Friday, July 31

Numbers 32: Life is soon to change for the Chosen People. They have never been sedentary, not even in Egypt, where they lived as semi-nomadic shepherds. How, however, they are to become farmers, the very type of people most tied to the land.

The differences between these two ways of life (exemplified as far back as Cain and Abel) are not reducible simply to their sources of livelihood. The differences extend, rather, to the entire social structure, particularly government and systems of loyalty.

Not all the Israelites are equally keen on making this transition to agriculture and vine-growing, especially those tribes that have been most successful in raising herds These included, especially, the tribes of Reuben and Gad, which now announce their preference to remain in the good grazing land east of the Jordan (verses 1-5).

Moses' immediate objection to this suggestion concerns Israel's diminished military strength, if its forces were to be reduced by two tribes. He likens the request of these two tribes to the earlier incident when the twelve spies brought back a discouraging word from their inspection of the Holy Land. Indeed, this discouragement is the point of the comparison (verses 6-15; compare Judges 5:16-17).
The tribes of Gad and Reuben, by way of response, declare their intention, after securing their own families on land east of the Jordan, to remain with the invading force until all the Promised Land is conquered (verses 16-19).

Moses agrees to this arrangement (verses 20-24), and the two tribes repeatedly pledge their cooperation (verses 25-27,31-32). Moses announces the compromise to the rest of Israel's leadership (verses 28-30).

Half the tribe of Manasseh, whose recent significant growth we have already had occasion to observe, is added to these two tribes inheriting land east of the Jordan (verse 33), and the chapter ends with a list of new Israelite villages and strongholds in that territory (verses 34-42).

The tribes that settled in the land of Gilead will be subject to unusually difficult pressures in the centuries to follow, as various peoples east of the Jordan, but especially Syria, will look upon that rich grazing land with a covetous eye.

Saturday, August 1

Numbers 33: As Israel's long journey draws nigh to its end, the inspired author of this book thinks it an opportune time to recount the stages, since Egypt, that the Chosen People have traveled (verse 1). This list is based on Moses own “log” of the trip, but the Lord Himself directed this recording of it (verse 2).

For us readers, nonetheless, identifying each of these places is a far from certain exercise. When the desert is called a “trackless waste,” full consideration should be given to that description. Deserts and their shifting sands are notoriously deficient in stable landmarks, and this record antedates by far the art of calculating one's precise geographical position by reference to the stars. In addition, archeology has not been able, in every instance, to identify the place names listed in this chapter. If it did, we could confidently map out the entire period of Israel's desert wandering.

An illustration of our difficulty is immediately provided by the name “Sukkoth” (verses 456-6), which means tents or booths. It may be the case that this place received its name for no other reason than the fact that Israel pitched its tents there.

The place names in the list in verses 5-15 correspond very closely to the account in Exodus 12:37-19:2. Dophkah (12-13), a name not included in Exodus, seems to be what is now called Serabit el Khadem, a site of turquoise mining in the south of the Sinai Peninsula. One suspects that Alush, also missing from Exodus, gave its name to Wadi el'esh, just south of Dophkah.

Kadesh, which Israel reaches by verse 36, is not desert at all. It is a lush valley with abundant spring water. The major spring was Ain el-Qudeirat, twelve miles from which is Ain Qudeis, which still preserves the name Kadesh.

Sunday, August 2

Numbers 34: The present chapter may be read as a contrast with the chapter we have just finished, and this contrast pertains to both time and place. Having looked backwards in the previous chapter, the inspired writer now turns his attention to the future, and as the former chapter took the measure of the desert, the present chapter will measure the Promised Land.

The large territory considered in the first half of this chapter (verses 2-15) was not all conquered during Joshua's period of conquest. Not until the monarchy in the tenth century before Christ did Israel occupy such a large area. When in this chapter, three centuries earlier, its distribution was being considered, the thought might have seemed fantastic.

Nonetheless, the territory outlined here really does correspond very closely to the “Canaan” over which earlier Egyptian pharaohs had exercised dominion until the close of the fourteenth century before Christ. In this sense it would have seemed normal to Moses and his contemporaries to think of Canaan (verse 2) in these same dimensions.
Having come up from the south, Moses first considered Canaan's southern border. Under Israel's occupation this southern border will be the land of Edom (verse 3)-that is, a line running westward from the border of the Dead Sea to the Mediterranean (cf. Joshua 15”3-4; Ezekiel 47:19). The Wadi el-Arish (“river of Egypt”-verse verse 5) serves as a kind of natural division of the Negev from the Sinai Peninsula.

The “sea” (verse 5) and “great sea” (verse 6) are references to the Mediterranean, Israel's natural western border.

On the north a line running eastward from the Mediterranean, somewhat north of Byblos, to the desert beyond Damascus, will border Israel. Zedad is northeast of Mount Hermon (verse 7-9).

Respecting the eastern border of Canaan, its northeastern corner will be Benaias (a later name, derived from the Greek god, Pan), the major source of the Jordan River. Then the Sea of Galilee, the Jordan, and the Dead Sea will roughly form the natural eastern border (verses 11-12).

We note that these boundaries completely exclude the land recently claimed by Gad, Reuben, and half of Manasseh. These latter tribes, therefore, are not considered in the division of the land just circumscribed (verse 13-15).

The chapter ends by listing the names of the men charged with the division of the Holy Land (verse 16-29).

Monday, August 3

Numbers 35: Part of the disposition of the Promised Land, a theme now continued from the previous chapter, is the arrangement for regional “cities of refuge.” These were special place of sanctuary for those whose lives were endangered by families seeking blood vengeance.

Since these assigned cities of refuge were all priestly cities, however, the chapter begins with the disposition of the priestly cities (cf. also Leviticus 25:32-34; Joshua 21:1-40). The tribe of Levi, the priestly tribe, was to inherit forty-eight cities, including the six cities of refuge, dispersed throughout the whole Promised Land (verses 6-7). Attached to this inheritance is pastureland in the vicinity of the priestly cities (verses 2-5).

Most of this chapter, however, is devoted to the cities of refuge themselves (verses 10-34). Because they were priestly cities, these cities of refuge had shrines and altars that would serve as precincts of sanctuary (cf. Exodus 21:14; 1 Kings 1:51).

Three were assigned to Canaan, three to Transjordania (verse 14).

These assigned cities served two discrete purposes: first, to guarantee that no retributive action would be taken against an accused killer until a fair trial could determine whether or not his offense was intentional; and second, to provide a haven for such a one, after the trial, against those still disposed to take vengeance on him anyway. In both cases, the function of the “city of refuge” was to place rational and political restraints on the exercise of revenge.

While the more obvious category involved in the institution of sanctuary is spatial (that is, the setting apart of a measured precinct), it has another dimension that may be called “temporal” (that is, the setting apart of a measured time). The institution implies an “until.” Thus, the accused could not be harmed until he was properly tired (verse 12). If granted further asylum that that trial, the accused person was safe until the death of the high priest (Joshua 20:6). In regard to the heat of avenging passion, the biblical text shows here a conspicuous respect for the therapeutic influence of time. It recognizes that time is not on the side of passion but of reason.
Thus, these cities of refuge, beyond the political and judicial significance conveyed in their literal and historical sense, are also possessed of a moral and ascetical meaning. As institutions of restraint, they represent a healthy distrust of impetuosity. They stand for the rational mind's control over the passions, especially an avenging anger that feels itself to be righteous. This institution embodies the truth that “the wrath of man does not produce the righteousness of God” (James 1:20).

Experience indicates that the passions, if not deliberately fueled and stoked, are marked by a native entropy. They resemble, in this respect, the flames often invoked to describe them. Left to themselves, the passions tend to diminish over time. Thus, wrath must act quickly, as it were, because it knows that its time is short (Revelation 12:12). Generally speaking, time is no friend to the passions.

Time is on the other side, that of reason. Reason, therefore, unlike the passions, knows how to wait. Reason is the realm of thought, and thought, unlike passion, requires the discipline of time. Consequently, properly cultivated reason is “slow to anger” (Proverbs 16:32; James 1:19).

Furthermore, reason is a bulwark of assured self-possession. Indeed, reason is slow precisely because it is confident. Reason can “take its time,” because, unlike the passions, reason deliberately invests in time. Time is one of reason's most interest-bearing endowments, its long-term investment. The true city of refuge, then, is the mind godly cultivated in the art of patience, cautious of the impromptu, wary of impulse, and suspicious of “quick returns.” Its manner is slow, deliberate. As a result, no blood is shed within its precincts; the avenger is restrained and sternly reprimanded at its gates.

Tuesday, August 4

Numbers 36: The Book of Numbers ends with a final determination about the property of five heiresses, the topic of an earlier discussion (27:1-11). The question raised in this chapter is directed to the inheritance of this property in the event that the inheriting heiress marries outside of her own tribe (verse 3). That is to say, what is needed is a further clarification of the earlier ruling, and Moses perceives the need for this clarification (verse 5).

The solution to the difficulty is a prohibition against these heiresses, if they do claim their inheritance, marrying outside their own tribe, lest the inherited property be lost to that tribe (verse 7). This solution is consistent with the intention of the earlier disposition-namely, to preserve in integrity the inheritance of each tribe and family (verse 8).

These heiresses dutifully conform to the prescribed arrangement (verses 10-13).

The last verse of this book asserts divine sanction for the decisions and judgments made throughout chapters 22-36, raising them to the same level of authority as the commandments received on Mount Sinai.

Wednesday, August 5

2 Peter 1:1-11: In the present reading Peter speaks of Jesus as “Savior,” a term more often used in the New Testament to refer to God the Father. Nonetheless, in these three chapters Peter uses the expression five times in reference to Jesus (1:1,11; 2:20; 3:2,18). In each case, except in 1:1, the use of “Savior” is joined with “Lord.” This is very rare in early Christian literature. Christians today are so accustomed to speaking of Jesus as “Lord and Savior” that they do not realize that, were it not for 2 Peter, this expression would probably never have become so standard a part of Christian vocabulary.

Verse 4 is the only place in the New Testament that describes Christians as “partakers of the divine nature” (theias koinonoi physeos), a very bold description of divine grace. However, an identical theology of grace is expressed elsewhere in the New Testament with a different vocabulary (e.g., 1 John 1:3; 3:2,9; John 15:4; 17:22-23; Romans 8:14-17, and so on).

One also observes that this sharing in the divine nature is manifest as a particular “knowledge” (epignosis and gnosis) of God in Christ (verses 3,5,6,8). This knowledge of God, which is the substance of our call (klesis), must be made “secure” (bebaia – verse 9) by the cultivation of virtue (verses 5-8) and the avoidance of sin (verse 9).

Verse 11 identifies eternal life as “the kingdom of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ,” an idea rare in early Christian literature (cf. Ephesians 5:5), which more often refers to the “kingdom of God.” The expression here in 2 Peter forms the biblical basis for that line of the Nicene Creed that says of Jesus, “of whose kingdom there shall be no end.”

Thursday, August 6

The Transfiguration in Peter: In addition to the three Synoptic Gospels, the event of our Lord’s Transfiguration is also described in the Second Epistle of Peter (1:13-21. This latter tells the story with less detail but certainly with no less interest.

St. Peter’s second epistle was written shortly before his martyrdom, traditionally dated during the persecution that followed Nero’s fire at Rome in the summer of A.D. 64. After the blame for that fire was shifted onto the Christians of the city, the imperial police rounded up the Christians, along with their obvious leader, Peter, the chief of the apostles. He evidently wrote this letter while waiting to die.

Hence, Peter’s mind was much taken up with his impending execution. He wrote, “Yes, I think it is right, as long as I am in this tent, to stir you up by reminding you, knowing that shortly I must put off my tent, just as our Lord Jesus Christ showed me. Moreover I will be careful to ensure that you always have a reminder of these things after my exodus.”

Two words in this account seem especially pertinent to our theme. First, Peter refers to his impending death as his exodus. This is the very word Luke uses to speak of the conversation of Jesus with Moses and Elijah: “And behold, two men talked with Him, who were Moses and Elijah, who appeared in glory and spoke of His exodus which He was about to accomplish at Jerusalem” (9:30-31). These are the only two occasions in the New Testament where exodus is used with reference to death.

Second, Peter speaks of his death in terms of putting off his “tent.” Perhaps the associations attached to this metaphor provided the occasion for him immediately to speak of the Transfiguration; we recall from all three Synoptic Gospels that Peter had spoken enigmatically of “tents” on that occasion.

In any case, the Apostle immediately goes on to describe that event: “For we did not follow cunningly devised fables when we made known to you the power and coming of our Lord Jesus Christ, but were eyewitnesses of His majesty. For He received from God the Father honor and glory when such a voice came to Him from the Excellent Glory: ‘This is My beloved Son, in whom I am well pleased.’ And we heard this voice which came from heaven when we were with Him on the holy mountain.”

There are several particulars to note about Peter’s description of the Transfiguration. First, the lack of detail is clearly to be explained by the Apostle’s presumption that the event was already well known to his readers. He was not obliged to elaborate on the details, beyond reminding his readers that he had been a witness to the event.

Second, his quality as a witness to the vision of glory and the Father’s voice established Peter’s authority to refute the “cunningly devised fables” that are the object of his concern throughout much of this epistle (2:1-22; 3:3,17).

Third, the Lord’s Transfiguration confirmed the hopes of the ancient prophets, who desired to see what the apostles saw. Thus Peter goes on to write, “And so we have the prophetic word confirmed, which you do well to heed as a light that shines in a dark place, until the day dawns and the morn
ing star rises in your hearts” (1:19). The fulfillment of biblical prophecy in Christ is a preoccupation of St. Peter (1 Peter 1:10; 2 Peter 3:2).

Fourth, the “cunningly devised fables,” concerning which Peter is so alarmed, have to do chiefly with the misinterpretation of prophecy. Thus, in this context of the Transfiguration he goes on to insist “that no prophecy of Scripture is of any private interpretation, for prophecy never came by the will of man, but holy men of God spoke as they were moved by the Holy Spirit” (2:20-21).

That is to say, for Peter the Transfiguration was weighted with an exegetical significance, the same emphasis we find in Luke’s account of the event. The glory of the Transfiguration casts a confirming radiation on biblical prophecy. The true meaning of the latter comes to light in the Transfiguration, where the apostles “have the prophetic word confirmed.” All other exegesis consists in “cunningly devised fables.” The glory of the transfigured Christ is the light of the Scriptures themselves, to which Christians “do well to attend.” This is their source of illumination “until the day dawns and the morning star rises in your hearts.” The Bible’s ultimate fulfillment comes in history’s final revelation of the transfigured Lord, “the bright morning star” (Revelation 22:16; cf. 2:28).

Friday, August 7

2 Peter 2:1-11: Like the apostle Paul taking leave of the Asian churches for the last time (Acts 20:29-30), part of Peter’s final legacy here consists in a warning against false teachers who will arise from within the congregation after his departure. These will carry on the deceptive work of the false prophets, begun in Old Testament times and frequently spoken of in Holy Writ (for example, Deuteronomy 13, Jeremiah 28).

Peter proceeds to provide biblical illustrations of this road to perdition. He cites, first of all, the fallen angels, those original tempters of our race (verse 4; Jude 6), and then goes on to speak of the destruction of sinners in the Deluge and the overthrow of Sodom and Gomorrah. Just as God spared Noah in the former instance, He spared Lot in the latter.

Peter’s picture of Noah as a “preacher of righteousness” is paralleled in his contemporary, Josephus (Antiquities 1.3.1), and in Clement of Rome’s letter to the Corinthians a generation later (7.6). Likewise, Peter’s very positive attitude toward Lot, which contrasts somewhat with the less flattering image in Genesis 19, reflects the picture of Lot in Wisdom 10:6 (“When the ungodly perished, [Wisdom] delivered the righteous man, who fled from the fire which fell down on the five cities”) and will likewise appear again in Clement of Rome (11.1).

The false teachers, by way of contrast, are said to introduce “heresies of damnation” (haireseis apoleias — verse 1), driven by fleshly lust (verses 2,10,13,14, 18) and rebellion (verses 1,10). Peter appreciates the moral “underground” of heresy. It is not simply false and unsound teaching, but a teaching prompted by lust and sustained by rebellion. If a person “loses the faith,” he has usually lost something else first, such as chastity, or patience, or sobriety. Heresy, that is to say, is normally a cover for some deeper vice. This is one of the reasons that the Bible takes such a dim view of false teachers.

Friday, July 24

Numbers 25: After the previous three chapters about Balaam, and especially in view of the latter's enthusiastic prophecies regarding Israel's great expectations, we may have anticipated immediate success for the Chosen People.

Alas, however, a serious moral lapse is going to delay even further Israel's entrance into the Promised Land. More sadly this lapse seems to have befallen the younger people, the very ones who were to replace the generation that perished in the wilderness.

The incident in this chapter took place at Shittim, the Hebrew for “acacia groves,” a wooded area east of the Jordan. It was from there that Joshua would in due time send the spies to investigate the Holy Land (Joshua 2:1).

This moral lapse, following so suddenly on the oracles of Balaam and narrated immediately after his departure, is not related to Balaam in this text, but Balaam is certainly blamed for it a few chapters later: “Look, these women caused the children of Israel, through the counsel of Balaam, to trespass against the Lord in the incident of Peor, and there was a plague among the congregation of the Lord” (21:16). This moral depravity of Balaam is the only context in which he is remembered in the New Testament (2 Peter 2:5; Revelation 2:14).

Israel's failing in the present circumstance began as fornication with Moabite women and proceeded to idolatry with Moabite gods (verses 1-2). Indeed, in popular religion in this part of the world, the two were sometimes hard to keep separate.
The Lord's reaction, to the surprise of no one who had been reflecting on recent events, was not favorable (Verse 3). Since the idol worship and sexual immorality of the Moabites were typical of the atmosphere into which Israel would soon be immersed, it was important that the problem be dealt with decisively.

“Decisively,” in fact, is exactly the adverb we want here. Coming from the Latin de-cido, meaning “to cut off,” generally refers to the cutting off of discussion.

Sometimes, nonetheless, cutting off discussion is more rapidly reached by cutting off the heads of those who continue the discussion. This was the approach adopted in the present instance (verses 4-5).

The pursuit of righteousness in this matter was exemplified by Phineas, the son of Eleazar and grandson of Aaron. He was certainly a decisive sort of priest, with a pronounced tendency to executive decisions (a word also derived from de-cido, meaning “to cut off” (verses 7-8). Phineas reacted in response the sinful activity of a particularly flagrant nature (verse 6), undertaken by a couple who evidently thought that, because their families were well placed and well connected, they were exempt from the common discipline, the universal moral law, and the authority of the priesthood. Phineas “decided” (also from de-cido, “to cut off”) to clarify the situation for them (verses 14-15).

This reasonable and highly commendable action of Phineas determined that Israel's priestly succession would pass to and through his own sons (verses 10-13); 1 Chronicles 5:30-34); Psalms 106 [105]:30; Sirach 45:23-26; 1 Maccabees 2:26,54).

Saturday, July 25

Numbers 26: The census at the beginning of this book was taken forty years earlier, the counting of a population that by now is truly gone (verses 64-65). An entire generation has died in the wilderness, replaced by its children, and these already have children, and doubtless grandchildren, of their own. Therefore, it is time for a new census before Israel moves again, this time across the Jordan into the Promised Land.

Indeed, the direct purpose of the present census is to determine the demographic figures necessary for the coming distribution of the Promised Land. It is no accident that the census in this chapter is followed by an outline of inheritance laws in the next chapter. Israel is exactly at the point when its existence will soon pass from migratory to sedentary, and it is the proper context for matching needs with resources. This census will indicate the needs.

The census complete, the distribution of the Promised Land is to be done by a double method of casting lots and maintaining equity in the distribution. Since there is great disproportion in the size of the inheriting tribes, this process is bound to be both complicated and difficult (verses 52-56).

Comparing the figures in this census with the earlier one in Numbers, we observe that some of the tribes have declined slightly, a thing not surprising in view of the extreme rigors of the desert. For instance, respecting the tribe of Reuben, one may compare the figure in verse 7 with Numbers 1:21. The tribe of Simeon, we note, has diminished by more than half (verse 14; 1:23), a circumstance that may explain why Judah eventually absorbed this tribe. Other tribes have declined as well: Zebulon (verse 27; 1:31), Ephraim (verse 37; 1:33), Naphtali (50:1:43).

Other tribes have actually grown. For instance, the tribe of Judah, eventually the royal tribe and of which we have already discerned an increasing prominence, has grown slightly (verse 22; 1:27), as have Dan (verse 43; 1:39), Issachar (verse 25; 1:29), and Asher (verse 47; 1:41). Even more pronounced is the growth of Benjamin (verse 41; 1:37). Manasseh has almost doubled in size (verse 34; 1:35), a fact that will explain why half of this tribe will settle on the east side of the Jordan.

Unlike the earlier census (1:49), this one does count the Levites, but care is still taken to keep their census separate from that of the other tribes (verse 62; cf. 1:47).

Eventually there will be some discussion about female inheritance in families that produced no male heirs. For this reason, two cases are mentioned in the present chapter (verses 33,46).

Sunday, July 26

Numbers 27: This chapter is divided between two subjects, the ordinances governing inheritances in the Promised Land (verses 1-11) and the choice of a successor to replace Moses and lead God's People to the west side of the Jordan (verses 12-23). Each section begins with a short story.

In the story introducing the first topic, five sisters, the only offspring of a man who had died a natural death in the wilderness, approach Moses and Eleazar to complain that, if the current laws, limiting the inheritance of real estate, were to obtain, their own father's memory would be obliterated from Israel's history (verses 3-4).

The resolution of this problem, by which these five women may obtain the inheritance of their dead father, was not prompted by an impulse to treat men and women equally in the inheritance laws. Had this been the case, their own treatment would not be regarded as an exception. On the contrary, the sole interest governing this decision was the preservation of the memory of these sisters' father, not a concern for the women themselves. It would be widely off the mark, therefore, to interpret this account as some sort of early version of “women's rights.”

The resolution of this individual case also provided the context for further legal determinations respecting the inheritance of property. In every instance considered here, the governing principle of inheritance was proximity in consanguinity (verses 8-11). The goal sought in this legislation was to maintain real estate attached to the family. That is to say, the major preoccupation in these rules was to guarantee that a family's inheritance really meant something concrete. It meant solid, indestructible, landed property.

With regard to the five young ladies that presented the problem in the first place, we know from Joshua 17:3-6 that they really did inherit, in the name of their father, land west of the Jordan. At least two of these women left their names to cities in the Holy Land.

In this chapter's second story the Lord tells Moses to climb the Abarim Mountains, in order to see the land that he will never enter. These heights, which Mount Nebo, rise on the western slopes of the plateau of Moab (verses 12-14).

In response Moses seeks from the Lord someone to succeed himself (verses 16-17). In implementing the Lord's choice of Joshua, we may especially observe its reliance on the priesthood of Aaron's family (verses 19,21,22). Like many successions in the bible, it is transmitted by the laying-on of hands (verses 18,23). Still, this succession is not hereditary but charismatic (verse 20).

Even the successor of Moses, Joshua did not receive the former's full authority, much less his historical role. Strictly speaking, Moses was irreplaceable.

Monday, July 27

Numbers 28: Outside of any logical sequence that we can recognize, there follow two chapters of regulations on the sanctification of time: the day, the week, the month, the year.

The first rule has to do with the two daily offerings of yearling lambs, on the morning and the other at evening (verses 3-8; Exodus 29:38-42). These two daily sacrifices, the one to consecrate the passage of light into darkness, and the other to dedicate the passage of darkness into light, were Israel's minimum requirement of daily sacrificial worship. These times of daily sacrifice became, for all Jews everywhere, special times of prayer each day, known as “the hours of prayer” (cf. Acts 3:1; 10:2-3,30). In this way each day was to be sanctified.

This discipline and custom, detached from the temple sacrifices, passed over into the Christian Church as daily Vespers in the
evening and daily Matins (Orthros) in the morning. This discipline, handed down since the time of the Apostles have remained as the two daily Canonical Hours in traditional churches of both East and West. This same discipline was also approved by the Protestant Reformers of the sixteenth century. Martin Luther, for example, provided for daily services in church (a full hour in length for each!), complete with two daily sermons on the Bible, while in England Thomas Cranmer provided the format and content of those services in The Book of Common Prayer.

After the two daily sacrifices, the Sacred Text turns next to the sanctification of the week through the observance of the Sabbath (verses 9-10). The details of the daily sacrifice are repeated for this weekly sacrifice, indicating that on the Sabbath the daily sacrifice was simply doubled.

Then comes the sanctification of the month, at the beginning of each new moon. This is time's next larger unit, and the sacrifice is much larger and more elaborate (verses 11-15).

Next the Sacred Text turns to the sacrifices associated with special feast days, through which the year itself is sanctified through the observance of the annual calendar. The first chief feasts in this cycle are Passover and Unleavened Bread (verses 16-25) and Pentecost (verses 26-31).

In this chapter, then, we observe the original outline of the daily, weekly, and annual services of worship that the Christian calendar inherited from Judaism. We observe that the component which the Christian Church did not take over was the special observance of services for each month. Was this a reluctance born of Colossians 2:16?

The solar month, after all, is the most artificial and unnatural division of time, while the lunar month, being more closely tied to biological cycles, is the most open to nature worship, especially the fertility cults. The lunar cycle is literally a “menstrual” cycle (from mensis, the Latin for “month”). For instance, we observe this association in the ancient statuary of the Ephesian Diana with her twenty-eight breasts, one for each day of the lunar month.

Tuesday, July 28

Numbers 29: This chapter, continuing the theme of the sanctification of time, moves from spring to autumn.

In Israel's ancient calendar, as reflected in this and the previous chapter, we observe a concentration of focus on the spring and the autumn, the two “transitional” seasons, moving from cold to warm and from warm to cold, from darkness to light and from light to darkness. These seasons, then, serve as the annual representations of each day's morning and evening. The sundry feasts associated with these two seasons become a kind of annual Matins and Vespers.

The autumnal “seventh month” (Tishri) is the exact correspondent to our own word “September” (from the Latin septem, meaning “seven.”) In fact, the ancient month Tishri overlaps September and October
.
Clearly this designation “seventh month” reflects a period when Israel began its yearly cycle in the spring (Leviticus 23). (This is equally true, of course, with our Latin September.) Such an arrangement has not obtained for a long time. At least since the period of the New Testament the Jewish calendar has begun in the autumn with Rosh Hashanah. (In the liturgical calendar of Eastern Orthodox Christians the first day of the year is still September 1, called The Crown of the Year.)

Because this beginning of autumn falls on the first day of the seventh month (verse 1), its prescriptions specify that the appointed sacrifices be done in addition to the regular sacrifices designated for each month (verse 6).

The autumnal season goes on to include Yom Kippur, the Day of Atonement (verses 7-11), which always falls on the tenth day of Tishri (cf. Acts 27:9 – If, as we are justified in suspecting, this was the year A.D. 59, then the Day of Atonement was October 5.) Requiring an extra day of rest, this feast has a Sabbath quality.

Finally comes the Feast of Tabernacles, Sukkoth (verses 12-40), which lasts an entire week and requires more detailed instructions. This feast, always occurring in the seventh month, also has about it a kind of Sabbath character, in the sense that it involves a time of rest (verses 12,35).

During the course of the weeklong Feast of Tabernacles, there is a gradual diminishing of the number of bullocks sacrificed on each day. There are thirteen on the first day (verse 13), twelve on the second day (verse 17), eleven on the third day (verse 20), and so on (verses 23,26,29,32), finishing with only one bullock on the eighth day (verse 36). That is to say, this feast has about it a quality of “winding down,” as it were.

The Sacred Text specifies that these “set feasts” (verse 39) do not exhaust the potential for Israel's piety as represented in the appointed sacrifices. There could and should be further “freewill offering” as the fervor of the people would dictate.

Nor does this list of the feast days preclude the addition of others at later times, such as Purim during the Persian era and Hanukah during the Greek period.

Wednesday, July 29
Numbers 30: from the “freewill offerings” mentioned in the previous chapter (29:39) there is a reasonable transition to the vows treated in the present one.

The subject of vows would hardly require much legislation except for those occasions when a vow is impossible, unadvisable, or even harmful to keep. The present chapter considers such cases.

The major principle about vows is enunciated at once: Vows are morally binding (verse 1). More particularly, they are binding on a man, a male person (<'ish) who is free to observe it. A woman, however, who is normally under male authority, represents a different set of cases.

The first case is the unmarried woman who is still under paternal authority. She is bound by such vows as her father permits (verses 3-4). Otherwise not (verse 5).

Similarly, a married woman, living under the authority of a husband, must observe such vows as he approves (verses 6-7). Otherwise not (verse 8).

In the case of a widow or divorced woman, who are under no male authority, their vows are treated exactly like those of a man (verse 9), unless the husband had formerly determined otherwise (verses 10-15).

The general line of reasoning in this chapter is clear. Of their very nature, vows involve supererogation—-they are added on to the existing and presupposed order of things. Vows are to be observed, therefore, except in those cases where they man threaten the stability of that order. This line of reasoning has always guided the Church's own discipline of vows.

Thursday, July 30

Numbers 31: Except for a recent skirmish with the Amorites a few chapters ago, the armies of Israel have not been involved in much fighting for a long time. The recent oracles of Balaam, however, indicated that Israel is now a significant military power, and we know that its armies will soon cross the Jordan to conquer Canaan. Hence, it is time to review some of the rules for warfare, specifically as they pertain to prisoners and spoils. Such is the burden of the present chapter, in which, once again, a prompting narrative precedes the rules.

Moses, before his death, must oversee Israel's vengeance on the Midianites (verse 2). This task, which involves only a fraction of Israel's forces (verses 3-6), is explained by Numbers 25:18, where we learned of a collusion between Moab and Midian in the moral seduction of young Israelites. That collusion also explains why Balaam is one of the casualties of the present conflict (verse 8).

Israel's force of twelve thousand is accompanied by Phineas, the warlike priest who is charged with blowing the trumpet (verse 6).

The reported execution of every Midianite male (verse 7) should be understood with something less than mathematical exactness, since we know that the Midianites in the next generation will be stronger than ever (cf. Judges 6).

This successful exercise in warfare brought certain practical problems attendant on military victory, chiefly what to do with the surviving captives and their possessions (verses 9-12). Moses is upset that ANY enemies survived the battle (verse 14). After all, were not these the very women who had corrupted Israel's youth just a few chapters back (verse 16)? In the end he permits only the virgins to be spared, in order to become wives for the Israelites (verse 18).

The ensuing slaughter of the women and little boys rightly offends our moral sense. If it did not, we would be in sorry shape. The Bible’s report of this event also cautions us, however, against elevating our moral sense in an absolute way that would challenge the holiness of God. This incident of the Moabites and Midianites was an attack on the holiness of God, and therefore it involves something more than a merely human offense.

Although we correctly disapprove of killing women and children in the context of war, and more especially when the war is already over, our correct moral disapprobation is not the last word on the subject. Even when our moral judgment is correct, it is still inadequate to deal with the holiness and righteous judgments of God. In the execution of the Midianites we touch on the holiness of God. The holiness and righteousness of God so transcends the moral sense of man that its activity, as exemplified here, may strike man's moral sense in offensive ways. It is imperative that we ever bear in mind that God is holier than even the most moral of moral men. This is all to say that man's morality is one thing, and a very good thing, but the holiness and righteousness of God is infinitely more.

All killing of human beings, even when blood is justly shed in combat, defiles and requires cleansing (verses 19-20). This does not mean that the shedding of blood in these circumstances is morally wrong. On the contrary, the shedding of blood in a just war is morally correct and may even qualify as an act of charity. (What else but genuine charity for our countrymen, including our own families and immediate neighbors, would prompt us, at the extreme risk to our own lives, to kill their enemies in combat? This perception explains why the Christian Church has always provided blessings and other prayers for the armed forces of our nations.)

Still, such bloodshed falls infinitely short of the purity necessary for entering into God's presence in worship. This is the reason why a prescribed purification process is necessary. Indeed, this is another example in which the holiness of God stands infinitely above even the highest morality of man. (The Christian Church, therefore, has always placed certain canonical, sacramental restraints on those who take the enemy’s life in warfare, not because such shedding of blood is morally wrong, but because it does not adequately reflect the holiness and righteousness of God’s house.)
Following this narrative comes the rules for the disposition of persons and booty captured in war (verses 22-40). A percentage of these spoils was dedicated to divine service, very much like the fruits of labor (verses 41-54).

This chapter's final section displays the same concern for numerical exactness and tabulation that we have elsewhere seen in this book appropriately called Numbers.

Friday, July 31

Numbers 32: Life is soon to change for the Chosen People. They have never been sedentary, not even in Egypt, where they lived as semi-nomadic shepherds. How, however, they are to become farmers, the very type of people most tied to the land.

The differences between these two ways of life (exemplified as far back as Cain and Abel) are not reducible simply to their sources of their livelihood. The differences extend, rather, to the entire social structure, particularly government and systems of loyalty.

Not all the Israelites are equally keen on making this transition to agriculture and vine-growing, especially those tribes that have been most successful in raising herds These included, especially, the tribes of Reuben and Gad, which now announce their preference to remain in the good grazing land east of the Jordan (verses 1-5).

Moses' immediate objection to this suggestion concerns Israel's diminished military strength, if its forces were to be reduced by two tribes. He likens the request of these two tribes to the earlier incident when the twelve spies brought back a discouraging word from their inspection of the Holy Land. Indeed, this discouragement is the point of the comparison (verses 6-15; compare Judges 5:16-17).
The tribes of Gad and Reuben, by way of response, declare their intention, after securing their own families on land east of the Jordan, to remain with the invading force until all the Promised Land is conquered (verses 16-19).

Moses agrees to this arrangement (verses 20-24), and the two tribes repeatedly pledge their cooperation (verses 25-27,31-32). Moses announces the compromise to the rest of Israel's leadership (verses 28-30).

Half the tribe of Manasseh, whose recent significant growth we have already had occasion to observe, is added to these two tribes inheriting land east of the Jordan (verse 33), and the chapter ends with a list of new Israelite villages and strongholds in that territory (verses 34-42).

The tribes that settled in the land of Gilead will be subject to unusually difficult pressures in the centuries to follow, as various peoples east of the Jordan, but especially Syria, will look upon that rich grazing land with a covetous eye.

Friday, July 17

Numbers 18: God does not often address Aaron directly. Only here (verses 1,20) and Leviticus 10:8.

The instructions given in this chapter begin with the solemn charge to Aaron and his sons regarding their full responsibility for the sanctuary, the priesthood, and the worship (verses 2-8). These instructions answer the question about approaching the holy things, the question raised in the final verse of the previous chapter. The answer is perfectly clear here (verse 22).

Worship in the Bible is never really “safe.” The atmosphere of the Burning Bush tends to prevail, and biblical history records later incidents in which a needed reminder was given on the point (for instance 2 Samuel 6:6-7).
Of the various offerings reserved to the priestly family, some could be eaten by all ritually pure members of the family (verses 11-13), while some were reserved to the male members of the family (verses 9-10).

The metaphor “covenant of salt” (berith melah—verse 19) perhaps invokes the preservative qualities of salt, implying that the covenant is perpetual.

As all Israel was obliged to tithe to the tribe of Levi, the latter was to tithe to the Aaronic family (verses 26-28).

Saturday, July 18

Numbers 19: This chapter is divided between the rite of the Red Heifer and a set of prescriptions covering ritual purification.

The first is a curious ritual in which someone, not the priest, slays a spotless heifer that has never been yoked (verses 2-3), the priest sprinkling her blood in prescribed places in the Tabernacle. The heifer is then burned, again not by the priest.

All of those associated with this ritual must then be purified (verses 7-10), and because of this impurity the task is not given to Aaron, who must in no wise incur impurity, but his son Eleazar.

The ashes of the heifer are then preserved in a safe place in order to be added later to the lustral water used for purification (verse 9).

It is not clear how this unusual ritual was fitted into Israel's sacrificial system, and it sits here in Numbers without connection to the rest of that system. There is a brief reference to rite in Hebrews 9:13, where it is mentioned solely to contrast it with the redemptive efficacy of the Blood of Christ.

Other Christians, even from earliest times, have explored the symbolic possibilities of the Red Heifer. The earliest extant of these, an anonymous writer from the early second century, who assumed the name of St. Barnabas. He compared the Red Heifer to the red cord hung from the window of Rahab at Jericho and the scarlet wool used by the High Priest. He wrote:

“And what do you suppose is the type involved here, in that He ordered Israel those men in whom sins are rendered perfect should offer a heifer. And when they had killed it, to burn it, and that then the children should take its ashes and put them in a container, and that scarlet wool should be wrapped around a piece of wood—Observe the type of the Cross again, and the scarlet wool and the hyssop—and thus the children should sprinkle each person to cleanse them of sins? Understand what is said with such simplicity. The calf is Jesus. Those sinful men who offered it are those who presented Him for slaughter. These men are no more. No more the glory of sinners! Those who sprinkle are children, the very ones who preach to us forgiveness of sins and purification of the heart. To them He entrusted the proclamation of the Gospel. They are twelve in number, representing the tribes” (Pseudo-Barnabas 8.1-3).

Sunday, July 19

Numbers 20: This story of the drought parallels that in Exodus 17:1-7. This parallel is one of several that serve to frame the gift of the Torah on Mount Sinai.

The opening verse is somewhat repetitious of Numbers 13:26. Did Israel actually go to Kadesh twice? While this is possible, it does not seem likely. More probable, it would appear, is the suggestion that the events of the previous few chapters took place during the early years at Kadesh, whereas the events now about to be recorded happened toward the end of the lengthy time.

It was at Kadesh that Miriam died.

The desert of Zin, sparsely inhabited by wandering nomadic tribes, formed the southern border to the land of Edom, just south of Canaan (Numbers 34:3; Joshua 15:1). It included the Negev.

This new drought provokes more murmuring and a rebellious spirit (verses 2-5). If, as we have supposed, these events took place toward the end of Israel's stay at Kadesh, the people have been gone from Egypt nearly forty years. Still, it is the same old complaint: Why did Moses insist on taking everybody out of that lovely, wonderful land, Egypt, and bringing them out here in the desert to die of thirst? The whole fault is Moses and his brother Aaron.

Once again the prayer of these brothers (verse 6) is answered by God's instruction for remedying the problem (verses 7-8). The “rod” is not identified, but the proximity of this story to that in chapter 17 prompts us to identify it as the miraculous rod of Aaron. The “his” describing it can refer to either man.

Ancient Hebrew legend identified the “rock” in this passage with the rock in Exodus 17, a stone that actually traveled along with the people through the desert. The Apostle Paul identified that rock for us, remarking that “all drank the same spiritual drink. For they drank of that spiritual Rock that followed them, and that Rock was Christ” (1 Corinthians 10:4).

The Lord's sudden wrath against Moses and Aaron (verse 12) apparently responds to their lack of faith (“because you did not believe Me”), perhaps indicated by Moses' striking the rock twice (verse 11). In fact, the text does not even say that Moses was to strike the rock at all; he was to take the rod and “speak” to the rock. The text remains, anyway, a bit obscure, prompting various speculations from earliest times.

Having incurred the Lord's wrath, neither Moses nor Aaron will be with the Israelites when they enter the land of Canaan (verse 24). The site of this incident gave it the name Meriba, meaning “strife.”

It is worth remarking that Moses does not complain about the Lord’s judgment on his own ministry. He does not murmur at not being permitted to enter the Promised Land. Moses accepts the judgment of God, rather, and continues on his way, evidently aware of himself only as an unworthy servant.

Israel now seeks permission to travel through the territory of Edom, using the royal highway (verses 14-17), a traditional caravan road running north from Israel's present position. Edom declines the request, thus discounting its ancient blood ties to Israel (verses 18-21).

Israel then moves to Mount Hor, now commonly identified as Jebel el Madra (verse 22). It is on top of that mountain that Aaron, handing the priestly succession to his son Eleazar, dies and is buried. The people see Eleazar, clad in the robes of the high priest, descend from the mountain with Moses (verses 23-29).

Monday, July 20

Numbers 21: As we saw in the previous chapter, Israel is running out of choices. If they are ever to enter the Promised Land, it will be necessary to pass through someone's territory. Their neighbors also realize this, and they are becoming understandably anxious. Tensions are on the rise.

These tensions are especially acute toward the south of Canaan, the area adjacent to Israel's current encampment. A local leader in the area, “King Arad of Canaan,” decided to hit Israel with a peremptory strike, in order to discourage the newcomers from any thought of entering the Holy Land by the southern route (verses 1-2). Israel's counterattack was entirely successful (verse 3), but they still did not pursue that route. Arad's name is still borne by a large mound (or tell) in that region, east of Beersheba.

Continuing their journey, the Israelites move further east to skirt the territory of the uncooperative Edomites (verse 4). Their recent discouragement leads to the incident of the Brazen Serpent (verses 5-9). The “fiery” (saraph, the root of the word “Seraphim,” by the way) serpents are so called by reason of the painful inflammation caused by their bite.

It is curious that this incident took place near Punon (33:42), where there were large copper mines at the time (Late Bronze Age), and it is certainly worth remarking that the excavations at Lachish, to the west, uncovered a bronze image of a snake dating from exactly this period! The story in 2 Kings 18:4, however, prevents our getting carried away with respect to this archeological find.

Anyway, the true significance of the Brazen Serpent is
explained in Wisdom 16:5-10 and John 3:14-16.

Israel, having skirted eastward to avoid the territory of the Edomites (verses 10-11), turn northward again and come to Wadi Zered, which separated Edom from Moab. This wadi, known today as Wadi el-Hesa, meaning “stream of the willow,” flows westward into the Dead Sea. This is the furthest north that the whole people have traveled.
Then, continuing northward but remaining well to the east, in order to avoid the land of the Moabites, Israel eventually arrived at the Arnon River, a westward flowing tributary of the Jordan (verses 12-16). It was very clear, of course, that if they would enter the land of Canaan, they would eventually have to move westward and, inevitably, cross someone else's land, where their progress would be challenged. This they were not eager to do. Meanwhile, Israel crossed over to the north bank of the Arnon and stopped on the northeastern outskirts of Moab, the capital of which was Ar. Here they abode long enough to dig a well (verses 16-17).

The Arnon, which the Israelites have now crossed, was the northern border of Moab, separating the Moabites from the Amorites on the other side of the river. Israel, having no quarrel with the Amorites, seeks permission to travel westward through their territory (verses 21-22). The Amorite king, Sihon, meets their request with a show of force (verse 23), but Israel defeats him soundly and actually seizes a portion of the territory. Indeed, this victory gives Israel its first piece of real estate, but they are still east of the Jordan (verses 24,31-32).

This territory, thus conquered from the Amorite, had but recently belonged to the Moabites (verses 25-29). Years later the Amorites would demand the return of this land, and Jephthe would be obliged to remind them that it had never really belonged to them anyway (Judges 11:4-27).

Having conquered part of the Amorite kingdom, Israel continued its northward march, proceeding parallel to the Jordan River, always looking for a westward passage across the Jordan into Canaan. Thus they arrived at the land of Bashan, a mountainous region east of the Jordan and extending up to the Golan Heights and Mount Hermon. At the southern extremity of the land of Bashan stood Mount Nebo. Here the Israelites arrive and settle for a while (verses 33-35). They have already conquered some land east of the Jordan, which they will in due course annex to the Promised Land.

Tuesday, July 21

Numbers 22: Israel's hosts now encamp on “the plains of Moab,” that Moabite territory north of the Arnon, territory that Israel had recently seized from the Amorites.

From this position, looking directly west, they have before them a wide and impressive vista. On their immediate right are the brown hills of Bashan, slightly to the left of which the viewers are able to trace the long, serpentine, green valley of the Jordan, on the opposite bank of which, but slightly to the right, stands the city of Jericho.

The same viewers, turning a bit to their left but still looking ahead, gaze on the northern fringe of the Dead Sea, the lowest geological point on the earth. It is at this point that the Jordan empties into the Dead Sea. A few degrees further right, on a clear day they can behold outlines of Jerusalem. Humanly speaking, everything would seem ready for Israel's crossing of the Jordan, but other trials and an entire book of the Bible, Deuteronomy, sill precede that great event.

The first of these trials comes from the Moabites, whose settled territory Israel has assiduously refrained from entering. Moab sits to Israel's immediate south, exactly ninety degrees to the left of those gazing over the Jordan (verse 1).

The Moabites, having recently been defeated by the Amorites, are rather impressed by Israel, the newcomer now victorious over those same Amorites (verses 2-3). Balak, the Moabite king, eager for a bit of help from on high, seeks the spiritual assistance of Balaam, evidently a well-known diviner, urging him to come and curse Israel (verse 6). He had to send some distance to summons Balaam, who lived far, far north at Pethor (called “Pitru” in Assyrian records), a city on the west bank of the Euphrates, some twelve miles south of Carchemish (verse 5).

Balaam, divinely instructed on the point, declines the summons to come and curse Israel (verses 7-14). The second invitation, however, Balaam accepts, again at divine instruction (verses 15-21). Nonetheless, the Lord may have sensed some inner infidelity in Balaam, because He becomes angry and sends an angel with a sword to convey one last warning message to Balaam (verse 22). There ensues one of the most humorous stories in Holy Scripture, the encounter of the angel with Balaam's donkey, which seems to be the only talking animal in the Old Testament (verses 23-35). (When I first read this story to my little children many years ago, they immediately remarked on this fact, mentioning that the feature was something they more readily associated with fairy tales. Their remarks, I thought, showed considerable skill at literary criticism.)

Duly chastened by the encounter with the angel, and having acquired a new respect for his donkey, Balaam eventually arrives at Moab and is taken to a height from which he can gaze down on the assembled hosts of Israel (verses 36-41).

Wednesday, July 22

Numbers 23: These next two chapters contain four oracles of Balaam relative to Israel, each of which is set in a liturgical context, complete with the offering of sacrifice. The words of the oracles come from the Lord Himself (verses 5,16).

The first oracle (verses 8-10), called a “parable” (mashal—-verse 7), testifies to the futility of defying God, even by religious means, such as blessing and cursing. In mystic vision Balaam see that there is more going on than meets the eye in Israel's sudden appearance in this time and place. There is more happening than human force can control or explain. Even this pagan and unworthy prophet can discern that God's secret purposes are at work, such as only a fool would undertake to resist. Israel, says Balaam, is not like other nations (verse 9).

Needless to say, this is not what Balak had in mind to hear (verse 11), and the Moabite king, evidently of the opinion that a change of view might be helpful to his cause, takes Balaam up to a higher place and asks him to give it a go from a new angle, as it were, a fresher approach to the situation (verse 14).

From Balak's perspective, this new angle is no help at all. Indeed, it simply amplifies the former message, insisting that on the inevitability of God's purpose respecting Israel (verses 18-24).

Completely frustrated, Balak wants to cancel the whole performance (verse 25), but the show must go on, says Balaam (verse 26). It is too late to stop. All right, answers Balak, let's try to find a third angle from which to view the thing. So everyone prepared to go through the whole complicated process once again (verses 27-30).

We behold Balak's bewilderment, as he continues to imagine that the gist of prophecy consists in changing one's perspective and looking at things from a different angle. This frustrating exercise is also part of the Lord's plan, so He permits the charade to continue. This next message will be of a piece with the other two.

Thursday, July 23

Numbers 24: Unlike Balak, Balaam has the situation figured out. He knows that it is hopeless; Israel cannot be cursed. Balaam turns his back, therefore, and stares into the wilderness; he will not look at Israel (verse 1). Even there, however, and apparently in mystic trance (verse 4), he beholds the hosts of the Israelites, and the Holy Spirit of prophecy descends upon him.

This new “parable” (mashal—verse 3), the most solemn hitherto (verses 5-9), invokes the lion symbolism that Jacob had used of Judah (verse 9; Genesis 49:9) and the imagery of the water and trees of Paradise (verse 6; Genesis 2:9-10).

Barak, naturally quite exasperated by now (verse 10), orders Balaam to leave at once (verse 11). The latter, however, after defending himself (verses 12-14), has one more parable “for the road,” as it were, this one not sought by Balak. Indeed, this final prophecy is a multiple parable (mashal—verses 15,20,21,23), a proph
ecy in parts, in which Balaam announces what Moab and its neighbors may expect of the Israelites in the years to come.

The star rising from Jacob (verse 17) is, of course, the Star of David and refers to the Messianic line of David's sons. Just as it was the pagan prophet Balaam who first saw this star in mystic vision, it was the pagan sages that beheld its coming with their own eyes (Matthew 2:2,7,9,10).

The Christian interpretation of this star was recognized early: “And that He should rise as a star from the see of Abraham, Moses demonstrated ahead of time when he said, 'A star shall arise from Jacob, and a leader from Israel'; and another Scripture says, 'Behold a Man, the East is His name.' Accordingly, when a star arose in heaven at the time of His birth, as is recorded in the memoirs of the Apostles, the Magi from Arabia, recognizing the sign by this, came and adored Him” (Justin Martyr, The Dialogue With Trypho 106).

And again: “Therefore there is one and the same God, who was proclaimed by the prophets and announced by the Gospel; and His Son, who was of the fruit of David's body, that is, of the Virgin descended from David, and Emmanuel; whose star Balaam also prophesied, 'A star shall arise out of Jacob, and a leader shall arise in Israel.' But Matthew says that the Magi, coming from the east, exclaimed, 'For we have seen His star in the east and are come to adore Him”; and having been led by the star into the house of Jacob, to Emmanuel, they showed by the gifts that they offered Him just whom they were adoring” (Irenaeus of Lyons, Against the Heresies 3.9.2).

Friday, July 24

Numbers 25: After the previous three chapters about Balaam, and especially in view of the latter's enthusiastic prophecies regarding Israel's great expectations, we may have anticipated immediate success for the Chosen People.

Alas, however, a serious moral lapse is going to delay even further Israel's entrance into the Promised Land. More sadly this lapse seems to have befallen the younger people, the very ones who were to replace the generation that perished in the wilderness.

The incident in this chapter took place at Shittim, the Hebrew for “acacia groves,” a wooded area east of the Jordan. It was from there that Joshua would in due time send the spies to investigate the Holy Land (Joshua 2:1).

This moral lapse, following so suddenly on the oracles of Balaam and narrated immediately after his departure, is not related to Balaam in this text, but Balaam is certainly blamed for it a few chapters later: “Look, these women caused the children of Israel, through the counsel of Balaam, to trespass against the Lord in the incident of Peor, and there was a plague among the congregation of the Lord” (21:16). This moral depravity of Balaam is the only context in which he is remembered in the New Testament (2 Peter 2:5; Revelation 2:14).

Israel's failing in the present circumstance began as fornication with Moabite women and proceeded to idolatry with Moabite gods (verses 1-2). Indeed, in popular religion in this part of the world, the two were sometimes hard to keep separate.
The Lord's reaction, to the surprise of no one who had been reflecting on recent events, was not favorable (Verse 3). Since the idol worship and sexual immorality of the Moabites were typical of the atmosphere into which Israel would soon be immersed, it was important that the problem be dealt with decisively.

“Decisively,” in fact, is exactly the adverb we want here. Coming from the Latin de-cido, meaning “to cut off,” generally refers to the cutting off of discussion.

Sometimes, nonetheless, cutting off discussion is more rapidly reached by cutting off the heads of those who continue the discussion. This was the approach adopted in the present instance (verses 4-5).

The pursuit of righteousness in this matter was exemplified by Phineas, the son of Eleazar and grandson of Aaron. He was certainly a decisive sort of priest, with a pronounced tendency to executive decisions (a word also derived from de-cido, meaning “to cut off” (verses 7-8). Phineas reacted in response the sinful activity of a particularly flagrant nature (verse 6), undertaken by a couple who evidently thought that, because their families were well placed and well connected, they were exempt from the common discipline, the universal moral law, and the authority of the priesthood. Phineas “decided” (also from de-cido, “to cut off”) to clarify the situation for them (verses 14-15).

This reasonable and highly commendable action of Phineas determined that Israel's priestly succession would pass to and through his own sons (verses 10-13); 1 Chronicles 5:30-34); Psalms 106 [105]:30; Sirach 45:23-26; 1 Maccabees 2:26,54).

Saturday, July 25

Numbers 26: The census at the beginning of this book was taken forty years earlier, the counting of a population that by now is truly gone (verses 64-65). An entire generation has died in the wilderness, replaced by its children, and these already have children, and doubtless grandchildren, of their own. Therefore, it is time for a new census before Israel moves again, this time across the Jordan into the Promised Land.

Indeed, the direct purpose of the present census is to determine the demographic figures necessary for the coming distribution of the Promised Land. It is no accident that the census in this chapter is followed by an outline of inheritance laws in the next chapter. Israel is exactly at the point when its existence will soon pass from migratory to sedentary, and it is the proper context for matching needs with resources. This census will indicate the needs.

The census complete, the distribution of the Promised Land is to be done by a double method of casting lots and maintaining equity in the distribution. Since there is great disproportion in the size of the inheriting tribes, this process is bound to be both complicated and difficult (verses 52-56).

Comparing the figures in this census with the earlier one in Numbers, we observe that some of the tribes have declined slightly, a thing not surprising in view of the extreme rigors of the desert. For instance, respecting the tribe of Reuben, one may compare the figure in verse 7 with Numbers 1:21. The tribe of Simeon, we note, has diminished by more than half (verse 14; 1:23), a circumstance that may explain why Judah eventually absorbed this tribe. Other tribes have declined as well: Zebulon (verse 27; 1:31), Ephraim (verse 37; 1:33), Naphtali (50:1:43).

Other tribes have actually grown. For instance, the tribe of Judah, eventually the royal tribe and of which we have already discerned an increasing prominence, has grown slightly (verse 22; 1:27), as have Dan (verse 43; 1:39), Issachar (verse 25; 1:29), and Asher (verse 47; 1:41). Even more pronounced is the growth of Benjamin (verse 41; 1:37). Manasseh has almost doubled in size (verse 34; 1:35), a fact that will explain why half of this tribe will settle on the east side of the Jordan.

Unlike the earlier census (1:49), this one does count the Levites, but care is still taken to keep their census separate from that of the other tribes (verse 62; cf. 1:47).

Eventually there will be some discussion about female inheritance in families that produced no male heirs. For this reason, two cases are mentioned in the present chapter (verses 33,46).

Sunday, July 26

Numbers 27: This chapter is divided between two subjects, the ordinances governing inheritances in the Promised Land (verses 1-11) and the choice of a successor to replace Moses and lead God's People to the west side of the Jordan (verses 12-23). Each section begins with a short story.

In the story introducing the first topic, five sisters, the only offspring of a man who had died a natural death in the wilderness, approach Moses and Eleazar to complain that, if the current laws, limiting the inheritance of real estate, were to obtain, their own father's memory would be obliterated from Israel's history (verses 3-4).

The resolution of this problem, by which these five women may obtain the inheritance of their dead father, was not prompted by an impulse to treat men and women equally in the inheritance laws. Had this been the case, their own treatment would not be regarded as an exception. On the contrary, the sole interest governing this decision was the preservation of the memory of these sisters' father, not a concern for the women themselves. It would be widely off the mark, therefore, to interpret this account as some sort of early version of “women's rights.”

The resolution of this individual case also provided the context for further legal determinations respecting the inheritance of property. In every instance considered here, the governing principle of inheritance was proximity in consanguinity (verses 8-11). The goal sought in this legislation was to maintain real estate attached to the family. That is to say, the major preoccupation in these rules was to guarantee that a family's inheritance really meant something concrete. It meant solid, indestructible, landed property.

With regard to the five young ladies that presented the problem in the first place, we know from Joshua 17:3-6 that they really did inherit, in the name of their father, land west of the Jordan. At least two of these women left their names to cities in the Holy Land.

In this chapter's second story the Lord tells Moses to climb the Abarim Mountains, in order to see the land that he will never enter. These heights, which Mount Nebo, rise on the western slopes of the plateau of Moab (verses 12-14).

In response Moses seeks from the Lord someone to succeed himself (verses 16-17). In implementing the Lord's choice of Joshua, we may especially observe its reliance on the priesthood of Aaron's family (verses 19,21,22). Like many successions in the bible, it is transmitted by the laying-on of hands (verses 18,23). Still, this succession is not hereditary but charismatic (verse 20).

Even the successor of Moses, Joshua did not receive the former's full authority, much less his historical role. Strictly speaking, Moses was irreplaceable.

Monday, July 267

Numbers 28: Outside of any logical sequence that we can recognize, there follow two chapters of regulations on the sanctification of time: the day, the week, the month, the year.

The first rule has to do with the two daily offerings of yearling lambs, on the morning and the other at evening (verses 3-8; Exodus 29:38-42). These two daily sacrifices, the one to consecrate the passage of light into darkness, and the other to dedicate the passage of darkness into light, were Israel's minimum requirement of daily sacrificial worship. These times of daily sacrifice became, for all Jews everywhere, special times of prayer each day, known as “the hours of prayer” (cf. Acts 3:1; 10:2-3,30). In this way each day was to be sanctified.

This discipline and custom, detached from the temple sacrifices, passed over into the Christian Church as daily Vespers in the
evening and daily Matins (Orthros) in the morning. This discipline, handed down since the time of the Apostles have remained as the two daily Canonical Hours in traditional churches of both East and West. This same discipline was also approved by the Protestant Reformers of the sixteenth century. Martin Luther, for example, provided for daily services in church (a full hour in length for each!), complete with two daily sermons on the Bible, while in England Thomas Cranmer provided the format and content of those services in The Book of Common Prayer.

After the two daily sacrifices, the Sacred Text turns next to the sanctification of the week through the observance of the Sabbath (verses 9-10). The details of the daily sacrifice are repeated for this weekly sacrifice, indicating that on the Sabbath the daily sacrifice was simply doubled.

Then comes the sanctification of the month, at the beginning of each new moon. This is time's next larger unit, and the sacrifice is much larger and more elaborate (verses 11-15).

Next the Sacred Text turns to the sacrifices associated with special feast days, through which the year itself is sanctified through the observance of the annual calendar. The first chief feasts in this cycle are Passover and Unleavened Bread (verses 16-25) and Pentecost (verses 26-31).

In this chapter, then, we observe the original outline of the daily, weekly, and annual services of worship that the Christian calendar inherited from Judaism. We observe that the component which the Christian Church did not take over was the special observance of services for each month. Was this a reluctance born of Colossians 2:16?

The solar month, after all, is the most artificial and unnatural division of time, while the lunar month, being more closely tied to biological cycles, is the most open to nature worship, especially the fertility cults. The lunar cycle is literally a “menstrual” cycle (from mensis, the Latin for “month”). For instance, we observe this association in the ancient statuary of the Ephesian Diana with her twenty-eight breasts, one for each day of the lunar month.

Tuesday, July 28

Numbers 29: This chapter, continuing the theme of the sanctification of time, moves from spring to autumn.

In Israel's ancient calendar, as reflected in this and the previous chapter, we observe a concentration of focus on the spring and the autumn, the two “transitional” seasons, moving from cold to warm and from warm to cold, from darkness to light and from light to darkness. These seasons, then, serve as the annual representations of each day's morning and evening. The sundry feasts associated with these two seasons become, as it were, a kind of annual Matins and Vespers.

The autumnal “seventh month” (Tishri) is the correspondent to our own word “September” (from the Latin septem, meaning “seven.”) In fact, the ancient month Tishri overlaps our September and October.

Clearly this designation “seventh month” reflects a period when Israel began its yearly cycle in the spring (Leviticus 23). (This is equally true, of course, with our Latin September.) Such an arrangement has not obtained for a long time. At least since the period of the New Testament the Jewish calendar has begun in the autumn with Rosh Hashanah. (In the liturgical calendar of Eastern Orthodox Christians the first day of the year is still September 1, called The Crown of the Year.)

Because this beginning of autumn falls on the first day of the seventh month (verse 1), its prescriptions specify that the appointed sacrifices be done in addition to the regular sacrifices designated for each month (verse 6).

The autumnal season goes on to include Yom Kippur, the Day of Atonement (verses 7-11), which always falls on the tenth day of Tishri (cf. Acts 27:9 – If, as we are justified in suspecting, this was the year A.D. 59, then the Day of Atonement was October 5.) Requiring an extra day of rest, this feast has a Sabbath quality.

Finally comes the Feast of Tabernacles, Sukkoth (verses 12-40), which lasts an entire week and requires more detailed instructions. This feast, always occurring in the seventh month, also has about it a kind of Sabbath character, in the sense that it involves a time of rest (verses 12,35).

During the course of the weeklong Feast of Tabernacles, there is a gradual diminishing of the number of bullocks sacrificed on each day. There are thirteen on the first day (verse 13), twelve on the second day (verse 17), eleven on the third day (verse 20), and so on (verses 23,26,29,32), finishing with only one bullock on the eighth day (verse 36). That is to say, this feast has about it a quality of “winding down,” as it were.

The Sacred Text specifies that these “set feasts” (verse 39) do not exhaust the potential for Israel's piety as represented in the appointed sacrifices. There could and should be further “freewill offering” as the fervor of the people would dictate.

Nor does this list of the feast days preclude the addition of others at later times, such as Purim during the Persian era and Hanukah during the Greek period.

Wednesday, July 29

Numbers 30: from the “freewill offerings” mentioned in the previous chapter (29:39) there is a reasonable transition to the vows treated in the present one.

The subject of vows would hardly require much legislation except for those occasions when a vow is impossible, unadvisable, or even harmful to keep. The present chapter considers such cases.

The major principle about vows is enunciated at once: Vows are morally binding (verse 1). More particularly, they are binding on a man, a male person ('ish) who is free to observe it. A woman, however, who is normally under male authority, represents a different set of cases.

The first case is the unmarried woman who is still under paternal authority. She is bound by such vows as her father permits (verses 3-4). Otherwise, not (verse 5).

Similarly, a married woman, living under the authority of a husband, must observe such vows as he approves (verses 6-7). Otherwise not (verse 8).

In the case of a widow or divorced woman, who are under no male authority, their vows are treated exactly like those of a man (verse 9), unless the husband had formerly determined otherwise (verses 10-15).

The general line of reasoning in this chapter is clear. Of their very nature, vows involve supererogation—-they are added on to the existing and presupposed order of things. Vows are to be observed, therefore, except in those cases where they man threaten the stability of that order. This line of reasoning has always guided the Church's own discipline of vows.

Thursday, July 30

Numbers 31: Except for a recent skirmish with the Amorites a few chapters ago, the armies of Israel have not been involved in much fighting for a long time. The recent oracles of Balaam, however, indicated that Israel is now a significant military power, and we know that its armies will soon cross the Jordan to conquer Canaan. Hence, it is time to review some of the rules for warfare, specifically as they pertain to prisoners and spoils. Such is the burden of the present chapter, in which, once again, a prompting narrative precedes the rules.

Moses, before his death, must oversee Israel's vengeance on the Midianites (verse 2). This task, which involves only a fraction of Israel's forces (verses 3-6), is explained by Numbers 25:18, where we learned of a collusion between Moab and Midian in the moral seduction of young Israelites. That collusion also explains why Balaam is one of the casualties of the present conflict (verse 8).

Israel's force of twelve thousand is accompanied by Phineas, the warlike priest who is charged with blowing the trumpet (verse 6).

The reported execution of every Midianite male (verse 7) should be understood with something less th
an mathematical exactness, since we know that the Midianites in the next generation will be stronger than ever (cf. Judges 6).

This successful exercise in warfare brought certain practical problems attendant on military victory, chiefly what to do with the surviving captives and their possessions (verses 9-12). Moses is upset that ANY enemies survived the battle (verse 14). After all, were not these the very women who had corrupted Israel's youth just a few chapters back (verse 16)? In the end he permits only the virgins to be spared, in order to become wives for the Israelites (verse 18).

The ensuing slaughter of the women and little boys rightly offends our moral sense. If it did not, we would be in sorry shape. The Bible’s report of this event also cautions us, however, against elevating our moral sense in an absolute way that would challenge the holiness of God. This incident of the Moabites and Midianites was an attack on the holiness of God, and therefore it involves something more than a merely human offense. Although we correctly disapprove of killing women and children in the context of war, and more especially when the war is already over, our correct moral disapprobation is not the last word on the subject.

Even when our moral judgment is correct, it is still inadequate to deal with the holiness and righteous judgments of God. In the execution of the Midianites we touch on the holiness of God. The holiness and righteousness of God so transcends the moral sense of man that its activity, as exemplified here, may strike man's moral sense in offensive ways. It is imperative that we ever bear in mind that God is holier than even the most moral of moral men. This is all to say that man's morality is one thing—and a very good thing—but the holiness and righteousness of God is infinitely more.

All killing of human beings, even when blood is justly shed in combat, defiles and requires cleansing (verses 19-20). This does not mean that the shedding of blood in these circumstances is morally wrong. On the contrary, the shedding of blood in a just war is morally correct and may even qualify as an act of charity.

(What else but genuine charity for our countrymen, including our own families and immediate neighbors, would prompt us, at the extreme risk to our own lives, to kill enemies in combat? This perception explains why the Christian Church has always provided blessings and other prayers for the armed forces of our nations.)

Still, such bloodshed falls infinitely short of the purity necessary for entering into God's presence in worship. This is the reason why a prescribed purification process is necessary. Indeed, this is another example in which the holiness of God stands infinitely above even the highest morality of man.

(The Christian Church, therefore, has always placed certain canonical, sacramental restraints on those who take the enemy’s life in warfare, not because such shedding of blood is morally wrong, but because it does not adequately reflect the holiness and righteousness of God’s house.)
Following this narrative comes the rules for the disposition of persons and booty captured in war (verses 22-40). A percentage of these spoils was dedicated to divine service, very much like the fruits of labor (verses 41-54).

This chapter's final section displays the same concern for numerical exactness and tabulation that we have elsewhere seen in this book appropriately called Numbers.

Friday, July 31

Numbers 32: Life is soon to change for the Chosen People. They have never been sedentary, not even in Egypt, where they lived as semi-nomadic shepherds. How, however, they are to become farmers, the very type of people most tied to the land.

The differences between these two ways of life (exemplified as far back as Cain and Abel) are not reducible simply to their sources of their livelihood. The differences extend, rather, to the entire social structure, particularly government and systems of loyalty.

Not all the Israelites are equally keen on making this transition to agriculture and vine-growing, especially those tribes that have been most successful in raising herds These included, especially, the tribes of Reuben and Gad, which now announce their preference to remain in the good grazing land east of the Jordan (verses 1-5).

Moses' immediate objection to this suggestion concerns Israel's diminished military strength, if its forces were to be reduced by two tribes. He likens the request of these two tribes to the earlier incident when the twelve spies brought back a discouraging word from their inspection of the Holy Land. Indeed, this discouragement is the point of the comparison (verses 6-15; compare Judges 5:16-17).
The tribes of Gad and Reuben, by way of response, declare their intention, after securing their own families on land east of the Jordan, to remain with the invading force until all the Promised Land is conquered (verses 16-19).

Moses agrees to this arrangement (verses 20-24), and the two tribes repeatedly pledge their cooperation (verses 25-27,31-32). Moses announces the compromise to the rest of Israel's leadership (verses 28-30).

Half the tribe of Manasseh, whose recent significant growth we have already had occasion to observe, is added to these two tribes inheriting land east of the Jordan (verse 33), and the chapter ends with a list of new Israelite villages and strongholds in that territory (verses 34-42).

The tribes that settled in the land of Gilead will be subject to unusually difficult pressures in the centuries to follow, as various peoples east of the Jordan, but especially Syria, will look upon that rich grazing land with a covetous eye.

Friday, July 10

Numbers 11: Although it is tightly crafted as a coherent and complex narrative, this chapter is usefully broken into four parts: The first (verses 1-9) describes the people’s discontent as they wander in the desert. The object of the complaint, once again (cf. Exodus 16), is the food available in the desert. The second part (verses 10-23) tells of Moses’ complaint and the Lord’s response. The third part (verses 24-30) gives an account of the Spirit poured out on the appointed elders, and the fourth (verses 31-35) narrates how the Lord dealt with the people’s discontent in the beginning of the chapter.

Throughout this chapter, the reader senses—beyond the incidents themselves—that something more radical is amiss with the Israelites in the desert, as though the author were preparing him for worse developments yet to come. As soon as the people start out on their journey, a kind of rebellion sets in, the first of several, which will test the divine patience over the next forty years.

It would appear that some of the Israelites, having spent the previous eleven months encamped in the desert at the foot of Mount Sinai, were ready for a change of scenery when the time came to move. When, at the end of the previous chapter, they found themselves at Paran, a place arguably worse than where they had been before, these hopes were dashed. The ensuing “murmuring” that forced itself on the ears of both the Lord and Moses introduces the narrative in the present chapter.

This English word “murmur,” the mere pronunciation of which forces the mouth and throat to imitate the very sound of the thing, signifies a hopeless, powerless discontent that we correctly associate with the selfishness of childhood. It is an extension of a baby’s indistinct cry for the relief of its undefined needs, but in the present case it does contain one further element beyond the cry of the infant. It conveys a general note of blame. The murmurer is not only complaining; he is implicitly blaming somebody for his discontent. Worse still, the act of murmuring does not quite find its way to explicit words, much less clear ideas. As the sound itself indicates, there is something frustratingly inarticulate about murmuring. It is extremely difficult to get a “handle” on the thing.

Thus, murmuring is the most distressing of sounds. Even God cannot endure it (verse 1), and His burning wrath, earlier experienced by the Egyptians, will soon be felt by Israel. Only the prayer of Moses, once again acting as Israel’s intercessor, was able to spare the Chosen People (verses 2-3).

Whereas the people’s first complaint about food, in Exodus 16, brought them the blessing of the manna, in the present case the manna itself is the occasion for the murmuring! In other words, the people show themselves ungrateful for the divine (and miraculous!) provision. Hence, the present chapter will end badly for the Israelites.

The people’s complaint, which brings forth the two responses that hold our chapter together, had to do with their unvarying diet of manna, the miraculous food that had sustained them at every meal, everyday, for a full eleven months. Some of the folks hankered after a more varied fare (verse 5).

When the people complain to Moses, Moses complains to God (verses 11-15). His prayer is truly desperate: He would rather die than continue to carry the burden of 600,000 souls! Moses feels squeezed from all directions, because everything seems to depend of him. No matter what goes wrong, it immediately becomes his problem. Using an ironical metaphor he speaks of nursing the people, as though he were responsible for feeding 600,000 screaming infants.

There are two problems in this chapter: the people’s problem and Moses’ problem. The Lord will deal with Moses’ problem first, by instituting the ministry of the Judges (verses 16-17). These seventy are drawn from the recognized elders of Israel and will participate in the same Spirit that fills Moses.

This new ministry is not identical with the administrative service found in Exodus 18:25-26. It is true charismatic leadership, pertaining to spiritual matters. Bearing the people’s burdens with Moses, these men become the antecedents of those charismatic Judges who will appear in the book called by that name.

Once Moses’ problem is addressed, the Lord turns to the people’s problem (verses 18-23). They will eat fresh meat everyday for a whole month, until it starts come out of their noses (verses 19-20). They will begin to hate this diet! Moses can hardly believe his ears at this prediction (verses 21-22), but the Lord warns him, “You’ll see!” (verse 23)

The third section of this chapter (verses 24-30) descries the outpouring of the Spirit on the seventy appointed elders. The presence of the Spirit on these men is apparently discerned in their ecstatic behavior, designated here as “prophesying.” It is difficult to identify this behavior more accurately, nor does this matter form a concern for the author. It suffices to say that the Israelites were able to perceive in these men some quality that enabled them to speak for God. The qualifying phenomenon is described as temporary (verse 25), but the status of the chosen elders is permanent.

The outpouring of the Spirit was not limited to the men actually assembled at the Tabernacle. Two others, though designated to be included in that group, failed to appear in the assembly as appointed. It happened, however, that this failure made no difference to their participation in the Spirit (verse 26).

This extended participation in the Spirit young Joshua, the understudy of Moses (verse 28), who perhaps feared that things were rather getting out of hand—individuals were off somewhere else in the camp, engaged in ecstatic phenomena.

Throughout the Bible’s treatment of him, Joshua is invariably portrayed as a man of consummate devotion, earnestness, and zeal. It may be the case that some perceived lack of attention to proper “form” in the present context—the failure of Eldad and Medad to be where they were supposed to be—represented for Joshua a kind of structural failure, the sort of thing that suggests disorder and chaos. He expected the Spirit to be conferred in the proper contextual setting, not haphazardly, as it were, and outside of divinely established protocol. He was uncomfortable in a situation not governed by recognizable form.

We note that the Bible does not criticize Joshua for this concern, inasmuch as it represented a godly caution and proper respect for appointed structures.

Moses, however, took Joshua’s reaction as overly cautious in the present case. In the view of Moses, there simply could not be an excess in God’s gift of the Spirit (verse 29). He wished that all God’s people were so richly endowed. Christian theology regards this wish of Moses as fulfilled on Pentecost morning, when all those gathered in the upper room were filled with the Holy Spirit.

This response of Moses to the concern of Joshua should be understood as an insistence that no leader of God’s people must be jealous of those with whom the Lord deigns to share the Holy Spirit.

The fourth and closing part of this chapter (verses 31-35) describes the miraculous catch of quail, the Lord’s answer to the people’s complaint about their excessively bland diet.

Several points should be made about these five verses.

First, the recurrence of the word ruah, translated here as “wind.” When this chapter began, there were two problems, we recall: a problem about food and a problem about leadership. Now we see that the Lord has dealt with both problems the same way—namely, through the ruah. In the first case, the problem of leadership, the Lord sent the ruah on the seventy elders (verses 17,25,26,29). Now the ruah brings in the birds to satisfy the people’s craving (verse 31). Because we are obliged to translate the w
ord ruah very differently in the two places, it would be easy not to notice that the same word is used in each instance. Indeed, in both cases, the ruah is ascribed to “the Lord.”

This is the second time that the people have been fed in the desert from a large flock of quail (cf. Exodus 16:13).

This quail is apparently the coturnix vulgaris known to ornithology. This bird migrates from eastern Europe and western Asia to north Africa for the warmer climate, but against a southerly wind it quickly grows weary and is blown off-course to fall in the desert.

This phenomenon, known even today, was described by Aristotle. He observed that some birds “migrate in August, some in September. They are always fatter when they migrate from cold countries, as the quail [ortychs] is fatter in the autumn than in the spring . . . The quails, when the begin their flight, if the weather is fine and the wind from the north, go in pairs and have a successful flight. If the wind is from the south, it goes very hard with them, and their flight is slow, for this wind is very moist and heavy. . . . They fly badly, on account of their weight, for their body is large. They therefore make a noise as they fly, because it is laborious for them” (Aristotle, De Historia Animalium 8.14.4-5).

This is what we find here in Numbers. The very exhausted quails, who have flown south from Greece and Asia Minor, are described as flying at an altitude of only two cubits, between six and seven feet off the ground. They are easily caught in nets or even by hand.

A single person is said to catch 10 homers of them—about 38 bushels—in just two days. That is a lot of meat, enough to satisfy the Lord’s prediction that they would eat meat for a whole month.

The Israelites spread the carcasses of the birds on the sand, to be dried out by the sun. The birds were eaten raw, not cooked—a sort of quail jerky. Herodotus describes this practice in Egypt: “Quails and ducks and small birds are salted and eaten raw” (Herodotus 2.77).

As it happened, however, many Israelites became sick. The reference to a “plague” may indicate food poisoning. Whatever the cause, many of the people died, so that they named the place Kibroth Hattaavah, “graves of craving.” As is the case so often in the desert, the place has never been identified by archeologists.

The very name of the place, however, indicates Israel’s interpretation of the event: They saw this plague as punishment for their own cravings and the murmuring with which they complained to God. God gave them, in fact, exactly what they asked for. It was yet another example of those “answered prayers,” as they were called by St. Teresa of Avila and Truman Capote: Prayers we should not have made, because they were made without regard to doing God’s will. Such are prayers made in selfishness and the impulse to use God for our own ends, without regard to His will. It is no blessing when God answers such prayers.

Saturday, July 11

Numbers 12: Besides being unbearable, murmuring is contagious. After a year or so in the desert, Israel’s psychological state was already becoming critical.

The problem for Moses this time is more domestic. His brother and sister, Aaron and Miriam, conceived a dislike for their African sister-in-law, Zipporah the Midianite (verse 1), and they vented their displeasure on Moses himself.

It is interesting to speculate on the source of the problem. For example, we know that Moses was very much under the counsel of Reul (or Hobab), his father-in-law and the father of Zipporah, and perhaps jealousies arose in that respect. Whatever the initial point of contention, however, it is clear that the grievance of Aaron and Miriam was directed at Moses himself.

Specifically the two began to wonder our loud whether they weren’t at least as important as Moses himself (verse 2). Aaron, after all, not Moses, was the high priest, and Miriam was a recognized prophetess (Exodus 20:15), so why should Moses have all the authority?

Moses, being a meek man (verse 3; Exodus 3:11; 4:10-13), was disposed to overlook the affront, but the Lord was not. For the pair of complainers He had a thing or two to say relative to the special position and authority of Moses as the chosen intimate of the divine counsels (verses 6-8).

Miriam, in addition, was struck with leprosy, which perhaps suggests that she had been the original instigator of the problem (verse 10). From this affliction she was delivered through the intercession of Moses (verses 13-15).

This entire scene—in which the Lord vindicates His righteous servant, putting to confusion those who unjustly blame him, and restoring the accusers themselves through the intercession of the righteous man—puts the reader in mind of the very similar story in the Book of Job.

Sunday, July 12

Numbers 13: Having advanced in the direction of the Promised Land, Israel is now ready to inspect that area and assess its prospects. Such reconnoitering is essentially a military exercise, to determine the strengths, assets, and positions of those forces that an invading army must face (verses 18-19). As in so many examples of martial reconnoitering, however, Israel’s spies returned with a great deal of information beyond that of purely military interest (verse 20). (One recalls that Alexander the Great took with him, on his vast expedition to the east, a large retinue of botanists, zoologists, cartologists, and other scientists, so that none of information acquired during the journey would be lost to posterity.)

This list of the twelve spies, one from each tribe (verses 4-15), calls them nasi’im, but the word as used here does not, as in earlier chapters, mean the ruling heads of the tribes. On the contrary, these are younger, more agile men with skills specific to their purpose.

These skills did not, alas, include godly wisdom in any great measure, and because of the unsound counsel given by this group, the list of their names is not exactly one of honor. The two exceptions are Joshua of Ephraim and Caleb of Judah.

Going out during the summer grape harvest (verse 20), the spies went over the desert of Zin, southwest of the Dead Sea. They traveled all the way north to the Beqa’ Valley in the region of Phoenicia (verse 21). Along that way, they came to Hebron, some twenty miles south of Jerusalem (verse 22). The author refers to the construction of this ancient city in the late 18th century BC.

Part of this espionage report consisted of the impressive grapes and other fruits representative of the land’s notable fertility (verses 23-27). This part of their report was very positive.

The spies’ assessment of the military situation, nonetheless, was downright dismal. They referred to the gigantic Anakim whom history had long associated with the place and who had created considerable problems even for Egypt at an earlier period (verse 28). They also listed other peoples who would resist invasion (verse 29), thoroughly discouraging the Israelites from attempting it (verses 31-33; Deuteronomy 2:11,20; 3:11 1 Samuel 17:11).

The obvious exaggerations about the physical size of the Canaanites undoubtedly came from the height of their walled cities, which the spies could only imagine as having been constructed by giants. Modern archeology has shown that some of these city walls were, in fact, up to fifty feet high and fifteen feet thick, posing obstacles that would be formidable to an untrained force inexperienced in siege works. (The presumption that high walls mean tall inhabitants was also made by the Greeks, referring to the walls of the Cyclops.)
The only bright spot was the minority report of Caleb (verse 30).

Monday, July 13

Numbers 14: The theme of rebellion continues. Starting with the murmuring in chapter 11 and the defiance of Aaron and Miriam in chapter 12, rebellion now reaches a definitive high point in the present chapter, when the Israelites determine to be guided by the “majority report” of the spies in chapter 12. They vote not to enter the Holy Land!

We recall that Israel undertook their flight from Egypt, not for the purpose of wandering in the wilderness, but in order to migrate to the Land of Promise. In this refusal to enter the Promised Land, therefore, the Israelites were thwarting the intent of the Exodus itself.

Their big mistake, of course, was to vote on the matter. When the Lord delivered Israel from Egypt, He gave no directives respecting a popular vote. The Exodus He did not intend to be an exercise in democratic government. The Lord cares no more for rule by majority vote than he does for any other expression of sinful disobedience.

The rebellion in the present chapter, therefore, is decisive. It marks Israel’s major and definitive apostasy. Israel’s entire current generation of adults, save on Joshua and Caleb (verses 6,24,30), will never see the Promised Land. They will all die and be interred in the desert. Indeed, only the intercession of Moses restrains the Lord from destroying all of them immediately and on the spot (verses 111-20).

The gravity of the offense here is linked to Israel’s experience of God’s power up till now. If, after so many “signs,” so many manifestations of His might and His mercy, Israel still remains unbelieving, then the offense is simply too much, and a chance for repentance is denied (verses 11,22-23,40-45; Hebrews 6:3-6).

Up to this point Israel has marched with a purpose. No more. From now on they will simply march, march, march—wandering aimlessly in the wilderness until death has blamed its proper and appointed toll (verses 29,35,38). It becomes literally a death march; they will walk themselves to death! This will require forty years, until the entire current generation has perished (verse 33).

The ten men responsible for the espionage “majority report” die immediately (verses 36-37).

Tuesday, July 14

Numbers 15: More legislation relative to sacrifice interrupts the narrative flow of Numbers once again. Since the rules in this chapter seem applicable only to those who will actually live in the Holy Land (verse 2), and since the previous chapter made it clear that none of the current generation will do so, this comment places an irony in the context of the material.

Perhaps the following consideration may explain and warrant this irony: After the stern condemnation at the end of the previous chapter, especially its declaration that none of the living adults would enter the Promise Land, there was some danger that the Promised Land would be forgotten altogether. Since no living adult would ever see it, why should they even think about it? At this point, however, the serene voice of God announces, “When you come into the land . . . which I will give you . . .” That is to say, the Promised Land still lies infallibly in your future.

Indeed, this sustained promise of the Land, a promise now applicable solely to Israel's next generation, must have instructed the Israelites to think more seriously about that rising generation. It would discourage them from indulging the “right now” aspect of their behavior and their expectations. The nature of the promise, that is to say, would have a “maturing” effect on their minds.
The laws given here contain material on animal sacrifice, grain sacrifice, and the libation of wine (verses 3-21). These regulations are complementary to the material in Leviticus 1-3.

This chapter clearly distinguishes between sins of ignorance and inadvertence, for which atonement is readily made (verses 22-29), and deliberate sins of malice (verses 30-31). This distinction is followed by an example that illustrates what is meant by a deliberate sin (verses 32-36).

The wearing of special tassels and ribbons on the clothing served to remind the Israelites of God's Law (verses 38-40; Matthew 9:20). It would seem that God's People always need tangible, visible reminders of their duty.

Wednesday, July 15

Numbers 16: Because of the several recent crises, including God's judgment that no adults then alive would enter the Promised Land, it is perhaps not surprising that there is ongoing ill will and dissent among the Israelites, the sorts of feelings spawned by despair.

The present chapter records two rebellions combined into a single narrative, a combination perhaps caused by their happening close together. (This is often the case in the history of rebellions.) Close attention to the text, however, permits the reader to distinguish between them.

The rebellion of Korah, a Levite (chiefly verses 1-11,16-24,27,35-43; Jude 11), was apparently directed against Aaron (verses 9-11) and involved the demand that the privileges of the priesthood be extended to all the sons of Levi. The rebellion of the Reubenites, Dathan and Abiram (1,12-15,25-34), appears to have been aimed more directly at the leadership of Moses.

Both of these rebellions were spawned of a democratic, leveling impulse, impatient of hierarchical authority derived directly from God. This is clearest in the remarks of Korah, who appealed explicitly to “the priesthood of all believers” (Exodus 19:6) as a political principle to deny the ranking authority of the Aaronic priesthood: “You take too much upon yourselves, for all the congregation is holy, every one of them, and the Lord is among them. Why then do you exalt yourselves above the assembly of the Lord?"

To Korah and the rebellious Levites Moses proposes a trial by ordeal, as it were (verses 5-7,16-18), which proved a disaster for the rebels (verse 35). Indeed, the censers used by these rebellious Levites were beaten into a bonze memorial, to warn whoever in the future might be tempted to pursue their example (verses 36-43).
Such a warning was needed, even if it has not always been heeded. The Christian Church has often been afflicted with such democratizing rebellions against priestly authority. A rather early example occurred in the church at Corinth toward the end of the first century, when the local congregation arose and attempted to depose the ministers that the Apostles had set over them. The congregation was addressed by Clement, the third bishop of Rome, in a letter that the early Christians were careful to preserve. It reads, in part: “Surely it is well for a man to confess his sins rather than harden his heart as the hearts of those who were hardened who rebelled against Moses the servant of God. Their condemnation was made plain. For they went down to Hell alive, and death was their shepherd” (Clement of Rome, To the Corinthians 51.3-4).

However it may have been related to the rebellion of Korah, the insurrection of the Reubenites seems to have been of a somewhat different complexion. Dathan and Abiram appreciated the gravity of their plight. They fully realized that they were already doomed, in fact, to perish in the wilderness. In spite of Moses' earlier pledge to take them all to the Promised Land, it was now clear that they would all die in the desert (verses 12-14). Their rebellion, on the other hand, far from removing their doom, only rendered it immediate (verses 23-34). In this sense, there was something suicidal about it.

This chapter is the only place in Holy Scripture where a sacrifice is said to assuage the “wrath of the Lord.” Indeed, this is the kind of language that the Bible tends strictly to avoid. It often speaks of God's wrath, and it frequently prescribes the offering of sacrifice, but the Bible uses great restraint to keep the two things separate, lest it ever be thought that the offering of sacrifice has something to do with appeasing the anger of God. This is, most emphatically, NOT a biblical idea. It is very significant, therefore, that in the present text, what propitiates the anger of God is not the shedding of sacrificial blood, but an offering of incense, which is a symbol of prayer (verses 44-50). That is to say, prayer is persuasive, as we saw in the case of Moses on Mount Sinai, persuading the Lord not to destroy Israel in the incident of the Golden Calf.

Thursday, July 16

Numbers 17: This short chapter covers the aftermath of the recent twofold revolt. The purpose of the ordeal and miracle of the twelve rods was to determine, in as clear a way as possible, exactly where the authority in Israel was to be recognized. In short there was to be No More Murmuring (verses 5,10)!

The Hebrew word for rod in this chapter is matteh, which in fact means both “staff” and “tribe.” On the rod of Aaron was to be inscribed the name of Aaron himself (verse 3). Aaron's is, of course, had the advantage of experience, if the expression is allowed. That is to say, we readers already know the sorts of things that Aaron's rod can do, such as turn into a snake and eat up the other rods (Exodus 7:9-15). We are not surprised by the outcome of the ordeal. The other rods in this story never stood a chance.

The overnight blossoming of an almond tress was not uncommon, and in fact Jeremiah (1:12) would later take it as symbolic of the swiftness of the divine judgment. The miracle in this chapter, of course, is that we are not talking about an almond tree, but a dead piece of wood. Anyway, the miracle produced in the Israelites a sudden change of attitude (verses 12-13).

At least at some periods of Israel's history, Aaron's rod was preserved inside of the Ark of the Covenant itself (Hebrews 9:4). As it does in the present chapter, and as the bronze plates do in the previous chapter, the rod would remind future generations of Israelites of the limits of God's tolerance about challenges to the authority of the altar and those who served thereat.

Now that the primacy of Aaron's household has been established so clearly, the next chapter will contain more rules for the Aaronic priesthood.

Friday, July 17

Numbers 18: God does not often address Aaron directly. Only here (verses 1,20) and Leviticus 10:8.

The instructions given in this chapter begin with the solemn charge to Aaron and his sons regarding their full responsibility for the sanctuary, the priesthood, and the worship (verses 2-8). These instructions answer the question about approaching the holy things, the question raised in the final verse of the previous chapter. The answer is perfectly clear here (verse 22).

Worship in the Bible is never really “safe.” The atmosphere of the Burning Bush tends to prevail, and biblical history records later incidents in which a needed reminder was given on the point (for instance 2 Samuel 6:6-7).
Of the various offerings reserved to the priestly family, some could be eaten by all ritually pure members of the family (verses 11-13), while some were reserved to the male members of the family (verses 9-10).

The metaphor “covenant of salt” (berith melah-verse 19) perhaps invokes the preservative qualities of salt, implying that the covenant is perpetual.

As all Israel was obliged to tithe to the tribe of Levi, the latter was to tithe to the Aaronic family (verses 26-28).

Friday, July 3

Numbers 4: The duties of the Levitical ministry were apportioned among their three clans. The tasks in this chapter all had to do with carrying the Tabernacle and its myriad instruments and appointment from place to place. Each time the Israelites moved away, the Tabernacle had to be disassembled and packed up, and each time Israel arrived at a new place, it was necessary to reassemble everything again.

Accordingly, this chapter breaks into four sections. The first three treat of the duties of the three Levitical families, the heirs of Levi’s three sons: Kohath (verses 1-20), Gershon (verses 21-28), and Merari (verses 29-33). The fourth section (verses 34-49) is a summary of the Levitical census.

In the distribution of the labor, the first place is given to the Kohathites, the descendents of Levi's second son (Exodus 6:16). The primacy of this clan was surely determined by the fact that Amram, the father of Moses and Aaron, belonged to it (Exodus 6:18,20), so it was more closely related to the priestly family itself (verses 2-4).
The task of the Kohathites was to carry the sacred vessels associated immediately with the ritual of the Tabernacle. Even this, however, they were unable to do until everything had been properly wrapped and prepared by the priests themselves, according to a very detailed prescription (verses 5-14). Only under the careful supervision of Eleazar, the older of Aaron's two remaining sons, could the Kohathites presume to carry this great burden (verse 15).

The task of the sons of Kohath, then, was plain and uncomplicated: They were simply to bear the burden of Israel’s holiness, embodied in the tabernacle and its contents. Theirs was a patient labor. Indeed, they were explicitly prohibited from looking at the things they carried on their shoulders; in addition, all these things were to be covered over and concealed from view.

The Kohathites thus represent all of those human souls who bear through history the mystery of holiness that abides among the People of God. Such saints are keenly aware of the mystery they carry, even though they may spend their lives without the leisure or opportunity to gaze upon the beauty they bear. These myriad Kohathites, who carry through their lives the hidden core of God’s presence among us, form the very backbone of Christian history. Without them, in fact, there would be no Christian history, precisely because they are the ones who carry it. Without the children of Kohath, the People of God would long ago have perished in the wilderness.

The next place in the Levitical order was held by the Gershonites (verses 21-28), the descendants of Levi's eldest son, who were charged with carrying the various drapes, veils, and hangings of the Tabernacle. Ithamar, Aaron’s younger son, supervised this work.

The clan of Merari, Levi's youngest son, was to carry the more solid parts of the Tabernacle, the sections made of wood and metal (verses 29-33). This task was also to be supervised by Ithamar.

In the instructions given to the sons of Gershon and Merari, we see nothing of the sense of caution directed to the Kohathites. The reason for this is obvious: The Gershonites and Merarites carry the various components of the Tabernacle itself, not the items concealed within. That is to say, the burdens carried by these two families are not dangerous to look upon; they do not represent the sacred mysteries but are simply the coverings of those mysteries. Consequently, the vocations of these two tribes are not thought of as especially “dangerous,” whereas the vocation of the Kohathites is constantly surrounded with peril.

This consideration indicates, I believe, the symbolism of the vocation of the Gershonites and Merarites: Inasmuch as it stands a further step removed from proximity to what is intrinsically holy, it is safer in the sense of more secular, as it were, and less spiritual. In other words, it runs a smaller spiritual risk.

Another example of vocations may illustrate this difference: If we think of a road builder, it is obvious that his calling is spiritually less dangerous than that of a poet or musical composer. The road builder merely lays down a path over which men and their animals will walk. What he accomplishes may be—and sometimes will be—of great significance, but it does not directly touch the human soul. The musical composer and the poet, on the other hand, directly and immediately touch the human soul. They give structure to the way human beings look at the world, thus conferring spiritual shape on those who listen to their poetry and music.

The same distinction is discernible if we compare the vocations of the teacher and the longshoreman. The teacher may be damned forever to hell for offenses a longshoreman will never be in a position to commit.

In summary, the more “spiritual” a person’s calling, the greater spiritual risk he runs. By such a standard, the most dangerous vocations in the world are those of governing and pastoring. This is why ancient thinkers, from the likes of Cicero and St. John Chrysostom, were careful to caution those who would either govern or pastor.

After the duties of each of the Levitical clans are listed, the fourth and final part of this chapter (verses 34-49) gives the census of each clan and the total of all of them.

Saturday, July 4

Numbers 5: These next two chapters give various prescriptions partly repetitious of the Holiness Code in Leviticus 17-26.

The present chapter has three parts: First, statutes about exclusion (verses 1-4); second, rules for confession and restitution (verses 5-10); third, a provision for trial by ordeal (verses 11-31).

First, then, there are statutes about exclusion. In accord with this book's concern with proportion and due order, this section begins with the “cleanliness” of the camp, the marked term referent to both hygienic and religious considerations (verses 2-4). These prescribed expulsions from the camp did not involve a removal of citizenship; those affected by it did not cease to be members of the congregation. Their condition, nonetheless, and a solicitude for the welfare of the congregation required that they should be treated in a special way that involved a measure of exclusion.

The holiness and wellbeing of God's People in this world have ever required exclusionary canons of this sort, analogous to the laws of quarantine by which other societies are protected from harm. The notion of “infection” covers a wide application of pathologies, whether moral, psychological, intellectual, or physical (Cf. 1 Corinthians 5:7-13; 2 Corinthians 6:16-18; Revelation 21:27). As long as we are in this world, healthy societies will necessarily resort to censure and exclusion from time to time.

Much as there are isolation units in hospitals, the Church has canons and pastoral provisions to safeguard Her general membership from the toxic influences of those who violate charity, truth, justice, and good order. Pastors should take these provisions very seriously. I confess to having seen a number of examples of both parishes and monasteries where life became nearly unbearable by reason of the pastor’s failure to impose the discipline necessary to curtail such abuses.

A pastor’s first responsibility is discernment, and the most elementary form of pastoral discernment is the ability to distinguish between a sheep and a wolf. It is sad to say—but also honest—that many a pastor who went out to retrieve what he understood to be a lost sheep, retuned to the flock carrying a wolf on his shoulders.

The second part of this chapter (verses 5-10) provides the rules for repentance and restoration that follow those of exclusion (verses 5-10). We observe that such repentance and restoration also involve an open, audible confession of the offense (verse 7), a confession explicit enough to determine the size of the restitution and nature of the sacrifice offered for its atonement. This confession is official, in the sense that it is received by the established priesthood. Even in the Old Testament, therefore, the priest served as a Father Confessor.

In both the Old Testament and the New, the priest represents the qahal, the ekklesia, God’s people in assembly. The priest, in both covenants, is the man designated to receive the repentance of the sinner on behalf of the Church.

Reconciliation with the Church—whether in the Old Testament or the New—is an integral part of one’s reconciliation with God. Indeed, our Lord told us not to bring our offerings to Him until we are reconciled to one another. No one can bypass the Church in order to “go directly to God,” because God did not set it up that way. He conferred on the Church, and more specifically the priestly ministry of the Church, the authority to bind and loose.

This is the reason that an explicit confession of one’s sins is required of the sinner, in both the Old Testament and the New (cf. 1 John 1:9). If a person imagines he will be forgiven his sins without that confessio
n (or, at least, endeavoring to make that confession), he has a theology of sin and atonement very different from that of the Bible.

Third, and perhaps most bewildering to the modern mind, there is a provision for trial by ordeal (verses 11-31). A certain affinity of symbolism may be the connecting line between the foregoing rules of restitution and these ensuing regulations for trial by ordeal.

Once again the nature of the alleged offense is made known to the priest (verse 15). Indeed, the ritual itself required the use of “holy water” (mayim qedoshim—verse 17), which was mixed with the very dust from the floor of the sanctuary. The sanctuary, as is clear, sanctified everything that it contained, including the dust.

In context, it seems, God Himself was thought to punish the woman that failed this test, evidently by the curse of barrenness (verses 27-28). There is no indication that she was stoned to death, the usual punishment for adultery proven in court (Leviticus 20:10).

This biblical story expressed a persuasion of the validity of trial by ordeal. Attested as early as Hammurabi’s Code and the Code of Ur-Nummu, this kind of trial—at least implicitly—invoked divine intervention to establish someone’s guilt or innocence. Apart from the explicit warrant conveyed in the present biblical text, such a trial could easily become a tempting of God (cf. Matthew 4:6-7).

For this reason we find efforts to resist it at various times in Christian history. For instance, among the Franks it was abolished by Louis the Pious in 829. Two forms of it—trials by fire and water—were prohibited by the Fourth Lateran Council in 1215. Nonetheless, we still find instances of its application as recently as the early 18th century. Modern readers are familiar with this practice through popular novels, like Jo Beverley’s Lord of Midnight.

There is a sense, I think, in which the present text lies at the very fringes of biblical religion. In the narrative parts of Holy Scripture, there is no evidence that the ritual prescribed here was much in use. It should probably be regarded as having no sustained significance in biblical theology. We are likely correct in lumping it with the early Christian practice of baptism for the dead (1 Corinthians 15:29).

We may add that even this ritual was not without its interest in quantity and proportion. There is mention of a measuring device, the ephah (verse 15), which seems to have contained about seven pints.

Sunday, July 5

Numbers 6: This chapter, the second of two containing regulations pertinent to holiness, is made up of two parts of unequal length. The first part is a collection of laws pertaining to a special consecratory vow (verses 1-21), and the second contains a prayer of priestly blessing (verses 22-27).

This chapter's consecratory vow created what Israel called a nazir, a person of either sex who was dedicated to the service of God in special way for a specified length of time. The present chapter is the only place in the Torah where this consecration is mentioned.

The nazir was “consecrated to the Lord,” in the sense that he was set apart from the normal life of men, a separation that meant holiness (qadosh—verses 5,8) and was an illustration of Israel's own consecration to the Lord as a special People set apart.

Characteristic of the nazir's discipline is that, like the priest in the time of his own service at the altar, he refrained from drinking fermented beverages and from handling dead bodies. That is to say, during the period covered by the vow, the nazir lived a life analogous to the priesthood (verses 34,6-7).

As a sign of his consecration, the nazir's hair was not trimmed during this time covered by the vow (verse 5), a regulation that may have prompted some candidates, prior to the vow, to shave their heads (cf. Acts 21:24).

When the determined time of the nazir's vow was finished, the event was marked by appropriate and specified sacrifices (verses 13-17), followed by the shaving of the head, the hair being burned with one of the sacrifices (verse 18).

In one instance of which we know, Samson, the nazir's consecration was for life (Judges 13:2-7), a tragic instance suggesting why the vocation is rare.

The priestly prayer of benediction that follows these rubrics is a general blessing, not related to the nazir (verses 22-27). So why does it appear at this place? It closes off a long section of the Torah, a collection of mainly legal material concerning the priesthood, extending from Leviticus 1 through the present chapter. The next chapter (Numbers 7:1) will return to the day when Moses set up the Tabernacle at the end of the Book of Exodus (40:17). Then, the movement of the story will continue for the next few chapters, proceeding from that date, and preparing for the first movement of the camp and the Tabernacle fifty days later (Numbers 10:11).

Thus, the priestly blessing prescribed in the present verses completes the ritual prescribed for the priesthood, much as the blessing itself seems to have served as a final blessing—both in Judaism and some parts of the Christian Church—at the end of liturgical services (cf. Leviticus 9:22).

According to these verses, it is the duty of the priest to pronounce God’s benediction over God’s people. The work of the priest is to bless. When priests bless God's people, God also blesses His people (verse 27).

The wording of the blessing itself is theologically rich. It is significant that the Torah, which strictly insists that no one can see God’s face and live, nonetheless asks that the light of the divine face should shine on His servants. At the end of every liturgical service the Old Testament, over the span of many centuries, it was the responsibility of the priest to beseech over Israel the light of God’s countenance.

This was, in fact, a prayer for the Incarnation, in which “the God who commanded light to shine out of darkness . . . has shone in our hearts unto the light of the knowledge of the glory of God in the face of Jesus Christ” (2 Corinthians 4:6). This was the blessing that accompanied every sacrifice offered by the hands of the Aaronic priesthood.

Thus, the entire priestly ministry of the Old Testament—every oblation, every holocaust, every peace offering, every prayer, every hymn—was pointed to the light of the Incarnation, in which the divine glory is revealed in the face of Christ. Every time that benediction was pronounced over Israel, it was a pleading for the Word to become flesh and dwell among us, that we might see His glory, the glory as of the only begotten of the Father, full of grace and truth.

Monday, July 6

Numbers 7: This chapter returns to the narrative sequence broken off at the end of the Book of Exodus. The reader finds himself at the scene of the dedication of the Tabernacle, described in Exodus 40:1-32. The Tabernacle, with its altar, has been consecrated by the outpouring of God’s presence and is ready to receive Israel’s first offerings.

One of the longest in Holy Scripture (89 verses), this chapter covers the offerings made on behalf of Israel’s “princes, meaning the tribal leaders” (nasi’im, the very word translated as “captains” in chapter 2). This word, an ancient and generic name for any leader of a tribal people, especially has reference to the kind of leadership exercised in the setting of the desert. Thus we find it used to designate the leaders of those who lived in the Negev Desert, such as the Midianites (Numbers 25; Joshua 13:21) and the Arabs (Genesis 17:20 [where the number is also twelve!]). The title corresponds rather exactly to the later Arabic sheik.

These nasi’im brought the first offerings to be sacrificed after the construction of the Tabernacle was complete (verse 1), and their number–
-twelve—shows that the nasi’im served as representatives of the respected tribes (verses 2-3). It is instructive that the theological (and now—since Moses—political) unity of God’s People does not destroy their tribal character. Indeed, the preservation of a “tribal” identity is in some sense eternal (cf. Revelation 5:9).

These tribal offerings, made over twelve consecutive days, began with the tribe of Judah (verse 12), which, as we have had occasion to remark, already enjoyed the primacy prophesied and promised by Jacob (Genesis 49:8-12).

The names of the nasi’im in this chapter correspond exactly to those in chapters 1 and 2. The order here, however, corresponds to the martial list in chapter 2 rather than the patriarchal ranking in chapter 1. Thus, Issachar follows Judah, and so on.

Once again, we observe in this chapter’s list the same care for numerical precision that we have seen all along in this book. We note especially its sustained recourse to the shekel, the standard unit of weight for metals (passim, but see especially verses 84-86).

Since the offering of every tribe was identical to the others, it is reasonable to inquire why the Sacred Text goes into such repeated detail when each offering is listed. Three ideas suggest themselves in this respect. First, this is an official record, much like the list of gifts recorded in the archives of a parish church. It required exactness. Second, this attention to detail is a way of emphasizing the integrity (and, apparently, equality, for all the gifts are equal) of every tribe.

Third, this detailed listing gives the reader the leisure to enjoy the procession as each unit, with considerable solemnity, presents itself. The literary style follows a liturgical and military manner, as it were, giving the reader the impression of being present at the event. The style resembles a military muster, in the course of which each unit leader says exactly the same words as the others (“All present or accounted for, sir!”). The author is obviously not in a hurry to get through this list, nor should the reader be.

Much the same sense of a liturgical procession is conveyed in the Book of Revelation, which contains a detailed accounting of the twelve tribes in the scene where they are all sealed on their foreheads. Exactly the same refrain appears for each of the tribes, so the effect is a kind of litany (Revelation 7:1-8). In both passages—Numbers and Revelation—there is the pronounced feeling of a liturgical procession.

The gifts of Israel’s tribal leaders are borne two-by-two on six wagons, each of which is drawn by two oxen (verse 3). Pairings of this sort are not surprising if we bear in mind, once again, the image of a liturgical procession, in which it has long been common to march two-by-two. Memory reverts to the picture of the animals walking by pairs into Noah’s Ark. One thinks also of the sending forth of the Apostles two-by-two.

The people of God, we are reminded, do not waltz into heaven. On the contrary, the saints go marching in.

At this end of this long and impressive procession, Moses goes before the Lord in the Tabernacle to listen to His voice (qol) proceeding from the “mercy seat” (kaphoreth—cf. Exodus 25:17-22) over the Ark of the Covenant (89). As the place where the Lord gave instruction to Moses, the kaphoreth replaced the Burning Bush and Mount Sinai.

Tuesday, July 7

July 8: The present chapter, concerned with miscellaneous regulations regarding the Levites, begins with the subject of ritual lamps in the sanctuary (verses 1-4; Exodus 25:31-40; Leviticus 24:2-4), which were maintained by the Levites.

The lampstand—Hebrew menorah—described here (verse 4) has already been mentioned in this book (3:31; 4:9). It had seven lamps and was constructed so as to suggest a sort of tree, with the flames themselves portrayed as fruits springing from flowers.

The original and primary purpose of such lamps was simple illumination in enclosed areas, such as temples, places not readily open to sunlight. As these lamps, nonetheless, were actual fires burning within sacred precincts, it was inevitable that a sacred significance would be attached to them. Shining in the darkness of the Sanctuary, for example, the flames on the menorah came to be likened to the seven eyes—the omniscience—of God (Zechariah 4:1-4; Revelation 1:14; 5:6).

Following the hint give by Flavius Josephus (Antiquities of the Jews 3.6.7), more than one religious philosopher has remarked that a lamp or candle is simply the human substitute for the sun. To light a candle is to imitate the sunrise. Consequently, such a flame would naturally assume in the human imagination the mystic symbolisms associated with the sun itself. For this reason, there are probably few religions in the world that forego the use of sacred lamps, and the Christian religion is emphatically not among them (cf. Acts 20:8).

Nor is the religion of heaven itself deprived of this blessing. Indeed, for a correct understanding of the Old Testament’s Tabernacle, it is imperative to remember that it was crafted on the heavenly model that Moses, in mystic vision, beheld when he was on the mountain (Exodus 25:40; Hebrews 8:5; 9:23). And the heavenly sanctuary, which Moses beheld on the mountain, most certainly contained (and still contains!) sacred lamps (verse 4).
These heavenly lamps, moreover, were among the first things that the Apostle John looked upon when, like Moses, he was privileged to gaze into the heavenly sanctuary (Revelation 1:12; 4:5). Furthermore, the author of Hebrews in his description of Moses’ Tabernacle, spoke of these lamps before anything else (9:2).

Following the treatment of the menorah come lengthy instructions for the consecration of the Levites (verses 5-22). Four points seem especially worthy of note in this section:

First, the Levites are chosen “from among the children of Israel” (verse 6), meaning that they represent Israel in their special ministry to the worship. The Levites are lifted up as a dedicatory offering (verse 11). This is the reason “the children of Israel shall lay their hands on the Levites” (verse 10), just as the Levites lay their hands on the animals sacrificed on their behalf. In both cases there is a substitution: As the offering of the bulls makes atonement for the Levites, so the offering of the Levites makes atonement for Israel.

Second, the dedication of the first-born sons, which figured so prominently in the theology of the paschal lambs, is extended by metaphor to pertain to the Levites. They take the place of Israel’s first-born sons, a substitution indicating the sacrificial nature of their ministry (verses 14-19).

Third, the material of this section invites comparison with the ceremonies of dedication for the priests in Leviticus 8. The two rites are obviously similar—a feature to be expected—but they are also different. A notable point of difference is found in the end results of the dedications themselves: Whereas the priest are initiated into the realm of holiness (qodesh—Leviticus 8:10,11,12,15,30), the Levites are initiated only in the category of the “purification” or “clean-ness” (tihar—verses 7-8). Thus, the Levites are qualified to stand and minister in the holy place, but they may not directly touch those objects that render the place holy.

Fourth, the age limits given here for the service of the Levites—between twenty-five and fifty (verse 24)—are discrepant with the ages given in Numbers 4:3, a discrepancy perhaps best explained as interpreting the latter text as referent to the age for military service, as distinct from sanctuary service. The significance of this difference is clear if we bear in mind that the Levites were especially charged with two tasks: the guarding of the holy place and the bearing of burdens pertaining to the holy place. This latter responsibility was assumed only by those Levites in their prime, whereas those Levites on either side of that prime age shared the duty of guarding the holy place.

It is worth remarking that the Sacred Text itself varies somewhat on the proper limits of that prime age, whether (as in the present text) as beginning at age twenty-five or thirty or even twenty (cf. 1 Chronicles 23:24; 2 Chronicles 31:17; Ezra 3:8). These differences probably reflect different historical periods and the variety of ministerial needs at various periods.

From the perspective of the sociology of religion, the very existence of the Levites indicates a special development in Israel’s “division of labor.” Holy Scripture does not regard a special class of consecrated men to care for the physical aspects of the worship as something at odds with the principle that all of Israel was a consecrated, priestly people. On the contrary, the particular needs of the worship required that certain individuals should be consecrated in special ways.

This special consecration is found among the People of God at all times. For instance, Clement of Rome, writing near the end of the first century, saw the ministry of the Levites expressed in the Church in the ministry of the deacons. Others in the Church, over the centuries, have been set aside for worship by special rites of consecration. One thinks of the tonsuring of monks and nuns as examples of such consecrations.

Wednesday, July 8

Numbers 9: There are two parts to this chapter: First, there is an auxiliary ordinance answering a specific problem that arose in connection with Israel’s second annual celebration of the Passover (verses 1-14). Second, there is an account of the fiery cloud that accompanied Israel’s journey through the desert (verses 15-23).

Israel now celebrates its second Passover. A whole year has elapsed since their escape from Egypt. As in the case of the first Passover, this text conveys certain concerns of ritual. This material, however, is by way of supplement to the ritual material already prescribed in Exodus 12 and Leviticus 23.

The situation described in verses 6-8 introduces a good example of case law. This law, too, is not ascribed to the jurisprudence of Moses, but to divine revelation. This is true case law, because it applied, not only to the immediate context, but to all analogous situations in the future (verse 10). Those whose contact with dead bodies precluded their participation in the Passover Seder are accorded permission to celebrate that feast a month later.

This particular case law addresses two concerns: the need for a compassionate flexibility for the Israelite who was ritually contaminated, and a reaffirmation of the requirement of ritual purity.

The concession made for such persons is extended to those on a journey among unbelievers (verse 10). One recalls the reluctance of Jesus’ enemies to enter the house of Pilate and so defile themselves from sharing the Passover (John 18:28).

Failure to observe these rules meant that a person was “cut off” from the community of Israel. Whether or not this expression meant capital punishment, it certainly meant excommunication, so that the offender was no longer part of the congregation of the saved. To be separated from the congregation of the saved is, after all, far worse than simply to be killed. The person “cut off” from Israel was on his own; he was no longer part of salvation history.

Especially, such a one had to “bear his own sin”—nishsha’ ‘avon. He is no longer part of the covenant, in which is found the remission of sins. He is like Cain, who must wander the earth as a stranger. This teaching remains a point of principle throughout the Bible: Remission of sins is provided within the covenant community. One finds salvation by his incorporation into that covenant communion. Otherwise, he is really on his own and must bear his own sins.

Resident aliens were permitted to observe this and other liturgical feasts of Israel, since they were also obliged to observe Israel’s weekly day of rest, the Sabbath, and Israel’s annual day of fasting, the Day of Atonement (verse 14).

In the second part of this chapter (verses 15-23), there is a description of the cloud and pillar of fire.

During all its time in the desert Israel was guided by the pillar of cloud and fire, which was now settled over the Tabernacle (verses 15-16). These two verses evoke the imagery of Exodus 40:2,34-38, emphasizing God’s presence in Israel. The Hebrew verbs here are in the imperfect tense, denoting continued or repeated action. They convey the sense that the cloud/pillar presence became normal for Israel. Now, however, that image is associated with the Tabernacle, not the mountain. Indeed, God is soon to move His people away from the mountain.

In verses 17-23 the message shifts to a concern about complete obedience to God’s guidance. The Lord’s People were led, not only by the fixed, firm, unchanging strictures of the Torah, but also by the immediate, mysterious, and applied guidance of the God who was beyond all discernible law. Both forms of guidance were integral to the life of Israel. Both pertained to the “command of the Lord” (‘al pi Adonai—five times in verses 18,20,23).

Israel recognized no possibility of conflict between God’s will fixed in the Torah and the more fluid guidance He provided in the cloud and pillar. The divine guidance in
the lives of the faithful is ever thus. At no point is God’s revealed will in conflict with the fixed and determined order by which men are ever to be governed, but also at no time is a man justified simply by observing those fixed and permanent norms of the Law. God always guides His people in these two ways.

God’s governance of His people is both horizontal and vertical. His horizontal governance means the written Law transmitted down through time. His vertical guidance is the immediate direction given by His Spirit, symbolized in the cloud and pillar. We may think of these two realities as Word and Spirit.

Thursday, July 9

Numbers 10: After celebrating its second Passover at the base of Mount Sinai, and having received guidance by the movement of the fiery cloud, Israel prepared to leave for the long trek through the desert. Before making its departure, nonetheless, the Chosen People received one more directive—to fashion two silver trumpets, these to be sounded whenever the whole camp was to receive specific instructions relative to the variations in its march.

The first part of this chapter (verses 1-10) prescribes how the trumpets will be used during the march through the wilderness. They were to be sounded for general assemblies (verse 3), as well as special meetings of the elders (verse 4). In short, all manner of directions could be conveyed by the various blasts and blowing of the trumpets. These included military directions (verse 9), even liturgical use (verse 10). The trumpeters were the priests (verse 8).

According to Josephus (The Antiquities of the Jews 3.12.6), the trumpets were less than a cubit in length—perhaps twenty inches. Crafted of beaten silver, they are not to be confused with the ram’s horn, or shophar.

Two further considerations pertain to these silver trumpets:

First, employed to direct the movement of Israel through the desert, the trumpets assisted and supplemented the general guidance provided by the fiery cloud (9:15-23). Thus, Israel benefited from two complementary forms of guidance: the fiery cloud, which came directly from God, and the trumpets, which came through human mediation. The Bible perceives no conflict between the two. Perhaps the fiery cloud can be called “charismatic,” inasmuch at its guidance is immediately divine, and the trumpets may be thought of as “institutional,” because their construction is fixed, permanent, and subject to human decision.

Second, these trumpets, which will play such significant roles in the future life of Israel long after the wandering through the wilderness—even being assumed into the liturgical rites of the Temple—were derived from a technology not originally intended for God’s service. Originally crafted by a descendant of Cain (cf. Genesis 4:21), musical instruments did not look very promising when first we learned of them.

Moreover, there has often been something a bit problematic about such music, morally considered. When King Nebuchadnezzar employed “the sound of the horn, flute, harp, lyre, and psaltery, in symphony with all kinds of music” (Daniel 3:5) for his idolatrous purposes, it was not the last instance when instrumental music served to deflect men from the worship of the true God.

Yet, in fact, God rather early designated musical instruments as appropriate to His own worship in the Tabernacle and the Temple. And, once again, in the final book of the Bible we find heaven to be a place resonating with the sounds of trumpet and harp.

As an added irony, furthermore, instrumental music is limited so exclusively to heaven that the damned are forever deprived of it! The sinful descendants of Cain, the very inventors of harp and flute, will never hear them again, inasmuch as the “sound of harpists, musicians, flutists, and trumpeters shall not be heard in you anymore” (Revelation 18:22). These things are now reserved for the blessed.

The regulations regarding the trumpets (verses 1-10) bring to a close the first major section of Numbers, coving the year that Israel encamped in the valley below Mount Sinai. This second part of this chapter (verses 11-28) begins the next large section of Numbers: the journey to Kadesh-barnea (10:11—12:16). This section covers two subjects: the departure from Sinai (verses 11-28) and a story concerning Moses’ in-laws (verses 29-36).

Instructed by the cloud, the Israelites depart from Mount Sinai eleven months after their arrival there and almost fourteen months after the crossing of the Red Sea. Nineteen days have elapsed since the census with which this book began.

The Chosen People move to Paran, to the north of Sinai, a desert region somewhat south of Kadesh. The cloud, we are told, settles at Paran (verse 2), but the journey to Paran is not described until the following two chapters.

One-by-one, the various tribal standards of the Israelites are lifted, signaling each tribe to break camp and fall in place in the march (verses 14-28).

We have observed the care taken in this book to portray the Israelites—even as they wandered through a trackless wilderness—as a tightly organized group. The entire populace, marched as one, tribe by tribe, everyone aware if his responsibilities and his place in the formation. It was like a military expedition. Israel, that is to say, thought of itself as an “organized religion.”

Indeed, this picture indicates an important point of ecclesiology: the Almighty does not favor a haphazard, disorganized style for His people. In both the Old Testament and the New, the Church is described as a living organism, not a shapeless mass of individuals.

From the perspective of its immediate context, we recognize that such discipline was necessary to the people’s survival in the desert. As we shall see in the ensuing chapters, this organization was crucial, because the Israelites tended to be scofflaws. Through the next two chapters we will find no fewer than three crises of authority, each connected with a site along the way. Rebellious Israel, we may well believe, might not have survived in the wilderness without the sustained discipline of its organized life.

The third part of this chapter (verses 29-32) tells of the Midianite in-laws of Moses. Since they were more familiar with the desert, Moses pleaded with them to remain in the company of Israel. From the reference in Judges 1:16, it appears that they acceded to Moses’ request.

With respect to this incident, we observe that Moses wanted to benefit from his in-laws’ greater familiarity with the geography of the region. This is significant: Since Israel, as we know, was to be guided by the fiery cloud, one might have concluded that recourse to human guidance through the desert would be superfluous. Indeed, even some of the Israelites may have thought so. In every age, after all, there have been those who regarded human knowledge and guidance with suspicion when divine knowledge and guidance were at hand.

It is instructive, therefore, to observe that Moses did not share that view. Even as Israel was to be led by the divine cloud, Moses did not disregard the merely human guidance derived of an advanced knowledge of geography. He did not regard recourse to such knowledge as a challenge to—or rival of—divine help.

In this respect we recall an incident in which Reuel (Jethro), the father of Hobab, provided Moses an important practical lesson in delegation and time-management (Exodus 18).

These two examples indicate a more general principle—namely, that the legitimacy of human knowledge is not vitiated by the availability of divine knowledge. Just as Moses learned geography and time management from his wife’s family, the people of God should not hesitate to benefit from merely human knowledge. It is legitimate to mention such human resources as medicine and astronomy. Just as prayer for the sick does not preclude recourse to the modern arts of healing, so the liturgical calendar of the Church should take advantage of the moder
n world’s more accurate knowledge of astronomy.

In this chapter’s final section (verses 33-36), the fiery cloud is said to be “over” (‘al) the people, as distinct from going “before” (lifne) them. This change of expression indicates that the cloud is not only a guide but also a protection for Israel. His presence with the people shelters them as well as leads them. According to psalmist, God is “in the midst of Israel” and also guides Israel (Psalm 47 [48];9,14; cf. 22 [23]:2-4). Therefore, he says to the Lord, “I am continually with You; You hold me by my right hand. You will guide me with Your counsel” (72 [73]:23-24). Both guidance and protection are included in the Lord’s pledge to His Church: “lo, I am with you always, to the end of the world” (Matthew 28:20).

The chapter closes with the acclamations of Moses whenever the Ark was lifted for the march and set down again at the end of it . These acclamations, which frame the journey, were later adapted, modified, and assumed into the Psalter, to be sung during Israel’s liturgical processions (cf. Psalms 68 [69]: 1; 132 [131]:8).

Friday, July 10

Numbers 11: Although it is tightly crafted as a coherent and complex narrative, this chapter is usefully broken into four parts: The first (verses 1-9) describes the people’s discontent as they wander in the desert. The object of the complaint, once again (cf. Exodus 16), is the food available in the desert. The second part (verses 10-23) tells of Moses’ complaint and the Lord’s response. The third part (verses 24-30) gives an account of the Spirit poured out on the appointed elders, and the fourth (verses 31-35) narrates how the Lord dealt with the people’s discontent in the beginning of the chapter.

Throughout this chapter, the reader senses—beyond the incidents themselves—that something more radical is amiss with the Israelites in the desert, as though the author were preparing him for worse developments yet to come. As soon as the people start out on their journey, a kind of rebellion sets in, the first of several, which will test the divine patience over the next forty years.

It would appear that some of the Israelites, having spent the previous eleven months encamped in the desert at the foot of Mount Sinai, were ready for a change of scenery when the time came to move. When, at the end of the previous chapter, they found themselves at Paran, a place arguably worse than where they had been before, these hopes were dashed. The ensuing “murmuring” that forced itself on the ears of both the Lord and Moses introduces the narrative in the present chapter.

This English word “murmur,” the mere pronunciation of which forces the mouth and throat to imitate the very sound of the thing, signifies a hopeless, powerless discontent that we correctly associate with the selfishness of childhood. It is an extension of a baby’s indistinct cry for the relief of its undefined needs, but in the present case it does contain one further element beyond the cry of the infant. It conveys a general note of blame. The murmurer is not only complaining; he is implicitly blaming somebody for his discontent. Worse still, the act of murmuring does not quite find its way to explicit words, much less clear ideas. As the sound itself indicates, there is something frustratingly inarticulate about murmuring. It is extremely difficult to get a “handle” on the thing.

Thus, murmuring is the most distressing of sounds. Even God cannot endure it (verse 1), and His burning wrath, earlier experienced by the Egyptians, will soon be felt by Israel. Only the prayer of Moses, once again acting as Israel’s intercessor, was able to spare the Chosen People (verses 2-3).

Whereas the people’s first complaint about food, in Exodus 16, brought them the blessing of the manna, in the present case the manna itself is the occasion for the murmuring! In other words, the people show themselves ungrateful for the divine (and miraculous!) provision. Hence, the present chapter will end badly for the Israelites.

The people’s complaint, which brings forth the two responses that hold our chapter together, had to do with their unvarying diet of manna, the miraculous food that had sustained them at every meal, everyday, for a full eleven months. Some of the folks hankered after a more varied fare (verse 5).

When the people complain to Moses, Moses complains to God (verses 11-15). His prayer is truly desperate: He would rather die than continue to carry the burden of 600,000 souls! Moses feels squeezed from all directions, because everything seems to depend on him. No matter what goes wrong, it immediately becomes his problem. Using an ironical metaphor he speaks of nursing the people, as though he were responsible for feeding 600,000 screaming infants.

There are two problems in this chapter: the people’s problem and Moses’ problem. The Lord will deal with Moses’ problem first, by instituting the ministry of the Judges (verses 16-17). These seventy are drawn from the recognized elders of Israel and will participate in the same Spirit that fills Moses.

This new ministry is not identical with the administrative service found in Exodus 18:25-26. It is true charismatic leadership, pertaining to spiritual matters. Bearing the people’s burdens with Moses, these men become the antecedents of those charismatic Judges who will appear in the book called by that name.

Once Moses’ problem is addressed, the Lord turns to the people’s problem (verses 18-23). They will eat fresh meat everyday for a whole month, until it starts come out of their noses (verses 19-20). They will begin to hate this diet! Moses can hardly believe his ears at this prediction (verses 21-22), but the Lord warns him, “You’ll see!” (verse 23)

The third section of this chapter (verses 24-30) describes the outpouring of the Spirit on the seventy appointed elders. The presence of the Spirit on these men is apparently discerned in their ecstatic behavior, designated here as “prophesying.” It is difficult to identify this behavior more accurately, nor does this matter form a concern for the author. It suffices to say that the Israelites were able to perceive in these men some quality that enabled them to speak for God. The qualifying phenomenon is described as temporary (verse 25), but the status of the chosen elders is permanent.

The outpouring of the Spirit was not limited to the men actually assembled at the Tabernacle. Two others, though designated to be included in that group, failed to appear in the assembly as appointed. It happened, however, that this failure made no difference to their participation in the Spirit (verse 26).

This extended participation in the Spirit to young Joshua, the understudy of Moses (verse 28), who perhaps feared that things were rather getting out of hand—individuals were off somewhere else in the camp, engaged in ecstatic phenomena.

Throughout the Bible’s treatment of him, Joshua is invariably portrayed as a man of consummate devotion, earnestness, and zeal. It may be the case that some perceived lack of attention to proper “form” in the present context—the failure of Eldad and Medad to be where they were supposed to be—represented for Joshua a kind of structural failure, the sort of thing that suggests disorder and chaos. He expected the Spirit to be conferred in the proper contextual setting, not haphazardly, as it were, and outside of divinely established protocol. He was uncomfortable in a situation not governed by recognizable form.

We note that the Bible does not criticize Joshua for this concern, inasmuch as it represented a godly caution and proper respect for appointed structures.

Moses, however, took Joshua’s reaction as overly cautious in the present case. In the view of Moses, there simply could not be an excess in God’s gift of the Spirit (verse 29). He wished that all God’s people were so richly endowed.
Christian theology regards this wish of Moses as fulfilled on Pentecost morning, when all those gathered in the upper room were filled with the Holy Spirit.

This response of Moses to the concern of Joshua should be understood as an insistence that no leader of God’s people must be jealous of those with whom the Lord deigns to share the Holy Spirit.

The fourth and closing part of this chapter (verses 31-35) describes the miraculous catch of quail, the Lord’s answer to the people’s complaint about their excessively bland diet.

Several points should be made about these five verses.

First, the recurrence of the word ruah, translated here as “wind.” When this chapter began, there were two problems, we recall: a problem about food and a problem about leadership. Now we see that the Lord has dealt with both problems the same way—namely, through the ruah. In the first case, the problem of leadership, the Lord sent the ruah on the seventy elders (verses 17,25,26,29). Now the ruah brings in the birds to satisfy the people’s craving (verse 31). Because we are obliged to translate the word ruah very differently in the two places, it would be easy not to notice that the same word is used in each instance. Indeed, in both cases, the ruah is ascribed to “the Lord.”

This is the second time that the people have been fed in the desert from a large flock of quail (cf. Exodus 16:13).

This quail is apparently the coturnix vulgaris known to ornithology. This bird migrates from eastern Europe and western Asia to north Africa for the warmer climate, but against a southerly wind it quickly grows weary and is blown off-course to fall in the desert.

This phenomenon, known even today, was described by Aristotle. He observed that some birds “migrate in August, some in September. They are always fatter when they migrate from cold countries, as the quail [ortychs] is fatter in the autumn than in the spring . . . The quails, when the begin their flight, if the weather is fine and the wind from the north, go in pairs and have a successful flight. If the wind is from the south, it goes very hard with them, and their flight is slow, for this wind is very moist and heavy. . . . They fly badly, on account of their weight, for their body is large. They therefore make a noise as they fly, because it is laborious for them” (Aristotle, De Historia Animalium 8.14.4-5).

This is what we find here in Numbers. The very exhausted quails, who have flown south from Greece and Asia Minor, are described as flying at an altitude of only two cubits, between six and seven feet off the ground. They are easily caught in nets or even by hand.

A single person is said to catch 10 homers of them—about 38 bushels—in just two days. That is a lot of meat, enough to satisfy the Lord’s prediction that they would eat meat for a whole month.

The Israelites spread the carcasses of the birds on the sand, to be dried out by the sun. The birds were eaten raw, not cooked—a sort of quail jerky. Herodotus describes this practice in Egypt: “Quails and ducks and small birds are salted and eaten raw” (Herodotus 2.77).

As it happened, however, many Israelites became sick. The reference to a “plague” may indicate food poisoning. Whatever the cause, many of the people died, so that they named the place Kibroth Hattaavah, “graves of craving.” As is the case so often in the desert, the place has never been identified by archeologists.

The very name of the place, however, indicates Israel’s interpretation of the event: They saw this plague as punishment for their own cravings and the murmuring with which they complained to God. God gave them, in fact, exactly what they asked for. It was yet another example of those “answered prayers,” as they were called by St. Teresa of Avila and Truman Capote: Prayers we should not have made, because they were made without regard to doing God’s will. Such are prayers made in selfishness and the impulse to use God for our own ends, without regard to His will. It is no blessing when God answers such prayers.