Numbers, Book Of (continued) – Nymphas

Numbers, Book Of (continued)

(b) if it was necessary that everyone should hear, that the trumpeters could not move about through the camp but must remain stationary at the tabernacle door; or

(c) that in the clear air of the desert the sound of the trumpets would not travel farther than in the noisy and murky atmosphere of modern cities; or

(d) that should occasion arise for more trumpets than two, Moses and his successors were forbidden to make them.

(3) Marching of the Host.

The marching of the host in four main divisions of about half a million each (Numbers 2:1–34; Numbers 10:14–20) has also been pronounced a stumbling-block (Colenso, Eerdmans, Doughty), inasmuch as the procession formed (i.e. if no division began to fall into line till its predecessor had completed its evolutions) would require the whole day for its completion, and would make a column of unprecedented length--of 22 miles (Colenzo), of 600 miles (Doughty)--and would even on the most favorable hypothesis travel only a few miles, when the whole line would again need to reconstruct the camp. The simple statement of this shows its absurdity as an explanation of what actually took place on the march, and indirectly suggests that the narrative may be historical after all, as no romancer of a late age would have risked his reputation by laying down such directions for the march, if they were susceptible of no other explanation than the above. How precisely the march was conducted may be difficult or even impossible to describe in such a way as to obviate all objections. But some considerations may be advanced to show that the march through the desert was neither impossible nor incredible.

(a) The deploying of the four main divisions into line may have gone on simultaneously, as they were widely apart from each other, on the East (Judah), on the South (Reuben), on the West (Ephraim) and on the North (Dan).

(b) There is no ground for thinking that the march would be conducted, at least at first, with the precision of a modern army, or that each division would extend itself to the length of 22 miles. It is more than likely that they would follow their standards as best they could or with such order as could be arranged by their captains.

(c) If the camps of Judah and Reuben started their preparations together, say at 6 o'clock in the morning (which might be possible), and occupied 4 hours in completing these, they might begin to advance at 10 o'clock and cover 10 miles in another 4 hours, thus bringing them on to 2 PM, after which 4 hours more would enable them to encamp themselves for the night, if that was necessary. The other two divisions falling into line, say at 2 o'clock, would arrive at 6 PM, and by 10 PM would be settled for the night.

(d) It does not seem certain that every night upon the march they would arrange themselves into a regularly constructed camp; rather it is reasonable to conclude that this would be done only when they had reached a spot where a halt was to be made for some time.

(e) In any case, in the absence of more details as to how the march was conducted, arithmetical calculations are of little value and are not entitled to discredit the truthfulness of the narrative.

(4) Victory over Midian.

This has been objected to on moral grounds which are not now referred to. It is the supposed impossibility of 12,000 Israelites slaying all the male Midianites, capturing all their women and children, including 32,000 virgins, seizing all their cattle and flocks, with all their goods, and burning all their cities and castles without the loss of a single man (Numbers 31:49), which occasions perplexity. Yet Scripture relates several victories of a similar description, as e.g. that of Abraham over the kings of the East (Genesis 14:15), in which, so far as the record goes, no loss was incurred by the patriarch's army; that of Gideon's 300 over the Midianites at a later date (Judges 7:22); that of Samson single-handed over 1,000 Philistines (Judges 15:15); and that of Jehoshaphat at the battle of Tekoa (2 Chronicles 20:24), which was won without a blow--all more or less miraculous, no doubt. But in profane history, Tacitus (Ann. xiii.39) relates an instance in which the Romans slaughtered all their foes without losing a single man; and Strabo (xvi.1128) mentions a battle in which 1,000 Arabs were slain by only 2 Romans; while the life of Saladin contains a like statement concerning the issue of a battle (Havernick, Intro, 330). Hence, Israel's victory over Midian does not afford sufficient ground for challenging its historic credibility.

IV. Authorship.

Restricting attention to evidence from Nu itself, it may be remarked in a general way that the question of authorship is practically settled by what has been advanced on its literary structure and historical credibility. For, if the materials of the book were substantially the work of one pen (whoever may have been their first collector or last redactor), and if these materials are upon the whole trustworthy, there will be little room to doubt that the original pen was in the hand of a contemporary and eyewitness of the incidents narrated, and that the contemporary and eyewitness was Moses, who need not, however, have set down everything with his own hand, all that is necessary to justify the ascription of the writing to him being that it should have been composed by his authority and under his supervision. In this sense it is believed that indications are not wanting in the book both against and for the Mosaic authorship; and these may now be considered.

1. Against the Mosaic Authorship:

(1) Alternating Use of Divine Names. This usage, after forming so characteristic a feature in Ge and largely disappearing in Exodus and Leviticus, reasserts itself in Numbers, and more particularly in the story of Balaam. If Numbers 23 and 24 can be explained only as late documents pieced together, because of the use of "God" in chapter 23 and of "Lord" in chapter 24, then Moses was not their author. But if the varying use of the divine names is susceptible of explanation on the assumption that the two chapters originally formed one document, then most distinctly the claim of Moses to authorship is not debarred. Now whether Balaam was a false or a true prophet, it is clear that he could hope to please Balak only by cursing Israel in the name of Yahweh, the God 'Elohim of Israel; and so it is always Yahweh he consults or pretends to consult before replying to the messengers of Balak. Four times he did so (22:8,19; 23:3,15); and 3 times it was Elohim who met him (22:9,20; 23:14), while every time it was Yahweh who put the word in his mouth. Can any conclusion be fairer than that the historian regarded 'Elohim and Yahweh as the same Divine Being, and represented this as it were by a double emphasis, which showed

(a) that the Yahweh whom Balaam consulted was Elohim or the supreme God, and

(b) that the God who met Balaam and supplied him with oracles was Israel's Lord? Thus explained, the alternate use of the Divine names does not require the hypothesis of two single documents rolled into one; and indeed the argument from the use of the divine names is now generally abandoned.

(2) Traces of Late Authorship.

Traces of late authorship are believed to exist in several passages:

(a) Numbers 15:32–36 seems to imply that the writer was no longer in the wilderness, which may well have been the case, if already he was in the land of Moab.

(b) 20:5 suggests, it is said, that the people were then in Canaan. But the language rather conveys the impression that they were not yet come to Canaan; and in point of fact the people were at Kadesh in the wilderness of Zin.

(c) In 21:14,15,17,18,27-30, certain archaic songs are cited as if the people were familiar with them, and the Arnon is mentioned as the border of Moab long before Israel reached the river. But that poets were among the people at the time of the exodus and probably long before, the song of Moses (Exodus 15:1–27) shows, and that a Book of the Wars of the Lord was begun to be composed soon after the defeat of Amalek is not an unreasonable hypothesis (Exodus 17:14). As for the statement that "Arnon leaneth upon the borders of Moab," that may have been superfluous as a matter of information to the contemporaries of Moses when they were about to cross the stream (Strack, Einl, 25), but it was quite in place in an old prophetic song, as showing that their present position had been long before anticipated and foretold.

(d) 24:7, according to criticism, could not have been composed before the rise of the monarchy; and certainly it could not, if prediction of future events is impossible. But if reference to a coming king in Israel was put into Balaam's mouth by the Spirit of God, as the narrator says, then it could easily have been made before the monarchy; and so could

(e) 24:17,18 have been written before the reign of David, though the conquest of the Edomites only then began (2 Samuel 8:14; 1 Kings 11:1; 1 Chronicles 18:12,1 Chronicles 18:13).

Examples such as these show that many, if not most, of the like objections against the Mosaic authorship of this book are capable of at least possible solution; and that Kuenen's caution should not be forgotten: "He who relies upon the impression made by the whole, without interrogation of the parts one by one, repudiates the first principles of all scientific research, and pays homage to superficiality" (Religion of Israel, I, 11).

2. For the Mosaic Authorship:

(1) Certain Passages Have the Appearance of Having Been Written by Moses.

These are:

(a) those which bear evidence of having been intended for a people not settled in cities but dwelling in tents and camps, as e.g. Numbers 1-4, describing the arrangements for the census and the formation of the camp; 6:24-26, the high-priestly benediction; 10:35,36, the orders for the marching and the halting of the host; 10:1-9, the directions about the silver trumpets; Numbers 19, the legislation which obviously presupposes the wilderness as the place for its observance (19:3,7,9,14). If criticism allows that these and other passages have descended from the Mosaic age, why should it be necessary to seek another author for them than Moses? And if Moses could have composed these passages, a presumption at least is created that the whole book has proceeded from his pen.

(b) The patriotic songs taken from the Book of the Wars of the Lord (Numbers 21), which some critics (Cornill, Kautzsch and others) hold cannot be later than 750 BC, are by equally competent scholars (Bleek, De Wette, E. Meyer, Konig and others) recognized as parts of Israel's inheritance from the Mosaic age, whenever they were incorporated in Numbers.

(c) The list of camping stations (Numbers 33) is expressly assigned to him. Whether "by the commandment of the Lord" should be connected with the "journeys" (Konig) or the "writing" makes no difference as to the authorship of this chapter, at least in the sense that it is based on a Mosaic document (Strack). It is true that even if this chapter as it stands was prepared by Moses, that does not amount to conclusive evidence of the Mosaic authorship of the whole book. Yet it creates a presumption in its favor (Drechsler, Keil, Zahn). For why should Moses have been specially enjoined to write so comparatively uninteresting and unprofitable a document as a list of names, many of which are now incapable of identification, if that was all? But if Moses was already writing up a journal or history of the wanderings, whether by his own hand or by means of amanuenses, and whether by express command or without it (not an unreasonable supposition), there was no particular need to record that this was so. If, however, Moses was not thinking of preserving an itinerary, and God for reasons of His own desired that he should do so, then there was need for a special commandment to be given; and need that it should be recorded to explain why Moses incorporated in his book a list of names that in most people's judgment might have been omitted without imperiling the value of the book. Looked at in this way, the order to prepare this itinerary rather strengthens the idea of the Mosaic authorship of the whole book.

(2) Acquaintance on the Part of the Author with Egyptian Manners and Customs.

This points in the direction of Moses.

(a) The trial by jealousy (Numbers 5:11–31) may be compared with the tale of Setnau, belonging probably to the 3rd century BC, but relating to the times of Rameses II, in which Ptahnefer-ka, having found the book which the god Thoth wrote with his own hand, copied it on a piece of papyrus, dissolved the copy in water and drank the solution, with the result that he knew all the book contained (RP, IV, 138). (b) The consecration of the Levites (Numbers 8:7) resembled the ablutions of the Egyptian priests who shaved their heads and bodies every 3rd day, bathed twice during the day and twice during the night, and performed a grand ceremony of purification, preparatory to their seasons of fasting, which sometimes lasted from 7 to 40 days and even more (WAE, I, 181).

(c) Uncleanness from contact with the dead (Numbers 19:11) was not unknown to the Egyptians, who required their priests to avoid graves, funerals and funeral feasts (Porphyry, De Abst. ii.50, quoted in Speaker's Comm.).

(d) The fish, cucumbers, melons, leeks, onions and garlic referred to in Numbers 11:5 were articles of diet in Egypt (Herodotus ii.93):

(e) The antiquarian statement about Hebron (13:22) fits in well with a writer in Mosaic times. "A later writer could have had no authority for making the statement and no possible reason for inventing it" (Pulpit Commentary on Numbers). On a candid review of all the arguments pro and con, it is not too much to say that the preponderance of evidence lies on the side of the substantial Mosaicity of the Book of Numbers.

LITERATURE.

Comms. on Nu by Bertheau (ET), Knobel, Keil (ET), Dillmann, Strack, Lange (English translation); in Speaker's Comm., Pulpit Comm., ICC (Gray); Biblical Intros of De Wette, Hengstenberg, Havernick, Bleek, Konig, Strack, Cornill, Driver; in encs, etc., RE, HDB, EB, Sch-Herz; critical comms.: Reuss, Die Geschichte der heiligen Schriften AT; Kuenen, The Religion of Israel (English translation); Wellhausen, Geschichte Israels and Prolegomena (English translation); Klostermann, Der Pentateuch; Eerdmans, Alttest. Studien; Addis, Documents of Hexateuch; Olford Hexateuch; EPC.

T. Whitelaw

Numenius

nu-me'-ni-us (Noumenios): The son of Antiochus, and Antipater were the two ambassadors whom Jonathan sent to the Romans, "to the Spartans, and to other places," after his victory in the plain of Hazor (Galilee) over the princes of Demetrius (1 Macc 12:1 ff) about 144 BC. Their mission was to confirm and renew the friendship and treaty which had existed from the days of Judas (1 Macc 8:17 ff). They were well received and successful, both at Rome (1 Macc 12:3 f) and at Sparta (1 Macc 12:19 ff; 14:22 f). After the death of Jonathan, the victories of Simon and the establishment of peace, Simon sent Numenius on a second embassy to Rome (1 Macc 14:24), again to confirm the treaty and present a golden shield weighing 1,000 minae--apparently just before the popular decree by which Simon was created high priest, leader and captain "for ever" (1 Macc 14:27 ff), September, 141 BC. The embassy returned in 139 BC, bearing letters from the senate to the kings of Egypt, Syria and "all the countries," confirming the integrity of Jewish territory, and forbidding these kings to disturb the Jews, and requiring them also to surrender any deserters (1 Macc 14:15 ff). See also LUCIUS; Schurer, Gesch. des judischen Volkes (3rd and 4th editions), I, 236, 250 f.

S. Angus

Nun (1)

noon ("n"): The 14th letter of the Hebrew alphabet; transliterated in this Encyclopedia as "n". It came also to be used for the number 50.

See ALPHABET, for name, etc.

Nun (2)

nun (nun "fish," derivative meaning "fecundity"): Father of Joshua (referred to thus 29 t) (Exodus 33:11; Numbers 11:28, etc.; 1 Chronicles 7:27, margin "Non"; Sirach 46:1, margin "Nave").

Nurse; Nursing

nurs, nurs'-ing: "Nurse" in the King James Version represents two different Hebrew words: In 8 passages (Genesis 24:59; Genesis 35:8; Exodus 2:7,Exodus 2:9; 2 Kings 11:2; 2 Chronicles 22:11; Isaiah 49:23) the word--noun or verb--renders some form of the verb yanaq, "to suck." The feminine causative part. of this verb is commonly used to denote nurse or foster-mother. According to Exodus 2:7 Moses' mother--"a nurse of the Hebrew women"--became, at Pharaoh's daughter's request, the foster-mother of the foundling. Joash, the son of Ahaziah, was in charge of a nurse until he was 7 years old (2 Kings 11:2; 2 Chronicles 22:11). But it is obvious that the term was used in a more general way, e.g. of a lady's maid or tire-woman. Rebekah was accompanied by her nurse when she left home to be married (Genesis 24:59; Genesis 35:8). In 5 passages (Numbers 11:12; Ruth 4:16; 2 Samuel 4:4; Isaiah 49:23; Isaiah 60:4 the King James Version) "nurse" represents the Hebrew word, 'aman, "to support," "be faithful," "nourish." The participle of this verb denoted a person who had charge of young children--a guardian or governess. Naomi took charge of Ruth's child "and became nurse unto it" (Ruth 4:16). In Numbers 11:12 Moses asks whether he has to take charge of the Israelites "as a nursing-father carrieth the sucking child." The same word is found in 2 Kings 10:15 (the King James Version "them that brought up," i.e. "guardians of the sons of Ahab) and in Esther 2:7 (the King James Version "and he brought up," i.e. he (Mordecai) adopted, his niece). Deutero-Isa uses both terms together (Isaiah 49:23) to describe the exalted position of Israel in the future when foreign kings and queens will offer their services and wait upon the chosen people.

In the solitary passage in the New Testament where "nurse" occurs, it renders the Greek word trophos. In this case the word does not mean a hired nurse, but a mother who nurses her own children (1 Thessalonians 2:7).

T. Lewis

Nurture

nur'-tur: The word occurs in the King James Version in Ephesians 6:4 as the translation of paideia, but the Revised Version (British and American) changes to "chastening," and uses "nurture" (verb) for the King James Version "bring up" (ektrepho) in the first part of the verse. Paideia has the idea of training and correction; in the Revised Version (British and American) 2 Esdras 8:12 for Latin erudio; and compare the King James Version The Wisdom of Solomon 3:11; Sirach 18:13 (paideuo), etc.

Nuts

nuts:

(1) ('eghoz; karua; Arabic jauz, "the walnut" (Song of Songs 6:11)): This is certainly the walnut tree, Juglans regia, a native of Persia and the Himalayas which flourishes under favorable conditions in all parts of Palestine; particularly in the mountains. In such situations it attains the height of from 60 to 90 ft. A grove of such trees affords the most delightful shade.

(2) (boTnim; terebinthoi (Genesis 43:11, margin "pistachio nuts")): The Hebrew is perhaps allied to the Arabic buTm, the "terebinth," which is closely allied to the Pistacia vera, Natural Order Anacardiaceae, which produces pistachio nuts. These nuts, known in Arabic as fistuq, are prime favorites with the people of Palestine. They are oblong, 3/4 inches long, with green, oily cotyledons. They are eaten raw and are also made into various sweets and confectionery. They are a product of Palestine, very likely to be sent as a present to Egypt (Genesis 43:11).

E. W. G. Masterman

Nymphas

nim'-fas (Numphas; Lachmann, Tregelles (margin), Westcott and Hort, The New Testament in Greek read Numpha, the name of a woman (Colossians 4:15)):

1. A Christian in Laodicea:

A Christian resident in Laodicea, to whom Paul sends salutations in the epistle which he wrote from Rome to the church in Colosse, the latter city being only a very few miles distant from Laodicea. Indeed, so near were they, that Paul directs that the Epistle to the Colossians be read also in Laodicea. Nymphas--or if Nympha be read, then it is a Christian lady who is meant--was a person of outstanding worth and importance in the church of Laodicea, for he had granted the use of his dwelling-house for the ordinary weekly meetings of the church. The apostle's salutation is a 3-fold one--to the brethren that are in Laodicea, that is to the whole of the Christian community in that city, and to Nymphas, and to the church in his house.

2. The Church in His House:

This fact, that the church met there, also shows that Nymphas was a person of some means, for a very small house could not have accommodated the Christian men and women who gathered together on the first day of every week for the purposes of Christian worship. The church in Laodicea--judging not only from the Epistle to the Ephesians, which is really Paul's Epistle to the Laodiceans, and which indicates that the church in Laodicea had a numerous membership, but also from what is said of it in Revelation 3:17 the King James Version--must have been large and influential: "Thou sayest, I am rich, and increased with goods, and have need of nothing." The house of Nymphas, therefore, must have possessed a large room or saloon sufficiently commodious to allow the meeting of a numerous company. Nymphas would he a person both of Christian character and of generous feeling, and of some amount of wealth. Nothing more is known regarding him, as this is the only passage in which he is named.

John Rutherfurd