Studies In Theology - 11/29/2006 (Moses Married Outside Of Israel, Recon. & Leprosy)

STUDIES IN THEOLOGY;

Popular Christianity 11/29/2006

Study Notes And Journal Entries,

An Observation

By

David A. Archer

02/15/1968

(r.f.p.p.s.h.)

11/29/2006

Almost directly at the beginning of Chapter 12, it describes Moses as marrying a Cushite - a female from outside of the Tribes of Israel - which then is said to have brought great criticism, even from Aaron. ~

In thinking about this, it really was the better move in my opinion to have married outside of the tribal affiliations - any other choice within the tribes would have caused a disruption in the social climate through making one thing or the other seem more special than the rest. ~

As a side note here; To me, it seems better in such a situation to have a single point of disdain - contained - than many running rampant.

Then in 12:02, it again depicts a diversity in Aaron and another in rhetorically asking if the Lord had not spoken through them, too? Suggesting an example of that diversified result in the inversion I have described . ~

It then continues to describe the Lord as actually appearing in the pillar of cloud and standing at the entrance of the Tabernacle. ~

It then describes Miriam (Moses and Aarons, sister) as turning white from leprosy immediately after the cloud moved from above the Tabernacle. Then comparing her to a still born baby decayed at birth. ~

Numbers 13 begins with stating instruction from the Lord to send people to explore the land of Canaan - which the Lord is supposedly giving to the Israelites.

It is specifically requested to send one leader from the 12 ancestral tribes.

This then indicates further social development within the tribes - perhaps even divisions within them as well as progress in formation from marriage and procreation? Most likely as result of intermingling with the others living amongst the tribes. ~

It then begins to describe instructions in 13:17 which are very much intended as reconnaissance - information gathering. ~

While being rather sound in the manner of leadership and preparedness, it sounds strange to have to explore the land which is to be given to them. ~

The land is found to be flowing with milk and honey - bountiful as it were, but with good reason as is described in the people living there are powerful. ~

Of course it is immediately suggested to take the land in 13:30, but just as predictably there is then reconsideration, which then leads to scare tactics about the giants that inhabit the land in an effort to dissuade the Israelites from wanting to go there. ~

This seemed to have a different effect on the people, creating instead of not wanting to go - more a sort of response which seems to be a precursor to the stereotypical (as is widely chided) modern Jewish rant; "If only we had died in Egypt! Or even here in the wilderness!" and followed of course with questions as to why they came all this way to die in battle? "Carried off as plunder - better to return to Egypt" which is then described as becoming plots to choose new leadership.

This then brings a change of information being that the land is now described as wonderful and on about the lord delivering as is common, thus far. ~

This brings the Lord again to reassure Moses with even replacing the "nation" of Israel if need be in light of the rebellion. ~

Then in 14:14, after another passive aggressive exchange in convincing the Lord not to do such..... it is stated that the Lord lives among his people (to paraphrase).

This would seem to present some options similar perhaps to what I have described as per embodiment of, and interaction with that inversion through the single point of focus. ~

It nowhere presents prophets among the tribes (except for the recent spirit issue), and maintains that Aaron and his descendants are priests - though having been spoken through, which then also presents the suggestion of Moses being perceived in some way, as that entity. ~

My inclination is very much more to the idea of the presented inversion and diversity. While again, in 14:18, it specifically refers to God as he - again lending to the idea of individual. ~

It then turns toward what appears to be a middle ground decision in stating that the Lord now forbids any of the Israelites from entering the land due to disrespect; "They will never even see the land sworn to their ancestors!" ~

Just as a note; again the number 40 appears with some frequency in being the number of days that those called ancestral leaders spent gathering information - and then the number of years that the children of the Israelites are now to wander in the wilderness - after their parents drop dead for their transgressions. Excepting of course, for "Caleb" and Joshua.

The children of the others to live as shepherds in the wilderness (before being allowed entry) while Caleb and Joshua were to be allowed immediately, their share of land. ~

Caleb being of the tribe of Judah, and Joshua that of Ephraim. ~

As I read this, I cannot help but see some tactical wisdom in the longer term sense in what is suggested here. That being presumably to hold off the majority of the populous in the interest perhaps of avoiding costly confrontations - while then simultaneously establishing a presence in the "promised" though populated land - for obvious purposes in that line of reasoning. ~

This is then shown to have been the wiser course when it is described that again the people rebelled and attempted entry of their own only to be met with attack and expulsion. Which of course more than likely ruined any chance of the infiltration with only a few from the tribes of Israel. Making them all now seem as a body of enemy. ~

In the next chapter it is directed to again observe sacrificial offerings when finally arriving in the land given them.

These sacrifices yet again, contain grain offerings which is an oddity given the transient aspects and the recent want of sustenance. ~

As a notable progression in development here- wine is now allowable as part of offerings. ~

In Chapter 15, a bit further - 15:13 - it then describes a differentiation which is pronounced; Native born Israelites.

This being quite interesting given the nomadic nature of their existence. ~

It then continues in stating that native born Israelites and foreigners are equal before the Lord and subject to the same decrees, as a permanent law. ~

Then it described that the first of each crop in the promised land must be set aside for the Lord -

In 15:37, it is instructed to attach blue tassels to the hems of clothing to remember the commands of the Lord. - This is notable if I say, in being related to the cloth color used in the Tabernacle, and further seems to be a precursor to the Catholic Rosary. ~

Though it is that this is described as an attachment to clothing - it still seems to serve a similar purpose as does the more modern Rosary.