The Korah Story Composition

by peacefulpete 9 Replies latest watchtower bible

  • peacefulpete
    peacefulpete

    A perennial favorite of the WT, and other hierarchal churches, is the infamous Korah rebellion tale of Numbers 16. The story has been a subject of debate for many many years. How did Korah die? Did his family? Was it Israelite chieftains or Levites who rebelled? Was the issue Moses or Aaron? etc. It's also been noticed for many years that the text appears choppy and stitched together with Korah inconsistently referenced.. Scholars of the Documentary Hypothesis have long determined that the story as we have it is a composite of at least 2 rebellion stories, (possible more as I will elude to later). An ancient J (JE) story of Datan and Abiram (Reubenites) rebelling against Moses merged with a P story of 250 Israelite chieftains rebelling. The Korah references, the inclusion of Aaron and bridging material implicating the Levites as instigators is either vestige of a third story or more likely completely the work of the redactor. Below I'll separate the stories as reconstructed by David Frankel, first the J story:

    12 Moses sent for Datan and Abiram, sons of Eliab; but they said, “We will not come! 13Is it not enough that you brought us from a land flowing with milk and honey to have us die in the wilderness, that you would also lord it over us? 14Even if you had brought us to a land flowing with milk and honey, and given us possession of fields and vineyards, should you gouge out those men’s eyes? (idiom meaning deception) We will not come!” 15 Moses was much aggrieved and he said to Yhwh, “Pay no regard to their oblation. I have not taken the ass of any one of them, nor have I wronged any one of them.” // 25 Moses rose and went to Datan and Abiram, the elders of Israel following him. 26 He addressed[them], saying, “Turn away from the tents of these wicked men and touch nothing that belongs to them, lest you be wiped out for all their sins.” 27 Now Datan and Abiram had come out and they stood at the entrance of their tents, with their wives, their children, and their little ones.

    28 And Moses said, “By this you shall know that it was Yahweh who sent me to do all these things; that they are not of my own devising: 29 if these men die as all men do, if their lot be the common fate of all mankind, it was not Yahweh who sent me. 30But if Yahweh brings about something unheard-of, so that the ground opens its mouth and swallows them up with all that belongs to them, and they go down alive into Sheol, you shall know that these men have spurned the Yahweh.” 31Scarcely had he finished speaking all these words when the ground under them burst asunder,

    32 And the earth opened its mouth and swallowed them up with their households. 33They went down alive into Sheol, with all that belonged to them; the earth closed over them. 34 All Israel around them fled at their shrieks, for they said, “The earth might swallow us!”



    Now the P:

    2 Two hundred and fifty Israelites, chieftains of the community, chosen in the assembly, men of repute rose up against Moses. // 4 When Moses heard this, he fell on his face.5 Then he spoke to [them], saying, “Come morning, Yahweh will make known who is His and who is holy, and will grant him access to Himself; He will grant access to the one He has chosen. 6 Do this: take fire pans, 7 and tomorrow put fire in them and lay incense on them before Yahweh. Then the man whom Yahweh chooses, he shall be the holy one. // 18 Each of them took his fire pan, put fire in it, laid incense on it, and took his place at the entrance of the Tent of Meeting. // 35 And a fire went forth from Yahweh and consumed the two hundred and fifty men offering the incense.

    We see clearer the narratives and possible motives when they are separated. In the J story Moses is being challenged as the undisputed leader by Reubenite characters named Datan (Dathan) and Abiram. Likely this stand alone narrative served to explain the losses of Reubenite clan much like the story of his losing his birthright because of bedding his Dad Jaob's concubine in Genesis. In this Priestly tale Moses is challenged by 250 chieftains over his role as unique priest. Possibly a reference to the rival Mushite priesthood that served in Dan and Shiloh??

    The Pentateuch is filled with examples of blending stories, merging traditions of the north and south into a single often disjointed narrative. This is simply one of countless examples. As a side note, it seems plausible this composite narrative was the form the author of Ps 106 was familiar with. He mentions Datan and Abiram being swallowed up and burned but not Korah or the Levites which is odd given his/their predominant role in the present text.

    So then why was the final elements, Korah, Aaron and the Levites, superimposed over the blended tale? What motivation? It is the view of most scholars that the objective lays with the then current dispute between priestly claims. This is a large topic but for now know that the neat and decisive establishment of an Aaronic priesthood is actually a retrojection into the histories. A redactors/editors with Aaronic priestly sympathies might logically have issue with references to priestly functions without the inclusion of Aaron. Further there were continuing disputes in post-exilic period of the role and blame of Levites as opposed to a narrower group privileged to be priests. Ezekiel's inclusion of this demotion of Levites around the same time as the work of these redactors of this story reveals the politics then current. The insertion of Levites sought to effectively change 250 Israelites Chieftains into Levites.

    So then, we now have only Korah to explain. Who was he? Simply said it looks likely his name was dropped here for editorial purposes. He plays the role of the archenemy, the main conspirator in both stories to unite them into one. This has lead to centuries of debates about how he died, in fire or swallowed up. It also required the final supplementary line about his sons not being killed at the end despite it saying explicitly that earlier. The "sons of Korah" play a role in later religious history after all. Perhaps they were also deemed a threat to the strict Aaronite priesthood at the time of this inclusion??

    The only references in the OT to Korah are in genealogies and retelling of this composite story.

    Interesting is that the genealogies of Genesis 6 and 1 Chron 1:35 identifies him as son of Esau whereas the redactor of Numbers 16 say he's the son of Eliphaz son of Esau. 1Chron 1:36 does not list Korah as a son of Eliphaz. In short the redactor was clever but not that careful.

  • peacefulpete
    peacefulpete

    There is much much more that can be discussed if anyone wants to contribute. I find the singular reference to "On son of Peleth" as one of the Reubenite conspirators to be curious. Ancient Rabbis have spun tales explaining why he was not included among the dead. His wife reasoned with him and talked him into repentance of course. In reality it's likely just a snippet left from the editing process, he likely had some larger role at some point.

  • waton
    waton

    the final narrative, really revealing, apocalyptic is: that

    Reuben is listed as an approved Tribe of Israel (of God), together with the new comer "tribe of Joseph"

    so, evidently sometimes "rebellions" have a tacit approval, in hindsight.

  • peacefulpete
    peacefulpete

    Ezekiel and Revelations depict idealized restoration of Israel using names that were originally ironically either place names, fictionalized or neighboring clans that at some point identified with the loose confederation of Israel. The inclusion of Reubenites (like Gadites and Manassehites) caused some tension in the narrative as they lived on the wrong side of the Jordan. The group was likely Amorite and their subculture subsumed. IOW the "tribe" no longer existed and stories such as these offered a religious explanation.

  • peacefulpete
    peacefulpete

    I guess the main message is that power struggles are nothing new. The ancient writers told terrifying tales of divine punishment to those who challenged the established order. Two tales which served this purpose were in turn merged into one and repurposed to meet the needs of the priesthood centuries later. It's not at all surprising then that modern church leaders utilize it and embellish it to secure their own control and authority.

  • peacefulpete
    peacefulpete

    No one finds the redaction process interesting? How about Yahweh wanting to kill everyone until Moses reasons with him? Then he kills the families of the men who conspired causing a panic among the rest of the people which pisses off Yahweh who again wants to kill everyone with a plague. Moses runs and gets Aaron who burns incense while standing between the living and the dead to calm Yahweh down. 14,700 died not counting all those he killed by fire and families eaten by the ground. Makes me feel warm all over. How about you?

  • Phizzy
    Phizzy

    Thanks for this Thread Pete, I shall look in to it some more, even as a believing Jaydub this story struck me as metaphorical, even though the org. took it as literal, I just couldn't.

    The org. also had some awful Pics. of the ground swallowing people, to frighten the JW kiddies, not sure if they had one of this story ? probably in that old 1950's terrible "Paradise" Book ?

  • peacefulpete
    peacefulpete

    Kindly natured people wish to find some way to dismiss the shear barbarity of passages like this. Reading chapts. 16&17 today certainly doesn't endear anyone to this deity. It's all about fear and threats.

  • Phizzy
    Phizzy

    Richard Dawkins certainly didn't like old Yahweh , see his view in "The God Delusion".

    Like all invented god's, YHWH reflected the character of those who invented, or in the case of the Israelites adopted, him.

  • Anony Mous
    Anony Mous

    We do know that until the Renaissance, most stories were not written as a statement of fact, but a narrative as to what happened and what future generations should now. The few facts we have on the period is from trade documents that merely indicate numbers for commercial purposes and a few laws/edicts. Almost everything else should be taken with a huge grain of salt, if not taken as a moral story. That includes things like Jesus and even ‘historians’ of the Roman period like Josephus that had a political motivation and a big slant in favor of his benefactors to write what he wrote. Beyond that, you also had editors and forgers that needed to shape stories for personal, religious or national benefit.

Share this

Google+
Pinterest
Reddit