NUMBERS 11

This chapter describes God's provision of quail to the Jews in the wilderness. The flow of the chapter is not transparently clear until one diagrams it to demonstrate the chiastic (mirror-image) arrangement of events:

    A. God is angry with the Jews for their complaining about food (vv. 1-6)

        B. Description of manna collection (vv. 7-9)

            C. 70 elders to share Moses' duties (vv. 10-17)

                D. God's commands to be given to the people (vv. 18-20)

                    E. God answers Moses' doubts (vv. 21-23)

                D'. Moses relays God's commands to the people (v. 24a)

            C'. God gives spirit to the 70 elders (vv. 24b-30)

        B'. Description of quail collection (vv. 31-32)

    A'. God's anger strikes out on the people (vv. 33-35)

The first question I would like to briefly address is whether the provision of quails was a natural or supernatural event. And if it is supernatural, what category of miracle does it fall into? It is probably an appropriate time to point out that some of the events in the Bible that we view as nature miracles, violations of natural laws, are probably better viewed as miracles of timing, miracles of knowledge, or in a very few cases are perhaps not even intended to be viewed as miracles at all. For more information on these categories of miracle, see my posts on “'Natural' Miracles in the Bible” and “Miracles of Knowledge.”

On the one hand, Wenham explains “Both Exodus and Numbers date the arrival of the quails in the second month of the Hebrew Year (Ex. 16:1; Nu. 10:11), which would coincide with the northern migration of the quails across the Sinai peninsula.” That would seem to explain their natural occurrence where the Israelites happened to be. But what about them dropping to the ground? Levine says, “Quail flourished in Europe and in the Mediterranean area and migrated across Canaan, the Sinai, [etc.]. When passing over Egypt and the Sinai, the quail were already extremely exhausted and would drop into the foliage for shelter before migrating further.” In that way the Arabs were known to have trapped large numbers of them in nets.

So it can be deduced that this was definitely not what would be called a nature miracle. But the supernatural aspects of this event can not be dismissed either. For one thing, God knew exactly when and where the dropping of the quails would occur. Also, note that they fell all around the perimeter of the Israelite camp, but not inside the camp. In those respects, it is akin to the ten plagues on Egypt which have also been given “natural” explanations by scholars.

As an aside related to where the quails fell, Wenham's opinion is worth keeping in mind: “The spirit was bestowed within the court of the tabernacle in the clean and holy area; the quails fell outside the camp, in the zone associated with uncleanness and death. The gift of the spirit drew men towards God; the quails led them away from God.

A second issue to deal with is the relationship of this story to Exodus 16 in which about one year [others dispute this time lapse and feel it was only one month] after the Israelites had started their wilderness journey they began complaining about the food. In reply, God gives them quail in the evening and manna in the morning. D.P. Wright calls the Numbers account a doublet of that in Exodus 16. And that was the standard position of earlier critical scholars. However, other commentators stress the differences between the two stories instead of their similarities:

    Ashley points out that in the case of Exodus 16, “the murmuring brought about food as a blessing, whereas in Numbers the food is a punishment.”

    Also, Childs notes that “negative interpretation of Israel in the wilderness [in Numbers] was equally part of the oldest tradition and not a later transformation of an earlier stage of the tradition [in Exodus] which was completely positive in character.”

    Stubbs puts the difference between the two accounts in this way – Before Sinai, God simply provides what they ask for. Now, after Sinai, God also punishes the people. “While before Sinai they were like a 'newly adopted child' who is tenderly taken care of, they now have come to a position of greater responsibility.”

This brings up another seemingly confusing aspect to the story. As you can see from the diagram at the start of this discussion, God begins by being very angry with the Jews for their grumbling. But then He gives every indication of giving in to their request. And finally, he seems to change His mind again, and His anger breaks out at the end of the story, too. There seems to be no consistency to God's actions at all.

Ashley notes the same thing: Verses 18-19 make it appear that God is merely going to grant the peoples' request. “Only v. 20 makes it clear that Yahweh is going to punish the people by giving them what they asked for – to excess.” Thus, the structure of the chapter shown above demonstrates that punishment was the consistent motive behind God's actions at the exact start, middle, and end of the story.

Stubbs says, “The quail ad nauseam is an answer to both the craving of the people and Moses's lack of faith.” Stubbs is referring to the incident in Numbers 11:22 where Moses questions God as to how he is going to provide quail for so many people. God's literal reply is, “Is the arm of Yahweh too short?” This idiom also appears in Isaiah 50:2 and 59:1. I am reminded of the interesting English movie “Time Bandits” in which God hunts down a group of renegade angels, portrayed by some very grubby little people. They ask Him how He was able to find them, and God's reply is, “I am the Creator of the Universe; I'm not entirely dim.”

Another point that I found of special interest is the incident described in Numbers 11:26-29. It takes place just after most of the 70 elders assembled in the Tabernacle have been given a spirit of prophecy. Here is how TEV translates it:

 “Two of the seventy leaders, Eldad and Medad, had stayed in the camp and had not gone out to the        Tent. There in the camp the spirit came on them, and they too began to shout like prophets. A young    man ran out to tell Moses what Eldad and Medad were doing. Then Joshua son of Nun, who had been    Moses' helper since he was a young man, spoke up and said to Moses, “Stop them sir.” Moses         answered, “Are you concerned about my interests? I wish that the LORD would give his spirit to all       this people and make all of them shout like prophets!”

My own opinion is that Joshua was perhaps more concerned about his own position as Moses' privileged right hand man than he was about Moses' reputation. But the thing that immediately struck me about this story was its great similarity to what happened to Christ and his apostles right after they had had an encounter with God at the Transfiguration. According to two of the Gospels (Mark 9:38-41; Luke 9:49-50), John told Jesus, “Master, we saw someone casting out demons in your name and we attempted to stop him since he is not one of us.” Jesus' reply is almost identical to the one Moses gave to Joshua under similar circumstances: “Do not stop him for whoever is not against you is for you.”

Interestingly, although Matthew does not include this story following the Transfiguration, he does record the similarly-themed account of the apostles asking who will be the greatest in the kingdom (Matthew 18:1-5).

It turns out that I am by no means the first person to note the similarity between this NT story and that found in Numbers 11:

    Horsely on Mark 9: “An allusion to the story in Num 11:27-29. The movement is not to be defensive or controlling.”

    Lane also points to the parallel between these two passages and adds, “The Twelve had an unduly narrow perspective toward the work of God.”

    Pao and Schnabel note the correspondence of Numbers 11 and Luke 9. “Jesus' response likewise prevents John from stopping those who are not within the inner circle from carrying out their work.”

    Marshall: “The background of the story [in Luke] lies...in the appointment of the Twelve to mission, and their incredulity that one who had not been authorised in the same way should be doing the same work. It is thus a New Testament parallel to the situation in Nu. 11:24-30.”

    In his commentary on Mark, Joel Marcus says, “Moses rebuffs his disciples' elitist suggestion with words that could easily be put into the Markan Jesus' mouth.”

    Stubbs says, “A similar balance between honoring the spirit's regular movement and being open to the work of the spirit outside standard channels is found in the Gospels...Like Joshua, they [the disciples] were suspicious of someone who was not part of their group, but Jesus, like Moses, told them not to stop this activity.”

There is general agreement as to the basic meaning to these three stories:

    Porter calls Luke's story “a warning against the uncharitableness of exclusiveness.”

    H. Anderson on Mark 9: “John appears here as an exemplar of the exclusiveness and conformity in the Church that is inward-looking and concerns itself only with the members.”

    Geldenhuys cautions that “believers must be magnanimous and tolerant towards persons, who, although they do not think or act exactly as themselves, nevertheless work in his name.”

    And Craddock summarizes it well by saying, “Apparently that spirit [of exclusiveness] entered the church quite early and it has certainly stayed late.”

By contrast with his followers, Moses comes off exceedingly well in this episode. Francis Schaeffer notes that he demonstrates the difference between leadership and self-aggrandizement. And T. Carson says, “Moses was above jealousy and his reply is one of the noblest sayings of Scripture.”

Of course, Moses' wish that God's Spirit would rest on all His people has now been granted.