The Hebrew expresses the strong wish or longing idiomatically: “Who will give us flesh to eat?” It is a rhetorical expression not intended to be taken literally, but merely to give expression to the longing they had. See GKC 476 §151. a .1.


The perfect tense here expresses the experience of a state of mind. sn As with all who complain in such situations, their memory was selective. It was their bitter cries to the Lord from the suffering in bondage that God heard and answered. And now, shortly after being set free, their memory of Egypt is for things they do not now have. It is also somewhat unlikely that they as slaves had such abundant foods in Egypt.


The imperfect tense would here be the customary imperfect, showing continual or incomplete action in past time.


The adverb “freely” is from the word חָנַן ( khanan , “to be gracious”), from which is derived the noun “grace.” The word underscores the idea of “free, without cost, for no reason, gratis.” Here the simple sense is “freely,” without any cost. But there may be more significance in the choice of the words in this passage, showing the ingratitude of the Israelites to God for His deliverance from bondage. To them now the bondage is preferable to the salvation – this is what angered the Lord .


Heb “our souls.”


Heb “before our eyes,” meaning that “we see nothing except this manna.”


Heb “And its taste was like the taste of fresh olive oil.”


The temporal clause is constructed of the infinitive construct from יָרָד ( yarad ) with a temporal preposition, followed by the subjective genitive.


Heb “came down.”


The participle “weeping” is functioning here as the noun in the accusative case, an adverbial accusative of state. It is explicative of the object.


Heb “it was evil in the eyes of Moses.”


The verb is the Hiphil of רָעַע ( ra ’ a ’, “to be evil”). Moses laments (with the rhetorical question) that God seems to have caused him evil.


The infinitive construct with the preposition is expressing the result of not finding favor with God (see R. J. Williams, Hebrew Syntax , 12-13, §57). What Moses is claiming is that because he has been given this burden God did not show him favor.


The verb means “to beget, give birth to.” The figurative image from procreation completes the parallel question, first the conceiving and second the giving birth to the nation.


The word אֹמֵן (’ omen ) is often translated “nurse,” but the form is a masculine form and would better be rendered as a “foster parent.” This does not work as well, though, with the יֹנֵק ( yoneq ), the “sucking child.” The two metaphors are simply designed to portray the duty of a parent to a child as a picture of Moses’ duty for the nation. The idea that it portrays God as a mother pushes it too far (see M. Noth, Numbers [OTL] , 86-87).


The Hebrew text simply has “from where to me flesh?” which means “from where will I have meat?”


The cohortative coming after the imperative stresses purpose (it is an indirect volitive).


The word order shows the emphasis: “I am not able, I by myself, to bear all this people.” The infinitive לָשֵׂאת ( lase ’ t ) serves as the direct object of the verb. The expression is figurative, for bearing or carrying the people means being responsible for all their needs and cares.


The subject of the verb “heavy” is unstated; in the context it probably refers to the people, or the burden of caring for the people. This responsibility was turning out to be a heavier responsibility than Moses anticipated. Alone he was totally inadequate.


The participle expresses the future idea of what God is doing, or what he is going to be doing. Moses would rather be killed than be given a totally impossible duty over a people that were not his.


The imperative of הָרַג ( harag ) is followed by the infinitive absolute for emphasis. The point is more that the infinitive adds to the emphasis of the imperative mood, which would be immediate compliance.


Or “my own ruin” (NIV). The word “trouble” here probably refers to the stress and difficulty of caring for a complaining group of people. The suffix on the noun would be objective, perhaps stressing the indirect object of the noun – trouble for me. The expression “on my trouble” ( בְּרָעָתִי , bÿra ’ ati ) is one of the so-called tiqqune sopherim , or “emendations of the scribes.” According to this tradition the original reading in v. 15 was [to look] “on your evil” ( בְּרָעָתֶךָ , bÿra ’ atekha ), meaning “the calamity that you bring about” for Israel. However, since such an expression could be mistakenly thought to attribute evil to the Lord, the ancient scribes changed it to the reading found in the MT.


The “officials” ( שֹׁטְּרִים , shottÿrim ) were a group of the elders who seem to have had some administrative capacities. The LXX used the word “scribes.” For further discussion, see R. de Vaux, Ancient Israel, 69-70.


The imperfect tense here is to be classified as a final imperfect, showing the result of this action by God. Moses would be relieved of some of the responsibility when these others were given the grace to understand and to resolve cases.


The Hitpael is used to stress that they are to prepare for a holy appearance. The day was going to be special and so required their being set apart for it. But it is a holy day in the sense of the judgment that was to follow.


Heb “in the ears.”


Possibly this could be given an optative translation, to reflect the earlier one: “O that someone would give….” But the verb is not the same; here it is the Hiphil of the verb “to eat” – “who will make us eat” (i.e., provide meat for us to eat).


The word “life” is not in the text. The expression is simply “it was for us,” or “we had good,” meaning “we had it good,” or “life was good.”


Heb “a month of days.” So also in v. 21 .


The expression לְזָרָה ( lÿzarah ) has been translated “ill” or “loathsome.” It occurs only here in the Hebrew Bible. The Greek text interprets it as “sickness.” It could be nausea or vomiting (so G. B. Gray, Numbers [ICC], 112) from overeating.


The use of the demonstrative pronoun here (“why is this we went out …”) is enclitic, providing emphasis to the sentence: “Why in the world did we ever leave Egypt?”


Heb “the people who I am in their midst,” i.e., among whom I am.


The Hebrew sentence stresses the number. The sentence begins “600,000….”


The word order places the object first here: “Meat I will give them.” This adds to the contrast between the number and the statement of the Lord .


The verb is the perfect tense with a vav ( ו ) consecutive, carrying the sequence from the preceding imperfect tense. However, this verb may be subordinated to the preceding to express a purpose clause.


Or “will happen” (TEV); KJV “shall come to pass unto thee.”


Heb “on him”; the referent (Moses) has been specified in the translation for clarity.


The temporal clause is introduced by the temporal indicator וַיְהִי ( vayÿhi ), which need not be translated. It introduces the time of the infinitive as past time narrative. The infinitive construct is from נוּחַ ( nuakh , “to rest”). The figurative expression of the Spirit resting upon them indicates the temporary indwelling and empowering by the Spirit in their lives.


The text may mean that these men gave ecstatic utterances, much like Saul did when the Spirit came upon him and he made the same prophetic utterances (see 1 Sam 10:10-13 ). But there is no strong evidence for this (see K. L. Barker, “Zechariah,” EBC 7:605-6). In fact there is no consensus among scholars as to the origin and meaning of the verb “prophesy” or the noun “prophet.” It has something to do with speech, being God’s spokesman or spokeswoman or making predictions or authoritative utterances or ecstatic utterances. It certainly does mean that the same Holy Spirit, the same divine provision that was for Moses to enable him to do the things that God had commanded him to do, was now given to them. It would have included wisdom and power with what they were saying and doing – in a way that was visible and demonstrable to the people! The people needed to know that the same provision was given to these men, authenticating their leadership among the clans. And so it could not simply be a change in their understanding and wisdom.


The final verb of the clause stresses that this was not repeated: “they did not add” is the literal rendering of וְלֹא יָסָפוּ ( vÿlo ’ yasafu ). It was a one-time spiritual experience associated with their installation.


The form of the word is the passive participle כְּתֻבִים ( kÿtuvim , “written”). It is normally taken to mean “among those registered,” but it is not clear if that means they were to be among the seventy or not. That seems unlikely since there is no mention of the seventy being registered, and vv. 24-25 says all seventy went out and prophesied. The registration may be to eldership, or the role of the officer.


The article indicates that the “young man” was definite in the mind of the writer, but indefinite in English.


The form is the Piel participle מְשָׁרֵת ( mÿsharet ), meaning “minister, servant, assistant.” The word has a loftier meaning than the ordinary word for slave.


The verb is בָּחַר ( bakhar , “to choose”); here the form is the masculine plural participle with a suffix, serving as the object of the preposition מִן ( min ). It would therefore mean “[one of] his chosen men,” or “[one of] his choice men.”


Heb “answered and said.”


The Piel participle מְקַנֵּא ( mÿqanne ’) serves as a verb here in this interrogative sentence. The word means “to be jealous; to be envious.” That can be in a good sense, such as with the translation “zeal,” or it can be in a negative sense as here. Joshua’s apparent “zeal” is questioned by Moses – was he zealous/envious for Moses sake, or for some other reason?


The optative is expressed by the interrogative clause in Hebrew, “who will give….” Moses expresses here the wish that the whole nation would have that portion of the Spirit. The new covenant, of course, would turn Moses’ wish into a certainty.


The verb means “burst forth” or “sprang up.” See the ways it is used in Gen 33:12 , Judg 16:3, 14 ; Isa 33:20 .


Or “left them fluttering.”


Heb “two cubits.” The standard cubit in the OT is assumed by most authorities to be about eighteen inches (45 cm) in length.


Heb “rose up, stood up.”


The verb (a preterite) is followed by the infinitive absolute of the same root, to emphasize the action of spreading out the quail. Although it is hard to translate the expression, it indicates that they spread these quail out all over the area. The vision of them spread all over was evidence of God’s abundant provision for their needs.


The verb is a prefixed conjugation, normally an imperfect tense. But coming after the adverb טֶּרֶם ( terem ) it is treated as a preterite.


The words “different food” are implied, and are supplied in the translation for clarity.


The preposition bet ( בְּ ) has the adversative sense here, “[speak] against” (see also its use for hostile speech in 21:5, 7 ). Speaking against is equal to the murmuring throughout the wilderness period. The verb of the sentence is וַתְּדַבֵּר ( vattÿdabber ), the feminine form of the verb. This indicates that Miriam was the main speaker for the two, the verb agreeing with the first of the compound subject. sn It may be that Miriam was envious of the Cushite woman Moses married. And, in view of the previous chapter’s content about others being given a portion of the Spirit to share in the leadership role, she may have seen this as her chance finally to become just as important in the nation as her younger brother. After all, she safeguarded his birth and early years (). But there are two issues here – the reason she gives (“does the Lord only speak through Moses?”), and the reason the text gives (the Cushite woman).


The Hebrew text has הַכֻּשִׁית ( hakkushit , “the Cushite”) as the modifier of “woman.” The Greek text interpreted this correctly as “Ethiopian.” The word Cush in the Bible can describe the Cassites, east of Babylon of the later period ( Gen 10:18 ), or Ethiopia ( Isa 20:3 ; Nah 3:5 ; et al). Another suggestion is that it would refer to Cushan of Hab 3:7 , perhaps close to Midian, and so the area Moses had been. This would suggest it could be Zipporah – but the Bible does not identify the Cushite as Zipporah. The most natural understanding would be that it refers to an Egyptian/Ethiopian woman. The text does not say when Moses married this woman, or what Miriam’s problem with her was. It is clear that it was a racial issue, by virtue of the use of “Cushite.” Whether she was of darker skin than the Hebrews would be hard to say, since the Bible gives no further detail. Neither does it say if this is a second wife, or a woman Moses married since Zipporah went home ( Exod 18:2 ). These do not seem to be the issues the text wishes to elaborate on; it is simply stating that this woman was the occasion for a deeper challenge.


Heb “taken.”


Now the text changes to use a plural form of the verb. The indication is that Miriam criticized the marriage, and then the two of them raised questions about his sole leadership of the nation.


The use of both רַק and אַךְ ( raq and ’ akh ) underscore the point that the issue is Moses’ uniqueness.


There is irony in the construction in the text. The expression “speak through us” also uses דִּבֵּר + בְּ ( dibber + bÿ ). They ask if God has not also spoken through them, after they have spoken against Moses. Shortly God will speak against them – their words are prophetic, but not as they imagined. sn The questions are rhetorical. They are affirming that God does not only speak through Moses, but also speaks through them. They see themselves as equal with Moses. The question that was asked of the earlier presumptuous Moses – “Who made you a ruler over us?” – could also be asked of them. God had not placed them as equals with Moses. The passage is relevant for today when so many clamor for equal authority and leadership with those whom God has legitimately called.


The spelling of the word is a Kethib-Qere reading with only a slight difference between the two. tn The word עָנָו (’ anav ) means “humble.” The word may reflect a trustful attitude (as in Pss 25:9, 37:11 ), but perhaps here the idea of “more tolerant” or “long-suffering.” The point is that Moses is not self-assertive. God singled out Moses and used him in such a way as to show that he was a unique leader. For a suggestion that the word means “miserable,” see C. Rogers, “Moses: Meek or Miserable?” JETS 29 (1986): 257-63. sn Humility is a quality missing today in many leaders. Far too many are self-promoting, or competitive, or even pompous. The statement in this passage would have been difficult for Moses to write – and indeed, it is not impossible that an editor might have added it. One might think that for someone to claim to be humble is an arrogant act. But the statement is one of fact – he was not self-assertive (until when he strikes the rock).


Heb “he.”


The form of this construction is rare: נְבִיאֲכֶם ( nÿvi ’ akhem ) would normally be rendered “your prophet.” The singular noun is suffixed with a plural pronominal suffix. Some commentators think the MT has condensed “a prophet” with “to you.”


The Hebrew syntax is difficult here. “The Lord” is separated from the verb by two intervening prepositional phrases. Some scholars conclude that this word belongs with the verb at the beginning of v. 6 (“And the Lord spoke”).


The word “faithful” is נֶאֱמָן ( ne ’ eman ), the Niphal participle of the verb אָמַן (’ aman ). This basic word has the sense of “support, be firm.” In the Niphal it describes something that is firm, reliable, dependable – what can be counted on. It could actually be translated “trustworthy.”


The emphasis of the line is clear enough – it begins literally “mouth to mouth” I will speak with him. In human communication this would mean equality of rank, but Moses is certainly not equal in rank with the Lord . And yet God is here stating that Moses has an immediacy and directness with communication with God. It goes beyond the idea of friendship, almost to that of a king’s confidant.


The word מַרְאֶה ( mar ’ eh ) refers to what is seen, a vision, an appearance. Here it would have the idea of that which is clearly visible, open, obvious.


The word “form” ( תְּמוּנָה , tÿmunah ) means “shape, image, form.” The Greek text took it metaphorically and rendered it “the glory of the Lord .” This line expresses even more the uniqueness of Moses. The elders saw God on one special occasion ( Exod 24:10 ), and the people never ( Deut 4:12, 15 ), but Moses has direct and familiar contact with God.


The disjunctive vav ( ו ) is here introducing a circumstantial clause of time.


There is no verb “became” in this line. The second half of the line is introduced with the particle הִנֵה ( hinneh , “look, behold”) in its archaic sense. This deictic use is intended to make the reader focus on Miriam as well.


Heb “turned to.”


The expression בִּי אֲדֹנִי ( bi ’ adoni , “O my lord”) shows a good deal of respect for Moses by Aaron. The expression is often used in addressing God.


The words “its mother” and “its flesh” are among the so-called tiqqune sopherim , or “emendations of the scribes.” According to this tradition the text originally had here “ our mother” and “ our flesh,” but the ancient scribes changed these pronouns from the first person to the third person. Apparently they were concerned that the image of Moses’ mother giving birth to a baby with physical defects of the sort described here was somehow inappropriate, given the stature and importance of Moses.


Some scholars emend אֵל (’ el , “God”) to עַל (’ al , “no”). The effect of this change may be seen in the NAB: “‘Please, not this! Pray, heal her!’”


The form is intensified by the infinitive absolute, but here the infinitive strengthens not simply the verbal idea but the conditional cause construction as well.


The clause has the Niphal infinitive construct after a temporal preposition.


The verse starts with the vav ( ו ) consecutive on the verb: “and….”


The imperfect tense with the conjunction is here subordinated to the preceding imperative to form the purpose clause. It can thus be translated “send…to investigate.”


The participle here should be given a future interpretation, meaning “which I am about to give” or “which I am going to give.”


Heb “one man one man of the tribe of his fathers.”


Heb “mouth.”


Heb “heads.”


Some scholars emend “tribe” to “sons.” Cf. Num 1:10 .


The preterite with vav ( ו ) consecutive is here subordinated to the next verb of the same formation to express a temporal clause.


The instructions had them first go up into the southern desert of the land, and after passing through that, into the hill country of the Canaanites. The text could be rendered “into the Negev” as well as “through the Negev.”


The form is the perfect tense with vav ( ו ) consecutive; the word therefore carries the volitional mood of the preceding imperatives. It may be either another imperative, or it may be subordinated as a purpose clause.


Heb “see the land, what it is.”


The verb is the Hitpael perfect with vav ( ו ) consecutive, from the root חָזַק ( khazaq , “to be strong”). Here it could mean “strengthen yourselves” or “be courageous” or “determined.” See further uses in 2 Sam 10:12 ; 1 Kgs 20:22 ; 1 Chr 19:13 .


Heb “Now the days were the days of.”


The MT has the singular, but the ancient versions and Smr have the plural.


The preterite with vav ( ו ) consecutive is here subordinated to the following clause. The first verse gave the account of their journey over the whole land; this section focuses on what happened in the area of Hebron, which would be the basis for the false report.


The word is related etymologically to the verb for “slip, slide, bend, totter.” This would fit the use very well. A pole that would not bend would be hard to use to carry things, but a pole or stave that was flexible would serve well.


The verb is rendered as a passive because there is no expressed subject.


Or “Wadi Eshcol.” The translation “brook” is too generous; the Hebrew term refers to a river bed, a ravine or valley through which torrents of rain would rush in the rainy season; at other times it might be completely dry.


The word “Eshcol” is drawn from the Hebrew expression concerning the “cluster of grapes.” The word is probably retained in the name Burj Haskeh, two miles north of Damascus.


The construction literally has “and they went and they entered,” which may be smoothed out as a verbal hendiadys, the one verb modifying the other.


Heb “They brought back word”; the verb is the Hiphil preterite of שׁוּב ( shuv ).


Heb “told him and said.” The referent (Moses) has been specified in the translation for clarity.


The relative clause modifies “the land.” It is constructed with the relative and the verb: “where you sent us.”


The word ( אֶפֶס , ’ efes ) forms a very strong adversative. The land was indeed rich and fruitful, but….”


Heb “the people who are living in the land.”


Heb “by the side [hand] of.”


The construction is emphatic, using the cohortative with the infinitive absolute to strengthen it: עָלֹה נַעֲלֶה (’ aloh na ’ aleh , “let us go up”) with the sense of certainty and immediacy.


The perfect tense with vav ( ו ) consecutive brings the cohortative idea forward: “and let us possess it”; it may also be subordinated to form a purpose or result idea.


Here again the confidence of Caleb is expressed with the infinitive absolute and the imperfect tense: יָכוֹל נוּכַל ( yakhol nukhal ), “we are fully able” to do this. The verb יָכַל ( yakhal ) followed by the preposition lamed means “to prevail over, to conquer.”


The vav ( ו ) disjunctive on the noun at the beginning of the clause forms a strong adversative clause here.


Or “an evil report,” i.e., one that was a defamation of the grace of God.


Heb “which we passed over in it”; the pronoun on the preposition serves as a resumptive pronoun for the relative, and need not be translated literally.


The verb is the feminine singular participle from אָכַל (’ akhal ); it modifies the land as a “devouring land,” a bold figure for the difficulty of living in the place.


Heb “in its midst.”


The Greek version uses gigantes (“giants”) to translate “the Nephilim,” but it does not retain the clause “the sons of Anak are from the Nephilim.” sn The Nephilim are the legendary giants of antiquity. They are first discussed in Gen 6:4 . This forms part of the pessimism of the spies’ report.


Heb “in our eyes.”


Heb “in their eyes.”


The two verbs “lifted up their voice and cried” form a hendiadys; the idiom of raising the voice means that they cried aloud.


There are a number of things that the verb “to weep” or “wail” can connote. It could reflect joy, grief, lamentation, or repentance, but here it reflects fear, hopelessness, or vexation at the thought of coming all this way and being defeated by the Canaanite armies. See Judg 20:23, 26 .


The Hebrew verb “to murmur” is לוּן ( lun ). It is a strong word, signifying far more than complaining or grumbling, as some of the modern translations have it. The word is most often connected to the wilderness experience. It is paralleled in the literature with the word “to rebel.” The murmuring is like a parliamentary vote of no confidence, for they no longer trusted their leaders and wished to choose a new leader and return. This “return to Egypt” becomes a symbol of their lack of faith in the Lord .


The optative is expressed by לוּ ( lu ) and then the verb, here the perfect tense מַתְנוּ ( matnu ) – “O that we had died….” Had they wanted to die in Egypt they should not have cried out to the Lord to deliver them from bondage. Here the people became consumed with the fear and worry of what lay ahead, and in their panic they revealed a lack of trust in God.


Heb “died.”


Heb “a man to his brother.”


The verb is נָתַן ( natan , “to give”), but this verb has quite a wide range of meanings in the Bible. Here it must mean “to make,” “to choose,” “to designate” or the like.


The word “head” ( רֹאשׁ , ro ’ sh ) probably refers to a tribal chief who was capable to judge and to lead to war (see J. R. Bartlett, “The Use of the Word רֹאשׁ as a Title in the Old Testament,” VT 19 [1969]: 1-10).


The form is a cohortative with a vav ( ו ) prefixed. After the preceding cohortative this could also be interpreted as a purpose or result clause – in order that we may return.


Heb “before all the assembly of the congregation.”


The repetition of the adverb מְאֹד ( mÿ ’ od ) is used to express this: “very, very [good].”


The subjective genitives “milk and honey” are symbols of the wealth of the land, second only to bread. Milk was a sign of such abundance ( Gen 49:12 ; Isa 7:21,22 ). Because of the climate the milk would thicken quickly and become curds, eaten with bread or turned into butter. The honey mentioned here is the wild honey (see Deut 32:13 ; Judg 14:8-9 ). It signified sweetness, or the finer things of life ( Ezek 3:3 ).


Heb “their shade.” The figure compares the shade from the sun with the protection from the enemy. It is also possible that the text is alluding to their deities here.


Heb “said to stone them with stones.” The verb and the object are not from the same root, but the combination nonetheless forms an emphasis equal to the cognate accusative.


The vav ( ו ) on the noun “glory” indicates a strong contrast, one that interrupts their threatened attack.


The Greek, Syriac, and Tg. Ps.-J. have “in the cloud over the tent.”


The verb נָאַץ ( na ’ ats ) means “to condemn, spurn” (BDB 610 s.v.). Coats suggests that in some contexts the word means actual rejection or renunciation ( Rebellion in the Wilderness , 146, 7). This would include the idea of distaste.


The verb “to believe” (root אָמַן , ’ aman ) has the basic idea of support, dependability for the root. The Hiphil has a declarative sense, namely, to consider something reliable or dependable and to act on it. The people did not trust what the Lord said.


The Greek version has “death.”


The construction is unusual in that we have here a perfect tense with a vav ( ו ) consecutive with no verb before it to establish the time sequence. The context requires that this be taken as a vav ( ו ) consecutive. It actually forms the protasis for the next verse, and would best be rendered “when … then they will say.”


The singular participle is to be taken here as a collective, representing all the inhabitants of the land.


“Face to face” is literally “eye to eye.” It only occurs elsewhere in Isa 52:8 . This expresses the closest communication possible.


The verb is the Hiphil perfect of מוּת ( mut ), וְהֵמַתָּה ( vÿhemattah ). The vav ( ו ) consecutive makes this also a future time sequence verb, but again in a conditional clause.


Heb “as one man.”


The form in the text is אֲדֹנָי (’ adonay ), the word that is usually used in place of the tetragrammaton. It is the plural form with the pronominal suffix, and so must refer to God.


The expression is רַב־חֶסֶד ( rav khesed ) means “much of loyal love,” or “faithful love.” Some have it “totally faithful,” but that omits the aspect of his love.


Or “rebellion.”


The infinitive absolute emphasizes the verbal activity of the imperfect tense, which here serves as a habitual imperfect. Negated it states what God does not do; and the infinitive makes that certain.


The verb סְלַח־נָא ( selakh-na ’), the imperative form, means “forgive” (see Ps 130:4 ), “pardon,” “excuse.” The imperative is of course a prayer, a desire, and not a command.


The construct unit is “the greatness of your loyal love.” This is the genitive of specification, the first word being the modifier.


Heb “forgiven according to your word.” The direct object, “them,” is implied.


The verb נָסָה ( nasah ) means “to test, to tempt, to prove.” It can be used to indicate things are tried or proven, or for testing in a good sense, or tempting in the bad sense, i.e., putting God to the test. In all uses there is uncertainty or doubt about the outcome. Some uses of the verb are positive: If God tests Abraham in Genesis 22:1 , it is because there is uncertainty whether he fears the Lord or not; if people like Gideon put out the fleece and test the Lord , it is done by faith but in order to be certain of the Lord ’s presence. But here, when these people put God to the test ten times, it was because they doubted the goodness and ability of God, and this was a major weakness. They had proof to the contrary, but chose to challenge God.


“Ten” is here a round figure, emphasizing the complete testing. But see F. V. Winnett, The Mosaic Tradition , 121-54.


Heb “listened to my voice.”


The word אִם (’ im ) indicates a negative oath formula: “if” means “they will not.” It is elliptical. In a human oath one would be saying: “The Lord do to me if they see …,” meaning “they will by no means see.” Here God is swearing that they will not see the land.


Heb “seed.”


The figure is aposiopesis, or sudden silence. The main verb is deleted from the line, “how long…this evil community.” The intensity of the emotion is the reason for the ellipsis.


The word נְאֻם ( nÿ ’ um ) is an “oracle.” It is followed by the subjective genitive: “the oracle of the Lord ” is equal to saying “the Lord says.”


Heb “in my ears.” sn They had expressed the longing to have died in the wilderness, and not in war. God will now give them that. They would not say to God “your will be done,” so he says to them, “your will be done” (to borrow from C. S. Lewis).


Or “your corpses” (also in vv. 32, 33 ).


The relative pronoun “which” is joined with the resumptive pronoun “in it” to form a smoother reading “where.”


The Hebrew text uses the anthropomorphic expression “I raised my hand” in taking an oath.


Heb “to cause you to dwell; to cause you to settle.”


Or “plunder.”


Heb “know.”


The word is “shepherds.” It means that the people would be wilderness nomads, grazing their flock on available land.


Heb “you shall bear your whoredoms.” The imagery of prostitution is used throughout the Bible to reflect spiritual unfaithfulness, leaving the covenant relationship and following after false gods. Here it is used generally for their rebellion in the wilderness, but not for following other gods.


The infinitive is from תָּמַם ( tamam ), which means “to be complete.” The word is often used to express completeness in a good sense – whole, blameless, or the like. Here and in v. 35 it seems to mean “until your deaths have been completed.” See also Gen 47:15 ; Deut 2:15 .


Heb “you shall bear.”


The phrase refers to the consequences of open hostility to God, or perhaps abandonment of God. The noun תְּנוּאָה ( tÿnu ’ ah ) occurs in Job 33:10 (perhaps). The related verb occurs in Num 30:6 HT ( 30:5 ET) and 32:7 with the sense of “disallow, discourage.” The sense of the expression adopted in this translation comes from the meticulous study of R. Loewe, “Divine Frustration Exegetically Frustrated,” Words and Meanings , 137-58.


The verb is the Hiphil infinitive construct with a lamed ( ל ) preposition from the root יָצָא ( yatsa ’, “to bring out”). The use of the infinitive here is epexegetical, that is, explaining how they caused the people to murmur.


The Hebrew text uses the preposition “from,” “some of” – “from those men.” The relative pronoun is added to make a smoother reading.


The preterite here is subordinated to the next preterite to form a temporal clause.


The word אָבַל (’ aval ) is rare, used mostly for mourning over deaths, but it is used here of mourning over bad news (see also Exod 33:4 ; 1 Sam 15:35; 16:1 ; etc.).


The verb וַיַּשְׁכִּמוּ ( vayyashkimu ) is often found in a verbal hendiadys construction: “They rose early…and they went up” means “they went up early.”


The Hebrew text says literally “the top of the hill,” but judging from the location and the terrain it probably means the heights of the hill country.


The verb is simply “said,” but it means the place that the Lord said to go up to in order to fight.


The line literally has, “Why is this [that] you are transgressing….” The demonstrative pronoun is enclitic; it brings the force of “why in the world are you doing this now?”


Heb “mouth.”


This verb could also be subordinated to the preceding: “that you be not smitten.”


N. H. Snaith compares Arabic ’ afala (“to swell”) and gafala (“reckless, headstrong”; Leviticus and Numbers [NCB], 248). The word עֹפֶל (’ ofel ) means a “rounded hill” or a “tumor.” The idea behind the verb may be that of “swelling,” and so “act presumptuously.”


The disjunctive vav ( ו ) here introduces a circumstantial clause; the most appropriate one here would be the concessive “although.”


Heb “came down.”


The verb used here means “crush by beating,” or “pounded” them. The Greek text used “cut them in pieces.”


The name “Hormah” means “destruction”; it is from the word that means “ban, devote” for either destruction or temple use.


Heb “the land of your habitations.”


The Hebrew participle here has the futur instans use of the participle, expressing that something is going to take place. It is not imminent, but it is certain that God would give the land to Israel.


The three words at the beginning of this verse are all etymologically related: “the one who offers his offering shall offer.”


Heb “for the one lamb,” but it clearly means “for each lamb.”


The text changes from direct address here to the third person form of the verb. If the MT is correct, then to make a smooth translation it would need to be made a passive (in view of the fact that no subject is expressed).


Heb “according to thus shall it be done.”


The word גּוּר ( gur ) was traditionally translated “to sojourn,” i.e., to live temporarily in a land. Here the two words are from the root: “if a sojourner sojourns.”


Heb “in your midst.”


The Hebrew text just has “to your generations,” but it means in the future.


The imperfect tenses must reflect the responsibility to comply with the law, and so the classifications of instruction or obligation may be applied.


The word “apply” is supplied in the translation.


Or “a statute forever.”


Heb “as you, as [so] the alien.”


The relative clause is literally, “which I am causing you to enter there.” The final adverb is resumptive, and must be joined with the relative pronoun.


The verse has a temporal clause that actually continues or supplements the temporal clause of the preceding verse. It is made up of the temporal indicator, the infinitive construct with the preposition, and the suffixed subjective genitive: “and it shall be when you eat.” Here it is translated simply “and eat” since the temporal element was introduced in the last verse.


This is the תְּרוּמָה ( tÿrumah ), the “raised offering” or “heave offering” (cf. KJV, ASV). It may simply be called a “contribution” (so NAB). The verb of the sentence is from the same root: “you shall lift up/raise up.” It was to be an offering separated from the rest and raised up to the Lord in the sight of all. It was designed to remind the Israelites that the produce and the land belonged to God.


Or “the first of your dough.” The phrase is not very clear. N. H. Snaith thinks it means a batch of loaves from the kneading trough – the first batch of the baking ( Leviticus and Numbers [NCB], 251).


The verb is the plural imperfect; the sin discussed here is a sin committed by the community, or the larger part of the community.


Heb “hand.”


The idea of לִשְׁגָגָה ( lishgagah ) seems to be that of “inadvertence” or “without intent.” The text gives no indication of how this offense might be committed, or what it might include. It probably describes any transgressions done in ignorance of the Law that involved a violation of tabernacle procedure or priestly protocol or social misdemeanor. Even though it was done unintentionally, it was still a violation and called for ritual purification.


Heb “[away] from the eyes of the community.”


The verb is the Piel perfect with vav ( ו ) consecutive ( וְכִפֶּר , vÿkhipper ) to continue the instruction of the passage: “the priest shall make atonement,” meaning the priest is to make atonement for the sin (thus the present translation). This verb means “to expiate,” “to atone for,” “to pacify.” It describes the ritual events by which someone who was separated from the holy Lord God could find acceptance into his presence through the sacrificial blood of the substitutionary animal. See and Num 17:6-15.


Again, rather than translate literally “and it shall be forgiven [to] them” (all the community), one could say, “they (all the community) will be forgiven.” The meaning is the same.


The Hebrew text has וְאִם־נֶפֶשׁ אַחַת ( vÿ ’ im-nefesh ’ akhat ), sometime translated “and if any soul.” But the word describes the whole person, the soul in the body; it refers here to the individual who sins.


Heb “soul.”


The sin is described literally as acting “with a high hand” – בְּיָד רָמָה ( bÿyad ramah ). The expression means that someone would do something with deliberate defiance, with an arrogance in spite of what the Lord said. It is as if the sinner was about to attack God, or at least lifting his hand against God. The implication of the expression is that it was done in full knowledge of the Law (especially since this contrasts throughout with the sins of ignorance). Blatant defiance of the word of the Lord is dealt with differently. For similar expressions, see Exod 14:8 and Num 33:3 .


The verb occurs only in the Piel ; it means “to blaspheme,” “to revile.”


The word order in the Hebrew text places “Yahweh” first for emphasis – it is the Lord such a person insults.


The clause begins with “and” because the verb is the perfect tense with vav ( ו ) consecutive. As discussed with Num 9:13 , to be cut off could mean excommunication from the community, death by the community, or death by divine intervention.


The verb בָּזָה ( bazah , “to despise”) means to treat something as worthless, to treat it with contempt, to look down the nose at something as it were.


The verb פָּרַר ( parar , “to break”) can mean to nullify, break, or violate a covenant.


The construction uses the Niphal imperfect with the modifying Niphal infinitive absolute. The infinitive makes the sentence more emphatic. If the imperfect tense is taken as an instruction imperfect, then the infinitive makes the instruction more binding. If it is a simple future, then the future is certain. In either case, there is no exclusion from being cut off.


The preterite of the verb “to be” is here subordinated to the next, parallel verb form, to form a temporal clause.


The sentence begins with the emphatic use of the infinitive absolute with the verb in the Hophal imperfect: “he shall surely be put to death.” Then, a second infinitive absolute רָגוֹם ( ragom ) provides the explanatory activity – all the community is to stone him with stones. The punishment is consistent with other decrees from God (see Exod 31:14,15; 35:2 ). Moses had either forgotten such, or they had simply neglected to (or were hesitant to) enact them.


Heb “stoned him with stones, and he died.”


The construction uses the imperative followed by perfect tenses with vav ( ו ) consecutives. The first perfect tense may be translated as the imperative, but the second, being a third common plural form, has to be subordinated as a purpose clause, or as the object of the preceding verb: “speak…and say…that they make.”


Heb “seek out, look into.”


This last clause is a relative clause explaining the influence of the human heart and physical sight. It literally says, “which you go whoring after them.” The verb for “whoring” may be interpreted to mean “act unfaithfully.” So, the idea is these influences lead to unfaithful activity: “after which you act unfaithfully.”


This clause also serves as a purpose/result clause of the preceding – “in order that you may remember….” But because the line is so long, it is simpler to make this a separate sentence in the translation.


The MT reading is plural (“the sons of Reuben”); the Smr and LXX have the singular (“the son of Reuben”).


In the Hebrew text there is no object for the verb “took.” The translation presented above supplies the word “men.” However, it is possible that the MT has suffered damage here. The LXX has “and he spoke.” The Syriac and Targum have “and he was divided.” The editor of BHS suggests that perhaps the MT should be emended to “and he arose.”


Heb “princes” (so KJV, ASV).


These men must have been counselors or judges of some kind.


Heb “men of name,” or “men of renown.”


The meaning of רַב־לָכֶם ( rab-lakhem ) is something like “you have assumed far too much authority.” It simply means “much to you,” perhaps “you have gone to far,” or “you are overreaching yourselves” (M. Noth, Numbers [OTL], 123). He is objecting to the exclusiveness of the system that Moses has been introducing.


Heb “fell on his face.”


Heb “him.”


Heb “his congregation” or “his community.” The expression is unusual, but what it signifies is that Korah had set up a rival “Israel” with himself as leader.


The verb is the Piel perfect. There is no imperfect tense before this, which makes the construction a little difficult. If the vav ( ו ) is classified as a consecutive, then the form would stand alone as an equivalent to the imperfect, and rendered as a modal nuance such as “would you [now] seek,” or as a progressive imperfect, “are you seeking.” This latter nuance can be obtained by treating it as a regular perfect tense, with an instantaneous nuance: “do you [now] seek.” sn Moses discerned correctly the real motivation for the rebellion. Korah wanted to be the high priest because he saw how much power there was in the spiritual leadership in Israel. He wanted something like a general election with himself as the candidate and his supporters promoting him. The great privilege of being a Levite and serving in the sanctuary was not enough for him – the status did not satisfy him. Korah gave no rebuttal. The test would be one of ministering with incense. This would bring them into direct proximity with the Lord . If God honored Korah as a ministering priest, then it would be settled. But Moses accuses them of rebellion against the Lord , because the Lord had chosen Aaron to be the priest.


Heb “Moses sent to summon.” The verb קָרָא ( qara ’) followed by the lamed ( ל ) preposition does not mean “call to” but “summon.” This is a command performance; for them to appear would be to submit to Moses’ authority. This they will not do.


The imperfect tense נַעֲלֶה ( na ’ aleh ) expresses their unwillingness to report: “we are not willing,” or “we will not.” The verb means “to go up.” It is used in the sense of appearing before an authority or a superior (see, e.g., Gen 46:31 ; Deut 25:7 ; Judg 4:5 ).


The question is rhetorical. It was not a small thing to them – it was a big thing.


The modern scholar who merely sees these words as belonging to an earlier tradition about going up to the land of Canaan that flows with milk and honey misses the irony here. What is happening is that the text is showing how twisted the thinking of the rebels is. They have turned things completely around. Egypt was the land flowing with milk and honey, not Canaan where they will die. The words of rebellion are seldom original, and always twisted.


The verb הִשְׂתָּרֵר ( histarer ) is the Hitpael infinitive absolute that emphasizes the preceding תִשְׂתָּרֵר ( tistarer ), the Hitpael imperfect tense (both forms having metathesis). The verb means “to rule; to act like a prince; to make oneself a prince.” This is the only occurrence of the reflexive for this verb. The exact nuance is difficult to translate into English. But they are accusing Moses of seizing princely power for himself, perhaps making a sarcastic reference to his former status in Egypt. The rebels here are telling Moses that they had discerned his scheme, and so he could not “hoodwink” them (cf. NEB).


Here אַף (’ af ) has the sense of “in addition.” It is not a common use.


Heb “will you bore out the eyes of these men?” The question is “Will you continue to mislead them?” (or “hoodwink” them). In Deut 16:19 it is used for taking a bribe; something like that kind of deception is intended here. They are simply stating that Moses is a deceiver who is misleading the people with false promises.


The verb means “to turn toward”; it is a figurative expression that means “to pay attention to” or “to have regard for.” So this is a prayer against Dathan and Abiram.


Heb “and take, a man, his censer.”


This verb and the following one are both perfect tenses with vav ( ו ) consecutives. Following the imperative they carry the same force, but in sequence.


This clause is clearly foundational for the clause that follows, the appearance of the Lord ; therefore it should be subordinated to the next as a temporal clause (one preterite followed by another preterite may be so subordinated).


The verb is הִבָּדְלוּ ( hibbadÿlu ), the Niphal imperative of בָּדַל ( badal ). This is the same word that was just used when Moses reminded the Levites that they had been separated from the community to serve the Lord .


The expression “the God of the spirits of all humanity [flesh]” is somewhat difficult. The Hebrew text says אֱלֹהֵי הָרוּחֹת לְכָל־בָּשָׂר (’ elohey harukhot lÿkhol-basar ). This expression occurs in Num 27:16 again. It also occurs in some postbiblical texts, a fact which has prompted some scholars to conclude that it is a late addition. The words clearly show that Moses is interceding for the congregation. The appeal in the verse is that it is better for one man to die for the whole nation than the whole nation for one man (see also John 11:50 ).


The verb is the Qal imperfect יֶחֱטָא ( yekheta ’); it refers to the sinful rebellion of Korah, but Moses is stating something of a principle: “One man sins, and will you be angry….” A past tense translation would assume that this is a preterite use of the imperfect (without vav [ ו ] consecutive).


The motif of “going up” is still present; here the Hebrew text says “go up” (the Niphal imperative – “go up yourselves”) from their tents, meaning, move away from them.


Heb “rose up.”


The word רָשָׁע ( rasha ’) has the sense of a guilty criminal. The word “wicked” sometimes gives the wrong connotation. These men were opposing the Lord , and so were condemned as criminals – they were guilty. The idea of “wickedness” therefore applies in that sense.


The preposition bet ( בְּ ) in this line is causal – “on account of their sins.”


The verb נִצָּבִים ( nitsavim ) suggests a defiant stance, for the word is often used in the sense of taking a stand for or against something. It can also be somewhat neutral, having the sense of positioning oneself for a purpose.


Heb “in this.”


The Hebrew text simply has כִּי־לֹא מִלִּבִּי ( ki-lo ’ millibbi , “for not from my heart”). The heart is the center of the will, the place decisions are made (see H. W. Wolff, Anthropology of the Old Testament ). Moses is saying that the things he has done have not come “from the will of man” so to speak – and certainly not from some secret desire on his part to seize power.


Heb “if like the death of every man they die.”


The noun is פְּקֻדָּה ( pÿquddah , “appointment, visitation”). The expression refers to a natural death, parallel to the first expression.


The verb בָּרָא ( bara ’) is normally translated “create” in the Bible. More specifically it means to fashion or make or do something new and fresh. Here the verb is joined with its cognate accusative to underscore that this will be so different everyone will know it is of God.


The figures are personifications. But they vividly describe the catastrophe to follow – which was very much like a mouth swallowing them.


The word is “life” or “lifetime”; it certainly means their lives – they themselves. But the presence of this word suggest more. It is an accusative specifying the state of the subject – they will go down alive to Sheol.


The word “Sheol” in the Bible can be used four different ways: the grave, the realm of the departed [wicked] spirits or Hell, death in general, or a place of extreme danger (one that will lead to the grave if God does not intervene). The usage here is certainly the first, and very likely the second as well. A translation of “pit” would not be inappropriate. Since they will go down there alive, it is likely that they will sense the deprivation and the separation from the land above. See H. W. Robinson, Inspiration and Revelation in the Old Testament ; N. J. Tromp, Primitive Conceptions of Death and the Netherworld in the Old Testament (BibOr 21), 21-23; and A. Heidel, The Gilgamesh Epic, especially ch. .


The initial temporal clause is standard: It begins with the temporal indicator “and it was,” followed here by the Piel infinitive construct with the preposition and the subjective genitive suffix. “And it happened when he finished.”


The infinitive construct with the preposition lamed ( ל ) functions here as the direct object of the preceding infinitive. It tells what he finished.


Heb “all Israel.”


Heb “voice.”


Heb “lest.”


For a discussion of the fire of the Lord , see J. C. H. Laughlin, “The Strange Fire of Nadab and Abihu,” JBL 95 (1976): 559-65.


Heb “say to.”


The verb is the jussive with a vav ( ו ) coming after the imperative; it may be subordinated to form a purpose clause (“that he may pick up”) or the object of the imperative.


The Hebrew text just has “fire,” but it would be hard to conceive of this action apart from the idea of coals of fire.


The expression is “in/by/against their life.” That they sinned against their life means that they brought ruin to themselves.


The form is the perfect tense with vav ( ו ) consecutive . But there is no expressed subject for “and they shall make them,” and so it may be treated as a passive (“they shall [must] be made”).


Heb “from the seed of.”


Heb “hand.”


The temporal clause is constructed with the temporal indicator (“and it was”) followed by the Niphal infinitive construct and preposition.


The verse uses וְהִנֵּה ( vÿhinneh , “and behold”). This is the deictic particle – it is used to point things out, suddenly calling attention to them, as if the reader were there. The people turned to look toward the tent – and there is the cloud!


Heb “they fell on their faces.”


Heb “took.”


Or “had spoken” (NASB); NRSV “had ordered.”


Heb “receive from them a rod, a rod from the house of a father.”


Heb “from every leader of them according to their fathers’ house.”


Heb “one rod for the head of their fathers’ house.”


The verb is the Hiphil perfect of נוּחַ ( nuakh , “to rest”), and so “to set at rest, lay, place, put.” The form with the vav ( ו ) consecutive continues the instruction of the previous verse.


The Hebrew text simply reads “the covenant” or “the testimony.”


Heb “a rod for one leader, a rod for one leader.”


Heb “the house of their fathers.”


The name of the tent now attests to the centrality of the ark of the covenant. Instead of the “tent of meeting” ( מוֹעֵד , mo ’ ed ) we now find the “the tent of the testimony” ( הָעֵדֻת , ha ’ edut ).


Here too the deictic particle (“and behold”) is added to draw attention to the sight in a vivid way.


The words “at them” are not in the Hebrew text, but they have been added in the translation for clarity.


The verb means “to finish; to complete” and here “to bring to an end.” It is the imperfect following the imperative, and so introduces a purpose clause (as a final imperfect).


This is another final imperfect in a purpose clause.


The use of הֵן ( hen ) and the perfect tense in the nuance of a prophetic perfect expresses their conviction that they were bound to die – it was certain (see GKC 312-13 §106. n ).


The verse stresses the completeness of their death: “will we be consumed by dying” ( הַאִם תַּמְנוּ לִגְוֹעַ , ha ’ im tamnu ligvoa ’).


Heb “your father’s house.”


The clause is a circumstantial clause because the disjunctive vav ( ו ) is on a nonverb to start the clause.


Now the sentence uses the Niphal perfect with a vav ( ו ) consecutive from the same root לָוָה ( lavah ).


The word is “stranger, alien,” but it can also mean Israelites here.


The clause is a purpose clause, and the imperfect tense a final imperfect.


Heb “taken.”


The infinitive construct in this sentence is from עָבַד (’ avad ), and so is the noun that serves as its object: to serve the service.


This is an uncommon root. It may be connected to the word “anoint” as here (see RSV). But it may also be seen as an intended parallel to “perpetual due” (see Gen 47:22 ; Exod 29:28 ; Lev 6:11 [HT]).


Heb “from the fire.” It probably refers to those parts that were not burned.


This form may be classified as a perfect of resolve – he has decided to give them to them, even though this is a listing of what they will receive.


The “ban” ( חֵרֶם , kherem ) in Hebrew describes that which is exclusively the Lord ’s, either for his sanctuary use, or for his destruction. It seems to refer to an individual’s devoting something freely to God.


The construction uses the infinitive absolute and the imperfect tense of the verb “to redeem” in order to stress the point – they were to be redeemed. N. H. Snaith suggests that the verb means to get by payment what was not originally yours, whereas the other root גָאַל ( ga ’ al ) means to get back what was originally yours ( Leviticus and Numbers [NCB], 268).


Or “throw, toss.”


The phrase “of property” is supplied as a clarification.


The Hebrew text uses the infinitive construct of the verb “to bear” with the lamed ( ל ) preposition to express the result of such an action. “To bear their sin” would mean that they would have to suffer the consequences of their sin.


The verse begins with the perfect tense of עָבַד (’ avad ) with vav ( ו ) consecutive, making the form equal to the instructions preceding it. As its object the verb has the cognate accusative “service.”


Heb “they”; the referent (the Levites) has been supplied in the translation for clarity.


The Hebrew text uses both the verb and the object from the same root to stress the point: They will not inherit an inheritance. The inheritance refers to land.


The classification of the perfect tense here too could be the perfect of resolve, since this law is declaring what will be their portion – “I have decided to give.”


In the Hebrew text the verb has no expressed subject (although the “Israelites” is certainly intended), and so it can be rendered as a passive.


The verb in this clause is the Hiphil perfect with a vav ( ו ) consecutive; it has the same force as an imperfect of instruction: “when…then you are to offer up.”


The verb is חָשַׁב ( khashav , “to reckon; to count; to think”); it is the same verb used for “crediting” Abram with righteousness. Here the tithe of the priests will be counted as if it were a regular tithe.


Heb “fullness,” meaning the fullness of the harvest, i.e., a full harvest.


The construction is “every raised offering of the Lord ”; the genitive here is probably to be taken as a genitive of worth – the offering that is due the Lord .


Or “its hallowed thing.”


The wording of this verse is confusing; it may be that it is addressed to the priests, telling them how to deal with the offerings of the Levites.


The clause begins with the infinitive construct with its preposition and suffixed subject serving to indicate the temporal clause.


The verb is the perfect tense with vav ( ו ) consecutive; it functions as the equivalent of the imperfect of permission.


The final clause could also be rendered “in order that you do not die.” The larger section can also be interpreted differently; rather than take it as a warning, it could be taken as an assurance that when they do all of this they will not be profaning it and so will not die (R. K. Harrison, Numbers [WEC], 253).


Heb “speak to.”


The line literally reads, “speak to the Israelites that [and] they bring [will bring].” The imperfect [or jussive] is subordinated to the imperative either as a purpose clause, or as the object of the instruction – speak to them that they bring, or tell them to bring.


The color is designated as red, although the actual color would be a tanned red-brown color for the animal (see the usage in Isa 1:18 and Song 5:10 ). The reddish color suggested the blood of ritual purification; see J. Milgrom, “The Paradox of the Red Cow (),” VT 31 (1981): 62-72.


Heb “wherein there is no defect.”


The clause is a little ambiguous. It reads “and he shall slaughter it before him.” It sounds as if someone else will kill the heifer in the priest’s presence. Since no one is named as the subject, it may be translated as a passive. Some commentators simply interpret that Eleazar was to kill the animal personally, but that is a little forced for “before him.” The Greek text gives a third person plural sense to the verb; the Vulgate follows that reading.


The verb is the perfect tense with vav ( ו ) consecutive; it functions here as the equivalent of the imperfect of instruction.


Again, the verb has no expressed subject, and so is given a passive translation.


The imperfect tense is third masculine singular, and so again the verb is to be made passive.


The sequence continues with the perfect tense and vav ( ו ) consecutive.


Heb “his flesh.”


This is the imperfect of permission.


Heb “it will be.”


The expression לְמֵי נִדָּה ( lÿme niddah ) is “for waters of impurity.” The genitive must designate the purpose of the waters – they are for cases of impurity, and so serve for cleansing or purifying, thus “water of purification.” The word “impurity” can also mean “abhorrent” because it refers to so many kinds of impurities. It is also called a purification offering; Milgrom notes that this is fitting because the sacrificial ritual involved transfers impurity from the purified to the purifier (pp. 62-72).


The form is the participle with the article functioning as a substantive: “the one who touches.”


Heb “the dead.”


The expression is full: לְכָל־נֶפֶשׁ אָדָם ( lÿkhol-nefesh ’ adam ) – of any life of a man, i.e., of any person.


The verb is a perfect tense with vav ( ו ) consecutive; it follows only the participle used as the subject, but since the case is hypothetical and therefore future, this picks up the future time. The adjective “ceremonially” is supplied in the translation as a clarification.


The verb is the Hitpael of חָטָא ( khata ’), a verb that normally means “to sin.” But the Piel idea in many places is “to cleanse; to purify.” This may be explained as a privative use (“to un-sin” someone, meaning cleanse) or denominative (“make a sin offering for someone”). It is surely connected to the purification offering, and so a sense of purify is what is wanted here.


The word order gives the classification and then the condition: “a man, when he dies….”


The expression for “in the open field” is literally “upon the face of the field” ( עַל־פְּנֵי הַשָּׂדֶה , ’ al pÿne hassadeh ). This ruling is in contrast now to what was contacted in the tent.


Heb “a dead body”; but in contrast to the person killed with a sword, this must refer to someone who died of natural causes.


The verb is the perfect tense, third masculine plural, with a vav ( ו ) consecutive. The verb may be worded as a passive, “ashes must be taken,” but that may be too awkward for this sentence. It may be best to render it with a generic “you” to fit the instruction of the text.


The word “heifer” is not in the Hebrew text, but it is implied.


Here too the verb is the perfect tense with vav ( ו ) consecutive; rather than make this passive, it is here left as a direct instruction to follow the preceding one. For the use of the verb נָתַן ( natan ) in the sense of “pour,” see S. C. Reif, “A Note on a Neglected Connotation of ntn ,” VT 20 (1970): 114-16.


The expression is literally “living water.” Living water is the fresh, flowing spring water that is clear, life-giving, and not the collected pools of stagnant or dirty water.


The construction uses a simple Piel of חָטָא ( khata ’, “to purify”) with a pronominal suffix – “he shall purify him.” Some commentators take this to mean that after he sprinkles the unclean then he must purify himself. But that would not be the most natural way to read this form.


The form has the conjunction with it: וּמַזֵּה ( umazzeh ). The conjunction subordinates the following as the special law. It could literally be translated “and this shall be…that the one who sprinkles.”


The Hebrew text stresses this idea by use of apposition: “the Israelites entered, the entire community, the wilderness.”


The verb is רִיב ( riv ); it is often used in the Bible for a legal complaint, a law suit, at least in form. But it can also describe a quarrel, or strife, like that between Abram’s men and Lot’s men in . It will be the main verb behind the commemorative name Meribah, the place where the people strove with God. It is a far more serious thing than grumbling – it is directed, intentional, and well-argued. For further discussion, see J. Limburg, “The Root ‘rib’ and the Prophetic Lawsuit Speeches,” JBL 88 (1969): 291-304.


Heb “and they said, saying.”


The particle לוּ ( lu ) indicates the optative nuance of the line – the wishing or longing for death. It is certainly an absurdity to want to have died, but God took them at their word and they died in the wilderness.


Heb “and why….” The conjunction seems to be recording another thing that the people said in their complaint against Moses.


The clause uses the infinitive construct with the lamed ( ל ) preposition. The clause would be a result clause in this sentence: “Why have you brought us here…with the result that we will all die?”


Heb “and why.”


Here also the infinitive construct (Hiphil) forms the subordinate clause of the preceding interrogative clause.


The verb is the Piel perfect with vav ( ו ) consecutive, following the two imperatives in the verse. Here is the focus of the instruction for Moses.


Heb “give.” The verb is the perfect tense with vav ( ו ) consecutive, as are the next two in the verse. These are not now equal to the imperatives, but imperfects, showing the results of speaking to the rock: “speak…and it will…and so you will….”


The word is הַמֹּרִים ( hammorim , “the rebels”), but here as a vocative: “you rebels.” It was a harsh address, although well-earned.


The word order and the emphasis of the tense are important to this passage. The word order is “from this rock must we bring out to you water?” The emphasis is clearly on “from this rock!” The verb is the imperfect tense; it has one of the modal nuances here, probably obligatory – “must we do this?”


Or “to sanctify me.” sn The verb is the main word for “believe, trust.” It is the verb that describes the faith in the Word of the Lord that leads to an appropriate action. Here God says that Moses did not believe him, meaning that what he did showed more of Moses than of what God said. Moses had taken a hostile stance toward the people, and then hit the rock twice. This showed that Moses was not satisfied with what God said, but made it more forceful and terrifying, thus giving the wrong picture of God to the people. By doing this the full power and might of the Lord was not displayed to the people. It was a momentary lack of faith, but it had to be dealt with.


Heb “in the eyes of.”


There is debate as to exactly what the sin of Moses was. Some interpreters think that the real sin might have been that he refused to do this at first, but that fact has been suppressed from the text. Some think the text was deliberately vague to explain why they could not enter the land without demeaning them. Others simply, and more likely, note that in Moses there was unbelief, pride, anger, impatience – disobedience.


The form is unusual – it is the Niphal preterite, and not the normal use of the Piel / Pual stem for “sanctify/sanctified.” The basic idea of “he was holy” has to be the main idea, but in this context it refers to the fact that through judging Moses God was making sure people ensured his holiness among them. The word also forms a wordplay on the name Kadesh.


Heb “And Moses sent.”


Heb “found.”


Heb “many days.”


The verb רָעַע ( ra ’ a ’) means “to act or do evil.” Evil here is in the sense of causing pain or trouble. So the causative stem in our passage means “to treat wickedly.”


The word could be rendered “angel” or “messenger.” Some ambiguity may be intended in this report.


The Hebrew text uses הִנֵּה ( hinneh ) to emphasize the “here and now” aspect of the report to Edom.


Heb “your border.”


The request is expressed by the use of the cohortative, “let us pass through.” It is the proper way to seek permission.


Heb “borders.”


The imperfect tense here has the nuance of prohibition.


Heb “to meet.”


The Hebrew text uses singular pronouns, “I” and “my,” but it is the people of Israel that are intended, and so it may be rendered in the plural. Similarly, Edom speaks in the first person, probably from the king. But it too could be rendered “we.”


Heb “to meet him.”


Heb “with many [heavy] people and with a strong hand.” The translation presented above is interpretive, but that is what the line means. It was a show of force, numbers and weapons, to intimidate the Israelites.


Again the passage uses apposition: “the Israelites, the whole community.”


The verb is in the second person plural form, and so it is Moses and Aaron who rebelled, and so now because of that Aaron first and then Moses would die without going into the land.


Heb “mouth.”


The word “priestly” is supplied in the translation for clarity.


Heb “will be gathered”; this is a truncated form of the usual expression “gathered to his ancestors,” found in v. 24 . The phrase “to his ancestors” is supplied in the translation here.


Heb “eyes.”


Or “the south”; “Negev” has become a technical name for the southern desert region and is still in use in modern times.


The Hebrew text uses a cognate accusative with the verb: They vowed a vow. The Israelites were therefore determined with God’s help to defeat Arad.


The Hebrew text has the infinitive absolute and the imperfect tense of נָתַן ( natan ) to stress the point – if you will surely/indeed give.”


Heb “my.”


On the surface this does not sound like much of a vow. But the key is in the use of the verb for “utterly destroy” – חָרַם ( kharam ). Whatever was put to this “ban” or “devotion” belonged to God, either for his use, or for destruction. The oath was in fact saying that they would take nothing from this for themselves. It would simply be the removal of what was alien to the faith, or to God’s program.


Smr, Greek, and Syriac add “into his hand.”


In the Hebrew text the verb has no expressed subject, and so here too is made passive. The name “Hormah” is etymologically connected to the verb “utterly destroy,” forming the popular etymology (or paronomasia, a phonetic wordplay capturing the significance of the event).


The “Red Sea” is the general designation for the bodies of water on either side of the Sinai peninsula, even though they are technically gulfs from the Red Sea.


Heb “the soul of the people,” expressing the innermost being of the people as they became frustrated.


Heb “our souls.”


The Israelites’ opinion about the manna was clear enough – “worthless.” The word used is קְלֹקֵל ( qÿloqel , “good for nothing, worthless, miserable”).


Heb “fiery.”


The designation of the serpents/ snakes is נְחָשִׁים ( nÿkhashim ), which is similar to the word for “bronze” ( נְחֹשֶׁת , nÿkhoshet ). This has led some scholars to describe the serpents as bronze in color. The description of them as fiery indicates they were poisonous. Perhaps the snake in question is a species of adder.


The verb is the Hiphil jussive with a vav ( ו ) consecutive from the verb סוּר ( sur ); after the imperative this form may be subordinated to become a purpose clause.


The word order is slightly different in Hebrew: “and it shall be anyone who is bitten when he looks at it he shall live.”


Heb “the rising of the sun.”


Or “border.”


The ancient versions show a wide variation here: Smr has “Waheb on the Sea of Reeds,” the Greek version has “he has set Zoob on fire and the torrents of Arnon.” Several modern versions treat the first line literally, taking the two main words as place names: Waheb and Suphah. This seems most likely, but then there would then be no subject or verb. One would need something like “the Israelites marched through.” The KJV, following the Vulgate, made the first word a verb and read the second as “Red Sea” – “what he did in the Red Sea.” But subject of the passage is the terrain. D. L. Christensen proposed emending the first part from אֶת וָהֵב (’ et vahev ) to אַתָּה יְהוָה (’ attah yehvah, “the Lord came”). But this is subjective. See his article “ Num 21:14-15 and the Book of the Wars of Yahweh,” CBQ 36 (1974): 359-60.


There are many variations in this text, but the MT reading of something like “the descent of the torrents/valleys” is preferable, since it is describing the topography.


The words “they traveled” are not in the Hebrew text, but are supplied here because of English style. The same phrase is supplied at the end of v. 18 .


After the adverb “then” the prefixed conjugation has the preterite force. For the archaic constructions, see D. N. Freedman, “Archaic Forms in Early Hebrew Poetry,” ZAW 72 (1960): 101-7. The poem shows all the marks of being ancient.


Or perhaps as a place name, “Jeshimon.”


Smr and the LXX have “words of peace.”


The Hebrew text uses the singular in these verses to match the reference to “Israel.”


Smr has “by the King’s way I will go. I will not turn aside to the right or the left.”


Heb “Sihon.”


Heb “people.”


The clause begins with a preterite with vav ( ו ) consecutive, but may be subordinated to the next preterite as a temporal clause.


The Hebrew text has “Israel,” but the verb is plural.


Heb “with the edge of the sword.”


Heb “its daughters.”


Meaning, “rebuilt and restored.”


Some scholars emend to בָּלְעָה ( bal ’ ah ), reading “and devoured,” instead of בַּעֲלֵי ( ba ’ aley , “its lords”); cf. NAB, NRSV, TEV. This emendation is closer to the Greek and makes a better parallelism, but the MT makes good sense as it stands.


The first verb is difficult. MT has “we shot at them.” The Greek has “their posterity perished” (see GKC 218 §76. f ).


The relative pronoun “which” ( אֲשֶׁר , ’ asher ) posed a problem for the ancient scribes here, as indicated by the so-called extraordinary point ( punta extraordinaria ) over the letter ר ( resh ) of אֲשֶׁר . Smr and the LXX have “fire” ( אֵשׁ , ’ esh ) here (cf. NAB, NJB, RSV, NRSV). Some modern scholars emend the word to שֹׁאָה ( sho ’ ah , “devastation”).


Heb “Israel.”


Heb “Moses sent to spy out.”


Heb “daughters.”


Heb “him”; the referent (Og) has been specified in the translation for clarity.


Heb “no remnant.”


The verse begins with the vav ( ו ) consecutive.


The word “River” is not in the Hebrew text, but has been supplied in the translation for clarity.


For the location of Jericho see Map5-B2 ; Map6-E1 ; Map7-E1 ; Map8-E3 ; Map10-A2 ; Map11-A1 .


The word is simply “company,” but in the context he must mean a vast company – a horde of people.


Heb “by the river”; in most contexts this expression refers to the Euphrates River (cf. NAB, NCV, NRSV, TEV, CEV, NLT).


Heb “in the land of Amaw” (cf. NAB, NRSV, TEV); traditionally “in the land of the sons of his people.” The LXX has “by the river of the land.”


Heb “eye.” So also in v. 11 .


The two lines before this verse begin with the particle הִנֵּה ( hinneh ), and so they lay the foundation for these imperatives. In view of those circumstances, this is what should happen.


Heb “people.” So also in vv. 10, 17, 41 .


The construction uses the imperfect tense אוּכַל (’ ukhal , “I will be able”) followed by the imperfect tense נַכֶּה ( nakkeh , “we will smite/attack/defeat”). The second verb is clearly the purpose or the result of the first, even though there is no conjunction or particle.


The verb is the Piel imperfect of בָּרַךְ ( barakh ), with the nuance of possibility: “whomever you may bless.” The Pual participle מְבֹרָךְ ( mÿvorakh ) serves as the predicate.


Heb “spoke.”


The verb לִין ( lin ) means “to lodge, spend the night.” The related noun is “a lodge” – a hotel of sorts. Balaam needed to consider the offer. And after darkness was considered the best time for diviners to consult with their deities. Balaam apparently knows of the Lord ; he testifies to this effect in 22:18 .


In this passage the text differs slightly; here it is “the nation that comes out,” using the article on the noun, and the active participle in the attributive adjective usage.


Here the infinitive construct is used to express the object or complement of the verb “to be able” (it answers the question of what he will be able to do).


The verb is the Piel perfect with vav ( ו ) consecutive. It either carries the force of an imperfect tense, or it may be subordinated to the preceding verbs.


The two verbs are negated imperfects; they have the nuance of prohibition: You must not go and you must not curse.


The word בָּרוּךְ ( barukh ) is the Qal passive participle, serving here as the predicate adjective after the supplied verb “to be.” The verb means “enrich,” in any way, materially, spiritually, physically. But the indication here is that the blessing includes the promised blessing of the patriarchs, a blessing that gave Israel the land. See further, C. Westermann, Blessing in the Bible and the Life of the Church (OBT).


The LXX adds “to your lord.”


The main verb is the Piel perfect, “he has refused.” This is followed by two infinitives. The first ( לְתִתִּי , lÿtitti ) serves as a complement or direct object of the verb, answering the question of what he refused to do – “to give me.” The second infinitive ( לַהֲלֹךְ , lahalokh ) provides the object for the preceding infinitive: “to grant me to go.”


Heb “rose up.”


The construction is a verbal hendiadys. It uses the Hiphil preterite of the verb “to add” followed by the Qal infinitive “to send.” The infinitive becomes the main verb, and the preterite an adverb: “he added to send” means “he sent again.”


Heb “than these.”


The infinitive construct is the object of the preposition.


The construction uses the Piel infinitive כַּבֵּד ( kabbed ) to intensify the verb, which is the Piel imperfect/cohortative אֲכַבֶּדְךָ (’ akhabbedkha ). The great honor could have been wealth, prestige, or position.


Heb “answered and said.”


Heb “mouth.”


In this case “lodge” is not used, but “remain, reside” ( שְׁבוּ , shÿvu ).


This clause is also a verbal hendiadys: “what the Lord might add to speak,” meaning, “what more the Lord might say.”


The word is שָׂטָן ( satan , “to be an adversary, to oppose”).


The word has the conjunction “and” on the noun, indicating this is a disjunctive vav ( ו ), here serving as a circumstantial clause.


The word means a “narrow place,” having the root meaning “to be deep.” The Greek thought it was in a field in a narrow furrow.


Heb “a wall on this side, and a wall on that side.”


Heb “he added to beat her,” another verbal hendiadys.


The optative clause is introduced with the particle לוּ ( lu ).


Here the Hiphil perfect is preceded by the Hiphil infinitive absolute for emphasis in the sentence.


Heb “to do thus to you.”


The Hishtaphel verb חָוָה ( khavah ) – שָׁחָה ( shakhah ) with metathesis – has a basic idea of “bow oneself low to the ground,” and perhaps in some cases the idea of “coil up.” This is the normal posture of prayer and of deep humility in the ancient religious world.


Heb “your way.”


The verb יָרַט ( yarat ) occurs only here and in Job 16:11 . Balaam is embarking on a foolish mission with base motives. The old rendering “perverse” is still acceptable.


Many commentators consider אוּלַי (’ ulay , “perhaps”) to be a misspelling in the MT in place of לוּלֵי ( luley , “if not”).


The verb is the cohortative from “return”: I will return [me].


The imperfect tense here can be given the nuance of permission.


The Hebrew word order is a little more emphatic than this: “but only the word which I speak to you, it you shall speak.”


The emphatic construction is made of the infinitive absolute and the perfect tense from the verb שָׁלַח ( shalakh , “to send”). The idea must be more intense than something like, “Did I not certainly send.” Balak is showing frustration with Balaam for refusing him.


The verb is אוּכַל (’ ukhal ) in a question – “am I able?” But emphasizing this is the infinitive absolute before it. So Balaam is saying something like, “Can I really say anything?”


The Piel infinitive construct (without the preposition) serves as the object of the verb “to be able.” The whole question is rhetorical – he is saying that he will not be able to say anything God does not allow him to say.


The imperfect tense is here taken as an obligatory imperfect.


The Hebrew text has “on the altar,” but since there were seven of each animal and seven altars, the implication is that this means on each altar.


The verb הִתְיַצֵּב ( hityatsev ) means “to take a stand, station oneself.” It is more intentional than simply standing by something. He was to position himself by the sacrifice as Balaam withdrew to seek the oracle.


Heb “and the word of what he shows me.” The noun is in construct, and so the clause that follows functions as a noun clause in the genitive. The point is that the word will consist of divine revelation.


The verb is the perfect tense with vav ( ו ) consecutive. This clause is dependent on the clause that precedes it.


The relative pronoun is added here in place of the conjunction to clarify that Balaam is speaking to God and not vice versa.


Heb “word.”


Heb “and thus you shall speak.”


The Hebrew text draws the vividness of the scene with the deictic particle הִנֵּה ( hinneh ) – Balaam returned, and there he was , standing there.


Heb “he”; the referent (Balaam) has been specified in the translation for clarity.


Heb “took up.”


The passage calls for a past tense translation; since the verb form is a prefixed conjugation, this tense should be classified as a preterite without the vav ( ו ). Such forms do occur, especially in the ancient poetic passages.


The figure is erotesis, a rhetorical question. He is actually saying he cannot curse them because God has not cursed them.


The imperfect tense should here be classified as a potential imperfect.


Heb “him,” but here it refers to the Israelites (Israel).


The verb could also be taken as a reflexive – Israel does not consider itself as among the nations, meaning, they consider themselves to be unique.


The question is again rhetorical; it means no one can count them – they are innumerable.


The perfect tense can also be classified as a potential nuance. It does not occur very often, but does occur several times.


Heb “and as a number, the fourth part of Israel.” The noun in the MT is not in the construct state, and so it should be taken as an adverbial accusative, forming a parallel with the verb “count.” The second object of the verse then follows, “the fourth part of Israel.” Smr and the LXX have “and who has numbered” ( וּמִסְפָּר , umispar ), making this colon more parallel to the preceding one. The editor of BHS prefers this reading.


The use of נֶפֶשׁ ( nefesh ) for the subject of the verb stresses the personal nature – me.


Heb “my latter end.”


Heb “his.”


The Hebrew text uses הִנֵּה ( hinneh ) here to stress the contrast.


The construction is emphatic, using the perfect tense and the infinitive absolute to give it the emphasis. It would have the force of “you have done nothing but bless,” or “you have indeed blessed.” The construction is reminiscent of the call of Abram and the promise of the blessing in such elaborate terms.


Heb “he answered and said.” The referent (Balaam) has been specified in the translation for clarity.


The verb שָׁמַר ( shamar ) means “to guard, watch, observe” and so here with a sense of “be careful” or even “take heed” (so KJV, ASV). The nuance of the imperfect tense would be obligatory: “I must be careful” – to do what? to speak what the Lord has put in my mouth. The infinitive construct “to speak” is therefore serving as the direct object of שָׁמַר .


The clause is a noun clause serving as the direct object of “to speak.” It begins with the sign of the accusative, and then the relative pronoun that indicates the whole clause is the accusative.


Heb “he brought him”; the referents (Balak and Balaam) have been specified in the translation for clarity.


Some scholars do not translate this word as “Pisgah,” but rather as a “lookout post” or an “elevated place.”


Heb “and he built.”


Heb “he”; the referent (Balaam) has been specified in the translation for clarity.


The verse uses כֹּה ( koh ) twice: “Station yourself here …I will meet [the Lord ] there .”


Heb “word.”


Heb “he.” The antecedent has been supplied in the translation for clarity.


Heb “took up.”


The verb probably means “pay attention” in this verse.


Heb “son of man.”


The verb is the Hiphil of קוּם ( qum , “to cause to rise; to make stand”). The meaning here is more of the sense of fulfilling the promises made.


The Hebrew text simply has “I have received [to] bless.” The infinitive is the object of the verb, telling what he received. Balaam was not actually commanded to bless, but was given the word of blessing so that he was given a divine decree that would bless Israel.


The verb is the Hiphil of שׁוּב ( shuv ), meaning “to cause to return.” He cannot return God’s word to him, for it has been given, and it will be fulfilled.


These could be understood as impersonal and so rendered “no one has discovered.”


The word means “wrong, misery, trouble.” It can mean the idea of “disaster” as well, for that too is trouble. Here it is parallel to “iniquity” and so has the connotation of something that would give God reason to curse them.


The people are blessed because God is their king. In fact, the shout of acclamation is among them – they are proclaiming the Lord God as their king. The word is used normally for the sound of the trumpet, but also of battle shouts, and then here acclamation. This would represent their conviction that Yahweh is king. On the usage of this Hebrew word see further BDB 929-30 s.v. תְּרוּעָה ; HALOT 1790-91 s.v.


The form is the Hiphil participle from יָצַא ( yatsa ’) with the object suffix. He is the one who brought them out.


Or “in Jacob.” But given the context the meaning “against” is preferable. The words describe two techniques of consulting God; the first has to do with observing omens in general (“enchantments”), and the second with casting lots or arrows of the like (“divinations” [ Ezek 21:26 ]). See N. H. Snaith, Leviticus and Numbers (NCB), 295-96.


The form is the preposition “like, as” and the word for “time” – according to the time, about this time, now.


The Niphal imperfect here carries the nuance of obligation – one has to say in amazement that God has done something marvelous or “it must be said.”


The words “look at” are not in the Hebrew text but have been added in the translation for clarity.


The pronoun “their” has been supplied for clarity; it is not present in the Hebrew text.


The verb is preceded by the infinitive absolute: “you shall by no means curse” or “do not curse them at all.” He brought him to curse, and when he tried to curse there was a blessing. Balak can only say it would be better not to bother.


The same construction now works with “nor bless them at all.” The two together form a merism – “don’t say anything.” He does not want them blessed, so Balaam is not to do that, but the curse isn’t working either.


Heb “answered and said.”


This first clause, “all that the Lord speaks” – is a noun clause functioning as the object of the verb that comes at the end of the verse. It is something of an independent accusative case, since it is picked up with the sign of the accusative: “all that the Lord speaks, it I must do.”


Heb “be pleasing in the eyes of God.”


Or perhaps as a place name, “Jeshimon” (cf. 21:20 ).


Heb “it was good in the eyes of the Lord .”


Heb “as time after time.”


The word נְחָשִׁים ( nÿkhashim ) means “omens,” or possibly “auguries.” Balaam is not even making a pretense now of looking for such things, because they are not going to work. God has overruled them.


The idiom signifies that he had a determination and resolution to look out over where the Israelites were, so that he could appreciate more their presence and use that as the basis for his expressing of the oracle.


Heb “living according to their tribes.”


Heb “and he took up his oracle and said.”


The word נְאֻם ( nÿ ’ um ) is an “oracle.” It is usually followed by a subjective genitive, indicating the doer of the action. The word could be rendered “says,” but this translations is more specific.


The Greek version reads “the one who sees truly.” The word has been interpreted in both ways, “shut” or “open.”


The phrase “flat on the ground” is supplied in the translation for clarity. The Greek version interprets the line to mean “falling asleep.” It may mean falling into a trance.


The last colon simply has “falling, but opened eyes.” The falling may simply refer to lying prone; and the opened eyes may refer to his receiving a vision. See H. E. Freeman, An Introduction to the Old Testament Prophets , 37-41.


Here מָה ( mah ) has an exclamatory sense: “How!” (see Gen 28:17 ).


Heb “as valleys they spread forth.”


Or “rows of palms.”


For this colon the LXX has “a man shall come out of his seed.” Cf. the Syriac Peshitta and Targum.


Heb “many.”


Heb “they will devour nations,” their adversaries.


On the usage of this word see HALOT 517 s.v. לָבִיא .


The construction is emphatic, using the infinitive absolute with the perfect tense for “bless.”


Heb “flee to your place.”


Heb “I am not able to go beyond.”


Heb “mouth.”


Heb “from my heart.”


The construction is the particle הִנֵּה ( hinneh ) suffixed followed by the active participle. This is the futur instans use of the participle, to express something that is about to happen: “I am about to go.”


Heb “in the latter days.” For more on this expression, see E. Lipinski, “ באחרית הימים dans les textes préexiliques,” VT 20 (1970): 445-50.


Heb “near.”


The verb is the perfect tense with vav ( ו ) consecutive; it is equal to the imperfect expressing the future. The verb דָּרַךְ ( darakh ), related to the noun “way, road,” seems to mean something like tread on, walk, march.”


The word is literally “corners,” but may refer to the corners of the head, and so “skull.”


The MT reads “shatter, devastate.” Smr reads קֹדְקֹד ( qodqod , “head; crown; pate”). Smr follows Jer 48:45 which appears to reflect Num 24:17 .


Or, understanding the Hebrew word for “city” as a place name, “of Ir” (cf. NRSV, NLT).


Heb “he”; the referent (Balaam) has been specified in the translation for clarity.


Heb “and he lifted up his oracle and said.” So also in vv. 21, 23 .


Heb “Nevertheless Cain will be wasted; how long will Asshur take you captive?” Cain was believed to be the ancestor of the Kenites. The NAB has “yet destined for burning, even as I watch, are your inhabitants.” Asshur may refer to a north Arabian group of people of Abrahamic stock ( Gen 25:3 ), and not the Assyrian empire.


Because there is no parallel line, some have thought that it dropped out (see de Vaulx, Les Nombres , 296).


The MT is difficult. The Kittim refers normally to Cyprus, or any maritime people to the west. W. F. Albright proposed emending the line to “islands will gather in the north, ships from the distant sea” (“The Oracles of Balaam,” JBL 63 [1944]: 222-23). Some commentators accept that reading as the original state of the text, since the present MT makes little sense.


Or perhaps “Assyria” (so NCV, TEV, CEV, NLT).


Or “it will end in utter destruction.”


Heb “place.”


This first preterite is subordinated to the next as a temporal clause; it is not giving a parallel action, but the setting for the event.


The verb simply says “they called,” but it is a feminine plural. And so the women who engaged in immoral acts with Hebrew men invited them to their temple ritual.


The verb is “yoked” to Baal-peor. The word is unusual, and may suggest the physical, ritual participation described below. It certainly shows that they acknowledge the reality of the local god. sn The evidence indicates that Moab was part of the very corrupt Canaanite world, a world that was given over to the fertility ritual of the times.


Heb “in the sun.” This means in broad daylight.


Heb “slay – a man his men.” The imperative is plural, and so “man” is to be taken collectively as “each of you men.”


The verse begins with the deictic particle וְהִנֵּה ( vÿhinneh ), pointing out the action that was taking place. It stresses the immediacy of the action to the reader.


Or “to his family”; or “to his clan.”


Heb “before the eyes of Moses and before the eyes of.”


The vav ( ו ) at the beginning of the clause is a disjunctive because it is prefixed to the nonverbal form. In this context it is best interpreted as a circumstantial clause, stressing that this happened “while” people were weeping over the sin.


The first clause is subordinated to the second because both begin with the preterite verbal form, and there is clearly a logical and/or chronological sequence involved.


The word קֻבָּה ( qubbah ) seems to refer to the innermost part of the family tent. Some suggest it was in the tabernacle area, but that is unlikely. S. C. Reif argues for a private tent shrine (“What Enraged Phinehas? A Study of Numbers 25:8 ,” JBL 90 [1971]: 200-206).


Heb “and he thrust the two of them the Israelite man and the woman to her belly [lower abdomen].” Reif notes the similarity of the word with the previous “inner tent,” and suggests that it means Phinehas stabbed her in her shrine tent, where she was being set up as some sort of priestess or cult leader. Phinehas put a quick end to their sexual immorality while they were in the act.


Heb “he was zealous with my zeal.” The repetition of forms for “zeal” in the line stresses the passion of Phinehas. The word “zeal” means a passionate intensity to protect or preserve divine or social institutions.


The word for “zeal” now occurs a third time. While some English versions translate this word here as “jealousy” (KJV, ASV, NASB, NRSV), it carries the force of God’s passionate determination to defend his rights and what is right about the covenant and the community and parallels the “zeal” that Phinehas had just demonstrated.


Heb “say.”


Here too the grammar expresses an imminent future by using the particle הִנְנִי ( hinni ) before the participle נֹתֵן ( noten ) – “here I am giving,” or “I am about to give.”


Or “my pledge of friendship” (NAB), or “my pact of friendship” (NJPS). This is the designation of the leadership of the priestly ministry. The terminology is used again in the rebuke of the priests in .


The motif is reiterated here. Phinehas was passionately determined to maintain the rights of his God by stopping the gross sinful perversions.


Heb “a father’s house.” So also in v. 15 .


Heb “head.”


The form is the infinitive absolute used in place of a verb here; it clearly is meant to be an instruction for Israel. The idea is that of causing trouble, harassing, vexing Midian. The verb is repeated as the active participle in the line, and so the punishment is talionic.


This is the same word as that translated “treachery.”


The MT has also “saying.”


Heb “house of their fathers.”


Heb “everyone who goes out in the army in Israel.”


The word “River” is not in the Hebrew text, but has been supplied in the translation for clarity (also in v. 62 ).


For the location of Jericho see Map5-B2 ; Map6-E1 ; Map7-E1 ; Map8-E3 ; Map10-A2 ; Map11-A1 .


“Number the people” is added here to the text for a smooth reading.


The Hebrew text has no preposition here, but one has been supplied in the translation for clarity. Cf. vv. 23, 30, 31, 32 .


The MT has “and the sons of Pallu.”


Or “company” (so KJV, NASB, NRSV); Heb “congregation.”


This is “Zohar” in Exod 6:15 and Gen 46:10 .


The MT of Gen 46:16 reads this as “Ezbon.”


The Greek version and Smr have “Ad[d]i,” probably by confusion of letters.


Gen 46:16 and the LXX here read “Arodi.”


Smr and the Greek version have “Hamuel.”


With the exception of a few manuscripts the MT has Shephupham . The spelling in the translation above is supported by Smr and the ancient versions.


The LXX has Adar . Cf. 1 Chr 8:3 .


“From Ard” is not in the Hebrew text.


Also mentioned in 1 Chr 7:30 .


Heb “to many you will multiply his inheritance.”


Heb “to a few you will lessen his inheritance.”


Heb “according to those that were numbered of him,” meaning, in accordance with the number of people in his clan.


Heb “divided.”


Heb “who she bore him to Levi.” The verb has no expressed subject. Either one could be supplied, such as “her mother,” or it could be treated as a passive.


The expression אֵשׁ זָרָה (’ esh zarah , “strange fire”) seems imprecise and has been interpreted numerous ways (see the helpful summary in J. E. Hartley, Leviticus [WBC 4], 132-33). The infraction may have involved any of the following or a combination thereof: (1) using coals from some place other than the burnt offering altar (i.e., “unauthorized coals” according to J. Milgrom, Leviticus [AB], 1:598; cf. Lev 16:12 and cf. “unauthorized person” [ אִישׁ זָר , ’ ish zar ] in Num 16:40 [ 17:5 HT], NASB “layman”), (2) using the wrong kind of incense (cf. the Exod 30:9 regulation against “strange incense” [ קְטֹרֶת זָרָה , qÿtoret zarah ] on the incense altar and the possible connection to Exod 30:34-38 ), (3) performing an incense offering at an unprescribed time (B. A. Levine, Leviticus [JPSTC], 59), or (4) entering the Holy of Holies at an inappropriate time ( Lev 16:1-2 ). sn This event is narrated in Lev 10:1-7 .


“who had been” is added to clarify the text.


The phrase “of the families of Manasseh” is absent from the Latin Vulgate.


This clause begins with a vav ( ו ) on a pronoun, marking it out as a disjunctive vav. In this context it fits best to take it as a circumstantial clause introducing concession.


Heb “in the midst of.”


The word order is emphatic: “but in/on account of his own sins he died.”


That is, the possession of land, or property, among the other families of their tribe.


The word is “brothers,” but this can be interpreted more loosely to relatives. So also in v. 7 .


Heb “[the daughters of Zelophehad] speak right” (using the participle דֹּבְרֹת [ dovÿrot ] with כֵּן [ ken ]).


The Hebrew text uses the infinitive absolute with the imperfect tense. The imperfect is functioning as the imperfect of instruction, and so the infinitive strengthens the force of the instruction.


The verb is the Hiphil perfect with a vav ( ו ) consecutive, from the root עָבַר (’ avar , “to pass over”). Here it functions as the equivalent of the imperfect of instruction: “and you shall cause to pass,” meaning, “transfer.”


Heb “a man, if he dies.”


The expression is חֻקַּת מִשְׁפָּט ( khuqqat mishpat , “a statute of judgment”), which means it is a fixed enactment that determines justice. It is one which is established by God.


The Greek version adds “which is Mount Nebo.” This is a typical scribal change to harmonize two passages. sn The area is in the mountains of Moab; Deut 34:1 more precisely identifies it as Mount Nebo.


The imperative could be subordinated to the first to provide a purpose clause, although a second instruction fits well enough.


This perfect tense would best be classified as a perfect of resolve: “which I have decided to give.” God had not yet given the land to them, but it was certain he would.


The first verb is a perfect tense with a vav ( ו ) consecutive, and the second verb is also. In such parallel clauses, the first may be subordinated, here as a temporal clause.


Heb “people.”


Heb “was gathered.” The phrase “to his ancestors” is elided in the Hebrew text, but is an implied repetition from the beginning of the verse, and has been supplied in the translation for stylistic reasons.


The preposition on the relative pronoun has the force of “because of the fact that.”


The verb is the second masculine plural form.


Heb “mouth.”


Heb “flesh”; cf. NAB, NIV “all mankind”; NCV “all people”; NLT “all living things.”


This is the same verb פָּקַד ( paqad ) that is used throughout the book for the aspect of “numbering” the people.


The Hebrew text has the conjunction with the negated imperfect tense, “and it will not be.” This clause should be subordinated to the preceding to form a result clause, and the imperfect then function as a final imperfect.


Or “said.”


This could be translated “position him,” or “have him stand,” since it is the causative stem of the verb “to stand.”


The verb is the Piel perfect of צִוָּה ( tsivvah , literally “to command”). The verb has a wide range of meanings, and so here in this context the idea of instructing gives way to a more general sense of commissioning for duty. The verb in sequence is equal to the imperfect of instruction.


Heb “in their eyes.”


The verb is simply “give,” but in this context giving some of Moses’ honor to Joshua in the presence of the people is essentially passing the leadership to him, or delegating the authority to him with the result that people would follow him.


The Greek, Syriac, and Vulgate read “glory” for this form that occurs only here in the Pentateuch. Elsewhere it is rendered “majesty, splendor” (see Ps 96:6 ). It could even be “vitality” here. The authority being transferred here is both spiritual and civil.


Heb “hear.”


The passage simply has “and he will ask,” but Eleazar is clearly the subject now.


Heb “ask.”


Heb “mouth,” meaning what he will say.


Heb “stood.”


Heb “spoke.”


Heb “hand.”


Heb “and say to them.” These words have not been included in the translation for stylistic reasons.


Th sentence begins with the accusative “my offering.” It is suspended at the beginning as an independent accusative to itemize the subject matter. The second accusative is the formal object of the verb. It could also be taken in apposition to the first accusative.


The construction uses the imperfect tense expressing instruction, followed by the infinitive construct used to express the complement of direct object.


Heb “between the evenings” meaning between dusk and dark.


Heb “the one lamb,” but it is meant to indicate for “each lamb.”


The word שֵׁכָר ( shekhar ) is often translated “strong drink.” It can mean “barley beer” in the Akkadian cognate, and also in the Hebrew Bible when joined with the word for wine. English versions here read “wine” (NAB, TEV, CEV); “strong wine” (KJV); “fermented drink” (NIV, NLT); “strong drink” (ASV, NASB, NRSV).


Heb “as the grain offering of the morning and as its drink offering.”