Posts
God FINALLY kills Aaron for being a jerk. Oh, no, wait, God kills Aaron because the Israelites asked for water.
God then kills more Israelites with fiery serpents but then gives Moses the power to cure fiery serpent bites.
The tribe tries passing through several lands but get the metaphorical doors slammed in their faces. They even gets their butts kicked in a battle.
After promising (again) to stand with the LORD, The Israelites start kicking and taking names. Moses enacts the scorched earth policy and leaves no living thing in his wake.
| Num 21:35 | So they smote him, and his sons, and all his people, until there was none left him alive: and they possessed his land. |
I'm curious about this part. God seems to be talking to the enemy of the Israelites.
| Num 22:9 | And God came unto Balaam, and said, What men [are] these with thee? |
| Num 22:20 | And God came unto Balaam at night, and said unto him, If the men come to call thee, rise up, [and] go with them; but yet the word which I shall say unto thee, that shalt thou do. |
Chapter 25 shows us that once again, the Israelites can't go one day without screwing up God's commands. God starts killing thousands (again) before the grandson of Aaron kills a man and woman with his spear. God likes that "he was zealous for my sake among them".
We end with God commanding Moses to exterminate the Midianites.
Ch. 13
ReplyDeleteThey're arriving just now in Kadesh, although they were alread in Kadesh in 13.26. Both passages being P. Either they're going in circles, this isn't P, P goofed, or P is out of order.
A large portion of the J text in Numbers 20-22 is alluded to (and quoted verbatim) in Judges 11. (I'm sure somebody else has noticed this, but I figured it out for myself. I did a detailed post, but it needs to be updated, I've learned a lot since October: http://betterthanesdras.wordpress.com/2010/10/16/sorry-about-this-one-folks/ )
21:1-3
Hormah is taken by the Israelites; it will be taken again in Judges 1:17. Both times it is "destroyed" and given the name Hormah (="destruction"). What a coincidence!
Ch. 21, E's strange bronze serpent story.
Like the Golden Calves, this is a reference to a later symbol, which King Hezekiah destroyed:
2 Kings 18:4 It was he who suppressed the hill-shrines, smashed the sacred pillars, cut down every sacred pole and broke up the bronze serpent that Moses had made.
We get a snippet from the "Book of the Wars of the Lord". I love it when the Bible cites its sources!
The rest of Ch. 21 is generally fascinating, old poetry and tales of conquest. This all involves the Israelites conquering the eastern neigbors- Amon, Moab, etc. My annotation says that 27-30 is an Amorite victory ballad!
22, Balaam! His talking ass gets a lot of press. I'm guessing this was a once-independent compilation of prophecy. (With older oracles embedded in an ingenious "framing story".)
Some have read the Balaam story as having multiple-source contradictions (first he's told by God to not go, then to go, then God gets angry for him going), some say it is literary repetition. I'm on the fence.
Ch. 25- is this the first time the Israelites start worshipping Baal?
Sources are obviously mingled, as the story begins about a Moabite woman (J), but then switches to Midianite (P).
In J, Moses's wife in a Midianite, so the story would be nonsensical.
Notice when Phinehas catches the couple in the Tent, he stabs them once, pinning them together. The implication, of course, is that he slew the beast with two backs.
A surprise reference is made to a "plague"- meaning that P is fragmentary here. (Could there have been a sequence of plagues, following the one in ch. 16?)
@Abbie "The implication, of course, is that he slew the beast with two backs."
ReplyDeleteLOVE IT!
Sources are obviously mingled, as the story begins about a Moabite woman (J), but then switches to Midianite (P)
ReplyDeleteI don't follow. What story begins with a Moabite woman? Num. 25:6?
Numbers 25:1-5 is about Moabite women, and 6-on is Midianite.
ReplyDeleteI heard of some places where these terms are different in different manuscripts, but KJV uses the same terms as my translation.
My question is how does Moses (the one man who authored these books) know the behind the scenes goings on of his enemies?
If Moses wrote the Torah he must be omniscient and prophetic. I mean, he knew what was going on everywhere, he alluded to events long after his death, etc.
Okay the example I was thinking of was from Judges 10, where there is mention of Maonites in the Masoretic Text but Midianites in some Septugagint manuscripts. Probably not relevant, sorry.
ReplyDeleteAnyway, it's likely that P, which is pro-Aaron, was being intentionally derogatory towards Moses in perjuring Midianites.
Oh, and the plague is more explicable if you recall that in Num. 8:19 there is a warning of a plague if anyone enters the Holy o' Holies (which happens here.)
Moses did not need to be omniscient to write about distant events. God told him. Ever since Exodus we have been reading "And God spake to Moses" so I guess there was more speaking going on.
ReplyDeleteAsimov's guide to the Bible says that baal coukd be translated as just "lord" and did not necessarily refer to a specific god. Also, at that time there was not a belief in just one god.
Ther were many mentions od the doings of Israel and Jacob, but didn't Genesis say they were the same?
I am appalled by the slaughter. I know it is all fiction, but i worry about those who say with a straight face that the Bible is all true and God is just and merciful. I can't imagine what they think the words justice and mercy mean.
I thought it was weird that Balaam would obey a god that clearly was not his god. He specifically said it was "their god", but he decided to obey the god of some other people?
ReplyDeleteThe talking donkey story made my boring Friday afternoon in an empty office slightly less boring. I really need to find a new job if that is the highlight of my day. Still, I got a chuckle out of it.
@Bruce,
ReplyDelete"God FINALLY kills Aaron for being a jerk. Oh, no, wait, God kills Aaron because the Israelites asked for water."
1. God did not kill Aaron, he was an old man, and God was telling Moses that he was going to die. And the reason that Aaron was going to die, God was not going to sustain his life to see the promises land, also with Moses is because of that water incident. No it was not because the people asked for water, it was for what Moses said. 20:10 "Hear now, ye rebels; must we fetch you water out of this rock? They were taking power and glory upon themselves. Aaron could have spoken up to Moses and said something, however he didn't. And God pointed it out to them: 20:12 And the Lord spake unto Moses and Aaron, Because ye believed me not, to sanctify me in the eyes of the children of Israel, therefore ye shall not bring this congregation into the land which I have given them. They were punished because they were acting as though the water would come by their strength and not Gods.
"My question is how does Moses (the one man who authored these books) know the behind the scenes goings on of his enemies?"
I am saying this just from my own thoughts, so it could be very wrong. I thought about your question then read over the text. Barbara does make a good point "Moses did not need to be omniscient to write about distant events. God told him." I can agree with that, also there could be other ways with that one. One of the possibilities is that Balak sent messengers to Moses to try and strike up an agreement. And a written account of what Balak had asked Balaam to do was part of that correspondence. Kinda like i see that your God is with you, and the guy we know that can bless and curse(22:6) people could only bless you, so let us live peaceably with one another. I have gold and silver (22:18) i can give it to you and we can live in peace (Deuteronomy 23:5,6).
Another thought is that one of Balaams 2 servants (22:22) that went with him left him and went to the Israelites. He then informed them of what had happened.
One last thought was that when Balaam was about to get his ticked punched (31:8) he recalled this story saying how he obeyed God and blessed Israel and did not curse them.
Now i know the text, from what little i know, does not emphatically support any of what i just wrote, so i am not dogmatic about any of it, i just view them as possibilities.
@bananacat1,
ReplyDelete"I thought it was weird that Balaam would obey a god that clearly was not his god. He specifically said it was "their god", but he decided to obey the god of some other people?"
Hey can you point out the scripture verse where it says "their God"? In my KJV it says in 22:18 "I cannot go beyond the word of the Lord my God, to do less or more." I have read over this twice now. However it is getting late so i might have missed it.
Some interesting stuff from Matthew Henry
(MHC)
The learned bishop Patrick inclines to think, with many of the Jewish writers, that Balaam had been a great prophet, who, for the accomplishment of his predictions and the answers of his prayers, both for good and evil, had been looked upon justly as a man of great interest with God; but that, growing proud and covetous, God departed from him, and then, to support his sinking credit, he betook himself to diabolical arts. He is called a prophet (2 Peter 2:16) because he had been one, or perhaps he had raised his reputation from the first by his magical charms, as Simon Magus, who bewitched the people so far that he was called the great power of God, Acts 8:10.
...
Balaam's seeming resistance of, but real yielding to, this temptation. We may here discern in Balaam a struggle between his convictions and his corruptions. 1. His convictions charged him to adhere to the command of God, and he spoke their language, 18. Nor could any man have said better: "If Balak would give me his house full of silver and gold, and that is more than he can give or I can ask, I cannot go beyond the word of the Lord my God." See how honourably he speaks of God; he is Jehovah, my God. Note, Many call God theirs that are not his, not truly because not only his; they swear by the Lord, and by Malcham. See how respectfully he speaks of the word of God, as one resolved to stick to it, and in nothing to vary from it, and how slightly of the wealth of this world, as if gold and silver were nothing to him in comparison with the favour of God; and yet, at the same time, the searcher of hearts knew that he loved the wages of unrighteousness. Note, It is an easy thing for bad men to speak very good words, and with their mouth to make a show of piety. There is no judging of men by their words. God knows the heart. 2. His corruptions at the same time strongly inclined him to go contrary to the command. He seemed to refuse the temptation, 18. But even then he expressed no abhorrence of it, as Christ did when he had the kingdoms of the world offered him (Get thee hence Satan), and as Peter did when Simon Magus offered him money: Thy money perish with thee. But it appears ( 19) that he had a strong inclination to accept the proffer; for he would further attend, to know what God would say to him, hoping that he might alter his mind and give him leave to go. This was a vile reflection upon God Almighty, as if he could change his mind, and now at last suffer those to be cursed whom he had pronounced blessed, and as if he would be brought to allow what he had already declared to be evil. Surely he thought God altogether such a one as himself. He had already been told what the will of God was, in which he ought to have acquiesced, and not to have desired a re-hearing of that cause which was already so plainly determined. Note, It is a very great affront to God, and a certain evidence of the dominion of corruption in the heart, to beg leave to sin.
I thought it was weird that Balaam would obey a god that clearly was not his god. He specifically said it was "their god", but he decided to obey the god of some other people?
ReplyDeleteIt doesn't really make sense why YHWH suddenly decides to talk to a Moabite. And why the Moabite automatically accepts this God of his rival's.
But the story was written by Israelites, and they think their God is pretty awesome, so they think if a Moabite met him, he'd be awed by the awesomeness.
One wonders why God didn't just reveal himself to all the Moabites, Ammonites, Amorites, Jebusites, Canaanites, Perizites, Midianites, Philistines, Phoenecians, Maorites, Ishmaelites, Amalekites, etc.
If it was as easy as it was with Baal, he could have saved them a lot of bloodshed.
(I just wanted to see how many I could name off the top of my head. Oh yeah Edomites!)
Hey can you point out the scripture verse where it says "their God"? In my KJV it says in 22:18 "I cannot go beyond the word of the Lord my God, to do less or more."
True, I see no reference to "your God". He also refers to God as "YHWH" at 22:8, before he'd even spoken to God. Was the sacred name of God common knowledge among Israel's enemies?
@Barbara,
ReplyDeleteI guess it's my turn. :-D
"I know it is all fiction, but i worry about those who say with a straight face that the Bible is all true and God is just and merciful."
With a straight face i say that i believe that the Bible is true from Genesis to Revelation. And i ask; How do you know it's fiction?
"I can't imagine what they think the words justice and mercy mean."
This is how i define justice and mercy that comes from God. Short definition taken from Noah Webster Dictionary 1828
Justice: "The virtue which consists in giving to every one what is his due;"
Mercy: "That benevolence, mildness or tenderness of heart which disposes a person to overlook injuries, or to treat an offender better than he deserves;"
And this is how i apply these two definitions to God.
God is Just because He will hold to the covenant that he makes with man. Summed up in the 10 commandments and Jesus Christ. How is God being Just demonstrated. Simply by holding to what He has said He would do in the covenant that He has made with man. If He did not give the blessing He promised and i keep my part would God be Just? Not at all, He is not giving me what is due unto me, the blessing of the covenant. Now if God upholds His end of the covenant and i don't uphold mine, should i expect God to over look that? Would God still be Just? Again no, because in that covenant are punishments that would be due unto me for not fulfilling my responsibilities of the covenant. If God did not punish me for neglecting my responsibility of the covenant then He is not Just. What would you say if God did not enforce his covenant? If it was recorded many times man violating the covenant and the punishment for the violation that was outlined in the covenant was not acted upon? Not enforcing the covenant in my mind only weakens societies respect and honour of a covenant and the duty to us to fulfil our part of covenants. This also has made God exactly like many would want, with now power to enforce the penalties of His covenant. And what pray tell, example would this be for any people that want to be in a covenant (contract) relationship with anyone else, if God, being Just, did not enforce His own covenant?
God is Mercy because i know i deserve Hell, (Romans 3:23) yet He has made a way out for me (Matthew 20:28; John 3:16). He came in the man Christ Jesus and took my punishment (I Peter 2:24) so that the relationship that God the Father had with man could be restored for eternity (Romans 5:10). Yes we see the punishment that is handed down here when people break the covenant with God, yet what awaits us after death is a whole lot worse than stoning. And because of that i see God as being Merciful. Hell was not designed for man, but for the fallen angels, man in his rebellion will find himself there with them if he will not humble himself and repent. And that is the kicker, reading around here how people call these silly rules, here is something to think about (Acts 2:21;Romans 10:13) "For whosoever shall call upon the name of the Lord shall be saved." So simple (II Corinthians 11:3) yet many people won't make that call from the heart, many make it with lips only. When judgement comes i doubt they will be thinking "oh how silly was the gift of salvation, so simple, yet i refused".
"i worry about those who say with a straight face that" there is no God. How can they know anything if the God of the Christian Faith does not exist? Knowing all the people that would not accept the free gift of salvation (Romans 5:18) this shows how loving God really is (John 15:13; Romans 5:6-9). He would leave Heaven take on the form of man just to save us and take our sin in a horrible way(Isaiah 53:9-12).
Something else that worries me is people that say with a straight face that Jesus never existed.
@Abbie,
ReplyDelete"Was the sacred name of God common knowledge among Israel's enemies?"
These people (Moabites) were not Israel's enemy. See Deuteronomy 2:9. Well not from the Israel perspective.
Seeing back in Genesis 4:26 they called on the name of the Lord. God does not hide himself from men. Also since you are in Genesis, 15:16 talks about the iniquity of the Amorites. I personally believe that God actively pursues man (Ezekiel 33:11). He wants them to repent from their wicked ways, as He wanted the Amorites, however He knew they all wouldn't, yet He gave them 400 years. Granted i think the Israelites helped pad that a little. :-D maybe? I can post a story from our First Nations people that, to me, lays more evidence down that God actively pursues man. I will need to get the book back from my friend.
I feel it was common knowledge, just like Jesus Christ is common knowledge today. Just many people reject or suppress that knowledge.
And i ask; How do you know it's fiction?
ReplyDeleteTalking donkeys. People living 800 years. Magic.
Something else that worries me is people that say with a straight face that Jesus never existed.
I wouldn't claim that. I think the evidence points towards there being a Jewish apocalypticist from Nazareth named Jesus.
Whether we have any authentic quotes from him is debatable. Maybe a few accurate paraphrases in Mark and Q.
And i ask; How do you know it's fiction?
ReplyDeleteTalking donkeys. People living 800 years. Magic.
....burning bushes, lack of Egyptian record keeping, floods, giants, wandering clouds, smiting ad naseum....
@Abbie & @momof atheists,
ReplyDeleteAlso don't forget about the talking snake. :-D As i believe in the Almighty God that spake this world into existence Genesis 1, is it such a great leap of faith to see that He can cause these things to happen? Wait until we get to the giant fish that swallowed a man.
So really how did man come into being? Want to talk about magic. Yes i believe there was a time when man lived to great ages. They were (Adam & Eve) made perfect, were they not? And you can see the decline as the environment changed, because of that flood, and change in diet, also their genetic code started degrading.
Yes there is evidence for a global flood. How can you have trees standing upright through several sedimentary layers, that man says took millions of years to lay down? How is it you can find dinosaur bones with soft tissue still?
"Dr. Mary Schweitzer, assistant professor of paleontology with a joint appointment at the N.C. Museum of Natural Sciences, has succeeded in isolating soft tissue from the femur of a 68-million-year-old dinosaur. Not only is the tissue largely intact, it’s still transparent and pliable, and microscopic interior structures resembling blood vessels and even cells are still present."
They say that soft tissue should not be around after 100K years.
I could go on, but don't want to get to far off topic.
I say magic! ;-) Or it's not anywhere close to 68 million years old, could have died out about 4500 years ago in a flood, or a disaster shortly afterward (Genesis 10:25).
How do we know the difference between good and evil, right and wrong? You talk about "smiting ad naseum", is that good or bad, and how do you know that?
Who is the anonymous 'they'? Yes her discovery was disputed, one has to be concerned with contamination of the sample, etc.. However the conclusion drawn is that some soft tissue samples last longer than expected (that they don't was the weaker theory) not that the earth is far younger than what all the other evidence shows.
ReplyDelete@Erp
ReplyDelete"Current theories about fossil preservation hold that organic molecules should not preserve beyond 100,000 years."
So i guess the "they" are the people that thought up the theories.
What is "all the other evidence"?
See Talk.origins
ReplyDeletehttp://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/dating.html
which covers dating methods
I will note that none of the scientists doing this research debate the age of the fossils (give or take a few years).
Also
http://pandasthumb.org/archives/2007/04/did-trex-taste.html
on this particular issue.
@Erp,
ReplyDeleteThanks for the link, i have read over the pandasthumb, not much evidence, just people and their opinion.
"Tiny bits of protein extracted from a 68-million-year-old dinosaur bone have given scientists the first genetic proof that the mighty Tyrannosaurus rex is a distant cousin to the modern chicken."
Humm common ancestor or common designer?
As for the talk origins link:
"Geochronologists do not claim that radiometric dating is foolproof (no scientific method is), but it does work reliably for most samples."
That would be the samples that they don't know the actual date for. :-D I have seen presentations on things that were carbon dated that were still alive giving dates that were totally wrong.
And another person had some items tested and they (the testing lab) requested the layer or depth they were found at. He provided the information and then sent in the samples. They send back the samples and dates, a few months later he switched the samples and sent them back again. And the dates changed again. Let's say sample A that was tested and said to be 40k years old and was found at the lower level was sent back in sample B's container that was found at the upper level and came back at 8k years old, when they got A back from the second test it was now close to the 8k year age. And he said those tests were not cheep. Be aware the numbers that i used were not the actual ones. If you are interested in seeing the video that i am recalling this from i will go find a sample somewhere on the internet.
This is not proof if you are critical and investigate it and also know the assumptions that go into these tests.