Subscribe to the Messianic Apologetics Podcast: Apple Podcasts | Spotify | iHeartRadio
Book of Numbers – Survey of the Holy Scriptures Study: YouTube
Messianic Apologetics editor John McKee surveys the Book of Numbers from a Messianic perspective.
reproduced from A Survey of the Holy Scriptures for the Practical Messianic
Approximate date: 1440-1400 B.C.E. (Right); 1300-1200 B.C.E. (conservative-moderate); 500s B.C.E. (Left)
Time period: Israel in the wilderness
Author: Moses exclusively (Right); Moses, Joshua, and later editors (conservative-moderate); compiled traditions and mythologies (Left)
Location of author: wilderness journey after the Exodus (Right, conservative-moderate); Babylon and/or Land of Israel (Left)
Target audience and their location: people of Israel wandering in the desert (Right, conservative-moderate); Jewish exiles returning from Babylon (Left)
The Hebrew title for the fourth book of the Torah is Bamidbar, meaning either “in the wilderness” or “in the desert” (Numbers 1:1). Another Jewish designation in antiquity derived from 1:1 was V’ydaber or “and He spoke,” known to early Church figures such as Jerome and Epiphanaus.[1] Other titles included omesh happikkudim or “the ‘fifth’ of the census,” indicating that this text composed one-fifth of the Torah.[2] The Septuagint translation applied the Greek name Arithmoi to the text, derived from “according to the number of their names” (Numbers 1:26, NETS). “This Greek name reflects an earlier Hebrew name for the book, well-attested in classical rabbinic sources, from a period when books of the Torah were named thematically rather than after one of their initial words”[3] (Jewish Study Bible), and was followed as Numeri in the Latin Vulgate. A number of evangelical examiners have suggested that Bamidbar is a better title—effectively making the English title Wilderness or Desert—as it avoids the controversy of the debates surrounding Biblical numbering, and instead focuses on the events which took place.[4]
The Book of Numbers may be easily divided into three broad sections: (1) Israel at Sinai, preparing to depart for the Promised Land (Numbers 1:1-10:10); (2) Israel at Kadesh, delayed because of its rebellion (Numbers 13:1-20:13); (3) Israel at the plains of Moab, anticipating conquest of the Promised Land (Numbers 22:2-32:42). Numbers probably covers the broadest scope of the Torah (excluding Genesis), as it completes the 38-year journey of the Israelites wandering in the wilderness.
Important features appearing in Numbers include God delivering the instructions on how the Tabernacle was to be transported (Numbers chs. 1-10). Within this selection appears specific regulations for the Levites (Numbers chs. 3-4, 7-8), the banishment of those who are extremely impure (Numbers 5:1-4), and how to deal with a defiled Nazirite (Numbers 6:1-21). Further features detail the rebellion of the Israelites and their refusal to fully take the Land of Canaan (Numbers ch. 14), and the condemnation of those who would have to die in the wilderness because of their disbelief. Some of the most important chapters in Numbers are Numbers ch. 6, which includes the giving of the Aaronic Benediction, and Numbers ch. 9, the instructions concerning how Israel was to keep Passover.
Throughout Numbers, readers see how God demonstrates a strong willingness to live with the Israelites, communicating to them through Moses (Numbers 7:89). The Lord was a guide for the people (Numbers 9:15-23), but Israel rebelled against Him (Numbers ch. 15), and God showed a desire not to judge them all at first (Numbers 16:20-22). God demonstrated a great deal of patience toward Israel, but ultimately in the defining part of the text (Numbers chs. 13-14) He must raise up a new generation of Israelites to replace the rebellious old generation.
There is a renewed interest today, in both Judaism and Christianity, to examine Numbers for encouraging a strong faith in God. Readers see the failure of Ancient Israel to obey or trust in Him, yet God was not remiss in punishing His own people, including Moses (Numbers ch. 20). God tested His people with false prophets such as Balaam (Numbers chs. 22-24), yet was able to issue a blessing through him (Numbers chs. 23-24). The Lord hates idolatry and sexual immorality (Numbers ch. 25). Many evangelical Protestants are keen to admit that there has been a lack of interest among ministers to appropriate these important themes in preaching from Numbers, and desire to see this change.[5] Ultimately, Numbers may be considered to be a prime example of God’s ongoing intentions in salvation history.[6]
Some substantial historical issues are presented in Numbers with the census of Israel’s population, particularly in Numbers 1:46: “all the numbered men were 603,550” (NASU). Many conservative scholars take this number at face value, and extrapolate that there were as many as 2-3 million involved in the Exodus. Other conservatives have suggested that the Pentateuch used terms such as “thousands” or “hundreds” more loosely than they would be used in modern times, and offer some alternative views. It is thought that “a total population of two to three million…hardly seems appropriate” (ISBE).[7] While reducing Israel’s population, a lesser view still asserts that God’s promises to Abraham to multiply his seed was being fulfilled. The default position regarding Numbers 1:46, adhered to by many, seems to be that 600,000 was more or less the exact population.[8]
Those who think that the numbering of 603,550 in Numbers 1:46 is something else, will claim that the Hebrew term elef or “thousand,” can also mean “squad” when considering its Ugaritic and other Semitic cognates.[9] This could possibly mean that what was being referred to is 603 squads of 550, placing Israel’s fighting force at around 331,650, although some would estimate it being a bit on the lower end at around 35,000.[10] If the total population of Ancient Israel had been only somewhere in the 20,000-35,000 range, it could have difficulties, as 22,273 firstborn males are specifically described in Numbers 3:43, although this itself could mean 22 squads/groups of 273 firstborn, actually being somewhere around 6,006. Another alternative to consider is how the term elef was easily confused with alluf or “captain” in ancient times, so the 62,700 fighting men of Dan mentioned (Numbers 1:39) could equate to being 60 captains and 2,700 men.[11] Ultimately, the debate over the actual numbers of Ancient Israel, is in recognizing how the census techniques of the ancients are probably not those of modern times—and examiners have to allow for the possibility of things being a bit different.
If the census in Numbers is not as “exact” as some may want it to be, then the obvious conclusion drawn is that there may have not been “millions” of Israelites involved in the Exodus from Egypt. Many conservatives do adhere to an exact literal numbering, concluding, “if they fanned out with their flocks over a wide area, they could sustain themselves as did the large Nabatean kingdom in the same area in Roman times” (Harris, NIDB).[12] In response to this, other conservative interpreters may assert, “It is hard to imagine the difficulties attendant upon sustaining two to three million people living in the wilderness for forty years: food, sanitation, living space, morale” (ISBE).[13]
If there was some kind of representative census in Numbers, then it would suggest that rather than there being 2-3 million Israelites involved in the Exodus, that there were likely only several hundred thousand, but no less than 100,000. Harrison makes the imperative point,
“An understanding of the contemporary situation with reference to the population of Canaan is instructive in this respect, for it is evident from sources such as the Tell el-Amarna tablets, as well as from the excavation of Canaanite cities of the thirteenth century B.C., that the overall population of the Promised Land was itself well below three million people” (Introduction to the Old Testament).[14]
Considering that the Torah indicates that the population of the Israelites was less than that of the Canaanites (Exodus 23:29; Deuteronomy 7:7, 17, 22)—then it may be safely assumed that a different numbering system was used in Numbers, than how a census would be conducted in the Twentieth and Twenty-First Centuries.
The Book of Numbers and its various accountings divide examiners among three distinct groups: (1) those who think that the number totals cannot be trusted and are over exaggerated; (2) those who think that the numbers are not as exact as they would have to be today, and are possibly representative in some places, but are certainly not as low as one thousand representing “one”; (3) those who think that the numbers are exact, with no exception. Admittedly, many get confused and prefer to assert that one cannot know for certain how the Israelites took a tally of their population groups.[15]
If one falls into a conservative handling of the text, then the options available at one’s disposal are #2 and #3, as we should choose to consider the Israelites at the very least to number in the several hundred thousand. But ultimately, there may be no satisfactory answer to these questions with the current extant data on the Ancient Near East. It should not cause anyone to think that a miniscule amount of people were involved in the Exodus. These views do, however, challenge many Messianics who have been taught that there are only “exact numbers” in Scripture, when things may not be as “exact” as they may want them to be, considering their ancient context.
Regarding the composition of Numbers, conservatives do assert principal Mosaic authorship, based on statements which indicate Moses’ writing activity (Numbers 33:1-2), also based on the strong assumption of the literary unity of the Torah.[16] In this, readers see how there were varied commandments given to Moses and Aaron (Numbers 1:1; 3:44; 6:1; 8:1, et. al.). “According to the book the original impetus for the recording of much of the material was from Moses. It indicates numerous times that Moses received instructions from God” (ISBE).[17] However, readers should not conclude exclusive Mosaic authorship of Numbers. While Moses recorded the names of the various places Israel journeyed (Numbers 33:2), Numbers was likely some combination of Mosaic and scribal writing.[18]
There are some signs of redaction in Numbers and additions by Israel’s historians. Conservatives will often assert that Numbers “is essentially Mosaic but includes source material and glosses” (Dillard and Longman).[19] Perhaps the most significant example of a post-Mosaic addition to the Torah appears in Numbers 12:3: “Now the man Moses was very humble, more than any man who was on the face of the earth” (NASU). Conservatives have always pointed out that if Moses were indeed the most humble human being who ever lived—then he could have never written this about himself! Harrison summarizes,
“In light of what is known about processes of scribal revision in Egypt and certain other areas of the ancient Near East, there appears to be no difficulty whatever in assuming that the reference in Numbers 12:3 concerning the modesty of Moses constitutes an addition by a later hand, quite possibly either that of Joshua or Samuel” (Introduction to the Old Testament).[20]
Another redaction may include the mention of the “Book of the Wars of the Lord” (Numbers 21:14), “a genuine Pentateuchal source” (Harrison),[21] or a later source which a scribe incorporated information from. Even though all conservatives strongly assert principal Mosaic involvement in the composition of Numbers, other textual additions would have included the census lists,[22] or possibly other slight additions during the time of the Israelite monarchy or via the authorization of Ezra the Priest after the Babylonian exile.[23] The general dating of Numbers would be tied to one’s timing of the Exodus, which for conservatives would fall between the Fifteenth or Thirteenth Centuries B.C.E. Admittedly, thinking that anybody but Moses, was involved in the composition of Numbers, is difficult for many Messianics to acknowledge, even though it seems quite certain.
Affirming the antiquity of the Book of Numbers, conservative scholars such as Harrison and Kitchen point out that the arrangement of the Israelites around the Tabernacle in Numbers 2:2 conformed to the strategic layout of the Egyptian army during the reign of Ramses II.[24] Certainly, if Moses had been a member of the Egyptian royal house, and as Stephen attested, “a man of power in words and deeds” (Acts 7:22, NASU), he could have learned Egyptian military strategy and incorporated it in his leading Israel. Furthermore, readers see how the use of silver trumpets (Numbers 10:1-2) was common in Egyptian ceremonies of the Thirteenth Century.[25]
In stark contrast to conservative examiners who affirm prime Mosaic involvement in the composition of Numbers, liberal examiners would argue for the final form of the text existing only after the Jewish exile to Babylon in 587 B.C.E., and possibly even that it foreshadows the return of the Jews to the Land of Israel in 539 B.C.E. Liberals commonly argue that the story depicted in Numbers would have strong significance for the exiles returning from Babylon, but strongly doubt its historicity. IDB indicates, “It is the large amount of purely statistical material incorporated in Numbers which makes much of it seem tedious to the modern reader…Some of it seems purely idealistic and unhistorical.”[26] Liberals will frequently claim that the events in Numbers seem too strange to have actually occurred, such as Balaam’s donkey talking (Numbers ch. 22), and instead frequently suggest that all which is necessary is some kind of literary explanation for the journeys of Israel. Any kind of unity in Numbers is regarded as being entirely “artificial” (IDB).[27]
In the critical scheme of Numbers’ composition, the bulk of the material is attributed to the P source or so-called Priestly writer, with incorporated additions by J and E,[28] and likely also D.[29] While conservatives frequently respond to these critiques with literary explanations of Numbers’ supposed discrepancies, the critical tradition has been right to point out that there are source materials present in the text. The Book of Numbers cannot be read with any naiveté,[30] and even a conservative reading requires a fair bit of sorting. Even though we might disagree with various critical presuppositions surrounding Numbers, liberals will validly point out that its “OT story is intended to be read as history and not as myth. The ancient Hebrew mind was not mythopoeic” (IDB),[31] affirming some kind of theological integrity for the book.
From a textual point of view, the Hebrew Masoretic Text of Numbers is fairly secure, with few disputations or major variances from the Samaritan Pentateuch or Greek Septuagint. This does not mean that the SP and LXX do not reflect some interpretations of commandments, but these are relatively minor. The text of Numbers has not been preserved as well as Leviticus,[32] likely because of the large accountings of people. But if there are any major differences in the accountings of people, they are ancient problems which go back too far in history to fix, and answers to these problems must be reconciled historically. “The very large numbers in the two census lists (Num 1-4; 26) do not betray corruption of numbers. Thus those who resort to the solution of the problem of the large numbers by suggesting textual corruption have to assume that such problems are very ancient” (Allen, EXP).[33]
The message which Numbers communicates to Bible readers today is primarily that God is merciful, yet He is also just. “Of all of God’s attributes, it is on his ḥesed that Moses bases his plea that God not destroy Israel (14:18-20). The word ḥesed stands for God’s constancy, his fidelity to his covenant with Israel” (Milgrom, ABD).[34] The Lord does not leave Israel in the wilderness, but does wait for a proper generation to be raised up which can accomplish His tasks. He provides food for His people with the manna (Numbers ch. 11), but also strikes Miriam, Moses’ sister, with leprosy (Numbers ch. 12), and punishes Moses for striking the rock (Numbers ch. 20).
Throughout Numbers, readers see God demonstrating His presence, discipline, and holiness.[35] The Book of Numbers “forms an essential link in that forward-directedness from Adam to Jesus” (Allen, EXP).[36] A challenge which anyone who really wants to study Numbers often faces, is that he or she must have great patience. Allen points out, “In a day marked by pop art, quick fixes, and fast foods, the Book of Numbers is particularly troublesome. It simply does not appeal to the person who is unwilling to invest time and energy in the study of Scripture” (EXP),[37] and readers certainly see the lack of patience in the Israelites’ behavior in Numbers. At the end of Numbers, the people of Israel were ready and prepared to enter into the Promised Land. “It is on this note of expectant hope that the book ends. Note that the hope never turns into certainty. That is, the hope of the second generation is an untried hope. This generation too will face severe threats to its faith (see Joshua), and it remains to be seen how they will respond” (Dillard and Longman).[38] To an extent, every generation of Believers should place themselves into the situation of Numbers.[39]
The current Messianic handling of Numbers is not that dissimilar from its handling of Leviticus. Like Leviticus, many of the commandments in Numbers cannot be presently observed without a working Tabernacle or Temple. But whereas Leviticus comprises mostly a code of conduct, Numbers does ask some serious questions about the relationship of God toward His people. When we see Moses strike the rock against God’s explicit command, there were consequences he had to face (Numbers 20:11-12). A few Messianics, who may have made Moses into some kind of demagogue, are confronted with the reality that he was human and that he did commit offenses against God.
Perhaps more significant for the emerging Messianic movement, is the fact that the Book of Numbers challenges us to become a self-critical movement which is not afraid to admit some of its problems. Certainly if we cannot identify with some of the grumbling attitudes of the Ancient Israelites, then are we to admit that we are instead “perfect”? Surely not. Furthermore, when we consider the numerical accounts in the text, we need to be willing to admit how there are things in the Torah which are not as “black and white” as we may want them to be, such as knowing how many people were exactly involved in the Exodus. We have to remember that there was probably a different numbering system in place in 1400-1200 B.C.E., which is largely foreign to our Twenty-First Century Information Age mindset.
With these things said, there is a large need for today’s Messianic community to engage more with conservative-critical scholarship of Numbers, which considers the historical framework of the Ancient Near East. Unfortunately, as with too much of the Tanach, sectors of the Messianic movement often give credence to ultra Orthodox and Chassidic Jewish views of Numbers, at the expense of its legitimate historicity. With the message of Numbers in view, will it take a long time for a generation of Messianic Believers to be raised up to be used effectively for the Lord? We may not know. But it does teach us how we are to endure through whatever trials may take place. As it concerns our studies of Numbers, it should include how we react properly to criticisms of the text, and whether or not we can involve ourselves with larger theological conversations going on.
Bibliography
Allen, Ronald B. “Numbers,” in EXP, 2:657-1008.
Carpenter, E.E. “Numbers, Book of,” in ISBE, 3:561-567.
Dentan, R.C. “Numbers, Book of,” in IDB, 3:567-571.
Dillard, Raymond B., and Tremper Longman III. “Numbers,” in An Introduction to the Old Testament, pp 83-90.
Fox, Nili S. “Numbers,” in Jewish Study Bible, pp 281-355.
Harris, R. Laird. “Numbers, Book of,” in NIDB, pp 713-714.
Harrison, R.K. “The Book of Numbers,” in Introduction to the Old Testament, pp 614-634.
Levine, B.A. “Numbers, Book of,” in IDBSup, pp 631-635.
Milgrom, Jacob. “Numbers, Book of,” in ABD, 4:1146-1155.
Olson, Dennis T. “Numbers,” in New Interpreter’s Study Bible, pp 189-240.
Thompson, J.A. “Numbers,” in NBCR, pp 168-200.
NOTES
[1] R.C. Dentan, “Numbers, Book of,” in George Buttrick, ed., et. al., The Interpreter’s Dictionary of the Bible, 4 vols. (Nashville: Abingdon, 1962), 3:567; cf. Ronald B. Allen, “Numbers,” in Frank E. Gaebelein, ed. et. al., Expositor’s Bible Commentary (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1992), 2:662.
[2] R.K. Harrison, Introduction to the Old Testament (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1969), 614; B.A. Levine, “Numbers, Book of,” in Keith Crim, ed., Interpreter’s Dictionary of the Bible: Supplementary Volume (Nashville: Abingdon, 1976), 631; Jacob Milgrom, “Numbers, Book of,” in David Noel Freedman, ed., Anchor Bible Dictionary, 6 vols. (New York: Doubleday, 1992), 4:1146.
[3] Nili S. Fox, “Numbers,” in Adele Berlin and Marc Zvi Brettler, eds., The Jewish Study Bible (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2004), 281.
[4] J.A. Thompson, “Numbers,” in D. Guthrie and J.A. Motyer, eds., The New Bible Commentary Revised (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1970), 168; E.E. Carpenter, “Numbers, Book of,” in Geoffrey Bromiley, ed., International Standard Bible Encyclopedia, 4 vols. (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1988), 3:561.
[5] Allen, in EXP, 2:660.
[6] Ibid., 2:657.
[7] Carpenter, “Numbers, Book of,” ISBE, 3:565.
[8] Allen, in EXP, 2:686-691.
[9] Harrison, Introduction to the Old Testament, pp 632-633; Ludwig Koehler and Walter Baumgartner, eds., The Hebrew & Aramaic Lexicon of the Old Testament, 2 vols. (Leiden, the Netherlands: Brill, 2001), 1:59-60.
[10] R. Laird Harris, “Numbers, Book of,” in Merrill C. Tenney, ed., The New International Dictionary of the Bible (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1987), 713; Allen, in EXP, 2:682-683.
[11] Thompson, “Numbers,” in NBCR, 169.
[12] Harris, “Numbers, Book of,” in NIDB, 714; cf. Allen, EXP, 2:680-681.
[13] Carpenter, “Numbers, Book of,” in ISBE, 3:565.
[14] Harrison, Introduction to the Old Testament, 632.
[15] Duane A. Garrett, ed., et. al., NIV Archaeological Study Bible (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 2005), 197.
[16] Carpenter, “Numbers, Book of,” in ISBE, 3:562; Allen, EXP, 2:663-668.
[17] Carpenter, “Numbers, Book of,” in ISBE, 3:562.
[18] Harrison, Introduction to the Old Testament, 617.
[19] Raymond B. Dillard and Tremper Longman III, An Introduction to the Old Testament (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1994), 84.
[20] Harrison, Introduction to the Old Testament, 616.
[21] Ibid.
[22] Ibid., pp 618-619.
[23] Thompson, in NBCR, 168; Carpenter, “Numbers, Book of,” in ISBE, 3:562.
[24] Harrison, Introduction to the Old Testament, pp 622-623.
[25] Ibid., 623.
[26] Dentan, “Numbers, Book of,” in IDB, 3:570.
[27] Ibid., 3:568.
[28] Dentan, “Numbers, Book of,” in IDB, 3:568; Thompson, in NBCR, pp 168-169; Levine, “Numbers, Book of,” in IDBSup, 631-632; Carpenter, “Numbers, Book of,” in ISBE, 3:562-563; Milgrom, “Numbers, Book of,” in ABD; 4:1148-1150; Fox, in Jewish Study Bible, 281.
[29] Dentan, “Numbers, Book of,” in IDB, 3:567.
[30] Allen, in EXP, 2:663.
[31] Dentan, in IDB, 3:571.
[32] Harrison, Introduction to Old Testament, 634.
[33] Allen, in EXP, 2:661.
[34] Milgrom, “Numbers, Book of,” in ABD, 4:1151.
[35] Thompson, in NBCR, 170.
[36] Allen, in EXP, 2:657.
[37] Ibid., 2:658.
[38] Dillard and Longman, 89.
[39] Ibid., 90.
