Numbers 5:6

5:6 “Tell the Israelites, ‘When ¹  a man or a woman commits any sin that people commit, ²  thereby breaking faith ³  with the Lord, and that person is found guilty, ⁴ 

Numbers 6:11

6:11 Then the priest will offer one for a purification offering ⁵  and the other ⁶  as a burnt offering, ⁷  and make atonement ⁸  for him, because of his transgression ⁹  in regard to the corpse. So he must reconsecrate ¹⁰  his head on that day.

Numbers 10:32

10:32 And if you come with us, it is certain ¹¹  that whatever good things the Lord will favor us with, we will share with you as well.”

Numbers 11:34

11:34 So the name of that place was called Kibroth Hattaavah, ¹²  because there they buried the people that craved different food. ¹³ 

Numbers 13:24

13:24 That place was called ¹⁴  the Eshcol Valley, ¹⁵  because of the cluster ¹⁶  of grapes that the Israelites cut from there.

Numbers 15:30-31

Deliberate Sin

15:30 “‘But the person ¹⁷  who acts defiantly, ¹⁸  whether native-born or a resident foreigner, insults ¹⁹  the Lord. ²⁰  That person ²¹  must be cut off ²²  from among his people. 15:31 Because he has despised ²³  the word of the Lord and has broken ²⁴  his commandment, that person ²⁵  must be completely cut off. ²⁶  His iniquity will be on him.’” ²⁷ 

Numbers 23:19

23:19 God is not a man, that he should lie,

nor a human being, ²⁸  that he should change his mind.

Has he said, and will he not do it?

Or has he spoken, and will he not make it happen? ²⁹ 

[5:6]  ¹ sn This type of law is known as casuistic. The law is introduced with “when/if” and then the procedure to be adopted follows it. The type of law was common in the Law Code of Hammurabi.

[5:6]  ² tn The verse simply says “any sin of a man,” but the genitive could mean that it is any sin that a man would commit (subjective genitive), or one committed against a man (objective genitive). Because of the similarity with Lev 5:22, the subjective is better. The sin is essentially “missing the mark” which is the standard of the Law of the Lord. The sin is not in this case accidental or inadvertent. It means here simply failing to live up to the standard of the Lord. Since both men and women are mentioned in the preceding clause, the translation uses “people” here.

[5:6]  ³ tn The verb is מַעַל (ma’al), which means to “defraud, violate, trespass against,” or “to deal treacherously, do an act of treachery.” In doing any sin that people do, the guilty have been unfaithful to the Lord, and therefore must bring him a sacrifice.

[5:6]  ⁴ tn The word used here for this violation is אָשָׁם (’asham). It can be translated “guilt, to be guilty”; it can also be used for the reparation offering. The basic assumption here is that the individual is in a state of sin – is guilty. In that state he or she feels remorse for the sin and seeks forgiveness through repentance. See further P. P. Saydon, “Sin Offering and Trespass Offering,” CBQ 8 (1946): 393-98; H. C. Thompson, “The Significance of the Term ’Asham in the Old Testament,” TGUOS 14 (1953): 20-26.

[6:11]  ⁵ tn The traditional translation of חַטָּאת (khatta’t) is “sin offering,” but it is more precise to render it “purification offering” (as with the other names of sacrifices) to show the outcome, not the cause of the offering (see Lev 4). Besides, this offering was made for ritual defilements (for which no confession was required) as well as certain sins (for which a confession of sin was required). This offering restored the person to the ritual state of purity by purifying the area into which he would be going.

[6:11]  ⁶ tn The repetition of “the one…and the one” forms the distributive sense of “the one…and the other.”

[6:11]  ⁷ tn The burnt offering (Lev 1) reflects the essence of atonement: By this sacrifice the worshiper was completely surrendering to God, and God was completely accepting the worshiper.

[6:11]  ⁸ tn The verb וְכִפֶּר (vÿkhipper) is the Piel perfect with vav (ו) consecutive. The meaning of the verb is “to expiate, pacify, atone.” It refers to the complete removal of the barrier of fellowship between the person and God, and the total acceptance of that person into his presence. The idea of “to cover,” often linked to this meaning, is derived from a homonym, and not from this word and its usage.

[6:11]  ⁹ tn The verb “to sin” has a wide range of meanings, beginning with the idea of “missing the way or the goal.” In view of the nature of this case – the prescribed ritual without confession – the idea is more that he failed to keep the vow’s stipulations in this strange circumstance than that he committed intentional sin.

[6:11]  ¹⁰ tn The verb simply means “to consecrate,” but because it refers to a vow that was interrupted, it must here mean to “reconsecrate.”

[10:32]  ⁹ tn Heb “and it shall be.”

[11:34]  ¹³ sn The name “the graves of the ones who craved” is again explained by a wordplay, a popular etymology. In Hebrew קִבְרוֹת הַתַּאֲוָה (qivrot hatta’avah) is the technical name. It is the place that the people craved the meat, longing for the meat of Egypt, and basically rebelled against God. The naming marks another station in the wilderness where the people failed to accept God’s good gifts with grace and to pray for their other needs to be met.

[11:34]  ¹⁴ tn The words “different food” are implied, and are supplied in the translation for clarity.

[13:24]  ¹⁷ tn The verb is rendered as a passive because there is no expressed subject.

[13:24]  ¹⁸ tn Or “Wadi Eshcol.” The translation “brook” is too generous; the Hebrew term refers to a river bed, a ravine or valley through which torrents of rain would rush in the rainy season; at other times it might be completely dry.

[13:24]  ¹⁹ tn The word “Eshcol” is drawn from the Hebrew expression concerning the “cluster of grapes.” The word is probably retained in the name Burj Haskeh, two miles north of Damascus.

[15:30]  ²¹ tn Heb “soul.”

[15:30]  ²² tn The sin is described literally as acting “with a high hand” – בְּיָד רָמָה (bÿyad ramah). The expression means that someone would do something with deliberate defiance, with an arrogance in spite of what the Lord said. It is as if the sinner was about to attack God, or at least lifting his hand against God. The implication of the expression is that it was done in full knowledge of the Law (especially since this contrasts throughout with the sins of ignorance). Blatant defiance of the word of the Lord is dealt with differently. For similar expressions, see Exod 14:8 and Num 33:3.

[15:30]  ²³ tn The verb occurs only in the Piel; it means “to blaspheme,” “to revile.”

[15:30]  ²⁴ tn The word order in the Hebrew text places “Yahweh” first for emphasis – it is the Lord such a person insults.

[15:30]  ²⁵ tn Heb “soul.”

[15:30]  ²⁶ tn The clause begins with “and” because the verb is the perfect tense with vav (ו) consecutive. As discussed with Num 9:13, to be cut off could mean excommunication from the community, death by the community, or death by divine intervention.

[15:31]  ²⁵ tn The verb בָּזָה (bazah, “to despise”) means to treat something as worthless, to treat it with contempt, to look down the nose at something as it were.

[15:31]  ²⁶ tn The verb פָּרַר (parar, “to break”) can mean to nullify, break, or violate a covenant.

[15:31]  ²⁷ tn Heb “soul.”

[15:31]  ²⁸ tn The construction uses the Niphal imperfect with the modifying Niphal infinitive absolute. The infinitive makes the sentence more emphatic. If the imperfect tense is taken as an instruction imperfect, then the infinitive makes the instruction more binding. If it is a simple future, then the future is certain. In either case, there is no exclusion from being cut off.

[15:31]  ²⁹ sn The point is that the person’s iniquity remains with him – he must pay for his sin. The judgment of God in such a case is both appropriate and unavoidable.

[23:19]  ²⁹ tn Heb “son of man.”

[23:19]  ³⁰ tn The verb is the Hiphil of קוּם (qum, “to cause to rise; to make stand”). The meaning here is more of the sense of fulfilling the promises made.