TromboneChat

Quote from: MoominDave on Feb 04, 2016, 02:47AM
Questions and Observations

1) The consequences of disobedience are detailed much more thoroughly and vividly than those of obedience. This particular crowd of humans evidently needed more stick than carrot to be held in Moses's sway.

Well actually, the carrots and sticks seemed to be long term like the Jubilee planning for 50 years time (eg talking about cities) so I don't think its about Moses holding them in his sway.

But I agree they needed more stick than carrot.  I'd think that's probably typical of people.

I've read that this sort of final statement of the carrots and sticks was typical of a treaty or agreement of the period that the Exodus was thought to have happened too.

Quote from: drizabone on Feb 04, 2016, 12:34PMQuote from: MoominDave on Feb 04, 2016, 02:19AM4. Leaving off sowing seed one year in seven sounds like a version of crop rotation. Did different farmers all have the same year off, or did they stagger it? The latter would make much more sense to me - else surely a bad harvest in year six would cause disaster in year seven, in contravention of God's promise here, risking popular unrest with the rule of Moses. But I'm not quite sure how to read it.
No it was the one rest year for everyone.  The implication was that they had to rely on God's provision of the extra harvest the year before the rest and then sowing year.  Similar to the way they got extra manna the day before the Sabbath.
I am not well informed on either modern or historical farming... In this time and place, would a largish bunch of people expect to be able to forgo a year's harvest without incurring starvation? Under normal conditions? Under bad harvest conditions? I suppose when food is short, the hunter type behaviour that wasn't that long displaced at this point could be turned to.

Quote from: drizabone on Feb 04, 2016, 12:34PMGod plans ahead.  Remember he promised Abraham that they would be aliens and strangers in another land for 400 odd years before they would enter into the promised land. (Gen 15) So 50 years is just like tomorrow.

Or the author fills in the gaps looking back. Or these laws came from an earlier time, when they applied better.



We've gone through Leviticus at some pace - only one chapter remains. It's felt like a hard chew in some ways though - the content's been quite dry and technical.

Leviticus 27 text

Highlights

 - Vow laws

Summary

 - Vows involving valuation of persons (presumably slaves?) are given numerical value, and exception cases listed.
 - Animals pledged to God may not be substituted.
 - Houses pledged to God may be redeemed for 120% of the valuation price.
 - Same for fields pledged, but with the additional complication that the amount is reduced accorded to how close one is to the next jubilee.
 - Firstborn animals must be pledged to God. But if they are unclean, presumably through disease etc., then they must be bought back at 120% of the valuation.
 - Devoted items cannot be redeemed.
 - Buying land implies paying a 20% to the priests.

Questions and Observations

1) What kind of promises are covered under 'vows to the Lord' here? Does this only deal with sacrificing, or are other concepts being invoked?
2) The valuations of the various male categories of age are substantially larger (1.5-2 times dependent on age) than the same for females. It is rare to see an actual numerical judgement from a society formalising the extent of their sexism.
3) The 20% surcharge on redeeming items pledged looks as if it could turn out harshly in reality. If your animal's first child is sickly, then you must give the priests 120% of its value for nothing but their continuing favour.
4) What is the difference between "dedicated" and "devoted" items?
5) With the final paragraph, the priests are essentially declared able to license the creation of new property rights. This would have been very lucrative.

And that's Leviticus. I'll post my summary of the book in a day or two - but do feel free to post your own, of course.

And, as ever, there's an open invite to anyone reading to get involved and post your own chapter summaries. It's ticking along nicely with just Martin and myself summarising, with others dropping in their comments in reply, but the project could always use more hands.

apropos of discussion about turning a wooden staff into a snake...

https://www.facebook.com/woodworkingcrazy/videos/1761541604067264/

Quote from: MoominDave on Feb 05, 2016, 03:34AM
Questions and Observations

1) What kind of promises are covered under 'vows to the Lord' here? Does this only deal with sacrificing, or are other concepts being invoked?

I think that they are sacrifices - in the sense of giving something up, and not necessarily as a burnt offering.  So the things that were offered were given to the priests for their use.  People given to the priest would become their servants and temple workers.

Quote2) The valuations of the various male categories of age are substantially larger (1.5-2 times dependent on age) than the same for females. It is rare to see an actual numerical judgement from a society formalising the extent of their sexism.

I think that the valuations of people were proportional to the amount of work they would be able to do for the priests. So younger men are worth more than older men and men are worth more than women because of that.

Quote3) The 20% surcharge on redeeming items pledged looks as if it could turn out harshly in reality. If your animal's first child is sickly, then you must give the priests 120% of its value for nothing but their continuing favour.

Verse 27 covers this and says that you don't have to buy it back if you don't want.

Quote4) What is the difference between "dedicated" and "devoted" items?

They mean the same thing except "dedicate" is used for the verb and "devoted" as the noun or adjective.

Quote5) With the final paragraph, the priests are essentially declared able to license the creation of new property rights. This would have been very lucrative.

ISTM that whether to redeem or not is always at the discretion of the offerer, not the priest.  Am I missing something?

From what I've read priests weren't allocated any farming land, so, apart from the top levels of the hierarchy the portions of offerings that priests were allocated was their main source of income.  It was enough to survive on but not enough to make them rich.  Unfortunately there were those in power that were able to rort the system.


QuoteAnd, as ever, there's an open invite to anyone reading to get involved and post your own chapter summaries. It's ticking along nicely with just Martin and myself summarising, with others dropping in their comments in reply, but the project could always use more hands.

+1

My (meta) Summary

It was more interesting and less problematic than I expected.

It almost seems like a cheat guide for the game of life .  It creates rule-based scenarios for people to achieve purity, avoid unholiness, and produce life in abundance. It maps out the territory, sets out possible endgames, explains the rules for how things interact, and provides tools to help make progress faster.

It maps out the various territories in Israel's day-to-day life and connects them all to the Tabernacle. This includes not merely physical space but also time.

And it takes its audience through multiple personal perspectives, such as those of the offerer, the priests, and the congregation, as well as multiple ways of modeling community life.

Themes

Community and Covenant
 - Communities need common rules to provide order so that they get along and can live together. Levitcus provides a common set of values and processes to build a community on based on the covenant with God

Society and Class
- the priestly class is obviously privileged here, the book sets up rituals and rules that make the priests of God the group that holds the Israelites together.  But if the Israelites are as successful as God promises to make them, it's only a matter of time before other folks get enough wealth and power to give the priests a run for their money. From the incest rules to the jubilee, the laws in Leviticus use an ethic of mutual care and social responsibility to keep a new 1% from taking control.

- the book talks about other people in Israel, too. Farmers, families, city dwellers, landless foreigners, the disabled, the poor—they all have their place in this growing nation, and not of all them are moving on up.

Morality and Ethics
An ethic of mutuality runs through all of Leviticus. Israelites look out for other Israelites. They follow through on their promises. They pay a fair price, don't cheat in business dealings, and don't exploit the weak. Even the rules about things like adultery, incest, and same-sex sexual intercourse might be more about respecting other Israelites than having too much fun.

Oh, and if they muck up the rules and hurt someone in the process, the Israelites have to atone for it by paying a proportional amount. You might say an eye for an eye. Or something like that.

Rules and Order
God is pretty keen on keeping things ordered and distinct. No 50 shades of grey, just black and white.

Morality and Ethics
- An ethic of mutuality runs through all of Leviticus. Israelites look out for other Israelites. They follow through on their promises. They pay a fair price, don't cheat in business dealings, and don't exploit the weak. Even the rules about things like adultery, incest, and same-sex sexual intercourse might be more about respecting other Israelites than having too much fun.

- and if they muck up the rules and hurt someone in the process, the Israelites have to atone for it by paying a proportional amount. You might say an eye for an eye. Or something like that.

Sin
- I've been researching this, cause some of the rules didn't seem to make sense.  Why did you need to make a sin offering when a house got mould or a women had her period?
- it seems that the Hebrew word for sin in this case, isn't really about doing something naughty, it means that something is not the way it should be, not necessarily morally. So cheating a customer? That ain't right. Blood leaking out of a body when everyone knows that blood belongs inside? That isn't right, either.

Sex
The prohibitions seem strange in that they tell us what not to do, but leave huge loop holes that don't prohibit things we would think would have been prevented.  And some of the things that are prohibited don't seem to be morally bad at all.  Could this be because of their understanding of sin?

Foreigners and the Poor
Travelers, sojourners, strangers, Israelites who are poor—Leviticus has a lot to say about the so-called disadvantaged. But who are these people and what's really going on?

I think that the reason immigrants and the poor are lumped together is land; in particular, the fact that immigrants and poor Israelites don't have any. In an agricultural society such as ancient Israel, this means they're stuck without a way to make money. And as you might imagine, that makes them dependent on everyone else. Immigrants pose a double puzzler because unlike Israelites, they also don't have a deeper connection to the Promised Land through the divine covenant.

Numbers 1 text

Highlights

- A census.  (some people like numbers!)

Summary

 - on the first day of the second month of the second year since they left Egypt, God told Moses to take a census of the People, by tribe

- they were to count the men 20 years and older - every man able to go to war

- the count was
  - Reuben   46,500
  - Simeon   59,300
  - Gad      45,650
  - Judah    74,600
  - Issachar 54,400
  - Zebulun  57,400
  - Ephraim  40,500
  - Manasseh 32,200
  - Benjamin 35,400
  - Dan      62,700
  - Asher    41,500
  - Naphtali 53,400

- that came to 603,550

- the Levites were exempted from the count because they had to look after the tabernacle.

Questions and Observations

1. The numbers are fairly precise, maybe rounding to the nearest 50.  But how accurate are they?  They are consistent with the number in Exodus.

2. The text says that its been 14 months since they left Egypt.  Time flies when you're having fun.

Numbers is pretty easy so far, so might as well power through it

Numbers 2 text

Highlights

- The camp

Summary

 - God told Moses and Aron how the People's camp was to be arranged
 - Judah, with Issachar and Zebulun were to camp on the East of the tent of meeting
 - Reuben, with Simeon and Gad were on the South
 - then when the tent of meeting and the Levites in the centre.
 - this is how they will camp and set out
 - Ephraim, with Manasseh and Benjamin on the West
 - Dan, with Asher and Naphtali on the North

 - and there are still 603,550 men.

Questions and Observations

1. It looks like they are preparing for war.

Numbers 3 text

Highlights

- disposition of Levites
- redemption of firstborn

Summary

 - Aaron and Moses' descendants at the time of Exodus listed.
 - God says that the Levites are to guard Aaron and guard and serve (minister) the tabernacle
 - the Levites are to take the place of the firstborn children of Israel and are thus consecrated to God
 - the Levite clans are listed (but not numbered) and are told where to camp around the tabernacle and what part of the tabernacle to look after.
 - any outsider who approached the tabernacle was to be put to death.

 - all the firstborn of Israel (both of people and cattle) had to be offered to the Lord
 - as the Levites and their cattle were considered to take the place of the first born, the people had to make up the difference.
 - as there were more firstborn than Levites, the People had to buy back (aka redeem) the extra firstborn.
 - Aaron and his sons got the redemption money.

Questions and Observations

1. When Aaron and Moses' descendants are listed, they are all Aaron's.  Why weren't Moses kids listed?
2. So while all the descendants of Levi work in the tabernacle, its only those who are Aaron's descendants who are priests.

Numbers 4 text

Highlights

- Levitical duties

Summary

 - The Levites were to be counted now, but only those between 30 and 50 years old.
 - Aaron and his sons (ie the priests) are the only ones allowed to prepare the "super" holy items for travel.  These are listed in detail and they are told how to wrap them so that the others don't touch or see them.
 - Korath and his descendants were counted: 2750. They are to carry these items, but only after they are wrapped, cause if they touch or look at the actual items themselves they will die.
 - Gershon and his sons were counted: 2630.  They are to carry the curtains that make up the tent and walls of the tabernacle
 - Merari and his sons were counted: 3200. They are to carry the frames and poles and pegs and ropes for the tabernacle.

Questions and Observations

1. It looks like they're getting organised to go somewhere

What's the minimum area you could fit those 600,000 people in if you had to talk to all of them at once?  It sounds awkward.

if you presumed 2 sq. ft. for every person...

-you'd need a square 1095 ft. on each side
-or a circle with a radius of 618 feet.
-or a 90° section of a circle with a radius of 874 feet.

You'd really need some lungs to be heard.

Quote from: robcat2075 on Feb 09, 2016, 09:28PMWhat's the minimum area you could fit those 600,000 people in if you had to talk to all of them at once?  It sounds awkward.

if you presumed 2 sq. ft. for every person...

-you'd need a square 1095 ft. on each side
-or a circle with a radius of 618 feet.
-or a 90° section of a circle with a radius of 874 feet.

You'd really need some lungs to be heard.

I'm guessing that they ran the place like an army camp: Moses told the Generals what to do, and they passed it on down the levels of the hierarchy until the privates finally found out from the sergeants.

And of course they would have had a trombone section as the standard mode of mass communication.

Actually, the population would have been larger? Did that number include all the women and children?

As a reminder, here's the Genesis and Exodus story summaries I made:

Quote from: MoominDave on Jan 10, 2016, 01:03PMAs an intro to the Exodus story summary, the same for Genesis, as the two run on into each other, more or less:

Quote from: MoominDave on Dec 05, 2015, 05:14AMHere we are - the story so far, Book of Genesis:

We start with big picture stuff.

Creation
 - Days of creation, the world and everything in it, Adam and Eve.
 - Tempting of Eve by the serpent; Eve and Adam eat the forbidden fruit.
 - The Fall; A&E expelled from the garden.
The first attempt at a human world
 - Cain murders Abel.
 - Humans spread. Some of them are bad people.
 - Many generations pass.
The flood
 - God becomes weary of human misbehaviour.
 - Noah told to build boat, gather family and animals.
 - Earth is flooded, everything else dies. [A point that we missed at the time occurs to me - if this is true, why do we have trees now? Did Noah take seeds as well?]
The second attempt at a human world
 - Many generations pass; listed lifespans decrease so rapidly that Noah's son Shem outlives all of them.
 - Language creation comes from the Tower of Babel story; Hebrew is specified as the earlier original language.

Now the narrative focusses in on more detail, dealing with the (mis)adventures of Abraham and his family.

Abraham
 - Abram starts out from Ur (modern-day Iraq), travelling extensively with family. He takes in Haran (modern-day Turkey), Canaan (modern-day Israel), the Negeb (desert region in the South of modern-day Israel) Egypt, where Abram and Sarai are evidently politically highly placed, Canaan again. He dwells by the Oaks of Mamre, and is buried in the Cave of Machpelah.
 - God promises Abram and Sarai lots of descendants, renames them Abraham and Sarah, demands circumcision. Isaac shows up late in life, a half-brother for Ishmael, who is banished along his mother Hagar, but also has lots of descendants.
 - Lot escapes Sodom, which Abraham pleads for.
 - Abraham gets out of sacrificing Isaac.
Isaac
 - Abraham's servant brings back Rebekah, a cousin-wife for Isaac.
 - They have twins, Esau and Jacob.
Jacob
 - Jacob subverts Esau's inheritance, and is banished. But Rebekah favours Jacob, and Isaac goes along with it.
 - Jacob is ostensibly sent away to find a cousin-wife. He ends up serving Laban for many years for this, but comes away with two wives (Leah and Rachel) and two concubines (Bilhah and Zilpah), eventually having various sons with all of them.
 - Jacob returns, fearful of Esau's reception. But Esau welcomes him.
 - He is renamed 'Israel'.
 - Jacob's sons create local trouble and he has to move.
Joseph
 - Joseph, Rachel's oldest son, is favoured by Jacob. His brothers resent this and sell him into slavery.
 - Sold to Egypt, he works for highly placed Potiphar, but his wife conspires to jail him.
 - He rises from jail through skill in interpreting dreams prophetically, becoming one of the foremost administrators of the land.
 - Having prepared for famine, Egypt fares well under his stewardship. His family, unknowingly, come to ask him for help.
 - After several turns, he then welcomes them to Egypt, where they take up residence. All live happily ever after...

Or do they...?

And then, Exodus:

Moses rises
 - Three generations have passed. The Israelites are now resented in Egypt and treated as a servant/slave class.
 - Pharaoh orders Israelite children killed. The baby Moses is placed on the Nile in a basket to escape this fate, and is rescued by Pharaoh's daughter.
 - Moses has a divine commission to extract the Israelites from Egypt.
 - A battle of wills is played, with plagues punishing Pharaoh.
 - The final plague is the death of the Egyptian firstborn, and is the explanation given for the Jewish festival of PAssover.
 - Eventually Moses gets his way; the Israelites all leave Egypt. Pharaoh rethinks, chasing them, but his troops are killed by the returning waters of the Red Sea.
The Wandering in the Desert, part 1
 - The Israelites begin their 40 years en route to their new home, moving between various places.
 - Moses is their acknowledged leader, but he faces a goodly portion of dissent.
 - When hungry, they are supplied with manna by God.
 - Joshua becomes a powerful figure in Israelite society, leading armed forces against the Amalekites.
 - Moses lays out secular laws, with help from Jethro, his father-in-law.
Mount Sinai
 - The Israelites reach the mountain.
 - Here Moses finds much to communicate with God about.
 - Divine covenants are regiven, and phrased more bloodily.
 - Sacred laws are given, and engraved on stone tablets.
 - God specifies to Moses over several days on the mountain how his portable temple ("tabernacle") is to be built by the Israelites.
 - While Moses is absent, Aaron mounts a coup, replacing God with a golden calf object.
 - When Moses returns, bloody reprisals are mounted to bring the Israelites back into line. The stone tablets are broken.
 - The command is given for the Israelites to prepare to move on from Mount Sinai.
 - The stone tablets are regiven.
 - The Israelites pull together to construct the tabernacle.

While Genesis and Exodus were largely a narration of historical events in sequence, Leviticus is different - essentially a legal code for this religious society, written down as if given to the Israelites as they sojourned at Mount Sinai. It is noteworthy that it seems agreed that this book was subject to modification over a long period - particularly so for those that are given to proclaiming this book as eternal and unchanging.

Miscellaneous laws
 - Laws about offerings to cover various categories of usage
 - Aaron and sons to be the priestly power, with their actions specified
 - Aaron's sons punished by death for deviating
 - Laws about cleanliness, using a concept rather akin to the Islamic haraam and halal
 - Designation of Yom Kippur as an annual festival to atone for the deeds of Aaron's sons
 - Laws about sacrifice
 - Laws about sex and relationships
 - Prescriptions for regular usage, and censure for those that don't follow
 - Laws for priests (stricter)
 - Laws about eligible animals for offerings
 - Specification of religious festivals
 - Laws about conflict
 - Laws about farming
 - Divine retribution for disobedience
 - Laws about vows

Quote from: drizabone on Feb 09, 2016, 12:46PMNumbers 1 text
- A census.  (some people like numbers!)
Goody! Yes, yes, we love numbers. And now we have a whole book named after them. I have a good feeling in my twitchy little mathematical soul about this.

Incidentally, the last few chapters from Martin have taken us over 10% of the total chapters analysed.

Quote from: drizabone on Feb 09, 2016, 12:46PM- that came to 603,550
- the Levites were exempted from the count because they had to look after the tabernacle.
1. The numbers are fairly precise, maybe rounding to the nearest 50.  But how accurate are they?  They are consistent with the number in Exodus.
Multiply by 12/11 to get an approximate number including Levites - ~650,000. And then as Dusty points out, multiply again by maybe 2 to find the total number - call it 1.3 million. It's interesting to have this number, but it does look as substantially inflated as the quoted 600,000 of the Exodus - this many people would have been a much more major contribution to the total demographics of the region (and indeed the world) than the external historical record shows.

This website, which seems to have an unscientifically keen interest in affirming this stuff as real, but in doing so with at least one eye on reasonableness, makes some interesting points - in particular, that the Hebrew word translated as "thousand" should in fact be translated as "an indeterminate-size clan, troop or family". It estimates on that basis that the total Israelite population here would be more reasonably deduced as around 20,000-40,000 in size.

Quote from: drizabone on Feb 09, 2016, 01:01PMNumbers 2 text
- The camp
1. It looks like they are preparing for war.
They're preparing to move en masse across the desert, right? So it would make sense to be prepared to defend themselves, otherwise the whole endeavour is going to fall to bits in a hurry.

But then a large group protected by a large group of armed men moving through one's territory is going to look at best like a provocation. Living off the land and all that. I can't recall how this does play out in the coming chapters, but I'd bet that conflict is not far off.

Quote from: drizabone on Feb 09, 2016, 01:22PMNumbers 3 text
1. When Aaron and Moses' descendants are listed, they are all Aaron's.  Why weren't Moses kids listed?

Here's some thoughts on why Moses's sons did not tend to merit mention.

Quote from: drizabone on Feb 09, 2016, 05:53PMNumbers 4 text
1. It looks like they're getting organised to go somewhere

Presumably the migration referenced in Exodus 33:1-6. Leviticus (and Numbers so far) seems to me to be presented as a 'putting the house in order before departure' type of thing. Get everyone in discipline beforehand to make a difficult task easier to accomplish.

Numbers 5 text

Highlights

- Keeping the camp clean

Summary

 - Unclean people must be put out of the camp where the Lord dwells.
 - Someone who realises that they have committed a sin against another shall confess and make restitution. This is not clear in the ESV, but the NIV makes it clear that the sin is against another person which is against God.  “Say to the Israelites: ‘Any man or woman who wrongs another in any way and so is unfaithful to the Lord is guilty". 
- If the person who has been wronged has no next of kin then the penalty goes to a priest.
- If a women is suspected of adultery or her husband is jealous of her then he can bring her to a priest with a jealousy offering.
- The priest shall write a curse in a book and wash them off with water. The woman then drinls the water and if she is guilty "the curse shall enter into her and cause bitter pain, and her womb shall swell, and her thigh shall fall away, and the woman shall become a curse among her people. 28 But if the woman has not defiled herself and is clean, then she shall be free and shall conceive children."

Questions and Observations

1. I guess the next of kin in verse 8 is a factor where the offended has died before the confession is made.
2. The test for guilt of a women who is suspected of adultery is much less of a problem than the test for witchcraft used in Salem 3000 years later.  Unless the priest used poison ink I'd expect that the woman would survive and the jealous husband would have been proven wrong - he might be grumpy, but tough. Do you think it looks like a way of keeping the peace when you've got an army living in close quarters?

It's pretty voodoo, isn't it? Wikipedia has some notes on it, btw.
I think it looks like a method of applying dramatic pressure to obtain a confession while not in reality actually endangering anyone's life. Ethically a bit confused, but fairly explicable. The dramatic approach is once again found under the rule of Moses.

There's a set-piece scene in the Bernard Cornwell novel Sword Song where the jealous husband Aethelred persuades the bishop of London to administer this ordeal to his innocent wife Aethelflaed in the middle of the night. King Alfred and his court in these novels are presented as extremely keen on the Christianity that is to eventually drive out the pagan Danes (though not for that long in the historical sweep, and arguably the Danes did win in the end, with William the Conqueror, though in quite altered form) - to an extreme extent. Would recommend the whole series of books (and Cornwell more generally) as good ripping yarns.

Numbers 6 text

Highlights

 - The "Nazirite" Vow

Summary

 - A method is specified for people to make themselves more holy, labelled the "Nazirite" vow, a word meaning "one separated", or "one consecrated"
 - Those who so vow must for the period of their vow:
  - Not imbibe wine and strong drink
  - Eat no grape derivative products
  - Not cut their hair
  - Not approach dead bodies - violation of this implies that they must shave their head, make offerings, and start again on the vow from the beginning
 - When the period of separation is complete:
  - Bring offerings
  - Shave hair and give it as an offering
 - Then wine is again permitted to them
 - A blessing for Aaron to give to the people of Israel is specified

Questions and Observations

1) This sounds rather like monks/nuns, but not totally.
2) How commonly was it practised? Was it regarded as a universally good thing by Jewish society? Some elementary Googling suggests not...
3) How long did it last? Do people still do this?
4) The later story of Samson is related to this, I think.

Quote from: MoominDave on Feb 11, 2016, 05:57AM
Questions and Observations

1) This sounds rather like monks/nuns, but not totally.
2) How commonly was it practised? Was it regarded as a universally good thing by Jewish society? Some elementary Googling suggests not...
3) How long did it last? Do people still do this?
4) The later story of Samson is related to this, I think.

I don't know much about it apart from what is here and Samson as you mention.  Other possible lifetime Nazirites were Samuel and John the Baptist.

I have never heard of it being practiced in christianity today, although that doesn't mean that people don't do it or something like it.  I'd expect christians would skip that sacrifices.  That makes it like giving up something for lent then.

I don't know if its practices in Judaism, but think its unlikely as there are not temples to make the prescribed sacrifices.

Numbers 7 text
Numbers 8 text

Highlights

- The tabernacle is dedicated
- The Levites are dedicated

Summary

 - on the day that the tabernacle was completed the chiefs of the tribes gave the Levites 6 wagons and 12 oxen.
 - Then for the next 12 days a different chief offered silver plates and basins filled with flour and oil, a gold dish full of incense; a bull, a ram, and a male lamb for a burnt offering and a male goat for a sin offering; and two oxen, five rams, five male goats, and five male lambs a year old for the sacrifice of peace offerings.
 - And when Moses went into the tent of meeting to speak with the Lord, he heard the voice speaking to him from above the mercy seat that was on the ark of the testimony, from between the two cherubim; and it spoke to him.

- God explains how he wants the lights set up
- God says to dedicate/sanctify/consecrate/separate (this are all synonyms) the Levites
- They are to be washed and shaved, and their clothes washed too.
- A grain, a sin and a burnt offering was made for them
- They were separated to the Lord as the "firstborn" of Israel, and given to Aaron and the priests to serve in the tabernacle and to make atonement for the people if Israel so there is no plague among them.
- The Levites served from the age of 25 to the age of 50.  Then they could become temple guards.

Questions and Observations

1. That would have been a gory 12 days for the priests. I wonder how long it took to sacrifice each animal?
2. I guess God was satisfied with the setup as he now speaks from above the ark of the covenant.
3. I wonder what sort of guard duty they did, as they were too old to serve, they wouldn't have been intimidating guards.

Numbers 9 text

Highlights

 - The second Passover anniversary celebrated
 - Cloud/Fire over the tabernacle

Summary

 - The Israelites are reminded to celebrate Passover in the prescribed manner
 - An edge case is tidied up - those who happen to be unclean for that day are given special dispensation to celebrate in the usual fashion
 - Penalty for failing to celebrate it: banishment
 - The previous arrangement of guidance, whereby a pillar of cloud by day and of fire by night led the way, is bestowed upon the tabernacle
 
Questions and Observations

1) Now 2 years have passed since they left Egypt. Serious preparations being made for travel.
2) Non-Israelites resident in the camp are specifically permitted to celebrate the Passover. This was not an inherently ethnically intolerant society.

Quote from: MoominDave on Feb 12, 2016, 02:05PMNumbers 9 text

...
 
Questions and Observations

1) Now 2 years have passed since they left Egypt. Serious preparations being made for travel.

Did you notice that the narrative isn't in chronological order:
- chapter 1 is "on the first day of the second month, in the second year after they had come out of the land of Egypt, saying, 2 Take a census..."
- chapter 7 is "On the day when Moses had finished setting up the tabernacle" the chiefs brought their offerings over 12 days
- chapter 9:1 is "...in the first month of the second year after they had come out of the land of Egypt"
- chapter 9:15 "On the day that the tabernacle was set up,the cloud covered the tabernacle"

I wonder what the reasoning behind the sequencing is?

Numbers 10 text

Highlights

- Trumpets
- Israel starts their journey.

Summary

 - make 2 silver trumpets for summoning the people and breaking camp
 - the sons of Aaron shall be the trumpeters
 - sound the trumpets when you go to war and at appointed feasts and over burnt offering and peace offerings
 - In the second year, on the second month on the 20th day the cloud lifted from over the tabernacle and the people finally set out. In order as previously specified.
 - Moses invites his brother in law Hobab to come too to act as scout.
 - they set out for 3 days

Questions and Observations

1. apparently the silver trumpets were about 18" long.  What key would that have made them in?
2. What were the pro's and con's of having silver trumpets rather than red, gold or yellow brass?
3. Finally they set out!
4. Just kidding about #2.

Numbers 11 text

Highlights

- The People grizzle and kindle God's anger
- Moses gets some help to look after the people

Summary

 - the people started grizzling which kindled God's anger and he burns up the outlying parts of the camp.
 - then the rabble started complaining that they didn't have any meat to eat like they did in Egypt, but only manna, which tasted like cakes baked with oil.
 - Moses stressed out at the people compaining and he complained to God about being made to look after all the people by himself.
- God tells Moses to appoint 70 elders to share the burden.
- God also told Moses to tell the people they would have so much meat they would be sick of it.
- A couple of the men didn't attend the consecration ceremony, but prophesied instead.
- Joshua told Moses to stop them, but Moses said that he would be happy for all the people to prophesy.
- God caused a wind to spring up from the ocean and blow quail inland to their camp.
- The people gathered them up and started eating them but got sick with a great plague.


Questions and Observations

1. The writer makes it sound like the people started complaining straight away, but its obvious that he doesn't have the same concerns for chronological sequence that we might.

Numbers 12 text

Highlights

- Miriam and Aaron Oppose Moses

Summary

 - Miriam and Aaron claim that God speaks through them as well as Moses.
 - God calls them together and lets them know that he speaks to prophets in dreams and visions, but to Moses he speaks plainly, face to face.
 - Mirian is made leprous. Aaron admits his guilt and asks that they not be punished ie Miriam
 - Moses pleads with God to heal Miriam.  God says she will be unclean for a week and has to stay outside of the camp for the duration.


Questions and Observations

1. Its interesting that Aaron and Miriam both speak against Moses, but the punishment that "they" get is for Miriam to be made leprous.

Quote from: drizabone on Feb 13, 2016, 06:09PMNumbers 10 text
1. apparently the silver trumpets were about 18" long.  What key would that have made them in?
Depends how conical they were... At a guess, something like double-piccolo D... So I would guess that the noises made would have been the fundamental resonance, or maybe even lower, a double or triple pedal?

Quote from: drizabone on Feb 13, 2016, 06:09PM2. What were the pro's and con's of having silver trumpets rather than red, gold or yellow brass?


Quote from: drizabone on Feb 13, 2016, 06:09PM3. Finally they set out!
This has been coming for a long old time. Must have been some nerves in the leadership to be finally shifting thousands of people across the desert in this long-planned fashion.

Quote from: drizabone on Feb 15, 2016, 06:55PMNumbers 11 text
- Moses gets some help to look after the people
It sounds like he belatedly realises what a tough task he has taken on. Getting them out of Egypt was one thing; getting them to stir again from a spot where they'd made themselves comfy was never going to go as smoothly (not that the original Exodus movement sounds like it went particularly smoothly as a society...).

Quote from: drizabone on Feb 15, 2016, 06:55PM - the people started grizzling which kindled God's anger and he burns up the outlying parts of the camp.
People love an irrational and violent figure to be in authority over them. Don't they?

Quote from: drizabone on Feb 15, 2016, 06:55PM - then the rabble started complaining that they didn't have any meat to eat like they did in Egypt, but only manna, which tasted like cakes baked with oil.
Sounds good to me - sweet caky fry-ups every day. Seems a bit ungrateful of them as presented. Robert's earlier crack about it destroying their motivation to work rings a bit truer.

Quote from: drizabone on Feb 15, 2016, 06:55PM- God also told Moses to tell the people they would have so much meat they would be sick of it.
Doesn't really seem consistent with God's reported deeds. I would have thought him more likely to strike people dead by inventive means until the rest fell into line.

Quote from: drizabone on Feb 15, 2016, 06:55PM- A couple of the men didn't attend the consecration ceremony, but prophesied instead.
- Joshua told Moses to stop them, but Moses said that he would be happy for all the people to prophesy.
1) Moses was clearly a more astute student of human nature than Joshua. He knows that the whole enterprise depends on everyone believing in his line to God, and trying to squash similar unauthorised God-reporting is only going to encourage more people to do it. Maybe they were even primed to do so by Moses, for his own reasons?
2) Describing them as just prophesying is quite an inadequate description. What were they saying? What did they predict? In the absence of that information, the passage seems, well... quaint.

Quote from: drizabone on Feb 15, 2016, 06:55PM- The people gathered them up and started eating them but got sick with a great plague.
Ah yes, this was the usual modus operandi after all, albeit with an unkind twist. Slay them until they believe again.

Quote from: drizabone on Feb 15, 2016, 06:55PM1. The writer makes it sound like the people started complaining straight away, but its obvious that he doesn't have the same concerns for chronological sequence that we might.

Or at least that someone in the transmission process between there and here didn't pass on that information.

Quote from: drizabone on Feb 15, 2016, 07:04PMNumbers 12 text
- Miriam and Aaron Oppose Moses
Two possibilities of interpretation strike me here -
  i) Genuine rebellion
  ii) Some kind of theatrical display to draw out rebellion elsewhere

My feeling is (i) - after all, we have had Aaron rebelling against Moses before. Now their oldest sister is in on it too.

Quote from: drizabone on Feb 15, 2016, 07:04PM - Miriam and Aaron claim that God speaks through them as well as Moses.
 - God calls them together and lets them know that he speaks to prophets in dreams and visions, but to Moses he speaks plainly, face to face.
 - Mirian is made leprous. Aaron admits his guilt and asks that they not be punished ie Miriam
 - Moses pleads with God to heal Miriam.  God says she will be unclean for a week and has to stay outside of the camp for the duration.
So this has the theatricality that is the stamp of Moses, which is what made me wonder about (ii) above. There was in comparison the trick of the leprous hand that was used to try to impress Pharaoh, back before the Exodus.

Quote from: drizabone on Feb 15, 2016, 07:04PM1. Its interesting that Aaron and Miriam both speak against Moses, but the punishment that "they" get is for Miriam to be made leprous.

There's definitely a lot of important detail glossed over in this and similar episodes. I suspect quite possibly enough to fill a book all by itself. What we can discern is that they was a powerful interlocking balance of political forces in play - Moses must have been sorely tempted to have Aaron killed at various points - and vice versa. But ultimately they both recognise that they need each other to make their joint aims happen.

Numbers 13 text

Highlights

 - The strength of Canaan is reported on

Summary

 - Spies are sent out, important Israelite political figures, to enter Canaan and observe how susceptible it might be to Israelite invasion.
 - They report back:
    - The land is fruitful ("milk and honey")
    - It is fortified and highly populated by tribes that have previously been identified as enemies
    - Some of the inhabitants are descendants of the Nephilim, and hence of extraordinary stature
 - There is hot-headed enthusiasm for immediate military action, but caution wins the day in the face of the strength seen in Canaan

Questions and Observations

1) "Nephilim". This is rather peculiar. Genesis 6 told us that the Nephilim bred with humans before Noah's flood, and that then the story moved on to say that only Noah's family survived that catastrophe. So what are descendants of the Nephilim doing here? This seems a tacit scriptural admission that the flood cannot have been global in scope.
2) This can't have been a very encouraging moment to have been an Israelite...

Numbers 14 text

Highlights

 - Israelite rebellion
 - God reacts
 - Some invade, but are defeated

Summary

 - The Israelites are mightily disheartened by the news that Canaan is strongly defended
 - They agitate for a change of leadership and return to Egypt
 - Joshua and Caleb plead with them not to give up on the religious dream of conquest
 - Those present want to stone them in return
 - The "glory of the Lord" appeared to everyone over the Tent of Meeting, quieting them

 - God is disgruntled; he threatens to kill the Israelites and start afresh from only those that have stayed faithful
 - Moses asks him to spare them
 - God agrees, but it still disgruntled; he pledges to keep them in the wilderness for 40 more years, permitting only Joshua and Caleb of those currently aged over 20 to enter Canaan
 - Then the spies who reported on Canaan are all executed by him by plague, excepting Joshua and Caleb

 - The people turn their attitude around and pledge to attack immediately
 - But this is not what God wants now
 - In defiance of the divine order via Moses, some invade the hill country of the Amalekites and the Canaanites impetuously, but are easily defeated

Questions and Observations

1) Once more we have the feeling that large amounts of salient facts have been omitted. For example, how did Moses re-establish his authority over the Israelites? The account given does not convince that it would have turned around a mob.
2) God executed all the spies? Or Moses did...
3) There's no mention of Aaron in all this; on past form, one might expect any rebellion to be centred around him
4) Being an Israelite would be getting less and less encouraging by the moment...

Quote from: MoominDave on Feb 16, 2016, 05:45AM
2) Describing them as just prophesying is quite an inadequate description. What were they saying? What did they predict? In the absence of that information, the passage seems, well... quaint.

Prophesying is not necessarily prediction - its passing on a message from God.  So Moses was prophesying when he was passing on the instructions that God had told him.

Quote from: drizabone on Feb 16, 2016, 12:07PMProphesying is not necessarily prediction - its passing on a message from God. 

Yes.  This is commonly misunderstood because our modern English use of the word has other connotations.

A prophet is not one who can predict the future;  it is one who can sense the will or message of God more than others can. 

Quote from: MoominDave on Feb 16, 2016, 06:01AM
Summary

 - Spies are sent out, important Israelite political figures, to enter Canaan and observe how susceptible it might be to Israelite invasion.
 - They report back:
    - The land is fruitful ("milk and honey")
    - It is fortified and highly populated by tribes that have previously been identified as enemies
    - Some of the inhabitants are descendants of the Nephilim, and hence of extraordinary stature
 - There is hot-headed enthusiasm for immediate military action, but caution wins the day in the face of the strength seen in Canaan

Questions and Observations

1) "Nephilim". This is rather peculiar. Genesis 6 told us that the Nephilim bred with humans before Noah's flood, and that then the story moved on to say that only Noah's family survived that catastrophe. So what are descendants of the Nephilim doing here? This seems a tacit scriptural admission that the flood cannot have been global in scope.
2) This can't have been a very encouraging moment to have been an Israelite...
The inhabitants are descendants of the Nephilim, and hence of extraordinary stature
 - There is hot-headed enthusiasm for immediate military action, but caution wins the day in the face of the strength seen in Canaan

Questions and Observations

1) "Nephilim". This is rather peculiar. Genesis 6 told us that the Nephilim bred with humans before Noah's flood, and that then the story moved on to say that only Noah's family survived that catastrophe. So what are descendants of the Nephilim doing here? This seems a tacit scriptural admission that the flood cannot have been global in scope.
2) This can't have been a very encouraging moment to have been an Israelite...

The text actually presents the spy's report from the opposite perspective.  Caleb is the calming influence, taking the reasoned view assessing that the people are able to take up God's promise and defeat the Cananites.   The others are presented as the hot-heads, providing a  "bad report" spun to incite the people to rebel against God's mission.

Quote from: drizabone on Feb 16, 2016, 12:07PMProphesying is not necessarily prediction - its passing on a message from God.  So Moses was prophesying when he was passing on the instructions that God had told him.

It still seems peculiar to me. They had an acknowledged hotline to God? And they didn't think it worth writing down what they were saying?

Quote from: MoominDave on Feb 16, 2016, 01:28PMIt still seems peculiar to me. They had an acknowledged hotline to God? And they didn't think it worth writing down what they were saying?

Not so sure they had writing.  Most of this stuff was oral tales for a good 1000 years before being written down. 

Indeed.

Try again:

They had an acknowledged hotline to God? And they didn't think it worth remembering what they were saying?

Or... Moses knew how to write, but didn't think the details of the prophecies were significant to the plot.

And maybe God wanted to frustrate detail oriented 21st C physicists


NB: and I'm assuming that we all know each others assumptions about the text and we're just explaining or questioning it accordingly.

Quote from: timothy42b on Feb 16, 2016, 01:37PMNot so sure they had writing.  Most of this stuff was oral tales for a good 1000 years before being written down. 

They had to have writing since the Ten Commandments were written down on stone tablets for them to study.

Quote from: timothy42b on Feb 16, 2016, 01:37PMNot so sure they had writing.  Most of this stuff was oral tales for a good 1000 years before being written down. 

How are you certain of this?  Writing in the Ancient Near East certainly predates any suggested dates for the Mosaic period.  Is there not the possibility that it's your presuppositions that are dictating your statement above?

Quote from: MoominDave on Feb 16, 2016, 06:20AM
Numbers 14 text

...

 - God is disgruntled; he threatens to kill the Israelites and start afresh from only those that have stayed faithful
 - Moses asks him to spare them
 - God agrees, but it still disgruntled; he pledges to keep them in the wilderness for 40 more years, permitting only Joshua and Caleb of those currently aged over 20 to enter Canaan

- I always liked the idea that disgruntled should be the opposite of gruntled.
- The writer shows that Moses gets God because Moses appeals to God based on how it will affect God's reputation - ie that other people will think that he's a puny God.
- The punishment is that they will not enter the land, that was promised to Abraham ..., ie they will die in the wilderness.

Quote - Then the spies who reported on Canaan are all executed by him by plague, excepting Joshua and Caleb
This is the writer explaining how God is asserting his authority

Quote - The people turn their attitude around and pledge to attack immediately
 - But this is not what God wants now
 - In defiance of the divine order via Moses, some invade the hill country of the Amalekites and the Canaanites impetuously, but are easily defeated

They still want to do it their way ...

QuoteQuestions and Observations

1) Once more we have the feeling that large amounts of salient facts have been omitted. For example, how did Moses re-establish his authority over the Israelites? The account given does not convince that it would have turned around a mob.
2) God executed all the spies? Or Moses did...

The writer doesn't say how Moses re-established his authority because his point is that God is the one asserting his authority: and he explains this by telling of God plaguing the spies and showing his glory.  That sounds pretty mob turning to me.

Quote3) There's no mention of Aaron in all this; on past form, one might expect any rebellion to be centred around him

it looks like he learnt his lesson in chapter 12.

Quote4) Being an Israelite would be getting less and less encouraging by the moment...

Being a rebellious grizzling Israelite had discouraging consequences.  But if you kept the covenant and were grateful for coriander baked caked then everything was going to work out.

Quote from: John the Theologian on Feb 16, 2016, 05:40PMHow are you certain of this?  Writing in the Ancient Near East certainly predates any suggested dates for the Mosaic period.  Is there not the possibility that it's your presuppositions that are dictating your statement above?

Not certain at all, but 930 BC is the date usually given for the first writing of the scriptures, and these stories clearly predate that. 

Quote from: MoominDave on Feb 16, 2016, 01:42PMIndeed.

Try again:

They had an acknowledged hotline to God? And they didn't think it worth remembering what they were saying?

Fast forward a thousand years.  Jesus dies, descends to the dead, and returns.  And is anyone curious about it? NOT A SINGLE PERSON asks him. 

Maybe they just didn't have paper to write this stuff down on because... (Sam Kinison voice) THEY'RE IN A DESERT!

Quote from: timothy42b on Feb 16, 2016, 07:49PMFast forward a thousand years.  Jesus dies, descends to the dead, and returns.  And is anyone curious about it? NOT A SINGLE PERSON asks him. 

How do we know this, Tim?

Numbers 15 text

Highlights

 - Legal reminders

Summary

 - Reminders about sacrifice law
 - Reminders about offerings law
 - A man is put to death by stoning for gathering sticks on the Sabbath
 - Reminder about tassels law

Questions and Observations

1) This seems to be a direct repeat of some of Leviticus. Though in all honesty I haven't compared the detail; hopefully I'm not wrong!
2) A moral system that impels people to execute someone for gathering sticks on a holiday day... I would submit is not a moral system promoting entirely good morals.
3) Tassels are important! This is why those who tell us that they disapprove of homosexuality for Biblical reasons always display the blue-corded tassels on the corners of their garments prominently.

Numbers 16 text

Highlights

 - Korah the Levite challenges Moses and Aaron
 - He and his backers are all killed

Summary

 - Korah and 250 Israelite chiefs tell Moses and Aaron that they are not happy to continue treating them as the leadership
 - Moses arranges for them to meet him the following day, supposedly for God to choose between them
 - Moses asks for reinforcement from Dathan and Abiram, but they will not, annoyed that the milk and honey has not been forthcoming; this greatly annoys Moses
 - Korah and his followers arrive at the appointed place and time
 - Moses bids those who are loyal to him move away from the tents of Korah, Dathan, and Abiram
 - The Earth opens to swallow the tents of these people
 - Korah and his 250 are burned by heavenly fire
 - The censers of these men are taken to be hammered into an altar covering to commemorate the event
 - The Israelites are angry with Moses for these deaths
 - God hates that, and unleashes a plague on them
 - Aaron takes a censer into the middle of the people, protecting them from the worst of the plague

Questions and Observations

1) Yes, it does seem that Moses and Aaron have made their peace enough after a long history of mutual fractiousness to be joint authority figures here. Perhaps they realised that things were rather falling apart at this time, realising that if they continued arguing, they might be no nation left.
2) 250? Seems a plausible number? Not sure if any translation issue might apply with it or not - I have learned to be cautious with Old Testament accounting in general.
3) The people are specifically angry with Moses for these deaths, not with God. They blamed human agency for it. That's suggestive.
4) A pattern has formed in the narration of the events surrounding the life of Moses. God judges the Israelites super-harshly for something, resolving to wipe them out - then Moses (or here Aaron) stands in between, thwarting the will of God. It seems strange to think of an omnipotent being being so easily thwarted, side-tracked, or changed in temper.

Quote from: MoominDave on Feb 17, 2016, 06:49AMNumbers 15 text

...

2) A moral system that impels people to execute someone for gathering sticks on a holiday day... I would submit is not a moral system promoting entirely good morals.

if you assumed the absence of God I would agree

Quote3) Tassels are important! This is why those who tell us that they disapprove of homosexuality for Biblical reasons always display the blue-corded tassels on the corners of their garments prominently.

You're criticism is correct if they just use Leviticus and Numbers for the source of their disapproval, as they are both directed at Israel, but not if they include the NT, as the NT transition carries some standards forwards and not others.  We'll get there in a couple of years at this rate, before we get sustainable nuclear fusion anyway.

Quote from: MoominDave on Feb 17, 2016, 07:11AMNumbers 16 text

...

Questions and Observations

1) Yes, it does seem that Moses and Aaron have made their peace enough after a long history of mutual fractiousness to be joint authority figures here. Perhaps they realised that things were rather falling apart at this time, realising that if they continued arguing, they might be no nation left.



Quote2) 250? Seems a plausible number? Not sure if any translation issue might apply with it or not - I have learned to be cautious with Old Testament accounting in general.

Ok I'll try some simple modelling:

- if they were chiefs of companies of 50 and 1/2 of the chiefs rebelled then there would have been 50x250x2 = 25000 warriors in Israel

- if they were chiefs of companies of 1000 and 1/2 of the chiefs rebelled then there would have been 50x1000x2 = 100000 warriors in Israel

- if they were chiefs of companies of 50 and 1/10 of the chiefs rebelled then there would have been 50x250x2 = 125000 warriors in Israel

- if they were chiefs of companies of 1000 and 1/10 of the chiefs rebelled then there would have been 50x1000x2 = 500000 warriors in Israel

What were you thinking?

And how many were left after the plague wiped out "14,700"?

Quote3) The people are specifically angry with Moses for these deaths, not with God. They blamed human agency for it. That's suggestive.

The writer attributes the responsibility for the deaths to God (earth quakes and fire) and has the Israelites fleeing "lest the earth swallow them up", but then says that the Israelites blamed Moses. 

So it sounds like the writer is saying that the Israelites thought that Moses caused the earthquake and fire that did the killing.  Is that what you mean?

Quote4) A pattern has formed in the narration of the events surrounding the life of Moses. God judges the Israelites super-harshly for something, resolving to wipe them out - then Moses (or here Aaron) stands in between, thwarting the will of God. It seems strange to think of an omnipotent being being so easily thwarted, side-tracked, or changed in temper.

I don't see it as a "thwarting of God's will" but that Moses or Aaron "changed God's mind", by pleading or atoning

Quote from: drizabone on Feb 17, 2016, 04:26PMif you assumed the absence of God I would agree
How does the presence of God change it?

Quote from: drizabone on Feb 17, 2016, 04:26PMYou're criticism is correct if they just use Leviticus and Numbers for the source of their disapproval, as they are both directed at Israel, but not if they include the NT, as the NT transition carries some standards forwards and not others.  We'll get there in a couple of years at this rate, before we get sustainable nuclear fusion anyway.

I'd still be interested to see the passage(s) in question. This point about what looks like clear hypocrisy from some on the subject of condemning homosexuality keeps coming back, and I think we won't get clear of it until we're out of Deuteronomy?

Quote from: drizabone on Feb 17, 2016, 06:00PMOk I'll try some simple modelling:

- if they were chiefs of companies of 50 and 1/2 of the chiefs rebelled then there would have been 50x250x2 = 25000 warriors in Israel

- if they were chiefs of companies of 1000 and 1/2 of the chiefs rebelled then there would have been 50x1000x2 = 100000 warriors in Israel

- if they were chiefs of companies of 50 and 1/10 of the chiefs rebelled then there would have been 50x250x2 = 125000 warriors in Israel

- if they were chiefs of companies of 1000 and 1/10 of the chiefs rebelled then there would have been 50x1000x2 = 500000 warriors in Israel

What were you thinking?
I quite liked the analysis of the link I posted earlier in Numbers, which concluded that the total population of Israel at this time was 20,000-40,000, pointing out the word translated as "thousand" in the census actually meant "tribal or family group of indeterminate size". This suggested (I thought rather strongly) that the total numbers were about a factor of 20 too high. For a total population of that size, maybe 10-15,000 warriors in total would seem reasonable? Making maybe 3,000-5,000 a significant but resistible rebelling? Which is some way below your lowest estimate above, but not a million miles.

Quote from: drizabone on Feb 17, 2016, 06:00PMAnd how many were left after the plague wiped out "14,700"?
Either this killed most of the population, or it too is inflated as a number. If it has the same 'thousands' error in it, we might deduce that maybe 500-1,000 people actually died - still a big fat disaster.

Quote from: drizabone on Feb 17, 2016, 06:00PMThe writer attributes the responsibility for the deaths to God (earth quakes and fire) and has the Israelites fleeing "lest the earth swallow them up", but then says that the Israelites blamed Moses. 

So it sounds like the writer is saying that the Israelites thought that Moses caused the earthquake and fire that did the killing.  Is that what you mean?
Firstly, let us note but leave aside the question I have concerning whether the textual description of events has been inflated to sound more dramatic - e.g. did Moses do something like burn them all in an enclosure, then throw them into a mass grave? I could quite easily see the Mosaic propaganda machine spin that this way.

Leaving that aside, yes, that's what I mean. It clearly says that the Israelites blamed Moses for it, not God. In fact, it's been notable that in general the Israelites, in their "stiffnecked" grumbliness, have been taking issue with the power in front of them (i.e. Moses), rather than the backing-up supernatural power that Moses has been throughout claiming is behind him. Is it only me that thinks that the general Israelite sentiment with all this throughout has been that Moses has been spinning them a tale? But one giving them useful motivation, that they're happy to tag along with, so long as he doesn't lead them into trouble. He must have been a man of rare charisma.

Quote from: MoominDave on Feb 18, 2016, 02:53AMHow does the presence of God change it?

I think that is related to a point you made on ch15 where you said "2) A moral system that impels people to execute someone for gathering sticks on a holiday day... I would submit is not a moral system promoting entirely good morals."  and I said I agreed if you assumed the absence of God.

So what I meant by referring to the "presence of God" was the implication that the rule wasn't just that gathering sticks on Saturday was bad, in which case it wasn't that bad in itself so the death penalty was a gross over-reaction, but that gathering sticks on Saturday was disobeying God so:
- it was in effect giving God the finger
- breaking the covenant between God and Israel and putting Israel at the risk of God's disgruntlement.

and it was that attitude and the danger it posed to Israel that warranted such a significant punishment.

QuoteI'd still be interested to see the passage(s) in question. This point about what looks like clear hypocrisy from some on the subject of condemning homosexuality keeps coming back, and I think we won't get clear of it until we're out of Deuteronomy?

Just briefly:
- It seems pretty clear that the rules in Exodus, Leviticus, Deuteronomy as specifically told to Israel.  That doesn't automatically include Gentile christians unless there is a statement that we are under the law.
- Gentiles are actually told that they are not under the law eg Rom 6:14. 
- also Acts 15 tells of an incident where Paul was accused of teaching Jews not to follow the Law.  The apostles decided that Gentiles didn't have to follow the Law except for a few items mentioned from v22 on. 
- So I read from that that the Law doesn't apply to Gentile Christians, so we don't have to wear blue tassles and the ban on homosex in the Law is irrelevant to us.
- But Romans 1 includes homosex as sinful and that is relevant to christians.  This doesn't say homosex is worse than other sins or that homosexuals are inherently worse than other sinners, infact the following verses lists many other wicked things like envy, strife, deceit and being disobedient to parents, foolish, faithless, heartless, ruthless. 

So in my understanding of the bible, for christians, homosex is a sin, (just like lying and being disobedient to your parents) but not wearing blue tassles is not a sin.

PS I'm not arguing that christians might not be hypocrits, just not for that reason.

QuoteI quite liked the analysis of the link I posted earlier in Numbers, which concluded that the total population of Israel at this time was 20,000-40,000, pointing out the word translated as "thousand" in the census actually meant "tribal or family group of indeterminate size". This suggested (I thought rather strongly) that the total numbers were about a factor of 20 too high. For a total population of that size, maybe 10-15,000 warriors in total would seem reasonable? Making maybe 3,000-5,000 a significant but resistible rebelling? Which is some way below your lowest estimate above, but not a million miles.

Either this killed most of the population, or it too is inflated as a number. If it has the same 'thousands' error in it, we might deduce that maybe 500-1,000 people actually died - still a big fat disaster.

I didn't read that earlier, it sounds pretty reasonable and makes more sense of what's going on with their interactions with other nations.

I was just doing the modelling cause we were talking about you modelling in the science thread and I wanted to be one too.  I think I failed

QuoteFirstly, let us note but leave aside the question I have concerning whether the textual description of events has been inflated to sound more dramatic - e.g. did Moses do something like burn them all in an enclosure, then throw them into a mass grave? I could quite easily see the Mosaic propaganda machine spin that this way.

Leaving that aside, yes, that's what I mean. It clearly says that the Israelites blamed Moses for it, not God. In fact, it's been notable that in general the Israelites, in their "stiffnecked" grumbliness, have been taking issue with the power in front of them (i.e. Moses), rather than the backing-up supernatural power that Moses has been throughout claiming is behind him. Is it only me that thinks that the general Israelite sentiment with all this throughout has been that Moses has been spinning them a tale? But one giving them useful motivation, that they're happy to tag along with, so long as he doesn't lead them into trouble. He must have been a man of rare charisma.

Ok I understand your point now.  My point was that as it was happening they acknowledged God as the source of the disasters, but later they wanted to blame Moses.  It seems that they or the writer are being inconsistent or that there is a reason for them to change - so what did the propaganda machine want us to think?

And no, I don't see it as Moses spinning a tale, but you knew that already.

Numbers 17 text

Highlights

- God puts an end to Israel's grumbling

Summary

 - God tells Moses a plan to stop the people grumbling about him
 - he says to get a staff from the head of each tribe to write Aaron's name on the Levite staff and to leave all the staffs (staves) in the front of the tent of meeting overnight
 - when Moses went to check them the next day, Aarons staff had budded and blossomed and bore ripe almonds.
 - Moses showed the staffs to the people and they checked them out and they realised how bad they were.
 - Moses put Aaron's staff in the tend of the meeting to make an end to the grumbling

Questions and Observations

1. That went well.

Quote from: drizabone on Feb 18, 2016, 02:07PMThat went well.

It did, didn't it? Implausibly so? Wouldn't have been hard for a man of Moses's magical means to have sneaked back in the middle of the night to replace Aaron's staff with a budding twig that had been carved to match it - and surely the Israelites would realise that. Maybe they were ready to fold their hand at this point anyhow, and this provided a graceful means to step back from conflict.