10:6 These things happened as examples for us, so that we will not crave evil things as they did. 10:7 So do not be idolaters, as some of them were. As it is written, “The people sat down to eat and drink and rose up to play.” 10:8 And let us not be immoral, as some of them were, and twenty-three thousand died in a single day.

The reference is to Num 25:9 which, however, puts the number who died in the plague as twenty-four thousand.  (Ex 32:28 gives a figure of three thousand, but this refers only to those the Levites killed by the sword).

How do we explain the apparent discrepancy?

The explanation, posited by JFB and others, that the verse in Numbers gives the overall figure, whereas the present gives the number of those who died in one day, is unlikely.

The contributor to the Apologetics Study Bible thinks that Paul is quoting from a version of the Greek Bible not known to us.  But this is mere surmise: there is no evidence for manuscript error or variation in this case.

For Robert H Mounce, the ‘problem’ is trivial, bearing in mind

‘The purpose of [the] authors and the acceptable standards of precision of that day…For the purpose that Paul had in mind it simply made no difference.  His concern was to warn against immorality, not to give a flawless performance in statistics.’

(Quoted by Lindsell in The Battle for the Bible).

Calvin also regards the difference as trivial:

‘Though [the two passages] differ as to number, it is easy to reconcile them, as it is no unusual thing, when it is not intended to number exactly and minutely each head, to put down a number that comes near it [..] Moses has set down the number above the mark, and Paul, the number below it, and in this way there is in reality no difference.’

For William Barclay, the explanation is that Paul is quoting from memory.  Barclay adds that Paul:

rarely quotes scripture with verbatim accuracy; no one did in those days. There was no such thing as a concordance to help find a passage easily; scripture was not written in books, which had not yet been invented, but on unwieldy rolls.

Johnson agrees that Paul may have misremembered the account, adding that the difference, slight as it is, make no difference to his main point.  Hays is of the same opinion.

Mark Taylor (NAC) judges the explanation just mentioned to be ‘far too simplistic’.  Taylor thinks that, as in 10:1-5, Paul might be drawing on an exegetical tradition which offered additional details of the story.

Barnes cites Grotius, according to whom:

‘perhaps twenty-three thousand fell directly by the plague, and one thousand were slain by Phinehas and his companions.’

Calvin, according to Rogers and McKim, explains the difference in terms of accommodation:

‘For Calvin, technical errors in the Bible that were the result of human slips of memory, limited knowledge or the use of texts for different purposes than the original were all part of the normal human means of communication. They did not call into question the divine character of Scripture’s message.’ (The Authority and Interpretation of the Bible, p110f).

But, actually, Calvin explains the ‘discrepancy’ in terms, not of accommodation, but of the rounding of numbers:

‘[I]t is easy to reconcile their statements. For it is not unheard of, when there is no intention of making an exact count of individuals to give an approximate number… Moses gives the upper limit, Paul the lower, and there is really no discrepancy.’

Matthew Poole also inclines to the view that both texts are employing round numbers.

Similarly, Charles Hodge explains the ‘discrepancy’ in terms of the rounding up or down of numbers; this reflecting the human side of Scripture (the divine side ensuring that no error was involved).

Leon Morris regards both figures as:

‘obviously round numbers, and in addition Paul may be making some allowance for those slain by the judges (Num. 25:5).’

Schreiner mentions a number of explanations, all possible but none decisive.  He notes that the:

’rounding off numbers and using approximations was quite common in the ancient world; hence the discrepancy between 23,000 and 24,000 may have seemed like a non-issue to the original readers.’

Kistemaker thinks that we lack the information required to give a definitive answer.  Indeed, Paul may have had access to information that we lack.

Ciampa and Rosner survey various possible explanations.  They regard as worthy of consideration the suggestion of Bart Koet that Paul has intentionally fused together elements on Num 25:9 and Ex 32:28.

Gundry points out that Paul is certainly not quilty of exaggeration, since he gives the lower of the two numbers.  Rather, Paul is:

’rounding off 24,000 to 20,000 and then adding 3,000 for an allusion to those who according to Exodus 32:28 were killed for worshiping the golden calf.’

Thiselton says that the patristic writers seemed untroubled by the apparent discrepancy.  He found no discussion of it in, for example, the writings of Origen, Chrysostom, or Augustine.

I am not minded to offer a definite opinion on this apparent discrepancy, trivial as it is.