Online Resource Library
Commentary Index | Return to PrayerRequest.com | DownloadPulpit Commentary - Numbers 11:4 - 11:35
(Show All Books | Show All Chapters)
This Chapter Verse Commentaries:
Num_11:4
The mixed multitude. Hebrew, ha-saphsuph, the gathered; the rift-raft, or rabble, which had followed the fortunes of Israel out of Egypt, where they had probably been strangers and slaves themselves. What the nature and the number and the fate of this rabble were is a matter of mere conjecture and of some perplexity. There does not seem any room for them in the regulations laid down for Israel, nor are they mentioned in any other place except at Exo_12:38. In Le Exo_24:10 we read of the son of an Israelitish woman by an Egyptian father, and this might lead us to conjecture that a great part of the "mixed multitude" was the offspring of such left-handed alliances. These half-breeds, according to the general rule in such cases, would follow their mothers; they would be regarded with contempt by the Jews of pure blood, and would accompany the march as hangers-on of the various tribes with which they were connected. As to their fate, it may be probably concluded, from the reason of things and from the absence of any further notice of them, that they found their way back to the slavery and the indulgences of Egypt; they were bound by no such strong restraints and animated by no such national feelings as the true people of the Lord. And the children of Israel also wept again. This expression, again (Hebrew, ùÑåÌá , used adverbially), would seem to point to some former weeping, and this is generally found in the "murmuring" of which they had been guilty in the desert of Sin (Exo_16:2, Exo_16:3). This, however, is unsatisfactory for several reasons: first, because that occurrence was too remote, having been more than a year ago; second, because there is no mention of any "weeping" at that time; third, because the matter of complaint on the two occasions was really quite different: then they murmured faithlessly at the blank starvation which apparently stared them in the face; now they weep greedily at the absence of remembered luxuries. It is therefore much more likely that the expression has regard to the "complaining" which had just taken place at Tabeerah. It was indeed wonderful that the punishment then inflicted did not check the sin; wonderful that it burst out again in an aggravated form almost immediately. But such was the obstinacy of this people, that Divine vengeance, which only perhaps affected a few, and only lasted for a brief space, was not sufficient to silence their wicked clamour. Who shall give us flesh to eat? áÈÌùÈÒø —Septuagint, κρέα —means flesh-meat generally. They had flocks and herds it is true, but they were no doubt carefully preserved, and the increase of them would little more than suffice for sacrifice; no one would dream of slaughtering them for ordinary eating.
Num_11:5
We remember the fish, which we did eat in Egypt freely, i.e; gratis. No doubt this was an exaggeration on the part of the murmurers, but it is attested by classical writers that fish swarmed in the Nile waters, and cost next to nothing. Cucumbers. ÷ÄùËÑàÄéí . Cucumbers of peculiar softness and flavour are spoken of by Egyptian travelers as fructus in Egypto omnium vulgatissimus. Melons. hsilgnE:egaugnaL\ àÇáÇèÄÌçÄéí }. Water-melons, still called battieh, grow in Egypt, as in all hot, moist lands, like weeds, and are as much the luxury of the poorest as of the richest. Leeks. çÈöÄéø . This word usually means grass (as in Psa_104:14), and may do so hare, for the modem Egyptians eat a kind of field-clover freely. The Septuagint, however, translates it by τὰ πράσα , leeks or chives, which agrees better with the context. Pliny (Nat. Hist. 19:33) speaks of it as "laudatissimus porrus in Egypto." Onions. áÀÌöÈìÄéí . Garlic. ùÑåÌîÀéí . These are mentioned in the well-known passage of Herodotus (2.125) as forming the staple food of the workmen at the pyramids; these still form a large part of the diet of the labouring classes in Egypt, as in other Mediterranean countries. If we look at these different articles of food together, so naturally and inartificially mentioned in this verse, we find a strong argument for the genuineness of the narrative. They are exactly the luxuries which an Egyptian labourer of that day would have cried out for, if deprived of them; they are not the luxuries which a Jew of Palestine would covet, or would even think of. The very words here used for the cucumber, the melon, and the garlic were probably Egyptian, for they may still be recognized in the common names of those vegetables in Egypt.
Num_11:6
Our soul is dried away. This exaggerated statement expressed their craving for the juicy and savoury food of which they had been thinking, and which was obviously unattainable in the wilderness. There is a physical craving in man for variety of diet, and especially for such condiments and flavours as he has been used to all his life, which makes the lack of them a real hardship. It is not necessary to condemn the Israelites for feeling very keenly the loss of their accustomed food, which is notoriously the one thing which the poorest classes are least able to bear; it is only necessary to condemn them for making this one loss of more account than all their gain. There is nothing at all, beside this manna, before our eyes. Rather, "we have nothing ( àÅéï ëÉÌì ) except that our eye (falls) upon this manna." These graphic words speak of the longing looks which turned in every direction after the accustomed dainties, only to fall with disgust upon the inevitable manna. It was very ungrateful of them to speak disparagingly of the manna, which was good and wholesome food, and sufficient to keep them in health and strength; but it is useless to deny that manna only for people who had been accustomed to a rich and varied diet must have been exceedingly trying both to the palate and the stomach (cf. Num_21:5).
Num_11:7
The manna was as coriander seed. On the name and the nature of the manna see Exo_16:31. It is commonly supposed that the brief description here inserted was intended to show the unreasonableness of the popular complaints. There is no trace whatever of any such purpose. So far as the description conveys fresh information, it was simply suggested by the occurrence of the word "manna," according to the artless style of the narrative. If any moral purpose must be assigned to this digression, it would rather be to suggest that the people had some real temptation to complain. It is often forgotten that, although the manna was supernatural, at least as to the amount and regularity of its supply, yet as an article of food it contained no supernatural elements. If we had to live upon nothing but cakes flavored with honey or with olive oil, it is certain that we should soon find them pall upon our appetite. To the eye of the Psalmist the manna appeared as angels' food (Psa_78:25); but then the Psalmist had not lived on manna every day for a year. We have to remember, in this as in many other cases, that the Israelites would not be "our ensamples" ( τύποι ἡμῶν , 1Co_10:6) if they had not succumbed to real temptations. As the colour of bdellium. See on Gen_2:12. As no one knows anything at all about bdellium, this adds nothing to our knowledge of the manna. The Septuagint has here εἷδος κρυστάλλου , "the appearance of ice," or perhaps "of hoar-frost." As it translates bdellium in Gen_2:12 by ἄνθραξ (carbuncle), it is probable that the comparison to ice here is due to some tradition about the manna. Taking this passage in connection with Exo_16:1-36 :81, we may reasonably conjecture that it was of an opalescent white, the same colour probably which is mentioned in connection with manna in Rev_2:17.
Num_11:8
And the people … ground it in mills. This information as to the preparation of the manna is new. It may be supposed that at first the people ate it in its natural state, but that afterwards they found out how to prepare it in different ways for the sake of variety. Small handmills and mortars for the preparation of grain they would have brought with them from their Egyptian homes. As the taste of fresh oil. In Exo_16:31 it is said to have tasted like wafers made with honey. Nothing is more impossible adequately to describe than a fresh taste. It is sufficient to note that the two things suggested by the taste of the manna, honey and oil, present the greatest possible contrast to the heavy or savoury food which they remembered in Egypt.
Num_11:9
And when the dew fell,… the manna fell upon it. We know from Exo_16:14 that when the dew evaporated in the morning it left a deposit of manna upon the ground; we learn here that the manna fell upon the dew during the night. Now the dew is deposited in the cool of the night beneath a clear sky, when radiation of heat goes on uninterruptedly from the earth's surface; it is clear, therefore, that the manna was let fall in some way beyond human experience from the upper air. What possible physical connection there could be between the dew and the manna we cannot tell. To the untaught mind, however, the dew seemed to come more directly than any other gift of nature from the clear sky which underlay the throne of God; and thus the Jew was led to look upon the manna too as coming to him day by day direct front the storehouse of heaven (cf. Psa_78:23, Psa_78:24; Psa_105:40).
Num_11:10
Throughout their families. Every family weeping by itself. Such was the contagion of evil, that every family was infected. Compare Zec_12:12 for a description of a weeping similar in character, although very different in its cause. Every man in the door of his tent. So that his wailing might be heard by all. So public and obtrusive a demonstration of grief must of course have been pre-arranged. They doubtless acted thus under the impression that if they made themselves sufficiently troublesome and disagreeable they would get all they wanted; in this, as in much else, they behaved exactly like ill-trained children. Moses also was displeased. The word "also" clearly compares and unites his displeasure with that of God. The murmuring indeed of the people was directed against God, and against Moses as his minister. The invisible King and his visible viceroy could not be separated in the regard of the people, and their concerted exhibition of misery was intended primarily for the eye of the latter. It was, therefore, no wonder that such conduct roused the wrath of Moses, who had no right to be angry, as well as the wrath of God, who had every right to be. angry. Moses sinned because he failed to restrain his temper within the exact limits of what befits the creature, and to distinguish carefully between a righteous indignation for Cod and an angry impatience with men. But he sinned under very sore provocation.
Num_11:11
Wherefore hast thou afflicted thy servant? These passionate complaints were clearly wrong, because exaggerated. God had not thrown upon Moses the responsibility of getting the people safely into Canaan, or of providing flesh for them; and apart from these exaggerations, it was a selfish and cowardly thing thus to dwell upon his own grievance, and to leave out of sight the grave dishonour done to God, and the awful danger incurred by the people. It was the more blameworthy in Moses because upon a former occasion he had taken upon him, with almost perilous boldness, to remonstrate with God, and to protest against the vengeance he threatened to inflict (Exo_32:11-13). In a word, Moses forgot himself and his duty as mediator, and in his indignation at the sin of the people committed the same sin himself. It is a strong note of genuineness that so grave (and yet so natural) a fault should be recorded with such obvious simplicity. Compare the eases of Elijah (1Ki_19:1-21) and of Jonah (Jon_4:1-11).
Num_11:12
Carry them in thy bosom, as a nursing father. Probably he meant to say that this was the part and the duty of God himself as the Creator and Father of Israel. Compare the reading, which is perhaps the correct one, in Act_13:18 : Τεσσαρακονταετῆ χρόνον ἐτροφοόρησεν αὐτοὺς ἑν τῇ ἐρήμῳ .
Num_11:14
1 am not able to bear all this people alone. This complaint, while reasonable in itself, shows how unreasonable the rest of his words were. However many he might have had to share his responsibilities, be could not have provided flesh for the people, nor enabled them to live one day in the wilderness; this had never been laid upon him.
Num_11:15
Kill me, I pray thee, out of hand, or "quite." Hebrew, úÈøÉâ , inf. abs. And let me not see my wretchedness. Let me not live to see the total failure of my hopes and efforts.
Num_11:16
And the Lord said unto Moses. The Divine dignity and goodness of this answer, if not an absolutely conclusive testimony, are at least a very strong one, to the genuineness of this record. Of what god, except the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, was it ever witnessed, or could it have been ever imagined, that he should answer the passionate injustice of his servant with such forbearance and kindness? The one thing in Moses' prayer which was reasonable he allowed at once; the rest he passed over without answer or reproof, as though it had never been uttered. Gather unto me seventy men of the elders of Israel. That the number seventy has a symbolic significance in Scripture will hardly be denied (cf. Exo_1:5; Dan_9:2, Dan_9:24; Luk_10:1), although it is probably futile to affix any precise meaning to it. Perhaps the leading idea of seventy is fullness, as that of twelve is symmetry (see on Exo_15:27). The later Jews believed that there were seventy nations in the world. There is no reason, except a reckless desire to confound the sacred narrative, to identify this appointment with that narrated in Exo_18:21, sq. and Deu_1:9, sq. The circumstances and the purposes appear quite distinct: those were appointed to assist Moses in purely secular matters, to share his burden as a judge; these to assist him in religious matters, to support him as a mediator; those used the ordinary gifts of wisdom, discretion, and personal authority; these the extraordinary gifts of the Spirit. It is more reasonable to suppose that these seventy were the same men that went up into Mount Sinai with Moses, and saw the God of Israel, and ate of the consecrated meal of the covenant, about a year before. Unless there was some decisive reason against it, an elder who had been chosen for that high religious privilege could hardly fail to be chosen on this occasion also; an interview with God himself, so mysteriously and awfully significant, must surely have left an ineffaceable stamp of sanctity on any soul at all worthy of it. It would be natural to suppose that while the present selection was made de novo, the individuals selected were personally the same. Compare note on Deu_1:5, and for "the elders of Israel" see on Exo_3:16. Whom thou knowest to be elders of the people, and officers over them. On the officers (Hebrew, shoterim), an ancient order in the national organization of Israel, continued from the days of bondage, see Exo_5:6. The Targ. Pal. paraphrases the word shoterim by "who were set over them in Mizraim." The Septuagint has hero πρεσβύτεροι τοῦ λαοῦ καὶ γρυμματεῖς αὐτῶν , words so familiar to the reader of the Greek Gospels. The later Jews traced back their Sanhedrim, or grand council of seventy, to this appointment, and found their eiders and scribes in this verse. There was, however, no further historical connection between the two bodies than this—that when the monarchy failed and prophecy died out, the ecclesiastical leaders of the Jews modeled their institutions upon, and adapted their titles to, this Divinely-ordered original.
Num_11:17
I will take of the spirit which is upon thee, and will put it upon them. The Holy Spirit is one and indivisible. But in the language of Scripture "the Spirit" often stands for the charismata, or gifts of the Spirit, and in this sense is freely spoken of as belonging to this or that man. So the "spirit of Elijah" (2Ki_2:9, 2Ki_2:15), which was transferred to Elisha, as it were, by bequest. It was not, therefore, the personal indwelling presence of the Holy Ghost in Moses which God caused him to share with the seventy elders, for that can in no ease be a matter of transfer or of arrangement, but simply those charismata or extraordinary gifts of the Spirit which Moses had hitherto enjoyed alone as the prophet of Israel. It is strange that in the face of the clear teaching of St. Paul in 1Co_12:1-31, 1Co_13:1-13, and in view of such cases as those of Saul (1Sa_10:10; 1Sa_19:1-24 :93) and David (1Sa_16:13), any difficulty should have been felt about this passage. They shall bear the burden of the people with thee. It does not appear how they were to do this, nor is there any record of their work. Their gifts, however, were spiritual, and we may probably assume that their usefulness lay in producing and maintaining a proper religious tone among the people. The real difficulty which stood in the way of Moses was not one of outward organization or of government, for that had been amply provided for; it lay in the bad tone which prevailed among the people, and threatened to destroy at any moment the very foundations of their national hope and safety. We may see in these seventy not indeed a Sanhedrim to exercise authority and discipline, but the first commencement of that prophetic order which afterwards played so large a part in the religious history of Israel and of the early Christian Church—an order designed kern the first to supplement by the freedom and originality of their ministry the more formal and unvarying offices of the priesthood. If this was the nature of their usefulness, it is not surprising that they are never mentioned again; and it is observable that a similar obscurity hangs over the activity of the prophets of the New Testament, who yet formed a most important part of the gospel regime (cf. 1Co_14:29-32; Eph_2:20).
Num_11:18
Sanctify yourselves against tomorrow. By certain ablutions, and by avoidance of legal pollution (see Exo_19:10, Exo_19:14, Exo_19:15). The people were to prepare themselves as for some revelation of God's holiness and majesty. In truth it was for a revelation of his wrath, and of the bitter consequences of sin. There is about the words, as interpreted by the result, a depth of very terrible meaning; it was as though a traitor, unknowing of his doom, were bidden to a grand ceremonial on the morrow, which ceremonial should be his own execution. For it was well with us in Egypt. These false and wicked words, in which the base ingratitude of the people reached its highest pitch, are repeated to them in the message of God with a quiet sternness which gave no sign to their callous ears of the wrath they had aroused.
Num_11:20
But even a whole month. There is some little difficulty about these words, because the Israelites do not seem to have made a long stay at Kibroth-Hattaavah, and the miraculous supply does not seem to have followed them. The words are words of stern irony and displeasure, and need not be literally pressed: it was enough that animal food was given them in quantity sufficient to have gorged the whole nation for a month, if they had eared to go on eating it (see below on Num_11:33).
Num_11:21
And Moses said. Moses had not recovered from the impatient and despairing temper into which the ill-behaviour of the people had betrayed him. He could not really have doubted the Divine power to do this, after what he had seen in the desert of Sin (Exo_16:13), but he spoke petulantly, and indeed insolently, out of the misery which was yet in his heart.
Num_11:22
Shall the flocks and herds be slain? Which they had brought out of Egypt with them (see on Exo_12:32), and which no doubt were carefully husbanded, partly in order to supply them with milk and other produce, partly in order to maintain the sacrifices of the law. All the fish of the sea. A wild expression from which nothing can be fairly argued as to the present position of the camp.
Num_11:23
Is the Lord's hand waxed short? So that it cannot reach far enough to fulfill his purposes. This simple and expressive figure of speech is adopted by Isaiah (Isa_1:2; Isa_59:1).
Num_11:24
Moses went out, i.e; out of the tabernacle. It is not stated that he went into the tabernacle to bring his complaint before the Lord, but the narrative obviously implies that he did (see on Num_7:89).
Num_11:25
The Lord came down in a cloud, i.e; in the cloud which was the symbol of his perpetual presence with. them. At other times this cloud dwelt ( ùÈÑëÇï ) above the tabernacle, soaring steadily above it in the clear air; but on certain occasions, for greater impressiveness, the cloud came down and filled the tabernacle, or at any rate the entrance of it, while Moses stood without (cf. Num_12:5 and Exo_33:9; Exo_40:35). Took of the spirit which was upon him. Not certainly in anger, or by way of diminishing the fullness of the spirit which was in Moses, but in order that the seventy might participate, and be known to participate, in a gift originally and specially given to Moses. The whole intention of the ceremonial was to declare in the most unmistakable way that the gifts of the seventy were to be exercised only in union with and in subordination to the mediator of Israel. The Targums are substantially correct in their paraphrase: "The Lord made enlargement of the spirit that was upon him, and imparted to the seventy men, the eiders." Theodoret very happily observes on this passage, "Just as a man who kindles a thousand flames from one does not lessen the first in communicating light to the others, so God did not diminish the grace imparted to Moses by the fact that he communicated of it to the seventy." They prophesied. The phenomenon here mentioned for the first time was no doubt an ecstatic utterance, not exactly beyond the control, but certainly beyond the origination, of those who prophesied. It must not be confounded with that state of calm, spiritual exaltation in which such men as Isaac and Jacob spake concerning things to come (Heb_11:20; cf. Gen_27:29; Gen_49:28). The Hebrew éÄúÀðÇáÀÌàåÌ means literally "were caused to pour forth," and the fundamental idea is that those affected became for the time being vents for the audible utterance of thoughts and expressions which were not theirs, but the Holy Ghost's. Compare the thought in Job_32:18-20, and the case of Saul and his messengers, as above. As to the matter of these prophesyings, we may probably conclude that they were of the same nature as the ecstatic utterances of the tongues on the day of Pentecost and afterwards; not "prophecy" in the ordinary sense, but inspired glorification of God, and declaration of his wonderful works (Act_2:4, Act_2:11). And did not cease. Rather, "did not add," or "repeat." åÀìÉà éÈñÀôåÌ . Septuagint, καὶ οὐκ ἔτι προσέθεντο . The ecstatic utterance did not continue or reappear. The New Testament history no doubt supplies us with the explanation of this. The supernatural sign thus accorded was of little use in itself, and was of much danger, because it attracted to its exhibition an attention which was rather due to more inward and spiritual things. As a sign it was sufficient that it should be once unmistakably manifested before all the people. (cf. 1Co_14:22; 1Co_13:8). The permanent charisma of the Holy Spirit which the seventy received and retained from this time forth was no doubt the ἀντιλήψις or κυβερνήσις of 1Co_12:28; the gift of "help" or "governance," not in temporal matters, but in the religious education and direction of the people.
Num_11:26
There remained two of the men in the camp. No reason is here given why they did not accompany the rest to the tabernacle; but as they did not thereby forfeit the gift designed for them, it is certain that some necessity or duty detained them. They were of them that were written. This incidental notice shows how usual the practice of writing was, at any rate with Moses, who was "learned in all the wisdom of the Egyptians" (Act_7:22). And they prophesied in the camp. As a sign that they too had received the charisma from the Lord. Seeing that it was the work of the Holy Spirit, there was of course nothing really more wonderful in their case than in the ease of the others, but no doubt it seemed so. That men in the camp, and away from the visible center and scene of Divine manifestations, should be accessible to the heavenly afflatus was a vast astonishment to an ignorant people. We may compare the surprise felt by the Jewish Christians when the sign of tongues was shown among the Gentiles (Act_10:45, Act_10:46).
Num_11:27
And there ran a young man. Literally, "the young man,"— äÇðÇÌòÇø ; ὁ νεανἱσκος , Septuagint,—by which some understand the young men of the camp collectively, but this is doubtful in grammar and unsatisfactory in sense. If this book was compiled from previous records, of which there are many apparent traces, we may suppose that the name of this young man was there given, but here for some reason omitted.
Num_11:28
Joshua the son of Nun. See on Exo_17:9. As before, he is called Joshua by anticipation. One of his young men. This implies that there were others who to some extent shared his duties towards Moses; but that Joshua stood in a peculiar relation to his master is evident from Exo_24:13 and Exo_32:17, as well as from this passage itself. My lord Moses, forbid them. Probably he did not know that they had been enrolled, and he was naturally jealous for the honour of Moses—a jealousy which was not at all unnecessary, as the events of the next chapter proved. The prophesying of Eldad and Medad in the camp might well seem like the setting up of an independent authority, not in harmony with that of Moses.
Num_11:29
Enviest thou for my sake? In this answer speaks for once "the meekest of men." It was his sad fate that his position as representative of God obliged him to see repressed with terrible visitations any rebellion against his sole and absolute authority. But he was devoid of personal ambition at all times, and at this time weary and disgusted with the responsibility of ruling such a people. How much more for the glory of God, and for his own peace, would it be if not only these, but all the people, shared the gifts of the Spirit! Mar_9:38, Mar_9:39 presents a partial, but still a striking, parallel.
Num_11:30
Moses gat him into the camp. Although the tabernacle stood in the midst of the camp, yet it was practically separated from the tents of the other tribes by an open space and by the encampments of the Levites. There is, therefore, no ground for inferring from this and similar expressions that the record really belongs to a time when the tabernacle was pitched outside the camp.
Num_11:31
A wind from the Lord. A wind Divinely sent for this purpose. In Psa_78:26 it is said to have been a wind from the east and south, i.e; a wind blowing up the Red Sea and across the Gulf of Akabah. And brought quails from the sea. On the "quails" (Hebrew, salvim—probably the common quail) see Exo_16:13. The Septuagint has in both places ἡ ὀρτυγομήτρα , "the quail-mother," the sense of which is uncertain. These birds, which migrate in spring in vast numbers, came from the sea, but it does not follow that the camp was near the sea. They may have been following up the Gulf of Akabah, and been swept far inland by the violence of the gale. Let them fall by the camp. Rather, "threw them down on the camp." éÄÌèÇùÑ òÇì äÇîÇÌçÂâÆä . Septuagint, ἐπέβαλεν ἐπὶ τὴν παρεμβολήν . Either the sudden cessation of the gale, or a violent eddying of the wind, threw the exhausted birds in myriads upon the camp (cf. Psa_78:21, Psa_78:28). Two cubits high upon the face of the earth. The word "high" is not in the original, but it probably gives the true meaning. The Septuagint, ὡσεὶ δίπηχυ ἀπο τῆς γῆς , is somewhat uncertain. The Targums assert that the quails "flew upon the face of the ground, at a height of two cubits;" and this is followed by the Vulgate ("volabant in acre duobus cubitis altiludine super terram") and by many commentators. This idea, however, although suggested by the actual habits of the bird, and adopted in order to avoid the obvious difficulty of the statement, is inconsistent with the expressions used here and in Psa_78:1-72. If the birds were "thrown" upon the camp, or "rained" upon it like sand, they could not have been flying steadily forward a few feet above the ground. It is certainly impossible to take the statement literally, for such a mass of birds would have been perfectly unmanageable; but if we suppose that they were drifted by the wind into heaps, which in places reached the height of two cubits, that will satisfy the exigencies of the text: anything like a uniform depth would be the last thing to be expected under the circumstances.
Num_11:32
And the people stood up … next day. A statement which shows us how greedy the people were, and how inordinately eager to supply themselves with an abundance of animal food. They were so afraid of losing any of the birds that they stayed up all night in order to collect them; probably they only ceased gathering and began to cat when the available supply was spent. Ten homers. It is difficult to calculate the capacity of the homer, especially as it may have varied from age to age. If it contained ten ephahs, as seems to be implied in Eze_45:11, and if the estimate of the Rabbinists (which is less than that of Josephus) be correct that the ephah held nearly four and a half gallons of liquid measure, then half a million of men must have collected more quails apiece than would have filled a 450 gallon tub. No doubt the total number was something enormous, and far above anything that could have been supplied by natural agencies. The gift of quails, like that of manna, was one of the gifts of nature proper to that region Divinely multiplied and extended, so as to show forth in the most striking way the boundless power and beneficence of God. They spread them all abroad. In order to dry them in the sun, as the Egyptians used to do with fish (Herod; 2:77), and as the South Americans do with beef. Flesh thus cured does not need salt, which the Israelites would not have in sufficient quantities.
Num_11:33
And while the flesh was yet between their teeth, ere it was chewed. If this were taken in the most literal sense, it would mean that no one of the people had time to swallow a single morsel of the coveted food ere he was stricken down by the Divine visitation. We can scarcely imagine, however, that such was the ease in every single instance. It would indeed appear as if they had with one consent postponed the enjoyment of eating the quails until they had gathered as huge a quantity for future use as possible; as if in defiance and contempt of the Divine warning that their greed would turn to satiety and loathing (see Num_11:19 and Num_11:32). If this were so, then the feast to which they so eagerly looked forward would begin throughout the camps on the second night, and the visitation of God might well have had the sudden and simultaneous character attributed to it here and in Psa_78:30, Psa_78:31. At any rate the statement of the text positively excludes the idea that they went on eating quails for a whole month, according to the promise (or threat) of Psa_78:20. There was flesh enough to have secured the literal fulfillment of that promise by gorging them for a whole month; but it is evident that the Divine wrath anticipated any such tardy revenges, and smote its victims in the very moment of their keenest gratification. The Lord smote the people with a very great plague. Both ancients and moderns state that the flesh of quails is unwholesome (cf. Pliny, 10:23), but this appears to have no very valid foundation. Unquestionably quails eaten for a month by people unused to a flesh diet would produce many and fatal sicknesses; but there is no room for any such natural results here. Whatever form the plague may have taken, it was as clearly supernatural in its suddenness and intensity as the supply of quails itself. We do not know anything as to who were smitten, or how many; the Psalmist tells us that they were "the fattest" and "the chosen in Israel, and we may naturally suppose that those who had been foremost in the lusting and the murmuring were foremost in the ruin which followed.
Num_11:34
Kibroth-Hattaavah. The graves of greediness. Septuagint, Μνήματα τῆς ἐπιθυμίας . This name, like Tabeerah, was given to the place by the Israelites themselves in connection with their own history; the name, therefore, like the sad memory it enshrined, lived only in the sacred record. It is utterly uncertain where it lay, except that it was apparently the terminus of a three days' journey from Sinai, and in the desert of Paran. How long they stayed at Kibroth-Hattaavah is also quite uncertain. If the plague followed hard upon the coming of the quails, a few days would suffice for all the events recorded in this chapter, and we may well believe that the people would be only too glad to receive the signal of departure as soon as they had buried their unhappy brethren.
Num_11:35
And abode at Hazeroth. Or, "were in Hazeroth." Septuagint, ἐγένετο ὁ λαὸς Ἀσηρώθ . Hazeroth, from çÈöÇø , to shut in, means "enclosures;" so named perhaps from some ancient stone enclosures erected by wandering tribes for their herds and flocks. It has been identified with Ain el Hadhera, a fountain eighteen hours northeast of Sinai, but on no satisfactory grounds beyond a partial resemblance of name. Assuming that the march lay in a northerly direction through the desert of Paran, the Israelites would naturally follow the road which leads across the southern mountain barrier of et-Tih, and on by the Wady es-Zulakeh into the desert plateau. On this road there is a large fountain, with pasturage, at a place called el Ain, and another somewhat further at Bit ed-Themmed. One or other of these was probably the site of Hazeroth (cf. Stanley, ‘Sinai,' page 84). It is, however, entirely a matter of conjecture, and of little real interest. The progress of Israel which is of unfading importance to us is a moral and religious, and not a geographical, progress.
I. THAT ALL THIS SIN AND MISERY BEGAN WITH "LUST," i.e; UNHALLOWED AND UNRESTRAINED DESIRE, which is indeed the inner source of all iniquity, because it is the will of the creature setting itself upon that which the Creator has forbidden or denied; hence it is the simplest and readiest way in which the creature can rebel against the Creator, for it is always possible, and indeed easy, to lust, and there is no one who is not tempted to it. Thus Eve lusted for the forbidden fruit, and brought death into the world. Even so St. James says, "Every man is tempted, when he is drawn away of his own lust, and is enticed. Then when lust hath conceived, it bringeth forth sin." And our Saviour, that all evil proceeds out of the heart, which is the seat of the emotions and desires. If, therefore, our desires were held in subjection to the will and word of God, there would be no sin in us; but as long as concupiscence is in us, it will assuredly draw us into evil (cf. Rom_7:7, Rom_7:8, Rom_7:11; Eph_2:3; 1Jn_2:16).
II. THAT THE FIRST EXPRESSION (AT ANY RATE) OF THIS UNHALLOWED DESIRE CAME FROM THE MIXED MULTITUDE—the aliens, or half-breeds, who had come with them, not from faith in God, but from inferior motives. Even so the low moral tone and the frequent enormities chargeable upon Christians are due in the first instance to those who are only nominally Christian, who have been attracted into the fellowship either by accident of birth or by worldly and unspiritual motives. It is the fate of every great and successful movement to carry away with it many who have (inwardly) no sympathy with it and no part in it. So it was with Israel, so with the Church of Christ, so with any religious revival. Here is the great danger of an established and fashionable Christianity; it numbers a multitude of nominal adherents, whose motives and desires are wholly unchastened, and who are always ready to set the worst example, and to encourage the most pernicious practices. Compare the "false brethren," 2Co_11:26.
III. THAT THE CHILDREN OF ISRAEL WERE CARRIED AWAY WITH IT, IN SPITE OF THE WARNING THEY HAD SO RECENTLY RECEIVED AT TABEERAH. No doubt it spread the more rapidly because,
(1) it fell in with their own secret feelings,
(2) it was recommended by considerations of friendship and relationship,
(3) the voice of prudence is scarcely ever a match for the promptings of desire.
Even so it is the most striking feature of sin in feeling or in act that it becomes an epidemic which only a very sound and vigorous spiritual state can resist. Compare the case of Judas and the other apostles (Mat_26:8, Mat_26:9; Joh_12:4, Joh_12:5); compare St. Peter and the Judaisers (Galatians if. 12, 13); compare the Corinthians (1Co_5:1, 1Co_5:2, 1Co_5:6, 1Co_5:11); and the sins which each generation of Christians has committed or does commit in common—such as lying, dueling, swindling. There is no sin against which more fearful warnings and examples lie than that of covetousness; yet there is none of which Christians are more generally guilty under stress of bad example and the low moral tone and degraded traditions of society, of trade, of business, &c. The warnings of the New Testament, though always fresh in the hearing and clear in the remembrance of Christian people, are absolutely ineffective as against the common promptings of evil desire.
IV. THAT WHAT THEY EVILLY DESIRED WAS NOT EVIL IN ITSELF. There was no harm in eating flesh, nor were any of the cheap luxuries they coveted objectionable in themselves. Even so we ever excuse ourselves for wanting, because what we want is not forbidden, but only denied. There is no harm (absolutely) in being rich, therefore we take no shame at covetousness. There is no harm (absolutely) in the pleasures of the flesh, therefore we are ready to excuse any indulgence in them. Christian morality is a law of liberty, unbound by formal rules, therefore we boldly strain that liberty to our immediate advantage, and fancy that the absence of prohibition is tantamount to actual allowance on the part of God.
V. THAT WHAT THEY DESIRED WAS WRONG, BECAUSE,
(1) IT WAS SUPERFLUOUS,
(2) BELONGED TO THE DAYS OF BONDAGE,
(3) HAD BEEN WITHHELD BY GOD, WHO ALONE COULD GIVE IT.
(1) Inasmuch as the food they had given them was nutritious, wholesome, and abundant for the short journey which lay before them.
(2) Inasmuch as the savoury and luscious things they wept for were peculiarly Egyptian, and went hand in hand (as they do still) with cruel oppression and degradation: it was the food of slavery.
(3) Inasmuch as such things were clearly not to be expected in a wilderness such as God was leading them through.
Even so sinful greed among Christians is known by the same three tokens.
(1) It is a craving for superfluities. What God has given us (however little compared with our desires) is enough; for it will suffice, if welt used, to bring us to our home in health and strength (Php_4:11; 1Ti_6:6-8.; Heb_13:5). More than we have must be more than enough, for God is pledged to give us that (Mat_6:33, Mat_6:34; Luk_12:32; Rom_8:32).
(2) It is a craving for things essentially connected with the bondage of sin and worldliness, from which we are escaped. Such luxuries as wealth, rank, or fashion can afford are (without being in themselves evil) so closely connected with evil that every earnest Christian must dread rather than covet them (Mat_6:19, Mat_6:21, Mat_6:31, Mat_6:32 a; Luk_6:24; Luk_16:19, Luk_16:25; Jas_5:1).
(3) It is an open contempt of God's appointment, who hath not given us any inheritance here, and hath told us to expect tribulation, and to love poverty and reproach, because it is good for us (Luk_6:20, Luk_6:22; Joh_16:33; Act_14:22; Rom_8:24; 2Co_4:18; 1Ti_6:9; Heb_13:14; Jas_2:5).
VI. THAT THE UNRESTRAINED WEEPING OF THE PEOPLE FOR THE DAINTIES THEY COULD NOT HAVE WAS EXCEEDING HATEFUL IN THE SIGHT OF GOD. It did indeed make no account of all his mercies, but rather reproached him for bringing them out of Egypt and setting them free. It was as good as saying they wished he had never troubled himself about them. Even so the greed of Christians is an open reproach against him that loved them and gave himself for them, as though he had done nothing to earn their trust and gratitude, and had rather treated them unkindly. He who passionately desires earthly gains, or bitterly laments earthly losses, flings contempt upon the gifts of Heaven and reproach upon his God and Saviour. Wherefore it speaks of "the covetous, whom the Lord abhorreth" (Psa_10:3; cf. Luk_12:15; Eph_5:3; Col_3:5; Jas_4:3, Jas_4:4).
VII. THAT THE LORD, IN ORDER TO PUNISH THE PEOPLE, GAVE THEM AN ABUNDANCE OF WHAT THEY ASKED FOR. Even so God punishes our greed by letting us have as much as we want of the coveted thing. The covetous person is punished by ample wealth, the slothful by abundance of ease, the proud by success and flattery, the vain by large admiration, the sensual by unstinted gratification. Thus the man punishes himself, the Lord providing h{m with the means of destruction. Whether we like it or not, this is the law of Providence; and to us it is the justice of God. Compare the case of Pharaoh (Rom_9:17, Rom_9:18); of the rich fool (Luk_12:16); of Herod (Act_12:22).
VIII. THAT THE PEOPLE IN THEIR GREED LABOURED DAY AND NIGHT TO ACCUMULATE PRODIGIOUS QUANTITIES OF FOOD WHICH THEY NEVER ATE. Even so do vain men labour and toil to lay up treasures upon earth, never resting as long as anything remains to be got—treasures which after all they shall never enjoy, and shall perhaps eternally regret (Mat_19:24; Luk_12:21; Luk_16:25; Jas_5:2; Rev_3:17).
IX. THAT THE PEOPLE, APART FROM ANY SUPERNATURAL INTERVENTION, WOULD HAVE SICKENED OF THE QUANTITY OF ANIMAL FOOD THEY THOUGHT TO EAT, AND FOUND IT "LOATHSOME." Even so self-indulgence soon reaches its natural limits, even when left to itself, and provokes a natural reaction of disgust. If this world were all, moderation, self-restraint, and contentment with a little would still make a happier life than luxury and dissipation. The "roses and raptures of vice" which are sung by many poets, ancient and modern, do not only fade very quickly, but leave a very evil smell behind them.
X. THAT THE JUSTICE Or GOD LEFT NOT THE ISRAELITES TO THE SLOW REVENGE OF NATURAL SATIETY; hardly had they tasted the flesh ere the plague began among them. Even so greed has its natural reaction of misery, even in the life of this world, but it has its Divine punishment in the soul. "He gave them their request, but sent leanness into their soul," says the Psalmist (Psa_106:15), revealing the spiritual truth which lay hid in this history. There is a balance Divinely held between the bodily life and that of the soul, so that if the first is full and fat and well-liking, the second is empty and lean and ill-favoured. No man can cater greedily for his body without impoverishing his soul; no man Can gratify eagerly his carnal appetites without incurring spiritual disease (Luk_6:24-26).
XI. THAT ONE OF THE EARLIEST STATIONS ON THE WAY TO CANAAN WAS "THE GRAVES OF GREED," AND THAT THE NEXT WAS "ENCLOSURES." Even so in the heavenward journey of the Church we soon come (alas, how soon I) to the graves of greed, to the dishonourable sepulchers of such as perished through love of money or of pleasure. Behold the graves of Ananias, of Sapphira, of those who "slept" at Corinth (1Co_11:30), of "that woman Jezebel" (Rev_2:20), of Demas. And after this we come to "enclosures "—long series of outward restrictions and regulations, some apostolic and some later, which mark a stage in the Church's journey, and testify to her efforts to maintain her moral purity (cf. 1Co_5:9, 1Co_5:11; 1Co_11:34 b; 1Ti_5:9). And what is true of the Church is true of many an individual member. As memory retraces the onward path, how soon come the "graves of greed," the sad memorials of passions sinfully indulged and sharply revenged! and after that the "enclosures "—the restraints and restrictions by which liberty was perforce abridged in order that sin and folly might be fenced out.
Consider, again, with respect to the manna—
I. THAT THE PEOPLE WERE REALLY TEMPTED TO WEARY OF THE SAMENESS AND INSIPIDITY OF THE MANNA, their staple food. To a palate accustomed to the pungent condiments and varied delicacies of Egypt, it was a great trial to have nothing but manna for a year; no doubt it failed to satisfy the appetite, and cloyed upon the taste, in spite of its wholesome and nutritious qualities. Even so it is a real trial to one who has known the excitements of sin and the dissipations of the world to satisfy himself with the spiritual joys and interests of religion, and we ought to recognize the fact that it is a real trial. In many Who have been recovered from a life of indulgence the craving for excitement is at times almost intolerable. Nature itself, even when not depraved by long habit, longs for excitement and change, and wearies of the calm monotony of faith, hope, and charity. Even the "sweetness" of the bread of life, which is at first as "honey" and as "fresh oil" to the starved and sickly soul, palls upon it after a while, and the old longings reassert themselves. How many tire of "angels' food" who took to it eagerly enough at first I (cf. 1Ti_5:11-13, 1Ti_5:15; Rev_2:4).
II. THAT THE MANNA WAS IN FORM AS "CORIANDER SEED," WHICH WE KNOW; IN COLOUR AS "BDELLIUM," WHICH WE DO NOT KNOW. Even so there is about the true bread of heaven a mixture of the known and the unknown, of that which can be expressed, and of that which passes human understanding. The coriander seed is of common use, but the bdellium is of paradise (Gen_2:12). And so may we all know the beauty of Christ in part, but in part we shall never know until we see him as he is (cf. Rev_2:17, "hidden manna;" Rev_3:12, "my new name;" Rev_19:12).
III. THAT THE PEOPLE HABITUALLY PREPARED THE MANNA FOR EATING IN VARIOUS WAYS, as experience and their own preference guided them. Even so the manna of souls, although it does not need, yet it does not reject, the use of human means and art in order to present it acceptably to the spiritual needs of men. God has nowhere said that all men, of whatsoever habit of mind, must receive the word and sacrament of Christ in the simplest and barest form, or not at all; it is only needful that Christ, however received, be the sole and substantial sustenance of the soul (Joh_6:50, Joh_6:58; 1Co_3:11; Gal_1:9; Php_1:18).
Consider, again, with respect to Moses and the seventy—
I. THAT THE SIN OF THE PEOPLE LED TO A DIFFERENT SIN IN MOSES. He would never have murmured at hardships, or have lusted; but he lost his temper, and spake unadvisedly with his lips. Even so sin constantly leads to sin, even where it has no direct influence, and other people's faults are often not less dangerous temptations to us because we abhor them. Thus a frivolous wife may make a soured husband; an unprincipled father a hard and stern child; a worldly clergyman a sarcastic and incredulous congregation (cf. Mat_24:12; Luk_18:11; Rom_2:22 b).
II. THAT THE TEMPTATION UNDER WHICH MOSES FELL WAS A PECULIARLY INSIDIOUS ONE. His passionate anger with the people and disgust with his position as their leader might seem only a noble indignation against wrong. Even so many are tempted to feel nothing but scorn at "baptized heathenism," and impatience with the moral failures of the age, without due consideration either of the wise and loving purposes of God or of their own duties (Psa_37:8; Jon_4:9; Eph_4:26, Eph_4:27; Jas_1:19, Jas_1:20).
III. THAT IN HIS SORROW AND RESENTMENT BY REASON OF THE WICKED HE WAS GUILTY OF GRAVE INJUSTICE AND INSOLENCE AGAINST GOD. Even so we, if we are carried away by indignation against un-Christlike Christians, are in danger of sinning against God, who has borne with them, and bears with them still, and who has made us responsible not for their perfection, but only for our own, and has not given to any a greater burden than he is able to bear (Luk_9:55, Luk_9:56; 2Co_2:11; 2Ti_2:21, 2Ti_2:25, 2Ti_2:26; 2Pe_3:15).
IV. THAT MOSES ALSO ERRED BY FORMING FAR TOO HIGH AN ESTIMATE OF HIS OWN OFFICIAL IMPORTANCE AND RESPONSIBILITY, as though he had been the real father of his people, whereas "one was their Father, which was in heaven." Even so it is very easy and natural for us, if we are in earnest, to exaggerate the importance of our work, and to mistake the nature of our responsibility in the Church. It is only God who by his one Spirit does all good work in the Church, and he will take care that it is done to his own mind; we are but instruments, who have no responsibility, save that of being "meet for the Master's use" (1Co_3:5; 1Co_4:2; 1Co_12:4-6).
V. THAT GOD WAS EXCEEDING MERCIFUL TO THE SIN OF MOSES, because it was of human infirmity, and because it was the petulant outbreak of a mind and heart overcharged with grief and failure. Even so did our Lord bear with his apostles, and will bear with all the errors and outbreaks of an honest heart (Psa_103:13, Psa_103:14; Luk_22:31-34, Luk_22:61; Joh_20:27).
VI. THAT GOD ALLOWED THE ONE COMPLAINT OF MOSES WHICH WAS REASONABLE, AND FOUNDED THE PROPHETIC ORDER TO ASSIST IN THE RELIGIOUS DIRECTION OF THE PEOPLE. Even so out of complaints and difficulties have arisen many permanent gifts of the Spirit to the Church, for in this as in other ways man's extremity is God's opportunity. Thus out of tile murmuring of the Grecians arose the diaconate (Act_6:1, Act_6:6); out of the troubles at Corinth the better regulation of the Agape and the Eucharist (1Co_11:17-34).
VII. THAT IT WAS THE SPIRIT WHICH RESTED UPON MOSES WHICH WAS COMMUNICATED TO THE SEVENTY, inasmuch as their prophetic office was to be held and exercised in unity with, and subordination to, the mediator of Israel. Even so it is the Spirit of Jesus which-is the spirit of prophecy—the Spirit of Christ and from Christ which must rest upon every Christian teacher. The anointing which qualifies to speak Divine mysteries must be from him who was anointed the one Mediator and the only Prophet (Joh_1:16, Joh_1:33; Joh_16:13, Joh_16:14, &c.).
VIII. THAT THE ANOINTING OF THE SPIRIT SHOWED ITSELF IN THE SEVENTY BY ECSTATIC UTTERANCE—A THING NEVER RECORDED OF MOSES HIMSELF. Even so the first evidence of the outpouring of the Spirit of Christ upon the disciples was that they spake with tongues, which our Lord had never done; for all such manifestations are for a sign, and are no evidence of any superior greatness or holiness in the person so endowed. How often are mere "gifts" mistaken for intrinsic worth, and "the disciple" really esteemed "above his master," because he is not" as his master"! (Joh_14:12 b; 1Co_13:1-13).
IX. THAT THE MANIFESTATION OF THE SPIRIT WAS INDEPENDENT OF OUTWARD ACCIDENTS, THOUGH NOT OF OUTWARD ORDER. The designation of the seventy was left to Moses, and Eldad and Medad were among the number selected; they were prevented from attending at the tabernacle, but they received the same gift as the others. Even so the gifts of the Spirit are not independent of ecclesiastical order, nor are they bestowed at random; but they are not restrained by anything unavoidable or accidental. It is the purpose of God which is operative, not the ceremonial, however authoritative. The Spirit of God is a free Spirit, even where he elects to act through certain channels (cf. Act_1:26; Act_13:2; 1Co_12:11; 2Co_3:17).
X. THAT THE JEALOUSY OF JOSHUA FOR HIS MASTER WAS RIGHT IN PRINCIPLE, ALTHOUGH WRONG IN THE PARTICULAR APPLICATION. It was impossible for him always to distinguish between a right and a wrong jealousy for the authority and supremacy of Moses. Even so jealousy for the sole pre-eminence of Christ is deeply rooted in all true Christian hearts, but it constantly shows itself in the most mistaken forms. The