Numbers 3–4

Footnotes

1. 1 For significant literature for this chapter, see M. Aberbach and L. Smolar, “Aaron, Jeroboam, and their Golden Calves,” 86 (1967): 129–40; G. Brin, “The First-born in Israel in the Biblical Period” (Ph.D. diss., University of Tel Aviv, 1971); S. H. Hooke, “Theory and Practice of Substitution,” 2 (1952): 2–17; and J. Morgenstern, “A Chapter in the History of the High Priesthood,” 55 (1938): 1–24.
2. 2 The construction is וְאֵלֶּה תּוֹלְדֹת (vé’elleh tolédot), which was traditionally translated “now these are the generations,” much as it was translated throughout the book of Genesis. The noun can refer to records, stories, genealogies, names, and accounts of people. Here it is the recorded genealogical list with assigned posts included. Like Genesis, it is a heading of a section, and not a colophon as some have suggested. It is here similar to Exodus: “these are the names of.” R. K. Harrison, Numbers (), 62, insists that it is a colophon and should end chapter 2, but if that is followed in the Pentateuch, it creates difficulty throughout the narratives. See the discussion by A. P. Ross, Creation and Blessing, 69–74.
3. 3 The expression in the Hebrew text (“in the day of”) is idiomatic for “when.”
4. 4 The verb מָשַׁח (mashakh) means “to anoint”; here the form modifies the “priests.” The service of consecration was carried out with anointing oil (Exod 30:30). The verb is used for the anointing of kings as well as priests in the OT, and so out of that derived the technical title “Messiah” for the coming ideal king—the “Anointed One.”
5. 5 In this verse the expression is in a relative clause: “who he filled their hand” means “whose hands he filled,” or “whom he consecrated.” The idiomatic expression used here is from Lev 8; it literally is “he filled their hand” (מִלֵּא יָדָם, mille’ yadam). In the ordination service Moses placed some of the meat from the sacrifice in the hand of the ordinand, and this signified what he was going to be about—having his hand full, or being consecrated to the priesthood. There is some evidence that this practice or expression was also known in Mesopotamia. In modern ordination services a NT or a Bible may be placed in the ordinand’s hand—it is what the ministry will be about.
6. 6 The form is an infinitival construction for the word for the priest, showing the purpose for the filling of the hands.
7. 7 The verb form is the preterite with vav (ו) consecutive, literally “and Nadab died.” Some commentators wish to make the verb a past perfect, rendering it “and Nadab had died,” but this is not necessary. In tracing through the line from Aaron it simply reports that the first two sons died. The reference is to the event recorded in Lev 10 where the sons brought “strange” or foreign” fire to the sanctuary.
8. 8 This initial clause is omitted in one Hebrew , , and the .
9. 9 The form בְּהַקְרִבָם (béhaqrivam) is the Hiphil infinitive construct functioning as a temporal clause: “when they brought near,” meaning, “when they offered.” The verb קָרַב (qarav) is familiar to students of the NT because of “corban” in Mark 7:11.
10. 10 Or “prohibited.” See זָר 3.
11. 11 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 [ 4], ). 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 [], 1:; cf. Lev 16:12 and cf. “unauthorized person” [אִישׁ זָר, ’ish zar] in Num 16:40 [17:5 ], “layman”), (2) using the wrong kind of incense (cf. the Exod 30:9 regulation against “strange incense” [קְטֹרֶת זָרָה, qétoret 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 [], ), or (4) entering the Holy of Holies at an inappropriate time (Lev 16:1–2). This event is narrated in Lev 10:1–7.
12. 12 The two young priests had been cut down before they had children; the ranks of the family of Aaron were thereby cut in half in one judgment from God. The significance of the act of judgment was to show that the priests had to sanctify the Lord before the people—they were to be examples that the sanctuary and its contents were distinct.
13. 13 The verb is the Piel preterite from the root כָּהַן (kahan): “to function as a priest” or “to minister.”
14. 14 The expression “in the presence of” can also mean “during the lifetime of” (see Gen 11:28; see also 818 פָּנֶה II.7.a; cf. , , , , ).
15. 15 The use of the verb קָרַב (qarav) forms an interesting wordplay in the passage. The act of making an offering is described by this verb, as was the reference to the priests’ offering of strange fire. Now the ceremonial presentation of the priests is expressed by the same word—they are being offered to God.
16. 16 The verb literally means “make it [the tribe] stand” (וְהַעֲמַדְתָּ אֹתוֹ, véha’amadta ’oto). The verb is the Hiphil perfect with a vav (ו) consecutive; it will take the same imperative nuance as the form before it, but follow in sequence (“and then”). This refers to the ceremonial presentation in which the tribe would take its place before Aaron, that is, stand before him and await their assignments. The Levites will function more like a sacred guard than anything else, for they had to protect and care for the sanctuary when it was erected and when it was transported (see J. Milgrom, Studies in Levitical Terminology, 8–10).
17. 17 The verb וְשֵׁרְתוּ (vésherétu) is the Piel perfect with a vav (ו) consecutive; it carries the same volitional force as the preceding verb forms, but may here be subordinated in the sequence to express the purpose or result of the preceding action.
18. 18 The Hebrew text uses the perfect tense of שָׁמַר(shamar) with a vav (ו) consecutive to continue the instruction of the preceding verse. It may be translated “and they shall keep” or “they must/are to keep,” but in this context it refers to their appointed duties. The verb is followed by its cognate accusative—“they are to keep his keeping,” or as it is often translated, “his charge.” This would mean whatever Aaron needed them to do. But the noun is also used for the people in the next phrase, and so “charge” cannot be the meaning here. The verse is explaining that the Levites will have duties to perform to meet the needs of Aaron and the congregation.
19. 19 The form is the Qal infinitive construct from עָבַד (’avad, “to serve, to work”); it is taken here as a verbal noun and means “by (or in) serving” (see R. J. Williams, Hebrew Syntax, 36, §195). This explains the verb “keep [his charge].” Here too the form is followed by a cognate accusative; they will be there to “serve the service” or “work the work.”
20. 20 The construction uses the infinitive construct (epexegetically) followed by its cognate accusative. It would convey “to serve the service of the tabernacle,” but more simply it may be rendered as “serving.” Their spiritual and practical service is to serve. The Levites had the duty of taking care of all the tabernacle and its furnishings, especially in times when it was to be moved. But they were also appointed to be gate-keepers (2 Kgs 22:4; 1 Chr 9:19) in order to safeguard the purity of the place and the activities that went on there. Their offices seem to have then become hereditary in time (1 Sam 1:3); they even took on more priestly functions, such as pronouncing the benediction (Deut 10:8). See further R. de Vaux, Ancient Israel, 348–49.
21. 21 The verb וְנָתַתָּה (vénatattah) is normally “give.” Here, though, the context refers to the assignment of the Levites to the priests for their duties. The form is the perfect tense with vav (ו) consecutive, continuing the sequence for the imperfect of instruction.
22. 22 This emphasis is derived from the simple repetition of the passive participle, נְתוּנִם נְתוּנִם (nétunim nétunim). See §123.e. The forms serve as the predicate with the subject pronoun.
23. 23 The Hebrew text simply has the preposition, “from the Israelites.”
24. 24 The includes the following words here: “and all things pertaining to the altar and within the veil.” Cf. Num 18:7.
25. 25 The word is זָר (zar), usually rendered “stranger, foreigner, pagan.” But in this context it simply refers to anyone who is not a Levite or a priest, an unauthorized person or intruder in the tabernacle. That person would be put to death.
26. 26 The particle הִנֵּה (hinneh) here carries its deictic force, calling attention to the fact that is being declared. It is underscoring the fact that the Lord himself chose Levi.
27. 27 Literally “in the place of.”
28. 28 The form הַכֹּתִי (hakkoti) is the Hiphil infinitive construct of the verb נָכָה (nakhah, “to strike, smite, attack”). Here, after the idiomatic “in the day of,” the form functions in an adverbial clause of time—“when I destroyed.”
29. 29 In the Exodus event of the Passover night the principle of substitution was presented. The firstborn child was redeemed by the blood of the Lamb and so belonged to God, but then God chose the Levites to serve in the place of the firstborn. The ritual of consecrating the firstborn son to the Lord was nevertheless carried out, even with Jesus, the firstborn son of Mary (Luke 2:22–23).
30. 30 Heb “the house of their fathers.” So also in v. 20.
31. 31 Heb “you are to/shall number them.”
32. 32 Heb “at the mouth of the Lord.”
33. 33 The Pual perfect may be given the past perfect translation in this sentence because the act of commanding preceded the act of numbering.
34. 34 The word “sons of” does at the outset refer to the sons of Levi. But as the listing continues the expression refers more to the family groups of the various descendants.
35. 35 The vav (ו) disjunctive on the noun at the beginning of the verse here signals a greater emphasis on the individual rather than another item in the numbering of the clans.
36. 36 Heb “a father’s house.” So also in vv. 30, 35.
37. 37 The disjunctive vav (ו) here introduces a new section, listing the various duties of the clan in the sanctuary. The Gershonites had a long tradition of service here. In the days of David Asaph and his family were prominent as musicians. Others in the clan controlled the Temple treasuries. But in the wilderness they had specific oversight concerning the tent structure, which included the holy place and the holy of holies.
38. 38 The phrases in this verse seem to be direct objects without verbs. suggests deleting the sign of the accusative (for which see P. P. Saydon, “Meanings and Uses of the Particle אֵת,” 14 [1964]: 263–75).
39. 39 Heb “for all the service of it [them].”
40. 40 Both Moses and Aaron came from this line (6:16–20). During the Hebrew monarchy this branch of the line of Levi was exemplary in music (1 Chr 6:33–48). They were also helpful to Hezekiah in his reforms (1 Chr 29:12–14).
41. 41 The construction here is a little different. The Hebrew text uses the participle in construct plural: שֹׁמְרֵי (shomérey, literally “keepers of”). The form specifies the duties of the 8,600 Kohathites. The genitive that follows this participle is the cognate מִשְׁמֶרֶת (mishmeret) that has been used before. So the expression indicates that they were responsible for the care of this part of the cult center. There is no reason to delete one of the forms (as does J. A. Paterson, Numbers, 42), for the repetition stresses the central importance of their work.
42. 42 The verb is יְשָׁרְתוּ (yésharétu, “they will serve/minister”). The imperfect tense in this place, however, probably describes what the priests would do, what they used to do. The verb is in a relative clause: “which they would serve with them,” which should be changed to read “with which they would serve.”
43. 43 The word is literally “its [their] service.” It describes all the implements that were there for the maintenance of these things.
44. 44 The Hebrew construction has “the leader of the leaders of” (וּנְשִׂיא נְשִׂיאֵי, unési’ nési’ey).
45. 45 Heb “the keepers of the responsibility” (שֹׁמְרֵי מִשְׁמֶרֶת, shomérey mishmeret). The participle is a genitive specifying the duty to which he was appointed (thing possessed); its cognate genitive emphasizes that their responsibility was over the holy place.
46. 46 The Hebrew text has “these they the families of Merari.” The independent personal pronoun has an anaphoric use, somewhat equivalent to the copula “and” (see R. J. Williams, Hebrew Syntax, 23, §115).
47. 47 Heb “and all their service.” This could possibly be a hendiadys: “and all their working tools.” However, the parallel with v. 26 suggests this is a separate phrase.
48. 48 In some Hebrew and “and Aaron” is not in the verse. The omission arose probably by scribal error with such repetitious material that could easily give rise to variant traditions.
49. 49 Here again the verb and its cognate noun are used: keeping the keep, or keeping charge over, or taking responsibility for the care of, or the like.
50. 50 Here again the Hebrew has “at the mouth of,” meaning in accordance with what the Lord said. So also in v. 51.
51. 51 The total is a rounded off number; it does not duplicate the precise total of 22,300. Some modern scholars try to explain it by positing an error in v. 28, suggesting that “six” should be read as “three” (שֵׁשׁ [shesh] as שָׁלֹשׁ [shalosh]).
52. 52 The verb נָשָׂא (nasa’, “take”) has here the sense of collect, take a census, or register the names.
53. 53 The verb is the perfect tense with vav (ו) consecutive; it carries forward the instructions from the preceding verse. The verb “take” now has the sense of appointing or designating the Levites.
54. 54 The verb again is the perfect tense in sequence; the meaning of “take” may be interpreted here with the sense of “collect.”
55. 55 The idea is expressed simply by repetition: “take five, five, shekels according to the skull.” They were to collect five shekels for each individual.
56. 56 The verb form now is the imperfect of instruction or legislation.
57. 57 Heb “them,” referring to the five shekels.
58. 58 The sanctuary shekel was first mentioned in Exod 30:13. The half-shekel of Exod 38:26 would then be 10 gerahs. Consequently, the calculations would indicate that five shekels was about two ounces of silver for each person. See R. B. Y. Scott, “Weights and Measures of the Bible,” 22 (1951): 22–40, and “The Scale-Weights from Ophel, 1963–1964,” 97 (1965): 128–39.
59. 59 The word used is “silver.” Coins were not in existence until after 700 b.c. (starting with Lydia).
60. 1 The chapter has four main parts to it: Kohathites (1–20), Gershonites (21–28), Merarites (29–33) and the census of the Levites (34–49).
61. 2 Heb “lift up the head.” The form נָשֹׂא (naso’) is the Qal infinitive absolute functioning here as a pure verb form. This serves to emphasize the basic verbal root idea (see §113.bb). The census of chapter 3 was to register all male Levites from a month old and up. It arranged the general duties of each of the tribes. The second census of Levites now will focus on those between 30 and 50 years of age, those who were actually in service. These are the working Levites. The duties here will be more specific for each of the families. The Kohathites, although part of the ordinary ministry of Levites, were a special group chosen to handle the most holy furnishings. J. Milgrom shows three aspects of their service: (1) skilled labor (מְלָאכָה, méla’khah) or “work,” (2) physical labor (עֲבֹדָה, ̑avodah) or “service,” and (3) assisting the priests (שָׁרֵת, sharet) or “ministering” (see his Studies in Levitical Terminology, 1:60–70).
62. 3 The word “company” is literally “host, army” (צָבָא, tsava’). The repetition of similar expressions makes the translation difficult: Heb “all [who] come to the host to do work in the tent.”
63. 4 The Hebrew text simply has “the holy of holies,” or “the holy of the holy things” (קֹדֶשׁ הַקֳּדָשִׁים, qodesh haqqodashim). The context indicates that this refers to all the sacred furnishings.
64. 5 The Hebrew text uses the infinitive construct in an adverbial clause of time; literally it says “in the journeying of the camp.” The genitive in such constructions is usually the subject. Here the implication is that people would be preparing to transport the camp and its equipment.
65. 6 The exact meaning of the Hebrew word here is difficult to determine. The term תַּחַשׁ (takhash) has been translated “badgers’ [skins]” by . has “sealskin” while uses “goatskin”; and have “porpoise skin,” and has “hides of sea cows.” This is close to “porpoise,” and seems influenced by the Arabic. The evidence is not strong for any of these meanings, and some of the suggestions would be problematic. It is possible the word is simply used for “fine leather,” based on the Egyptian ths. This has been followed by (“fine leather”) and (“fine goatskin leather”) along with the present translation. See further תַּחַשׁ.
66. 7 The Hebrew actually has the “table of faces,” and this has been traditionally rendered “table of shewbread.”
67. 8 The Greek has “violet” instead of blue. This is also the case in vv. 8, 10, and 14.
68. 9 The “pole” or “bar” (מוֹט, mot) is of a different style than the poles used for transporting the ark. It seems to be a flexible bar carried by two men with the implements being transported tied to the bar. The suggests the items were put in a bag and slung over the bar, but there is no indication of the manner.
69. 10 The Greek text has “and he must place the cover upon the altar” instead of “and they must take away the ashes from the altar.” The verb is the Piel form; its nuance seems to be privative, i.e., stating that the object is deprived of the material—the ashes are removed. This is the main altar in the courtyard.
70. 11 For this passage the Greek and have a substantial addition concerning the purple cloth for the laver and its base, and a further covering of skin (see D. W. Gooding, “On the Use of the for Dating Midrashic Elements in the Targums,” 25 [1974]: 1–11).
71. 12 The verb form is the Piel perfect with a vav (ו) consecutive; it continues the future sequence, but in this verse forms a subordinate clause to the parallel sequential verb to follow.
72. 13 The Piel infinitive construct with the preposition serves as the direct object of the preceding verbal form, answering the question of what it was that they finished.
73. 14 Heb “after this.”
74. 15 The form is the Qal infinitive construct from נָשָׂא (nasa’, “to lift, carry”); here it indicates the purpose clause after the verb “come.”
75. 16 The imperfect tense may be given the nuance of negated instruction (“they are not to”) or negated obligation (“they must not”).
76. 17 Here the article expresses the generic idea of any holy thing (R. J. Williams, Hebrew Syntax, 19, §92).
77. 18 The verb is the perfect tense with a vav (ו) consecutive, following the imperfect tense warning against touching the holy thing. The form shows the consequence of touching the holy thing, and so could be translated “or they will die” or “lest they die.” The first is stronger.
78. 19 The word מַשָּׂא (massa’) is normally rendered “burden,” especially in prophetic literature. It indicates the load that one must carry, whether an oracle, or here the physical responsibility.
79. 20 This is supplied to the line to clarify “appointed.”
80. 21 Heb “and.”
81. 22 One would assume that he would prepare and wrap these items, but that the Kohathites would carry them to the next place.
82. 23 The verb is simply the Qal, “do not cut off.” The context calls for a permissive nuance—“do not let them be cut off.” It was a difficult task to be handling the holy things correctly; Moses and Aaron were to see to it that they did it right and did not handle the objects, that is, Moses and Aaron were to safeguard their lives by making certain that proper procedures were followed.
83. 24 The word order is different in the Hebrew text: Do this … and they will live. Consequently, the verb “and they will live” is a perfect tense with a vav (ו) consecutive to express the future consequence of “doing this” for them.
84. 25 The perfect tense with vav (ו) consecutive continues the instruction for Aaron.
85. 26 The distributive sense is obtained by the repetition, “a man” and “a man.”
86. 27 In the Hebrew text the verse has as the subject “they,” but to avoid confusion the antecedent has been clarified in the translation.