Thoughts on Numbers 5:11-31

[earl40]

Any thoughts how long this was practiced before Jesus came and what the percentage of tests were answered by God? I can understand those that were bitten by snakes who were healed when they looked on the staff but I doubt that miracle lasted beyond the current crisis they encountered.

Did this practice continue after they entered the promise land and if so did it work? I ask because there is no doubt in my mind that the trial by testing in Salem were hocus pocus.

Numbers 5:11-31

The Adultery Test

11 Then the Lord spoke to Moses, saying, 12 “Speak to the sons of Israel and say to them, ‘If any man’s wife goes astray and is unfaithful to him, 13 and a man has intercourse with her and it is hidden from the eyes of her husband and she is [a]undetected, although she has defiled herself, and there is no witness against her and she has not been caught in the act, 14 if a spirit of jealousy comes over him and he is jealous of his wife when she has defiled herself, or if a spirit of jealousy comes over him and he is jealous of his wife when she has not defiled herself, 15 the man shall then bring his wife to the priest, and shall bring as [c]an offering for her one-tenth of an [d]ephah of barley meal; he shall not pour oil on it nor put frankincense on it, for it is a grain offering of jealousy, a grain offering of memorial, a reminder of iniquity.

16 ‘Then the priest shall bring her near and have her stand before the Lord, 17 and the priest shall take holy water in an earthenware vessel; and [e]he shall take some of the dust that is on the floor of the tabernacle and put it into the water. 18 The priest shall then have the woman stand before the Lord and let the hair of the woman’s head go loose, and place the grain offering of memorial [f]in her hands, which is the grain offering of jealousy, and in the hand of the priest is to be the water of bitterness that brings a curse. 19 The priest shall have her take an oath and shall say to the woman, “If no man has lain with you and if you have not gone astray into uncleanness, being under the authority of your husband, be [g]immune to this water of bitterness that brings a curse; 20 if you, however, have gone astray, being under the authority of your husband, and if you have defiled yourself and a man other than your husband has had intercourse with you” 21 (then the priest shall have the woman swear with the oath of the curse, and the priest shall say to the woman), “the Lord make you a curse and an oath among your people by the Lord’s making your thigh [h]waste away and your abdomen swell; 22 and this water that brings a curse shall go into your stomach, and make your abdomen swell and your thigh [j]waste away.” And the woman shall say, “Amen. Amen.”

23 ‘The priest shall then write these curses on a scroll, and he shall [k]wash them off into the water of bitterness. 24 Then he shall make the woman drink the water of bitterness that brings a curse, so that the water which brings a curse will go into her [l]and cause bitterness. 25 The priest shall take the grain offering of jealousy from the woman’s hand, and he shall wave the grain offering before the Lord and bring it to the altar; 26 and the priest shall take a handful of the grain offering as its memorial offering and offer it up in smoke on the altar, and afterward he shall make the woman drink the water. 27 When he has made her drink the water, then it shall come about, if she has defiled herself and has been unfaithful to her husband, that the water which brings a curse will go into her [m]and cause bitterness, and her abdomen will swell and her thigh will [n]waste away, and the woman will become a curse among her people. 28 But if the woman has not defiled herself and is clean, she will then be free and conceive [o]children.

29 ‘This is the law of jealousy: when a wife, being under the authority of her husband, goes astray and defiles herself, 30 or when a spirit of jealousy comes over a man and he is jealous of his wife, he shall then make the woman stand before the Lord, and the priest shall apply all this law to her. 31 Moreover, the man will be free from [p]guilt, but that woman shall bear her [q]guilt."

 

[py3ak]

Earl, we have no records in Scripture of the trial being undergone. I am not aware of any record of this trial being performed in Josephus, the Apocrypha, or any other historical writing, but would be very interested to read it if anyone else does know of such a record.

However that does not mean that it wasn't practiced at appropriate moments. After all, there is no record in Judges of sabbath observance, but that doesn't mean that no one during that time frame observed the Sabbath. It does mean that your question about percentages could be answered only by wild and worthless speculation. I found Fairbairn's treatment of this trial very stimulating. You can read it here: THE TYPOLOGY OF SCRIPTURE - PATRICK FAIRBAIRN - Google Books

 

[earl40]

Earl, we have no records in Scripture of the trial being undergone. I am not aware of any record of this trial being performed in Josephus, the Apocrypha, or any other historical writing, but would be very interested to read it if anyone else does know of such a record.

However that does not mean that it wasn't practiced at appropriate moments. After all, there is no record in Judges of sabbath observance, but that doesn't mean that no one during that time frame observed the Sabbath. It does mean that your question about percentages could be answered only by wild and worthless speculation. I found Fairbairn's treatment of this trial very stimulating. You can read it here: THE TYPOLOGY OF SCRIPTURE - PATRICK FAIRBAIRN - Google Books

Of course I assume that God answered %100 of the time when the test was administered. Of course we have no witness of the percentage that passed the test. I also assume that this practice must have stopped after the destruction of the temple.

What I find interesting is that this test was always accompanied with a real miracle.

 

[py3ak]

Of course I assume that God answered %100 of the time when the test was administered. Of course we have no witness of the percentage that passed the test. I also assume that this practice must have stopped after the destruction of the temple.

What I find interesting is that this test was always accompanied with a real miracle.

I'm reluctant to make either assumption, given the paucity of data. It is interesting to realize that this discriminating function is also exercised by the Lord's table; while harmless, and indeed beneficial, to worthy receivers, it does bring chastening or condemnation upon unworthy recipients.

 

[Peairtach]

Some commentators believe that Jesus' actions in writing on the ground in the Temple in connection with the woman taken in adultery, were related to this ritual.

 

[a mere housewife]

Re: Fairbairn, I read the section and found it very interesting that the woman is the one essentially bringing/presenting an offering (her husband provides it only as the provider of everything for her), which she holds throughout the invocation of the oath -- while the priest holds the bitter dregs she has to drink down. If she is righteous, Fairbairn seems to say, God will accept her offering (these items change hands when she must drink the cup). It is a rather beautiful picture if you think of Christ standing in that woman's place, in Israel's guilty stead, but Himself righteous; drinking a cup of judgment which was very bitter. But God accepted His offering, and raised Him again, pronouncing Him righteous. I'm sure I'm not saying that very well, but at least in the section I read Fairbairn didn't draw out the parallels.

 

[earl40]

Is it me,in that this passage seem so strange in that The Lord would use this method to clarify ones guilt or innocence and not for other serious sins that have no witnesses? It just seems so out of place with the rest of the law.

 

[Mushroom]

Heidi, I suspect there is very much in your insight to this, but knowing my own frailty, I am fearful of treading further into it than your very lovely treatment of it. When we are finally home I'm sure He will make it fully known to us. May He hasten the Day!

 

[a mere housewife]

Brad thank you for such kind words. It will be beautiful in heaven to sit at his feet and learn of him together. I ought to clarify that I feel certain it cannot be my own insight (I wouldn't wish to claim it as such) and so am very hesitant to sketch it out more in detail myself, and wish someone else might do so. Yet it is a passage I love to see my Savior in. The sweetest thing in this life too, and the most like heaven, is already to sit at his feet and learn.

Earl, just repeating what I read in Fairbairn: he said one of the special things about this is the covenant aspect, and the curse. I think of the jealousy of God cited in his visiting of iniquity to the third and fourth generations and of the bitterness and depth of jealousy in Divine love. ('Set me as a seal upon thine heart, as a seal upon thine arm: for love is strong as death; jealousy is cruel as the grave: the coals thereof are coals of fire, which hath a most vehement flame. Many waters cannot quench love, neither can the floods drown it: if a man would give all the substance of his house for love, it would utterly be contemned.')

It seems somewhat similar to casting lots, the disposing of which is of the Lord? Because it is a trial directly referred Him; and in that light, it does seem that what Richard said is significant -- they brought the adulterous woman to him (perhaps because of His divine claims and the nature of this trial -- to test Him? Not really believing His claims themselves, but bringing her to Him quite appropriately) in the temple for judgment; and the ritual of her trial and guilty condemnation would have involved her drinking of that dust he began writing in? Fairbairn points out that dust is associated with the curse in Scripture ('Dust thou art, unto dust thou shalt return'; the serpent had to go on its belly in the dust). But instead of her trial and condemnation, Christ takes it upon Himself to defend this guilty woman, to silence her accusers ('Who is he that condemns?') to pronounce her uncondemned, to set her free -- because He would stand in that place not only for Israel, but in *her* place.

 

[earl40]

I appreciate all your incites, esp. Heidi, on this truly unique passage of scripture.The more I read the less "strange" they become.

 

[a mere housewife]

I should point out that I think I'm confused though -- because the woman's adultery was known and not secret. They didn't want her to be tested, but put to death? It was a ritual associated with adultery as referred to divine judgment, but with hidden things?

And then it would be the hidden aspect, the sins of those who would throw stones, that relates to Christ's writing in the dust?

I have to disclaim insight again (I obviously just bring my own curiosity and confusion to many of these discussions . The Fairbairn treatment is in a book about 'typology' so I'm sure it is a recognised type; I just didn't see where he draws the parallels himself and would love to know more about that. Please don't take my thinking aloud for anything else!

 

[py3ak]

You are on the right track about John 8. The woman wasn't under suspicion: she was known to be guilty. But her accusers did not have the moral standing to bring a charge against her. And the one who did, didn't. But it's a fairly distant echo of the ritual. It does bear noticing that the typical economy would have justified the righteous and condemned the guilty, in that particular instance; but the fulfilment of that economy (if not of that precise part of it) justified the ungodly by having the righteous stand in as a substitute.

 

[Jackie Kaulitz]

Any thoughts how long this was practiced before Jesus came and what the percentage of tests were answered by God? I can understand those that were bitten by snakes who were healed when they looked on the staff but I doubt that miracle lasted beyond the current crisis they encountered.

Did this practice continue after they entered the promise land and if so did it work? I ask because there is no doubt in my mind that the trial by testing in Salem were hocus pocus.

Numbers 5:11-31

The Adultery Test

11 Then the Lord spoke to Moses, saying, 12 “Speak to the sons of Israel and say to them, ‘If any man’s wife goes astray and is unfaithful to him, 13 and a man has intercourse with her and it is hidden from the eyes of her husband and she is [a]undetected, although she has defiled herself, and there is no witness against her and she has not been caught in the act, 14 if a spirit of jealousy comes over him and he is jealous of his wife when she has defiled herself, or if a spirit of jealousy comes over him and he is jealous of his wife when she has not defiled herself, 15 the man shall then bring his wife to the priest, and shall bring as [c]an offering for her one-tenth of an [d]ephah of barley meal; he shall not pour oil on it nor put frankincense on it, for it is a grain offering of jealousy, a grain offering of memorial, a reminder of iniquity.

16 ‘Then the priest shall bring her near and have her stand before the Lord, 17 and the priest shall take holy water in an earthenware vessel; and [e]he shall take some of the dust that is on the floor of the tabernacle and put it into the water. 18 The priest shall then have the woman stand before the Lord and let the hair of the woman’s head go loose, and place the grain offering of memorial [f]in her hands, which is the grain offering of jealousy, and in the hand of the priest is to be the water of bitterness that brings a curse. 19 The priest shall have her take an oath and shall say to the woman, “If no man has lain with you and if you have not gone astray into uncleanness, being under the authority of your husband, be [g]immune to this water of bitterness that brings a curse; 20 if you, however, have gone astray, being under the authority of your husband, and if you have defiled yourself and a man other than your husband has had intercourse with you” 21 (then the priest shall have the woman swear with the oath of the curse, and the priest shall say to the woman), “the Lord make you a curse and an oath among your people by the Lord’s making your thigh [h]waste away and your abdomen swell; 22 and this water that brings a curse shall go into your stomach, and make your abdomen swell and your thigh [j]waste away.” And the woman shall say, “Amen. Amen.”

23 ‘The priest shall then write these curses on a scroll, and he shall [k]wash them off into the water of bitterness. 24 Then he shall make the woman drink the water of bitterness that brings a curse, so that the water which brings a curse will go into her [l]and cause bitterness. 25 The priest shall take the grain offering of jealousy from the woman’s hand, and he shall wave the grain offering before the Lord and bring it to the altar; 26 and the priest shall take a handful of the grain offering as its memorial offering and offer it up in smoke on the altar, and afterward he shall make the woman drink the water. 27 When he has made her drink the water, then it shall come about, if she has defiled herself and has been unfaithful to her husband, that the water which brings a curse will go into her [m]and cause bitterness, and her abdomen will swell and her thigh will [n]waste away, and the woman will become a curse among her people. 28 But if the woman has not defiled herself and is clean, she will then be free and conceive [o]children.

29 ‘This is the law of jealousy: when a wife, being under the authority of her husband, goes astray and defiles herself, 30 or when a spirit of jealousy comes over a man and he is jealous of his wife, he shall then make the woman stand before the Lord, and the priest shall apply all this law to her. 31 Moreover, the man will be free from [p]guilt, but that woman shall bear her [q]guilt."

Please bear with my honesty and I hope this isn't too off topic, but as a woman, I shudder reading through the law because of these verses and other similar verses. It's hard to think that these words were written by God and not man. I am thankful that I am born during these times and in America and not under that law.

I know several women who's husbands cheated on them and then because of their own guilt, started accusing their faithful wives of being unfaithful. I can just see these men using this law against their wives.

It is a mighty faithful woman who would be willing to follow through with drinking poison and trusting God to spare her.

Anyone who has a beautiful way of looking at these verses, I'd love to hear it. They just make me cringe and wonder how Jesus would apply them.

 

[earl40]

Any thoughts how long this was practiced before Jesus came and what the percentage of tests were answered by God? I can understand those that were bitten by snakes who were healed when they looked on the staff but I doubt that miracle lasted beyond the current crisis they encountered.

Did this practice continue after they entered the promise land and if so did it work? I ask because there is no doubt in my mind that the trial by testing in Salem were hocus pocus.

Numbers 5:11-31

The Adultery Test

11 Then the Lord spoke to Moses, saying, 12 “Speak to the sons of Israel and say to them, ‘If any man’s wife goes astray and is unfaithful to him, 13 and a man has intercourse with her and it is hidden from the eyes of her husband and she is [a]undetected, although she has defiled herself, and there is no witness against her and she has not been caught in the act, 14 if a spirit of jealousy comes over him and he is jealous of his wife when she has defiled herself, or if a spirit of jealousy comes over him and he is jealous of his wife when she has not defiled herself, 15 the man shall then bring his wife to the priest, and shall bring as [c]an offering for her one-tenth of an [d]ephah of barley meal; he shall not pour oil on it nor put frankincense on it, for it is a grain offering of jealousy, a grain offering of memorial, a reminder of iniquity.

16 ‘Then the priest shall bring her near and have her stand before the Lord, 17 and the priest shall take holy water in an earthenware vessel; and [e]he shall take some of the dust that is on the floor of the tabernacle and put it into the water. 18 The priest shall then have the woman stand before the Lord and let the hair of the woman’s head go loose, and place the grain offering of memorial [f]in her hands, which is the grain offering of jealousy, and in the hand of the priest is to be the water of bitterness that brings a curse. 19 The priest shall have her take an oath and shall say to the woman, “If no man has lain with you and if you have not gone astray into uncleanness, being under the authority of your husband, be [g]immune to this water of bitterness that brings a curse; 20 if you, however, have gone astray, being under the authority of your husband, and if you have defiled yourself and a man other than your husband has had intercourse with you” 21 (then the priest shall have the woman swear with the oath of the curse, and the priest shall say to the woman), “the Lord make you a curse and an oath among your people by the Lord’s making your thigh [h]waste away and your abdomen swell; 22 and this water that brings a curse shall go into your stomach, and make your abdomen swell and your thigh [j]waste away.” And the woman shall say, “Amen. Amen.”

23 ‘The priest shall then write these curses on a scroll, and he shall [k]wash them off into the water of bitterness. 24 Then he shall make the woman drink the water of bitterness that brings a curse, so that the water which brings a curse will go into her [l]and cause bitterness. 25 The priest shall take the grain offering of jealousy from the woman’s hand, and he shall wave the grain offering before the Lord and bring it to the altar; 26 and the priest shall take a handful of the grain offering as its memorial offering and offer it up in smoke on the altar, and afterward he shall make the woman drink the water. 27 When he has made her drink the water, then it shall come about, if she has defiled herself and has been unfaithful to her husband, that the water which brings a curse will go into her [m]and cause bitterness, and her abdomen will swell and her thigh will [n]waste away, and the woman will become a curse among her people. 28 But if the woman has not defiled herself and is clean, she will then be free and conceive [o]children.

29 ‘This is the law of jealousy: when a wife, being under the authority of her husband, goes astray and defiles herself, 30 or when a spirit of jealousy comes over a man and he is jealous of his wife, he shall then make the woman stand before the Lord, and the priest shall apply all this law to her. 31 Moreover, the man will be free from [p]guilt, but that woman shall bear her [q]guilt."

Please bear with my honesty and I hope this isn't too off topic, but as a woman, I shudder reading through the law because of these verses and other similar verses. It's hard to think that these words were written by God and not man. I am thankful that I am born during these times and in America and not under that law.

I know several women who's husbands cheated on them and then because of their own guilt, started accusing their faithful wives of being unfaithful. I can just see these men using this law against their wives.

It is a mighty faithful woman who would be willing to follow through with drinking poison and trusting God to spare her.

Anyone who has a beautiful way of looking at these verses, I'd love to hear it. They just make me cringe and wonder how Jesus would apply them.

I am not sure the stuff she was to drink was naturally poisons. If this is so this would be a truly supernatural work of God.

 

[py3ak]

It is a mighty faithful woman who would be willing to follow through with drinking poison and trusting God to spare her.

Ink and dust aren't poisonous, though it seems unlikely they are pleasant. The water was effective because of the curse that had been attached to it - a curse that related only to the unfaithful.

You may well be glad that you were not born under the yoke of a law which neither the Jews of Christ's time nor their ancestors (nor their descendants) had been able to bear. But I would encourage you when you shudder at the thought that God has written something to stop and consider. If the Bible offends your conscience or sensibilities, which is right? There are things in Scripture very hard for us to receive; but it is because we are so sinful, weak, and foolish, not because the law of the Lord is anything but right. These words in Numbers are also the words of Jesus.

 

[Jackie Kaulitz]

It is a mighty faithful woman who would be willing to follow through with drinking poison and trusting God to spare her.

Ink and dust aren't poisonous, though it seems unlikely they are pleasant. The water was effective because of the curse that had been attached to it - a curse that related only to the unfaithful.

You may well be glad that you were not born under the yoke of a law which neither the Jews of Christ's time nor their ancestors (nor their descendants) had been able to bear. But I would encourage you when you shudder at the thought that God has written something to stop and consider. If the Bible offends your conscience or sensibilities, which is right? There are things in Scripture very hard for us to receive; but it is because we are so sinful, weak, and foolish, not because the law of the Lord is anything but right. These words in Numbers are also the words of Jesus.

Truly, I did not understand what it was she was to drink. Somewhere along the way, I learned it was "poison." Yikes, who taught me that it was poison? But truly, as you have stated, the verse does only say water, ink and dust, which shouldn't be poisonous in itself.

Yes, when the Bible offends, I fully agree - we should stop and consider because it is designed to offend out sinful inclinations. And the desire to survive probably along with the lie of "I don't deserve to die" makes me cringe at these types of verses. But I do know fully that yes, I do deserve to die and it is purely by the grace of God that I am living and breathing right this second. Thanks for your insightful comment. I learned something new today and have been freed from the lie I was previously taught.

 

[py3ak]

It's a privilege to be of service, Jackie, and a great joy to see such a teachable spirit.

 

[J. Dean]

You know, while re-reading this passage, it just occurred to me (DUH!) that this was a protection for the woman against a jealous husband who might be tempted to act without proof.

 

[Ask Mr. Religion]

You know, while re-reading this passage, it just occurred to me (DUH!) that this was a protection for the woman against a jealous husband who might be tempted to act without proof.

Indeed, one aspect.

See Calvin's view here.

AMR

 

[Peairtach]

I appreciate all your incites, esp. Heidi, on this truly unique passage of scripture.The more I read the less "strange" they become.

To some extent the Lord took what would have been familiar, rather than strange, to the Israelites and sanctified it.

The declaratory oath - used in litigation - was, apparently, one of the most widespread legal procedures in the ancient Near East. The fear of the oath's consequences - divine punishment realising the self-curses pronounced - was such that the defendant not infrequently refused to swear, the plaintiff would concede the case rather than let him/her swear, or the two parties would reach a compromise rather than proceed to the oath.

The above came from Everyday Law in Biblical Israel: An Introduction (pp46-47) by Raymond Westbrook and Bruce Wells. Although this book contains much useful and interesting, and no doubt valid, material it cannot be recommended without reserve as it is by no means orthodox but subscribes to the liberal Documentary, JEDP, Hypothesis. But the approving mention of the Documentary Hypothesis seems to have little effect on the substance of the book.

Rushdoony - whom I also cannot recommend without reserve, as I find his approach to the Mosaic death penalty simplistic at best - relates Jesus' encounter with the Pharisees and the woman taken in adultery to Numbers 5 in his Institutes.

Take the meat and leave the bones.

 

[earl40]

The declaratory oath - used in litigation - was, apparently, one of the most widespread legal procedures in the ancient Near East. The fear of the oath's consequences - divine punishment realising the self-curses pronounced - was such that the defendant not infrequently refused to swear, the plaintiff would concede the case rather than let him/her swear, or the two parties would reach a compromise rather than proceed to the oath.

The above came from Everyday Law in Biblical Israel: An Introduction (pp46-47) by Raymond

Very nice Richard. Thanks.