Numbers 9–11

Footnotes

1. 1 The chapter has just the two sections, the observance of the Passover (vv. 1–14) and the cloud that led the Israelites in the wilderness (vv. 15–23). It must be remembered that the material in vv. 7–9 is chronologically earlier than vv. 1–6, as the notices in the text will make clear. The two main discussions here are the last major issues to be reiterated before dealing with the commencement of the journey.
2. 2 The temporal clause is formed with the infinitive construct of יָצָא (yatsa’, “to go out; to leave”). This verse indicates that a full year had passed since the exodus and the original Passover; now a second ruling on the Passover is included at the beginning of the second year. This would have occurred immediately after the consecration of the tabernacle, in the month before the census at Sinai.
3. 3 The verb is simply “to do; to make” (עָשָׂה [’asah] in the jussive). It must have the idea here of “to perform; to keep; to observe” the ritual of the Passover.
4. 4 For a detailed study note on the Passover, see the discussion with the original institution in . The word פֶּסַח (pesakh)—here in pause and with the article—has become the technical name for the spring festival of Israel. In Exod 12 the name is explained by the use of the verb “to pass over” (עָבַר, ’avar), indicating that the angel of death would pass over the house with the blood applied. Many scholarly attempts have been made to supply the etymology of the word, but none has been compelling enough to be accepted by a large number of biblical scholars. For general literature on the Passover, see J. B. Segal, The Hebrew Passover, as well as the Bible dictionaries and encyclopedias.
5. 5 The Greek text uses a plural here but the singular in vv. 7 and 13; the uses the plural in all three places.
6. 6 The literal Hebrew expression is “between the evenings” (so also in vv. 5, 11). Sunset is certainly one evening; the other may refer to the change in the middle of the afternoon to the late afternoon, or the beginning of dusk. The idea is probably just at twilight, or dusk (see R. B. Allen, 2:694).
7. 7 The two verbs in this verse are identical; they are imperfects of instruction. The English translation has been modified for stylistic variation.
8. 8 The two words in this last section are standard “Torah” words. The word חֹק (khoq) is a binding statute, something engraved and monumental. The word מִשְׁפָּט (mishpat) means “judgment, decision,” but with a more general idea of “custom” at its core. The verse is making it very clear that the Passover had to follow the custom and form that was legislated in Egypt.
9. 9 Heb “spoke to.”
10. 10 The infinitive construct functions as the direct object of the preceding verb (a Hebrew complementary usage), answering the question of what he said.
11. 11 The omits this first clause; it also omits “at twilight.”
12. 12 In the Hebrew text the noun has no definite article, and so it signifies “some” or “certain” men.
13. 13 The meaning, of course, is to be ceremonially unclean, and therefore disqualified from entering the sanctuary.
14. 14 Or “a human corpse” (so , ). So also in v. 7; cf. v. 10.
15. 15 This clause begins with the vav (ו) conjunction and negative before the perfect tense. Here is the main verb of the sentence: They were not able to observe the Passover. The first part of the verse provides the explanation for their problem.
16. 16 The verb is simply “stand,” but in the more general sense of waiting to hear the answer.
17. 17 The cohortative may be subordinated to the imperative: “stand … [that I] may hear.”
18. 18 This sense is conveyed by the repetition of “man”—“if a man, a man becomes unclean.”
19. 19 The perfect tense with vav (ו) consecutive functions as the equivalent of an imperfect tense. In the apodosis of this conditional sentence, the permission nuance fits well.
20. 20 The delay of four weeks for such people would have permitted enough time for them to return from their journey, or to recover from any short termed defilement such as is mentioned here. Apart from this provision, the Passover was to be kept precisely at the proper time.
21. 21 The disjunctive vav (ו) signals a contrastive clause here: “but the man” on the other hand.…
22. 22 The verb חָדַל (khadal) means “to cease; to leave off; to fail.” The implication here is that it is a person who simply neglects to do it. It does not indicate that he forgot, but more likely that he made the decision to leave it undone.
23. 23 The pronouncement of such a person’s penalty is that his life will be cut off from his people. There are at least three possible interpretations for this: physical death at the hand of the community (G. B. Gray, Numbers [], ), physical and/or spiritual death at the hand of God (J. Milgrom, “A Prolegomenon to Lev 17:11,” 90 [1971]: 154–55), or excommunication or separation from the community (R. A. Cole, Exodus [], ). The direct intervention of God seem to be the most likely in view of the lack of directions for the community to follow. Excommunication from the camp in the wilderness would have been tantamount to a death sentence by the community, and so there really are just two views.
24. 24 The word for “sin” here should be interpreted to mean the consequences of his sin (so a metonymy of effect). Whoever willingly violates the Law will have to pay the consequences.
25. 25 The words translated “resident foreigner” and “live” are from the same Hebrew root, גּוּר (gur), traditionally translated “to sojourn.” The “sojourner” who “sojourns” is a foreigner, a resident alien, who lives in the land as a temporary resident with rights of land ownership.
26. 26 The verb is the simple perfect tense with vav (ו) consecutive. It is therefore the equivalent to the imperfect that comes before it. The desiderative imperfect fits this usage well, since the alien is not required to keep the feast, but may indeed desire to do so.
27. 27 The Hebrew text has “there will be to you,” which is the way of expressing possession in Hebrew. Since this is legal instruction, the imperfect tense must be instruction or legislation.
28. 28 Or “you must have one statute.”
29. 29 The conjunction is used here to specify the application of the law: “and for the resident foreigner, and for the one …” indicates “both for the resident foreigner and the one who.…”
30. 30 This section (Num 9:15–23) recapitulates the account in Exod 40:34 but also contains some additional detail about the cloud that signaled Israel’s journeys. Here again material from the book of Exodus is used to explain more of the laws for the camp in motion.
31. 31 Heb “and/now on the day.”
32. 32 The construction uses the temporal expression with the Hiphil infinitive construct followed by the object, the tabernacle. “On the day of the setting up of the tabernacle” leaves the subject unstated, and so the entire clause may be expressed in the passive voice.
33. 33 The explanation and identification of this cloud has been a subject of much debate. Some commentators have concluded that it was identical with the cloud that led the Israelites away from Egypt and through the sea, but others have made a more compelling case that this is a different phenomenon (see 4:796). A number of modern scholars see the description as a retrojection from later, perhaps Solomonic times (see G. H. Davies, 3:817). Others have tried to connect it with Ugaritic terminology, but unconvincingly (see T. W. Mann, “The Pillar of Cloud in the Reed Sea Narrative,” 90 [1971]: 15–30; G. E. Mendenhall, The Tenth Generation, 32–66, 209–13; and R. Good, “Cloud Messengers?” 10 [1978]: 436–37).
34. 34 The cloud apparently was centered over the tent, over the spot of the ark of the covenant in the most holy place. It thereafter spread over the whole tabernacle.
35. 35 The imperfect tense in this and the next line should be classified as a customary imperfect, stressing incomplete action but in the past time—something that used to happen, or would happen.
36. 36 Heb “like the appearance of fire.”
37. 37 The lacks the words “by day,” but a number of ancient versions have this reading (e.g., Greek, , ., Latin ).
38. 38 The verb in this initial temporal clause is the Niphal infinitive construct.
39. 39 Heb “in the place where it settled there”; the relative clause modifies the noun “place,” and the resumptive adverb completes the related idea—“which it settled there” means “where it settled.”
40. 40 Heb “at the mouth of” (so also in vv. 20, 23).
41. 41 Heb “all the days of—that the cloud settled over the tabernacle.” “All” is the adverbial accusative of time telling how long they camped in one spot—all. The word is then qualified by the genitive of the thing measured—“all of the days”—and this in turn is qualified by a noun clause functioning as a genitive after “days of.”
42. 42 This is the same Hebrew expression that was used earlier for the Levites “keeping their charge” or more clearly, “fulfilling their obligations” to take care of the needs of the people and the sanctuary. It is a general expression using שָׁמַר (shamar) followed by its cognate noun מִשְׁמֶרֶת (mishmeret).
43. 43 The sentence uses וְיֵשׁ (véyesh) followed by a noun clause introduced with אֲשֶׁר (’asher) to express an existing situation; it is best translated as an adverbial clause of time: “and it was when the cloud was.…”
44. 44 The word “number” is in apposition to the word “days” to indicate that their stay was prolonged for quite a few days.
45. 45 Heb “mouth of the Lord.”
46. 46 The construction is the same in the preceding verse.
47. 47 “Only” is supplied to reflect the contrast between the two verses.
48. 48 The construction in this half of the verse uses two vav (ו) consecutive clauses. The first is subordinated to the second as a temporal clause: “when … then.…”
49. 49 The has אוֹ־יָמִים (’o-yamim). Most translators use “or a year” to interpret this expression in view of the sequence of words leading up to it, as well as in comparison with passages like Judg 17:10 and 1 Sam 1:3 and 27:7. See also the uses in Gen 40:4 and 1 Kgs 17:15. For the view that it means four months, see F. S. North, “Four Month Season of the Hebrew Bible,” 11 (1961): 446–48.
50. 50 In the Hebrew text this sentence has a temporal clause using the preposition with the Hiphil infinitive construct of אָרַךְ (’arakh) followed by the subjective genitive, “the cloud.” But this infinitive is followed by the infinitive construct לִשְׁכֹּן (lishkon), the two of them forming a verbal hendiadys: “the cloud made long to stay” becomes “the cloud prolonged its stay.”
51. 51 Heb “and they would not journey”; the clause can be taken adverbially, explaining the preceding verbal clause.
52. 52 Heb “hand.”
53. 1 Here we have a short section (10:1–10) dealing with the regulations for blowing trumpets in times of war or in times of peace.
54. 2 The Hebrew text uses what is called the “ethical dative”—“make [for] you two trumpets.” It need not be translated, but can simply be taken to underscore the direct imperative.
55. 3 The imperfect tense is again instruction or legislation.
56. 4 The instructions are not clearly spelled out here. But the trumpets were to be made of silver ingots beaten out into a sheet of silver and then bent to form a trumpet. There is archaeological evidence of silver smelting as early as 3000 b.c. Making silver trumpets would have been a fairly easy thing for the Israelites to do. The trumpet would have been straight, with a tapered form, very unlike the “ram’s horn” (שׁוֹפָר, shofar). The trumpets were used by the priests in Israel from the outset, but later were used more widely. The sound would be sharp and piercing, but limited in scope to a few notes. See further C. Sachs, The History of Musical Instruments.
57. 5 Heb “and they shall be for you for assembling,” which is the way of expressing possession. Here the intent concerns how Moses was to use them.
58. 6 The perfect tense with vav (ו) consecutive is here subordinated as a temporal clause to the following similar verbal construction.
59. 7 The verb תָקַע (taqa’) means “to strike, drive, blow a trumpet.”
60. 8 Heb “the assembly shall assemble themselves.”
61. 9 Heb “they shall assemble themselves.”
62. 10 The word for an alarm is תְּרוּעָה (téru’ah). The root verb of this word means “to give a blast on the trumpet.” It may also on occasion mean “give a shout” in battle (Josh 6:10). In this passage it must refer to the sound of the trumpet.
63. 11 Heb “the camps that are camping.”
64. 12 The perfect tense with vav (ו) consecutive functions as the equivalent of the imperfect tense. Here the emphasis is on the start of the journey.
65. 13 The does not mention the departures of the northerly and westerly tribes. The Greek text completes the description by adding them, making a full schedule of the departure of the groups of tribes. The Greek is not likely to be original, however, since it carries all the signs of addition to complete the text, making a smooth, full reading. The is to be preferred; it apparently used two of the groups to give the idea.
66. 14 The Hebrew text has “they shall blow an alarm”; the sentence without a formal subject should be taken as a passive idea.
67. 15 There is no expressed subject in the initial temporal clause. It simply says, “and in the assembling the assembly.” But since the next verb is the second person of the verb, that may be taken as the intended subject here.
68. 16 The signal for moving camp was apparently different in tone and may have been sharper notes or a different sequence. It was in some way distinguishable.
69. 17 Both the “adversary” and “opposes” come from the same root: צָרַר (tsarar), “to hem in, oppress, harass,” or basically, “be an adversary.”
70. 18 The Niphal perfect in this passage has the passive nuance and not a reflexive idea—the Israelites would be spared because God remembered them.
71. 19 The conjunction may be taken as explicative or epexegetical, and so rendered “namely; even; that is,” or it may be taken as emphatic conjunction, and translated “especially.”
72. 20 The vav (ו) is taken here in its alternative use and translated “or.”
73. 21 The form is the perfect tense with vav (ו) consecutive. After the instruction imperfects, this form could be given the same nuance, or more likely, subordinated as a purpose or result clause.
74. 22 The verb “to be” (הָיָה, hayah) has the meaning “to become” when followed by the preposition lamed (ל).
75. 23 This section is somewhat mechanical: It begins with an introduction (vv. 11, 12), and then begins with Judah (vv. 13–17), followed by the rest of the tribes (vv. 18–27), and finally closes with a summary (v. 28). The last few verses (vv. 29–36) treat the departure of Hobab.
76. 24 inserts a lengthy portion from Deut 1:6–8, expressing the command for Israel to take the land from the Amorites. The expression is difficult; it is מִשְׁכַּן הָעֵדֻת (mishkan ha’edut). The reference is to the sacred shrine that covered the ark with the commandments inside. renders the expression as “tabernacle of the Token”; has “the dwelling of the commandments.”
77. 25 The verb is the same as the noun: “they journeyed on their journeyings.” This underscores the point of their continual traveling.
78. 26 Heb “mouth.”
79. 27 Heb “hand.”
80. 28 The “standard” (דֶּגֶל, degel) was apparently some kind of a symbol put up on a pole to signify the tribal hosts. R. de Vaux thought it simply referred to a pole or a mast, but that would not distinguish tribes (Ancient Israel, 226–27).
81. 29 Heb “carrying the sanctuary,” a metonymy of whole for parts, representing all the holy objects that were located in the sanctuary.
82. 30 The verb is the third person plural form; without an expressed subject it is treated as a passive.
83. 31 Heb “against their coming.”
84. 32 The uses a word that actually means “assembler,” so these three tribes made up a strong rear force recognized as the assembler of all the tribes.
85. 33 Or “journeyings of.”
86. 34 The verb is the preterite with vav (ו) consecutive. But in this sentence it should be subordinated as a temporal clause to the preceding statement, even though it follows it.
87. 35 For additional bibliography for this short section, see W. F. Albright, “Jethro, Hobab, and Reuel in Early Hebrew Tradition,” 25 (1963): 1–11; G. W. Coats, “Moses in Midian,” 92 (1973): 3–10; B. Mazar, “The Sanctuary of Arad and the Family of Hobab the Kenite,” 24 (1965): 297–303; and T. C. Mitchell, “The Meaning of the Noun ḥtn in the Old Testament,” 19 (1969): 93–112.
88. 36 There is a problem with the identity of Hobab. The says that he is the son of Reuel, making him the brother-in-law of Moses. But Judg 4:11 says he is the father-in-law. In Judg 1:16; 4:11 Hobab is traced to the Kenites, but in Exod 3:1 and 18:1 Jethro (Reuel) is priest of Midian. Jethro is identified with Reuel on the basis of Exod 2:18 and 3:1, and so Hobab becomes Moses’ חֹתֵן (khoten), a relative by marriage and perhaps brother-in-law. There is not enough information to decide on the identity and relationships involved here. Some suggest that there is one person with the three names (G. B. Gray, Numbers [], ); others suggest Hobab is a family name (R. F. Johnson, 2:615), and some suggest that the expression “the son of Reuel the Midianite” had dropped out of the genealogy of Judges, leading to the conflict (J. Crichton, 2:). If Hobab is the same as Jethro, then Exod 18:27 does not make much sense, for Jethro did go home. On this basis many conclude Hobab is a brother-in-law. This would mean that after Jethro returned home, Moses conversed with Hobab, his brother-in-law. For more discussion, see the articles and the commentaries.
89. 37 The verb is the Hiphil of the root “to be good” (יָטַב, yatav); it may be translated “treat well, deal favorably, generously with.” Here it is a perfect tense with vav (ו) following the imperative, showing a sequence in the verbal ideas.
90. 38 The Hebrew text simply has “has spoken good” for Israel.
91. 39 Heb “he”; the referent (Hobab) has been specified in the translation for clarity.
92. 40 Heb “he”; the referent (Moses) has been specified in the translation for clarity.
93. 41 The form with אַל־נָא (’al-na’) is a jussive; negated it stresses a more immediate request, as if Hobab is starting to leave, or at least determined to leave.
94. 42 In the Hebrew text the expression is more graphic: “you will be for us for eyes.” Hobab was familiar with the entire Sinai region, and he could certainly direct the people where they were to go. The text does not record Hobab’s response. But the fact that Kenites were in Canaan as allies of Judah (Judg 1:16) would indicate that he gave in and came with Moses. The first refusal may simply be the polite Semitic practice of declining first so that the appeal might be made more urgently.
95. 43 Heb “and it shall be.”
96. 44 The phrase “a journey of three days” is made up of the adverbial accusative qualified with the genitives.
97. 45 The scribes sensed that there was a dislocation with vv. 34–36, and so they used the inverted letters nun (ן) as brackets to indicate this.
98. 46 The adverbial clause of time is composed of the infinitive construct with a temporal preposition and a suffixed subjective genitive.
99. 47 These two formulaic prayers were offered by Moses at the beginning and at the end of the journeys. They prayed for the Lord to fight ahead of the nation when it was on the move, and to protect them when they camped. The theme of the first is found in Ps 68:1. The prayers reflect the true mentality of holy war, that it was the Lord who fought for Israel and defended her. The prayers have been included in the prayer book for synagogue services.
100. 1 The chapter includes the initial general complaints (vv. 1–3), the complaints about food (vv. 4–9), Moses’ own complaint to the Lord (vv. 10–15), God’s response to Moses (vv. 16–25), Eldad and Medad (vv. 26–29), and the quail (vv. 30–35). The first part records the burning of the camp, named Taberah. Here is one of the several naming narratives in the wilderness experience. The occasion for divine judgment is the complaining of the people. The passages serve to warn believers of all ages not to murmur as the Israelites did, for such complaining reveals a lack of faith in the power and goodness of God. For additional literature, see W. Brueggemann, “From Hurt to Joy, from Death to Life,” 28 (1974): 3–19; B. S. Childs, “The Etiological Tale Re-examined,” 24 (1974): 387–97; G. W. Coats, Rebellion in the Wilderness; and A. C. Tunyogi, “The Rebellions of Israel,” 81 (1962): 385–90.
101. 2 The temporal clause uses the Hitpoel infinitive construct from אָנַן (’anan). It is a rare word, occurring in Lam 3:39. With this blunt introduction the constant emphasis of obedience to the word of the Lord found throughout the first ten chapters suddenly comes to an end. It is probable that the people were tired of moving for several days, the excitement of the new beginning died out quickly in the “great and terrible wilderness.” Resentment, frustration, discomfort—whatever it all involved—led to complaining and not gratitude.
102. 3 Heb “it was evil in the ears of the Lord.” The word רַע (ra’) is a much stronger word than “displeased” would suggest. The bold anthropomorphism shows that what the Lord heard was painful to him.
103. 4 The preterite with vav (ו) consecutive is here subordinated to the next verb as a temporal clause.
104. 5 The common Hebrew expression uses the verb חָרָה (harah, “to be hot, to burn, to be kindled”). The subject is אַפּוֹ (’appo), “his anger” or more literally, his nose, which in this anthropomorphic expression flares in rage. The emphasis is superlative—“his anger raged.”
105. 6 The vav (ו) consecutive does not simply show sequence in the verbs, but here expresses the result of the anger of the Lord for their complaining. With such a response to the complaining, one must conclude that it was unreasonable. There had been no long deprivation or endured suffering; the complaining was early and showed a rebellious spirit.
106. 7 The “fire of the Lord” is supernatural, for it is said to come from the Lord and not from a natural source. God gave them something to complain about—something to fear. The other significant place where this “fire of the Lord” destroyed was in the case of Nadab and Abihu who brought strange fire to the altar (Lev 10:2).
107. 8 Heb “Moses.”
108. 9 Here is the pattern that will become in the wilderness experience so common—the complaining turns to a cry to Moses, which is then interpreted as a prayer to the Lord, and there is healing. The sequence presents a symbolic lesson, an illustration of the intercession of the Holy Spirit. The NT will say that in times of suffering Christians do not know how to pray, but the Spirit intercedes for them, changing their cries into the proper prayers (Rom 8).
109. 10 The name תַּבְעֵרָה (tav’erah) is given to the spot as a commemorative of the wilderness experience. It is explained by the formula using the same verbal root, “to burn.” Such naming narratives are found dozens of times in the OT, and most frequently in the Pentateuch. The explanation is seldom an exact etymology, and so in the literature is called a popular etymology. It is best to explain the connection as a figure of speech, a paronomasia, which is a phonetic wordplay that may or may not be etymologically connected. Usually the name is connected to the explanation by a play on the verbal root—here the preterite explaining the noun. The significance of commemorating the place by such a device is to “burn” it into the memory of Israel. The narrative itself would be remembered more easily by the name and its motif. The namings in the wilderness wanderings remind the faithful of unbelief, and warn us all not to murmur as they murmured. See further A. P. Ross, “Paronomasia and Popular Etymologies in the Naming Narrative of the Old Testament,” Ph.D. diss., University of Cambridge, 1982.
110. 11 The story of the sending of the quail is a good example of poetic justice, or talionic justice. God had provided for the people, but even in that provision they were not satisfied, for they remembered other foods they had in Egypt. No doubt there was not the variety of foods in the Sinai that might have been available in Egypt, but their life had been bitter bondage there as well. They had cried to the Lord for salvation, but now they forget, as they remember things they used to have. God will give them what they crave, but it will not do for them what they desire. For more information on this story, see B. J. Malina, The Palestinian Manna Tradition. For the attempt to explain manna and the other foods by natural phenomena, see F. W. Bodenheimer, “The Manna of Sinai,” 10 (1947): 1–6.
111. 12 The mixed multitude (or “rabble,” so , , ; “foreign rabble”) is the translation of an unusual word, הֲָאסַפְסֻף (ha’safsuf). It occurs in the Hebrew Bible only here. It may mean “a gathering of people” from the verb אָסַף (’asaf), yielding the idea of a mixed multitude (in line with Exod 12:38). But the root is different, and so no clear connection can be established. Many commentators therefore think the word is stronger, showing contempt through a word that would be equivalent to “riff-raff.”
112. 13 The Hebrew simply uses the cognate accusative, saying “they craved a craving” (הִתְאַוּוּ תַּאֲוָה, hit’avvu ta’vah), but the context shows that they had this strong craving for food. The verb describes a strong desire, which is not always negative (Ps 132:13–14). But the word is a significant one in the Torah; it was used in the garden story for Eve’s desire for the tree, and it is used in the Decalogue in the warning against coveting (Deut 5:21).
113. 14 The Greek and the Latin versions read “and they sat down” for “and they returned,” involving just a change in vocalization (which they did not have). This may reflect the same expression in Judg 20:26. But the change does not improve this verse. The Hebrew text uses a verbal hendiadys here, one word serving as an adverb for the other. It literally reads “and they returned and they wept,” which means they wept again. Here the weeping is put for the complaint, showing how emotionally stirred up the people had become by the craving. The words throughout here are metonymies. The craving is a metonymy of cause, for it would have then led to expressions (otherwise the desires would not have been known). And the weeping is either a metonymy of effect, or of adjunct, for the actual complaints follow.
114. 15 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 §151.a.1.
115. 16 The perfect tense here expresses the experience of a state of mind. 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.
116. 17 The imperfect tense would here be the customary imperfect, showing continual or incomplete action in past time.
117. 18 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.
118. 19 Heb “our souls.”
119. 20 The Hebrews were complaining both about the bland taste of the manna and dehydration—they were parched in the wilderness.
120. 21 Heb “before our eyes,” meaning that “we see nothing except this manna.”
121. 22 Heb “And its taste was like the taste of fresh olive oil.”
122. 23 The temporal clause is constructed of the infinitive construct from יָרָד (yarad) with a temporal preposition, followed by the subjective genitive.
123. 24 Heb “came down.”
124. 25 Moses begins to feel the burden of caring for this people, a stubborn and rebellious people. His complaint shows how contagious their complaining has been. It is one thing to cry out to God about the load of ministry, but it is quite another to do it in such a way as to reflect a lack of faith in God’s provision. God has to remind the leader Moses that he, the Lord, can do anything. This is a variation on the theme from Exodus—“who am I that I should lead.…”
125. 26 The participle “weeping” is functioning here as the noun in the accusative case, an adverbial accusative of state. It is explicative of the object.