Punishment and Forgiveness in Israel's Migratory Campaign (review)

Hebrew Studies 45 (2004) 320 Reviews could serve for this (pp. 1951–1952). There is more to pilgrimage celebrations than what is in Leviticus. Pilgrimage psalms were part of First Temple Israelite religion, yet they are not reflected in priestly texts. This reader is grateful for Milgrom’s efforts, in his commentaries and monographic works. His penetrating research has deepened our understanding of priestly texts, and those who study the Hebrew Bible will be forever in debt to Jacob Milgrom. Pamela Barmash Washington University in St. Louis St. Louis, MO 63130 pbarmash@artsci.wustl.edu PUNISHMENT AND FORGIVENESS IN ISRAEL’S MIGRATORY CAMPAIGN. By Won W. Lee. Pp. xv + 308. Grand Rapids, Mich.: Eerdmans, 2003. Paper, $45.00. In a very systematic and at times densely written discourse on the macrostructure of the book of Numbers, Lee has proven conclusively that the book can be and has been divided in every conceivable way by redaction critics. After summarizing and meticulously analyzing the arguments of the major commentators, Lee ultimately chooses to create his own structural arrangement for the book, focusing primarily on Num 10:11–36:13. He agrees with Rolf Knierim and others that Num 10:11 provides a “decisive break” in the book of Numbers, based on the conceptual model created of (1) preparation for the campaign in Num 1:1–10:10 (a part of the Sinai pericope), which is fixed geographically by the camp laid out before Mount Sinai and the tent of meeting, and (2) Num 10:11–12, which signals the commencement of the militarily-oriented, sanctuary campaign. The remainder of Numbers then enumerates the cycle of failure, punishment, and reorganization of the campaign by the second generation (p. 99). 1.¬Macrostructure of Num 10:11–36:13 Lee’s thesis, in examining the role of Num 10:11–36:13 as part of the larger conquest periscope that extends to Joshua 12, is that this second major section of Numbers functions as an explanation of the failure to complete the conquest from the south and the resultant forty years of wandering before another attempt is made from the east. Based on this conclusion, he can therefore assert that Num 36:13 “is the appropriate ending for the second division of Numbers” (p. 104). He identifies this final verse in Numbers as a “subscription,” which concludes the preceding material, placing the Israelites Hebrew Studies 45 (2004) 321 Reviews geographically in the “Plains of Moab” and thus at the end of their forty year period of wandering (p. 112), but it “does not make a transition to the book of Deuteronomy” (p. 111). Furthermore, Num 36:13 also “closes the corpus ” of diverse materials (including a legal section) found as far back as Num 15:1. Structurally, there is a clear division between Num 36:13 and Deut 1:1–5. Lee posits that the former directs the reader backwards to Yahweh’s commands and actions, while the latter introduces and directs the reader to listen to Moses’ speeches on strict obedience to Torah, and to prepare for the conquest under Joshua’s leadership. 2.¬Individual Units within Num 10:11–36:13 Having established his major demarcations, Lee then divides the second portion of Numbers into two sections: (1) An event—the failed campaign to enter the Promised Land from the south (Num 10:11–14:45), and (2) the consequence—forty year delay in entrance into promised land (Num 15–36). The structural divider between these two sections is Num 13:1–14:45, which contains the “rebellion narrative” of the spy story. This unit highlights the underlying concept of “Israel’s failure to let Yahweh fulfill the land promise to its ancestors” (p. 232). The “intensity and seriousness” of the Israelites’ rebellion in Numbers 13–14 is matched by Yahweh’s fatal punishment for the Exodus generation (p. 234). For Lee, chapter 20 marks “the completion of Yahweh’s punishment of the Exodus generation” (p. 262) because of its geographical placement at Kadesh, the mention of Aaron’s death in the fortieth year, and the resultant transference of priestly office to his son Eleazar (Num 20:22–29). He suggests that the...