Self-confidence and neglected prayer?

The wrath of God because of sin? 1 Sam 15:23

2. The Threat of God’s Wrath: Ichabod

Ichabod (means inglorious in Hebrew) appear in the Books of Samuel as the brother of Ahitub and the son of Phinehas. He was born on the day [...]]]> 1. The Reason for Spiritual Defeat

Self-confidence and neglected prayer?

The wrath of God because of sin? 1 Sam 15:23

2. The Threat of God’s Wrath: Ichabod

Ichabod (means inglorious in Hebrew) appear in the Books of Samuel as the brother of Ahitub and the son of Phinehas. He was born on the day that the Ark was taken into Philistine captivity. His mother went into labour due to the shock of hearing that her husband and father-in-law died and the Ark had been captured. She is said to have died shortly after having given birth to him, and having named him (1 Sam 4:21). His name is said to be a reference to the fact that the glory is departed from Israel, either in reference to the death of his father, or of Eli, or a reference to the loss of the Ark.

The process to Achan’s sin: He saw, he coveted, and he took. Gen. 3:6, 2 Sam. 11:2-4

3. The Impact of Sin

1. On his community (in their defeat). 1 Cor 10; Eph 4:30; 1 Thess 5:19

2. On his family (in their death). Acts 5; Rev 14:18-20; Is 63:1-6

The death of the whole family is another troubling aspect of the book of Joshua (see my discussion on herem).  Our 21st century shock comes from our sense of individual responsibility.  However, in many cultures and certainly in the Ancient New East household did take corporate responsibility for the actions of its individual members.  God held the whole of Israel for the actions of individuals.  We might see an echo in the sense of familial shame that some cultures apply when one person is found guilty.

In this case it is only those who where living in his household (v24) and not his entire family. The “devoted thing” was hid in the middle of the tent, dug into the ground. Therefore, everyone in the tent must have been aware of it and at the very least acquiesced in its stealth, and therefore shared in Achan’s sin. Therefore, God did not punish these people merely for the sin of the father. He destroyed the whole family because  “Don’t you know that a little yeast works through the whole batch of dough?” 1 Cor 5:6. The “whole batch” being Israel, and the “little yeast” being the household of Achan.  We see something of the same principle at work in Hebrews 10:26-31:

If we deliberately keep on sinning after we have received the knowledge of the truth, no sacrifice for sins is left, but only a fearful expectation of judgment and of raging fire that will consume the enemies of God. Anyone who rejected the law of Moses died without mercy on the testimony of two or three witnesses. How much more severely do you think a man deserves to be punished who has trampled the Son of God under foot, who has treated as an unholy thing the blood of the covenant that sanctified him, and who has insulted the Spirit of grace? For we know him who said, “It is mine to avenge; I will repay,” and again, “The Lord will judge his people.” It is a dreadful thing to fall into the hands of the living God.

It also works in reverse for Rahab:

The city and all that is in it are to be devoted to the LORD. Only Rahab the prostitute and all who are with her in her house shall be spared, because she hid the spies we sent. … Joshua said to the two men who had spied out the land, “Go into the prostitute’s house and bring her out and all who belong to her, in accordance with your oath to her.” So the young men who had done the spying went in and brought out Rahab, her father and mother and brothers and all who belonged to her. They brought out her entire family and put them in a place outside the camp of Israel. Joshua 6:17-23

So then, it seems that God did not destroy any innocent member of the household of Achan, but He did spare Rahab’s whole family for her righteousness.

4. The Appeal in Prayer

Can we be defeated? 1 Cor. 10:13

Our failure dishonours the Lord

Our plea is that the Lord will be glorified. Rom 8:28-29

5. The Mercy of God (v 14-21; 2 Cor 7:8-11; 1 John 1:5-9)

Experiencing the mercy of God comes from repentance.  In 2 Corinthians we are reminded that that sorrow lasts only for a little while (v 8). The kind of sorrow that God intends results in a change of heart: Your sorrow led you to repentance (v 9). The Corinthians did not merely regret what they had done but repented of it. Metanoia (repentance) denotes not just a change of mind about something but a reorientation of the whole person. Judas felt remorse for what he had done in betraying Jesus to the authorities but his remorse did not result in repentance. Feeling sorry is remorse. Repentance goes further. Repentance the wrong committed but also seeks to rectify it.

Cell Outline

Pick some questions from both sections:

Section 1
As we grow older the sins obviously become more serious. Why is it sometimes hard for us to admit them?

Do you agree or disagree with the statement that ‘the churches God uses are the ones filled with messed up people? Why? Luke 19:10

Why would God want to use ‘messed up people’? What do you think about this statement: “if you’ve messed up ‘bigger’ you may be a ‘bigger’ candidate to be used by God”? Exodus 4:10

Someone has said: “God doesn’t choose the prepared but he prepares the chosen”. Why is it possible that God is able to use someone who really feels they need God’s help compared to someone who ‘has it all together’? 1 Samuel 16:7

What areas in your life have you noticed that you are more likely to depend on God?

What can you specifically do this week that shows you really are depending on God with any struggles or sins you feel are in your life? What inadequacies do you deal with that you feel like you can pray about that God can change?

Section 2

How do you explain the spies making such a big error in estimating the strength of Ai? (Compare 7:3 and 8:25)

What were the different steps in Achan’s sin? (7:21)? How does this pattern show the usual workings of sin? (James 1:15)? Can you think of any other Bible stories of a sinful action that followed this pattern? How do you see this pattern in your life?

What do you learn about God from the word “unless” in 7:12?

What had to be accomplished for restoration of fellowship with God and power against their enemy? (Compare the end of the chapter with the beginning.)

What important lessons do you learn in this chapter about (i) Sin (ii) Judgment for sin (iii) Forgiveness

How do you view these things in your life as compared to how God sees them? What steps can you make in your life to view these things the way God does?

Witness

Is there some area of your life that you have really struggled and overcome and you know that now God wants you to help others with the same struggles?

What are the possibilities of making restitution for something you have done wrong in the past?

They devoted the city to the Lord and destroyed (herem) with the sword every living thing in it—men and women, young and old, [...]]]> Anyone who has taken the trouble to look dispassionately at the Old Testament quickly comes across some very difficult passages.  Amongst the hardest is this one following Joshua’s victory at Jericho:

They devoted the city to the Lord and destroyed (herem) with the sword every living thing in it—men and women, young and old, cattle, sheep and donkeys (6.17).

With the exception of Rahab and her household everything is put to death.  This is herem; the utter destruction of cities, nations, people and livestock.  Herem has a religious purpose.  Whatever is annihilated is assumed to have been consecrated to God for his exclusive ownership.  It now enjoys the highest degree of holiness (set apartness) and cannot be returned for normal use (Lev 27:28).  

Not every act of destruction in the OT is herem: Only God can decide what is herem. So here, at Jericho, there is to be no humane exceptions for the elderly, disabled, women, or children. Everyone dies. Whilst other nations also engaged in religiously inspired liquidation, this command is from the God whom Christians worship as being the ultimate expression of love. And it leaves us troubled.

God applied herem at Jer­icho and Ai differently. He decreed all of Jericho to be herem and off-limits to Israel as plunder, but exempted sil­ver, gold, bronze and iron objects from destruction (they went into his treasury; 6:19, 26). At Ai, however, God also exempted any objects or animals the Israelites wanted to keep for themselves. An act of God’s grace to benefit his people?

But behind the varied applications of herem is a vital truth: God owns everything. His ownership gives him the authority to decide whether and to what extent humans may enjoy the use of his property. 

The earth is the Lord’s, and everything in it,
the world, and all who live in it;
for he founded it upon the seas
and established it upon the waters. Psalm 24:1 -2

The "earth" refers to what we call "property” today and "everything in it" is … everything. This includes everything that humans have created using the raw materials since the latter all belong to God. "All who live in it" refers to all earth’s inhabitants, including humans and animals. There are no areas marked "Property of X" or "Belonging to Y"; everything is marked "Property of God," and there are no exceptions. God owns everything, and we humans own nothing.

So what is it that God finds so abhorrent about the Canaanites that warrants action that risks us doubting his very character?  The reason usually given is that he needed to protect Israel from the Canaanites disgusting but tempting religious beliefs, from apostasy.  But was Canaanite religion so attractive and Israel’s faith so fragile to warrant herem?  And is God so capricious?

In Joshua, the nations are dealt with so differently to elsewhere in the Old Testament.   Usually God is the merciful ruler of all peoples (Ps 96; Jonah), the defender of the weak of all nations (Ps 82), the one whom the nations seek (Isa. 2:1 -4). That view of God ought to mean that Canaanites should have been able to live in dignity. If then the warrior policies of Joshua are out of step with the God of the rest of the Bible, we should try and understand why that is the case rather than ignore the book. Not to have a good answer to what is happening in Joshua, will trip us up when we are next challenged by someone dismissing our God as a violent ethic cleansing tyrant.

So here is my understanding. Joshua’s war and land policies were time-specific and limited. They applied only to the conquest and settlement period and are not a precedent. But this does not answer the question of God’s morality. Let’s look again then at Joshua for other insights about God’s character. The book contrasts the acceptance of God’s plans by Rahab and the Gibeonites (2:9-11; 9-10) with the resistance to it by others (5:1; 9:1-2; 10:1-5; 11:1-5). This contrast suggests that the Canaanites perished for resisting God, and not for their religious decadence or economic oppression. Those who submit to God’s sovereignty are saved but resistance is met with force.

Indeed, L.G. Stone argues, that overall Joshua shows that obedience to the law is the test of anyone’s acceptance or resistance to God’s rule. Therefore this time-limited holy war (Stone’s term) is much more about "uncompromising obedience to God’s law" than about "territory or warfare".  The experience of Rahab and the Gibeonites in receiving God’s compassion, in fact – his salvation, shows that God permits exceptions (Deut 20) to those who acknowledge his greatness.

Therefore, rather than promote violence as the normal treatment of those who lived in the land before Israel arrived, Joshua teaches three things:

1. Those who honour God’s greatness and do not teach Israel idolatry may remain in the land (Rahab and the Gibeonites),
2. Rigorous obedience to the law is God’s expectation for all peoples in the land (there are repeated references to the law and to Moses), and
3. God shows righ­teous anger towards his opponents but his mercy and compassion towards those who turn to him.

Seen this way, the openness to some non-Israelites in Joshua parallels the inclusive themes of the rest of the OT, and antici­pates the New Testament’s emphasis on an international ethnically inclusive community (Acts 1:8,- Rev. 5:9, 14:6). 

Jericho
Though small in area (about ten acres), Jericho is among the world’s oldest towns (founded ca. 8000 BC).  In the mid-1930s, ruins of both a double city wall on top the mound and a residential area on its southeast slope were dated to 1400 BC. Other spectacular evidence suggested the town’s great prosperity during the early Middle Bronze Age (from 2000 BC).  This gave rise to some excitement as it seemed to confirm the historical accuracy of Joshua. 

However, later excavations indicated that by 1550 BC the mound itself showed only a few traces of prosperity. A violent battle then left the town barren and uninhabited for two centuries, and that erosion had washed away all but a few traces of occupation after that. It therefore seemed that except for a small, short-lived settlement around 1400 BC, Jericho was completely uninhabited from 1550-1100 BC. It was then rebuilt during Ahab’s reign (1 Kings 16:34).

In other words, notwithstanding what we read in Joshua 6, was there a fortified city of Jericho for Joshua and Israel to conquer?  The absence of a "fortified city," however, does not necessarily mean that Jericho was completely uninhabited in Joshua’s time. Most Late Bronze Age towns were small and unwalled, and the evidence is of such a settlement at Jericho at the correct time. The "wall" of Joshua 2 and 6 might be well be the outer walls of houses (like Rahab’s) that together formed a protective circle around the city.

The latest scholarly opinions show differences in approach.  Some say that that the archaeological history of Jericho remarkably parallels the biblical account. For example, that the eastern walls fell before they were burnt (Josh 6:20-24).  Others argue that the Jericho of Joshua 6 was washed away by erosion and that the ruins lie under modern day roads and farmland. Whatever was there has long, long since gone, and that “Joshua’s Jericho” will never be found!

http://www.bible-lands.info/Jericho.htm

In the desert, Israel had to learn humility.  They needed to be dependent on God and not themselves.  The only reason they were now able to enter Canaan was that they had indeed become completely dependent on their God.

During the forty years of waiting in the wilderness, none of the [...]]]> Relationship Restored (v2-6a)

In the desert, Israel had to learn humility.  They needed to be dependent on God and not themselves.  The only reason they were now able to enter Canaan was that they had indeed become completely dependent on their God.

During the forty years of waiting in the wilderness, none of the sons born had been circumcised. Now God commanded that this could now be done. The old generation did not obey the voice of the Lord, and take the promise of a land flowing with milk and honey by faith. Only now, a new generation was available to be raised up in place of the generation of unbelief. God’s work will always go on, but the people of unbelief cannot share in it.

Circumcision was a powerful act of consecration to God. In it, an Israelite said “I’m not like the other nations. I listen to God and do what He says I should do.” It was a symbol of dying to self and living for God. But this act of circumcision was also an act of madness from the military point of view. All the men of fighting age were made completely vulnerable and unable to fight for a period of several days. It creates another moment of total dependence upon God’s protection.

Certainty promised  (v6b).

God will perform what we think of as absurd or even impossible in order to keep his promises.  Barren women have children. Slaves are brought out of captivity. Jericho’s walls fall without force. Gideon’s armies win by subterfuge. A child slays a giant. Hosea marries a prostitute. A virgin conceives. A king leads by washing the feet of his disciples. Average people are empowered by the Holy Spirit. And ultimately death is trumped by resurrection.

Walter Brueggemann makes reference to the grand plan of salvation when he writes,

Everything is possible to God – except one thing. The thing not possible is the removal of the cup. What God will not (or cannot) do is to circumvent the reality of suffering, hurt, the cross. Thus, our text does not permit a casual triumphalism that simply believes everything is possible. Because of the character of God, everything is possible for those who stay through the dark night of barrenness with God.

New blessings (v7-12)

Israel suffered the bitter ridicule of both their enslavement in Egypt and then their forty years of wandering in the desert.  How could they be the people of special blessing of God?

Now they rejoiced in a land of milk and honey and no longer needed the limited blessing of the manna.  Why live with the blessings of past times, when God has so much more to provide now?

This obedient younger generation is prepared to celebrate the Passover, most likely only for the third time in Israel’s history. Neither Joshua or the Lord have prompted it.  It is a heart response of the people in their new dependent state.  This (as with the previous two occasions) was a time of celebrating the next stage of Israel’s national life.

The eating of the Passover presupposes that the produce is from Canaan itself.  It is home grown, allotment food. Even if it is fast food, it represents living off God’s new blessings.

Encountering Jesus (v13-15)

Somewhere “near Jericho,” Joshua meets a man standing in front of him holding his drawn sword. The man is a soldier ready for combat, but seems to have appeared “out of thin air”.

The phrase “drawn sword” only ever occurs with the expression “the angel of the Lord” (Num 22:23, 1 Chron 21:16) and strongly suggests that the “man” is in fact the divine messenger.  However, Joshua fails to see that!

Eventually the stranger is identified as the ‘captain of the army of the Lord,” a title that occurs only here, and we are reminded that God has a heavenly army (his “hosts,” hence his title “Lord of hosts,” 1 Kings 22:19; Ps 103:19-21), and that Israel is also his “army” (Ex 7:4, 12:41; 1 Sam 17:45). The Lord leads both as king.

Joshua now falls face down on the ground and worships him, a gesture of high respect, for he has realised that the “army” is God’s almighty, invisible host and the stranger is an angelic figure in human form (Gen 16:7-14; Gen 21:17-21; Genesis 22:11-18; Genesis 31:11, 13; Exodus 3:2; Judges 2:1-4; Judges 6:11-24; Judges 13:3-22; 2 Samuel 24:16; Zechariah 3:1-5). This man is clearly a friend coming to support Israel,  but the words “My Lord” and “his “servant” show Joshua’s submission to the strangers authority.

“’Take off your sandals, for the place where you are standing is holy” (v15a), is virtually identical to God’s familiar order to Moses at the burning bush (Ex 3:5). The echo reconfirms Joshua as Moses successor and marks this moment as Joshua’s “burning bush experience.”

“Holy ground” is a sure sign that God is present and about to speak  (cf. Ex 3:2-4:17; 6:2-5), since his holy presence is the only thing able to sanctify space. This is a moment of immense significance. God has turned up with his invisible army to join with Israel in the land which was promised so long ago.  “All at last is ready”.

Memorials help us remember God’s goodness

Joshua 3-4 stresses the need to remember the history of God’s people. We get can even get a dim glimpse of some of Israel’s worship at places like Gilgal.  Deuteronomy 16:16 required that all Israelite men met at the temple in Jerusalem three times each year—at the [...]]]>

Memorials help us remember God’s goodness

Joshua 3-4 stresses the need to remember the history of God’s people. We get can even get a dim glimpse of some of Israel’s worship at places like Gilgal.  Deuteronomy 16:16 required that all Israelite men met at the temple in Jerusalem three times each year—at the annual Feasts of Unleavened Bread (or Passover), Weeks (or Pentecost), and Booths (Ex. 34:23; 2 Chron. 8:13). Each festival remembers some important event in Israel’s past, an event foundational to their national identity. 

Such annual celebrations served three purposes: (1) They ensured that Israel

remembered her history; (2) they reminded Israel of the unique identity and sovereignty of their God; and (3) they reaffirmed the kind of conduct that pleased the Lord and through which they were to live out their covenant with him.

For example, Moses commanded Israel to “commemorate this day [the Exodus], the day you came out of Egypt, out of the land of slavery” (Ex. I 13:3). The Passover remembered what happened at the Red Sea, reminded Israel of the overwhelming might of her covenant God, and reaffirmed that that power was available at any time. It also recalled Israel’s hardship as oppressed slaves and, thus, built an attitude of God-like compassion toward fellow Israelites suffering hardship (Lev. 25:25-28, 35-38, 39-43).

In bringing their offering of firstfruits during the Festival of Weeks (Deut. 26:3-11), each man set his basket of grain before the altar at the temple and recited the summary of Israel’s early history from the patriarchs (“my father was a wandering Aramean …”), through the Egyp­tian oppression, the miraculous Exodus, and onto the settlement in Canaan. The grain gift acknowledges that the whole harvest is God’s gift to Israel (v 10).

This worship reaffirmed God’s identity, sovereignty (specifically, his “mighty hand and … outstretched arm” (Deut. 27:8)) and generosity.  It also reaffirmed Israel’s own unique identity. In confessing his slave background and his presence in Canaan, the Israelite confessed his total depen­dence on God’s goodness and, through his gift, acknowledges God’s sovereignty over his own life.

These memorials link the individuals’ personal story and faith with Israel’s national story and identity.

•Faith and forgetfulness (4:1-10, Deut

•Teaching the new generation (4: 7, 21-24)

•Unique events need unique memorials (1 Cor 11)

The Lord’s Supper is a prime way in which we remember the “amazing things” God has done. They include the fact that Jesus voluntarily died so that, in the mysterious workings of God’s plan, his followers might enjoy release from their slavery to sin.

Our times of remembrance in reality are times of proclamation:”… whenever you eat this bread and drink this cup, you proclaim the Lord’s death until he comes” (v. 26).

How can we make our communion observances both times of remembrance and proclamation? Joshua 3-4 suggest several things.

(1) We need to include a review of the historical events behind communion as part of our observance of it.  Without the events of Easter Week, there is no crucifixion, and without the crucifixion there is no point to the Lord’s Supper.  The repetition of Scripture over time, over years, firmly fixes the events of Jesus’ death in our minds.

In a world that has little interest in “the past,” especially the distant past, we must keep the past alive. We must remember how Jesus went to the cross his death is actual history, not to be equated with Star Wars or Beauty and the Beast.

(2) Communion is a family-centred event. In Joshua 4, the remembrance of the Jordan crossing is focussed around a child’s question (v6) and an adult’s answer. Unlike today, each family did not have their own copy of the story. It had to pass from one generation to the next. Families had to pass it on by telling the story again and again over the years. Such family observances offer an obvious educational advantage: Everyone learns what happened and what it means, not just adults.

But the challenge for us is that to include children as participants means that remembrance has meaning for children as well as adults. But making communion more family-centred can be unsettling.  Certainly, I don’t suggest that children should take communion but that they somehow participate in it. With proper instruction (as we were doing, as it happens, last week in Re:Forge at GBC), they ought to be able to enjoy their role in the church’s remembrance, while fully understanding the reason why they cannot yet take communion.

It maybe that the question-and-answer pattern of Joshua 4 could be a basis for a family communion reading. Robert Hubbard offers the following:

Leader: We meet at this table because Jesus passed on this practice to his disciples who passed it on to us. We meet to remember what happened on the night that he was betrayed.

 

Child: (holding up the bread) This bread—what does it mean to you? Why do you eat it?

 

Parents: (taking the bread) We eat it because Jesus said, “This is my body given for you.” We eat it to obey Jesus’ command, “Do this in remembrance of me.”

 

Child: (holding up the cup) This cup—what does it mean to you? Why do you drink it?

 

Parents: (taking the cup) We drink it because Jesus said, “This cup is the new covenant in my blood.” We drink it to obey Jesus’ command, “Do this, as often as you drink it, in remembrance of me.”

 

Everyone: And so let us remember the death of Jesus. Let us eat and

drink in his memory and, in so doing, “proclaim his death until he comes.”

If done well and wisely, such simple ceremonies can celebrate that Jesus died for everyone, young and old, even though only those with  personal faith may actually take the elements.

Hubbard goes on to suggest that families could be used to serve communion, as well as forming “symbolic families” of single-parent families, single adults, and older people.  The point being that everyone participates, everyone learns and everyone relearns the truth that Jesus died “one for all” for the forgiveness of sins.

Memorials help us remembers God’s power (4:18)

•“Fear” of the all powerful God is woven into Bible (Gen 22:12; 1 Sam 12:24; 1 Peter 2:17)

•“Fear” = Treat with the greatest respect

•“Fear” is demonstrated in action (Ex 9:20; Lev 19:14; Josh 24:14)

Memorials help us remember God’s faithfulness  (4:19)

•Their redemption: begun and completed (Exodus 12:2-3)

•Our redemption: begun and completed (Eph 1:3-4)

Long before he laid down earth’s foundations, he had us in mind, had settled on us as the focus of his love, to be made whole and holy by his love. Long, long ago he decided to adopt us into his family through Jesus Christ.

I recall years ago someone having a passionate debate with me about where the [...]]]> I’m not preaching this week, but I was reading through Joshua 3 and thinking about the role of the ark.  It won’t crop up in the sermon or in the Cell Outline.  So these are just some extra thoughts. 

I recall years ago someone having a passionate debate with me about where the ark is now.  He’d spent years carefully scouring the OT to discover its whereabouts!  The ark is, of course, a prized object and not just in The Raiders of the Lost Ark, but some Ethiopian Christians claim that during Solomon’s reign an Israelite priest secretly brought it to Ethiopia where it still resides today.

In Joshua 3, the ark was a kind of “divine crossing guard,” stopping the Jordan’s flow until all Israel, including the priests, have safely crossed into Canaan. Basically a gilded wooden box, the ark represented the footstool to God’s throne and symbolised the presence of God who would otherwise be invisible to human sight.

Constructed at Mount Sinai (Ex. 25:10; 37:1) and kept in the tabernacle’s Most Holy Place (26:33), the place where God spoke to Israel through Moses (25:22; Num. 7:89), it was the home of the Tablets of the Law (Deut. 10:2, 5; 1 Kings 8:9; cf. Heb. 9:4).  It was carried through the wilderness (Num. 10:33-36; 14:44), kept in Solomon’s temple (1  Kings 8:6) and used in worship (Ps. 132:8).

While in Philistine hands, the ark so disrupted Philistine life that they gladly returned it to Israel.  For failing to pay it due respect, God killed seventy members of one family (1 Sam. 6:19), as he did with Uzzah, who touched it without authority (2 Sam. 6:6-7). Even David was terrified by the ark’s apparent power (1 Sam. 6:20; 2 Sam. 6:9). By contrast, when treated properly, the Lord’s blessing was released, e.g Obed-Edom (2 Sam. 6:11).

After David retrieved the ark from its twenty-year exile and brought it to Jerusalem  with a great ceremony, he installed it in a tent until its move into the Temple (2 Sam. 6:16-19; 1 Kings 8:4). From there it vanished from history except for a brief mention by King Josiah three centuries later (2 Chron. 35:3).

Jeremiah prophesied that after the exile, the ark would not be remembered, missed, or remade (3:16).  And that seems to have been the case. Only in Hebrews 9:4 and Rev. 11:19 is it mentioned again, where we find its final resting place in the heavenly temple .

Since the Reformation, most Christians no longer hold religious objects in special awe, so it’s a strange idea that a gilded wooden box would command such wonder and exude such power.   Yet Israel associated the ark with both the presence and the “hand (or power) of God” (Josh. 4:24).

So how did Israel avoid the ark becoming an idol? The ancients believed the idol was the place where the god actually lived. The image before them a god. Indeed, on one occasion Israel also came close to treating the ark as if it were a magic good-luck charm. The Philistines had inflicted a shattering defeat and great loss of life on Israel (1 Sam. 4). Israel’s leaders responded by ordering that the ark be sent to the next battle. That way, “it [the ark] will save us … from … our enemies” (4:3). The implication of their words is telling: Their reliance was not on the presence of God with the ark but on “it” (the ark itself). 

They seemed close to believing that the ark somehow was God and his mysterious power was present in it.  Subsequent events plainly show them to be wrong. In the next battle, with the ark present, the Philistines again routed Israel and, worse, actually captured the ark and took it home! (1 Sam. 4:10-11). The ark possessed no power to defend itself against humans.

The biblical principle is that the ark’s powerful influence always come from God’s presence with it not in it. The ark may be in God’s presence but it does not guarantee to bring God’s presence. As a physical object, the ark did not offer a physical representation of God — that is, what he actually looks like. In the ancient world, idols might visually present the god (Baal, for example), but a gilded box in no way presents a visible image of who God is.

God is completely invisible and hence impossible to represent. God’s majesty so defies physical representation as to make all such attempts both futile and blasphemous. That was the error of the golden calves promoted by Aaron and King Jero­boam as representations of God (Ex. 32; 1 Kings 12:28; 2 Kings 10:29). They horribly misrepresented him! They were nothing but ugly, grotesque forgeries—insults to God himself—and earned both of them just punishment.

In the ancient world, to “look on” something was, in a sense, to exercise some control over it. Our expression to “keep (something) in our sights” is similar. To look on God implies an attempt at human control, however limited, over him. No wonder people who attempt to “look at God” himself run the risk of instant death simply for doing so (Judg. 13:22; cf. John 1:18).

Therefore to look at the ark, or move it, was not to look on God or seek to control him.  As a symbol the ark was “like an arrow pointing away from itself to the invisible God hovering above it”.  And God now dwells within believers by his Spirit.  So no wonder we cannot find the ark.  It, like the Temple, is no  longer needed.

Rahab – Ruth – Naaman – Nebuchadnezzar

Without special relationship they stand condemned (Eph 2:11-13, Josh 23, Hos 1:2-3) but God saves!

Rahab acceptance into Israel is not unique. The common impression is that Israel excluded outsiders from God’s people. But several other “outsiders” figure [...]]]> Amazing Grace for an outsider!

Rahab – Ruth – Naaman – Nebuchadnezzar

Without special relationship they stand condemned (Eph 2:11-13, Josh 23, Hos 1:2-3)
but God saves!

Rahab acceptance into Israel is not unique. The common impression is that Israel
excluded outsiders from God’s people. But several other “outsiders” figure prominently in Israel’s history.

1. RUTH
Ruth is one of the best known.She was a Moabitess who married into an Israelite family during their temporary stay in her country. Her husband died, but rather than remain and remarry in Moab, she moved to Judah with her widowed mother-in-law, Naomi. There she experienced life as an “outsider” —a foreigner from one of Israel’s competitor countries, a woman in a man’s world, and a childless widow in a world of married couples with children.

Several times calls her “Ruth the Moabitess” (Ruth 1:22; 2:21), we are reminded that she is “not from around here.” Her vulnerability as an outsider comes into sharp relief when Boaz, her family benefactor (and eventual husband), twice instructs his male workers not to mistreat her (2:15, 16).  But her loyalty to Naomi ushers in a remarkable reversal of fate. The childless, widowed foreigner becomes the wife of
Boaz, a leading citizen of Bethlehem (4:9-12), and bears Obed, grandfather of the great King David.

In short, through God’s providence and her own stunning commitment (1:16—17), she moves from outside Judah to inside one of its prominent families. She becomes a full-fledged Israelite spiritually by her faith and sociologically by her marriage.

2. NAAMAN
The Syrian general Naaman also moves from being an outsider to
insider (2 Kings 5).  But his story is significantly different from Ruth’s. As head of the Syrian army, royal confidant, and popular war hero, he was part of his country’s upper crust. But a terrible skin disease plagues him.

A young Israelite woman captured during a raid works for his wife. She advises him to seek healing from Elisha the prophet in Israel. Initially, he angrily rejects the prophet’s prescription—to immerse himself seven times in the Jordan—as offensive. At his staff’s urging, however, he obeys and on the seventh time healed.

The experience proves to him that Yahweh is Cod, and he is converted (v. 15). But now comes the surprise: Naaman the convert has to return to Syria where he faces a more complex future as an Israelite than Ruth in Bethlehem. In a poignant gesture, he requests a two-mule load of Israelite soil to build a dirt altar to Yahweh back home (v. 17). Since his job requires him to ceremonially bow before the god, Rimmon, he asks
in advance for Yahweh’s forgiveness for that apparent idolatry (v. 18).

Elisha sends him home with a reassuring word—in essence, not to worry” (v. 19). The reassurance dispenses a moment of amazing grace: God accommodates Naaman’s evident sincerity and unique circumstances.

In theology and worship both Ruth and Naaman belong to Israel, but in national identity and geography Naaman remains a Syrian.  Naaman shows that it is possible to be an “insider” in belief but an “outsider” in culture.

3. NEBUCHADNEZZAR

Nebuchadnezzar is an outsider who comes close to the kingdom but does not quite make it! He tells the astounding story of Cod’s dealings with him in Daniel 4. He dreams of a gigantic, lusciously leafy fruit tree—a typical biblical symbol for a thriving kingdom (cf. Dan. 5:22-23; Ezek. 17:23; 31:6; Matt. 13:32). But divine judgment causes this tree to be cut down (Dan. 4:14). Daniel explains that the dream decrees the king’s own fate. He is to lose his grip on power and his mind (4:25, 33). The once mighty monarch will live for a long while among
cattle, grazing on grass and drenched with dew. 

But, the king reports, when he came to his senses, when he humbly bowed before the sovereignty of God and praised his greatness, God restored both his mind and his role  (v 34-36). His report ends where it began, with a personal testimony acknowledging the supremacy of God’s kingdom over all human ones (v. 37.

But notice that unlike Ruth and Naaman, Nebuchadnezzar simply refers to “God” and never invokes God’s personal name “Yahweh”.  He is a deist.  He accepts the power and authority of God without knowing any relationship with him. His repentance and faith are real.  But he lacks the warmth of relationship in God that Ruth and Naaman have.

Lessons for an insider!

•“Not like us” people meet God (v11, Deut 4:39)!

•“Not like us” people need our welcome (6.22-25)

•“Not like us” people will bring us encouragement (v24, Matt 1:5)

Rehab’ legacy

•To look at Rehab is to look at oneself (1 Cor 6.11)

– Our confrontation with sin leads to our appreciation of God’s amazing grace.

– Our salvation saves us from self-righteousness (Ezek 16.2-43)

– What radical choice for the Kingdom will I take?

We are just starting our series on Joshua.  I have posted some background information on the book here.

“This is a time for dreams to be ‘rebirthed’. Dreams you have had for yourselves, for your lives, for your families and for this church. Dreams which have been buried under layers of disappointment and [...]]]>

We are just starting our series on Joshua.  I have posted some background information on the book here.

“This is a time for dreams to be ‘rebirthed’. Dreams you have had for yourselves, for your lives, for your families and for this church. Dreams which have been buried under layers of disappointment and pain in some of you for many years, but dreams which came from me and which I now desire to rebirth in you . I know you and I know your dreams because it was I who put them there in the first place.

I long to come by my Spirit to restore those dreams you have let go of. Allow me to rebirth in you my dreams for you. Repent of unbelief that ‘this will never happen’. Believe the plans I have for you are good and  see the healing that will come as I restore and bring those dreams into realities.”

1. The vitality of God’s promises (1-4) 

Content and context (Gen 15:18, Deut 1:7, 11:24, Deut 34:10-12)

No more waiting or weeping over Moses – cross over!

No more waiting or weeping for us!

A great theme of the Bible is the “Kingdom of God”. Salvation is the means by which the sovereign God brings sinful people into that Kingdom as his willing and ac­ceptable subjects.

When Jesus began His preaching, He declared that the Kingdom of God was “at hand.” The term “Kingdom of God” is not an OT one, but the concept is. Clearly, Jesus’ hearers had some con­cept of “kingdom” which rested on their Old Testament upbringing, and they would have recognised Jesus’ words as a claim that the hope or expectation of Israel was to find its fulfilment in him.

In the Old Testament “the land” represents a type of Kingdom of God.   Abra­ham was given significant covenant promises:
   1. God will make of his descendants a great nation.
   2. They will be given a land to dwell in.
   3. They will be established on a special relationship to God.

Abraham’s descendants are to be God’s people, in God’s place, under God’s rule.  When God gave His covenant stipulations at Sinai, He addressed Israel as His people. The law of Moses are not rule to keep and so achieve salvation. Salvation is by grace, and the covenant of Sinai was given, not so that Israel might be saved, but because she was saved. The law is thus a manifesto for the people of the Kingdom.

The pattern is the same:

1. The promise of the kingdom was given to Abra­ham are confirmed as God brings Israel out of Egypt were the definitive acts of salvation.
2. Salvation as the way into the kingdom  in­volved the bringing of Israel into possession of Canaan, “the land”.

3. Sinai marked the objective constitution of Israel as the people of God.

The pattern of conquest under Joshua continued the demonstration of the fact that it was the power of God at work in salvation which brought the people together in the land and in covenant with God.

While the NT concentrates on the Kingdom as a reality in the spiritual plane, the same basic struc­ture of the kingdom is there as is in the OT. The NT kingdom is proclaimed every­where as the fulfilment of the OT expecta­tions.

1. God’s People.  Adam in Eden corresponds with Israel in the promised land.  Adam is the son of God (Luke 3:38). Israel is the people of God: ” . . . I . . . will be your God, and you shall be My people.” Lev. 26:12.   Jesus is the “beloved Son” with whom God is pleased (Luke 3:22). Indeed. Luke follows this baptismal declaration with his genealogy showing that through Adam, Jesus is the Son of God.

Jesus is looked upon as both the ideal Adam and the ideal Israel-that is, He is the people of God, the Seed of Abraham to whom all promises were made (see Gal. 3:16). Jesus as the Son of Adam (Son of man) accom­plishes that which Adam failed to do; and likewise, as the true Israel, He does what Israel failed to do. Thus the temptation narratives show the reversal of Satan’s conquest of Adam in the garden and of Israel in the wilderness.

If Jesus is the true people of God, the true Adam and the true Israel, all the prophecies concerning the restora­tion of Israel to be the people of God must have their fulfilment in Him. So Paul, preaching the gospel of Christ, was addressing himself to the hope of Israel (Acts 26:6, 7; 28:20). The consistent testimony of the apostle is to Christ as fulfiller (see 2 Cor. 1 :20). We may not seek the true Israel outside of Christ or look for her restoration apart from the gospel. To become one of the people of God, one must be incorporated into Christ by faith (John 1 :12; 2 Cor. 5:17; etc.).

2. God’s Place. Israel’s hope was to return to Zion, the place of God’s dwelling among His people. The New Testament must tell us where Zion is if we would dis­cover the new temple and the ruling son of David. Be­cause Jesus is the Son of David to whom rule is given, Zion is where He is. The kingdom of God cannot be separated from the presence of Jesus (Heb. 12:22).

The prominence in the OT of the promised land should not be allowed to establish our concept of God’s place. We need to remember that the promised land, Canaan, is an earthly expression of a reality which we see set forth in the garden of Eden. But even Eden could not be Eden without the presence of God.

The tribe of Levi was chosen to be priestly representatives of Israel in having access to God. God told Moses that He intended to make a nation of priests (Ex. 19:6), a truth which has its fulfilment in the priest­hood of all believers.

In this sense Levi was privileged to represent God’s people in the ideal relationship of being accepted into God’s presence. In Joshua we will see all the tribes given land as their inheritance, except Levi. Levi, the truly representative Israel, was given a far greater gift: “They shall have no inheritance among their brethren; the Lord is their inheritance. . . .” Deut. 18:2.

The ultimate in­heritance Christians receive is related to priesthood rather than land rights. And it is this priesthood that the NT applies to Christians, for they have access to the presence of God through Jesus Christ.

3. God’s Rule.  When God “walked” in the garden of Eden, there was no need for a symbol of his presence. But in the fallen world where sin separates man from God, a tangible symbol was provided. The tabernacle was given to symbolise both the presence of God among the people and the separation between a holy God and a sinful people.

Solomon’s temple became a fixed symbol of God’s dwelling and rule until it was destroyed in 586 B.C. Prophecy established the hope in the restored temple as the centre of God’s rule in Zion.

As far as the NT is concerned, OT prophecy about the rule of God and the temple is fulfilled in the gospel. The resurrection of Jesus is not only the restoration of the temple (John 2:19-22), but also the re-enthronement of the Davidic king (Acts 2:30,31). The true temple is in heaven, where Jesus reigns now (Acts 2:33, 36; Heb. 8:1-2). While be­lievers are separated from their Lord (they are on earth, He is in heaven), there is another temple created by the Holy Spirit, who unites believers with the ascended Lord (2 Cor. 6:16; Eph. 2:11-22; 1 Peter 2:4-
8).

The New Testament develops Stephen’s assertion that God’s temple is not made with hands (Acts 7:47­50). It is, in fact, the heavenly dwelling to which temple prophecy ultimately points, and there the Eden typology is answered in the face-to-face relationship which re­quires no symbolic temple, for God is the temple (Rev. 21 :22).

Every element of the OT’s unfolding revelation of “the land” leads to the NT “Kingdom of God” and the Per­son of Jesus Christ. The Kingdom of God has its reality in him. He is God’s true people. His word comes as God’s ruling word with all authority.

The New Testament, in declaring the kingdom is “at hand” with the coming of Jesus, also points us to the fact that there is a not-yet element too. The final coming of the Kingdom is described in Revelation 21 and 22.

When we preach about “the Land” in the OT, we are therefore on safe theological and exegetical ground to apply it to the “Kingdom of God” in the New Testament, and therefore to ourselves today. 

2. The reality of God’s presence (5, 9, 17)

Assurance and exhortation (Ex 3:12-15; Hosea 1:9; Jos 2:24, 3.7……

I will be with you as you cross over (Heb 13:5-6)!

I will be with you!

3. The centrality of God’s Word (7-8) 

Care and command (Ps 1:2)

Have I not commanded you?

The unity of God’s people (12-18) 

Meat in the unlikely places! (Num 32:14-27; Joshua chs 3-4)

Unity is a prerequisite for loyalty (Heb 10:25; 1 Sam 23:16)

Are God’s promises, presence, Word and people enough>>>

                   >>> to be bold and courageous?`!

Cell outlines

1. What do you think Joshua was feeling at the time of Moses’ death while taking over leadership of Israel?
2. Moses acted as Joshua’s mentor: What valuable life lessons did he learn from him? How could you apply the same kinds of principles to your spiritual life? (Hint: try turning back a page?)
3. What promises does God make to Joshua as a leader of God’s people? Do these extend also to his people in leadership positions today? If so, in what ways do and can you lead others as God’s representative at home? At church? At work?
4. “I will never leave you nor forsake you.” What might these words have meant to Joshua? What can the mean to us in the midst of life’s challenges? (Hebrews 13:5-8)
5. What commands does the Lord give to Joshua? How is verse 8 a command and an encouragement to Joshua? To us? (Psalm 1:1-3)
6. Joshua gives his first commands as leader of Israel (v10ff). How was the presence of God’s made evident in their response? (Numbers 32:1-27)
7. Going deeper
   Joshua was known for his deep trust in God and as “a man in whom is the Spirit” (Numbers 27:18). What does this mean and how can that same depth of trust in God grow in you?
8. Going deeper
   The Greek form of the name Joshua is Jesus. How can you already see the work of Jesus reflected in the account of Joshua 1?