27th Morning
Numbers 17-18
We continue with the concept of leadership as it is presented in these chapters and in this book of Numbers. In the story that began in Numbers 16, we find a general condition of upset and unrest among the people of Israel. They are demoralized by the faithless and cowardly report from 10 of the 12 scouts, and Israel’s leadership’s subsequent decision to avoid the conquest of Canaan, their Promised Land. At least that is where we left off in the chapters that we handled earlier.
The people were emotionally unstable as it was always with them and wanted change; new leadership seemed to them like a good place to start. One professor of mine once said:
“It is one thing for men to occasionally seek to remove one set of leaders and replace them with another; it is quite another for men to try to usurp God’s will as was the case with this rebellion.”
Before we go into the lessons, let us first look at what exactly is happening that actually frames the content of Numbers chapter 17.
Korah, a Levite, is dissatisfied that the line of Aaron (a family line who is also from the tribe of Levi, but from a different clan than his own) is the only family line that can be appointed as highly prestigious Priests. Even though the entire tribe of Levi is separated from Israel for special holiness and service to YHWH, the Priests have been given an even greater degree of sanctification than the other Levites, with the High Priest (currently Aaron) being given the highest degree of holiness possible for any Hebrew (save for Moses).
Korah is jealous and disputes this. He challenges Aaron’s position and wants it for himself. He also wants the priesthood to be more evenly distributed among the other Levite clans. This was typical tribal society behavior where tribes, and clans within tribes, were in a never-ending cycle of vying among themselves for dominance, status and power. In a sense there is a power struggle. It is understandable to have power struggle in political institutions, but it is a shame to have such power struggles in Theocratic institutions like this. I wonder whether Korah and the team understood how power was allocated and from whom it came!
The majority of the tribe of Levi (those who were NOT of Aaron’s clan) were not the only ones who had a serious axe to grind. We found that two clan leaders of the tribe of Reuben were challenging Moses for his job as the ultimate leader and authority over all Israel. The founder of the tribe of Reuben (Reuben) had been dead for at least 300 years, so what Numbers 16 is referring to are his descendants.
Reuben, the firstborn son of Jacob, expected that he (and therefore his future tribe) would become the dominant tribe among the 12 tribes of Israel, as he also fully expected to have been awarded the leadership role over Israel by means of his birthright as the first son born to Jacob, thus receiving the customary blessings of the Firstborn from his father. But Jacob rejected Reuben and refused to give him the Firstborn blessing, and therefore, the authority of the firstborn. This humiliating act would impact Reuben’s family (and eventual tribe) in a negative way from that moment forward.
Instead Jacob split the provisions of the firstborn blessing that should have gone to Reuben, giving the right of leadership over the nation of Israel to Judah, and the right to inherit the largest portion of wealth to Joseph. Reuben’s descendants (even after all this time) had neither accepted this humiliation nor gotten over the loss of leadership status they felt should always have been theirs.
As a result, at this moment, we find two tribal leaders of Reuben (Datan and Aviram) challenging Moses’ position as leader of Israel; they wanted the job. Along with Korah, Datan, and Aviram were 250 leaders of other Israelite tribes who also wished to remove Moses and Aaron from their God-established positions, and to take over the leadership of the nation of Israel for themselves.
Moses’ solution was to let God handle it by means of a public demonstration in what we know as: THE BUDDING OF AARON’S ROD. We see a contest of supremacy among leaders who really wanted to know who the greatest among them was in chapter 17. What we have there is not leaders seeking clarity about job description. All leaders know what to do, when and who does what. The issue at hand is one of greatness and who is the leader of leaders.
Such attitudes continue to exhibit throughout the Bible and in the New Testament we see mother of some two brothers (disciples) coming to plead with Jesus about the positions of her sons after Jesus becomes king. This is what we see here in the book of numbers. So it seems these leaders have concluded like I have always said: equilibrium and leadership cannot co-exist. We cannot be practically equal and operate or have leadership amidst us. They put the Lord to task and asked him to tell them who the leader of leaders is.
Now before I talk about how God resolved the matter, I have to say a few things about leadership again. I have been a leader most of my life, if not to myself, I have been one to others. But it has been revealed to me that leadership is a continuous evolution. Leadership keeps on becoming a necessity at all levels. When people gather, they seek for leadership and the next thing they do is to put one in place. And when they do, their choices of a leader depends on two things:
- They look for an individual who has conducted himself in thought. When a community has a problem they choose the community member who understands, dissects and discusses the issue either thoroughly or better than everyone else.
- Appearance: In choosing leadership, ones looks are very important. He or she must have some physical features different from all others. This is How King Saul became the first king of Israel.
But even when these leaders are put in place and they assemble as leaders, instinct tells them that they still need leadership of leaders. This is what we see in this chapter. All this tells us that, leadership is the ultimate instrument geared to solving man’s problems. We need leadership both at a personal level and at corporate level. You see in leadership, there are two kinds of power. A leader can be powerful due to his position or a leader can be powerful because of his personality (who he is regardless of the conventional title).
Jim Shaffer in his book The Leadership Solution page 52 he wrote:
People with Position Power are leaders for instance in companies who are CEOs, Managers, or Supervisors. Or they can be simply top management, (a term that is perceived differently by different people). To some, top management means three levels up from where they are in the hierarchy. To others, it means the head of a plant, a division or a branch office. And to others it is the ultimate leader, the CEO or the owner.
Leaders can be people with Personal Power. They are people others gravitate to regardless of their position or job title. They are people who others go to and ask, “What do you think?” Or “What is really going on?” When these leaders speak, others nod in agreement. These are the natural leaders. Every organization has natural leaders. Sometimes natural leaders can persuade people to follow the company lines, sometimes they can persuade people to join the union.
What we see in this chapter, are two factors: first it is a leadership that needs leadership. We must understand that the Bible is teaching all leaders today that every leadership needs leadership too. We cannot afford to have a leadership that has no reference. We all have heard and seen all leaders being ushered into new offices and raising up religious books and swearing in the name of various deities. This symbolism communicates what is or what ought to be. A leader must:
- First lead himself before he attempts leadership of others.
- He must lead others from where they are to where they want to go.
- He must also, as leads himself and others follow or be led by God the ultimate and absolute leader.
Before we demonize the complaint of these leaders we need to draw the good in it and exhibit to the whole world to see. The problem of most nations in the world today are leaders who are not subjected to any other sober supernatural leadership. Well, having God as the leader of our leadership might too much to ask, but I also think that even our leaders must have other human leaders that help them out. I think that is the first thing we can learn from the situation in Numbers 17.
What is happening in chapter 17 of the book of Numbers, is not that the complaining leaders have a personal thing with Aaron or it is personal vendetta. Those challenging his leadership, like I said earlier, are not fighting an individual. They have no problem with Aaron and neither are they challenging his leadership approach but their problem is the position of Aaron. So their problem is position power. As leaders we must understand that people fight us not because of who we are but because of where we are.
These individuals came from the same tribe with Aaron and they were brothers, so they had no personal problem with him but rather contested his position. Leaders must not misinterpret all opposition or criticism from people to be some sort of hatred or jealousy to them as individuals but rather some opposition is directed to their positions and not their persons.
Aaron and Miriam, in chapter twelve, had issues with Moses, but the leaders in chapter 17 have issues with the authority of Aaron but not Aaron himself. I know sometimes the distinguishing line might be too thin to be detected but the truth of the matter remains. We all know retired leaders do not suffer community attitude as incumbent leaders do. There is a conflict in the camp and next we see God resolving the conflict. This is how he does it:
Every leader has a rod as a symbol of his authority, so let all of them bring their symbols of authority (Position Power), and one which will be budded will be the rod whose position power is over all other powers. Now let us look at what the rod meant briefly. According to S. R. Driver, (Introduction to the Literature of the Old Testament {1910}, 20-30),
The rod referred to is very likely the same shepherd’s rod which Moses was carrying at the time of his call (Exodus 4:2), and when turned into a serpent, became a sign to Moses and Aaron, to Israel and to Pharaoh, of the divine mission and authority of Moses (v. 17). It is twice called “the rod of God” (4:20; 17:9), but usually either Moses’ rod (4:17) or Aaron’s rod (7:14-20). Sometimes the command was to stretch forth the hand with the rod (8:5).
Sometimes it was simply to stretch forth the hand (9:22), with the implication that the rod would be in the hand (v. 23). In the battle with Amalek the rod was in Moses’ hand; and Aaron and Hur supported his arms when he was weary. Moses was commanded to take the rod “from before the Lord” and he and Aaron were told to “speak to the rock” (Numbers 20:8). Instead of following these instructions implicitly, Aaron spoke arrogantly to the people, and Moses lifted up his hand with his rod and smote the rock twice (v. 11), acts of presumption for which he and Aaron were severely punished.
All of these expressions are natural in view of the significance of the rod. It was called the “rod of God,” for it was the symbol of His authority; it was Moses’ rod, because it belonged to him and was carried by him; it was also Aaron’s rod, because Aaron at times spoke and acted for Moses. This expression is used specifically of the rod that budded to vindicate the divine authority of Aaron as high priest (Numbers 17:8).
When Korah and his confederates challenged the supreme authority of Moses and Aaron (chapters. 16, 17), which was the most important event during the thirty-seven years of wandering described in chapters. 15-19, Moses demanded that the rods of each of the princes of the tribes be given him; and their rods with Aaron’s he laid up “before the Lord in the tabernacle of the witness” (17:7). On the morrow Aaron’s rod was found to have budded; and it was then placed before the Ark in the Holy of Holies to be preserved as a witness against all who might rebel against his authority (Hebrews 9:4).
God used their very position to solve the conflict between them as leaders. God budded the rod of Aaron, and not all the others, it was not because Aaron was better than all other leaders but because he was different from all others. Given time and circumstances all the other rods could have budded, but it was that of Aaron that did.
In our world, we elect leaders of leaders based on the performance sheet, but God does not follow such criteria. God sets us as leaders, not because we are better than anyone, but because we are different from others. There were Korah and other confederates but he was Aaron. It is that simple. They judged him and challenged his position power, but God judged him and appointed him based on his personal power.
We all know Aaron was a poor leader, he even at some point was driven by the people-pressure and compromised the entire worship system and yet he was the steward of worship. But God still wanted him as the man at the top, not basically because of what he could or could not do but because of who he was. God knows each and every one of us, he knows our deep-hidden desires, those desires that we have but we apparently do not know we do. He knows our strengths and weaknesses that we ourselves do not know. The mission belonged to God and him alone as the potter knew which clay to use. It did not matter whether other spectators deemed this clay as incompatible, it was what the Lord had chosen.
This is what I begun with, it is dangerous to assume power in an office of appointment the same as we do in those electorate offices. What the Kohathites did not understand that God had chosen Aaron and his family to have supremacy in the Levitical order. It was not a majority vote, as they had gathered everyone against the positional power of Aaron and his family; but a divine appointment. God had not voted or elected Aaron into that position but he had appointed him.
The appointment of God, is not a result of any credentials or qualifies like education, affluence and connections, it is not a result of public opinion. But it all starts with God and ends with him the owner of the project and he who appoints people into these offices. Now this the challenge we face in modern day Ecclesiastical elections when we hold a delegates conference, cast votes (in various versions) and then go out to declare to people that the leader we are instituting has been appointed by God (Acts 3:21-26).
If Kohathites fight such leaders, they have a justification if they fight them with numbers. Leaders are thrown out of office by the very means they came by. Aaron was never elected by his clan, he could not be dethroned by those forces which never brought him to power. These are things we need to understand always. Chapter 18 has two sections: the first verses 1-5 is about the Job descriptions of Aaron and the Kohathites that questioned his authority.
In the last lesson, Aaron’s rod bloomed, which gave unquestioned authority of the priesthood to him and his sons. We found in the book of Leviticus, that God spoke to the people through the Urim and Thummim of the high priest. Aaron’s father’s house was the Kohathites. The mention of them has to do with the carrying of the furniture, curtains, and boards of the tabernacle. The “bearing of the iniquity” speaks of the responsibility to teach against iniquity. This is separating out Aaron and his sons to work in the holy place, and in the holy of holies, while the other Kohathites do not minister in the tabernacle.
They just move the actual structure of the tabernacle, when they move from place to place. Only Aaron and his sons are anointed of the oil of separation to come into the holy place. The vessels can be handled only by them. Even the carrying of the vessels from place to place, must be done by Aaron and his sons. Anything in the holy place, or holy of holies, cannot be touched by anyone other than Aaron or his sons. The penalty is death to those who touch them. The penalty would be death for Aaron to allow them to touch them as well.
The second part of chapter 18 is from verses 6-30 which is basically about the provisions of the Levitical priesthood. We remember from previous lessons that God separated out the tribe of Levi to substitute for the firstborn of each family. They belong totally to God. They are not even camped with the other tribes. They are camped close to the tabernacle. The tabernacle is their responsibility. The Levites have no land, or really no private life. They belong to God for His service. They belong to God 24/7, 366days.
This is the normal setting of a priest commonly known as pastor in our modern world. They belong to God and they are not supposed to be part-timers in the work of God. They must dedicate all their lives to the service of the Lord. They are to do no other business but that of the Lord. In the division of the land, the Levites were not given a portion of land for the Lord said: I am their inheritance and I the lord am their portion. When you read these verses in chapter 18, you will discover the plan of God’s provision to the materialistic needs of the priests.
The process was a simple one, the priests were to be faithful and pour their lives into serving and intermediating people with their God, and people were to ensure that the priests have more than they need. The reason for this was that, when God planned for the priests, he had in mind even those destitute and circumstantially oppressed orphans, homeless widows, and whoever was in utter need and could not help himself. This is why the Levites received land which had 13 cities of refugee. Refuge to the fugitives, the hungry, the beggars, the sinners and all sorts of people hopeless and helpless.
The problem with our modern day priesthood is twofold. The first side is that the organized institutions that patronize all the mainstream religions like Catholicism, Anglican SDA, Orthodox, some Baptist, and all other organized religions with conferences and dioceses, have taken the priests from the hands of God and owned them. It is these institutions through their financial collection instruments that collect all the priesthood offering and in return they pay the pastors salaries.
A pastor’s salary is not a biblical concept but rather a man-made device to manipulate and compromise both the minister and the gospel itself (he who pays the piper determines the tune). Pastors are directed, subjected to, and constrained by institutional policy and not by the word of God. This is what initially God avoided when he created a nation whose success and survival centered on worship. But today, we live in a world where people think they do not need a priest to survive economically but they need a priest to officiate the funeral service. Because people became unfaithful in returning the offerings to the priests, religion institutionalized this entire thing. They started blackmailing people through all sorts of threats and at some point raffles due to performance.
The second abuse of this divine design is by the priests themselves. These priests are they that have what I call the Gehazi Syndrome. It is a practice of financially transacting God for materialism in various fashions. These are men of God who transact God, his gospel and his providence (healing, prayers and counselling) for wealth. These are the modern celebrity preachers and pastors who are airing right now on your TV set and channeled on that radio station. These are not under the Levitical order that the Lord set as we have seen in this chapter of Numbers.
These pastors have rather become ravenous wolves that hurt the flock. In a sense then there are opportunists who take advantage both of the goodness of the lord and the problems of man. Our generation is dominated by these so-called men of God who have done more harm than good. Numbers chapter 18 intends to communicate the importance of the priestly office. This is a representative office of heaven. Whoever serves in it must have the carefulness that a surgeon has while in the theatre at operation.
27th Evening
Numbers 19-20
Chapter 19 is a about contagious sin and detergent water. The God of the Old Testament is one who has quite a number of responsibilities. However, we can classify all the tasks that the Lord performs in two categories. The Lord has to teach his people about salvation and at the same time also teach them, civility. Chapter 19 begins with a sacrifice that is ordained by God himself to slaughter a red heifer. This is for purposes of salvation and he is emphasizing the power of the blood of Jesus who was slaughtered in his youthful days and by whose blood shed we have this salvation.
However, God, again, ensures that we understand that the process of this sacrifice compromises our sanity. And once our sanity is affected our health is and while our health is compromised, our spiritual lives are vulnerable. This is why the Old Testament God is very keen with physical sanity. When you look at all the Ecclesiastical sanitary sentiments and regulations you will realize that it is a God struggling to train slaves in matters of civility. The uncleanness of an individual is emphasized for two purposes: First, for the fact that we are sinners and sin has affected all our operations in life and therefore God only can cleanse us from all this uncleanness brought about by sin and secondly, that this uncleanness brought about by sin also affects us in our daily living.
This is something that I have already covered. However, it is a recurrent theme in the theology of the Old Testament. In chapter 19, however, the issue is not so much on the contagiousness of uncleanness but rather on the power of the detergent known as water. Water is a powerful symbol in the Old Testament and in fact, it reflects two important realities. In the OT, water fundamentally means: 1. Life and 2. Purity. Yahweh in the life of the Jewish economy, apart from him being a militant God as they had labeled him, only had two things to offer to the economy of religion distinct from all other religious gods. And these two exclusive elements were: LIFE and PURITY.
Dr. Patterson talking about the importance of water writes thus:
“The imagery associated with water is likewise present in the Scriptures, particularly so in the Old Testament. Thus Lot chose for himself the “whole region of the Jordan” because he saw that “all of it was well-watered … like the garden of the LORD” (Gen. 13:10).5 The Scriptures teach that water in its various forms is under divine control (e.g., Job 38:16, 22-34; Ps. 29:3, 10). It is God who set the water in place in the original creation and supervises its placement and boundaries (Gen. 1:9-10; Ps. 104:6-12; Jer. 5:22).
God uses water in accordance with his own purposes. These include the floodwaters of judgment (Amos 5:8), such as the flood of Noah’s day (Gen. 6-9).6 God’s control over water is also in evidence in the parting of the Red Sea at the time of the exodus, an act that allowed the Hebrews safe passage through the surrounding walls of water, but after their passing through it, brought the judgment of death by water to the pursuing Egyptians (Exod. 14:21-31; 15:4-12; Ps. 78:13).”
“The beneficial aspect of the Hebrews safe passage through the Red Sea is a reminder that God’s control over water could also provide positive results for His people. For example, He brought water from a rock for the Israelites as they traveled through the Desert of Sin on the way to Mount Sinai (Exod. 17:1-7; cf. Isa.48:21) and did so again many years later (Num. 20:1-13). He also assured His people that He would bring them into a land of an abundant water supply so as to insure the fertility of the land and to meet the people’s needs (Deut. 8:7-10; 11:11-12). Therefore, He could justly describe His relation to Israel metaphorically as “the fountain of life-giving water” (Jer. 2:13).
The above references to water as a metaphor serves to introduce the main lesson of this study, which is to explore the figurative and symbolic uses of water in the Bible in its various forms. As in the cases where literal water is present, the figures under which water is presented may be viewed as to whether they are used in a negative or positive sense. Although both aspects of the use of water will be considered, special emphasis will be directed toward the manifold uses of water in its positive perspective. After noting the scriptural imagery associated with water, several conclusions will be drawn, followed by suggested applications relative to Christian living.”
When you read the rest of the Bible in relation to water, you will realize that water is used figuratively and all we can draw from its symbolism is that water means Life and water is a Purifier. And this water might not necessarily be literal as Jesus intimates in his conversation at the well with the Samaritan woman (John 4). Jesus is the water symbolized by the water in the well and he is the living water with the water in the well.
Since the times of the Old Testament understanding, God is He who is a “fountain of life giving water” (Jeremiah. 2:13; Isaiah 55:1). It was deemed so foolish of God’s people in Judah to turn away from God the source of “life giving water” and turn to idols, which are nothing more than “cracked cisterns, which cannot even hold water” (Jeremiah. 2:13). Nor does it do any good to relate to nations so as to “drink water from the Sihor” [i.e., a branch of the Nile River] or “drink water from the River” [i.e., the Euphrates] (Jeremiah. 2:18).
In a more positive sense, water is viewed as that which is both a source and sustainer of life and of refreshment. In a graphic simile the reception of good news from a distant land is likened to cold water to a weary person (Proverbs. 25:25). That which water provides to seeds so that the plant may grow is compared to the ministry of people who provide spiritual nourishment to those who have been exposed to the gospel (1Corinthian. 3:6).
Indeed, water can symbolize the salvation that brings new life: “Husbands, love your wives just as Christ loved the church and gave himself for her to sanctify her by cleansing her with the washing of the water by the word (Ephesians. 5:25-26)”. Water can symbolize the life that God blesses (Ps. 23:2) or even life that has been renewed: “At that time … joyfully you will draw water from the springs of deliverance” (Isaiah. 12:1-3). The believer is likened to a tree planted by flowing streams; it yields its fruit at the proper time, and its leaves never fall off” (Psalm. 1:3).
Water in the Bible is likened to many things and presented in many different forms like rivers, dew and snow, rain and showers, oceans and seas, Wells, pools and fountains, springs and streams etc. depending on your translation. What is clear is that water is not merely a necessity but part of our existence and that is why I have argued that the principal symbolism of water is Life.
The religion of Judaism utilized water for many purposes but what stood out of all was the aspect of water baptism. In Judaism, baptism was part of the religious life make-up. Baptism was a ritual of purity before God and at the same time, it was a repentance ritual. Archaeologists digging close to Jerusalem’s Temple Mount have discovered nearly 100 ritual baths, or bathing pools, dating to the first century B.C.E. and the first century C.E. A synagogue inscription from the second or third century C.E. speaks of such baths being provided for “visitors who need them.” Other pools have been found in the quarter of Jerusalem that was occupied by wealthy and priestly families; nearly every house had its own private ritual bath.
The Mosaic Law emphasized the need for God’s people to be clean, both spiritually and physically. The Israelites incurred various forms of uncleanness from which they had to purify themselves by bathing their bodies and washing their clothes.—Leviticus 11:28; 14:1-9; 15:1-31; Deuteronomy 23:10, 11. Jehovah God is absolutely pure and holy. So priests and Levites were required, on pain of death, to wash their hands and their feet before approaching his altar.—Exodus 30:17-21.
“Ritual purity was required of a Jew before entering the Temple Mount, before making a sacrifice, before receiving the benefit of a priestly offering and for other similar purposes.” Both the Essenes and the Pharisees practiced frequent ablutions. One source reports regarding Jesus’ time: Talmudic texts state that bathers were expected to immerse themselves completely. Jews could bathe themselves in this ritual every time they became or felt unclean. Staunch Pharisees, priestly homes and wealthy families had these baths inbuilt in their houses.
Water was a primary element in the rituality and worship of the religion of then. It is no wonder that when John the Baptist appealed to the nation through baptism, he almost baptized the entire nation since it was a baptism of national repentance and preparing for a militant exclusive Jewish messiah. It is important that we understand that according to Mathew 3, the baptism concept of John was not the same as that of Jesus Christ whom he ushered in. For John, baptism was a use of water to prepare the Jews for the coming of the messiah who was coming to deliver the people of Israel from the tyranny of the roman oppressors.
On the other hand however, the concept of Jesus on water baptism was one that centered on the fact that it was the death of the old sinful nature, its burial and birth by water of the individual. For Jesus, water was a symbol of ablution of the old sinful nature and initiation on the new born to a new life. The conversation between Jesus and Nicodemus in John Chapter 3 Jesus told Nicodemus that the birth by water was prerequisite to enter into the kingdom of God. In John chapter 4 Jesus talking to the Samaritan woman, he pointed out that, unlike the water in the well that solves physical thirst temporarily, he said he had living water that could quench both the physical and spiritual thirst of the Samaritan woman.
From this New Testament we draw the fact that water has three uses: we need water to cleanse (Ephesians 5:26, Acts 2:38,), to quench the thirst (John 4:15) and for birth (John 3:5). Jesus used water metaphorically to demonstrate to us that he deals with our sin just as literal water deals with physical dirt. We use water to cleanse our bodies in and out, so is the efficiency of the Lord Jesus in cleansing us of sin both external and internal. Sin is a smell from within and outside. The Christian ritual of Baptism exhibits the manner in which our Lord deals with sin. Paul in Romans 6 extended this metaphor by stating its stages: first we are buried in water (Romans 6:1-4, 7-11), then rebirthed/resurrect (Romans 6:4, 2Corinthian 5:17) and we are spiritually empowered (Rom 6:4). In all these, there is a connection between water and the spirit as it is stated by Jesus in John 3:5 and re-emphasized by Paul in Ephesians 4:5.
When one reads Numbers 19, it will not be too difficult to see that, water is an important aspect as it reflects the importance of life and purity in a Christian life. The difference between Judaism and Christianity is that in Judaism, this water was appreciated generally at its ritual sense and yet in Christianity, this water is applied in its reality value. Jesus is the living water that gives life eternal and this very Jesus is our righteousness and purity. This world that is thirsty needs this water, and we should like the Samaritan woman go out and tell people about this water. We are to show people the real source of water and not pose as if we are the source of the water like Moses and Aaron did in Numbers 20.
This chapter opens with the usual complaints by the usual complainants and God decides to respond. Unfortunately, instead of Moses speaking to the rock, he struck it and by that, he played the Roman role of whipping Jesus instead preaching Jesus. It was the waters of meribbah that saved the thirsty Israelites and at the same time that caused both Moses and Aaron to miss the land of Canaan. After People got the water, the people were happy enough; but it turns out the Lord doesn’t feel the same way about it. He informs Moses and Aaron that because they did not affirm God’s sanctity in front of the Israelite community, that neither of them will enter the Promised Land.
We have no record of a response or reaction from Moses or Aaron, but one can only imagine their shock and depression from this edict of God. According to one scholar: And, anyone studying this might want to ask himself: why? Why such a harsh decree from the Lord to the very two men who He has used, and to some degree used up, to achieve His purposes. What is it that Moses and Aaron did that would bring this sort of wrath from God upon them?
The obvious is that Moses disobeyed God; he hit the rock that he was only supposed to verbally order to produce water. But, this seems so small a thing in comparison to the consequences. In truth, there have been many theories produced to explain this devastating retribution upon Moses and Aaron. Among those theories are these: that in striking the rock he struck it twice instead of once. Also that his character flaws were displayed: a blazing temper caused Moses to care little for a very real need of the people (water), and thus saw the matter as mostly a bother to him personally. Another is that he doubted God, and thus God told him exactly that (“because you did not trust in Me”). And of course the most popular is that he struck the rock instead of speaking to it as ordered by God.
I think that the matter primarily comes down to an attitude Moses displayed in front of Israel in which he unintentionally validated a pagan belief held by most people of that era; and in doing so, failed to show God as the One who brings forth the water, not a man. We must remember that Israel was but a few months removed from Egypt. They behaved and thought more as Egyptians than Hebrews. Deep seated in their belief system was the acceptance of magic and of sorcerers; men who possessed special power that was loaned to them by the gods. Thus sorcerers invariably made quite a show of it using incantations accompanied by all sorts of gestures when they did their magic. And naturally these magicians were greatly feared and revered for the power they claimed to possess.
Moses and Aaron took credit for the water coming forth from the rock; in fact, in the way they behaved they implied it was by THEIR power that this amazing thing happened. Verse 10 says: “Listen here you rebels are WE (Moses and Aaron) supposed to bring you water from this rock?” Then Moses struck the rock and water gushed forth. Some of the great Hebrew sages say that the great sin resulted from Moses saying, notsi’ meaning, “shall WE draw forth” when what he should have said is yotsi’, meaning, “shall HE draw forth”. By saying notsi’ Moses was giving credit to he and Aaron as though they had the power of sorcerers to call forth water from a rock, instead of directing all honor and glory to YHWH who is the one with the power.
How is it different with the modern pastors today? Pastors who more famous and popular than the Jesus they represent? It is a painful thing to lead people to where you will never reach. We all need the water, none of us gives the water. We are given the water.
God bless you and please keep reading the Bible
Pr. I.T.WHITE
THE GOSPEL HAWKER (Appointed & Anointed)
iTiS Well of Worship Fellowship (John 4:24) 