Thread by @CoreyJMahler

This line of ‘argument’ is common amongst the illiterati, but it is becoming increasingly popular even among pastors (who should certainly know better). I have addressed this previously and elsewhere, but I will address it again here in order to make sure the matter is clear.

I will address three points:
1. Ancient Cush does not map neatly onto any modern country or even region.
2. There is no support in Scripture for Moses having taken a second wife.
3. The narrative in Numbers 12 has nothing to do with Moses’ wife or wives.

(I will use modern geographical names throughout to make this easier to follow.)

1. Ancient Cush does not map neatly onto any modern country or even region.

The ancient Kingdom of Cush (or Kush) is almost certainly named after the grandson of Noah by Ham — Cush (Gen 10:6). This kingdom was located somewhere along the Nile in, essentially, the region bounded by the first cataract of the Nile and the confluence of the Blue and White Niles (the location of Khartoum). (There is also linguistic evidence for some of this.)

Bear in mind that the regions of (what is today) Egypt are named according to their location on the Nile, not their locations geographically (so, Upper Egypt is south of Lower Egypt).

However, things are not so easy as identifying Cush as Nubia. The term “Cush” has been used by various writers to mean everything from portions of the Arabian Peninsula to something roughly equivalent to ‘Africa’. In the Biblical context, it probably roughly correlates to area surrounding the Red Sea, primarily Middle and Upper Egypt, but also possibly parts of northern Sudan, the Sinai Peninsula, and even the eastern shore of the Gulf of Aqaba. Which is to say that the term very likely included in its full or broad scope the land known as Midian.

This leads into the second point.

2. There is no support in Scripture for Moses having taken a second wife.

Zipporah, from the land of Midian (Exo 2, 18), was a descendant of Abraham by his wife Keturah (Gen 25). Scripture says very little about Keturah. This is to say that she was a cousin (of some degree) of the Israelites, including Moses.

The word used in Num 12 is “Αἰθιοπίς”, which means both Cushite and Ethiopian (another term that has a range of meanings in the ancient world). As already mentioned (see the first point), this does not tell us anything particularly specific about the ancestry of this wife of Moses.

As “Cush” could very well include Midian, it is not possible to conclude whether or not Zipporah or a second wife is in view in Num 12. It could be that Miriam and Aaron were simply describing Zipporah; it could be that they were insulting Zipporah; or it could be that Moses did, indeed, take a second wife. God clearly did not view this as something important enough for us to know with specificity.

3. The narrative in Numbers 12 has nothing to do with Moses’ wife or wives.

It is, in fact, irrelevant if Moses took a second wife or not, because the narrative in Num 12 has nothing to do with Zipporah or any other wife (supposed or actual) of Moses.

Read through Num 12 (it is quite short).

Miriam and Aaron do, indeed, single out the “Cushite woman” whom Moses had married, but this is very obviously pretext for their actual complaint, given in verse 2: “Has the Lord indeed spoken only through Moses? Has he not spoken through us also?”

Miriam and Aaron were attempting to usurp the place of Moses and, in the process, insulted the Lord God by insulting His prophet — this is their sin.

Scripture notes that ‘the Lord heard this’. The balance of chapter 12 is silent about the comment/accusation/insult of “Cushite woman” — because it is not the point. The Lord makes this very clear when He speaks to the three of them:

“Hear my words: If there is a prophet among you, I the Lord make myself known to him in a vision; I speak with him in a dream. Not so with my servant Moses. He is faithful in all my house. With him I speak mouth to mouth, clearly, and not in riddles, and he beholds the form of the Lord. Why then were you not afraid to speak against my servant Moses?”

Again, the point is very clear: By questioning Moses (with ill intent, no less), Miriam and Aaron have insulted the Lord, and it is for this that God calls them to account (and punishes Miriam). Their pretext (i.e., the marriage to a “Cushite woman”) is entirely irrelevant.

Thus, Num 12 is entirely irrelevant to the matter of the propriety or impropriety of interracial marriages (for Scripture does not give us specifics about this wife of Moses) — it can be used by neither side in that debate without impermissible eisegesis.

Further, even if specifics about this “Cushite woman” were given, the chapter would still be largely irrelevant in the discussion of interracial marriage, as the sin for which Miriam and Aaron are summoned, rebuked, and punished is questioning and attempting to usurp the anointed prophet and representative of the Lord — their pretext is not the matter in view.

Pastors and others would do well to pay closer and more careful attention to the actual words of Scripture, instead of reading their own modern preconceptions and priors (and agendas) into the Word of God.