Good afternoon friends,
If you have been following the San Francisco school board adventure of "de-naming" schools, the contrast between how history is dealt with in this passage and today can't be much more clear. God repeats the story of rebellion and disobedience so it will not be forgotten. Today we "de-name" in hopes of erasing history. That way we don't have to learn from it. Which do you think is better for us?
Blessings,
Jeff
After 40 days of no food or water (living on every word that proceeds from the mouth of God), God makes Israel's disobedience Moses' problem. God refers to them as "your people whom you have brought from Egypt" But the Exodus was not Moses' idea. He didn't go on his own authority. He didn't part the Red Sea. He didn't provide manna.
Certainly, God was not surprised by any of Israel's disobedience from the day they left Egypt to the day they cross over Jordan. His anger is often aroused and is only averted when Moses intercedes. Calvin points out that destruction for sin is averted only by God's grace. Moses' intercession is just the secondary cause. The lesson for us is that sin is always to be taken seriously and we should repent and turn away as soon as we realize our error. But forgiveness is not a result of our repentance, but the perfect sacrifice on the cross.
The use of flashback can be a little confusing. Chapter starts with warnings as Israel is preparing to cross the Jordan. Then in the middle of the chapter the Golden Calf episode is repeated. The adults who went after the calf are now all dead as a result of failing to entry the Promised Land immediately after leaving Sinai. But God does want the current generation to forget the folly of their parents. The same events are recorded in Exodus 32. So why does God repeat the story? Seems to be emphasis. Moses knows that the story is recorded else where, but dutifully repeats it. He realizes he is writing God's book, not his own book. And it is almost word for word.
Comments
Post a Comment