Yet Between Their Teeth

[Dr. Shane]

[:"blue"] And there went forth a wind from the Lord, and brought quails from the sea, and let them fall by the camp, as it were a day's journey on this side, and as it were a day's journey on the other side, round about the camp, and as it were two cubits high upon the face of the earth. And the people stood up all that day, and all that night, and all the next day, and they gathered the quails: he that gathered least gathered ten homers: and they spread them all abroad for themselves round about the camp. And while the flesh was yet between their teeth, ere it was chewed, the wrath of the Lord was kindled against the people, and the Lord smote the people with a very great plague. And he called the name of that place Kibrothhattaavah: because there they buried the people that lusted.

Numbers 11: 31-34 [/]

Why did God give the Children of Israel quail just so He could kill them for eating it?

What lessons are we to learn from this story?

[bevin]

http://nationalzoo.si.edu/Publications/ZooGoer/2001/2/quail.cfm

http://lists.ibiblio.org/pipermail/b-hebrew/2003-June/015509.html

The biggest and most important lesson is that people attribute to God things that can be explained as natural phenomona. You will notice that there is no explicit sin named, nor is there any evidence that the deed is super-natural.

We should not let religious zealots use natural events to create guilt that they can use to manipulate us.

This has happened throughout history - it is being used by fundamentalist preachers on TV in the USA today - trying to use Katrina to prove God is angry with the USA for having too much personal freedom - and hence to incite the population to vote the way they want them to, and to send them $$$ so they can live their extravagent, sanctimonious, and sometimes adulterous, lifestyles.

It is also one of the main reasons why Christians have such a screwed up set of priorities around sex v. violence.

Very few people have an urge to be violent, so it is no good for creating guilt in a congregation. Most people have an urge for sex, so it is great for creating guilt.

In this story, a natural urge to eat is used by religious fanatics to create guilt to use to manipulate a population.

When asked "Who sinned, this man or his parents?" Jesus rejected this whole approach.

/Bevin

[Dr. Shane]

</font><blockquote><font class="small">Quote:</font><hr />

the Lord smote the people with a very great plague.

<hr /></blockquote><font class="post">

The Bible clearly says this was an act of the Lord. I am going to believe the Word of God, not doubt it (that was Eve's mistake).

The passage says the sin of the people was lust. But lust for what? Meat. Why would that be a sin if God has already granted permission to eat meat after the flood? Unless it was for blood. Could it be that the people were eating the meat with the blood?

</font><blockquote><font class="small">Quote:</font><hr />

And they smote the Philistines that day from Michmash to Aijalon: and the people were very faint. And the people flew upon the spoil, and took sheep, and oxen, and calves, and slew them on the ground: and the people did eat them with the blood. Then they told Saul, saying, Behold, the people sin against the Lord, in that they eat with the blood. And he said, Ye have transgressed: roll a great stone unto me this day. 1 Sam. 14:31-33

<hr /></blockquote><font class="post">

Just a little speculation to consider...

[cardw]

Quote:

---

he passage says the sin of the people was lust. But lust for what? Meat. Why would that be a sin if God has already granted permission to eat meat after the flood? Unless it was for blood. Could it be that the people were eating the meat with the blood?

---

So God kills people for having a lust for blood. It seems that God has a lust for blood here. How does killing someone for a health issue serve justice?

This "word of God" stuff breaks down so quickly. If we, as humans, can see more loving ways to deal with this, how come we create this hot tempered, unjust, violent god?

[LifeHiscost]

Quote:

---

cardw said:

This "word of God"

---

I am now experiencing a deeper sense of the presence of the Divine. There is a much richer world out there than I even imagined, a spiritual realm of unlimited possibility and healing.

---

Richard, your expertise in defining God, in the few years you have developed on this earth, somehow surpasses the wisdom of our Father, Who chose to reveal Himself through the written Word of the Prophets and Apostles which you deny, Himself coming from eternity.

[:"red"] "The Revelation of Jesus Christ, which God gave unto him, to shew unto his servants things which must shortly come to pass; and he sent and signified it by his angel unto his servant John" [/] Revelation 1:1 KJV

[:"red"] "For we have not followed cunningly devised fables, when we made known unto you the power and coming of our Lord Jesus Christ, but were eyewitnesses of his majesty." [/] 2 Peter 1:16 KJV

[Kevin H]

Reminds me of what we studied in by Biblical Geography class. Quail that fly into the Sinai tend to be blown by stron crosswinds from Greece and find themselves over the medterainian and have to continue on until they find land. In Greece they eat portions of the hemlock which, and after the long flight they are very easy to get by the Beduin living in the Sinai.

Eaten in moderate amounts the quail causes no problems, but if a Beduin is either gluttenous, or has exerted a large amount of energy to catch the quail, either the increased amount of hemlock or the mixture of the smaller amount of hemlock with the lactic acid produced by the body becomes lethal and even today you can die with the food still between your teeth, a natural result of the sins of gluttony and/or selfishness. And another example as to why we build medical centers and exault God's law, instead of focusing on instant healing and saying the law was done away with. Natural and supernatural work together, we can either cooperate with God's laws or God will give us the natural consequences.

Another example on how God's wrath is God's giving the natural results of our choices. It was God's wrath back then, and today.

[cardw]

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

I am now experiencing a deeper sense of the presence of the Divine. There is a much richer world out there than I even imagined, a spiritual realm of unlimited possibility and healing.

---

Richard, your expertise in defining God, in the few years you have developed on this earth, somehow surpasses the wisdom of our Father, Who chose to reveal Himself through the written Word of the Prophets and Apostles which you deny, Himself coming from eternity.

---

Where did I define God? Why are you so intent on misrepresenting my words?

You then quote the Bible as if you are not defining God by your selection of texts. You are judged by your own accusations.

In our dialogs I have consistently presented the idea that God is undefinable and yet you have attempted to more tightly define God with each post. You claim, through your selection of texts, to have a superior understanding of what God wants and what God is like.

You are unwilling to consider the foolishness of some of these ideas and simply quote condemnation. Your misrepresentation of my words is a form of dishonesty and futher confirms the weakness of your positions.

[benherndon]

Quoting:

"It turns out that the quail in question are not native to the Middle East. They are European birds that, twice each year, join with thousands of other species and fly one of the world's great migration routes around or across the eastern end of the Mediterranean. From there, they make their way south into the desert, headed for their winter range in Central and Southern Africa. In the spring, they return by the same route. Given this behavior, they are now known, not surprisingly, as the European migratory quail.

Because they are still hunted and eaten by the populations all along their migration route, the disease that so stunned the Hebrews is now well understood. As we moderns would have assumed all along, there is a completely natural, physiological explanation for the horrible death that occasionally follows the eating of quail.

Sometimes, within hours of quail consumption, there is the onset of severe muscle pain accompanied by myoglobinuria (literally, the red respiratory pigment of muscle in the urine), followed by kidney failure. The urine turns dusky red because muscle cells throughout the body disintegrate and the respiratory pigment of muscle, myoglobin, enters the blood stream. The myoglobin pigment is excreted by the kidneys, but the capacity of the kidneys for excretion of this pigmented protein is not limitless. If the portion of quail meat has been sufficiently large, the kidneys will fail and, in a society that lacks machines for renal dialysis, death is inevitable.

Such a death accompanied by the pain of disintegrating muscle throughout the body would certainly have been frightening to those friends and relatives who stood helplessly by. Nor are the symptoms in any way similar to those of food poisoning. Still, to have had one's urine turn red, decrease in quantity and then cease--shortly after a meal of quail--would certainly have left a lasting impression on those who were unaffected by the plague. It would also have had an even greater effect on those who produced the ominous red urine but survived.

In the past several years considerable progress has been made in tracking down the reason why the migrating quail sometimes cause the dreaded myoglobinuria and renal shutdown. As the quail migrate southward they will often stop in the Greek islands to feed. Growing on the Island of Lesbos and other islands nearby is the red hemp-nettle whose scientific name is Galeopsis Ladanum. It blooms late in the summer and sets its seed by the first or second week in September. This seed, ingested by the quail, makes their flesh poisonous to mammals (but not to birds) because an alkaloid in the hemp-nettle seed causes the cell mambrane of mammalian muscle cells to disintegrate. At other times of the year, or if the quail have not eaten the seed of this particular plant, the meat produces no deleterious effects." (Brian Bull and Fritz Guy, in SPECTRUM, Assoc of Adventist Forums, Vol 32, Issue #2, 2004)

[brian Bull, MD is a world renowned Pathologist and Editor of BLOOD magazine, and, Prof Fritz Guy, Dept of Religion, LaSierra University, Riverside, Calif. combined their skills to write the article, "Then a Miracle Occurs"--in that issue of SPECTRUM.]

See also: A.G.Billis et al,"Acute Renal Failure After a Meal of Quail," The Lancet, Sept 25, 1971, 702

Th. I. Ouznellis, Journal of the American Medical Association 211(1970): 1186

R. Aparicio et al, "Epidemic Rhabdomyolysis Following Quail Ingestion: A Clinical Epidemiologic and Experimental Study," Clinical Toxicology 112 (1999): 143-36

..........................................................

Do not be too critical of these findings nor attribute to them some 'satanic' impulse in those who inform you of such honest research---please.

Moses was a human and not everything he wrote was necessarily correct, perhaps, exactly as he portrays it or as we deduce facts from his writing of the Torah. God did not write the Torah. When I read the Torah, I find texts that cause me to ask if God really commanded or permitted and advised absolutely everything written.

God may well have intervened in the migration of His quail to pass over the camped Israelites. I assume He did. But my 'assumption' is not fixed in truth necessarily.

There are some problems that may well have been exaggerated by the writer and/or the copyists or scribes. Stories people tell are easily altered enthusiasticly once they have been repeated a few times. This is a problem of human nature. I think of the quail coming in such numbers as to be 18 inches thick on the ground for a distance as long as a person could walk in one day. That's quite a few quail. Obviously the quail so 'stacked' would have been dead and decay and putrefaction would have set in pretty quickly ordinarily. There was no refrigeration---but, of course, God could have prevented the 'spoiling' of their bodies, too. The Bible says the body of Christ after death 'did not see putrefaction.' I presume this was a 'miracle.'

Ben

[Dr. Shane]

Dr. Ben:

</font><blockquote><font class="small">Quote:</font><hr />

Moses was a human and not everything he wrote was necessarily correct,

<hr /></blockquote><font class="post">

Jesus:

</font><blockquote><font class="small">Quote:</font><hr />

If they hear not Moses and the prophets, neither will they be persuaded, though One rose from the dead.

<hr /></blockquote><font class="post">

Hmmmmmm... which should I believe?

[Kevin H]

Both!!!!

[Kevin H]

Thank you Benherndon

[LifeHiscost]

Quote:

---

Kevin H said:

Another example on how God's wrath is God's giving the natural results of our choices. It was God's wrath back then, and today.

---

I find no difficulty in accepting the explanation, for many of the miracles of God, when fully understood, become passe'. Take for instance the turning on of a light bulb.

OTOH, to think that we (the human race) are now intelligent enough to understand all of our Lord's dealings with the logic of a fallen race, does not seem to me to be logical.

[:"red"] "For my thoughts are not your thoughts, neither are your ways my ways, saith the LORD." [/] Isaiah 55:8 KJV

Keep the faith!!

[cardw]

Quote:

---

OTOH, to think that we (the human race) are now intelligent enough to understand all of our Lord's dealings with the logic of a fallen race, does not seem to me to be logical.

---

And that is what the OT writers were doing. They were explaining God within the logic and knowledge of that time. I think we can now look at the OT, and while we may not have an explanation now, we can admit when an ancient human explanation is not God speaking, but human minds speaking within the assumptions of their time.

I would also point out that you are using human logic to support your point of view.

[benherndon]

Shane, it is plain that what comes from me is my opinion. You don't have to subscribe to it---I would hope you would research it for yourself and make up your own mind. Nothing I say is to be believed just because "I" say it---that's for sure!

What Jesus said is true, in my opinion, but look at the context when He said it. He was, if I recall correctly, making the point that Moses spoke of Him and referenced His coming someday. When Jesus spoke of "Moses" he was probably speaking like humans do, i.e. categorically, while making His point. Just because Jesus said that about "Moses" does not mean, in my opinion, that Jesus was reflecting on the particular statment by Moses that the Israelite soldiers were to kill all the women who had had sex and keep the 'virgins' for their own wives or enjoyment.

Jesus was speaking categorically about "Moses" writings--not specifically to each sentence Moses wrote.

Well, now that I've said all this WDYT? Am I wrong?

Ben

[Robert]

Quote:

---

Shane said:

Quote:

---

the Lord smote the people with a very great plague.

---

The Bible clearly says this was an act of the Lord. I am going to believe the Word of God, not doubt it

---

It's not that you're doubting it, rather it's more like through the Spirit you are endeavoring to understand it....

Anyone can read the Bible and come up with "Thus saith the Lord"....That's why the reader of the Bible must see in its many contradictions and paradoxes, the need of a higher power to understand its many pages....

Quote:

---

....the Lord was kindled against the people, and the Lord smote the people with a very great plague.

---

God depicts Himself as doing what He does not prevent....

[Dr. Shane]

Why would have God been angry with them for eating food He had given them permission to eat?

The arguement that Moses didn't understand God and thought He was angry doesn't fly with me. Moses spoke with God perhaps more than any other prophet. We was moved by the Holy Spirit to write the Scriptures.

I have no problem trusting in the fact that Moses knew God and God was angry. My question is why? Why was God angry? Becuase they lusted? Yes. But lusted after what? Eating meat that God gave them permission to eat? That doesn't sound right.

[bevin]

They ate

They died

It got into the oral histories

It got written down by scribes at about the time of the Babylonian captivity

Somewhere along the way, someone put the 'moral' into the story

There is NO EVIDENCE IN THE BIBLE OR OUT that Moses wrote the first five books. That claim has no scriptural basis.

/Bevin

[LifeHiscost]

Quote:

---

cardw said:

I would also point out that you are using human logic to support your point of view.

---

Agreed! Which is the reason I post with the words of Scripture (Word of God) more often than not, because human logic alone carries very little substance more than personal opinion. Whereas the Word carries with it the power of the Holy Spirit to give it the meaning that God intended to give.

[:"red"] "And when he comes, he will convince the world of its sin, and of God's righteousness, and of the coming judgment." [/] John 16:8 NLT

[:"red"] "When the Spirit of truth comes, he will guide you into all truth. He will not be presenting his own ideas; he will be telling you what he has heard. He will tell you about the future." [/] John 16:13 NLT

[:"red"] "In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.

He was in the beginning with God.

All things came into being through Him, and apart from Him nothing came into being that has come into being.

In Him was life, and the life was the Light of men.

And the Word became flesh, and dwelt among us, and we saw His glory, glory as of the only begotten from the Father, full of grace and truth." [/] John 1:1-4,14 NASB

[:"red"] "This is the judgment, that the Light has come into the world, and men loved the darkness rather than the Light, for their deeds were evil." [/] John 3:19 NASB

[:"red"] "Jesus said to the people, "I am the light of the world. If you follow me, you won't be stumbling through the darkness, because you will have the light that leads to life." [/] John 8:12 NLT

[Dr. Shane]

This thread was not started to be a place to question the authonticity of the Bible. I believe the Scriptures were written by holy men of God as they were moved by the Holy Spirit. I believe all Scripture is good for doctrine, reproof and instruction in righteousness. I know many doubt the Scripture but this is not the thread for such doubts. Here I wish to discuss the story of Israelites dying after eating quail and what lessons God desires us to take from such a story. I welcome a healthy discussion on that.

I will start another thread for those who wish to express their doubts over the trustworthiness of Scripture.

[Robert]

Quote:

---

Shane said:

Why was God angry?

---

First of all God's so-called anger can't be compared to our anger. God is agape....It is not within His nature to kill and destroy....That is a given!

Now I do find a clue in Numbers 11:34 -- "there they buried the people that lusted."

What were they lusting after? Right, Kentucky fried quail! Had not God given them His own heavenly food? Yes...Manna! Well apparently they didn't like His food and probably grumbled and complained.

Did God actually bring in the quail? No...I don't believe it. Even more so, did God bring in "plagued" quail? No, I don't believe that either! That is outside God's character....He doesn't have Lucifer's attributes...not even close.

So what most like happened? The quail came in and they decided the manna wasn't all that....So they cooked the birds and when they started eating them they died.

Since God is sovereign (meaning that nothing can happen with out His permission) and since He has allowed Lucifer's kingdom of "self" to continue, He assumes the blame. But ultimately the blame will go to Lucifer the inventer and creator of sin.

Take for example the following statement:

• "So Saul died for his unfaithfulness; he was unfaithful to the Lord in that he did not keep the command of the Lord, and also consulted a medium, seeking guidance, 14 and did not seek guidance from the Lord. Therefore the Lord killed him, and turned the kingdom over to David the son of Jesse."

Did God kill him? NO! Saul killed himself! Proof:

• Saul said to his armorbearer, “Draw your sword, and thrust me through with it” . . . But his armorbearer would not. . . . Therefore, Saul took a sword and fell on it. . . . So Saul . . . died"(1 Chron. 10:4, 6).

Saul killed Saul….he had rejected God…he had hardened his heart, and because God’s love does not coerce – it does not force – God had to abandon Saul.

Throughout the Bible you’ll see that God sees and describes Himself as doing what He does not prevent. That’s the key to understanding God's so called dark-side.

[Robert]

Quote:

---

Robert said:

Throughout the Bible you’ll see that God sees and describes Himself as doing what He does not prevent. That’s the key to understanding God's so called dark-side.

---

Case in point:

Ex 4:11 Then the Lord said to him [Moses], “Who has made man’s mouth? Who makes him dumb, or deaf, or seeing, or blind? Is it not I, the Lord?

Is 45:6 I am the LORD, and there is none else. 7 I form the light, and create darkness: I make peace, and create evil: I the LORD do all these things.

1 Chronicles 10:13 So Saul died for his unfaithfulness; he was unfaithful to the Lord in that he did not keep the command of the Lord, and also consulted a medium, seeking guidance, 14 and did not seek guidance from the Lord. Therefore the Lord killed him, and turned the kingdom over to David the son of Jesse.

Exodus 4:21 And the Lord said to Moses, “When you go back to Egypt, see that you do all those wonders before Pharoah which I have put in your hand. But I will harden his heart [why?] so that he will not let the people go.”

1 Samuel 16:14 But the Spirit of the Lord departed from Saul, and an evil spirit from the Lord troubled him.

2 Thessalonians 2:10 They perish because they refused to love "the truth" [Jesus] and so be saved. 11 For this reason God sends them a powerful delusion so that they will believe the lie....

On this last one, if you look back to verse 9 you'll see that God doesn't cause the deception. It clearly states that it is the "Activity of Satan...with all wicked deception...."

So again why does God take the blame for evil? If you answer that question then you can answer the quail question.....

[Dr. Shane]

[:"blue"] "And the Lord spake unto Moses, saying, I have heard the murmurings of the children of Israel: speak unto them, saying, At even ye shall eat flesh, and in the morning ye shall be filled with bread; and ye shall know that I am the Lord your God. And it came to pass, that at even the quails came up, and covered the camp: and in the morning the dew lay round about the host. And when the dew that lay was gone up, behold, upon the face of the wilderness there lay a small round thing, as small as the hoar frost on the ground." Ex 16:11-14 [/]

Here it is recorded that God sent (or allowed) the quail at the same time he sent manna. Nothing here is recorded about anger or death as a result of the quail.

[:"blue"] "The people asked, and he brought quails, and satisfied them with the bread of heaven." Psalms 104:40 [/]

The psalmist seems to be referring to the text in Exdodus as he refers to both the quail and manna.

This does not seem to be the same event as the one mentioned in Numbers 11. Chronological Bibles place the two events a year apart from each other.

Many conclude the plague was sent due to their complaining, yet the Isrealites complained many times and God provided for them as a result.

The problem with believing the quail were diseased is that it means God allow diseased quail to be blown in and failed to protect Israel from them. While in the desert for 40 years, God protected the Israelites from stavation, lack of water and poisenous animals. Thus this story is contrary to the rest unless there is something more to it.

[cardw]

Quote:

---

Agreed! Which is the reason I post with the words of Scripture (Word of God) more often than not, because human logic alone carries very little substance more than personal opinion. Whereas the Word carries with it the power of the Holy Spirit to give it the meaning that God intended to give.

---

This is ridiculous. This is like saying a newspaper editor has no responsibility in how they quote their sources. The words in the Bible have no magical qualities connected with them. You are using human logic in determining which scriptures apply to what. This is claiming the power of a god. This is flat out dishonest.

You are giving yourself the freedom to lie, hide your true intentions, and to misrepresent those you disagree with, as long as you quote scripture.

[Robert]

Well...that's why I don't go to the Old Testament too often. I am NT guy. Jesus came to show the love of the Father....He came to reveal His Father's character.

The unclear stuff (i.e., the quail thingy) might have to be left unanswered until you meet Love Himself....In the meantime, "we see but a poor reflection as in a mirror; then we shall see Him face to face." The context of 1 Cor 13 is love....

Hopefully I am not deluded as to God's love. Yes I too see His love as in a mirror dimly. I say this because of those verses that seem to give God a dark side....They are confusing at best.

What keeps me focused is the cross. It is there that God's love is revealed. It is there were we see one of the God-head who became us....It is there that, though forsaken of God and the hope of his resurrection, Jesus was willing not to say goodbye for 3 days, but rather goodbye to life forever so that His enemies could take His place.

• The mystery of the cross explains all other mysteries. In the light that streams from Calvary, the attributes of God, [:"Red"]which had filled us with fear[:"black"] [past tense] and awe, appear beautiful and attractive....While we behold the majesty of His throne, high and lifted up, we see His character in His gracious manifestations, and comprehend, as never before, the significance of that endearing title, "Our Father." [AC 186]

  The sacrifice of Christ as an atonement for sin is the great truth around which all other truths cluster. [:"red"]In order to be rightly understood[:"black"] and appreciated, every truth in the Word of God, from Genesis to Revelation, must be studied in the light which streams from the cross of Calvary.... [5BC 1137]

If you want to understand God's love go to the cross....Everything thing else can be cleared up once you understand God's love.

Personally I don't waste a lot of time with some of that Old Testament God of damnation....We weren't there and we only have a very limited view as revealed in the OT.

The bottom line is God's love revealed from the cross....You can't understand this if,

1] You believe that mankind has an immortal soul and,

2] That Jesus didn't assume our fallen life under the curse.

That is why Paul decided "to know nothing among you except Jesus Christ, and Him crucified." It is there that the God of supposed wrath is fully revealed.....

I'll leave your question to someone else...but whatever the answer it can't contradict God's love found in Christ Jesus and revealed through the cross....

[LifeHiscost]

Quote:

---

cardw said:

You are giving yourself the freedom to lie, hide your true intentions, and to misrepresent those you disagree with, as long as you quote scripture.

---

[:"red"] "I am not conscious of anything against myself, and I feel blameless; but I am not vindicated and acquitted before God on that account. It is the Lord [Himself] Who examines and judges me." [/]

[:"red"] "But he is a Jew who is one inwardly; and circumcision is that which is of the heart, by the Spirit, not by the letter; and his praise is not from men, but from God. " [/] Romans 2:29 NASB