One of the most acrimonious debates over Scripture continues to be the issue of counting heads. We see in the various historical accounts, especially in the Old Testament, figures reported for how many soldiers this tribe had, how many died in that battle, and so on. Further, we have troubles with the ages reported for certain individuals, and how many years passed between certain pivotal events. Worst of all, when the same event is reported in two different places, and the accounts differ on the details of counting people or years, we see clearly that this is not just a matter that someone doesn't have faith.
On the one hand, it's a clear principle of Scripture that folks who aren't serving Jesus can't possibly understand the faith. Without the presence of the Holy Spirit, certain things just can't be seen. As it is, there are plenty of spiritual principles that we understand but may have a really hard time putting into words. Lost folks can obtain a certain intellectual acquaintance, but only in the sense of noting they can see a trend or a structure, but don't accept it. Our responsibility to them is rather limited. Primarily, we have to make the Word plain by living it. Having established our credibility, we are then in a position to talk some. Still, even those most talented in apologetics (defending the faith by reason) will admit they aren't responsible for making people see the Light. That's the job of the Holy Spirit.
Meanwhile, our best Bible scholars find it necessary to work alongside folks who don't believe. We Christians are not in a position to close off our research to the world. We can't muster that level of political power, nor wealth, and frankly it's not our way of doing things. We assume the need to be open to a watching world. There are plenty of personal matters we keep to ourselves, but nothing about our faith can be secret. That's the whole point of "revelation" -- we are allowed to serve Him in life as agents of His revelation. So we do our archaeological digging and such often outnumbered by the Lost. They have inquiring minds, too. Civilized discourse means that we will attempt to answer their objections to some things we say.
There are plenty of examples in pagan cultures where some written record ascribes exceeding great glory to their rulers and the fine people he ruled. They might claim he was three times normal size, lived at least 2000 years, sired several thousand children, etc. Then we find his body, shorter than most modern humans, and test his DNA to find he died at age 60. Digging for his subjects finds most of them slightly smaller and dying on average at 40. Okay, so it's a matter of exaggeration. If we find enough graves containing the right DNA, we can discuss his progeny, too.
Another legendary record will speak to us of a city of ten million inhabitants, but digging down to solid rock, we find a rather smallish town. Even if everyone in the town stood shoulder-to-shoulder, there wouldn't be room for more than ten thousand. Bad translation? Maybe, but more likely what we call "pious fraud." They really meant well, wanted folks to think highly of them, or maybe just had to deal with a master who was a megalomaniac and thought he was a god.
So if the story of Moses tells us the census returned a body count of two million men, plus uncounted women, children and old folks, how is that any different? Ahem. This is different. Pagan records are clearly lying, and the stories they tell aren't supported by any evidence, or simply are too improbable. The Babylonian version of The Flood describes a square boat, which we know wouldn't work. It's been tried -- repeatedly. Noah's Ark was described in more realistic fashion. So the part about two of every species must also be true, since this story comes from the One True God.
To someone who believes in no god, that sounds like more pious fraud. Without the Holy Spirit to convince them, the Bible is just another ancient tale full of outlandish claims, most which have no archaeological support. Yet we believe. We want to insure our belief is reasonable, and maybe we just don't understand what the author meant, or maybe there were simple little scribal mistakes when making copies over the centuries.
We don't have room here to chase all the details of how the Bible came to us over the many centuries. In short, people in ancient times wrote on fragile materials in ancient languages. Someone decided some of these records were worth keeping, so they made new copies. But the language had changed some, so they wrote differently, and had to change a few words to make sense to readers of their day, especially in place names. Since it was the Word of God, we Christians assume He kept watch over things to insure nothing really important was lost. Yet it's all too obvious that the copies we have left today just don't agree 100% on some details. So we do our best to decide how to weed out the obvious scribal errors, but some things just can't be settled. So we have a story in 2 Samuel 24 where David takes a census of all the men in Israel eligible for military service. The same story appears in 1 Chronicles 21. When the count is given, we have from the first 800,000 in the North, and 500,000 in the South. In the latter account it's 1.1 million and 470,000. Which is wrong? Both, maybe? This is the Word of God! It's not supposed to be like this.
Let's consider for a moment what we know of that time and place from other records, or at least can guess. It seems that other nations of similar culture to the Hebrews also conducted a census from time to time. They also counted only fighting men. They did it by noting that some men were average Joes who worked for a living, but might have their own weapons for defense against robbers and wild animals. During the slow season when not much work was done, they might get together and practice a little. They would naturally be aided in their training by men of wealth and power, who had all the time in the world to do nothing but train and collect weapons. Being richer, they had a better diet, and were probably physically larger than the average Joe. These men were professional warriors, as almost every ancient nobleman was. They had skill and experience and attitude to match. They would lead in battle. Based on their experience and skill, they would lead varying sizes of groups, usually made of the average Joes who had been conscripted.
As near as we can tell, these men were counted separately from the conscripts. The census would probably come back with a count of warriors and a count of conscripts. Our problem is that in Hebrew, the common word for a "professional warrior" was the same as the word for 1000 men. That's probably because the average warrior could lead that many, and might be as useful in battle as that many, for all we know. By David's time, they might have begun giving men a rank name based on their leadership ability, instead of our modern captains, colonels, and such.
So in a particular village, we have 32 professional soldiers and 420 conscripts. Of that cadre of 32, four are competent to lead large formations of 1000, and the rest can handle up to 100. The count might look like this: 4 "thousands," 28 "hundreds" and 420. Somewhere down through the years, a scribe looks at this, and tries to make sense of it. In his day, the nomenclature had changed. He decides this is just a body count, and doesn't know why it's like this, but decides to clean it up. It looks to him like 4,000 + 3200 + 420. That adds up to 7,620. So an actual 452 bodies of mixed skill becomes a much larger number.
Did it happen that way? Nobody knows for sure, but things we do know point that way. Given what we also know of all the other details of life, we might wonder about an army of over one million being available to David. Even with modern technology, it's hard to cram bodies into a city with small land-space. Best we can tell, most cities of David's time in Palestine weren't too big. There also weren't too awful many of them. They seem never to have had more than two floors in their buildings, and while they might live in tighter quarters than we could tolerate today, it still doesn't add up. There might have been that many humans total, but not that many soldiers.
Will it change our standing with God either way? I can't imagine how it will affect my salvation. Jesus' death, burial and resurrection didn't depend on whether David had one million or just 100,000. We know he had enough to keep every nation on his border scared for the most part. So when we hear that Moses left Egypt with 2 million men, and we compare that with what we know about Egypt -- Egypt never had an army larger than 20,000 -- why didn't that many men just turn and overwhelm Pharaoh's troops? Maybe it's another case of errors in transmission. Surely, God could have empowered Moses to lead that many, and God could rain enough manna to feed that many. Even if we account for God's miracle protection on their population growth during their 480 years in Egypt, it doesn't square with even the most exceptional birth and survival rate. Given the confusion of the Hebrew words for "soldier" and "thousand," I suppose a good guess might be 250,000 leaving Egypt. That might give us 100,000 men of fighting age, and maybe as many as one in ten a professional. That means a mere 10,000 professional soldiers (or less) and a large herd of untrained ex-slaves to face up to 20,000 trained Egyptian warriors with chariots and without conscripts.
Of course, there is a class of Christian that will charge me with blasphemy on this account, but I stopped worrying about them long ago. As far as I can tell, they worship the Bible, not the God who gave it. My salvation depends in part on the fact that Israel took some laps around Mount Sinai, not on how many there were doing it. There were not enough to fight Egypt's army, but after living in the desert forty years, they were numerous and tough enough to knock out poorly organized tribal nations in Canaan and others on the way. We still can't decide if it was the Reed Sea or Red Sea, we don't know for sure where Mount Sinai was, nor half the other places named in the Exodus.
So when a certain king is listed as being crowned at eight years of age in one place, and eighteen in another, we don't need to fret. Of all the details in Hebrew writing, numbers are probably the weak spot in transmission. Only rarely is the count of something too obviously correct, so we need not enslave our minds to such things. In a culture that didn't bother to write the vowel sounds of their language, we have enough to worry about getting more critical details clear. If we believe that Our Lord protected the keeping of His Word, we have to believe that discrepancies only appear in things that don't really matter.
[ Return to Lesson Index ]
[ Return to Exodus Lesson ]
[ Return to Wilderness Rebellion Lesson ]
[ Return to Davidic Census Lesson ]
Ed Hurst
02 October 2004
COPYRIGHT NOTICE: People of honor need no copyright laws; they are only too happy to give credit where credit is due. Others will ignore copyright laws whenever they please. If you are of the latter, please note what Moses said about dishonorable behavior -- "be sure your sin will find you out" (Numbers 32:23)