Numbers 11

[Dondi]

Help me out here, please.

Why is God so angry toward the Israelites simply because they wanted something other than manna to eat. Granted, God is providing for their physical nourishment here by giving the manna in the first place, but had I'd been there, I might have been inclined to have some variety in my diet also, after being fed the same thing every day.

Then after God gives them an inordinate amount of quail (two feet deep, twenty miles square), He then inflicts the Israelites with a plague.

Am I missing something here?

BTW - I am aware of the timeline during this point in the wilderness wanderings. It is appearing just before the incident with the twelve spies from each camp in scoping out the Promised Land, which is met with disaster after ten of the spies complain about the giants in the land, and thus compelling the people the uselessness of trying to conquer and weed out those in occupation of the land, resulting in another dismal 40 years in the desert and the first generation dying off. They were so close, yet so far.

Relating back then to the complaint about the manna, this obviously puts the wilderness wanderings very early and maybe only several months of years after the Exodus(?). At any rate, I suppose the complaint should have never arisen given that they were not far from their ultimate destination. Am I correct in this?

 

[bananabrain]

sorry, dondi, should have responded to this before:

simply because they wanted something other than manna to eat.

well, if you look at the context (see here Chumash with Rashi - Behaalotecha - Parshah ) you'll see in verse one that the people were "looking to complain". and the fact is, as rashi points out (see verse 4) they'd taken a lot of cattle and sheep and so on out of egypt with them, so they weren't actually short of meat - they were just seeking a pretext.

Then after God gives them an inordinate amount of quail (two feet deep, twenty miles square), He then inflicts the Israelites with a plague.

the clue's in verse 18, where G!D essentially says "oh, you want meat, is that right? well, I'll Give you meat, you bunch of whingers.."

BTW - I am aware of the timeline during this point in the wilderness wanderings. It is appearing just before the incident with the twelve spies from each camp in scoping out the Promised Land, which is met with disaster after ten of the spies complain about the giants in the land, and thus compelling the people the uselessness of trying to conquer and weed out those in occupation of the land, resulting in another dismal 40 years in the desert and the first generation dying off. They were so close, yet so far.

and they were also used to complaining, or at least the wicked and the "mixed multitude" were, always agitating about how good they had had it in egypt, what with cucumbers and melons and stuff.

At any rate, I suppose the complaint should have never arisen given that they were not far from their ultimate destination. Am I correct in this?

well, the complaint should never have arisen, full stop. they should have trusted G!D and moses' leadership. that's kind of what it's about. we are told that egypt was like a "crucible" for us - we were melted down like silver and then subsequently refined, to remove the impurities and coarseness from our souls to make us worthy to enter the land of canaan. of course, this process was never entirely successful, as we can all see.

b'shalom

bananabrain

 

[Dondi]

Thanks for responding, bb.

First, I find it interesting that Rashi's Commentary points out that there were times that Israel were called My people, but in other times are addressed as the people, as if God at certain points wanted to disown them. There is even a time that God wanted to wipe out the whole clan, but for the intervention of Moses.

I suppose the people were so used to complaining in Egypt, under bondage, that old habits were hard to break. They had a new Master over them, but old attitudes left over from being under the old master.

About the mixed multitude. Were these "leaders" of the people while they were in Egypt. The comment from R. Simeon ben Menassia indicates these are "most distinguished" and "prominant ones". I'm thinking that these are the same people who instigated the construction of the Golden Calf while Moses was busy getting the Ten Commandments.

 

[bananabrain]

I suppose the people were so used to complaining in Egypt, under bondage, that old habits were hard to break. They had a new Master over them, but old attitudes left over from being under the old master.

this is precisely the problem that the commentators identify.

About the mixed multitude. Were these "leaders" of the people while they were in Egypt. The comment from R. Simeon ben Menassia indicates these are "most distinguished" and "prominant ones". I'm thinking that these are the same people who instigated the construction of the Golden Calf while Moses was busy getting the Ten Commandments.

yes, these were the calf guys and the leaders and so on. however, the mixed multitude are considered to be non-israelites (or part-israelites) or hangers-on who left egypt at the same time because they figured that they were on to a good thing, jumping on the bandwagon as it were. many of them were the first to start backtracking. there is a tradition that blames nearly everything bad that happens on them, but i think that's a bit extreme personally.

b'shalom

bananabrain

 

[Dondi]

Interesting. I've read elsewhere from Jewish sources, and forgive me for not remembering the reference, that much of what God did in all the rituals and laws were design to "wean" the Israelites from the Egyptian practices. That they were accustomed to Egyptian sacrifices and that God used the sacrificial system to get Israel to learn of His ways. What is your assessment?

 

[wil]

we are told that egypt was like a "crucible" for us - we were melted down like silver and then subsequently refined, to remove the impurities and coarseness from our souls to make us worthy to enter the land of canaan. of course, this process was never entirely successful, as we can all see.

awesome concept...just as each and every percieved or real insult on my current life...just refining out impurities...and each of my responses is indicative that more work needs to be done!

 

[Quahom1]

Interesting. I've read elsewhere from Jewish sources, and forgive me for not remembering the reference, that much of what God did in all the rituals and laws were design to "wean" the Israelites from the Egyptian practices. That they were accustomed to Egyptian sacrifices and that God used the sacrificial system to get Israel to learn of His ways. What is your assessment?

I think (uh oh, there he goes again...), God got ticked off. 'Cause when He said He'd take care of them, they began to make demands, instead of being simply grateful.

This wasn't a time at Club Med, where God plays Maitre' D to a bunch of snobby guests...

Their very existence as a people was at stake...they were in a desert for crying out loud. They should not have lasted 40 days, let alone 40 years...

Yet, they ate every day, and remained healthy and viable.

The "Grace" of God is nothing to take for granted...nor a gift to be taken to the "exchange desk", because it doesn't suit the recipient.

(ok, done thinking).

v/r

Joshua

 

[Prober]

yes, these were the calf guys and the leaders and so on.
b'shalom

bananabrain

btw, I heard that the day (of the year) that they worshipped the golden calf was the same day (of the year) that the Romans attacked Jerusalem and that there was a connection.

True?

 

[Quahom1]

btw, I heard that the day (of the year) that they worshipped the golden calf was the same day (of the year) that the Romans attacked Jerusalem and that there was a connection.

True?

You're about 1000 years off...

Jerusalem did not exist yet (nor did Israel or Judah).

Hebrews were new...without a country/land to call their own.

(I think, but then I might be mixing history).

 

[Dondi]

You're about 1000 years off...

Jerusalem did not exist yet (nor did Israel or Judah).

Hebrews were new...without a country/land to call their own.

(I think, but then I might be mixing history).

And were strangers in a strange land.

But I think what Prober was saying is not that it occurred on the same exact date, but the same day of the year. Never heard of that, nor I wouldn't know why it would be a connection.

 

[Quahom1]

And were strangers in a strange land.

But I think what Prober was saying is not that it occurred on the same exact date, but the same day of the year. Never heard of that, nor I wouldn't know why it would be a connection.

Ah, but I have a space suit...so will travel...(I admire Robert Heinlein too)