatives beyond Moses to representatives from all twelve tribes, especially firstborn Reuben (so w. 12—15).
Sheol (the abode of all the dead; cf. the image in Isa 5:14), then they have despised the Lord (note: not Moses). The latter happens immediately to 'everyone who belonged to Korah and all their goods' (v. 32). Korah, Dathan, and Abiram are not specifically mentioned (they are in 26:9—10; cf. Deut 11:6; Ps 106:17). The people panic, perhaps because of complicity; it quickly turns to accusation, v. 41.
Moses responds in deed and word to this confrontation (w. 4-17). After 'falling on his face' (see 14:5), Moses proposes a test. The antagonists are to bring censers (metal trays that hold hot coals on which incense is burned, cf LEV 10:1—2) to the tabernacle and prepare them for offering incense. If God accepts their offerings, their priestly status would be recognized. The phrase 'and who is holy' (v. 5) assumes gradations of holiness; even if all are holy, God chooses the priest and this status entails a holiness that sets him apart from other holy ones (cf. 6:8). So God, not Moses, will decide the identity of 'the holy one' who is to approach the altar. But Moses makes his opinions clear. They (and here Levites, whom Korah represents, become the focus), not we (v. 3), have gone too far (v. 7)!
In the wake ofthe killing ofthe 250 men because of their presumption, special attention is given to their censers (w. 36—40), which became holy because ofthe use to which they were put, even by unqualified persons ('at the cost of their lives'). They are gathered from the fire by Eleazar and not Aaron (see Lev 21:11) and, at God's command, hammered into an altar covering (perhaps a supplement; cf. Ex 38:2) to serve as a reminder that only Aaron's sons can approach the Lord to offer incense.
The reply in w. 8-n addresses the Levites' challenge to Aaron's leadership (v. n). Their displeasure with the duties they have been assigned by God (1:48—54), and their desire for higher status, is a move 'against the LORD' (v. n). They have elevated privilege above service. Next Moses speaks to challenges to his own leadership (w. 12—15), sending for Dathan and Abiram. They twice refuse to come, believing themselves to be deceived (to 'put out the eyes'). In their complaint about Moses' authoritarianism (after all, Reuben was the firstborn son), they give Moses' own words in v. 9 an ironic twist (v. 13), and even call Egypt the land of milk and honey! Moses tells God (spitefully?) to ignore their offerings, i.e. not act through them on their behalf, for he has taken nothing (cf. i Sam 12:3) from them or harmed them. Finally, Moses repeats his instructions to Korah, adding that Aaron is also to appear (w. 16-17).
The congregation, however, remembers only the killings, blames Moses and Aaron, and threatens them (16:41). Again the glory ofthe Lord appears, this time to Moses and Aaron, and God again threatens to annihilate this people (cf. w. 1921). Once again Moses and Aaron intercede by falling on their faces, presumably pleading with God (cf. v. 22). In the absence of God's response, they take the initiative and act to make atonement for the (intentional! cf. 15:22-31) sins ofthe people through the use of incense (unprecedented, but appropriate for this story). They do so with haste, and at some risk (he 'stood between the dead and the living'—a job description for a priest!), because a plague had already broken out (on divine judgement, see NUM 13—14; note that wrath is impersonally described, see NUM 1:53). The act of atonement had the effect of stopping the plague, but not before many died (14,700).
The time for the divine decision arrives (w. 18-35). Each of the men stands before the Lord at the tent with his censer prepared. In addition, Korah assembles the entire congregation, apparently in sympathy with him, to watch the proceedings. The glory of the Lord appears (see 9:15-16) and God tells Moses and Aaron to move away for God is going to destroy the assembled congregation (in essence, the old generation; cf. v. 45) immediately. But Moses and Aaron intercede on behalf
The disaster experienced by Korah and his company proves the special status of both Moses (w. 28—9) and Aaron (v. 40). It is not that such leaders never fail (12:1—16; 20:12) or that other persons are never channels God might use to reveal his will (11:24-30; Balaam), but these persons are chosen and are deserving of respect. Implicit is that the way to adjudicate differences with leaders in the community is not through envy or personal attack (common in Numbers), but
123 NUMBERS
10:8), of God's speaking to Aaron alone, indicating its importance for Aaronides.
through a careful discernment of God's will for the flourishing of the community. God goes to enormous lengths to protect the place of good leaders (on the divine wrath, see NUM 1:53).
w. 1-7 gather previous material (see 1:50-3; 3:5-10, 14-39; 4:1-33; 8:14-19) and delineate the relationship among the various groups regarding their duties at the tent of meeting
(17:1-13) Aaron's Blossoming Rod Whereas 16:1-40 was concerned about the status of both Aaron and Moses, and Aaron among other Levites, this passage focuses on Aaron 'the man' (v. 5) among other tribal leaders. In view of the renewed rebellions of the people and Aaron's risking his life on their behalf (16:41-50), God makes another effort to demonstrate Aaron's priestly status. Whereas 16:40 showed that through an ordeal that led to death, this passage makes the same point through an ordeal that symbolizes life (the budding staff), emblematic of Aaron's life-saving actions in 16:46-50. Both the bronze covering for the altar (16:38) and Aaron's staff serve as ongoing visual signs for the community of God's choice of Aaron's priestly leadership. This story, best designated a legend (with parallels in many cultures), may reflect later struggles between rival priestly groups. Yet, unlike 16:3—11, rivalry with the Levites is not evident.
('covenant', 17:7). The protection of the community as a whole ('outsider') from 'wrath' (v. 5, see NUM 1:53) is a prime concern (w. ia, 4-5, 7, 22; 'outsider' in v. 7 would also include Levites). Aaronides and Levites alone (not laity) 'bear responsibility for offences', that is, suffer the consequences for violations (their own and that of the laity) relative to the sanctuary (w. ia, 23). In addition, priests are responsible for other priests (v. ifc) and priests and Levites for Levites (v. 3, 'they and you'). God stresses to the Aaronides that priesthood is a gift from God as is the service oftheir 'brother Levites' (w. 6-7; cf. v. 19); they cannot presume upon their office in relationship to their brothers or all Israel.
w. 8—32, a gathering of materials from Lev 6—7; v. 27 primarily reviews the God-commanded portion due to the Aaronides from the people (w. 8-20) and the Levites (w. 25-32, a new provision) and that due to the Levites (w. 21-4), in perpetuity (w. 8, n, 19, 23), in spite oftheir failures.
God's effort on behalf of Aaron's priestly status is settled by means of a unique ordeal. At God's command, Moses places twelve staffs (a symbol of authority; 'staff and 'tribe' translate the same Hebrew word) from the leaders (cf. 16:2) of the tribes, each inscribed with a leader's name, before the Lord, i.e. the ark (see 10:35-6), in which the 'covenant', the Decalogue, was placed (Ex 25:16, 21). Aaron's staff, the powers of which had already been demonstrated (EX 7:8—12, 19; 8:16— 17), was added to them (the Levites are the thirteenth tribe in Numbers). God set the terms: the staff that sprouts would indicate which leader God had chosen for priestly prerogatives. Upon Moses' inspection the following morning, only the staff of Aaron had sprouted; moreover, it flowered and bore ripe almonds (symbolic of the life-enchancing, fruit-bearing capacity of priests for the community). Moses shows the evidence to all the people. At God's command Moses put Aaron's staff before the ark, to be kept as a warning (Hebrew 'sign') to the rebels. For usage of this image in messianic texts, see ISA 11:1-2.
In w. 8-20 the 'portion' consists of those 'holy gifts' the people give to the Lord, which in turn God 'gives' to the priests and Levites and their 'sons and daughters' for the sake oftheir support and for that of the sanctuary, w. 9—10 specify the 'most holy' gifts, reserved for the priests: 'every offering of theirs' (those parts not burned, 'reserved from the fire'), w. 11-18 specify the 'holy' gifts (v. 19), 'elevation offerings'
(tenupd) or gifts dedicated to God, to be eaten by any clean member of the priests' families. They include first fruits ('choice produce'); anything 'devoted' to the Lord's service, proscribed under the provisions of the ban (see LEV 27:21,28); and firstborn human and unclean animals, for which the priests receive the redemption price (v. 15 is detailed in 16—18). On the redemption ofthe firstborn, see NUM 3:11-13,40-51.
These holy gifts of God to the priests are called 'a covenant of salt forever before the LORD' (v. 19). Salt is presented with all offerings (Lev 2:13); as a preservative it becomes a symbol for an everlasting covenant (see 2 Chr 13:5). This provision is God's commitment to the priests in perpetuity, for the Aaronides have no property. God alone is their share and possession, that is, they are dependent for life and health upon the gifts of God, albeit gifts mediated through human beings, rather than on land.
God had performed such a sign 'to put a stop to the complaints' against 'you' (pi.; Moses and Aaron) and 'me' (w. 5, 10); it soon becomes clear that God did not succeed in his objective (see 21:5).
The concluding verses (12—13) lead into the next chapter. The people, apparently convinced, express their dismay and worry about dying. Yet the focus is not on what they have done, but on the possibility of encroaching upon the tabernacle precincts. The next chapter provides protections against such a possibility.
The Levites' portion for their work is the Israelites' tithe of agricultural produce (w. 21—4). The tithe belongs to YHWH (v. 24) and is given to the Levites (on the title see Milgrom 1990: 432-6). They also have no tribal territory, but are given forty-eight cities with pasture land (see 35:1—8). On w. 22—3, see w. 1—7.
(18:1—32) Rights and Responsibilities of Priests and Levites The Priestly material of chs. 18-19 constitutes a second break in the narrative flow (cf. 15:1-14). On law and narrative, see NUM 15.
Finally, in a speech to Moses, God commands the Levites to give a tithe ofthe tithe they have received (the 'best of it') to the Aaronides (w. 25—32). The other nine-tenths ofthe offering shall be no longer holy and become in effect their own produce, 'as payment for your service'. But if they do not give their tithe, that will 'profane' the holy gifts, and they shall die.
Given the establishment of Aaron's status with the people and other Levites (chs. 16-17), and the concern of the people about encroachment on the tabernacle (17:12-13), a redefinition of the responsibilities of the tribe of Levi is now given along with their means of support (though the people are not said to hear this), w. i, 8, 20 contain the only cases (except Lev
(19:1—22) Ritual ofthe Red Heifer 5:1—4 stipulated a measure to be taken in cases of 'contact with a corpse'. Such unclean
N U M B E R S 124
arrive again in Kadesh (they set out again in v. 22). Probably the forty years in the wilderness has been completed, as v. 12 and the time of Aaron's death (v. 28 with 33:38) suggests. The 'first month' in v. i would thus be in the fortieth year. On the problems of redaction in chs. 20—1 see Milgrom (1990: 463-7). The people again complain to Moses and Aaron about wilderness conditions, but this time the narrator agrees that 'there was no water' (w. 2,5). They return to the basic questions they had in 14:2—4; events have apparently not changed this people. They even express the wish that they had died with Korah, Dathan, and Abiram (16:32-5, 49)! Again, Moses and Aaron fall on their faces and turn towards God (14:5; 16:4); again the glory of the Lord appears (see 9:15—16).
persons were to be placed 'outside the camp' so as not to defile the community. This passage expands upon that statute, providing for rituals of purification for such persons in perpetuity
(mostly laypersons, Israelite and alien), especially in view of all who had died (e.g. 16:32-5, 49) and would die (14:32-5). Caring for the dead is a necessary (and dangerous) task, so this impurity is not linked to sin. On purity issues, see Nelson (1993: 17-38). The origin of this ritual is unknown, but it probably can be traced to ancient Near Eastern rites developed to deal with the same issue. These statutes are to be conveyed to the Israelites (v. 2; contrast 18).
The choice of a (brownish-)red heifer (actually, cow) perhaps symbolized blood/life (red animals were so used in the ancient Near East); it was to be unblemished (see Lev 21:16— 24; 22:20) and never used for work (Deut 21:3—4). Th£ burning of the entire animal (including its blood/life, v. 5, uniquely here) may have been thought to concentrate life in the ashes which, when mixed with water and applied to the unclean person or thing, would counteract (literally thought to absorb?) the contagious impurity of death and the diminishment of life in the community. This happened, not in some magical way, but because God had decreed it so. The placement of cedar wood and hyssop (cleansing agents), and crimson material (symbolizing blood?), during the burning intensified the purifying quality (literal and symbolic) of the resultant ashes. The sprinkling of the blood/life seven times towards the entrance of the tabernacle (that is, towards Godjcf. Lev 4:6) shows the importance of the ritual for maintaining the integrity of the community in relationship to God (19:4, 13, 20). w. i—10 specify the procedure by which the life-giving and cleansing agent was prepared under the supervision of the priest (the absence of reference to death may mean an earlier, more general application). Eleazar is charged with this duty (Aaron dies in 20:28); he and those who assist him must be clean, but they become unclean in the process (because of contact with the holy) and short-term 'decontamination' rituals are prescribed for each.
The reader expects to hear about God's judgement; but God has a different response this time, recognizing that the people's need for water is real. God commands Moses to take 'the staff (from v. 9 this is Aaron's staff that had been placed in the tent, 17:10-11; 'his' staff refers to the one he was using, v. n) and 'command [speak to] the rock before their eyes to yield its water' (my itals.). The reference to 'the rock' (v. 8) suggests a prominent rock in the area. This was the way in which Moses was 'to bring water out of the rock for them'.
Moses takes the staff as God had commanded him. The reference to Moses' obedience usually concludes his actions; here it breaks into the sequence, suggesting that his following actions are less than what God commanded. Having gathered the people, Moses calls them rebels (as does God, 17:10), and asks them:'shall we bring water for you out of the rock?' (my itals.). He proceeds to strike the rock twice with Aaron's staff, and water flows. God's response is negative: Moses and Aaron did not trust God to 'show my holiness' before the people, and hence they will not lead the people into the land. The place name Meribah is linked to the people's quarrelling with God (as in EX 17:7, without judgement) and to God's showing his holiness, perhaps because of the gift of water (but apparently less so than if Moses and Aaron had trusted, v. 12).
A much debated question: what did Moses and Aaron (Aaron stays in the background) do to deserve this divine response (for the history of interpretation, see Milgrom 1990: 448-56)? The charge in v. 12—they did not 'trust' in God (used ofthe people in 14:11, with the same result) 'to show my holiness' before Israel; in v. 24—they 'rebelled against my command'; in 27:14—they 'rebelled against my word... and did not show my holiness' before Israel; in Deut 32:51—they 'broke faith... by failing to maintain my holiness among the Israelites'; in Deuteronomy elsewhere (1:37; 3:26; 4:21)—God was angry towards Moses because ofthe people, as if Moses suffered vicariously; in Ps 106:32-3—the people make Moses' spirit bitter and his words rash (v. 10?), qualifying Moses' fault.
w. 11—13, detailed in 14—22, specify the use to which the ashes and fresh ('running') water are put for persons and things (w. 14-16) that have had contact with death. As in other cases (see Lev 12:2) they are unclean for seven days; during this time, if they are to become clean, they must twice be sprinkled with this mixture by a clean person (w. 17-19; outside the camp? cf v. 9 and 5:3-4). Otherwise they 'defile the tabernacle' where God dwells (5:3) and shall be 'cut off from Israel' (19:13, 20; see NUM 9:13) for the sake of the community's wholeness.
(20:1—29) The Disobedience of Moses and Aaron The text returns to a narrative mode, explaining why Israel's key leaders did not enter Canaan. It is enclosed by the deaths of Miriam and Aaron and marked especially by the 'rebellion' of Moses and Aaron. It may be a reworking of the story in EX 17:1—7, which also took place at a place called Meribah ('Quarrelled'). Priestly materials surround a report from the epic tradition in 20:14-21.
It is difficult to bring coherence to this variety; it may be purposely ambiguous. The 'we' of v. 10 could suggest that this was their work not God's, hence reducing the witness to God. But the focus in v. 24 and 27:14 is 'rebelling against' God's command (a major issue in Numbers), ironically using Moses' own word regarding the people (v. 10). This could entail a lack of trust or breaking faith. Neither the questioning ofthe people nor the striking ofthe rock (rather than speaking to it) followed God's command. The former, with its negative
v. i is difficult given the reference to Kadesh in 13:26. Perhaps God's command in 14:25 to wander back towards Egypt was in fact carried out (contrast 33:36-7), and so they
125 NUMBERS
DEUT 32:50; 34). Aaron's vestments are transferred to Eleazar before 'the whole congregation', an assuring sight signifying continuity into the future. Aaron dies (is 'gathered to his people', cf. Gen 25:8) and is mourned by Israel for thirty days (as with Moses, Deut 34:8), rather than the usual seven.
address, does not recognize the real needs of the people (as God did twice in v. 8), and the latter would be less a witness to God's power. Thus God's compassion and power, both analytic of God's holiness, are compromised 'in the eyes of the people.
The point is sharply made that the end result (here, water to drink) is not only what counts as a witness to God, but also the means by which that result is achieved. The most trusted of God's leaders fall into the trap of thinking that the end justifies any means. The reader should beware of both 'rationalization' and supernaturalism in interpreting stories such as this
The next five chapters are transitional. The new generation seems to be essentially, if not entirely in place (20:12). And so the texts portray a mix of the old and the new. (21:1-35) Victory, Complaint, and Healing The narrative from 11:1 to this point has been predominantly negative. The promulgation of laws for life in the land (chs. 15; 18; 19) and the installation of Eleazar have given signs of hope. As the narrative moves towards the census ofthe new generation (ch. 26), these signs become more frequent. Indeed, from this time on Israel will be successful in all its battles. Yet negative realities still abound. In this passage military victories enclose a negative report about further complaint and judgement.
(as with the manna and quail, 11:7-9, 31)- Th£ provision of food and water is not to be divorced from a recognition of nature's God-given potential. Even in the wilderness God's world is not without resources. In ways not unlike the gifts of manna and quail, water courses through rock formations. God is not creating out of nothing here; water does not materialize out of thin air. God works in and through the natural to provide for his people. The rock itself plays a significant role in this.
Victory over Arad (w. 1—3): this text functions paradigmatically for other holy war texts in a way that 11:1—3 did for the complaint passages; it summarizes the essence of what is at stake. For the geographical and chronological problems associated with Canaanite contact at Arad and Hormah (a region in the Negeb), given the references to Edom in 20:21 and 21:4, see Milgrom (1990: 456-8).
(20:14—21) Before reporting the death of Aaron, an interlude recounts developments in Israel's journeying. Theyare'onthe edge' of Edom (v. 16) and request permission from the Edomites to use the King's Highway (the major north-south route through Transjordan) to pass through and, presumably, enter Canaan from the east (cf. the failure from the south in 14:39— 45). Edom's refusal to allow Israel to pass creates an external difficulty that matches the internal difficulties in the chapter. Together they raise questions about endangered promises. The text gives no reason for the reader to think this request of Edom was unfaithful because God was not consulted.
The Canaanites of Arad fought with some success against Israel; this prompts 'Israel' to make a vow to wage holy war against them if God would give them victory (cf. Jephthah's vow, Judg 11:30—1). Israel's victory reverses the earlier failure at Hormah (14:45).
Israel then fulfils the vow, utterly destroying the people and their towns. Such texts (see also ch. 31) are virtually genocidal in their ferocity towards others. These understandings are grounded in a concern about infidelity and extreme danger to Israel's future (Deut 20:16—18) and unfaithful Israel experiences similar destruction (see Deut 28:15—68). Such practices are followed only in this era of land settlement (and hence are not paradigmatic, even for Israel). Yet they rightly remain incomprehensible to modern sensibilities. That Israel understands their God to want such destruction makes this practice even more difficult to fathom. The canon as a whole subverts such understandings (see Isa 2:1-4).
The Edomites are the first people Israel encounters since Sinai (cf. GEN 25:19—36:43 on Jacob/Esau). Moses initiates the contact by sending messengers to the 'king of Edom' (no evidence exists that Edom was a kingdom at this time; cf. the chieftains of GEN 36). Moses' letter, typical in that world, uses the word 'brother' for Edom, a dual reference assuming a relationship of both ally and actual brother (see Gen 33:9).
Moses briefly recounts Israel's history from the descent into Egypt through the Exodus to the present time. Notable is the confessional character of this account: they cried to
YHWH, who heard and sent an angel, God in human form (see NUM 9:15—23; EX 14:19; 23:20—3), to bring them out. It is assumed that the king of Edom knows who YHWH is (cf. Ex 15:15)! Given the last reference to an Edom—Israel encounter, which ends on an ambivalent note (33:4—17), it is not surprising that Edom refuses (Judg 11:17). Edom refuses even though Israel promises not to trouble them and, after negotiation, even promises to pay for water (w. 19—20). Edom's show of military force convinces Israel to go 'around' Edom (so 21:4; Judg 11:18; Deut 2:4—8 has access to a memory that the Israelites passed through Edom without incident).
(21:4—9) returns for a final time to the complaining mode (for form, NUM n; for content, NUM 14), qualifying the victories that enclose it. The seriousness ofthe complaint is evident in that it is directed for the first time against both God and Moses
(though see 14:2—3), yet for the first time the people sincerely (cf. 14:40) confess their sin, and the segment ends on a healing note. This occurs as the people turn towards the Red Sea, that is, the Gulf of Aqaba, and begin their journey around Edom. The complaint focuses on the lack of (palatable) food and water, and God is charged with intending death in the Exodus. The God-facilitated effect of their complaining is an infestation of poisonous (lit. fiery, because of the burning) snakes that results in many deaths (not unheard of in this area). The people confess their sin to Moses and request his intercession to have the snakes taken away. Though the people repent (and presumably are forgiven), the snakes are not removed nor kept from biting. In other words, as is typical, the effects of sin continue beyond forgiveness. But God works
(20:22-9) returns to internal issues, with the installation of Eleazar as successor to his father as high priest and the death of Aaron. The people continue their journey along the border of Edom and come to Mount Hor (site unknown). In view of Aaron's imminent death, and at God's command and as a reminder of their rebellion ('you' is pi.), Moses, Aaron, and Eleazar climb to the top of the mountain (cf. Moses' death in
N U M B E R S 126
(22:1—24:25) The Story of Balaam This text has been deemed intrusive in its context, and its central figure Balaam thought less than worthy of God's purposes for Israel. He is a travelling professional seer, and a non-Israelite at that, who seems all too ready to pronounce curses if the price is right. But the story with its oracles has in fact been cleverly woven into the larger fabric of Numbers and God uses Balaam in remarkable ways to bring blessing to Israel.
on those effects by commanding a means (a homeopathic Egyptian technique to ward off snakes and heal snakebite), with which the promise of God is associated, through which to heal those who are bitten (cf Wis 16:7; the combination of prayer and medicine in 2 Kings 20:1-7). Moses makes a copper image of a snake and sets it upon a pole for all to see; God is true to promises made, healing those who look to it and trust the means God has provided. The copper snake ends up in the temple, but its meaning is distorted and Hezekiah has it destroyed (2 Kings 18:4). On snakes as symbols of both death and life in the ancient Near East and the discovery of copper snakes in that area, including a copper snake 5 in. long near Timnah in a copper-smelting region, see Joines (1974); Milgrom (1990: 459—60) (for NT usage, see JN 3:14-15).
Source-critical attempts to divide this story into J and E (only 22:1 is P) have not been successful. Coherence difficulties and the various divine names may reflect a long history of transmission and editing of both narrative and poetry, the earliest forms of which may date from before the monarchy. An Aramaic inscription from the eighth century BCE has been found at Tell Deir 'Alia in Jordan, the contents of which are ascribed to a 'seer of the gods' named 'Balaam, son of Beor'. He reports a vision of a meeting of the gods who are planning disaster for the earth (for text and details, see Milgrom 1990: 473-6). Scholars agree that this text and Num 22-4 both have roots in Transjordan traditions about this legendary figure. A few biblical traditions have a negative assessment of Balaam, perhaps having access to still other traditions (cf. Num 31:8, 18; Josh 13:22; Rev 2:14). The text combines a narrative and four poetic oracles, the basic content of which is blessing. Literary studies have noted the repetition of key words such as '(not)seeing' and the number three, including a probable tripartite structure: (a) Balaam's three encounters with God (22:1-40); (b) Balak's three attempts to curse Israel thwarted by Balaam's three blessings (22:41—24:13); (c) A climactic fourth blessing
(21:10—20) Travel in Transjordan: the tempo of the journey picks up as Israel moves through various places on its way to Canaan. The character of the journey changes as well; water is provided at the divine initiative at Beer (v. 16, meaning 'well', the first positive etymology in Numbers) and the people sing songs of appreciation (w. 17-18, 27-30, from unknown sources).
Though several sites cannot be identified (and do not fully correspond to the itinerary in 33:41—9), the route takes Israel around Edom and Moab. The Wadi Zered is the boundary between Moab and Edom and the Wadi Arnon the northern boundary of Moab. The Arnon prompts the narrator to insert a portion from the otherwise unknown Book of the Wars of the Lord (apparently an early collection of poems about Israel's conquests). This poetic piece (though not spoken by Israel) and the songs in w. 17—18 and 27—30 contribute to the increasingly anticipatory character of the march. Finally, they arrive at Mount Pisgah 'across the Jordan from Jericho' (22:1).
(24:14-25).
The function of this material at this juncture in Numbers has been delineated by Olson (1985: 156-64) especially. With its focus on the blessing of Israel and its remarkable reiteration of divine promises, the story envisages a marvellous future for Israel at a key transition between old generation and new. The material also functions ironically; a non-Israelite with less than sterling credentials voices God's promises in a way that no Israelite in Numbers does, not even Moses. God finds a way to get the word through in spite of the rebellions of Israel and its leaders (and Balaam's own failings, 22:22-35; 31:8, 16). The disastrous activities in 25:1—18 make the words of Balaam stand out all the more brightly. That the people do not actually hear these words is testimony that, contrary to appearances, God continues to be at work in fulfilling these promises. Indeed, God turns even the worst of situations (the potential curses of Balaam) into blessing.
(21:21-35) Victories over the Amorites: these reports probably precede 21:10-20 chronologically. For greater detail, cf. Deut 2:24—3:7. With Israel situated on the 'boundary of the Amorites' (21:13), Moses sends a message (similar to 20:17) t° King Sihon requesting safe passage. Moses receives the same reply as he got from Edom, but Sihon also pursues Israel in battle. In response, Israel defeats his armies, kills him, and takes possession of his lands, to the border of the Ammonites in the east (at the Wadi Jabbok), including the capital Heshbon, perhaps a short distance east of Jericho. These lands include former Moabite lands, and the song in 21:27—30 (cf. Jer 48:45— 6) praises the victory of the Amorites over the Moabites and their god Chemosh (21:29) and the capture of their lands, now belonging to Israel. Notable is Israel's integration of a nonIsraelite story into their own story of these events. Because Sihon defeated Moab and Israel defeated Sihon this enhances Israel's strength. Israel's 'settling' in the land of the Amorites sets up a later controversy (see NUM 32).
(22:1—40) Balak, king of Moab, is fearful that Israel, given their numbers and victories over the Amorites, will next turn on what is left of his kingdom (which includes Midianites, 22:4,7; 31:7-9) and overcome his armies with ease. And so, as kings were wont to do in that world (cf. i Kings 22), he turns to a mercenary diviner from Syria (the exact location is uncertain), famous for his effective blessings and cursings (v. 6, an ironic statement, given later developments!). Messengers, prepared to pay for his services, inform Balaam of Balak's request to have him curse Israel so that he can defeat them (in v.ii the compliment of v. 6 is omitted). Note that the curses were not thought to be finally effective apart from Balak's
The victory over the aggressor Og, another Amorite king (w. 33—5), mirrors that of the victory over Arad in 21:1—3 (cfJosh 10:8), with its stress upon holy war, and this in express response to a word from God. The total destruction is like what was done to Sihon (v. 34).
Israel is now situated at the boundary of the promised land and is given a foretaste of victories and settlements to come. Those promises are now raised in the story of Balaam.
127 NUMBERS
a vehicle through which God works to show Balaam's dependence upon God for his insight and words and to sharpen his faithfulness.
subsequent actions. Divination (usually condemned in Israel, Deut 18:9—14) was a widely practised 'art' whereby the meaning and course of events was sought through interpretation of various natural phenomena.
With sword drawn, the angel of YHWH (God in human form, see 9:15—23) confronts Balaam and donkey three times in increasingly restrictive circumstances. The donkey alone sees the figure in the road; twice it is able to avoid a confrontation, but the third time it proves impossible and so it lies down under Balaam. Each time Balaam strikes the donkey, becoming angry (like God in v. 22) the third time. God opens the donkey's mouth and it questions Balaam about its mistreatment. Balaam thinks that he has been made to look the fool; if he had had a sword, he would have killed the animal. When the donkey queries him about their long history together, Balaam admits that the donkey has not acted this way before.
Asking for a delay in order to consult YHWH (!), Balaam has the first of three encounters with God. That YHWH's name is placed in the mouth of Balaam, that he is called 'my God', converses with him, and is accepted as a matter of course by the visitors, is remarkable. Such a usage expresses, not a historical judgement, but the narrator's conviction that the god with whom Balaam had to do is none other than YHWH (cf Ex 15:15; Gen 26:28). The divine enquiry into the visitors' identity (v. 9) is designed to elicit the response Balaam gives; how he responds—absolute divine foreknowledge is not assumed—will shape the nature of God's response. God prohibits Balaam from going to Moab to curse Israel, for they are blessed (see 6:22-7). Balaam obeys God and recounts the divine refusal to the visitors (both acts relate to Balaam's faithfulness to God), who report back to Balak but without any reference to God (v. 14).
At this point God opens Balaam's eyes so that he can see as the donkey sees. When he sees the angel with drawn sword he falls on his face, presumably pleading for his life. It was not the donkey who was against him but God. The angel gives the reason for the confrontation, noting that if it had not been for the donkey's manceuverings, he would have killed Balaam. Balaam responds that, though he did not know that God opposed him, he has sinned; he offers to return home if God remains displeased. But God renews the commission (v. 35) and Balaam proceeds.
Readers would expect such a reply from God and think this is the end of the matter, but not Balak: he sends a larger and more distinguished delegation, who make a more attractive offer—promising honour and writing a blank cheque (v. 17). Even with such a tempting offer, Balaam again demonstrates his faithfulness by consulting with 'YHWH my God' and telling the visitors that he is subject exactly (not 'less or more', v. 18) to the divine command. In view of Balaam's demonstrated and promised faithfulness, God changes the strategy and commands him to go and do 'only what I tell you to do' (v. 20), a word which the reader is led to think God can now speak with more confidence. Balaam goes, but the reader is left to wonder what God might tell him to do.
The three episodes of Balaam with his donkey are mirrored in the first three oracles of 22:41-24:13. These oracles show that the experiences of Balaam with his donkey parallel the experiences of Balak with Balaam. The donkey's experience becomes Balaam's experience. Just as the donkey is caught between God's threatening presence and Balaam's increasing anger so Balaam is caught between God's insistence on blessing and Balak's increasing anger about the curse. From another angle, Balaam's difficulties with the donkey are like God's experience with Balaam. It is a conflict of wills. Balaam has to be brought more certainly to the point where he will allow God to use him as God sees fit (see v. 38). God will open Balaam's mouth just as God opened the donkey's mouth (v. 28). From still another angle, the donkey becomes a God figure)!), speaking for God and reflecting God's relationship to Balaam (w. 28—30). God has been mistreated by Balaam along the journey because Balaam thinks this trip is making him look the fool. The donkey reminds Balaam of their long life together and his faithfulness to him.
What follows is surprising (v. 22), probably to both ancient and modern readers (in view of various disjunctions most regard w. 22-35 as a later interpolation). The reader (but not Balaam) is told of God's anger because he departed (for the translation, 'as he was going', see Ashley 1993:454—5); indeed, God has become Balaam's 'adversary'. To create curiosity about the reason, the narrator delays informing the reader until v. 32, where it is clear that God still has questions about Balaam's faithfulness, remarkable in view of his responses in w. 13—21. This strange encounter thus amounts to a 'blind' test. The reader will remember Jacob in GEN 32:22-32 and Moses in EX 4:24-6, both of whom encounter a God who creates trials as they embark upon a new venture relative to God's call. The language is also similar to Joshua's experience (JOSH 5:13-15). At the end of this test (v. 35), God's command to Balaam remains the same as it was in v. 20—to speak only what God tells him.
Having arrived at the boundary of Moab (v. 36), Balaam is greeted by Balak, who chides him for his initial refusal. Balaam responds by saying, rhetorically, that he does not have the power 'to say just anything' (v. 38). What God puts in his mouth, as with the prophets (see Jer 1:9; 15:16; Ezek 2:8—3:3), this is what he must say (cf. Jer 20:7—9).
But to get to that goal, the narrator makes use of fable motifs with a talking donkey (cf. GEN 3:1-6; JUDG 9:7-15) to portray the test. God here uses irony and humour to get through to Balaam. The donkey becomes his teacher (!), one who sees the things of God (including potential disaster) more clearly than Balaam sees and subverts Balaam's supposed powers. Balaam's treatment of the donkey during the journey is a sign of his unfaithfulness; he does not see the God who stands before him in increasingly inescapable ways and respond appropriately (cf. Joshua in JOSH 5:13-15). The donkey is
(22:41-24:13) Balaam's first three oracles. The first two oracles are integral to the surrounding narrative; the third (as with the fourth) is less so but still has close links. Each situation contains seven similar elements; the third time around breaks the pattern in key ways (cf. Olson 1996: 145-7):
i. Balak brings Balaam to a high point overlooking the Israelite camp (22:41; 23:13—14, 27—8), a people so vast he cannot see them all (23:13). The place changes each time and
N U M B E R S 128
strong deliverer, imaged as strong animals (23:22; 24:8—9), and will defeat Israel's enemies (24:8—9).
Balak hopes that the venue (and the sight of a smaller portion of the people) might change the word spoken; in the third instance Balak uses (will of) God language (23:27). But the place makes no difference, and he finally sees all the people (24:2).
6. Balak's reactions to Balaam's oracles are increasingly negative, issuing finally in anger and dismissal (23:11, 25-6; 24:10—11). But Balak comes to recognize that Balaam's God is the one with whom he has to do (23:17, 27) and finally blames YHWH for the fact that Balaam will not be paid for his services (24:11).
2. Balak builds seven altars and sacrifices a bull and a ram on each (23:1—2, 14, 29—30), the first and the last at Balaam's request. Sacrifices were a typical part of the diviner's art, perhaps to appease the deity and to look for omens in the entrails. Balaam's purpose may be to show Balak that he is proceeding in a proper manner. But, in fact, divination is seen to be bankrupt as a means of revelation (23:23; 24:1).
7. Balaam's response to Balak in each case is a testimony to the word of God (23:12, 26; 24:12—13). That he must'take care' to say what God has put in his mouth again indicates that he does have other options. But he knows he must speak in view of the source of the words.
3. Balaam twice turns aside from the offerings to consult with YHWH, but the third time he does not look for omens'
(24:14-25) Balaam's fourth oracle stands outside the form delineated above and comes directly from Balaam, with no reference to the spirit ofthe Lord (as in 24:2), but with a claim that he himself 'knows the knowledge of the Most High'
(24:1; diviner's language is used for consulting with YHWH). In the first case, he is uncertain that YHWH will meet him and informs God about the offerings (23:3-4); the second time he is certain and says nothing about offerings (23:15).
(24:16). This oracle is suddenly introduced as Balaam's word to Balak upon his departure, a word that ironically makes clear that Balak and Moab are expressly in Israel's future. Israel will bring Moab (24:17, and perhaps Ir in 24:19; cf. 22:36), Edom, and the other peoples in the region (the Shethites) under the aegis of Israel and its God and will be exalted among the nations.
4. God twice meets Balaam and puts a word in his mouth and commands him to return and speak that word (23:5,16). God's insistence on what he must say recognizes that Balaam does have options. It becomes increasingly clear, even to Balak (23:17), that God reveals through the word, not divination. In the third instance, the spirit of God comes upon him (see 11:17, 25~6) without consultation after he 'sets his face' and 'sees' Israel's situation (24:2).
The means by which this will be accomplished is anticipated in the kingdom language of 24:7; God will raise up a star and sceptre (the future 'him') of 24:170; from the tribe of Judah, for whom lion imagery is also used (see Gen 49:9— 10), and Israel will be established among the nations (24:1720). These royal images are usually associated with the Davidic dynasty and its victories over Moab and Edom (2 Sam 8:2, 12—14) and have been messianically interpreted. The obscure (and possibly added) brief oracles against the nations (24:20-4) name the Amalekites (cf. its king Agag, 24:7, and i SAM 15; 30); the Kenites (Kain), a subgroup ofthe Midianites; Assyria (or an obscure tribal group, Gen 25:3); Eber (perhaps another tribal group in the area); and the Philistines or other sea people (Kittim). The oracles announce their ultimate demise. In all of these events Israel's God will be the chief actor (24:23).
5. Balaam speaks God's blessings on Israel rather than curses. The blessings become less descriptive, more future oriented, and more properly blessings as one moves through the four oracles. Even more, those who curse Israel will themselves be cursed, while those who bless will be blessed (24:9). Prominent throughout is the language of seeing; the one who did not see the purposes of God (22:22-30) now does see them (23:9, 21, 23—4; 24:3—4,15—17). Indeed, the clarity of his seeing increases over the course of the oracles; the most expansive claims are the 'knowledge' of 24:16 and the seeing into the future of 24:17. Falling down but alert (24:4,16) may refer to a qualified ecstatic reception of God's word.
Balaam 'sees' Israel's history and God's promises, moving from the past through the present to a more and more specific future: election from among the nations (23:9); promise (and fulfilment) of many descendants, like the dust of the earth (23:10; see Gen 13:16, 28:14), an(^ blessing (24:9, cf. GEN 12:3); exodus (23:22; 24:8); God's presence among them and his care in the wilderness (23:21; cf. 24:5-6). He anticipates a successful conquest, as both Israel and God are imaged as lions (22:23—4; 24:7~9)> me rise of the monarchy and specific conquests relating thereto (24:7,17-19). The overall scene for Balaam is a blessed people: numerous, confident, flourishing, powerful, and its king is God. In Balaam's words (23:io):'let my end be like his!'
But the Moabites come back to haunt Israel almost immediately. The Israelites remain at the boundary of Moab across from Jericho.
(25:1-18) The Final Rebellion Scholars agree that this chapter combines two separate stories about Israelite men and foreign women (often assigned to JE and P), with a conclusion that assumes both stories. The second story may have been added to illustrate the first and to raise up the stature ofthe Aaronic line (at the expense of Moses?). The chapter is highly condensed and the reader must fill in many gaps. The focus is violation ofthe first commandment, the first notice of idolatry since Ex 32 (for parallels, see Olson 1996: 153-4), anomalous given God's blessings in chs. 22—4. In these events the old generation seems finally to die off (14:26—35; 26:64—5). Th£
Balaam 'sees' some of Israel's basic convictions about God. God is not a human being, is not deceptive, blesses Israel, reveals his word to people such as Balaam, and makes promises and keeps them (23:19—20). The claim that God has spoken and will not change his mind (23:19) refers to these promises for Israel and is not a general statement about divine immutability (see Gen 6:5-6; Ex 32:14) or a general claim about prophecy (see Jer 18:7—10). This God chooses to dwell among this people and is acclaimed as their king (23:21), is a
decks are cleared for the new generation (whose census follows in ch. 26).
The first story (w. 1—5; cf. Deut 4:3—4) involves Moabite women who, through acts of prostitution, invite Israelite males into idolatrous practices associated with the god
129 N U M B E R S
is killed for his participation in Israel's apostasy. The condemnation of a Simeonite, when combined with the actions of Levites and Reubenites in ch. 16, means that the curse on these three tribes in Jacob's last testament (Gen 49:1-7) is brought to completion (see Douglas 1993: 194—5).
(sing.) Baal, the Canaanite god of Peor (on Balaam's advice, 31:16). God tells Moses to impale the chiefs of Israel so thatthe anger of God is turned away from Israel; no notice is given of obedience (unusual in Numbers; a failure of Moses?). Moses issues a different command, namely to kill only the idolaters (also not executed), w. 8—9 speak of a severe plague, which v. 18 and 31:16 associate with the idolatry of Peor, and must have begun in 25:3 (cf weeping in 25:7). Because the wrath of God was not turned away by following God's command to execute a few, a more devastating plague occurred, a working out of the consequences of the deed (see NUM 1:53; 14).
The New Generation on the Plains ofMoah (26:1-36:13)
The balance of Numbers (all Priestly material) contains little narrative in the usual sense, though enough to keep the law and narrative rhythm alive (see chs. 31; 32). Various statutes and lists are presented that prepare Israel for its life in the land.
The second story (w. 6-15) involves a relationship between a Midianite woman and a Simeonite; the detail given in w. 1415 testifies to their status (and may link the man with v. 4). The phrase 'into his family' (v. 6) suggests marriage, but the Hebrew is 'to his brothers'; the tabernacle setting suggests something more sinister, as does the word 'trickery' in v. 18 (36631:16). He did this 'in the sight of Moses' and afflsraelites as they voiced their lament to God at the tabernacle. The wrong committed is uncertain, but the combination of marriage to a Midianite (paired with idolatrous Moabites, v. 18) and the defiance exhibited in parading themselves before the lamenting people suggests idolatrous practice.
This census marks the beginning of the new generation without the presence of the old (see NUM c.2). Given the obedient preparations for the journey in chs. i—10, the reader may wonder whether anything external can be developed to prevent the rebellions of a new generation. The oracles of Balaam, however, have made it clear that God will be true to promises made, and those promises have been focused on this new generation by God himself (14:24, 31). From the assumptions of land ownership and allocation in chs. 27—36, this new generation will inherit the land, regardless of what it does. Hence, these chapters have a promissory force (see NUM
Perhaps Moses had difficulty acting because he himself had married a Midianite. In any case, the blatant act exhibited in his sight was serious enough to call for a decisive response. Moses' failure entails two instances of disobedience in quick succession. But Phinehas, grandson of Aaron, does not hesitate. He enters their tent (perhaps a nearby shrine?—the Hebrew word occurs only here) and pierces them through. The single act suggests they were having intercourse and the tabernacle vicinity suggests an act of cultic prostitution, which would link back to v. i. The effect of his action (in effect a 'sacrifice') was to 'make atonement for the Israelites' (v. 13; cf. 16:46—8) and stop the plague, which God's command to Moses in v. 4 had called for, and Phinehas now fulfils at least in part. God interprets this action as a zeal exercised on behalf of the divine jealousy (the related Hebrew words show that God's zeal became Phinehas's), which links the action to idolatry (see Ex 34:14-16; Hos 9:10). So, this is a zeal for the first commandment (and the first reference to Baal, which may account for the god's later infamy, e.g. Ps 106:28).
15)- Yet this does not lessen the call to be faithful (Caleb and Joshua stand as examples) and so chs. 27-36 (and Deuteronomy, also addressed to the new generation) seek to assist Israel in its faithfulness through new orderings of a community confronted with many of the same issues. Many signs of hope will surface, not least the complete absence of death notices. But this picture dare not contribute to undue optimism. Deut 28—31 will make it clear that this new generation will be no more faithful than the old and will experience many of the same failures and consequences (see Deut 29:22-8; 31:20-9). On parallels between Num 1-25 and 26-36, see Olson (1996: 158—9).
Characteristic of chs. 27—36 is the recognition that older law may need to change in view of new life situations. The heart of the matter is community justice and stability; for that reason God becomes engaged in social and economic change. Such ongoing divine involvement witnesses to a dynamic understanding of law, in which the tradition is reinterpreted for the sake of life in a new situation. Instead of an immutable, timeless law, Israel insists on a developing process in which experience in every sphere of life is drawn into the orbit of law, but always in the service of life and the flourishing of community.
This action of Phinehas becomes the basis for God's establishing with the Aaronides an everlasting covenant of peace, which is interpreted to mean a covenant of perpetual priesthood ('my' means that its fulfilment is solely dependent on God). What is new, given earlier divine commitments to Aaron (Ex 29:9; 40:15; cf. Mai 2:4-5)? Covenant (of peace) language is new (see Isa 54:10; Ezek 34:25), suggesting a formalization of a prior commitment.
(26:1-65) The Census of the New Generation The second census begins as did the first (cf. v. 2 with 1:2—3), with military service in mind, Eleazar replacing his father Aaron, and land allotment issues paramount. The reference to all these persons having come out of Egypt seems strange; perhaps this is how they identify themselves as a community. See GEN 46:824, whose list of seventy individuals have here—basically— become seventy clans (cf. also i Chr 2-8). Even with the failures of certain tribal groups and the diminishment of numbers, the twelve-tribe reality remains intact here (only Manasseh and Ephraim are inverted). The listing focuses on clans rather than individuals (for land allotment); the totals
This text may reflect later priestly rivalries. The status of Phinehas is raised up over Aaron's other son Ithamar (whose descendants were banished by Solomon, i Kings 2:26-7) and God's commitment to Phinehas, whose descendants were Zadokites (i Chr 6:4—10; Ezek 44:15), is eternal.
The conclusion (w. 16-18) combines elements from both stories (known to Num 31:8-16 and Ps 106:28-31). The divine word to 'harass [be an enemy to] the Midianites' is directly correspondent to their harassment of Israel; see NUM 31, where Israel goes to war against the Midianites and Balaam
N U M B E R S I30
originally stood here (or after 36:13) and concluded an earlier version of the 'Pentateuch'.
are given for each tribe and the total for all: 601,730 compared to 603,550 in 1:46. Even with all the deaths in chs. 11—25, me numbers remain essentially the same. God's blessings have been at work behind the scenes.
The need for a successor to Moses on the eve of the entry into the land is made clear by his (and Aaron's) earlier rebellion (v. 14; see 20:12). It is striking that Moses is the one who initiates the issue of succession (v. 15), appealing to God as Creator, the one who gives breath (spirit) to all people (see 16:22), in an apparent reference to God as the one who has given Joshua the spirit, a specific charisma for leadership (27:18; cf. 11:17, 2^J Deut 34:9). Joshua has been an 'assistant' to Moses since the Exodus (11:28; Ex 24:13; 33:11). Here his responsibilities are especially associated with leading the Israelites in battle (see Ex 17:8—14), the basic meaning of'go out before them and come in before them' (27:17, 21; Josh 14:11). Yet the image of sheep and shepherd suggests a more comprehensive leadership role, even royal in its basic sense (see 2 Sam 5:2).
Several events of previous chapters are recalled, the rebellion of Korah and the Reubenites (w. 9—11; cf also v. 19), the deaths of Er and Onan (v. 19; cf. Gen 38:3—10), the deaths of Nadab and Abihu (v. 61; cf. Lev 10:1-2), and a reference to Jochebed, the mother of Moses (v. 59). Another reference to women anticipates events yet to occur (v. 33), and is the reason for the lengthier generation list of Manasseh. A new reason for the census is given in w. 52-6, i.e. land apportionment is to be based on tribal size after the conquest is complete
(though the location of land will be based on lot, a means of eliminating human bias). Such a method sought to ensure a fair distribution of the land to the various families.
The Levites are also newly enrolled (cf. 3:14-39, with an increase of 1,000), separately as before (1:48—9), with reference to the absence of tribal allotment (18:23—4). As God had said (14:20-35), no member of the old generation is still alive except Caleb and Joshua and, for a time, Moses.
In response to Moses, God commands him to take Joshua and commission him by laying his hand upon him, a symbolic act signifying the transfer of authority through which God was active (so v. 20; cf. 8:10-11; Deut 34:9). The investiture is public, before 'all the congregation', so that it is clear that he is the one whom the people are to obey (v. 20). The act is also to take place before Eleazar the high priest (see 20:229), to whom Joshua is responsible with respect to the discernment of the will of God (esp. regarding battle) through the use of Urim and Thummim (see EX 28:29—30). The latter explains why only'some' of Moses' authority was given to Joshua (v. 20; cf. Moses' role in 12:6-8; Deut 34:10; Josh 1:7-8). Moses did as God had commanded him.