Numbers 11:1

The Israelites Complain

11:1 ¹ When the people complained, ²  it displeased ³  the Lord. When the Lord heard ⁴  it, his anger burned, ⁵  and so ⁶  the fire of the Lord ⁷  burned among them and consumed some of the outer parts of the camp.

Numbers 11:4-6

Complaints about Food

11:4 ⁸ Now the mixed multitude ⁹  who were among them craved more desirable foods, ¹⁰  and so the Israelites wept again ¹¹  and said, “If only we had meat to eat! ¹²  11:5 We remember ¹³  the fish we used to eat ¹⁴  freely ¹⁵  in Egypt, the cucumbers, the melons, the leeks, the onions, and the garlic. 11:6 But now we ¹⁶  are dried up, ¹⁷  and there is nothing at all before us ¹⁸  except this manna!”

Exodus 16:3-7

16:3 The Israelites said to them, “If only we had died ¹⁹  by the hand of the Lord in the land of Egypt, when we sat by ²⁰  the pots of meat, when we ate bread to the full, ²¹  for you have brought us out into this desert to kill ²²  this whole assembly with hunger!”

16:4 Then the Lord said to Moses, “I am going to rain ²³  bread from heaven for you, and the people will go out ²⁴  and gather the amount for each day, so that I may test them. ²⁵  Will they will walk in my law ²⁶  or not? 16:5 On the sixth day ²⁷  they will prepare what they bring in, and it will be twice as much as they gather every other day.” ²⁸ 

16:6 Moses and Aaron said to all the Israelites, “In the evening ²⁹  you will know that the Lord has brought you out of the land of Egypt, 16:7 and in the morning you will see ³⁰  the glory of the Lord, because he has heard ³¹  your murmurings against the Lord. As for us, what are we, ³²  that you should murmur against us?”

Jude 1:2

1:2 May mercy, peace, and love be lavished on you! ³³ 

[11:1]  ¹ sn The chapter includes the initial general complaints (vv. 1-3), the complaints about food (vv. 4-9), Moses’ own complaint to the Lord (vv. 10-15), God’s response to Moses (vv. 16-25), Eldad and Medad (vv. 26-29), and the quail (vv. 30-35). The first part records the burning of the camp, named Taberah. Here is one of the several naming narratives in the wilderness experience. The occasion for divine judgment is the complaining of the people. The passages serve to warn believers of all ages not to murmur as the Israelites did, for such complaining reveals a lack of faith in the power and goodness of God. For additional literature, see W. Brueggemann, “From Hurt to Joy, from Death to Life,” Int 28 (1974): 3-19; B. S. Childs, “The Etiological Tale Re-examined,” VT 24 (1974): 387-97; G. W. Coats, Rebellion in the Wilderness; and A. C. Tunyogi, “The Rebellions of Israel,” JBL 81 (1962): 385-90.

[11:1]  ² tn The temporal clause uses the Hitpoel infinitive construct from אָנַן (’anan). It is a rare word, occurring in Lam 3:39. With this blunt introduction the constant emphasis of obedience to the word of the Lord found throughout the first ten chapters suddenly comes to an end. It is probable that the people were tired of moving for several days, the excitement of the new beginning died out quickly in the “great and terrible wilderness.” Resentment, frustration, discomfort – whatever it all involved – led to complaining and not gratitude.

[11:1]  ³ tn Heb “it was evil in the ears of the Lord.” The word רַע (ra’) is a much stronger word than “displeased” would suggest. The bold anthropomorphism shows that what the Lord heard was painful to him.

[11:1]  ⁴ tn The preterite with vav (ו) consecutive is here subordinated to the next verb as a temporal clause.

[11:1]  ⁵ tn The common Hebrew expression uses the verb חָרָה (harah, “to be hot, to burn, to be kindled”). The subject is אַפּוֹ (’appo), “his anger” or more literally, his nose, which in this anthropomorphic expression flares in rage. The emphasis is superlative – “his anger raged.”

[11:1]  ⁶ tn The vav (ו) consecutive does not simply show sequence in the verbs, but here expresses the result of the anger of the Lord for their complaining. With such a response to the complaining, one must conclude that it was unreasonable. There had been no long deprivation or endured suffering; the complaining was early and showed a rebellious spirit.

[11:1]  ⁷ sn The “fire of the Lord” is supernatural, for it is said to come from the Lord and not from a natural source. God gave them something to complain about – something to fear. The other significant place where this “fire of the Lord” destroyed was in the case of Nadab and Abihu who brought strange fire to the altar (Lev 10:2).

[11:4]  ⁸ sn The story of the sending of the quail is a good example of poetic justice, or talionic justice. God had provided for the people, but even in that provision they were not satisfied, for they remembered other foods they had in Egypt. No doubt there was not the variety of foods in the Sinai that might have been available in Egypt, but their life had been bitter bondage there as well. They had cried to the Lord for salvation, but now they forget, as they remember things they used to have. God will give them what they crave, but it will not do for them what they desire. For more information on this story, see B. J. Malina, The Palestinian Manna Tradition. For the attempt to explain manna and the other foods by natural phenomena, see F. W. Bodenheimer, “The Manna of Sinai,” BA 10 (1947): 1-6.

[11:4]  ⁹ tn The mixed multitude (or “rabble,” so NASB, NIV, NRSV; NLT “foreign rabble”) is the translation of an unusual word, הֲָאסַפְסֻף (ha’safsuf). It occurs in the Hebrew Bible only here. It may mean “a gathering of people” from the verb אָסַף (’asaf), yielding the idea of a mixed multitude (in line with Exod 12:38). But the root is different, and so no clear connection can be established. Many commentators therefore think the word is stronger, showing contempt through a word that would be equivalent to “riff-raff.”

[11:4]  ¹⁰ tn The Hebrew simply uses the cognate accusative, saying “they craved a craving” (הִתְאַוּוּ תַּאֲוָה, hit’avvu ta’vah), but the context shows that they had this strong craving for food. The verb describes a strong desire, which is not always negative (Ps 132:13-14). But the word is a significant one in the Torah; it was used in the garden story for Eve’s desire for the tree, and it is used in the Decalogue in the warning against coveting (Deut 5:21).

[11:4]  ¹¹ tc The Greek and the Latin versions read “and they sat down” for “and they returned,” involving just a change in vocalization (which they did not have). This may reflect the same expression in Judg 20:26. But the change does not improve this verse.

[11:4]  ¹² tn The Hebrew expresses the strong wish or longing idiomatically: “Who will give us flesh to eat?” It is a rhetorical expression not intended to be taken literally, but merely to give expression to the longing they had. See GKC 476 §151.a.1.

[11:5]  ¹³ tn The perfect tense here expresses the experience of a state of mind.

[11:5]  ¹⁴ tn The imperfect tense would here be the customary imperfect, showing continual or incomplete action in past time.

[11:5]  ¹⁵ tn The adverb “freely” is from the word חָנַן (khanan, “to be gracious”), from which is derived the noun “grace.” The word underscores the idea of “free, without cost, for no reason, gratis.” Here the simple sense is “freely,” without any cost. But there may be more significance in the choice of the words in this passage, showing the ingratitude of the Israelites to God for His deliverance from bondage. To them now the bondage is preferable to the salvation – this is what angered the Lord.

[11:6]  ¹⁶ tn Heb “our souls.”

[11:6]  ¹⁷ sn The Hebrews were complaining both about the bland taste of the manna and dehydration – they were parched in the wilderness.

[11:6]  ¹⁸ tn Heb “before our eyes,” meaning that “we see nothing except this manna.”

[16:3]  ¹⁹ tn The text reads: מִי־יִתֵּן מוּתֵנוּ (mi-yitten mutenu, “who will give our dying”) meaning “If only we had died.” מוּתֵנוּ is the Qal infinitive construct with the suffix. This is one way that Hebrew expresses the optative with an infinitive construct. See R. J. Williams, Hebrew Syntax, 91-92, §547.

[16:3]  ²⁰ tn The form is a Qal infinitive construct used in a temporal clause, and the verb “when we ate” has the same structure.

[16:3]  ²¹ sn That the complaint leading up to the manna is unjustified can be seen from the record itself. They left Egypt with flocks and herds and very much cattle, and about 45 days later they are complaining that they are without food. Moses reminded them later that they lacked nothing (Deut 3:7; for the whole sermon on this passage, see 8:1-20). Moreover, the complaint is absurd because the food of work gangs was far more meager than they recall. The complaint was really against Moses. They crave the eating of meat and of bread and so God will meet that need; he will send bread from heaven and quail as well.

[16:3]  ²² tn לְהָמִית (lÿhamit) is the Hiphil infinitive construct showing purpose. The people do not trust the intentions or the plan of their leaders and charge Moses with bringing everyone out to kill them.

[16:4]  ²³ tn The particle הִנְנִי (hinni) before the active participle indicates the imminent future action: “I am about to rain.”

[16:4]  ²⁴ tn This verb and the next are the Qal perfect tenses with vav (ו) consecutives; they follow the sequence of the participle, and so are future in orientation. The force here is instruction – “they will go out” or “they are to go out.”

[16:4]  ²⁵ tn The verb in the purpose/result clause is the Piel imperfect of נָסָה (nasah), אֲנַסֶּנוּ (’anassenu) – “in order that I may prove them [him].” The giving of the manna will be a test of their obedience to the detailed instructions of God as well as being a test of their faith in him (if they believe him they will not gather too much). In chap. 17 the people will test God, showing that they do not trust him.

[16:4]  ²⁶ sn The word “law” here properly means “direction” at this point (S. R. Driver, Exodus, 146), but their obedience here would indicate also whether or not they would be willing to obey when the Law was given at Sinai.

[16:5]  ²⁷ tn Heb “and it will be on the sixth day.”

[16:5]  ²⁸ sn There is a question here concerning the legislation – the people were not told why to gather twice as much on the sixth day. In other words, this instruction seems to presume that they knew about the Sabbath law. That law will be included in this chapter in a number of ways, suggesting to some scholars that this chapter is out of chronological order, placed here for a purpose. Some argue that the manna episode comes after the revelation at Sinai. But it is not necessary to take such a view. God had established the Sabbath in the creation, and if Moses has been expounding the Genesis traditions in his teachings then they would have known about that.

[16:6]  ²⁹ tn The text simply has “evening, and you will know.” Gesenius notes that the perfect tense with the vav consecutive occurs as the apodosis to temporal clauses or their equivalents. Here the first word implies the idea “[when it becomes] evening” or simply “[in the] evening” (GKC 337-38 §112.oo).

[16:7]  ³⁰ tn Heb “morning, and you will see.”

[16:7]  ³¹ tn The form is a Qal infinitive construct with a preposition and a suffix. It forms an adverbial clause, usually of time, but here a causal clause.

[16:7]  ³² tn The words “as for us” attempt to convey the force of the Hebrew word order, which puts emphasis on the pronoun: “and we – what?” The implied answer to the question is that Moses and Aaron are nothing, merely the messengers. The next verse repeats the question to further press the seriousness of what the Israelites are doing.

[1:2]  ³³ tn Grk “may mercy and peace and love be multiplied to you.”