Discovery BoxNumbers 11:25-29
Context11:25 And the Lord came down in the cloud and spoke to them, and he took some of the Spirit that was on Moses 1 and put it on the seventy elders. When the Spirit rested on them, 2 they prophesied, 3 but did not do so again. 4
11:26 But two men remained in the camp; one’s name was Eldad, and the other’s name was Medad. And the spirit rested on them. (Now they were among those in the registration, 5 but had not gone to the tabernacle.) So they prophesied in the camp. 11:27 And a 6 young man ran and told Moses, “Eldad and Medad are prophesying in the camp!” 11:28 Joshua son of Nun, the servant 7 of Moses, one of his choice young men, 8 said, 9 “My lord Moses, stop them!” 10 11:29 Moses said to him, “Are you jealous for me? 11 I wish that 12 all the Lord’s people were prophets, that the Lord would put his Spirit on them!”
Numbers 11:1
Context11:1 13 When the people complained, 14 it displeased 15 the Lord. When the Lord heard 16 it, his anger burned, 17 and so 18 the fire of the Lord 19 burned among them and consumed some of the outer parts of the camp.
Numbers 10:10
Context10:10 “Also in the time when you rejoice, such as 20 on your appointed festivals or 21 at the beginnings of your months, you must blow with your trumpets over your burnt offerings and over the sacrifices of your peace offerings, so that they may 22 become 23 a memorial for you before your God: I am the Lord your God.”
Numbers 19:20
Context19:20 But the man who is unclean and does not purify himself, that person must be cut off from among the community, because he has polluted the sanctuary of the Lord; the water of purification was not sprinkled on him, so he is unclean.
Numbers 19:1-2
Context19:1 24 The Lord spoke to Moses and Aaron: 19:2 “This is the ordinance of the law which the Lord has commanded: ‘Instruct 25 the Israelites to bring 26 you a red 27 heifer 28 without blemish, which has no defect 29 and has never carried a yoke.
Numbers 15:1
Context15:1 30 The Lord spoke to Moses:
Matthew 7:22
Context7:22 On that day, many will say to me, ‘Lord, Lord, didn’t we prophesy in your name, and in your name cast out demons and do 31 many powerful deeds?’
Matthew 10:4
Context10:4 Simon the Zealot 32 and Judas Iscariot, 33 who betrayed him. 34
Matthew 10:8
Context10:8 Heal the sick, raise the dead, 35 cleanse lepers, cast out demons. Freely you received, freely give.
Luke 10:20
Context10:20 Nevertheless, do not rejoice that 36 the spirits submit to you, but rejoice 37 that your names stand written 38 in heaven.”
John 11:49-51
Context11:49 Then one of them, Caiaphas, who was high priest that year, said, 39 “You know nothing at all! 11:50 You do not realize 40 that it is more to your advantage to have one man 41 die for the people than for the whole nation to perish.” 42 11:51 (Now he did not say this on his own, 43 but because he was high priest that year, he prophesied that Jesus was going to die for the Jewish nation, 44
[11:25] 1 tn Heb “on him”; the referent (Moses) has been specified in the translation for clarity.
[11:25] 2 tn The temporal clause is introduced by the temporal indicator וַיְהִי (vayÿhi), which need not be translated. It introduces the time of the infinitive as past time narrative. The infinitive construct is from נוּחַ (nuakh, “to rest”). The figurative expression of the Spirit resting upon them indicates the temporary indwelling and empowering by the Spirit in their lives.
[11:25] 3 tn The text may mean that these men gave ecstatic utterances, much like Saul did when the Spirit came upon him and he made the same prophetic utterances (see 1 Sam 10:10-13). But there is no strong evidence for this (see K. L. Barker, “Zechariah,” EBC 7:605-6). In fact there is no consensus among scholars as to the origin and meaning of the verb “prophesy” or the noun “prophet.” It has something to do with speech, being God’s spokesman or spokeswoman or making predictions or authoritative utterances or ecstatic utterances. It certainly does mean that the same Holy Spirit, the same divine provision that was for Moses to enable him to do the things that God had commanded him to do, was now given to them. It would have included wisdom and power with what they were saying and doing – in a way that was visible and demonstrable to the people! The people needed to know that the same provision was given to these men, authenticating their leadership among the clans. And so it could not simply be a change in their understanding and wisdom.
[11:25] 4 tn The final verb of the clause stresses that this was not repeated: “they did not add” is the literal rendering of וְלֹא יָסָפוּ (vÿlo’ yasafu). It was a one-time spiritual experience associated with their installation.
[11:26] 5 tn The form of the word is the passive participle כְּתֻבִים (kÿtuvim, “written”). It is normally taken to mean “among those registered,” but it is not clear if that means they were to be among the seventy or not. That seems unlikely since there is no mention of the seventy being registered, and vv. 24-25 says all seventy went out and prophesied. The registration may be to eldership, or the role of the officer.
[11:27] 6 tn The article indicates that the “young man” was definite in the mind of the writer, but indefinite in English.
[11:28] 7 tn The form is the Piel participle מְשָׁרֵת (mÿsharet), meaning “minister, servant, assistant.” The word has a loftier meaning than the ordinary word for slave.
[11:28] 8 tn The verb is בָּחַר (bakhar, “to choose”); here the form is the masculine plural participle with a suffix, serving as the object of the preposition מִן (min). It would therefore mean “[one of] his chosen men,” or “[one of] his choice men.”
[11:28] 9 tn Heb “answered and said.”
[11:28] 10 sn The effort of Joshua is to protect Moses’ prerogative as leader by stopping these men in the camp from prophesying. Joshua did not understand the significance in the
[11:29] 11 tn The Piel participle מְקַנֵּא (mÿqanne’) serves as a verb here in this interrogative sentence. The word means “to be jealous; to be envious.” That can be in a good sense, such as with the translation “zeal,” or it can be in a negative sense as here. Joshua’s apparent “zeal” is questioned by Moses – was he zealous/envious for Moses sake, or for some other reason?
[11:29] 12 tn The optative is expressed by the interrogative clause in Hebrew, “who will give….” Moses expresses here the wish that the whole nation would have that portion of the Spirit. The new covenant, of course, would turn Moses’ wish into a certainty.
[11:1] 13 sn The chapter includes the initial general complaints (vv. 1-3), the complaints about food (vv. 4-9), Moses’ own complaint to the
[11:1] 14 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
[11:1] 15 tn Heb “it was evil in the ears of the
[11:1] 16 tn The preterite with vav (ו) consecutive is here subordinated to the next verb as a temporal clause.
[11:1] 17 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] 18 tn The vav (ו) consecutive does not simply show sequence in the verbs, but here expresses the result of the anger of the
[11:1] 19 sn The “fire of the
[10:10] 20 tn The conjunction may be taken as explicative or epexegetical, and so rendered “namely; even; that is,” or it may be taken as emphatic conjunction, and translated “especially.”
[10:10] 21 tn The vav (ו) is taken here in its alternative use and translated “or.”
[10:10] 22 tn The form is the perfect tense with vav (ו) consecutive. After the instruction imperfects, this form could be given the same nuance, or more likely, subordinated as a purpose or result clause.
[10:10] 23 tn The verb “to be” (הָיָה, hayah) has the meaning “to become” when followed by the preposition lamed (ל).
[19:1] 24 sn In the last chapter the needs of the priests and Levites were addressed. Now the concern is for the people. This provision from the sacrifice of the red heifer is a precaution to ensure that the purity of the tabernacle was not violated by pollutions of impurity or death. This chapter has two main parts, both dealing with ceremonial purity: the ritual of the red heifer (vv. 1-10), and the purification from uncleanness (vv. 11-22). For further study see J. Milgrom, “The Paradox of the Red Cow (Num 19),” VT 31 (1981): 62-72.
[19:2] 26 tn The line literally reads, “speak to the Israelites that [and] they bring [will bring].” The imperfect [or jussive] is subordinated to the imperative either as a purpose clause, or as the object of the instruction – speak to them that they bring, or tell them to bring.
[19:2] 27 tn The color is designated as red, although the actual color would be a tanned red-brown color for the animal (see the usage in Isa 1:18 and Song 5:10). The reddish color suggested the blood of ritual purification; see J. Milgrom, “The Paradox of the Red Cow (Num 19),” VT 31 (1981): 62-72.
[19:2] 28 sn Some modern commentators prefer “cow” to “heifer,” thinking that the latter came from the influence of the Greek. Young animals were usually prescribed for the ritual, especially here, and so “heifer” is the better translation. A bull could not be given for this purification ritual because that is what was given for the high priests or the community according to Lev 4.
[19:2] 29 tn Heb “wherein there is no defect.”
[15:1] 30 sn The wilderness wandering officially having begun, these rules were then given for the people to be used when they finally entered the land. That they would be provided here would be of some encouragement to the nation after their great failure. God still spoke of a land that was to be their land, even though they had sinned greatly. This chapter collects a number of religious rules. The first 16 verses deal with rulings for sacrifices. Then, vv. 17-36 concerns sins of omission. Finally, rules concerning tassels are covered (vv. 37-41). For additional reading, see G. B. Gray, Sacrifice in the Old Testament (Oxford: Clarendon, 1925); B. A. Levine, In the Presence of the
[7:22] 31 tn Grk “and in your name do.” This phrase was not repeated here in the translation for stylistic reasons.
[10:4] 32 tn Grk “the Cananean,” but according to both BDAG 507 s.v. Καναναῖος and L&N 11.88, this term has no relation at all to the geographical terms for Cana or Canaan, but is derived from the Aramaic term for “enthusiast, zealot” (see Luke 6:15; Acts 1:13), possibly because of an earlier affiliation with the party of the Zealots. He may not have been technically a member of the particular Jewish nationalistic party known as “Zealots” (since according to some scholars this party had not been organized at that time), but simply someone who was zealous for Jewish independence from Rome, in which case the term would refer to his temperament.
[10:4] 33 sn There is some debate about what the name Iscariot means. It probably alludes to a region in Judea and thus might make Judas the only non-Galilean in the group. Several explanations for the name Iscariot have been proposed, but it is probably transliterated Hebrew with the meaning “man of Kerioth” (there are at least two villages that had that name). For further discussion see D. L. Bock, Luke (BECNT), 1:546; also D. A. Carson, John, 304.
[10:4] 34 tn Grk “who even betrayed him.”
[10:8] 35 tc The majority of Byzantine minuscules, along with a few other witnesses (C3 K L Γ Θ 700* al), lack νεκροὺς ἐγείρετε (nekrou" ejgeirete, “raise the dead”), most likely because of oversight due to a string of similar endings (-ετε in the second person imperatives, occurring five times in v. 8). The longer version of this verse is found in several diverse and ancient witnesses such as א B C* (D) N 0281vid Ë1,13 33 565 al lat; P W Δ 348 have a word-order variation, but nevertheless include νεκροὺς ἐγείρετε. Although some Byzantine-text proponents charge the Alexandrian witnesses with theologically-motivated alterations toward heterodoxy, it is interesting to find a variant such as this in which the charge could be reversed (do the Byzantine scribes have something against the miracle of resurrection?). In reality, such charges of wholesale theologically-motivated changes toward heterodoxy are immediately suspect due to lack of evidence of intentional changes (here the change is evidently due to accidental omission).
[10:20] 36 tn Grk “do not rejoice in this, that.” This is awkward in contemporary English and has been simplified to “do not rejoice that.”
[10:20] 37 tn The verb here is a present imperative, so the call is to an attitude of rejoicing.
[10:20] 38 tn The verb here, a perfect tense, stresses a present reality of that which was a completed action, that is, their names were etched in the heavenly stone, as it were.
[11:49] 39 tn Grk “said to them.” The indirect object αὐτοῖς (autois) has not been translated for stylistic reasons.
[11:50] 40 tn Or “you are not considering.”
[11:50] 41 tn Although it is possible to argue that ἄνθρωπος (anqrwpo") should be translated “person” here since it is not necessarily masculinity that is in view in Caiaphas’ statement, “man” was retained in the translation because in 11:47 “this man” (οὗτος ὁ ἄνθρωπος, outo" Jo anqrwpo") has as its referent a specific individual, Jesus, and it was felt this connection should be maintained.
[11:50] 42 sn In his own mind Caiaphas was no doubt giving voice to a common-sense statement of political expediency. Yet he was unconsciously echoing a saying of Jesus himself (cf. Mark 10:45). Caiaphas was right; the death of Jesus would save the nation from destruction. Yet Caiaphas could not suspect that Jesus would die, not in place of the political nation Israel, but on behalf of the true people of God; and he would save them, not from physical destruction, but from eternal destruction (cf. 3:16-17). The understanding of Caiaphas’ words in a sense that Caiaphas could not possibly have imagined at the time he uttered them serves as a clear example of the way in which the author understood that words and actions could be invested retrospectively with a meaning not consciously intended or understood by those present at the time.
[11:51] 43 tn Grk “say this from himself.”
[11:51] 44 tn The word “Jewish” is not in the Greek text, but is clearly implied by the context (so also NIV; TEV “the Jewish people”).
