Numbers 16:27

16:27 So they got away from the homes of Korah, Dathan, and Abiram on every side, and Dathan and Abiram came out and stationed themselves ¹  in the entrances of their tents with their wives, their children, and their toddlers.

Numbers 16:24-25

16:24 “Tell the community: ‘Get away ²  from around the homes of Korah, Dathan, and Abiram.’” 16:25 Then Moses got up ³  and went to Dathan and Abiram; and the elders of Israel went after him.

Numbers 26:9

26:9 Eliab’s descendants were Nemuel, Dathan, and Abiram. It was Dathan and Abiram who as leaders of the community rebelled against Moses and Aaron with the followers ⁴  of Korah when they rebelled against the Lord.

Numbers 16:1

The Rebellion of Korah

16:1 ⁵ Now Korah son of Izhar, the son of Kohath, the son of Levi, and Dathan and Abiram, the sons of Eliab, and On son of Peleth, who were Reubenites, ⁶  took men ⁷ 

[16:27]  ¹ tn The verb נִצָּבִים (nitsavim) suggests a defiant stance, for the word is often used in the sense of taking a stand for or against something. It can also be somewhat neutral, having the sense of positioning oneself for a purpose.

[16:24]  ² tn The motif of “going up” is still present; here the Hebrew text says “go up” (the Niphal imperative – “go up yourselves”) from their tents, meaning, move away from them.

[16:25]  ³ tn Heb “rose up.”

[26:9]  ⁴ tn Or “company” (so KJV, NASB, NRSV); Heb “congregation.”

[16:1]  ⁵ sn There are three main movements in the story of ch. 16. The first is the rebellion itself (vv. 1-19). The second is the judgment (vv. 20-35). Third is the atonement for the rebels (vv. 36-50). The whole chapter is a marvelous account of a massive rebellion against the leaders that concludes with reconciliation. For further study see G. Hort, “The Death of Qorah,” ABR 7 (1959): 2-26; and J. Liver, “Korah, Dathan and Abiram,” Studies in the Bible (ScrHier 8), 189-217.

[16:1]  ⁶ tc The MT reading is plural (“the sons of Reuben”); the Smr and LXX have the singular (“the son of Reuben”).

[16:1]  ⁷ tn In the Hebrew text there is no object for the verb “took.” The translation presented above supplies the word “men.” However, it is possible that the MT has suffered damage here. The LXX has “and he spoke.” The Syriac and Targum have “and he was divided.” The editor of BHS suggests that perhaps the MT should be emended to “and he arose.”