Numbers 17

Updated
2001-05-26; 14:32:21utc

D. Role of the Priesthood 17:1-19:22

This section consists of three parts:

Aaron's budding staff 17:1-13

The task description of the Levites 18:1-32

The water of purification 19:1-22Aaron's budding staff 17:1-13

After the war scene with which the previous chapter ends, there is the sweet interlude of a stick of dead wood that turns into a blooming almond tree. There can have been no doubt about it that Aaron's staff was a piece of dead wood, but overnight it turns into a living tree. This is resurrection! From that day on there were two almond trees in the tabernacle: Aaron's staff, and the lampstand, which was made in the form of a almond tree. The two symbols stand for victory over death and the testimony of the Holy Spirit.

The Pulpit Commentary seems to suggest that Aaron's rod may have been a freshly cut branch from an almond tree. This could be the meaning of the paragraph: "This particular rod had been cut from an almond tree, and it would seem probable that it had on it shoots and flowers and fruit at once, so that the various stages of its natural growth were all exemplified together." But maybe the commentary speaks about the condition of the rod after it bloomed. As stated above, there is no doubt in my mind that Aaron's rod, as the other rods presently before the Lord, were walking sticks that were in daily use, and could therefore not arouse any suspicion that life juices that could cause sprouting were still present. As in the opening words of Dickens' A Christmas Carol, (Marley was dead to begin with, there was no doubt whatsoever about it. He was as dead as a doornail); by which introduction the author wants to say, that if Marley were still alive, the story would loose its intrinsic value; so we can safely say, that if Aaron's rod was not dead, there was no miracle either. Matthew Henry's Commentary agrees with this: "It is probable that they were not now fresh cut out of a tree, for then the miracle would not have been so great; but that they were the staves which the princes ordinarily used as ensigns of their authority (of which we read <Num 21:18>), old dry staves, that had no sap in them, and it is probable that they were all made of the almond-tree."

The Hebrew word for staff is matteh, which according to Strongs Definitions can mean: "a branch (as extending); figuratively, a tribe; also a rod, whether for chastising (figuratively, correction), ruling (a sceptre), throwing (a lance), or walking (a staff; figuratively, a support of life, e. g. bread)." The

KJV renders it variously with: "rod, staff," or "tribe." The sentence structure of vs. 2 is interesting also; it reads literally: "Take of them a rod, a rod." We are not told whether all the staffs were originally cut off from almond trees, but this could very well be the case.

There is in the use of the staff, made from the branch of a almond tree more than meets the eye, since the word almond has a special meaning in Hebrew also. Nelson's Illustrated Bible Dictionary says: "The Hebrew word for almond means 'awakening,' an allusion to the almond blossom, which is first to bloom in the spring. The almond's pinkish-white blossoms always appear before its leaves. The decorations on the lampstands were modeled after the almond blossom <Ex. 25:33>, and Aaron's rod was an almond twig <Num. 17:8>. The almond also symbolized the dependability of God <Jer. 1:11-12>."

From New Unger's Bible Dictionary we copy: "The almond nut is remarkably graceful. This naturally led to its selection for ornamental carved work; and it was the pattern selected for the bowls of the golden lampstand <Exo. 25:33-34; 37:19>, 'symbolizing the speedy and powerful result of light' (Keil, Arch., 1:146)…. In <Jer. 1:11-12> there is an allusion to another of the meanings of the Heb. root, which is to hasten. In the first of the two verses the almond tree is mentioned by its name shaqed, and in the second it is said 'for I am watching My word,' watching being from the same root as almond. The almond was chosen to symbolize God's haste in fulfilling His promises." None of these various shades of meaning come through, of course, in any of the translations. But the Israelites in the desert understood much more of what God was saying to them in the blooming of Aaron's staff than we do in reading the report of it.

Adam Clarke's Commentary says of the staffs: "MaTeh, the staff or sceptre, which the prince or chief of each tribe bore, and which was the sign of office or royalty among almost all the people of the earth." And Jamieson, Fausset, and Brown Commentary adds to this: "Moses was ordered to see that the name of each was inscribed upon his rod or wand of office-- a practice borrowed from the Egyptians. The Babylonians had the same (Rawlinson's `Herodotus, ' b. i., ch. xix., sec. 5, note 3)." So the staff stood for the dignity of the office of the leaders of the tribes, and the double meaning of the word suggested that the staff represented the whole tribe.

Moses has to get a staff from the leader of each tribe, twelve in all. The Pulpit Commentary says about this: "Of all their princes … twelve rods. These princes must be those named in ch. ii and vii. Since among these are to be found the tribe princes of Ephraim and Manasseh, standing upon a perfect equality with the rest, it is evident that the twelve rods were exclusive of the of Aaron." So, according to this commentary, there was a total of thirteen rods. Jamieson, Fausset, and Brown does not agree with this, and thinks that the total was twelve and that Ephraim and Manasseh were counted as one tribe for this purpose. This is also Matthew Henry's opinion, who writes: "It should seem they were but twelve in all, with Aaron's, for, when Levi comes into the account, Ephraim and Manasseh make but one, under the name of Joseph." The assumption of The Pulpit Commentary Seems to me the more logical one. Vs. 6 reads: "So Moses spoke to the Israelites, and their leaders gave him twelve staffs, one for the leader of each of their ancestral tribes, and Aaron's staff was among them." The Hebrew word translated "among" is tavek, which means "among," or at "the center," or "in the middle of." The text does not necessarily include Aaron's staff in the number twelve.

The staffs are all placed overnight by Moses inside the tabernacle, where exactly is not mentioned. "In front of the Testimony, where I meet with you," would make us suppose that it was in front of the curtain that separated the Holy Place from the Holy of Holiest. The next morning Moses "saw that Aaron's staff, which represented the house of Levi, had not only sprouted but had budded, blossomed and produced almonds." In the tropical regions of the world some trees produce blossoms, buds, and fruit simultaneously at different branches. But the almond tree in the Middle East produces blossoms in early January of the year, before even the leaves start sprouting. So the staff of Aaron, with buds, blossoms and ripe fruit presented a double miracle. The Pulpit Commentary uses the Greek word semeion, to describe the demonstration of God's power. We read: "In any case the flowering and fruiting of Aaron's rod, while it was an unquestionable miracle (for if not a miracle, it could only have been a disgraceful imposture), was a semeion in the true sense, i. e. a miracle which was also a parable. Aaron's rod could no more blossom and fruit by nature than any of the others, since it also had been severed from the living tree; and so in Aaron himself was no more power or goodness than in the rest of Israel. But as the rod germinated and matured its fruit by the power of God, supernaturally starting and accelerating the natural forces of vegetable life, even so in Aaron the grace of God was quick and fruitful to put forth, not the signs only and promise of spiritual gifts and energies, but the ripened fruits as well." The whole incident is pregnant with meaning that goes beyond the actual words of the text. It could be called a parable, as The Pulpit Commentary calls is, if we do not imply with this designation that the story had no historical basis.

Matthew Henry's Commentary sees here a proof "that there should be a succession of priests. Here were not only almonds for the present, but buds and blossoms promising more hereafter."

The leaders of the tribes had been told what to expect. God had said to Moses: "The staff belonging to the man I choose will sprout." And the purpose of this demonstration was, in God's words: "I will rid myself of this constant grumbling against you by the Israelites." The grumbling had been against Moses, but God had taken this personally. He did not say: "I will help you to rid yourself," but "I will rid myself." The Israelites had never said that God chose the wrong man for the priesthood, but they had implied that God had not spoken; it was all Moses' idea. The miracle did put an end to "this constant grumbling." The issue was never brought up again afterwards.

God ordered Moses to put Aaron's staff back before the ark, that is, apparently, before the curtain that separated the Holy Place from the Holy of Holiest. Thus it became a constant reminder for the people that God had spoken, and that the institution of the Levitical priesthood was no mere human invention.

The placement of the staff seems to be a point of contention in Scripture. The writer of the Hebrew epistle states: "This ark contained the gold jar of manna, Aaron's staff that had budded, and the stone tablets of the covenant."[ 1 ] But when the ark is placed in Solomon's newly constructed temple we read: "There was nothing in the ark except the two stone tablets that Moses had placed in it at Horeb, where the LORD made a covenant with the Israelites after they came out of Egypt."[ 2 ] Hebrews speaks primarily about the ark as it was in the days of Moses and in the period following the conquest of Canaan. The fact that the jar of manna and Aaron's staff had disappeared in the days of Solomon presents no problem. The question remains whether the staff was placed inside the ark, or in front of it. The writer of Hebrews designates the place of the staff by using the Greeks words en he, (feminine of hos) which, according to Strongs Definitions, can mean "in, at, on, by, etc." There is, therefore, no grammatical problem that forces us to believe that the staff was actually placed inside the ark. The size of the ark, 3 ¾ feet by 2 ¼ feet, by 2 ¼ feet [ 3 ], would hardly have allowed enough space for a walking stick of normal dimensions. The important feature of the act of connecting Aaron's staff, the jar of manna and the tablets with the Ten Commandments with the presence of God may not escape us. It gives to Aaron's staff, and everything it stands for the same eternal value as to the Ten Commandments and God's supernatural intervention in the daily life of His children, symbolized by the jar of manna.

The chapter ends on a jarred note. Thus far the picture had been one of hope and beauty. God's holiness and the call to priesthood had been represented under the image of a blooming and fruit bearing almond tree. But instead of rejoicing in the beauty of God's holiness, the Israelites panic. We can clearly hear their nervous exclamations: "We will die! We are lost, we are all lost! Anyone who even comes near the tabernacle of the LORD will die. Are we all going to die?" They completely misunderstood what God had tried to tell them. It is true that terrible things had happened among them. Almost fifteen thousand people had died within the span of a few days only. That the cause of this disaster was their own rebellion does not seem to have penetrated. They blame God for what happened. "Anyone who even comes near the tabernacle of the LORD will die," puts the burden upon the holiness of God instead of on their own sin. They not only say "We will die," but also "we are lost, we perish." The Hebrew word used is 'abad, which is defined by Strongs as "to wander away, i.e. lose oneself; by implication to perish." This could mean that God's holiness had made an impression on them similar to that of Isaiah when he saw the Lord and he cried out: " 'Woe to me! … I am ruined! For I am a man of unclean lips, and I live among a people of unclean lips, and my eyes have seen the King, the LORD Almighty.' "[ 4 ] But, seen in the context of the preceding chapter, we may assume that the cries of the people are the smoldering remains of the fire of rebellion. Even if there was a trace of conviction of sin in their cry, they did not understand that God had a plan of redemption and forgiveness; that their lives could be touched by coals from the altar, like Isaiah's lips were. The did not know the Lord, nor did they love Him, otherwise they would not have panicked in this way.

[ 1 ] Heb. 9:4

[ 2 ] I Kings 8:9

[ 3 ] See Ex. 25:10 (TLB)

[ 4 ] Isa. 6:5