Numbers 11 question

[webdog]

During the account where the people were complaining to Moses about not having meat, the Lord said in verse 18 - 20 "And say to the people, ‘Consecrate yourselves for tomorrow, and you shall eat meat, for you have wept in the hearing of the LORD, saying, “Who will give us meat to eat? For it was better for us in Egypt.” Therefore the LORD will give you meat, and you shall eat. You shall not eat just one day, or two days, or five days, or ten days, or twenty days, but a whole month, until it comes out at your nostrils and becomes loathsome to you, because you have rejected the LORD who is among you and have wept before him, saying, “Why did we come out of Egypt?”’”

Then after they received the meat we read in verse 33 "While the meat was yet between their teeth, before it was consumed, the anger of the Lord was kindled against the people, and the Lord struck down the people with a very great plague."

1. They didn't eat meat for a month as was told by the Lord, they were struck down.

2. Did the Lord change His mind?

3. Is this yet more proof that not all instances of not telling the truth are sinful since they didn't get to do what they were told they would?

 

[thisnumbersdisconnected]

1. They didn't eat meat for a month as was told by the Lord, they were struck down.

The quail fell to a depth of three feet (two cubits) for a day's journey -- figure that as 30 miles in all directions (average pace of 2.5 miles/hour for 12 hours) -- from the camp, which is more quail than the world of that time could eat in a month. They didn't need to gather 100 bushels (10 homers) as the least productive gatherer managed, but they did anyway. Their greed for something other than what the Lord had originally given them caused them to sin with gluttony and avarice.

2. Did the Lord change His mind?

Nope. But He knew what the fools would to, too.

3. Is this yet more proof that not all instances of not telling the truth are sinful since they didn't get to do what they were told they would?

They ruined it for themselves doubly, first by despising the Lord's manna, and then by greedily collecting more quail than they could possibly eat in a month. God didn't lie. What He gave them they could have easily dined on for a month, if they had not been so greedy and gluttonous in eating the quail.

And if they wanted meat that badly, why not just slaughter some of their livestock? That truly tells of their greed, because they didn't want to cut into their personal riches to satisfy their lust for food other than what God promised and delivered. The children of Israel did have difficulties, but that was not the real reason that they murmured. The reason they murmured was because of their unbelief. They didn't believe God could bring them out of their difficulties. The psalmist recorded this as fact.

Psalm 78, NASB
19 Then they spoke against God;
They said, "Can God prepare a table in the wilderness?
20 "Behold, He struck the rock so that waters gushed out,
And streams were overflowing;
Can He give bread also?
Will He provide meat for His people?"
21 Therefore the LORD heard and was full of wrath;
And a fire was kindled against Jacob And anger also mounted against Israel, 22 Because they did not believe in God
And did not trust in His salvation.​

The next few verses detail the same story your posted from Numbers, followed by ...

Psalm 78
32 In spite of all this they still sinned And did not believe in His wonderful works.​

Object lesson: Don't murmur against God. Trust Him to do what He says He will do, even if it is not according to the way we would want it done, or when we would want it done.

 

[Deacon]

I just finished teaching through Numbers two weeks ago.
A friend is teaching through Deuteronomy and I get some time to prepare for Joshua.

You’ve got a couple of questions/statements you ask.

POINT TO REMEMBER: The genre of the passage is narrative – it’s a story told to illustrate a point the author wants to make. Don’t read it so literally as to destroy the authors intentions.

Statement #1 They didn't eat meat for a month as was told by the Lord, they were struck down.

COMMENT: The plague struck those that complained in the hearing of the Lord.
“They buried the people who had the craving” (vs 34). Presumably those that died would have been of the first generation that left Egypt.

Statement #2 Did the Lord change His mind?

COMMENT: The Lord was teaching a lesson.

Statement #3 Is this yet more proof that not all instances of not telling the truth are sinful since they didn't get to do what they were told they would?

COMMENT: I think you are overanalyzing the passage and missing the point of the narrative.

Introduction – Three complaints​

(1) Numbers 11:1-3 [The people complained about their hardship [bad fortune] – God is not good to us!]

* note the play on words – the Lord’s anger was “kindled” - fire raged among them – they named the place Taberah (burning)

(2) Numbers 11:4-35 [The people complain about God’s provisions – God doesn’t provide for us!]

(3) Numbers 12:1 [Miriam and Aaron complain about Moses’ leadership]

The chiasm of the Second Complaint - Numbers 11:4-35

A. People’s complaint: meat (vv. 4-10a)

B. Moses’ complaint: assistance (vv. 10b-15)​

C. God’s answer to both complaints (vv. 16-24a)​

“You shall not eat just one day, or two days, or five days, or ten days, or twenty days, but a whole month, until it comes out at your nostrils and becomes loathsome to you, because you have rejected the Lord who is among you and have wept before him saying, :Why did we come out of Egypt?” (vss 19-20)

B’. God authorizes elders; extends Moses (vv. 24b-30)​

A’. God supplies meat: punishes complainers (vv. 31-34)

Rob

 

[Deacon]

I just finished teaching through Numbers two weeks ago.
A friend is teaching through Deuteronomy and I get some time to prepare for Joshua.

You’ve got a couple of questions/statements you ask.

POINT TO REMEMBER: The genre of the passage is narrative – it’s a story told to illustrate a point the author wants to make.
Don’t read it so literally as to destroy the authors intentions.

Statement #1 They didn't eat meat for a month as was told by the Lord, they were struck down.

COMMENT: The plague struck those that complained in the hearing of the Lord.
“They buried the people who had the craving” (vs 34). Presumably those that died would have been of the first generation that left Egypt.

Statement #2 Did the Lord change His mind?

COMMENT: The Lord was teaching a lesson.

Statement #3 Is this yet more proof that not all instances of not telling the truth are sinful since they didn't get to do what they were told they would?

COMMENT: I think you are overanalyzing the passage and missing the point of the narrative.

Introduction – Three complaints​

(1) Numbers 11:1-3 [The people complained about their hardship [bad fortune] – God is not good to us!]

* note the play on words – the Lord’s anger was “kindled” - fire raged among them – they named the place Taberah (burning)

(2) Numbers 11:4-35 [The people complain about God’s provisions – God doesn’t provide for us!]

(3) Numbers 12:1 [Miriam and Aaron complain about Moses’ leadership]

The chiasm of the Second Complaint - Numbers 11:4-35

A. People’s complaint: meat (vv. 4-10a)

B. Moses’ complaint: assistance (vv. 10b-15)​

C. God’s answer to both complaints (vv. 16-24a)​

“You shall not eat just one day, or two days, or five days, or ten days, or twenty days, but a whole month, until it comes out at your nostrils and becomes loathsome to you, because you have rejected the Lord who is among you and have wept before him saying, :Why did we come out of Egypt?” (vss 19-20)

B’. God authorizes elders; extends Moses (vv. 24b-30)​

A’. God supplies meat: punishes complainers (vv. 31-34)

Rob

 

[webdog]

I just finished teaching through Numbers two weeks ago.
A friend is teaching through Deuteronomy and I get some time to prepare for Joshua.

You’ve got a couple of questions/statements you ask.

POINT TO REMEMBER: The genre of the passage is narrative – it’s a story told to illustrate a point the author wants to make. Don’t read it so literally as to destroy the authors intentions.

Statement #1 They didn't eat meat for a month as was told by the Lord, they were struck down.

COMMENT: The plague struck those that complained in the hearing of the Lord.
“They buried the people who had the craving” (vs 34). Presumably those that died would have been of the first generation that left Egypt.

Statement #2 Did the Lord change His mind?

COMMENT: The Lord was teaching a lesson.

Statement #3 Is this yet more proof that not all instances of not telling the truth are sinful since they didn't get to do what they were told they would?

COMMENT: I think you are overanalyzing the passage and missing the point of the narrative.

Introduction – Three complaints​

(1) Numbers 11:1-3 [The people complained about their hardship [bad fortune] – God is not good to us!]

* note the play on words – the Lord’s anger was “kindled” - fire raged among them – they named the place Taberah (burning)

(2) Numbers 11:4-35 [The people complain about God’s provisions – God doesn’t provide for us!]

(3) Numbers 12:1 [Miriam and Aaron complain about Moses’ leadership]

The chiasm of the Second Complaint - Numbers 11:4-35

A. People’s complaint: meat (vv. 4-10a)

B. Moses’ complaint: assistance (vv. 10b-15)​

C. God’s answer to both complaints (vv. 16-24a)​

“You shall not eat just one day, or two days, or five days, or ten days, or twenty days, but a whole month, until it comes out at your nostrils and becomes loathsome to you, because you have rejected the Lord who is among you and have wept before him saying, :Why did we come out of Egypt?” (vss 19-20)

B’. God authorizes elders; extends Moses (vv. 24b-30)​

A’. God supplies meat: punishes complainers (vv. 31-34)

Rob

I do realize the main point of the passage, but I found the individual details interesting.

1. The ones that were complaining and were struck down were the ones given the statement.

2. That doesn't answer the question They were told they would eat it for a month. They didn't even get to swallow it.

3. Not trying to over analyze it. I just see where the Lord says one thing and another thing happens instead.

 

[Winman]

I do realize the main point of the passage, but I found the individual details interesting.

1. The ones that were complaining and were struck down were the ones given the statement.

2. That doesn't answer the question They were told they would eat it for a month. They didn't even get to swallow it.

3. Not trying to over analyze it. I just see where the Lord says one thing and another thing happens instead.

These quail might have been like the manna. Remember the Jews were forbidden to hoard manna for another day except the sabbath?

15 And when the children of Israel saw it, they said one to another, It is manna: for they wist not what it was. And Moses said unto them, This is the bread which the LORD hath given you to eat.
16 This is the thing which the LORD hath commanded, Gather of it every man according to his eating, an omer for every man, according to the number of your persons; take ye every man for them which are in his tents.
17 And the children of Israel did so, and gathered, some more, some less.
18 And when they did mete it with an omer, he that gathered much had nothing over, and he that gathered little had no lack; they gathered every man according to his eating.
19 And Moses said, Let no man leave of it till the morning.
20 Notwithstanding they hearkened not unto Moses; but some of them left of it until the morning, and it bred worms, and stank: and Moses was wroth with them.

So, perhaps the promise meant that like the manna, God would provide meat each and every day for a month. There was no need to hoard this meat. But the people did not believe God's promise and hoarded, therefore God destroyed them.

 

[Deacon]

33–34 These verses tell of Yahweh’s judgment on the people, thus fulfilling the threat of 11:20. Two related questions arise: first, the nature of the plague, and, second, its timing. The word plague (lit., “blow, stroke,” makkâ) is used in this sense in seven other places in the OT. In Deut. 28 and 29 the term parallels words for “sickness” or “disease” (ḥolî, taḥălu’îm). In 1 Sam. 4 the term describes the plagues of Egypt. The cognate verb occurs in Exod. 3:20 and 9:15 to describe these plagues. In the present context (a large supply of meat), the most natural thought is of some form of food poisoning.
If this is the case, one must translate the temporal clause differently than some English versions do, e.g., “While the meat was still between their teeth, before it was chewed” (so NKJV; cf. AV, RV, NASB), because such a translation would indicate that the plague descended at the first taste of the meat. The problem is the translation of the verb kāraṯ (Niphal, lit., “be cut”) as “be chewed.” This translation is unique for kāraṯ. Much more common would be the translation “to fail, be exhausted.” If the latter translation is adopted, the passage indicates that the plague came upon the people before the great supply of fresh quails had been exhausted.

Ashley, T. R. (1993). The Book of Numbers (p. 219). Grand Rapids, MI: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co.

(John Wycliffe Bible 1185) Yit `fleischis weren in the teeth `of hem, and siche mete failide not; and lo! the woodnesse of the Lord was reisid ayens the puple, and smoot it with a ful greet veniaunce.

(D-R) As yet the flesh was between their teeth, neither had that kind of meat failed: when behold the wrath of the Lord being provoked against the people, struck them with an exceeding great plague.

(Brenton LXX Eng) The flesh was yet between their teeth, before it failed, when the Lord was wroth with the people, and the Lord smote the people with a very great plague.

(GNB) While there was still plenty of meat for them to eat, the LORD became angry with the people and caused an epidemic to break out among them.

(YLT) The flesh is yet between their teeth—it is not yet cut off—and the anger of Jehovah hath burned among the people, and Jehovah smiteth among the people—a very great smiting;