Skip to main content

You want WHAT? Numbers 32

In Summary: The Israelites have wandered in the wilderness. They have conquered nations. They have defended their people, avenged their losses, and come toward the Jordan River. Soon, they will enter the Promised Land. It should be a time of celebration and unity.

It’s not. The Twelve Tribes of Israel start to come apart in Numbers 32. The Reubenites, Gadites, and the half-tribe of Manasseh take a look at the eastern side of the Jordan River, where the Israelites are right then and decide “We like this.” They are within sight of the Promised Land, but choose to settle with what they have.

This is certainly a test of Moses’ patience. He knows that his time on earth is short (Numbers 31:2 tells of his impending death), and he has dedicated his last forty years to bringing Israel into the Promised Land. Now, again, some of the people are rejecting God’s gift to them. This has to be frustrating to him. It shows in his response. Numbers 32:15 has Moses warning the leaders of Reuben and Gad that “you will destroy all these people!”

After some discussion, the issues are sorted out, though. The warriors for the two and a half tribes will go with the rest of Israel, help secure the Promised Land, and then come back. They will leave their people who are not warriors in the conquered territory of Gilead. Moses and the people agree. I find some concern in the absence of any “consulting of YHWH” by either Moses or anyone else. It reads like a straight-forward political compromise, and I’d like to think theocratic Israel was better than that.
In Focus: The overall concern here is that the Reubenites and Gadites are going to discourage the people by staying. This might cause the rest of the nation to suffer God’s judgment for not going forward, while these tribes are happily not going forward. There’s also an inherent unfairness: all Twelve Tribes have worked to conquer the Gilead region—should the Ten that go forward now work without the help of the Two that stay?

These are the roots of division among the people, and this is a danger for the people of Israel. It shows up again at the end of Joshua, and we’ll look at it again there as the people settle into the land.

In Practice: Division continues to be a problem among God’s people. What is the cause of it? Typically this: we decide to stop short of God’s command, being satisfied with where we are rather than where we are going. How does this connect? Let us not forget that the Exodus and trip to the Promised Land was not just to bless Israel.

It was a command of God that they go do it.

Stopping with almost obedience brings division. Settling for nearly there brings division. Even if it looks good, if you are not where you ought to be, you must keep going. We must all do that. Now, the compromise is instructive as well—there are those who need protection from certain issues. The youngest, for example, are not exempted from the commands of God. They are simply insulated while preparing to fulfill them. As such, a wise parent may insulate a child from certain challenges with a goal of releasing them into full responsibility in appropriate time. (That assumes this: an intent to release. Another discussion, another day.)

How much farther do we have to go? That is a question that I cannot answer for you right now. I cannot truly answer it for me, either—but I know this: for long years, Christianity has used Promised Land imagery, crossing over Jordan imagery, as the picture of death and passing into eternity. I am not dead yet—and neither are you.

It is not time to park it in a pew, behind our Ebenezers, and leave the work to others. Sharpen your swords, folks, and let’s go.

In Nerdiness:  Take a little excursion with me on this Nerd Time. You’ll need either an NRSV Bible or access to a digital view of the Dead Sea Scrolls. Take a look at 1 Samuel 10 (try here: http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=1%20Samuel%2010&version=NRSV) and look at the last bit about Nahash the Ammonite. It appears that old Nahash was causing quite the ruckus in Gilead, and that this is one of the major immediate causes of Israel asking for a king.

You know, the king they rejected God in favor of having? The king that was a whole lot of trouble, not much good, and had to be replaced fairly soon by a king labeled as “after God’s own heart?” Then there was the First Dynastic War of Israel between Saul’s house and David’s house—

All sorts of trouble. And going forward, you still have a lingering difficulty because of the distance of the separated tribes.

Now, take a second excursion, this time in concept, to Gilead. God had instructed and empowered the people of Israel to eliminate the pagan kingdoms in the region of Gilead. The Israelites had conquered a fairly decent eastern buffer from paganism. The Negev guarded the southern approaches to the nation of Israel. The two threat points were from the sea (The Philistines) and from the northern stretches (Assyrians, Hittites, depending on when.)

By occupying Gilead, the two-and-a-half tribes connected Israel with the pagan nations on the east side. Like the Moabites and their detestable god, Chemosh/Molech. The settling here also split the attention from the threat axis on the west side, and caused the nation to be sandwiched between theological and practical enemies.

All for grazing land, all for maintaining wealth. Folks, eat a cow and stay united.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Book Review: The Heart Mender by @andyandrews (Andy Andrews)

The Heart Mender: A Story of Second ChancesEver read a book that you just kind of wish is true?  That's my take on The Heart Mender by Andy Andrews.  It's a charming story of love and forgiveness, and it's woven into the historical setting of World War II America.  For the narrative alone, the book is worth the read, but the message it contains is well worth absorbing as well.However, let's drop back a minute.  This book was originally published under the title Island of Saints.  I read Island of Saints and enjoyed it greatly.  Now, Andrews has released it under a new title, with a few minor changes.  All of this is explained in the Author's Note at the beginning, but should be noted for purchaser's sake.  If you read Island of Saints, you're rereading when you read The Heart Mender.  Now, go ahead and reread it.  It will not hurt you one bit.Overall, the story is well-paced.  There are points where I'd like more detail, both in the history and the geog…

Abraham Lincoln Quoted by Jesus! Mark 3

Mark records a curious event in his third chapter (link). If you look at Mark 3:25, you'll see that Jesus quotes the sixteenth President of the United States, Abraham Lincoln. After all, one of the highlights of the Lincoln years is his famous speech regarding slavery in the United States where he used the phrase that "a house divided against itself cannot stand." This speech was given in 1858 when he accepted the nomination to run against Stephen A. Douglas for Senate, but is still remembered as the defining speech regarding slaveholding in the United States. I recall being taught in school how brilliant and groundbreaking the speech was, how Lincoln had used such wise words to convey his thought. Yet the idea was not original to Lincoln. Rather, it was embedded in Lincoln from his time reading the Bible. Now, I have read varying reports about Lincoln's personal religious beliefs: some place him as a nearly completely committed Christian while others have him somewh…

Independence Day 2017

I don’t know if Thomas Paine will be aggrieved that I paste his thoughts from Common Sense here, from the electronic edition. It’s a Public Domain work at this point, so hopefully none will be bothered that I am not paying for it...I think there is value in seeing the underlying reasons of Independence. I find a couple of things noteworthy in his introduction:First, he speaks of those who disagree and, while calling those out, holds the strength of his affirmative argument will be enough to straighten them out. We could do well to think more like that.Second, his final sentence should be a required view: the influence of reason and principle. Not self-interest masquerading as principle. Not party propaganda disguised as reason.That being said, not everything Paine said is right. If he and I lived at the same time, we’d argue religion over a great deal. However, the idea of “natural rights of man” follows from the idea of humanity as a special creation—that all are created equal and en…