New answers tagged

2

Let's see the context: Numbers 34:13 Moses commanded the Israelites: “Assign this land by lot as an inheritance. The Lord has ordered that it be given to the nine-and-a-half tribes, 14because the families of the tribe of Reuben, the tribe of Gad and the half-tribe of Manasseh have received their inheritance. In Numbers 34:16-29, two tribes are missing: ...


0

While OPs answer is good, instead of viewing all the Amalakites as descendents from Amalek (grandson of Esau) which would make the language in Genesis 14:7 mean "all the country of the Amalekites", there's another view and this is the view Merrill F. Unger has taken Amalek (...) may have been progenitor of a tribe that was merged with the original ...


1

There are various answers given to this question in the traditional Jewish commentaries on these verses: There were two Korahs, one was Esau's son from Aholibamah (verse 14 and 18) and one was his grandson the son of Eliphaz who was Adah's firsborn (verses 15 and 16). See Chizkuni (citing Rashi on the Talmud) Korah was Eliphaz's son born from an incestual ...


3

First, the use of "father of" or "son of" can refer to any descendent. E.g. the claim that "Abraham is our father" in Matt 3.9. The pharisees did not say this because they were confused about who their own fathers were, or because they thought they were all biological brothers, but rather they were making a claim to be ...


Top 50 recent answers are included