As an inquiry of space-related methods this article evaluates the concept of “the world of the text” in relationship to the book of Numbers. It is contrasted with a more loose understanding of setting as referential field, which has been used in connection with narrative anthologies. Numbers may be described as an anthology with an attenuated frame narrative concerning Israel’s wandering through the wilderness. Therefore, setting as referential field is a better way to conceptualize space in the book than reading for the “world” of Numbers. This is seen through two case-studies where the two approaches are compared. One concern-ing the high census numbers at the start of Numbers together with the wilderness setting, which are shown to not invite a “factual” reading of them in a world of the wilderness, but rather as theological constructs connected to the tabernacle. The other concerning the con-fused itinerary notices, which are shown to not cohere into a logical trail through the wilder-ness, but rather fulfill their function in the passages they are part of, among other things.

Als eine Untersuchung raumbezogener Methoden stellt dieser Artikel das Konzept der „Welt des Textes“ mit Bezug auf das Buch Numeri auf den Prüfstand. Es wird mit einem loseren Verständnis von Setting als Bezugsfeld kontrastiert, welches in Verbindung mit er-zählenden Sammlungen verwendet worden ist. Numeri kann als eine Sammlung mit einem losen erzählerischen Rahmen über Israels Wanderung durch die Wildnis beschrieben werden. Darum ist Setting als Bezugsfeld besser geeignet, um Raum in diesem Buch zu konzeptuali-sieren, als nach der „Welt“ von Numeri zu suchen. Dies wird anhand von zwei Fallstudien gezeigt, in welchen die beiden Zugänge verglichen werden. Eine betrifft die hohe Anzahl des Volkes am Beginn von Numeri zusammen mit dem Setting der Wildnis, wobei gezeigt wird, dass diese Zahlen nicht „faktisch“ in einer Welt der Wildnis verstanden werden wollen, son-dern als theologisches Konstrukt in Verbindung mit dem Heiligtum. Die andere betrifft die verwirrenden Angaben zur Reiseroute, wobei gezeigt wird, dass diese sich nicht zu einem logischen Weg durch die Wildnis zusammenfügen, sondern ihre Funktion in den Erzählpas-sagen erfüllen, zu denen sie gehören.

Stories of many different kinds abound in biblical Hebrew, and analyses have shown them to be both well composed and unique in some respects. Thus, narrative criticism has identified intricate compositional features, text-linguistics has analyzed the cohesion and coherence of narratives, and it has been argued that the prose form of the narratives stands out in view of the epics of the Levant (see e.g. Kawashima 2004; 2021). However, lexemes for the telling of stories have not been investigated to the same degree (to these may be counted, for instance אמר בשׂר דבר דָבָר זִכָּרוֹן נגד ספר שֵׁמַע  תוֺלְדוֺת). This paper seeks to remedy this fact by looking into the semantic field of storytelling in biblical Hebrew, with a focus on the verb ספר (piel). What is meant by telling a story shifts throughout times and cultures, and instead of relying on essentialist definitions it is suggested that the concept of narrative and the telling of stories may be viewed from three angles: story, discourse, and what may be called narrative situation (Andersson 2001, 138–39). Such an approach points to the family resemblances of storytelling, while at the same time giving room for different kinds of narratives and situations. In this perspective, the storytelling aspects of lexemes in biblical Hebrew, and ספר in particular, become clearer. ספר in piel often means “count” and “announce,” but also “report,” however, without presupposing much of a story told, a discourse developed in narrative respect, and the situation is primarily that of relating information. Yet, at times, the verb presupposes more developed stories and discourses, warranting a meaning closer to “tell” and “narrate” (cf. Gen 29:13; 40:8–9; Exod 10:2; 18:8; 2 Kings 8:4–5; and Sir 43:24). Furthermore, such a meaning is also found in psalms recounting “God’s mighty acts,” and not merely alluding to them (see Ps 44:2; 78:3; 107:22; also Sir 42:17, and cf. the “stories” in Ps 105; 106; and 114). In these story and discourse are fairly well developed, while the situation indicates praise and confession. 

The Sotah-ritual in Num 5:11–31 has been the focus of many interpretations, part of which is how we understand what the potion used in the ritual is supposed to do. Among these Roy E. Gane has argued that it is the dynamic of holiness versus impurity that creates the effect of the potion (2016), and Yitzhaq Feder that the waters so to speak seek out the impurity of another man’s seed in the woman and punish her (2022). But what is the rationale behind this? While it is impossible to know the details, the line of argument followed in this paper is to say that the genitive mey ha’arim (water of bitterness, v. 18, 19, 23) should be understood objectively as indicating what the ritual is about, and not indicating the harmful effect of the potion. At the same time, the text describes that upon taking the potion the woman’s womb discharge and her uterus will drop (v. 22). So how does this come about if the potion in itself is not harmful?  The argument made here is that this is because the potion is considered holy, in that holy water is used for it (v. 17), while the woman is considered (potentially) impure (v. 27), and that it is this meeting of holy and impure that creates the harmful effect. This understanding is strengthened by the use of dust in the ritual (v. 17). It is not described as holy, but it is taken from the floor of the (holy) tabernacle. Furthermore, rituals in Zoroastrian religion during Persian times, roughly contemporary with the composition of the book of Numbers, use dust for purification, thus forming suggestive parallels to interpret the Sotah.

Themes of land, rebellion, punishment and forgiveness, generational change, and death have all been subjects of theological interpretation of the book of Numbers, but holiness and purity less so. Typically, those themes have instead been treated as part of analyses of purity rules and in relationship to the book of Leviticus. However, both on literary and historical grounds there are reasons to distinguish Numbers from the rest of the Pentateuch. Thus, Num 1–10 to a large extent revolve around preparations for the wandering through the wilderness, but this includes organizing the Israelites around the tabernacle. If the Holiness Code extends holiness in regard of persons and places (cf. Milgrom), Numbers orders these in zones and grading (chs. 1–4), and introduces purity rules to uphold the purity of the camp (5:1–4 and following). Further, Num 11–21 feature several murmuring stories but in distinction to those found in Exodus 15–18, they emphasize punishment and also purity and holiness motifs, such as Miriam’s skin disease (Num 12), the rebellion of Korah, Dathan, and Abiram involving offering incense (Num 16–17), and Moses and Aaron not holding God holy at Meribah (Num 20). Significantly, several of them take place close to Kadesh, meaning holiness. Again, Num 22–36 to a large extent depict preparations for entering the promised land, and present purity rules concerning mixed marriages (Num 31; cf. Num 25), the sacrifices of the public cult (Num 28–29), and the impurity of manslaughter in the promised land (Num 35:9–34). Finally, certain motif of holiness and purity span the entire book, such as those concerning death, which is found in Num 5:1–4 (sending out those with death-impurity from the camp), Num 19 (the red cow ritual setting out how to handle death-impurity, in view of the preceding rebellions), and Num 35:9–34 (manslaughter as an extreme case of death-impurity in the holy land). These are at each instance related to the surrounding passages, while at the same time they create a certain coherence for the book as a whole. The purpose of the present paper is to unearth the often forgotten theology of holiness and purity in Numbers and argue its significance in the interpretation of the book.

The significance of generational change for understanding the book of Numbers is often taken for granted. It was Dennis Olson’s study of 1985 that put the spotlight on this theme. Of the several conclusions drawn by Olson, two are highlighted here: that Numbers portray two contrasting generations and promote the new over the old, and that this portrayal is consistent with the redactional structure or final form of Numbers. These two conclusions are taken as starting points in sketching the compositional provenance theologically of the book in Persian times in light of recent research. 

Four contexts are inquired into: the origin of the so called Israelite credo in the Spy story (14:18) in light of form criticism and inscriptional evidence; the parallel text of the Golden calf-episode in Exod 32–34, which also features the credo and relates to covenantal theology; and the idea of generational punishment being refuted in Ezekiel 18 and replaced in the books of Chronicles. 

Together these contexts show that Numbers has a timely message concerning the forgiveness and opportunities of the new generation standing on the edge of the promised land in the book, which may be read as a stand-in for the Yahweh-believing communities in Persian times.

This paper explores the nature of the Primeval History and more specifically if there is a complication formulated here, that is later taken up or answered somehow in the rest of Genesis (or the Pentateuch). This is formulated as a question of if we can say that there is a plot in Genesis. Scholars such as Gerhard von Rad, David Clines, and Todd Patterson are reviewed. In dialogue with historical-critical research it is concluded that the relationship of the Primeval History to what follows is best understood in terms formulated by Georg Nicol as "rolling-plot," where a certain formulation of plot is not strictly followed to a denouement, but rather taken up and amended in a slightly different direction.