Jean Louis Ska, «Old and New in the Book of Numbers», Vol. 95 (2014) 102-116
Among the numerous questions raised by the Book of Numbers, this article treats three of them: (1) The unique complexity of the Book of Numbers; (2) The four main types of solutions proposed by scholars, namely different versions of the documentary hypothesis; two main and three secondary redactional layers (R. Achenbach); a series of Fortschreibungen; a mere synchronic reading of Numbers; (3) The presence or absence of the Priestly Writer in Numbers.
06_Biblica_AN_Ska_Layout 1 01/04/14 12:04 Pagina 115
115
OLD AND NEW IN THE BOOK OF NUMBERS
* *
*
Not all is said on the topic, admittedly, and a more complete argumen-
tation is indispensible if one wants to demonstrate that the Priestly Writer
is actually present in the Book of Numbers. My purpose was to show that
we have enough grounds to believe that this investigation will not be in
vain. I am thinking in particular of Numbers 13–14; 20,1-13; and 27. In
other words, it seems unlikely to me that the Priestly Writer could stop
before answering some basic questions, one of them being the question
of the land. This is first of all a question of narrative logic 51.
Where to look for the conclusion drawn by the Priestly Writer is an-
other question. In my opinion, however, the conclusion by the Priestly
Writer could be an open conclusion, which is not unusual in biblical lit-
erature. “Tomorrow is another dayâ€, as Margaret Mitchell would say 52.
Via della Pilotta, 25 Jean Louis SKA
I – 00187 Rome (Italy)
51
It was not possible to discuss the thesis of J. Wöhrle in this article. See J.
WÖHRLE, “The Un-Empty Land: The Concept of Exile and Land in Pâ€, The
Concept of Exile in Ancient Israel and Its Historical Contexts (eds. E. BEN ZVI
– C. LEVIN) (BZAW 404; Berlin – New York 2010) 189-206; ID., Fremdlinge
im eigenen Land. Zur Entstehung und Intention der priesterlichen Passagen der
Vätergeschichte (FRLANT 246; Göttingen 2012). The author affirms that the
land is already given to the patriarchs in P, in Genesis 17, and is given anew to
each generation. The patriarchs are usufructuaries, but not proprietors of the
land. The only proprietor of the land is God. This may be true according to the
strongly theological language adopted by P in Genesis 17 and elsewhere. From
God’s perspective the land is obviously given, especially if the covenant is uni-
lateral. In other words, the land is given de iure. But is the land taken de facto?
See N. LOHFINK, “Wann hat Gott dem Volk Israel das den Vätern verheissene
Land gegeben? Zu einem rätselhaften Befund im Buch Numeriâ€, Väter der Kir-
che. Ekklesiales Denken von den Anfängen bis in die Neuzeit. Festgabe für
Hermann Josef Sieben SJ zum 70. Geburtstag (Hrsg. J. ARNOLD – R. BERNDT
– R.M.W. STAMMBERGER) (Paderborn 2004) 9-30. More important, in Gen 17,8
and 48,4, God promises to Abraham and Jacob to give them the land as “eternal
possession†– ~lw[ tzxa. Is this compatible with the idea that usufruct of the
land must be given anew to each generation? The latter idea seems to be closer
to Heb 13,14 than to P’s theological and juridical language.
52
See SKA, “Une histoire sans finâ€, 636-639. Tomorrow is another day
are the last words of the novel Gone with the Wind, by Margaret Mitchell
(1936).