# comment

text:
<p style='margin-left:1em'><em>As the nations that Yahweh makes to perish before you, so you too shall perish, because you wouldn’t listen to the voice of Yahweh your God-</em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>Israel did not obey / hearken to the voice of Yahweh, and He did not hearken to their voice in prayer (<em><a href='B:50 1:45'>Deu 1:45</a></em>; <em><a href='B:50 9:23'>Deu 9:23</a></em>; <em><a href='B:50 28:15'>Deu 28:15</a></em>; <em><a href='B:60 5:6'>Jos 5:6</a></em>; <em><a href='B:70 2:20'>Jdg 2:20</a></em>; <em><a href='B:70 6:10'>Jdg 6:10</a></em> cp. <em><a href='B:50 8:20'>Deu 8:20</a></em> s.w.). <em><a href='B:120 18:12'>2Ki 18:12</a></em> states this specifically. God hearkened to Joshua's voice in prayer (<em><a href='B:60 10:14'>Jos 10:14</a></em>) because Joshua hearkened to His voice. It was to be the same with Saul. He didn't hearken to God's voice (<em><a href='B:90 15:19'>1Sa 15:19</a></em>) and God didn't hearken to Saul's voice in prayer in his final desperation at the end of his life (<em><a href='B:90 28:18'>1Sa 28:18</a></em>). If God's word abides in us, then our prayer is powerful, we have whatever we ask, because we are asking for things according to His will expressed in His word (<em><a href='B:500 15:7'>Joh 15:7</a></em>). </p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1em'><em>Hear, Israel- </em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>Moses really wanted Israel's well-being, he saw so clearly how obedience would result in blessing (e.g. <em><a href='B:50 6:3'>Deu 6:3</a></em>; <em><a href='B:50 12:28'>Deu 12:28</a></em>). This is a major theme of Moses in Deuteronomy. There was therefore a real sense of pleading behind his frequent appeal for Israel to "hear" or obey God's words. "<em>Hear</em>, O Israel" in Deuteronomy must have had a real passion behind it in his voice, uncorrupted as it was by old age. He didn't rattle it off as some kind of Sunday School proof. At least four times Moses interrupts the flow of his speech with this appeal: "<em>Hear </em>(‘be obedient’), O Israel" (<em><a href='B:50 5:1'>Deu 5:1</a></em>; <em><a href='B:50 6:3-4'>Deu 6:3-4</a></em>; <em><a href='B:50 9:1'>Deu 9:1</a></em>; <em><a href='B:50 20:3'>Deu 20:3</a></em>). And a glance through a concordance shows how often in Deuteronomy Moses pleads with them to hear God's voice. So he was back to his favourite theme: Hear the word, love the word, make it your life. For in this is your salvation. And the Lord Jesus (e.g. in passages like <em><a href='B:500 6:1-71'>Joh 6:1-71</a></em>) makes just the same urgent appeal.&nbsp;</p>&nbsp;<p style='margin-left:1em'><em>You are to pass over the Jordan this day- </em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>They did not pass over that day because they mourned for Moses 30 days (<em><a href='B:50 34:8'>Deu 34:8</a></em>). It is possible that Moses felt so despised by them that he assumed there would be no period of mourning for him. He could be using "this day" in a general sense of "at this time", but this may also be an example of 'I tell you this day' being a solemn statement, as discussed on <em><a href='B:50 8:19'>Deu 8:19</a></em>.&nbsp;&nbsp;</p><p style='margin-left:1em'><em>To go in to dispossess nations greater and mightier than yourself, cities great and walled up to the sky- </em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>"Drive out" is s.w. "possess". We must note the difference between the&nbsp; Canaanite peoples and their kings being "struck" and their land "taken" by Joshua-Jesus; and the people of Israel permanently taking possession. This is the difference between the Lord's victory on the cross, and our taking possession of the Kingdom. Even though that possession has been "given" to us. The word used for "possession" is literally 'an inheritance'. The allusion is to the people, like us, being the seed of Abraham. The Kingdom was and is our possession, our inheritance- if we walk in the steps of Abraham. But it is one thing to be the seed of Abraham, another to take possession of the inheritance; and Israel generally did not take possession of all the land (<em><a href='B:60 11:23'>Jos 11:23</a></em>; <em><a href='B:60 13:1'>Jos 13:1</a></em>; <em><a href='B:60 16:10'>Jos 16:10</a></em>; <em><a href='B:60 18:3'>Jos 18:3</a></em>; <em><a href='B:60 23:4'>Jos 23:4</a></em>). The language of inheritance / possession is applied to us in the New Testament (<em><a href='B:560 1:11'>Eph 1:11</a></em>; <em><a href='B:560 1:14'>Eph 1:14</a></em>; <em><a href='B:580 3:24'>Col 3:24</a></em>; <em><a href='B:510 20:32'>Act 20:32</a></em>; <em><a href='B:510 26:18'>Act 26:18</a></em>; <em><a href='B:670 1:4'>1Pe 1:4</a></em> etc.). Israel were promised: "You shall possess it" (<em><a href='B:50 30:5'>Deu 30:5</a></em>; <em><a href='B:50 33:23'>Deu 33:23</a></em>). This was more of a command than a prophecy, for sadly they were "given" the land but did not "possess" it. They were constantly encouraged in the wilderness that they were on the path to possessing the land (<em><a href='B:50 30:16'>Deu 30:16</a></em>; <em><a href='B:50 30:18'>Deu 30:18</a></em>; <em><a href='B:50 31:3'>Deu 31:3</a></em>; <em><a href='B:50 31:13'>Deu 31:13</a></em>; <em><a href='B:50 32:47'>Deu 32:47</a></em>), but when they got there they didn't possess it fully. </p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1em'><em>a people great and tall, the sons of the Anakim, whom you know and of whom you have heard say, Who can stand before the sons of Anak?- </em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>This was apparently a proverbial expression of the time, but it caught hold of the minds of the spies who first entered the land, and came to dominate the thinking of the generation who refused to enter the Kingdom and were therefore condemned in the wilderness. We see here the power of words and phrases; the little credos by which men live are often taught by snatches of lyrics from popular songs, or half remembered quotations once seen somewhere online. This is why we are to speak to ourselves in psalms, hymns and spiritual songs, and not allow our self talk to be donated by the phrases of the secular world (<em><a href='B:560 5:19'>Eph 5:19</a></em>). We are to speak also to each other in these terms (<em><a href='B:580 3:16'>Col 3:16</a></em>); for our self talk is reflected in our words to others. And this is what happened to that generation who failed to enter the land; it was exactly this repetition of the words "Who can stand before the sons of Anak?", in their hearts and to each other, which led to a generation of Israel being denied the Kingdom which had been prepared for them.</p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1em'><em>Know therefore this day that Yahweh your God is He who goes over before you as a devouring fire-</em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>It was the Angel in the pillar of fire which was to go before Israel. Deborah in <em><a href='B:70 4:14'>Jdg 4:14</a></em> quotes the words of <em><a href='B:50 9:3'>Deu 9:3</a></em> concerning the Angel going before Israel to drive out the nations to Barak, to inspire him with courage in fighting them. She recognized that the work the Angels did when they went out many years ago to do all the groundwork necessary for Israel to destroy all the tribes of Canaan was done for all time. It was not too late to make use of that work by making a human endeavour in faith. So with us, the smaller objectives in our lives as well as our main goal of reaching the Kingdom have all been made possible through the work of Christ and the Angels in the past. Deborah's recognition of this is shown in her song- <em><a href='B:70 5:20'>Jdg 5:20</a></em>: "They (the Angels) fought from Heaven; the stars (Biblical imagery for Angels) in their courses fought against Sisera".</p><p style='margin-left:1em'><em>He will destroy them and He will bring them down before you; so you shall drive them out- </em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>The nations in the land being "subdued" or 'brought down' was the outcome of Israel being obedient to the covenant (s.w. <em><a href='B:50 9:3'>Deu 9:3</a></em>). We read this word "subdued" used of how the land was at times subdued before Israel (<em><a href='B:70 3:30'>Jdg 3:30</a></em>; <em><a href='B:70 4:23'>Jdg 4:23</a></em>; <em><a href='B:70 8:28'>Jdg 8:28</a></em>; <em><a href='B:70 11:33'>Jdg 11:33</a></em>). But each time it is clear that the people generally were not obedient to the covenant. One faithful leader was, and the results of his faithfulness were counted to the people. This is what happened with the Lord's death leading to righteousness being imputed to us.</p><p style='margin-left:1em'><em>And make them perish quickly, as Yahweh has spoken to you-</em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>See on <em><a href='B:60 5:13-14'>Jos 5:13-14</a></em>; <em><a href='B:720 1:8'>Jud 1:8</a></em>. The implications that we should respond ‘quickly’ to the Gospel surely mean that we should not have any element of indifference in our response to the call of God, and yet the foundations of a true spiritual life cannot be laid hastily. The Father drove out the tribes from Canaan slowly, not immediately- or at least, He potentially enabled this to happen (<em><a href='B:70 2:23'>Jdg 2:23</a></em>). But Israel were to destroy those tribes “quickly” (<em><a href='B:50 9:3'>Deu 9:3</a></em>). Here perhaps we see what is meant- progress is slow but steady in the spiritual life, but there must be a quickness in response to the call of God for action in practice. Compare this with how on one hand, God does not become quickly angry (<em><a href='B:230 103:8'>Psa 103:8</a></em>), and yet on the other hand He <em>does </em>&nbsp;get angry quickly in the sense that He immediately feels and responds to sin (<em><a href='B:230 2:12'>Psa 2:12</a></em>); His anger ‘flares up in His face’. </p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1em'><em>Don’t say in your heart- </em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>Time and again, Moses speaks of the state of their heart. He warns them against allowing a bad state of heart to develop, he speaks often of how apostasy starts in the heart. Moses makes a total of 49 references to the heart / mind of Israel in Deuteronomy, compared to only 13 in the whole of Exodus, Leviticus and Numbers. This indicates the paramount importance which our Lord attaches to the state of our mind. This was perhaps his greatest wish as He faced death; that we should develop a spiritual mind and thereby manifest the Father and come to salvation. Moses likewise saw the state of our mind as the key to spiritual success. But do we share this perspective? Do we guard our minds against the media and influence of a mind-corrupting world? It's been observed that the phrase "The God of (somebody)", or similar, occurs 614 times in the Old Testament, of which 306 are in Deuteronomy. Our very personal relationship with God was therefore something else which Moses came to grasp in his spiritual maturity. Statistical analysis of the word "love" in the Pentateuch likewise reveals that "love" was a great theme of Moses at the end of his life (Moses uses it 16 times in Deuteronomy, and only four times in Exodus, Leviticus and Numbers). </p><p style='margin-left:1em'><em>After Yahweh your God has thrust them out from before you, For my righteousness Yahweh has brought me in to possess this land; because Yahweh drives them out before you because of the wickedness of these nations- </em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>The thrusting out of Israel's enemies from the land was conditional upon Israel's obedience (<em><a href='B:50 6:18-19'>Deu 6:18-19</a></em>). They were disobedient, and yet still God thrust out the tribes and warned them therefore not to think that this was done because of their righteousness (<em><a href='B:50 9:4'>Deu 9:4</a></em>). It was by grace alone that they inherited the Kingdom, as with us. But there was always a tendency for Israel to forget that they had been given the Kingdom despite their lack of the required personal righteousness; they became over familiar with living in it under such grace. And so the warning comes down to us. </p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1em'><em>Not for your righteousness or for the uprightness of your heart do you go in to possess their land, but for the wickedness of these nations Yahweh your God drives them out from before you- </em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>The grace of God guarantees our salvation. Yet we find it so hard to believe- that I, with all my doubts and fears, will really be there. Israel were warned that they were being given the land (cp. salvation) "not for thy righteousness, or for the uprightness of thy heart... for thou art a stiffnecked people" (<em><a href='B:50 9:5-6'>Deu 9:5-6</a></em>). These words are picked up in <em><a href='B:630 3:5'>Tit 3:5</a></em> and applied to the new Israel: "Not by works of righteousness which we have done, but according to his mercy he saved us, by the washing (baptism) of regeneration, and renewing of the Holy Spirit" - by His grace alone. Moses urges the peoples' faithfulness so that Yahweh might "establish His covenant" with them (<em><a href='B:50 8:18'>Deu 8:18</a></em>); but here we note that despite their disobedience, He still "established" the covenant with them, by grace alone (<em><a href='B:50 9:5'>Deu 9:5</a></em>). </p><p style='margin-left:1em'><em>And that He may establish the word which He swore to your fathers, to Abraham, to Isaac and to Jacob-</em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>We could say that the promises to Abraham which form the basis of the covenant are about grace. <em><a href='B:50 9:1-29'>Deu 9:1-29</a></em> spells out that Israel would not inherit the land sworn to their fathers because they were righteous- the implication was that it was a gift promised by pure grace. </p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1em'><em>Know therefore that Yahweh your God doesn’t give you this good land to possess- </em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>The Hebrew word for "spied out" in <em><a href='B:50 1:24'>Deu 1:24</a></em> also means 'to slander' (s.w. <em><a href='B:100 19:27'>2Sa 19:27</a></em>; <em><a href='B:230 15:3'>Psa 15:3</a></em>). Their slander of the land was in that they misrepresented the strength of the people there, who were in fact fearful of the Israelites. They brought up an evil report of the land (<em><a href='B:40 13:32'>Num 13:32</a></em>), characterizing it as not "good" but "evil", as if inhabited by insuperable forces of cosmic evil. They disbelieved God's simple statement that He was bringing them a "good land" (<em><a href='B:20 3:8'>Exo 3:8</a></em>). Moses therefore repeatedly calls the land a "good land", denying their wrong idea that the land was inhabited by 'evil spirits' (<em><a href='B:50 3:25'>Deu 3:25</a></em>; <em><a href='B:50 4:21-22'>Deu 4:21-22</a></em>; <em><a href='B:50 6:18'>Deu 6:18</a></em>; <em><a href='B:50 8:7'>Deu 8:7</a></em>; <em><a href='B:50 9:6'>Deu 9:6</a></em>; <em><a href='B:50 11:17'>Deu 11:17</a></em>). We see here how belief in 'evil spirits' or 'demons' militated against their faith in God and His eagerness to give His good Kingdom to His people. That continues to be His "good pleasure" (<em><a href='B:490 12:32'>Luk 12:32</a></em>) toward us, but like Israel, we are tempted to disbelieve this and allow our own perceptions and empirical conclusions to lead us away from simple faith in this. </p><p style='margin-left:1em'><em>Because of your righteousness, for you are a stiff-necked people- </em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>Like Paul in his time of dying, Moses in Deuteronomy saw the importance of obedience, the harder side of God; yet he also saw in real depth the surpassing love of God, and the grace that was to come, beyond Law. This appreciation reflected Moses' mature grasp of the Name / characteristics of God. He uses the name "Yahweh" in Deuteronomy over 530 times, often with some possessive adjective, e.g. "Yahweh thy God" (AV- i.e. you singular), or "Yahweh our God". He saw the personal relationship between a man and his God. Jacob reached a like realization at his peak. </p><p style='margin-left:1em'>Although the people were "stiff-necked", refusing to bow their necks in obedience, and thereby liable to destruction if God was amongst them (<em><a href='B:20 32:9'>Exo 32:9</a></em>; <em><a href='B:20 33:3'>Exo 33:3</a></em>; <em><a href='B:20 33:15'>Exo 33:15</a></em>), God was willing to give this stiff-necked people a place in God's Kingdom (<em><a href='B:50 9:6'>Deu 9:6</a></em>). And so although God had said that He would not go in the midst of a stiff-necked people, yet Moses asks Him to do so (<em><a href='B:20 34:9'>Exo 34:9</a></em>)- for He senses God's desire to save them by grace despite their hardened disobedience. We contrast this with the God who demands respect, the God who slew Uzzah and insists upon loyalty to Him.&nbsp;</p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1em'><em>Remember, don’t forget, how you provoked Yahweh your God to wrath in the wilderness. From the day that you went forth out of the land of Egypt until you came to this place you have been rebellious against Yahweh- </em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>We are left to imagine in what tone of voice Moses said that. Israel had rebelled against the commandment of Yahweh through disbelief, and therefore couldn't enter Canaan (<em><a href='B:50 1:26'>Deu 1:26</a></em>; <em><a href='B:50 9:7'>Deu 9:7</a></em>; <em><a href='B:50 9:23-24'>Deu 9:23-24</a></em>; <em><a href='B:50 31:27'>Deu 31:27</a></em>; <em><a href='B:40 27:4'>Num 27:4</a></em>); they were as the rebellious son who rebelled against his father's commandment (s.w. <em><a href='B:50 21:18'>Deu 21:18</a></em>; <em><a href='B:50 21:20'>Deu 21:20</a></em>). For he himself had rebelled against the commandment of Yahweh and because of this was also barred from entering Canaan (<em><a href='B:40 20:24'>Num 20:24</a></em>; <em><a href='B:40 27:14'>Num 27:14</a></em>). One reason for this was that he had called the Israelites "rebels" (<em><a href='B:40 20:10'>Num 20:10</a></em>), and no sooner had he done so, than he himself rebelled against Yahweh's commandment just like them, but in a different way. <em></em></p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1em'><em>Also in Horeb you provoked Yahweh to wrath and Yahweh was angry with you to destroy you- </em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>God can be provoked to anger (<em><a href='B:50 9:7'>Deu 9:7</a></em>; <em><a href='B:150 5:12'>Ezr 5:12</a></em>), His wrath ‘arises’ because of sinful behaviour (<em><a href='B:140 36:16'>2Ch 36:16</a></em>). He drove Israel into captivity in anger and fury (<em><a href='B:300 32:37'>Jer 32:37</a></em>). The wrath of God ‘waxes hot’ against sinful men, and Moses begged God to ‘turn’ from that wrath (<em><a href='B:20 32:11-12'>Exo 32:11-12</a></em>). The whole intercession of Moses with God gives the impression of God changing His mind because of the intercession of a mere man. Admittedly the idea of anger flaring up in God’s face and then Him ‘turning’ from that wrath is some sort of anthropomorphism. The very same words are used about Esau’s wrath ‘turning away’, i.e. being pacified, as are used about the pacification of God’s wrath (<em><a href='B:10 27:45'>Gen 27:45</a></em>). But all the same, this language must be telling us something. The wrath of God did come upon Israel in the wilderness (<em><a href='B:230 78:31'>Psa 78:31</a></em>; <em><a href='B:330 22:31'>Eze 22:31</a></em>), but Moses ‘turned’ God from executing it as He planned (<em><a href='B:230 106:23'>Psa 106:23</a></em>). Many times He turned away from the full extent of His wrath (<em><a href='B:230 78:38'>Psa 78:38</a></em>). It is by righteous behaviour and repentance that the wrath of God turns away (<em><a href='B:50 13:17'>Deu 13:17</a></em>; <em><a href='B:140 12:12'>2Ch 12:12</a></em>; <em><a href='B:140 29:10'>2Ch 29:10</a></em>; <em><a href='B:140 30:8'>2Ch 30:8</a></em>). <em><a href='B:150 10:14'>Ezr 10:14</a></em> speaks of God’s wrath turning away because those who had married Gentile women divorced them. God’s wrath is also turned away by the death of the sinner- the heads of the sinners in <em><a href='B:40 25:4'>Num 25:4</a></em> were to be ‘hung up’ before the Lord so that His wrath would turn away. A similar example is to be found in <em><a href='B:60 7:26'>Jos 7:26</a></em>. Jeremiah often comments that God’s wrath is turned away by the execution of judgment upon the sinner (e.g. <em><a href='B:300 30:24'>Jer 30:24</a></em>). In this sense His anger and wrath are poured out or ‘accomplished’, i.e. they are no more because they have been poured out (<em><a href='B:310 4:11'>Lam 4:11</a></em>). The fact that men such as Moses and Jeremiah (<em><a href='B:300 18:20'>Jer 18:20</a></em>) turned away God’s wrath without these things happening, or simply by prayer (<em><a href='B:340 9:16'>Dan 9:16</a></em>) therefore means that God accepted the intercession of those men and counted their righteousness to those from whom His wrath turned away. We shouldn’t assume that these righteous men merely waved away God’s wrath. That wrath was real, and required immense pleading and personal dedication on their behalf.</p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1em'><em>When I had gone up onto the mountain to receive the tablets of stone, the tablets of the covenant which Yahweh made with you. Then I stayed on the mountain forty days and forty nights-</em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'><em><a href='B:20 24:16'>Exo 24:16</a></em> says that Moses was six and a half days on the mountain waiting for the call to meet God, so he was with God for 33 and a half days. This perhaps looks forward to the 33 and a half years ministry of the Lord Jesus.</p><p style='margin-left:1em'><em>I neither ate bread nor drank water- </em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>It could be argued that this is not speaking of absolutely not eating nor drinking (it would be hard not to drink for 40 days), but rather that He didn't eat bread nor drink water. The implication is that He had food to eat from God, associated with the word given him, which others weren't aware of. The Lord may allude to this in <em><a href='B:500 4:32'>Joh 4:32</a></em>. This is the third period of 40 days which Moses was there, and the Rabbis calculate that he would have therefore returned from the mountain (cp. the Lord's second coming from Heaven) on the Day of Atonement. </p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1em'><em>Yahweh delivered to me the two tablets of stone written with the finger of God- </em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>The tables themselves were made by God, and were written on both sides (<em><a href='B:20 32:15-16'>Exo 32:15-16</a></em>). As they were small enough to be carried, we assume they contained the ten commandments and not the rest of the laws given to Moses. They were the tables of the covenant, and so the letter of the law which was to give way to the spirit of the new covenant therefore includes the command about the Sabbath. For that was one of the ten commandments.</p><p style='margin-left:1em'><em>And on them were all the words which Yahweh spoke with you on the mountain out of the midst of the fire in the day of the assembly- </em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>Moses graciously doesn't mention that they shied away from Yahweh's appearance at that time and wanted him only to engage with Yahweh. Grace and speaking graciously about others' weaknesses is a sign of spiritual maturity, and we see it in Moses now at the end of his life.</p><p style='margin-left:1em'>The references to fire, smoke, furnace, earthquake and the descent of Yahweh (<em><a href='B:20 19:18'>Exo 19:18</a></em>) is very similar to the language of Divine judgment, especially of Sodom (<em><a href='B:10 19:28'>Gen 19:28</a></em>; <em><a class='bible' href='#b66:9:2'>Rev 9:2</a></em>). And we know from the prophets that Israel were considered by God as Sodom. We could read this as His wrath with Israel for breaking His simple commandments about not touching the mountain, and for not having sufficiently sanctified themselves (see on <em><a href='B:20 19:10'>Exo 19:10</a></em>; <em><a href='B:20 19:14'>Exo 19:14</a></em>; <em><a href='B:20 19:18'>Exo 19:18</a></em>). The argument of <em><a href='B:650 12:1-29'>Heb 12:1-29</a></em> appears to be that the scene here is one of condemnation of sinful man- and we have not been called to that, but to salvation by grace in the new covenant in Christ. But out of that condemnation, God earnestly wished to reach out to His people, with words of covenant salvation.</p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1em'><em>At the end of forty days and forty nights Yahweh gave me the two tablets of stone, the tablets of the covenant- </em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>The tables had the ten commandments written upon them, for this was the old covenant which was made with Israel (<em><a href='B:50 4:13'>Deu 4:13</a></em>). We are not now under the old covenant, but under the new. Which means we are not bound to keep the Sabbath, seeing this was one of the ten commandments. Knowing the apostacy of Israel, God still gave Moses the tokens of the covenant. The implication was that there was grace as the basis of the giving of that covenant.</p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1em'><em>Yahweh said to me Arise, get down quickly from here, for your people whom you have brought out of Egypt have corrupted themselves. They have quickly turned aside out of the way which I commanded them; they have made themselves a molten image- </em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>When God told Moses to leave Him alone to destroy them, and go back down to the people immediately (<em><a href='B:50 9:12'>Deu 9:12</a></em>), Moses stayed on to plead with God not to destroy them. And God listened (<em><a href='B:20 32:7-14'>Exo 32:7-14</a></em>). He repented of the evil He had thought to do. He changed His mind, because Moses stayed on. There is an element of striving with God in prayer, knowing that His mind is open to change (<em><a href='B:520 15:30'>Rom 15:30</a></em>). Jacob is a symbol of us all. He became Israel, he who struggles with God. And this is a key feature of all those who comprise the true Israel. This is what stimulates me to what intensity in prayer I can muster. That God is open to hearing and even changing His holy mind about something. Such is His sensitivity to us. Such is His love, that God changing His mind becomes really feasible as a concept. And such is the scary implication of the total freewill which the Father has afforded us. This is why God could reason with Moses as a man speaks to his friend and vice versa. It was a dynamic, two way relationship in thought and prayer and being. <em></em></p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1em'><em>Furthermore Yahweh spoke to me saying, I have seen this people and truly it is a stiff-necked people- </em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>Pharaoh was condemned and Egypt overthrown because of his hard heart- but the very word is used to describe the hardness of Israel's heart at the time (<em><a href='B:20 32:9'>Exo 32:9</a></em>; <em><a href='B:20 33:3-5'>Exo 33:3-5</a></em>; <em><a href='B:20 34:9'>Exo 34:9</a></em>). Israel were really no better than Egypt- just as Egypt was plagued "so that they could not drink the water" (<em><a href='B:20 7:24'>Exo 7:24</a></em>), so we find Israel in the same situation right after leaving Egypt (<em><a href='B:20 15:23'>Exo 15:23</a></em>). As the Egyptians were stripped of their jewellery, so Israel stripped themselves of it before the golden calf (<em><a href='B:20 12:36'>Exo 12:36</a></em>; <em><a href='B:20 33:6'>Exo 33:6</a></em>). Although the people were "stiff-necked", refusing to bow their necks in obedience, and thereby liable to destruction if God was amongst them (<em><a href='B:20 32:9'>Exo 32:9</a></em>; <em><a href='B:20 33:3'>Exo 33:3</a></em>; <em><a href='B:20 33:15'>Exo 33:15</a></em>), God was willing to give this stiff-necked people a place in God's Kingdom (<em><a href='B:50 9:6'>Deu 9:6</a></em>). And so although God had said that He would not go in the midst of a stiff-necked people, yet Moses asks Him to do so (<em><a href='B:20 34:9'>Exo 34:9</a></em>)- for He senses God's desire to save them by grace despite their hardened disobedience. We contrast this with the God who demands respect, the God who slew Uzzah and insists upon loyalty to Him.&nbsp;</p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1em'><em>let Me alone- </em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>This reflects the amazingly close relationship between God and Moses. It’s as if God is saying: ‘I know you might persuade Me to change My mind on this one, but please, don’t try, I might give in, when really they do need to be destroyed’. We too can have this level of intimacy with God.</p><p style='margin-left:1em'>This seems to suggest that God knew both Himself and Moses well enough to know that Moses could well persuade Him to change His mind, against His ideal intention. And Moses doesn't leave God alone, and does persuade Him. We marvel at the humility and humanity of God, and His extreme openness to human intercession.</p><p style='margin-left:1em'>Think of God's bitter disappointment with Israel when He invites Moses into the mount as their representative, in order to enter into further covenant with them. Down below, they started worshipping other gods. When God says to Moses "Leave me alone..." (<em><a href='B:20 32:10'>Exo 32:10</a></em>), He may well refer to the desire for isolation / solitude which a person in extreme grief desires. And of course we are aware of how Moses reasons with God, and asks God to consider His own future and how it might turn out, and how that can be avoided. And God takes Moses seriously, with integrity, and appears to even acquiesce to his arguments. It's amazing. This God is our God. </p>&nbsp;<p style='margin-left:1em'><em>That I may destroy them and blot out their name from under the sky, and I will make of you a nation mightier and greater than they-</em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>Moses prayed that <em>his</em> name would be ‘blotted out’ instead (<em><a href='B:20 32:32'>Exo 32:32</a></em>). To be blotted out of the book God had written may have been understood by Moses as asking for him to be excluded from an inheritance in the promised land; for later, a ‘book’ was written describing the various portions (<em><a href='B:60 18:9'>Jos 18:9</a></em>). The connection is made explicit in <em><a href='B:330 13:9'>Eze 13:9</a></em>. If Israel were to be blotted out there and then in the wilderness, then Moses wanted to share this experience, such was his identity with his ungrateful people; and yet this peak of devotion is but a dim shadow of the extent of Christ’s love for us. In <em><a href='B:50 9:18'>Deu 9:18</a></em> he says that his prayer of <em><a href='B:20 32:32'>Exo 32:32</a></em> <em>was heard</em>- in that he was not going to enter the land, but they would. Hence his urging of them throughout Deuteronomy to go ahead and enter the land- to experience what his self-sacrifice had enabled. In this we see the economy of God, and how He works even through sin. On account of Moses’ temporary rashness of speech, he didn't enter the land. And yet by this, his prayer was heard. He was temporarily blotted out of the book, so that they might enter the land. This is why Moses stresses now at the end of his life that he wouldn’t enter the land <em>for Israel’s sake</em> (1:37; 3:26; 4:21). He saw that his sin had been worked through, and the essential reason for him not entering was because of the offer he had made. It “went badly with him <em>for their sakes</em>” (<em><a href='B:230 106:32'>Psa 106:32</a></em>).</p><p style='margin-left:1em'>Despite knowing their weakness and his own righteousness, Moses showed a marvellous softness and humility in that speech recorded in Deuteronomy. When he reminds them how God wanted to reject them because of their idolatry with the golden calf, he does not mention how fervently he prayed for them, so fervently that God changed His expressed intention (<em><a href='B:50 9:14'>Deu 9:14</a></em>); and note deeply, Moses <em>does not mention how he offered his physical and eternal life for their salvation</em>. That fine, fine act and desire by Moses went unknown to Israel until the book of Exodus came into circulation. And likewise, the depth of Christ's love for us was unrecognized by us at the time. Moses had such humility in not telling in Israel in so many words how fervently he had loved them. The spiritual culture of the Lord is even greater.&nbsp;See on <em><a href='B:20 32:32'>Exo 32:32</a></em>.</p><p style='margin-left:1em'>There is almost a pattern with God- to devise His purpose, and then in the 'gap' until its fulfillment, be open to the persuasion of His covenant people to change or ammend those plans. This could be what <em><a href='B:370 3:7'>Amo 3:7</a></em> is speaking of: "Surely the Lord God does nothing without revealing His secret to His servants the prophets". It's as if He reveals His plans to them so that they can then comment upon them in prayer. And maybe this is why God tells Jeremiah not to pray to Him to change His stated plans against Israel (<em><a href='B:300 7:16'>Jer 7:16</a></em> cp. <em><a href='B:300 11:14'>Jer 11:14</a></em>; <em><a href='B:300 14:11'>Jer 14:11</a></em>; <em><a href='B:300 15:1'>Jer 15:1</a></em>), and why He asks Moses to 'leave Me alone' and not try to persuade Him to change His mind (<em><a href='B:20 32:10'>Exo 32:10</a></em>). He didn't want, in these cases, His stated plans to be interrupted by the appeals of His people to change them. Interestingly, in both these examples, Moses and Jeremiah know God well enough, the relationship is intimate enough, for them to still speak with Him- and change His mind. Those who've prayed to God in cases of terminal illness (and countless other situations) will have sensed this 'battle', this 'struggle' almost, between God and His friends, His covenant people, and the element of 'persuasion' which there is going on both ways in the dialogue between God and ourselves. The simple fact that God really can change- there are over 40 references to His 'repentance' in Scripture- is vital to understand- for this is the basis of the prayer that changes things, that as it were wrestles with God. </p>&nbsp;


text:
<p style='margin-left:1em'><em>So I turned and came down from the mountain, and the mountain was burning with fire- </em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>See on <em><a href='B:20 32:30'>Exo 32:30</a></em>. Moses in great humility doesn't mention how he persuaded God through intense intercession not to do this. The “pillar of fire” was only “as it were the appearance of fire” (<em><a href='B:40 9:15'>Num 9:15</a></em>) but the record elsewhere speaks of it as “fire”, because that’s what it looked like to the Israelites. The Scriptures speak of how a pillar of fire was with Israel in the wilderness (<em><a href='B:230 105:39'>Psa 105:39</a></em>). But actually when it first appeared, it was described as “<em>the appearance </em>of fire” (<em><a href='B:40 9:15'>Num 9:15</a></em>). It wasn’t fire, it appeared as fire. And yet it’s spoken of later simply as “fire”. There’s no inspired footnote reminding us that, well, actually, it wasn’t really fire. Likewise “the mount (of Sinai) burnt with fire” (<em><a href='B:50 9:15'>Deu 9:15</a></em>). The mountain didn’t catch fire. But that’s how it looked to the Israelites from a distance; and so that’s how it’s described. And this explains the NT language of demons.</p><p style='margin-left:1em'><em>And the two tablets of the covenant were in my two hands-</em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>They were not therefore that large, and fitted within the ark, which was also not large. They would not have had space on them for all the law, just the ten commandments.</p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1em'><em>I looked and truly- </em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>This implies Moses had such a high view of Israel and hope or them, that he didn't fully believe what God had told him about their apostacy. Admission of past failings was a sign of his spiritual maturity, speaking now on the last day of his life. </p><p style='margin-left:1em'><em>You had sinned against Yahweh your God; you had made yourselves a molten calf; you had turned aside quickly out of the way which Yahweh had commanded you- </em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>"Molten" is literally 'covered'. They had presumably made the calf of the common acacia wood, and covered it with gold- just as the tabernacle furniture was to be constructed in a similar way. Again we see that they were mixing Yahweh worship with idolatry. </p><p style='margin-left:1em'>As explained on <em><a href='B:20 32:4-6'>Exo 32:4-6</a></em>, they were worshipping an idol in the name of Yahweh worship. They had corrupted or turned aside the glory of God into the form of an ox which eats grass (<em><a href='B:230 106:20'>Psa 106:20</a></em>). And this is the abiding temptation for us all. The glory of God was visible to them on Sinai at the time. God's glory was in His invisible leading of them through the Angel (<em><a href='B:20 32:1'>Exo 32:1</a></em>). But they changed that into the visible and secular. They were not totally rejecting Yahweh, but making an ox / calf similar to one facet of the cherubim. This is classic apostacy, mixing truth with error.</p><p style='margin-left:1em'>It appears that Israel identified the golden calf with the Egyptian goddess Hathor. “The Egyptian goddess Hathor came in the form of a cow, a woman with a cow’s head, or a woman with cows horns and / or cows ears. She bore several other titles including The Golden One and Mistress of Music. She was the patron of love, motherhood, drunkenness, fun, dance and music. The worship of Hathor degenerated into immorality and she is depicted in some scenes and statues as a sensual young woman. Hathor was the protector of travellers from Egypt to various areas including Sinai”. So Israel so quickly forgot the lesson so artlessly taught them – that the idols / demons of Egypt were of no power at all, seeing they had all been targetted by the plagues. </p><p style='margin-left:1em'>The following references to Hathor provide further insight; supporting references are to be found in my book "The Real Devil" section 4-2-3:</p><p style='margin-left:1em'>Hathor had several forms including, a cow, a women with a cow’s head, or a woman with cows horns and or ears.</p><p style='margin-left:1em'>Hathor was also known as ‘The Golden One’</p><p style='margin-left:1em'>Hathor was the protector of travellers from Egypt to various areas including Sinai </p><p style='margin-left:1em'>Patron of drunkenness </p><p style='margin-left:1em'>Hathor had the title ‘Mistress of Music’ </p><p style='margin-left:1em'>The worship of Hathor included playing on all kinds of musical instruments together with dancing </p><p style='margin-left:1em'>The worship of Hathor was for the joy and pleasure of those who took part </p><p style='margin-left:1em'>Hathor is also the goddess of love </p><p style='margin-left:1em'>The worship of Hathor degenerated into immorality.<em></em></p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1em'><em>I took hold of the two tablets and cast them out of my two hands and broke them before your eyes- </em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'><em><a href='B:20 32:19'>Exo 32:19</a></em> adds: "Moses’ anger grew hot, and he threw the tablets out of his hands, and broke them beneath the mountain". God’s anger “burned hot” and so did that of Moses. But Moses asks God not to wax hot in anger (<em><a href='B:20 32:10-11'>Exo 32:10-11</a></em>; <em><a href='B:20 32:19'>Exo 32:19</a></em>). What are we to make of this? Surely, positively, Moses was totally in tune with the feelings of God. And yet he does himself what he asks God not to do.&nbsp; His anger growing hot was exactly the feeling of God. But unlike God, he immediately broke the symbols of the covenant with Israel. Again, God is revealed as more gracious and patient than man. As Moses had pleaded with Yahweh not to be so angry, so Aaron was to do so with the furiously angry Moses. Aaron in all his weakness therefore becomes as Moses, who was also weak before God's presence.</p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1em'><em>I fell down before Yahweh as at the first, forty days and forty nights. I neither ate bread nor drank water, because of all your sin which you sinned, in doing that which was evil in the sight of Yahweh to provoke him to anger-</em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>At the very end of his life, Moses reeled off this great speech of Deuteronomy, knowing full well that he was to die without entering the land. In <em><a href='B:50 9:18'>Deu 9:18</a></em> he says that his prayer of <em><a href='B:20 32:32'>Exo 32:32</a></em> was heard- in that he was not going to enter the land, but they would. Hence his urging of them to go ahead and enter the land- to experience what his self-sacrifice had enabled. In this we see the economy of God, and how He works even through sin. On account of Moses’ temporary rashness of speech, he was excluded- and yet by this, his prayer was heard. He was temporarily blotted out of the book, so that they might enter. Moses’ fleeting requests to enter the land must be read as a flagging from the height of devotion he reached, rather like the Lord’s request to escape the cross in Gethsemane. But ultimately he did what he intended- he gave his place in the Kingdom / land so that they might enter (although of course he will be in the future Kingdom). This is why Moses stresses on the last day of his life that he wouldn’t enter the land for Israel’s sake (<em><a href='B:50 1:37'>Deu 1:37</a></em>; <em><a href='B:50 3:26'>Deu 3:26</a></em>; <em><a href='B:50 4:21'>Deu 4:21</a></em>). He saw that his sin had been worked through, and the essential reason for him not entering was because of the offer he had made. It “went ill with him for their sakes” (<em><a href='B:230 106:32'>Psa 106:32</a></em>). </p><p style='margin-left:1em'>God can be grieved (s.w. 'provoke to anger'). He has emotions, and His potential foreknowledge doesn't mean that these feelings are not legitimate. They are presented as occurring in human time, as responses to human behaviour. This is the degree to which He has accommodated Himself to human time-space limits, in order to fully enter relationship and experience with us. As He can limit His omnipotence, so God can limit His omniscience, in order to feel and respond along with us.</p><p style='margin-left:1em'>True prayer is to be "in secret". There should be an appropriate modesty in speaking about it to others. Consider how Moses spent 40 days in intense intercession for Israel, and succeeded in changing God's mind. But he didn't tell them this for about 37 years, until Moses recounted it to the people at the end of his life in <em><a href='B:50 9:18'>Deu 9:18</a></em>. We have no idea how many others are praying for us, or how the Lord in Heaven is praying for us as Moses did on Sinai. </p>&nbsp;


text:
<p style='margin-left:1em'><em>For I was afraid of the anger and hot displeasure with which Yahweh was angry against you to destroy you. But Yahweh listened to me that time also-</em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>Israel were certainly representative of us. The <em>degree</em> of love shown by Moses to Israel is only a shadow of the degree, the kind of love shown by Christ to us, who hopefully are not rejecting him as Israel did. The power of this point just has to be reflected upon. That Moses could love Israel, to the extent of being willing to give his life and salvation for them, is a fine, fine type of the devotion of Christ. There is another oft emphasized aspect of Moses' love for Israel: the power of his mediation for them. We are told that God " hearkened" to Moses' prayers for them (<em><a href='B:50 9:19'>Deu 9:19</a></em>; <em><a href='B:50 10:10'>Deu 10:10</a></em>). He prayed for them with an intensity they didn't appreciate, he prayed for <em>and gained </em>their forgiveness before they had even repented, he pleaded <em>successfully</em> for God to relent from His plans to punish them, even before they knew that God had conceived such plans &nbsp;(<em><a href='B:20 32:10'>Exo 32:10</a></em>; <em><a href='B:20 32:14'>Exo 32:14</a></em>; <em><a href='B:20 33:17'>Exo 33:17</a></em>&nbsp; etc.). The fact we will, at the end, be forgiven of some sins without specifically repenting of them (as David was in <em><a href='B:230 19:12'>Psa 19:12</a></em>) ought to instill a true humility in us. This kind of thing is in some ways a contradiction of God's principles that personal repentance is required for forgiveness, and that our own effort is required if we are to find acceptability with Him. Of course ultimately these things are still true, and were true with respect to Israel.</p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1em'><em>Yahweh was very angry with Aaron to destroy him, and I prayed for Aaron also at the same time-</em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>This must be given its full weight. Aaron comes over in <em><a href='B:20 32:22'>Exo 32:22</a></em> as more worried about the wrath of Moses his brother than that of God: "Don’t let the anger of my lord grow hot". And so it can easily be with us. We can forget God's feelings and worry only about our image with our family and brethren.</p><p style='margin-left:1em'>We can as it were do the work of the Saviour Himself, if we truly live as in Him. In this spirit, <em>Moses’</em> faith in keeping the Passover led to <em>Israel’s </em>salvation, they left Egypt <em>by </em>him (<em><a href='B:650 3:16'>Heb 3:16</a></em>; <em><a href='B:650 11:28'>Heb 11:28</a></em>); and when Aaron deserved death, he was redeemed by Moses’ prayer on his behalf<em>. </em>Sodom's destruction was largely due to Abraham's prayer for his deliverance; without this, it would seem Lot was altogether too unprepared and spiritually insensitive to have responded to the Angels' call in his own strength. The Lord spared Aaron because of Moses' intercession for him; and this is perhaps the basis for James' appeal to pray for one another, that we may be healed, knowing that through our prayer and pastoral work for others, we can save a man from his multitude of sins and his soul from death (<em><a href='B:660 5:20'>Jas 5:20</a></em>). The very ability we have to do this for each other should register deeply with us. And in response, we should live lives dedicated to the spiritual welfare and salvation of our brethren. </p><p style='margin-left:1em'>It was only thanks to Moses' intercession for Aaron that Aaron's life was spared at this point. We see here how intercession even for the impenitent can be effective (for Aaron in <em><a href='B:20 32:24'>Exo 32:24</a></em> was impenitent, claiming the calf had jumped out of the fire ready made). This has huge pastoral implications for our ministry and prayer life, recalling how for the sake of the faith of the friends, the Lord pronounced the paralyzed man forgiven (<em><a href='B:480 2:5'>Mar 2:5</a></em>; also <em><a href='B:660 5:20'>Jas 5:20</a></em>).</p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1em'><em>I took your sin, the calf which you had made- </em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>"A great sin" (<em><a href='B:20 32:21'>Exo 32:21</a></em>) is the phrase used of Jeroboam's golden calf, which was based upon this calf (<em><a href='B:120 17:21'>2Ki 17:21</a></em>). Aaron made the calf, but "you made" it. People can be made to sin by others- a sober reminder to watch our behaviour. </p><p style='margin-left:1em'>The Biblical record highlights the sin of Aaron and the people; the Jewish literature excuses it by blaming it on Satan / "mastema". Time and again, the Jewish apocryphal literature wrongly sought to distance God from doing anything negative in human life. <em><a href='B:10 22:1'>Gen 22:1</a></em> clearly states that it was <em>God </em>who put Abraham to the test by asking him to kill his son Isaac; Jubilees retells the story with "Prince Mastema", the Satan figure, telling Abraham to do this (Jub. 17:15-18). Likewise <em><a href='B:20 4:24'>Exo 4:24</a></em> recounts how "the Lord", presumably as an Angel, met Moses and tried to kill him for not circumcising his son; but Jubilees again claims that Mastema / Satan did this (Jub. 48:1-3). Indeed, several times the Hebrew word <em>mastema</em> ('hostility, enmity') occurs, it is in the context of urging Israel to see that <em>they</em> and their internal desires to sin are the true <em>mastema</em>. <em><a href='B:350 9:7'>Hos 9:7</a></em> is an example: "Because your sins are so many and your hostility (<em>mastema</em>) so great".</p><p style='margin-left:1em'><em>And burnt it with fire and stamped it, grinding it very small until it was as fine as dust, and I cast its dust into the brook that descended out of the mountain- </em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>They were forced to drink / eat dust, just as Adam had to; for he was dust and had to eat the fruit of the dust in punishment. His sin was the essence of every man's sin, including Israel's at this time. The reference to their being made naked (<em><a href='B:20 32:25'>Exo 32:25</a></em>) is another allusion to Adam. Israel had been an unfaithful wife to Yahweh, and so they were punished as the woman tested for adultery was (<em><a href='B:40 5:24'>Num 5:24</a></em>). "Grinding it very small until it was as fine as dust" would have been necessary for it to float on the surface on the water, as gold is so heavy. </p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1em'><em>(At Taberah and at Massah and at Kibroth Hattaavah you provoked Yahweh to wrath- </em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>God can be grieved (s.w. 'provoke to anger'). He has emotions, and His potential foreknowledge doesn't mean that these feelings are not legitimate. They are presented as occurring in human time, as responses to human behaviour. This is the degree to which He has accommodated Himself to human time-space limits, in order to fully enter relationship and experience with us. As He can limit His omnipotence, so God can limit His omniscience, in order to feel and respond along with us.&nbsp;Idolatrous Israel never <em>consciously</em>&nbsp; tried to provoke Yahweh to anger with their apostasy; the words of the prophets must have seemed to them a gross exaggeration. But this was really how God saw it (<em><a href='B:140 34:25'>2Ch 34:25</a></em>). I have suggested that Deuteronomy was edited, under Divine inspiration, during the exile. This statement has particular relevance to the exiles, who had likewise "provoked Yahweh to wrath" and had therefore been exiled, and were now to return to the land; just as Israel at the end of the 40 year wandering (<em><a href='B:150 5:12'>Ezr 5:12</a></em>; <em><a href='B:450 8:14'>Zec 8:14</a></em>). </p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1em'><em>When Yahweh sent you from Kadesh Barnea, saying Go up and possess the land which I have given you, then you rebelled against the commandment of Yahweh your God, and you didn’t believe Him, nor listen to His voice-</em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>Israel did not obey / hearken to the voice of Yahweh, and He did not hearken to their voice in prayer (<em><a href='B:50 1:45'>Deu 1:45</a></em>; <em><a href='B:50 9:23'>Deu 9:23</a></em>; <em><a href='B:50 28:15'>Deu 28:15</a></em>; <em><a href='B:60 5:6'>Jos 5:6</a></em>; <em><a href='B:70 2:20'>Jdg 2:20</a></em>; <em><a href='B:70 6:10'>Jdg 6:10</a></em> cp. <em><a href='B:50 8:20'>Deu 8:20</a></em> s.w.). <em><a href='B:120 18:12'>2Ki 18:12</a></em> states this specifically. God hearkened to Joshua's voice in prayer (<em><a href='B:60 10:14'>Jos 10:14</a></em>) because Joshua hearkened to His voice. It was to be the same with Saul. He didn't hearken to God's voice (<em><a href='B:90 15:19'>1Sa 15:19</a></em>) and God didn't hearken to Saul's voice in prayer in his final desperation at the end of his life (<em><a href='B:90 28:18'>1Sa 28:18</a></em>). If God's word abides in us, then our prayer is powerful, we have whatever we ask, because we are asking for things according to His will expressed in His word (<em><a href='B:500 15:7'>Joh 15:7</a></em>).</p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1em'><em>You have been rebellious against Yahweh from the day that I knew you)- </em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>They were disobedient from the day God knew them, i.e. Passover night<em>. </em>The number of firstborn males after Israel left Egypt was remarkably small (around 20,000, <em><a href='B:40 3:43'>Num 3:43</a></em>). Women in most primitive societies have an average of 7 births. this would mean that given a total population of around 2,800,000 on leaving Egypt (<em><a href='B:20 12:37'>Exo 12:37</a></em>), there should have been around 400,000 firstborn males. But instead, there is only a fraction of this number. Why? Did all Israel eat the Passover?&nbsp;Were many in fact slain. My suggestion- and this is well in the category of things you will never know for sure and can only ponder- is that many Hebrew firstborns died on Passover night. Israel were warned that if they did not properly keep the Passover, “the Destroyer” Angel would kill their firstborn (<em><a href='B:20 12:23'>Exo 12:23</a></em>). “The Destroyer” is mentioned in <em><a href='B:530 10:10'>1Co 10:10</a></em>: “Neither murmur ye, as some of them also murmured, and were destroyed of the Destroyer” (olothreutes; this is a proper noun in the Greek). Who was the Destroyer? If Scripture interprets Scripture, it was the ‘Destroyer’ Angel of Passover night. In similar vein <em><a href='B:650 11:28'>Heb 11:28</a></em> speaks of “He (the Angel) that destroyed (Gk. olothreuo) the firstborn”.&nbsp;Israel were side-tracked from what should have been the central object of their attention: the blood of the lamb.</p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1em'><em>So I fell down before Yahweh the forty days and forty nights because Yahweh had said He would destroy you- </em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>It is likely that this was the first time Israel knew about this. The intensity of those 40 days intercession, after having spent 40 days also in the mountain just days beforehand, was one of the most amazing and intense spiritual achievements of anyone apart from the Lord Jesus. For Moses succeeded in persuading God to change His mind about destroying His sinful people, even without their repentance. But Moses didn't boast of it nor tell anyone about it, until the day of his death. We like Israel can live our lives unaware of the intensity of the Lord's mediation for us over specific issues. For the Lord in Heaven with the Father, from which He will return, was represented by Moses with God at the top of Sinai.</p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1em'><em>I prayed to Yahweh and said Lord Yahweh, don’t destroy Your people and Your inheritance that You have redeemed through Your greatness, that You have brought out of Egypt with a mighty hand- </em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>"Corrupted" in :12 is s.w. "'destroyed" here. All judgment is finally self inflicted. Sin is its own judgment; hence the Hebrew word for "corruption" also means "destruction", for moral corruption is its own destruction. God Himself does judge, but always prefers men to judge themselves.</p><p style='margin-left:1em'>The might and "greatness" of Yahweh's hand was shown through His grace in as it were forcing Israel out of Egypt, when they actually wanted to remain there and He wished to destroy them (<em><a href='B:330 20:8'>Eze 20:8</a></em>). They were idolatrous and had told Moses to leave them alone and let them serve the Egyptians. Yahweh's strength therefore refers to the power of His grace in continuing His program with them.</p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1em'><em>Remember Your servants, Abraham, Isaac and Jacob. Don’t look at the stubbornness of this people, nor at their wickedness, nor their sin- </em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>"Corrupted" or 'destroyed' in :12 is the same word used of the threatened destruction of everyone in Sodom, which Abraham's intercession avoided (s.w. <em><a href='B:10 18:28'>Gen 18:28</a></em>; <em><a href='B:10 18:31'>Gen 18:31</a></em>). That incident surely motivated Moses to rise up to the same possibility of dialogue with God in order to change His intended purpose. We too are to be motivated by Biblical examples of intercession. God could have given legitimate answers to each of Moses' objections; for there were indeed times when He did not turn from the fierceness of His wrath (<em><a href='B:20 32:12'>Exo 32:12</a></em>)- such as <em><a href='B:300 4:8'>Jer 4:8</a></em>; <em><a href='B:120 23:26'>2Ki 23:26</a></em>. He intended to fulfil the promises to Abraham, but through Moses. But such is His sensitivity and pure pity that He accepted Moses' pleas.</p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1em'><em>lest the land You brought us out from say, ‘Because Yahweh was not able to bring them into the land which He promised to them and because He hated them He has brought them out to kill them in the wilderness’- </em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>Caleb and Joshua perceived that Israel were “well able” to overcome the tribes and inherit the land, seeing that the Angel-hornet had gone ahead and prepared the way; and yet due to Israel’s disabling of this possibility at the time, it was in some ways so that God Himself was “not able” to give them the inheritance, because <em>they </em>judged that <em>they </em>were “not able” to take it (<em><a href='B:40 13:30-31'>Num 13:30-31</a></em>; <em><a href='B:40 14:16'>Num 14:16</a></em>). </p><p style='margin-left:1em'>The way Moses pleaded with God to change His mind and not destroy Israel for the sake of what the surrounding nations would say is indeed inspirational to us all. It surely inspired David to pray likewise- for “wherefore should the heathen say, Where is now there God?” (<em><a href='B:230 115:2'>Psa 115:2</a></em>). We see here God's sensitivity to how the Gentiles perceive Him, and this has big implications for how we act before them. For we are God's representatives, and how we represent Him before the world is so significant to Him. For effectively we are Him in this world, and it is our living example far more than our doctrinal explanations which will convert others to Him. </p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1em'><em>Yet they are Your people and Your inheritance, which You brought out by Your great power and by Your outstretched arm-</em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>We are God's portion / inheritance (<em><a href='B:50 4:20'>Deu 4:20</a></em>; <em><a href='B:50 9:29'>Deu 9:29</a></em>; <em><a href='B:560 1:18'>Eph 1:18</a></em>), and He is our inheritance (<em><a href='B:230 16:5-6'>Psa 16:5-6</a></em>; <em><a href='B:230 73:26'>Psa 73:26</a></em>; <em><a href='B:310 3:22-24'>Lam 3:22-24</a></em>; <em><a href='B:560 1:11'>Eph 1:11</a></em> RV); we inherit each other. There is a mutuality between God and His people. </p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1em'><em>At that time Yahweh said to me, Cut two tablets of stone like the first and come up to Me onto the mountain and make an ark of wood- </em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>The tables were the "tables of the covenant", which had been broken by the apostacy with the golden calf. God now assures Moses that the covenant relationship has been restored. This must be read in the context of the previous verses, where Moses has doubted whether his intercession for Israel has in fact "worked". He struggles to believe that God can be that gracious as His word had stated. Just like ourselves. And so just as Aaron had used a chisel to fashion the golden calf, Moses is asked to chisel out two stone tablets, upon which the covenant will be reaffirmed by God. At this time, God asked Moses to also make the ark, into which the tables were to be put. This was to be the sign that His presence was really to abide with His people as promised. </p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1em'><em>I will write on the tablets the words that were on the first tablets which you broke, and you shall put them within that ark- </em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>"Which you broke" is emphasized by God. Moses in <em><a href='B:20 33:1-23'>Exo 33:1-23</a></em> had been doubting whether his intercession for Israel had really "worked", even though God assured him that it had. Moses is being reminded that his anger had burned hot just as God's anger had; but it was he and not God who had smashed the symbols of the covenant in that wrath. The idea is that God is kinder and more patient than man- even than a man as patient and loving as Moses. </p><p style='margin-left:1em'>"Broke" is s.w. in <em><a href='B:20 34:13'>Exo 34:13</a></em>; <em><a href='B:50 12:3'>Deu 12:3</a></em> used of breaking covenant relationship with idols. By doing so, Moses had purposefully sought to break Israel's relationship with Yahweh, despite having earlier prayed for it to be restored. When he saw the apostacy with his own eyes, he wanted God to revert to His 'plan A', to destroy Israel. He realizes in <em><a href='B:20 33:1-23'>Exo 33:1-23</a></em> that he was wrong in this and therefore probes God as to whether indeed His relationship with Israel is indeed intact, despite his having broken the symbols of covenant. And God is assuring him that indeed it is.</p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1em'><em>So I made an ark of acacia wood and cut two tablets of stone like the first, and went up onto the mountain, having the two tablets in my hand- </em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>The acacia bush was all they had in the wilderness. It was hardly suitable for making furniture, being brittle and the sticks very thin and hard to weld together. The root translated "shittim" really means a stick or rod, and is translated "thorns" in <em><a href='B:60 23:13'>Jos 23:13</a></em>. It refers to the common thorn bushes found in the scrubland they were passing through in the desert. Thorns were part of the curse in Eden. We shouldn't be surprised at the brittle nature of the folk with whom God works, their difficulty in binding together and resistance to being worked with- this is as it were all God has to work with. Acacia was plentiful in the wilderness, but it is little more than brushwood; a surprising choice of material to be used in God’s dwelling place. But His choice of <em>us</em> with all our weakness and dysfunction, the common, weak stuff of the wilderness, is no less surprising. The choice of acacia wood for constructing the tabernacle is one of several points in the whole enterprise where it seems a less than ideal material was chosen, from a construction point of view. This aspect emphasizes that God prefers to work with the soft, weak and broken in order to do His work (as also in <em><a href='B:330 15:2-5'>Eze 15:2-5</a></em>).</p><p style='margin-left:1em'><em><a href='B:20 25:10'>Exo 25:10</a></em> "They shall make an ark" becomes "I made an ark" in Moses' autobiography (<em><a href='B:50 10:3'>Deu 10:3</a></em>), although apparently Bezaleel made the ark (<em><a href='B:20 37:1'>Exo 37:1</a></em>). The people were generous when asked, but were not real workers. Perhaps Moses himself had to make the ark because they didn't get to it. Or maybe his work was counted as theirs, as happens between the Lord Jesus and ourselves. </p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1em'><em>He wrote on the tablets according to the first writing, the Ten Commandments, which Yahweh spoke to you on the mountain out of the midst of the fire in the day of the assembly, and Yahweh gave them to me- </em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>Although God spoke to Moses alone in the mount, Moses stresses that actually God "spake unto <em>you</em> in the mount out of the midst of the fire". The word of God to His scribes really is, to the same gripping, terrifying degree, His direct word to us (<em><a href='B:50 4:36'>Deu 4:36</a></em>; <em><a href='B:50 5:25'>Deu 5:25</a></em>; <em><a href='B:50 10:4'>Deu 10:4</a></em>). This explains why David repeatedly refers to the miracle at the Red Sea as if this had affected him personally, to the extent that he could ecstatically rejoice because of it. </p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1em'><em>I turned and came down from the mountain and put the tablets into the ark which I had made, and there they are as Yahweh commanded me- </em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>The ark was not that big, and Moses carried the tablets one in each hand as he descended the mountain. They were therefore quite small, and contained only the ten commandments.</p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1em'><em>(The children of Israel travelled from Beeroth Bene Jaakan to Moserah. There Aaron died and there he was buried, and Eleazar his son ministered in the priest’s office in his place- </em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>"Moserah" means 'place of chastisement / correction'. Aaron and Moses will be in the Kingdom despite their sin, but it needed Aaron's death for them to be corrected. The punishment was therefore their correction, and was not the angry lashing out of an offended Deity. Moses only mentions this place name at the end of his life, indicating how he looked back and perceived that indeed he had been corrected and learned his lesson, even if it cost him his life. </p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1em'><em>From there they travelled to Gudgodah and from Gudgodah to Jotbathah, a land of brooks of water- </em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>"A land of brooks of water" is precisely the phrase used of Canaan (<em><a href='B:50 8:7'>Deu 8:7</a></em>). They were constantly given foretastes of the Kingdom before entering it, just as we are on our wilderness journey.</p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1em'><em>At that time Yahweh set apart the tribe of Levi to bear the ark of the covenant of Yahweh, to stand before Yahweh to minister to Him and to bless in His name, to this day- </em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>Although the Levites had been set apart for Divine service immediately after God's meeting with Israel at Sinai, as outlined in Leviticus and Numbers, it seems that not until Aaron died at the end of the 40 years wandering did they actually in practice begin to serve as intended (<em><a href='B:50 10:8'>Deu 10:8</a></em>). It could be that the reason was that the Levites were ever slow to accept their responsibilities. And they generally failed in their calling over Israel's history, climaxing in the priests arranging the murder of God's own Son.</p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1em'><em>Therefore Levi has no portion or inheritance with his brothers; Yahweh is his inheritance according as Yahweh your God spoke to him.)- </em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>The Levites had no material inheritance because "the sacrifices of Yahweh the God of Israel... are his inheritance... Yahweh God of Israel was their inheritance" (<em><a href='B:60 13:14'>Jos 13:14</a></em>; <em><a href='B:60 13:33'>Jos 13:33</a></em>; <em><a href='B:40 18:20'>Num 18:20</a></em>; <em><a href='B:50 10:9'>Deu 10:9</a></em>; <em><a href='B:50 18:2'>Deu 18:2</a></em>). Notice how "Yahweh" is put for what is sacrificed to Him. His very existence is an imperative to sacrifice to Him, despising all material advantage in doing so. Job comments that to make gold our hope and wealth our confidence is to deny “the God that is above” (<em><a href='B:220 31:24'>Job 31:24</a></em>; <em><a href='B:220 31:28'>Job 31:28</a></em>). To trust in material wealth is effectively to proclaim ourselves atheists. We are described as the new priesthood (<em><a href='B:670 2:5'>1Pe 2:5</a></em>), so all that was true for the Levites becomes true for us. We are not to seek material inheritance. God will provide for us in ways other than our possessing land and leaving an inheritance to our children. The wonder of serving Him is to more than compensate for this. </p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1em'><em>I stayed on the mountain, as at the first time, forty days and forty nights and Yahweh listened to me that time also; Yahweh would not destroy you-</em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>Israel were certainly representative of us. The <em>degree</em> of love shown by Moses to Israel is only a shadow of the degree, the kind of love shown by Christ to us, who hopefully are not rejecting him as Israel did. The power of this point just has to be reflected upon. That Moses could love Israel, to the extent of being willing to give his life and salvation for them, is a fine, fine type of the devotion of Christ. There is another oft emphasized aspect of Moses' love for Israel: the power of his mediation for them. We are told that God "hearkened" to Moses' prayers for them (<em><a href='B:50 9:19'>Deu 9:19</a></em>; <em><a href='B:50 10:10'>Deu 10:10</a></em>). He prayed for them with an intensity they didn't appreciate, he prayed for <em>and gained </em>their forgiveness before they had even repented, he pleaded <em>successfully</em> for God to relent from His plans to punish them, even before they knew that God had conceived such plans &nbsp;(<em><a href='B:20 32:10'>Exo 32:10</a></em>; <em><a href='B:20 32:14'>Exo 32:14</a></em>; <em><a href='B:20 33:17'>Exo 33:17</a></em>&nbsp; etc.). The fact we will, at the end, be forgiven of some sins without specifically repenting of them (as David was in <em><a href='B:230 19:12'>Psa 19:12</a></em>) ought to instill a true humility in us. This kind of thing is in some ways a contradiction of God's principles that personal repentance is required for forgiveness, and that our own effort is required if we are to find acceptability with Him. Of course ultimately these things are still true, and were true with respect to Israel.</p><p style='margin-left:1em'>"Corrupted" in <em><a href='B:20 32:7'>Exo 32:7</a></em> is s.w. "'destroyed" here. All judgment is finally self inflicted. Sin is its own judgment; hence the Hebrew word for "corruption" also means "destruction", for moral corruption is its own destruction. God Himself does judge, but always prefers men to judge themselves.</p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1em'><em>Yahweh said to me Arise, take your journey before the people, and they shall go in and possess the land, which I swore to their fathers to give to them-</em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>It was only through Moses' leadership that they reached Canaan: "The Lord said unto (Moses), Arise (cp. Christ's resurrection), take thy journey before the people (as Christ, the good shepherd, goes <em>before</em> the flock, <em><a href='B:500 10:3'>Joh 10:3</a></em>), <em>that</em> they may go in and possess the land" (<em><a href='B:50 10:11'>Deu 10:11</a></em>).</p><p style='margin-left:1em'>Moses led God’s people to the land, the Kingdom, but couldn’t himself take them in there- the Law with which he was associated revealed the Kingdom, but it needed Joshua / Jesus to actually bring them into it.</p><p style='margin-left:1em'>"Drive out" is s.w. "possess". We must note the difference between the&nbsp; Canaanite peoples and their kings being "struck" and their land "taken" by Joshua-Jesus; and the people of Israel permanently taking possession. This is the difference between the Lord's victory on the cross, and our taking possession of the Kingdom. Even though that possession has been "given" to us. The word used for "possession" is literally 'an inheritance'. The allusion is to the people, like us, being the seed of Abraham. The Kingdom was and is our possession, our inheritance- if we walk in the steps of Abraham. But it is one thing to be the seed of Abraham, another to take possession of the inheritance; and Israel generally did not take possession of all the land (<em><a href='B:60 11:23'>Jos 11:23</a></em>; <em><a href='B:60 13:1'>Jos 13:1</a></em>; <em><a href='B:60 16:10'>Jos 16:10</a></em>; <em><a href='B:60 18:3'>Jos 18:3</a></em>; <em><a href='B:60 23:4'>Jos 23:4</a></em>). The language of inheritance / possession is applied to us in the New Testament (<em><a href='B:560 1:11'>Eph 1:11</a></em>; <em><a href='B:560 1:14'>Eph 1:14</a></em>; <em><a href='B:580 3:24'>Col 3:24</a></em>; <em><a href='B:510 20:32'>Act 20:32</a></em>; <em><a href='B:510 26:18'>Act 26:18</a></em>; <em><a href='B:670 1:4'>1Pe 1:4</a></em> etc.). Israel were promised: "You shall possess it" (<em><a href='B:50 30:5'>Deu 30:5</a></em>; <em><a href='B:50 33:23'>Deu 33:23</a></em>). This was more of a command than a prophecy, for sadly they were "given" the land but did not "possess" it. They were constantly encouraged in the wilderness that they were on the path to possessing the land (<em><a href='B:50 30:16'>Deu 30:16</a></em>; <em><a href='B:50 30:18'>Deu 30:18</a></em>; <em><a href='B:50 31:3'>Deu 31:3</a></em>; <em><a href='B:50 31:13'>Deu 31:13</a></em>; <em><a href='B:50 32:47'>Deu 32:47</a></em>), but when they got there they didn't possess it fully. <em></em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>It was God's intention that Moses would go before the people and lead them into the land (<em><a href='B:50 10:11'>Deu 10:11</a></em>), but Moses failed, and so it fell to Joshua. But it seems he was nervous, and so God used the ark rather than Joshua personally to 'go before the people' (s.w. <em><a href='B:60 3:6'>Jos 3:6</a></em>). All the time we see God setting up potential programs which have to be amended because of human weakness.</p><p style='margin-left:1em'>The repeated references to the “journeys” of the people in the wilderness had as their basis the description of Abraham taking his journey through the desert to the promised land (<em><a href='B:10 13:3'>Gen 13:3</a></em>); the very same two Hebrew words recur in the command to Israel to now ‘take their journey’ (<em><a href='B:50 10:11'>Deu 10:11</a></em>), following in the steps of their father Abraham. As Abraham was commanded to "be perfect" (<em><a href='B:10 17:1'>Gen 17:1</a></em>), so Israel were told: "<em>You</em> (after the pattern of father Abraham) shall be perfect with the Lord" (<em><a href='B:50 19:13'>Deu 19:13</a></em>). <em></em></p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1em'><em>Now Israel, what does Yahweh your God require of you, but to fear Yahweh your God, to walk in all His ways and to love Him and to serve Yahweh your God with all your heart and with all your soul- </em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>Alluded to in <em><a href='B:400 6:8'>Mic 6:8</a></em>, where walking in God’s ways is understood as walking in humility; and ‘loving God’ is expanded into loving to show justice and mercy. To love (God)" is paralleled with "to love mercy". If we love God, we will be merciful as He is. To know Him in truth is to actively be like Him. We can be tempted to think that we can ‘love God’ within our own hearts by accepting His existence and reading the Bible. But it has to be more than that; to love God is to love others, to be merciful to the irritating and ungracious (:18). We cannot love God without loving our brethren (<em><a href='B:690 3:17'>1Jn 3:17</a></em>; <em><a href='B:690 4:21'>1Jn 4:21</a></em>). To love God in this way is in the end ‘for our own good’ (:13). These words are interpreted in <em><a href='B:400 6:8'>Mic 6:8</a></em>: “<em>What does Yahweh require of you</em>, but to do justly, and to love mercy, and<em> to walk humbly</em> (‘to humble yourself to walk’) with your God?”. Walking in God’s ways is paralleled with walking in humility, humbling oneself. This, then, is the end result of our obedience to the way of God: a self humbling through regular submission to God’s principles, as hour by hour we experience the provocations of our flesh. </p><p style='margin-left:1em'>Yahweh was to be loved with all the heart, soul and mind (<em><a href='B:50 6:5'>Deu 6:5</a></em>). This is understood by Joshua as meaning that those who loved Yahweh would not "mix with" and intermarry with the nations and accept their gods (<em><a href='B:60 23:11-12'>Jos 23:11-12</a></em>; <em><a href='B:60 23:16'>Jos 23:16</a></em>). "Love" for God was not therefore a feeling; Joshua said that they must "take good heed therefore to yourselves, that you love Yahweh" (<em><a href='B:60 23:11'>Jos 23:11</a></em>). This is the love of conscious direction of the mind, the love which is a choice rather than an emotion.&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;</p><p style='margin-left:1em'>Some time, read through the book of Deuteronomy in one or two sessions. You'll see many themes of Moses in Deuteronomy. It really shows how Moses felt towards Israel, and how the Lord Jesus feels towards us, and especially how he felt towards us just before his death. For this is what the whole book prefigures. "Love" and the idea of love occurs far more in Deuteronomy than in the other books of the Law. "Fear the Lord your God" of <em><a href='B:20 9:30'>Exo 9:30</a></em>; <em><a href='B:30 19:14'>Lev 19:14</a></em>; <em><a href='B:30 19:32'>Lev 19:32</a></em>; <em><a href='B:30 25:17'>Lev 25:17</a></em> becomes "love the Lord your God" in Deuteronomy (<em><a href='B:50 6:5'>Deu 6:5</a></em>; <em><a href='B:50 7:9'>Deu 7:9</a></em>; <em><a href='B:50 10:12'>Deu 10:12</a></em>; <em><a href='B:50 11:1'>Deu 11:1</a></em>; <em><a href='B:50 19:9'>Deu 19:9</a></em>; <em><a href='B:50 30:6'>Deu 30:6</a></em>; <em><a href='B:50 30:16'>Deu 30:16</a></em>; <em><a href='B:50 30:20'>Deu 30:20</a></em>). There are 23 references to not hating in Deuteronomy, compared to only 5 in Ex. - Num.; Moses saw the danger of bitterness and lack of love. He saw these things as the spiritual cancer they are, in his time of maturity he warned his beloved people against them. His mind was full of them. The LXX uses the word ekklesia eight times in Deuteronomy, but not once in Moses' other words (<em><a href='B:50 4:10'>Deu 4:10</a></em>; <em><a href='B:50 9:10'>Deu 9:10</a></em>; <em><a href='B:50 18:16'>Deu 18:16</a></em>; <em><a href='B:50 23:1-3'>Deu 23:1-3</a></em>; <em><a href='B:50 23:8'>Deu 23:8</a></em>; <em><a href='B:50 32:1'>Deu 32:1</a></em>). Responsibility for the whole family God had redeemed was a mark of Moses; maturity at the end of his life, at the time of Deuteronomy. It is observable that both as a community and as individuals, this will be a sign of our maturity too.</p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1em'><em>to keep the commandments of Yahweh and His statutes- </em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>The word so often used for "keeping" / "diligently observing" Yahweh's commandments is from the word meaning a thorn hedge; the idea originally was to hedge in. Taking this too literally led Judaism to all their endless fences around the law, i.e. forbidding this or that because it might lead to doing that or this, which in turn would then lead to breaking an actual commandment. And those various fences become elevated to the level of commandments. But this is not the idea. We are indeed to hedge ourselves in ("take heed to yourself", <em><a href='B:50 11:16'>Deu 11:16</a></em>; <em><a href='B:50 12:13'>Deu 12:13</a></em>; <em><a href='B:50 12:19'>Deu 12:19</a></em>; <em><a href='B:50 12:30'>Deu 12:30</a></em>; <em><a href='B:50 12:32'>Deu 12:32</a></em> s.w.), so that we may keep / hedge ourselves in to keep the commandments of God (<em><a href='B:30 18:4-5'>Lev 18:4-5</a></em>; <em><a href='B:30 18:26'>Lev 18:26</a></em>; <em><a href='B:30 18:30'>Lev 18:30</a></em>; <em><a href='B:30 19:19'>Lev 19:19</a></em>; <em><a href='B:30 19:37'>Lev 19:37</a></em>; <em><a href='B:30 20:8'>Lev 20:8</a></em>; <em><a href='B:30 20:22'>Lev 20:22</a></em>; <em><a href='B:30 22:9'>Lev 22:9</a></em>; <em><a href='B:30 22:31'>Lev 22:31</a></em>; <em><a href='B:30 25:18'>Lev 25:18</a></em>; <em><a href='B:30 26:3'>Lev 26:3</a></em>; <em><a href='B:40 28:2'>Num 28:2</a></em>;&nbsp;&nbsp; <em><a href='B:50 7:11-12'>Deu 7:11-12</a></em>; <em><a href='B:50 8:1'>Deu 8:1</a></em>; <em><a href='B:50 8:11'>Deu 8:11</a></em> (s.w. "beware"); 10:13; 11:1,8,22,32; 12:1; 13:4,18; ; 15:5,9 ("beware");&nbsp; 17:19; 19:9; 23:9 ("keep yourself"); 24:8; 26:16-18; 27:1; 28:1,9,13; 29:9; 30:10,16; 31:12; 32:46). And without falling into the legalism of Judaism, self discipline does require a degree of fencing ourselves in to the one way. Thus the man struggling with alcoholism avoids the supermarket where alcohol is pushed in front of the eyes of the shoppers; the married woman struggling with attraction to another man makes little laws for herself about avoiding his company. And if we do this, then the Lord will "keep" us, will hedge us in to keeping His way (s.w. <em><a href='B:40 6:24'>Num 6:24</a></em>).</p><p style='margin-left:1em'><em>Which I command you this day for your good?- </em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>Throughout&nbsp;the Law of Moses, the unity of Israel was emphasized. But that unity was not predicated upon any statement of faith, and the history of Israel has no example of the faithful minority removing themselves from association or “fellowship” with the majority, who clearly were unfaithful in both theology and practice. Moses in his last great speech as recorded in Deuteronomy seems to have purposefully confused his use of "you" plural (AV “ye”) and "you" singular (AV “thee”) in addressing them; as if to show that they, the many, were also one body (e.g. <em><a href='B:50 10:12-22'>Deu 10:12-22</a></em>; <em><a href='B:50 11:1-2'>Deu 11:1-2</a></em>). He as it were zooms in from the collective to the individual, lest any should think that they were just some nameless individual before God, saved or damned only according to their group affiliation.</p><p style='margin-left:1em'>We note that the sum total of the commandments were intended to reinforce spirituality, obedience led to more obedience. Hence the whole system would lose its potential power if commandments were added or removed from it. But the law was "holy, just and good" because it was not a burden to man, but intended for his "good".</p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1em'><em>Behold, to Yahweh your God belongs heaven and the heaven of heavens, the earth, with all that is in it- </em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>God's possession of literally all things, the entire cosmos, is cited here as an encouragement to believe that He could therefore so easily give Israel the promised land. Just as it is not at all difficult for Him to give us His Kingdom. But like Israel, we balk at the promise, as if somehow His ability is somehow limited. The simplest truth is that God loves us and it is His will and pleasure to give us the Kingdom. And seeing He owns all things, to give us a place in His Kingdom is not at all difficult for Him. The choice is only with us.</p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1em'><em>It’s just that Yahweh had a delight in your fathers to love them, and He chose their seed after them, even you above all peoples, as it is at this day- </em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>This is a clear statement that love is a choice, not a passing emotion. For the love of God is reflected in His choosing to love His people rather than others. “You did not choose me, but I chose you… out of the world” (<em><a href='B:500 15:16'>Joh 15:16</a></em>; <em><a href='B:500 15:19'>Joh 15:19</a></em>) corresponds to the oft repeated theme of Moses that God has chosen Israel “out of all peoples” (<em><a href='B:50 7:6'>Deu 7:6</a></em> RVmg.), by grace (<em><a href='B:50 4:37'>Deu 4:37</a></em>; <em><a href='B:50 10:15'>Deu 10:15</a></em>; <em><a href='B:50 14:2'>Deu 14:2</a></em>). </p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1em'><em>Circumcise therefore the foreskin of your heart, and be no more stiff-necked- </em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'><em><a href='B:580 2:12'>Col 2:12</a></em> presents baptism as the equivalent in our day if we wish to enter the new covenant, which is based upon the same promises to Abraham. But there is more to new covenant relationship than simply the ritual of baptism. Circumcision spoke of a cutting off of the flesh in the most private and intimate place. We always read of circumcision as being done to a person. Water baptism enables us to receive the birth of the Spirit, whereby the Lord will work through the Spirit to change our hearts, to cut off our flesh in the most private and personal recesses of human hearts. <em><a href='B:580 2:11'>Col 2:11</a></em> explains: "In him you were also circumcised with a circumcision not made with hands, in the putting off of the body of the flesh, in the circumcision of Christ". Through baptism, we enter the "in Christ" status, and our flesh is as it were cut off, by status we are in Him and not in the flesh. This is repeated in Paul's argument in <em><a href='B:520 1:1-32'>Rom 1:1-32</a></em>; <em><a href='B:520 2:1-29'>Rom 2:1-29</a></em>; <em><a href='B:520 3:1-31'>Rom 3:1-31</a></em>; <em><a href='B:520 4:1-25'>Rom 4:1-25</a></em>; <em><a href='B:520 5:1-21'>Rom 5:1-21</a></em>; <em><a href='B:520 6:1-23'>Rom 6:1-23</a></em>; <em><a href='B:520 7:1-25'>Rom 7:1-25</a></em>; <em><a href='B:520 8:1-39'>Rom 8:1-39</a></em>, although there he stresses that our flesh still remains; but from God's perspective, it is cut off. It takes faith to believe this- faith in God's operation, that the circumcision operation was really performed by Him (<em><a href='B:580 2:12'>Col 2:12</a></em>). Baptism is the means by which we become "in Christ" and in spiritual terms cease to be uncircumcised (<em><a href='B:580 2:13'>Col 2:13</a></em>). If Israel took the initiative in attempting to circumcise their hearts (<em><a href='B:50 10:16'>Deu 10:16</a></em>; <em><a href='B:300 4:4'>Jer 4:4</a></em>), then God would confirm them in this by doing what man cannot do- operating directly upon the human heart to cut off the flesh from it (<em><a href='B:50 30:6'>Deu 30:6</a></em>).</p><p style='margin-left:1em'>Time and again, Moses speaks of the state of their heart. He warns them against allowing a bad state of heart to develop, he speaks often of how apostasy starts in the heart. Moses makes a total of 49 references to the heart / mind of Israel in Deuteronomy, compared to only 13 in the whole of Exodus, Leviticus and Numbers. This indicates the paramount importance which our Lord attaches to the state of our mind. This was perhaps his greatest wish as He faced death; that we should develop a spiritual mind and thereby manifest the Father and come to salvation. Moses likewise saw the state of our mind as the key to spiritual success. But do we share this perspective? Do we guard our minds against the media and influence of a mind-corrupting world? It's been observed that the phrase "The God of (somebody)", or similar, occurs 614 times in the Old Testament, of which 306 are in Deuteronomy. Our very personal relationship with God was therefore something else which Moses came to grasp in his spiritual maturity. Statistical analysis of the word "love" in the Pentateuch likewise reveals that "love" was a great theme of Moses at the end of his life (Moses uses it 16 times in Deuteronomy, and only four times in Exodus, Leviticus and Numbers). </p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1em'><em>For Yahweh your God, He is God of gods and Lord of lords, the great God, the mighty and the awesome, who doesn’t respect persons nor take reward- </em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>The argument proceeds in :18,19 to appeal for Israel to show justice and grace to the foreigners and poor. God does this because He doesn't respect persons. And so our likely temptation not to do these things is because we effectively do respect persons. We are more likely to give some help to someone whose person we know and respect, on our own broad social or ethnic level; rather than the mass of poor folks whom we are tempted to refer to as "Them... just them...", as if their low status precludes us from having a duty to relieve them.</p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1em'><em>He executes justice for the fatherless and widow and loves the foreigner, in giving him food and clothing- </em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>The Hebrew <em>mishpat</em>, "ordinances" or "justice", has a wide range of meaning. The idea is of judgment, as if God and His Angels gave these laws as their considered judgment after considering the human condition, and Israel were to abide by them. But the word also the idea of a right or privilege; and that is how we should see God's laws. They are only felt as a burden because of human hardness of neck towards God's ways. His laws are not of themselves burdensome, but rather a privilege and blessing. The law was indeed "holy, just and good" (<em><a href='B:520 7:12'>Rom 7:12</a></em>), designed to inculcate a holy, just and good life (<em><a href='B:630 1:8'>Tit 1:8</a></em>), a way in which a man should "walk" in daily life (<em><a href='B:30 18:4'>Lev 18:4</a></em>), a culture of kindness and grace to others which reflected God's grace to man. If we dwell upon the idea of "rights" carried within the word <em>mishpat</em>, we note that the law begins in <em><a href='B:20 21:1-2'>Exo 21:1-2</a></em> (also <em><a href='B:50 15:12-18'>Deu 15:12-18</a></em>) with the rights of a slave- those considered to have no rights in the society of that day. The "rights" to be afforded by us to others are the essence of God's rightness / justice.</p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1em'><em>Therefore love the foreigner, for you were foreigners in the land of Egypt- </em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>One of the most repeated themes of Moses in Deuteronomy is the way he keeps on telling them to "remember" all the great things which God had done for them on their wilderness journey (e.g. <em><a href='B:50 10:21'>Deu 10:21</a></em>; <em><a href='B:50 11:3-6'>Deu 11:3-6</a></em>), and especially the wonder of how he had redeemed them as children (his audience had been under twenty years old when they went through the Red Sea). Just look up all the times "remember" occurs in Deuteronomy. He really wanted them to overcome the human tendency to forget the greatness of God as manifested earlier in our lives and spiritual experience. Our tendency as the new Israel is just the same- to forget the wonder of baptism, of how God reached out His arm to save us.&nbsp;And the remembrance of our own status in the world, before we were redeemed, is to make us generous to foreigners and oppressed persons in practice.</p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1em'><em>You must fear Yahweh your God; you must serve Him and cling to Him and you shall swear by His name- </em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>The idea of 'cleaving' to God is a big theme of Moses in Deuteronomy (<em><a href='B:50 4:4'>Deu 4:4</a></em>; <em><a href='B:50 10:20'>Deu 10:20</a></em>; <em><a href='B:50 11:22'>Deu 11:22</a></em>; <em><a href='B:50 13:4'>Deu 13:4</a></em>; <em><a href='B:50 13:17'>Deu 13:17</a></em>; <em><a href='B:50 28:21'>Deu 28:21</a></em>; <em><a href='B:50 28:60'>Deu 28:60</a></em>; <em><a href='B:50 30:20'>Deu 30:20</a></em>); the only other time Moses uses the word in his writings is in <em><a href='B:10 2:24'>Gen 2:24</a></em>, concerning a man cleaving to his wife. Moses seems to have been suggesting to Israel that their covenant relationship with God meant they were <em>marrying God</em>. This was a real paradigm breaker. We may be used to such things. But against the theological background of the time, not to say the generally low level of spirituality among Israel, this was a shocking idea. It reflected the heights to which Moses had risen.</p><p style='margin-left:1em'>The Lord’s common Upper Room theme of ‘abiding’ in Him uses the same word as Moses used in the LXX when exhorting his people to ‘cleave unto’ God (<em><a href='B:50 10:20'>Deu 10:20</a></em>; <em><a href='B:50 11:22'>Deu 11:22</a></em>). This abiding involved loving God and keeping His commandments- all ideas which occur together in <em><a href='B:50 13:4'>Deu 13:4</a></em>; <em><a href='B:50 30:20'>Deu 30:20</a></em>.</p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1em'><em>He is your praise and He is your God, Who has done for you these great and awesome things which your eyes have seen-</em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>Fear is always the antithesis of faith. God is often called an "awesome God" (<em><a href='B:50 7:21'>Deu 7:21</a></em>; <em><a href='B:50 10:21'>Deu 10:21</a></em> etc.). The Hebrew word for "awesome" is that for 'fear' (s.w. <em><a href='B:10 3:10'>Gen 3:10</a></em>; <em><a href='B:10 15:1'>Gen 15:1</a></em>; <em><a href='B:10 18:1-33'>Gen 18:1-33</a></em>; <em><a href='B:10 15:1-21'>Gen 15:1-21</a></em> etc.). The idea is that God's people are to be in such fear / awe of Him that they fear / are in awe of nothing else. Hence <em><a href='B:50 7:21'>Deu 7:21</a></em> says that Israel should "not be scared of" their enemies, because their God is "awesome", He is the one to be feared.</p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1em'><em>Your fathers went down into Egypt with seventy persons, and now Yahweh your God has made you as the stars of the sky for multitude- </em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>This was an initial, primary fulfilment of the promises to Abraham; we too have some foretastes of the Kingdom life even now. Like Paul in his time of dying, Moses in Deuteronomy saw the importance of obedience, the harder side of God; yet he also saw in real depth the surpassing love of God, and the grace that was to come, beyond Law. This appreciation reflected Moses' mature grasp of the Name / characteristics of God. He uses the name "Yahweh" in Deuteronomy over 530 times, often with some possessive adjective, e.g. "Yahweh thy God" (AV- i.e. you singular), or "Yahweh our God". He saw the personal relationship between a man and his God. Jacob reached a like realization at his peak. </p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1em'><em>Therefore you must love Yahweh your God and keep His instructions, His statutes, His ordinances and His commandments always- </em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>Yahweh was to be loved with all the heart, soul and mind (<em><a href='B:50 6:5'>Deu 6:5</a></em>). This is understood by Joshua as meaning that those who loved Yahweh would not "mix with" and intermarry with the nations and accept their gods (<em><a href='B:60 23:11-12'>Jos 23:11-12</a></em>; <em><a href='B:60 23:16'>Jos 23:16</a></em>). "Love" for God was not therefore a feeling; Joshua said that they must "take good heed therefore to yourselves, that you love Yahweh" (<em><a href='B:60 23:11'>Jos 23:11</a></em>). This is the love of conscious direction of the mind, the love which is a choice rather than an emotion.&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;</p><p style='margin-left:1em'>Some time, read through the book of Deuteronomy in one or two sessions. You'll see many themes of Moses in Deuteronomy. It really shows how Moses felt towards Israel, and how the Lord Jesus feels towards us, and especially how he felt towards us just before his death. For this is what the whole book prefigures. "Love" and the idea of love occurs far more in Deuteronomy than in the other books of the Law. "Fear the Lord your God" of <em><a href='B:20 9:30'>Exo 9:30</a></em>; <em><a href='B:30 19:14'>Lev 19:14</a></em>; <em><a href='B:30 19:32'>Lev 19:32</a></em>; <em><a href='B:30 25:17'>Lev 25:17</a></em> becomes "love the Lord your God" in Deuteronomy (<em><a href='B:50 6:5'>Deu 6:5</a></em>; <em><a href='B:50 7:9'>Deu 7:9</a></em>; <em><a href='B:50 10:12'>Deu 10:12</a></em>; <em><a href='B:50 11:1'>Deu 11:1</a></em>; <em><a href='B:50 19:9'>Deu 19:9</a></em>; <em><a href='B:50 30:6'>Deu 30:6</a></em>; <em><a href='B:50 30:16'>Deu 30:16</a></em>; <em><a href='B:50 30:20'>Deu 30:20</a></em>). There are 23 references to not hating in Deuteronomy, compared to only 5 in Ex. - Num.; Moses saw the danger of bitterness and lack of love. He saw these things as the spiritual cancer they are, in his time of maturity he warned his beloved people against them. His mind was full of them. The LXX uses the word <em>ekklesia</em> eight times in Deuteronomy, but not once in Moses' other words (<em><a href='B:50 4:10'>Deu 4:10</a></em>; <em><a href='B:50 9:10'>Deu 9:10</a></em>; <em><a href='B:50 18:16'>Deu 18:16</a></em>; <em><a href='B:50 23:1-3'>Deu 23:1-3</a></em>; <em><a href='B:50 23:8'>Deu 23:8</a></em>; <em><a href='B:50 32:1'>Deu 32:1</a></em>). Responsibility for the whole family God had redeemed was a mark of Moses; maturity at the end of his life, at the time of Deuteronomy. It is observable that both as a community and as individuals, this will be a sign of our maturity too.</p><p style='margin-left:1em'>Throughout&nbsp;the Law of Moses, the unity of Israel was emphasized. But that unity was not predicated upon any statement of faith, and the history of Israel has no example of the faithful minority removing themselves from association or “fellowship” with the majority, who clearly were unfaithful in both theology and practice. Moses in his last great speech as recorded in Deuteronomy seems to have purposefully confused his use of "you" plural (AV “ye”) and "you" singular (AV “thee”) in addressing them; as if to show that they, the many, were also one body (e.g. <em><a href='B:50 10:12-22'>Deu 10:12-22</a></em>; <em><a href='B:50 11:1-2'>Deu 11:1-2</a></em>).</p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1em'><em>Know this day - for I don’t speak with your children who have not known, and who have not seen the chastisement of Yahweh your God - His greatness, His mighty hand and His outstretched arm- </em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>The might of Yahweh's hand was shown through His grace in as it were forcing Israel out of Egypt, when they actually wanted to remain there and He wished to destroy them (<em><a href='B:330 20:8'>Eze 20:8</a></em>). They were idolatrous and had told Moses to leave them alone and let them serve the Egyptians. Yahweh's strength therefore refers to the power of His grace in continuing His program with them.</p><p style='margin-left:1em'>Moses was to stretch forth his hand to cause the waters of the Red Sea to part and return, not his rod; because he was manifesting the hand of Yahweh which was to deliver Israel (s.w. <em><a href='B:20 7:5'>Exo 7:5</a></em>). The repeated references to the stretched our arm or hand of Yahweh to save His people invite us to recall this incident, and to perceive that Yahweh's hand had been manifest through the hand of Moses (<em><a href='B:50 4:34'>Deu 4:34</a></em>; <em><a href='B:50 5:15'>Deu 5:15</a></em>; <em><a href='B:50 7:19'>Deu 7:19</a></em>; <em><a href='B:50 11:2'>Deu 11:2</a></em>; <em><a href='B:50 26:8'>Deu 26:8</a></em>). That stretched out, saving arm and hand of Yahweh was and is stretched out still, to save His people (<em><a href='B:110 8:42'>1Ki 8:42</a></em>; <em><a href='B:330 20:34'>Eze 20:34</a></em>; <em><a href='B:340 9:15'>Dan 9:15</a></em> "as at this day") and bring about a new creation in human lives (<em><a href='B:290 45:12'>Isa 45:12</a></em>). For the deliverance through the Red Sea is intended to be experienced by all God's people, and is now seen through His saving grace at baptism (<em><a href='B:530 10:1-2'>1Co 10:1-2</a></em>). What happened there was but the beginning of the work of God's outstretched arm (<em><a href='B:50 3:24'>Deu 3:24</a></em>). Yet the stretched out arm / hand of God is also a figure for His judgment (<em><a href='B:130 21:16'>1Ch 21:16</a></em>; <em><a href='B:290 9:12'>Isa 9:12</a></em>; <em><a href='B:290 10:4'>Isa 10:4</a></em>). His hand is at work in our lives- either to our condemnation or our salvation. And it is for us therefore to humble ourselves beneath that mighty hand (<em><a href='B:670 5:6'>1Pe 5:6</a></em>).</p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1em'><em>His signs and His works, which He did in the midst of Egypt to Pharaoh the king of Egypt and to all his land- </em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>It is stressed that Israel were taken out from the "midst of Egypt" (<em><a href='B:50 4:34'>Deu 4:34</a></em>; <em><a href='B:110 8:51'>1Ki 8:51</a></em>). The plagues and wonders were done in "the midst of Egypt" (<em><a href='B:20 3:20'>Exo 3:20</a></em>; <em><a href='B:50 11:3'>Deu 11:3</a></em>). The midst of Egypt appears to be defined in <em><a href='B:230 135:9'>Psa 135:9</a></em>; <em><a href='B:290 19:3'>Isa 19:3</a></em>; <em><a href='B:330 29:3'>Eze 29:3</a></em> as being Pharaoh and his servants. The narrative therefore stresses so much his response to the plagues. God's especial focus had been upon his conversion, and yet he refused. Israel were taken out right from under his nose, from the very heart of Egypt. <em><a href='B:330 20:8'>Eze 20:8</a></em> reveals what is not recorded in the historical record; that because the Israelites were so devoted to Egyptian idolatry still, His thought had been to destroy them "in the midst of the land of Egypt" (<em><a href='B:330 20:8'>Eze 20:8</a></em>). But God's pole of grace overcame the pole of necessary judgment. He tolerated them and saved them, with enthusiasm, by the grace which comes from love- love taken to its ultimate, saving term. The whole narrative speaks as if the Hebrews were all at one place at one time and left "the midst of Egypt" together. Although unrecorded in the historical narrative, this would have meant that they gathered together "in the midst of Egypt" with Moses, who was not in Goshen but in the locality and presence of Pharaoh.&nbsp;&nbsp;</p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1em'><em>and what He did to the army of Egypt, to their horses and to their chariots; how He made the water of the Red Sea overflow them as they pursued after you- </em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>But they were cast into the sea by God (<em><a href='B:20 15:21'>Exo 15:21</a></em>). We see here how God confirms people in the desires of their heart, for both good and bad. </p><p style='margin-left:1em'><em>And how Yahweh has destroyed them to this day- </em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>Although the pursuit of Israel by the Egyptians was a historical act at a specific time, caused by God's direct action upon the hearts of the Egyptians (<em><a href='B:20 14:8'>Exo 14:8</a></em>), the pursuit and their destruction is described as ongoing "to this day" (<em><a href='B:50 11:4'>Deu 11:4</a></em>). God's word and His actions according to that word are somehow alive to this day. This is the unique nature of Biblical history. All the incidents within it speak to us of later generations. And so in <em><a href='B:60 24:1-33'>Jos 24:1-33</a></em>; <em><a href='B:60 6:1-27'>Jos 6:1-27</a></em> and often, Israel are bidden understand their history as speaking directly to them, to perceive God's grace to them in history, and respond now.&nbsp;</p><p style='margin-left:1em'>We are to understand each victory and achievement of God as somehow ongoing right down to our own day and our own lives and experience. This is what makes the Bible a <em>living</em> word for us. This explains why David repeatedly refers to the miracle at the Red Sea as if this had affected him personally, to the extent that he could ecstatically rejoice because of it. Thus <em><a href='B:230 114:5-6'>Psa 114:5-6</a></em> RV describes the Red Sea as even now fleeing before God’s people. And thus because of the records of God's past activities, we should be motivated in our decisions now. </p><p style='margin-left:1em'>It is in this sense that the punishment for sin is ‘everlasting’, in that there will be no end to their death. To remain dead for ever is an everlasting punishment. An example of the Bible using this kind of expression is found in <em><a href='B:50 11:4'>Deu 11:4</a></em>. This describes God’s one-off destruction of Pharaoh’s army in the Red Sea as an eternal, on-going destruction in that this actual army never again troubled Israel: “He made the waters of the Red sea overflow them... the Lord has destroyed them to this day”.</p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1em'><em>and what He did to you in the wilderness, until you came to this place- </em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>The reference may be to the manna, which they received until they came to Canaan; or to the leadership of the Angel in the pillar of fire and cloud.</p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1em'><em>and what He did to Dathan and Abiram, the sons of Eliab, the son of Reuben, how the earth opened its mouth and swallowed them up, and their households and their tents and every living thing that followed them in the midst of all Israel- </em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>We note the Korah isn't mentioned, although he was the ringleader of the rebellion (<em><a href='B:720 1:11'>Jud 1:11</a></em>). The point here is that those who followed wicked men were punished. And that remains the abiding lesson. The earth is likened to a monster swallowing up people. A case could be made that the whole record of Israel’s rejection from entering the land of Canaan is framed to adduce a reason for this as the fact they chose to believe that the land was inhabited by an evil dragon who would consume them there. This was a slander of the good land, and the whole point was that if they had believed in the power of God, then <em>whatever</em> ‘adversary’ was in the land, in whatever form, was ultimately of no real power (<em><a href='B:40 13:32'>Num 13:32</a></em>; <em><a href='B:40 14:36'>Num 14:36</a></em>; <em><a href='B:50 1:25'>Deu 1:25</a></em>). And yet it was not God’s way to specifically tell the people that there was no such dragon lurking in the land of Canaan – instead He worked with them according to their fears, by making the earth literally open and swallow up the apostate amongst them (<em><a href='B:40 16:30'>Num 16:30</a></em>) – emphasizing that by doing this, <em>He</em> was doing “a new thing”, something that had never been done before – for there was no dragon lurking in any land able to swallow up people. And throughout the prophets it is emphasized that <em>God</em> and not any dragon swallowed up people – “The Lord (and not any dragon) was as an enemy; <em>He</em> has swallowed up Israel” (<em><a href='B:310 2:5'>Lam 2:5</a></em> and frequently in the prophets). The people of Israel who left Egypt actually failed to inherit Canaan because they believed that it was a land who swallowed up the inhabitants of the land (<em><a href='B:40 13:32'>Num 13:32</a></em>), relating this to the presence of giants in the land (<em><a href='B:40 13:33'>Num 13:33</a></em>). As Joshua and Caleb pleaded with them, they needed to believe that whatever myths there were going around, God was greater than whatever mythical beast was there. And because they would not believe that, they failed to enter the land, which in type symbolized those who fail to attain that great salvation which God has prepared.</p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1em'><em>Your eyes have seen all the great work of Yahweh which He did-</em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>Because God saved them from Egypt by grace (cp. baptism- <em><a href='B:530 10:1-2'>1Co 10:1-2</a></em>), with they themselves so spiritually weak at the time, still taking idols of Egypt through the Red Sea with them- <em>therefore</em> they were to keep the law (<em><a href='B:50 11:7-8'>Deu 11:7-8</a></em>). Because God gave them the land of Canaan, a land for which they did not labour, didn't do any 'work' to receive, but were given because "You did a favour unto them" (<em><a href='B:230 44:3'>Psa 44:3</a></em>)- <em>therefore </em>they were to keep the law (<em><a href='B:50 26:15-16'>Deu 26:15-16</a></em>; <em><a href='B:50 29:8-9'>Deu 29:8-9</a></em>; <em><a href='B:60 23:5-6'>Jos 23:5-6</a></em>). David said that he loved keeping the law <em>because</em> God's testimony to him was so miraculous (<em><a href='B:230 119:129'>Psa 119:129</a></em> Heb.). There is an awesomeness to God's grace in all this. Hence the paradox of <em><a href='B:20 20:20'>Exo 20:20</a></em>: "Fear not... that the fear of God may be before your faces". We are not to fear Him, for such perfect love casts out fear... yet it is exactly because of the wonder of all this that we live life in some fear / awe of misusing and abusing that grace. </p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1em'><em>Therefore you must keep all the commandment which I command you this day, that you may be strong and go in and possess the land where you go over to possess it-</em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>See on <em><a href='B:50 31:9'>Deu 31:9</a></em>; <em><a href='B:60 1:6'>Jos 1:6</a></em>. Joshua (cp. Jesus) is repeatedly made parallel with Israel (cp. Us); his victories were theirs; what he achieved is counted to them. In the same way, the people of the Lord Jesus are counted as Him. Joshua was to be strong and possess the land (<em><a href='B:60 1:6'>Jos 1:6</a></em>), just as they had been told to do, using the same Hebrew words (<em><a href='B:50 11:8'>Deu 11:8</a></em>). Indeed, Israel and Joshua are given parallel charges, to be strong and of good courage to take the land (<em><a href='B:50 31:6-7'>Deu 31:6-7</a></em>). Both Israel and Joshua are given the same charge to keep the words of the covenant, that they might “prosper” (<em><a href='B:50 29:9'>Deu 29:9</a></em>; <em><a href='B:60 1:7'>Jos 1:7</a></em>). </p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1em'><em>and that you may prolong your days in the land which Yahweh swore to your fathers to give to them and to their seed- </em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>For "prolong your days", see on :21. </p><p style='margin-left:1em'><em>A land flowing with milk and honey- </em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>Israel came to describe the Egypt they had been called out from as the land flowing with milk and honey (<em><a href='B:40 16:12'>Num 16:12</a></em>), and denied that the Kingdom was in fact like that. And so we have the same tendency to be deceived into thinking that the kingdoms of this world, the world around us, is effectively the Kingdom of God, the only thing worth striving after.</p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1em'><em>For the land where you go in to possess it isn’t as the land of Egypt that you came out from, where you sowed your seed and watered it with your foot, as a garden of herbs-</em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>Our separation from this world isn’t merely negative. We are separated <em>from</em> the world ("come out from")&nbsp; so that we might be separated <em>unto</em> the things of God ("you go in"). These two ideas are found together in the Hebrew word for ‘holiness’.<em></em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>Egypt had little rainfall, and water was supplied from the flooding of the Nile being distributed by a series of foot pumps. But Canaan would have its own rainfall. The Biblical record is consistently credible. Hence the punishment of Judah was to become like a garden of herbs which had no water (<em><a href='B:290 1:30'>Isa 1:30</a></em>). Unfaithful Israel entered the land, still clutching the idols of Egypt, and received blessings for obedience. This was by grace alone. But they failed to respond to that grace.</p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1em'><em>but the land you go over to possess is a land of hills and valleys which drinks water of the rain of the sky- </em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>The people were often reminded that they were about to “go over (Jordan) to possess” the land, as if they were on the banks of Jordan almost. But a lack of rain was one of the Law’s curses for idol worship (<em><a href='B:50 11:10-12'>Deu 11:10-12</a></em>; <em><a href='B:50 11:17'>Deu 11:17</a></em>). Elijah’s response to Israel’s idolatry was to tell them there would be no rain (<em><a href='B:110 17:1'>1Ki 17:1</a></em> cp. 16:32,33). Those reflective upon God’s Law would have realized the implied criticism which this carried; the more unspiritual would have just cursed Elijah for bringing about a devastating drought.</p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1em'><em>a land which Yahweh your God cares for- </em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>Yahweh cared for / sought after the land and Kingdom He had promised Israel (<em><a href='B:50 11:12'>Deu 11:12</a></em>). The same word is used of how His people were to seek Him, to care for the things of His Kingdom above all else (<em><a href='B:50 12:5'>Deu 12:5</a></em>). There thus develops a mutuality between God and man. </p><p style='margin-left:1em'><em>The eyes of Yahweh your God are always on it, from the beginning of the year to the end of the year-</em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>Under Michael's control (see on <em><a href='B:340 12:1'>Dan 12:1</a></em>) there are many other Angels ("the eyes of Yahweh") similarly dedicated to the affairs of the people of Israel. Does the phrase "Yahweh your God" here refer to the Angel which led them through the wilderness? The Angel Michael? Remember Moses was speaking&nbsp; to the people of Israel at this time, and they very much conceived of the "Yahweh your God" in terms of the Angel of the presence going with them. Thus God was promising that His Angels would physically be present in the land and would be especially sensitive to the events there.</p><p style='margin-left:1em'>The Biblical record seems to very frequently seek to deconstruct popular ideas about sin and evil. One of the most widespread notions was the "evil eye", whereby it was believed that some people had an "evil eye" which could bring distress into the eyes of those upon whom they looked in jealousy or anger. This concept is alive and well in many areas to this day. The idea entered Judaism very strongly after the Babylonian captivity; the Babylonian Talmud is full of references to it. The sage Rav attributed many illnesses to the evil eye, and the Talmud even claimed that 99 out of 100 people died prematurely from this (Bava Metzia 107b). The Biblical deconstruction of this is through stressing that <em>God's</em> eye is all powerful in the destiny of His people (<em><a href='B:50 11:12'>Deu 11:12</a></em>; <em><a href='B:230 33:18'>Psa 33:18</a></em>); and that "an evil eye" refers to an <em>internal</em> attitude of mean spiritedness <em>within</em> people- e.g. an "evil eye" is understood as an ungenerous spirit in <em><a href='B:50 15:9'>Deu 15:9</a></em>; <em><a href='B:470 6:23'>Mat 6:23</a></em>; <em><a href='B:470 20:15'>Mat 20:15</a></em>; or pure selfishness in <em><a href='B:50 28:54'>Deu 28:54</a></em>; <em><a href='B:50 28:56'>Deu 28:56</a></em>; <em><a href='B:240 23:6'>Pro 23:6</a></em>; <em><a href='B:240 28:22'>Pro 28:22</a></em>. We must remember that the people of Biblical times understood an "evil eye" as an <em>external</em> ability to look at someone and bring curses upon them. But the Bible redefines an "evil eye" as a purely <em>internal</em> attitude; and cosmic evil, even if it were to exist, need hold no fear for us- seeing the eyes of the only true God are running around the earth <em>for</em> us and not against us (<em><a href='B:140 16:9'>2Ch 16:9</a></em>). </p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1em'><em>If you will listen diligently to my commandments which I command you this day, to love Yahweh your God, and to serve Him with all your heart and with all your soul-</em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>See on <em><a href='B:50 7:4'>Deu 7:4</a></em>. As Moses very intensely manifested God to the people, so he foreshadowed the supreme manifestation of the Father in the Son. The commands of Moses were those of God (<em><a href='B:50 7:11'>Deu 7:11</a></em>; <em><a href='B:50 11:13'>Deu 11:13</a></em>; <em><a href='B:50 11:18'>Deu 11:18</a></em>; <em><a href='B:50 2:32'>Deu 2:32</a></em> concerning Moses' words is quoted in <em><a class='bible' href='#b66:22:18-19'>Rev 22:18-19</a></em> concerning God's words); his voice was God's voice (<em><a href='B:50 13:1-18'>Deu 13:1-18</a></em>; <em><a href='B:50 18:1-22'>Deu 18:1-22</a></em>; <em><a href='B:50 15:5'>Deu 15:5</a></em>; <em><a href='B:50 28:1'>Deu 28:1</a></em>), as with Christ. Israel were to show their love of God by keeping Moses' commands (<em><a href='B:50 11:13'>Deu 11:13</a></em>); as the new Israel do in their response to the word of Christ. Indeed, the well known prophecy that God would raise up a prophet "like unto" Moses to whom Israel would <em>listen</em> (<em><a href='B:50 18:18'>Deu 18:18</a></em>) is in the context of Israel saying they did not want to hear God's voice directly. Therefore God said that he would raise up Christ, who would be another Moses in the sense that <em>he too</em> would speak forth God's word.&nbsp;</p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1em'><em>I will give the rain of your land in its season, the former rain and the latter rain, that you may gather in your grain, your new wine and your oil- </em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>But these blessings were given anyway, despite their disobedience; when they were conditional upon their careful obedience to God's laws (:13; <em><a href='B:350 6:3'>Hos 6:3</a></em>). We see here God's grace, and overpowering desire to give His people His Kingdom. And in our low moments of faith in His grace we can remember this. Israel were rebuked for failing to thank God for the former and latter rains, which were given despite their spiritual weakness (<em><a href='B:300 5:24'>Jer 5:24</a></em>).</p><p style='margin-left:1em'>Moses is one of greatest types of the Lord Jesus, in whom the Father was supremely manifested. Because of this, it is fitting that we should see a very high level of God manifestation in Moses. Indeed it seems that God was manifest in Moses to a greater degree than in any other Old Testament character. Therefore the pronouns often change (in Deuteronomy especially), showing a confusion between the voice of God and that of Moses. <em><a href='B:50 7:4'>Deu 7:4</a></em> is an example: “They will turn away thy son from following me (this is Moses speaking for God)... so will the anger of the Lord be kindled against you”. Thus Moses’ comments on God’s words are mixed up with the words of God Himself. There are other examples of this in <em><a href='B:50 7:11'>Deu 7:11</a></em>; <em><a href='B:50 29:1'>Deu 29:1</a></em>; <em><a href='B:50 29:10'>Deu 29:10</a></em>; <em><a href='B:50 29:14-15'>Deu 29:14-15</a></em> (“I” cp. “us”). Consider especially <em><a href='B:50 11:13-14'>Deu 11:13-14</a></em>: “If ye shall diligently hearken unto my commandments which I command you this day, to love the Lord... that I will give you the rain of your land... I will send grass in thy fields”. The “I” here switches at ease between God and Moses. The Moses/God pronouns are also mixed in <em><a href='B:520 10:19'>Rom 10:19</a></em>.<em></em></p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1em'><em>I will give grass in your fields for your livestock and you shall eat and be full- </em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>Israel were given manna in the wilderness, and they ate it and were full (<em><a href='B:20 16:8'>Exo 16:8</a></em>; <em><a href='B:20 16:12'>Exo 16:12</a></em>). But they were promised that in the promised land of the Kingdom, they would likewise eat and be full, again from blessing given by God (s.w. <em><a href='B:50 8:10'>Deu 8:10</a></em>; <em><a href='B:50 11:15'>Deu 11:15</a></em>; <em><a href='B:50 14:29'>Deu 14:29</a></em>; <em><a href='B:50 26:12'>Deu 26:12</a></em>; <em><a href='B:50 31:20'>Deu 31:20</a></em>). After our Red Sea baptism, we are now in the wilderness; but by feeding on the manna, the word of God in the Lord Jesus, we have a foretaste of the Kingdom experience. But the curse for disobedience was that they would eat and not be full / satisfied (<em><a href='B:30 26:26'>Lev 26:26</a></em>).</p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1em'><em>Take heed to yourselves, lest your heart be deceived and you turn aside, and serve other gods and worship them- </em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>There are so many other examples of Moses showing his recognition of exactly <em>how</em> Israel were likely to be tempted (<em><a href='B:50 6:11-13'>Deu 6:11-13</a></em>; <em><a href='B:50 8:11-20'>Deu 8:11-20</a></em>; <em><a href='B:50 9:4'>Deu 9:4</a></em>; <em><a href='B:50 11:16'>Deu 11:16</a></em>; <em><a href='B:50 12:13'>Deu 12:13</a></em>; <em><a href='B:50 12:19'>Deu 12:19</a></em>; <em><a href='B:50 12:23'>Deu 12:23</a></em>; <em><a href='B:50 12:30'>Deu 12:30</a></em>; <em><a href='B:50 13:1-4'>Deu 13:1-4</a></em>; <em><a href='B:50 14:27'>Deu 14:27</a></em>; <em><a href='B:50 15:9'>Deu 15:9</a></em>; <em><a href='B:50 15:18'>Deu 15:18</a></em>; <em><a href='B:50 17:11-12'>Deu 17:11-12</a></em> ("will"),14,16,17; 21:18; 22:1-4,18; 23:21; 25:8). See on <em><a href='B:50 7:16'>Deu 7:16</a></em>. We can take comfort in God’s sensitivity to us in an age unlike any other and apparently with its own unprecedented temptations. </p><p style='margin-left:1em'>Paul warned the new Israel that after his death ("after my departing", <em><a href='B:510 20:29'>Act 20:29</a></em>) there would be serious apostasy. This is the spirit of his very last words, in <em><a href='B:620 4:1-22'>2Ti 4:1-22</a></em>. it is exactly the spirit of Moses' farewell speech throughout the book of Deuteronomy, and throughout his final song (<em><a href='B:50 32:1-52'>Deu 32:1-52</a></em>) and <em><a href='B:50 31:29'>Deu 31:29</a></em>: "After my death you will utterly corrupt yourselves". Paul's "Take heed therefore unto yourselves" (<em><a href='B:510 20:28'>Act 20:28</a></em>) is quoted from many places in Deuteronomy (e.g. <em><a href='B:50 2:4'>Deu 2:4</a></em>; <em><a href='B:50 4:9'>Deu 4:9</a></em>; <em><a href='B:50 4:15'>Deu 4:15</a></em>; <em><a href='B:50 4:23'>Deu 4:23</a></em>; <em><a href='B:50 11:16'>Deu 11:16</a></em>; <em><a href='B:50 12:13'>Deu 12:13</a></em>; <em><a href='B:50 12:19'>Deu 12:19</a></em>; <em><a href='B:50 12:30'>Deu 12:30</a></em>; <em><a href='B:50 24:8'>Deu 24:8</a></em>; <em><a href='B:50 27:9'>Deu 27:9</a></em>).</p><p style='margin-left:1em'>We note the continual emphasis upon the heart. This was unique amongst contemporary religions, which (as today) were all about external appearance rather than the internal transformation of the spirit / mind. The worship of other gods was rightly defined as a self deception deep within the heart.</p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1em'><em>and the anger of Yahweh be kindled against you-</em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>If God's wrath burns hot against people, it means death for them (s.w. <em><a href='B:20 22:24'>Exo 22:24</a></em>; <em><a href='B:40 11:1'>Num 11:1</a></em>; <em><a href='B:40 11:33'>Num 11:33</a></em>; <em><a href='B:40 22:22'>Num 22:22</a></em>; <em><a href='B:40 25:3'>Num 25:3</a></em>; <em><a href='B:50 6:15'>Deu 6:15</a></em>; <em><a href='B:50 31:17'>Deu 31:17</a></em>). But Moses averted this at the time of <em><a href='B:20 32:10'>Exo 32:10</a></em> by his intercession. He does so because God's wrath had burned hot against him personally (<em><a href='B:20 4:14'>Exo 4:14</a></em> s.w.), but he had been saved from death by grace. And so he reflects this in appealing for he salvation of others, against whom God's wrath burned hot (<em><a href='B:20 32:10-11'>Exo 32:10-11</a></em>). But Moses at the end of his life warns them not to make God's wrath burn hot against them again- because he will not be around to intercede for them (<em><a href='B:50 6:15'>Deu 6:15</a></em>; <em><a href='B:50 7:4'>Deu 7:4</a></em>; <em><a href='B:50 11:17'>Deu 11:17</a></em>).</p><p style='margin-left:1em'><em>And He shut up the sky, so that there shall be no rain, and the land shall not yield its fruit and you perish quickly- </em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'><em><a href='B:50 11:17'>Deu 11:17</a></em> had said that God's people would "perish (s.w. "destroy") quickly from off the good land". But by grace, that didn't happen "quickly" at all. They were finally destroyed from off it (<em><a href='B:120 24:2'>2Ki 24:2</a></em> and often), but God did not bring that about quickly but after much patient pleading through the prophets. This is one of so many examples of where God simply did not punish His people to the extent He said He would; simply because of His grace and love toward them. </p><p style='margin-left:1em'><em>From off the good land which Yahweh gives you- </em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>The Hebrew word for "spied out" in <em><a href='B:50 1:24'>Deu 1:24</a></em> also means 'to slander' (s.w. <em><a href='B:100 19:27'>2Sa 19:27</a></em>; <em><a href='B:230 15:3'>Psa 15:3</a></em>). Their slander of the land was in that they misrepresented the strength of the people there, who were in fact fearful of the Israelites. They brought up an evil report of the land (<em><a href='B:40 13:32'>Num 13:32</a></em>), characterizing it as not "good" but "evil", as if inhabited by insuperable forces of cosmic evil. They disbelieved God's simple statement that He was bringing them a "good land" (<em><a href='B:20 3:8'>Exo 3:8</a></em>). Moses therefore repeatedly calls the land a "good land", denying their wrong idea that the land was inhabited by 'evil spirits' (<em><a href='B:50 3:25'>Deu 3:25</a></em>; <em><a href='B:50 4:21-22'>Deu 4:21-22</a></em>; <em><a href='B:50 6:18'>Deu 6:18</a></em>; <em><a href='B:50 8:7'>Deu 8:7</a></em>; <em><a href='B:50 9:6'>Deu 9:6</a></em>; <em><a href='B:50 11:17'>Deu 11:17</a></em>). We see here how belief in 'evil spirits' or 'demons' militated against their faith in God and His eagerness to give His good Kingdom to His people. That continues to be His "good pleasure" (<em><a href='B:490 12:32'>Luk 12:32</a></em>) toward us, but like Israel, we are tempted to disbelieve this and allow our own perceptions and empirical conclusions to lead us away from simple faith in this. </p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1em'><em>Therefore you must lay up these my words in your heart and in your soul, and you shall bind them for a sign on your hand and they shall be for memorials between your eyes-</em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>As taught in <em><a href='B:50 6:6'>Deu 6:6</a></em>, the essence was that "These words which I command you this day shall be on your heart". The heart refers to the mind, the brain, if you will; and we could understand this as meaning that this was to be externally memorialized by binding them between the eyes. This is how orthodox Judaism understands it. But I suggest that the memorial was essentially in the heart, and this is just another way of speaking about the wholeness of internal and external devotion to God's words. Whatever is done externally with the hand, whatever is thought about in our mind between our eyes, is to be dominated by our awareness of God's laws. We fail to read in later scripture any mention of literally making boxes containing God's law and wearing them. The Passover deliverance was likewise to be a "frontlet" (s.w. "memorial") between the eyes and upon the hand (<em><a href='B:20 13:16'>Exo 13:16</a></em>); but not in any literal sense. They were to be ever mentally aware of their great salvation, and live accordingly.</p><p style='margin-left:1em'>Contemporary ideas about Satan, demons etc. are often alluded to in the Pentateuch, and Israel are given the true understanding. Wearing a phylactery wasn't a new concept; the idea "refers to amulets which were worn in order to protect their wearers against demons". So by giving this command, Israel's God was showing His people that instead of being on the <em>defensive</em> against demons, needing good luck charms against them, they should instead replace these by a positive remembrance of God's words in their hearts and actions. Rejoicing in His salvation and constantly remembering it was intended to totally sideline the various false beliefs about demons which were prevalent at the time. It could be argued that God is saying that instead of the literal phylacteries of the pagan Gentile world, they were to have an internal mental awareness of their God.</p>&nbsp;


text:
<p style='margin-left:1em'><em>You must teach them to your children, talking of them when you sit in your house and when you walk by the way, when you lie down and when you rise up- </em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>The latter day repentant remnant will be characterized by talking to each other of spiritual things (<em><a href='B:460 3:16'>Mal 3:16</a></em> cp. <em><a href='B:340 12:2'>Dan 12:2</a></em>), especially of the law (<em><a href='B:460 3:7'>Mal 3:7</a></em>). But we are to do this now in our day of opportunity, and not be forced to it by tribulation. The priests were the official teachers of Israel, but it was ever God's intention that all Israel should be priests. All under the new covenant are declared priests (<em><a href='B:670 2:5'>1Pe 2:5</a></em>). All Israel were to be teaching each other (<em><a href='B:300 31:34'>Jer 31:34</a></em>), especially their children- not leaving it to others, nor over relying upon a priesthood or spiritual eldership to teach their children. This is a myth inadvertently created by the Sunday School movement, excellent and commendable as that movement is- that a child is sent to "Sunday School" and there learns God's ways. The real teaching is done sitting in the house and walking by the way, and not by specialist teachers. The specific reference to teaching when you lie down and rise up could suggest that God specifically intended His people to teach their children, every morning and every evening. This is the essence of family life in the Lord.</p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1em'><em>Write them on the door posts of your house and on your gates- </em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>Writing God's laws on door posts recalls the daubing of Passover lamb blood on the door posts. Indeed at Passover time, the faithful Israelite would have painted over the laws of Moses with the blood of the Passover lamb. This was looking ahead to how those laws were to be blotted out by the Lord's sacrifice. It was perhaps also to remind them that the blood of the Passover lamb, shed for their salvation, was an imperative to their obedience to God's laws. And again we see contemporary religious ideas deconstructed; for "It was the custom of the ancient Egyptians to inscribe on lintels and door-posts sentences of good omen". Such good luck charms were to be replaced with realistic practical calls for obedience in real life; for this was the basis of Divine blessing, and not good luck charms.</p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1em'><em>that your days may be multiplied, and the days of your children, in the land which Yahweh swore to your fathers to give them- </em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>Does "prolong your days" mean that long life promised to the obedient Israelite under the Old Covenant? Solomon observed that a just mad perished young and "a wicked man who prolongs his life in his wickedness" (<em><a href='B:250 7:15'>Ecc 7:15</a></em>). <em><a href='B:330 12:22'>Eze 12:22</a></em> suggests that faithless Israel cynically observed that "The days are prolonged" and God's prophetic word of condemnation had failed- implying they thought that prolonged days were being experienced by them despite their disobedience. The Hebrew phrase 'to prolong days' is found in <em><a href='B:290 53:10'>Isa 53:10</a></em>, where it is applied to how Messiah would 'prolong His days' not in this life, but in the resurrection. The repeated promises recorded in Deuteronomy of prolonged days upon the land of Israel would therefore hint at the eternity of the Kingdom rather than this life. Indeed, <em><a href='B:50 4:40'>Deu 4:40</a></em> says they would prolong their days "for ever". For an individual Israelite might be faithful but not prolong his or her days in the land because the whole people were to be carried away captive for their sins and the land given to a Gentile power. The opposite of 'days being prolonged' was 'utter destruction' (:26)- which would then speak of condemnation in the second death. This is one of many examples of where eternal life was possible under the Old Covenant- there were multiple different possibilities and plans God could have worked by. Israel could have accepted the Lord Jesus as their Messiah and not killed Him, and so forth. It seems the closer we probe God's word, the more open He is revealed as being.</p><p style='margin-left:1em'><em>As the days of the heavens upon the earth- </em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>This is the essence of the New Testament idea of the “Kingdom of Heaven” (not, the Kingdom <em>in </em>Heaven) coming upon earth at Christ’s return. But it was precluded by Israel's disobedience.</p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1em'><em>For if you will diligently keep all these commandments which I command you, to do them, to love Yahweh your God, to walk in all His ways and to cleave to Him- </em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>The idea of 'cleaving' to God is a big theme of Moses in Deuteronomy (<em><a href='B:50 4:4'>Deu 4:4</a></em>; <em><a href='B:50 10:20'>Deu 10:20</a></em>; <em><a href='B:50 11:22'>Deu 11:22</a></em>; <em><a href='B:50 13:4'>Deu 13:4</a></em>; <em><a href='B:50 13:17'>Deu 13:17</a></em>; <em><a href='B:50 28:21'>Deu 28:21</a></em>; <em><a href='B:50 28:60'>Deu 28:60</a></em>; <em><a href='B:50 30:20'>Deu 30:20</a></em>); the only other time Moses uses the word in his writings is in <em><a href='B:10 2:24'>Gen 2:24</a></em>, concerning a man cleaving to his wife. Moses seems to have been suggesting to Israel that their covenant relationship with God meant they were <em>marrying God</em>. This was a real paradigm breaker. We may be used to such things. But against the theological background of the time, not to say the generally low level of spirituality among Israel, this was a shocking idea. It reflected the heights to which Moses had risen.</p><p style='margin-left:1em'>The Lord’s common Upper Room theme of ‘abiding’ in Him uses the same word as Moses used in the LXX when exhorting his people to ‘cleave unto’ God (<em><a href='B:50 10:20'>Deu 10:20</a></em>; <em><a href='B:50 11:22'>Deu 11:22</a></em>). This abiding involved loving God and keeping His commandments- all ideas which occur together in <em><a href='B:50 13:4'>Deu 13:4</a></em>; <em><a href='B:50 30:20'>Deu 30:20</a></em>.</p><p style='margin-left:1em'>“If you love me you will keep my commandments” (<em><a href='B:500 14:15'>Joh 14:15</a></em>; <em><a href='B:500 14:21'>Joh 14:21</a></em>; <em><a href='B:500 14:23'>Joh 14:23</a></em>; <em><a href='B:500 15:10'>Joh 15:10</a></em>) reflects a major identical theme in <em><a href='B:50 5:10'>Deu 5:10</a></em>; <em><a href='B:50 7:9'>Deu 7:9</a></em>; <em><a href='B:50 11:1'>Deu 11:1</a></em>; <em><a href='B:50 11:22'>Deu 11:22</a></em>; <em><a href='B:50 13:3-4'>Deu 13:3-4</a></em>; <em><a href='B:50 19:9'>Deu 19:9</a></em>; <em><a href='B:50 30:16'>Deu 30:16</a></em>. Moses at the end of his life, when he spoke Deuteronomy, was very much the image of the future Lord Jesus. </p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1em'><em>then will Yahweh drive out all these nations from before you and you will dispossess nations greater and mightier than yourselves- </em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'><em><a href='B:50 11:23-24'>Deu 11:23-24</a></em> seem to imply that after God had driven out the seven nations which lived in Canaan, He planned- given Israel's obedience- to drive out yet greater nations from before them. I can only take that as meaning that His intention was to drive out the nations who possessed the rest of the land promised to Abraham, right over to the Euphrates. I see here a promise of ultimate victory against Babylon and Assyria, who controlled the Euphrates area. But the very opposite happened- even though potentially, those nations need never have developed and their empires were intended to be Israel's. These potential victories were to be because all the land Israel trod upon (Heb. 'to bend the bow against'), they would receive (<em><a href='B:50 11:25'>Deu 11:25</a></em>). But they weren't ambitious enough to go much beyond their farmsteads. We too will be given all we tread upon, all we desire to inherit of God's Kingdom, if we go forward in faith. It's all potentially possible, if we bend our bow with ambition, we will receive are furthermost dreams and beyond. This line of thought inevitably connects with the incident where Elisha sees the shooting of arrows as a symbol of how far God would give Israel deliverance from Syria (<em><a href='B:120 13:17'>2Ki 13:17</a></em>). </p><p style='margin-left:1em'>"Drive out" is s.w. "possess". We must note the difference between the&nbsp; Canaanite peoples and their kings being "struck" and their land "taken" by Joshua-Jesus; and the people of Israel permanently taking possession. This is the difference between the Lord's victory on the cross, and our taking possession of the Kingdom. Even though that possession has been "given" to us. The word used for "possession" is literally 'an inheritance'. The allusion is to the people, like us, being the seed of Abraham. The Kingdom was and is our possession, our inheritance- if we walk in the steps of Abraham. But it is one thing to be the seed of Abraham, another to take possession of the inheritance; and Israel generally did not take possession of all the land (<em><a href='B:60 11:23'>Jos 11:23</a></em>; <em><a href='B:60 13:1'>Jos 13:1</a></em>; <em><a href='B:60 16:10'>Jos 16:10</a></em>; <em><a href='B:60 18:3'>Jos 18:3</a></em>; <em><a href='B:60 23:4'>Jos 23:4</a></em>). The language of inheritance / possession is applied to us in the New Testament (<em><a href='B:560 1:11'>Eph 1:11</a></em>; <em><a href='B:560 1:14'>Eph 1:14</a></em>; <em><a href='B:580 3:24'>Col 3:24</a></em>; <em><a href='B:510 20:32'>Act 20:32</a></em>; <em><a href='B:510 26:18'>Act 26:18</a></em>; <em><a href='B:670 1:4'>1Pe 1:4</a></em> etc.). Israel were promised: "You shall possess it" (<em><a href='B:50 30:5'>Deu 30:5</a></em>; <em><a href='B:50 33:23'>Deu 33:23</a></em>). This was more of a command than a prophecy, for sadly they were "given" the land but did not "possess" it. They were constantly encouraged in the wilderness that they were on the path to possessing the land (<em><a href='B:50 30:16'>Deu 30:16</a></em>; <em><a href='B:50 30:18'>Deu 30:18</a></em>; <em><a href='B:50 31:3'>Deu 31:3</a></em>; <em><a href='B:50 31:13'>Deu 31:13</a></em>; <em><a href='B:50 32:47'>Deu 32:47</a></em>), but when they got there they didn't possess it fully. </p><p style='margin-left:1em'>The Hebrew word translated as "thousand" can mean a family, or some other administrative division. Many of the 'number problems' in the Hebrew Bible are only really resoluble using this approach. And that may be in view in the census of Israel taken in <em><a href='B:40 1:1-54'>Num 1:1-54</a></em>, and in the statement that six hundred 'thousands' of footmen left Egypt (<em><a href='B:20 12:37'>Exo 12:37</a></em>). The census of <em><a href='B:40 1:1-54'>Num 1:1-54</a></em> gives figures such as those in <em><a href='B:40 1:21'>Num 1:21</a></em> for Reuben, which could be rendered: "forty six families ('thousands') and five hundred (men)". Although a "hundred" might also refer to an administrative division. The total in <em><a href='B:40 1:1-54'>Num 1:1-54</a></em> would then be 598 families with a total of 5550 men. The sum given in the second census in <em><a href='B:40 26:1-65'>Num 26:1-65</a></em> comes out as roughly the same, with 596 families amounting to 5730 men. On this basis, the total population (including women and children) would be anything between 20,000 to 40,000. This would enable us to make better sense of the statements that Israel were the smallest numerically of all the surrounding peoples (<em><a href='B:50 7:1'>Deu 7:1</a></em>; <em><a href='B:50 7:7'>Deu 7:7</a></em>; <em><a href='B:50 11:23'>Deu 11:23</a></em>; <em><a href='B:50 20:1'>Deu 20:1</a></em>). If we insist upon taking "thousand" literally in <em><a href='B:20 12:37'>Exo 12:37</a></em>, then 600,000 male foot soldiers would imply a total population of between two and six million. The population density would have been intense, and far greater than that of many modern nations. Estimates of global population at the time suggest it was only about 40 million, and the population of Egypt was a maximum of three million (probably far less). If the Israelites were smaller than the other nations, and they numbered say 5 million, then the total population of the seven peoples of Canaan would have been at least 40 million. The territory of Canaan could not have supported such numbers. Only 70 Israelites came into Egypt with Jacob. Expansion over 430 years to several million is not realistic. This approach helps us better understand how all the men of war marched around Jericho (<em><a href='B:60 6:3'>Jos 6:3</a></em>). If there were literally 600,000 men then the city would have had to be many kilometers in circumference for them all to march around it seven times in one day. Archaeological evidence from Jericho simply doesn't support the idea of such a vast city. If Israel numbered say 5 million people, and recall there was also a "mixed multitude" with them, then if they marched 10 abreast this would require a column stretching around 1000 kilometers. Their promises to Edom and the Amorites to march only along a highway and not spill over it (<em><a href='B:40 20:17'>Num 20:17</a></em>; <em><a href='B:40 21:22'>Num 21:22</a></em>) is unrealistic if they had such huge numbers. A figure of 600 family units leaving Egypt is more realistic; otherwise we start to wonder how ever all the Israelites, millions of them, came to be in one place at one time on Passover night.</p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1em'><em>Every place on which the sole of your foot shall tread shall be yours, from the wilderness and Lebanon, from the river Euphrates, to the hinder sea shall be your border- </em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>This meant that according to their spiritual ambition, so would be their inheritance of the Kingdom. The temptation for them, as for us, was to consider that once we have our small inheritance, our farmstead and secure land, as it was for them- then we need have no wider vision. For to go onwards from that parochial mentality and tread upon the entire land up to the Euphrates was a vision only worth pursuing if they had a vision of collective inheritance of the Kingdom. To seek to get others there is a call which few really perceive. The entire territory promised to Abraham could’ve been given to them if they had bothered to go there; but they settled just for the fertile land along the Mediterranean coast. They, like us so often, lacked any sense of spiritual ambition.</p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1em'><em>No man will be able to stand before you. Yahweh your God will lay the fear of you and the dread of you on all the land that you will tread on, as He has spoken to you- </em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>The command to subject the animals in Eden (the land promised to Abraham?) corresponds to later commands to subject the tribes living in the land (<em><a href='B:10 1:28'>Gen 1:28</a></em> = <em><a href='B:40 32:22'>Num 32:22</a></em>; <em><a href='B:40 32:29'>Num 32:29</a></em>; <em><a href='B:60 18:1'>Jos 18:1</a></em>). The “fear and dread” of humans which fell on the animals after the flood is clearly linkable with the “fear and dread” which was to come upon the inhabitants of Canaan due to the Israelites (<em><a href='B:10 9:2'>Gen 9:2</a></em> = <em><a href='B:50 1:21'>Deu 1:21</a></em>; <em><a href='B:50 11:25'>Deu 11:25</a></em>). </p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1em'><em>Behold, I set before you this day a blessing and a curse-</em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>The blessing and curse are defined in <em><a href='B:50 28:1-68'>Deu 28:1-68</a></em>, suggesting that all of Deuteronomy was spoken on "this day"- the last day of Moses' life. The implications of "this day" lead me to think that this is the reference, although the blessing and cursings were pronounced on Ebal and Gerizim some time later.</p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1em'><em>the blessing, if you will listen to the commandments of Yahweh your God which I command you this day- </em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>We can read this as meaning that the blessings of <em><a href='B:50 28:1-68'>Deu 28:1-68</a></em> were conditional upon obedience. Israel were not obedient, from Sinai onwards, as the prophets lament. But many of those blessings were still experienced by Israel. So we conclude that this was by grace alone, and indeed the idea of Abraham's seed being "blessed" is associated in the New Testament with the blessing of grace. Again we note God's passionate desire to by all means give His people His Kingdom. He wants to do this, it is the good pleasure or will of God to give us the Kingdom. He is not indifferent to our salvation, and wants us desperately to be in His Kingdom, as the parable of the marriage supper also indicates. It concludes with pretty much anyone willing to say "yes" being ushered in to the marriage supper.&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;</p><p style='margin-left:1em'>The blessing of Yahweh would come if His commands were obeyed (<em><a href='B:50 11:27'>Deu 11:27</a></em>); but in response, He would command that blessing (s.w. <em><a href='B:50 28:8'>Deu 28:8</a></em>). His commandments were therefore effectively a commandment of blessing. They were designed for Israel's good and blessing, and not as a test of mindless obedience.</p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1em'><em>and the curse if you will not listen to the commandments of Yahweh your God, but turn aside out of the way which I command you this day, to go after other gods which you have not previously known- </em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>"Go after" is a phrase Moses frequently uses in his last speech in Deuteronomy, but not elsewhere. It means literally to follow or walk after. He warns against going after other gods (<em><a href='B:50 4:3'>Deu 4:3</a></em>; <em><a href='B:50 6:14'>Deu 6:14</a></em>; <em><a href='B:50 8:19'>Deu 8:19</a></em>; <em><a href='B:50 11:28'>Deu 11:28</a></em>; <em><a href='B:50 13:2'>Deu 13:2</a></em>; <em><a href='B:50 28:14'>Deu 28:14</a></em>), and urges following / walking behind / going after Yahweh alone (<em><a href='B:50 13:4'>Deu 13:4</a></em>). I suggest he was reflecting upon how by following after Yahweh in the Angel, the people had been brought out of Egypt, through the wilderness and to the promised kingdom. Caleb had faithfully followed / walked after Yahweh, and so entered the land. The phrase is used of the people following after the ark to enter Canaan (<em><a href='B:60 3:3'>Jos 3:3</a></em>; <em><a href='B:60 6:9'>Jos 6:9</a></em>). Following after idols led them just to pointless wandering in circles. And so it is in human life today. Following idols leads to pointless wandering, whereas following Yahweh has a specific destination in view- possession of the Kingdom. Elijah uses the phrase when telling Israel they could either follow after Baal, or Yahweh; and if Yahweh is God, then we are to follow Him (<em><a href='B:110 18:21'>1Ki 18:21</a></em>). We cannot follow two directions. But Israel followed after (s.w.) vanity and thereby became vain (<em><a href='B:120 17:15'>2Ki 17:15</a></em>). They carried the tabernacle of Moloch and also of Yahweh, throughout the wilderness journey (<em><a href='B:510 7:1-60'>Act 7:1-60</a></em>:). Following after Baal is paralleled with following / walking after the imagination of their own evil heart (s.w. <em><a href='B:300 3:17'>Jer 3:17</a></em>; <em><a href='B:300 9:14'>Jer 9:14</a></em>; <em><a href='B:300 13:10'>Jer 13:10</a></em>), walking after their own spirit rather than God's (<em><a href='B:330 13:3'>Eze 13:3</a></em> s.w.) and their own covetousness (s.w. <em><a href='B:330 33:31'>Eze 33:31</a></em>). To walk / live just according to the word of our own imaginations is our great temptation. But we are to instead follow God's imaginations and heart, as revealed in His word (<em><a href='B:330 20:16'>Eze 20:16</a></em> s.w.). This is where our acceptance of the word of God as indeed His word... has endless implications. </p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1em'><em>When Yahweh your God brings you into the land where you go to possess it, you shall set the blessing on Mount Gerizim and the curse on Mount Ebal-</em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>God repeated the promise of blessing to Abraham at Shechem (<em><a href='B:10 12:6'>Gen 12:6</a></em>), where later Israel had to choose between blessing and cursing (<em><a href='B:50 11:29-30'>Deu 11:29-30</a></em>)- as if they had to make the choice to appropriate the promised blessing to themselves, or not. And yet the covenant in <em><a href='B:10 15:1-21'>Gen 15:1-21</a></em> was one way, unconditional, from God to us. It's as if <em>His</em> part in our salvation is so much greater than our response. </p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1em'><em>Aren’t they beyond the Jordan, behind the way of the going down of the sun, in the land of the Canaanites who dwell in the Arabah, over against Gilgal, beside the oaks of Moreh?- </em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'><em><a href='B:50 27:2-8'>Deu 27:2-8</a></em> had commanded that "in the day" Israel passed over Jordan, they were to set up plastered stones with the law written upon them (perhaps just the ten commandments), and put them "in mount Ebal". The location was defined as near Gilgal (<em><a href='B:50 11:30'>Deu 11:30</a></em>), where they camped after entering the land. Clearly enough, the ceremony of blessing and cursing ought to have been done immediately they entered the land. But they let secular concerns dominate their spiritual obligation to be thankful as God had asked. For when Joshua fulfilled it in <em><a href='B:60 8:30'>Jos 8:30</a></em>, this was not "in the day" that Israel passed over Jordan. They had indeed taken stones with them from the Jordan, but had not used them as intended. They didn't plaster them nor write the law upon them. And so perhaps God ammended His intention- which was initially that they would set those stones up in mount Ebal immediately. Instead, He sent the people against Jericho, and then against Ai. Perhaps an instant conquest of Jericho had been originally intended, so that they could proceed to mount Ebal immediately. For later in Joshua we will read of God giving His people unnaturally speedy progress against their enemies, all in the same day. Or maybe His intention was that firstly they ought to have gone to mount Ebal with the plastered stones, and only then attacked Jericho. But they didn't plaster the stones nor wish to proceed immediately to Ebal. And so He arranged the campaign against Jericho and then Ai. We see how God is so eager to accommodate His programs to the weakness of men.&nbsp;&nbsp;</p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1em'><em>For you are to pass over the Jordan to go in to possess the land which Yahweh your God gives you, and you shall possess it, and dwell therein- </em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>As noted above, possessing the land was conditional upon obedience. But they weren't obedient, but by grace they possessed the land. Their response to that grace was therefore to be that they kept the commandments (:32). Such commandments as we have are likewise to be obeyed not in order to be worthy of the Kingdom, but as a channel through which to express our gratitude for having been given the Kingdom in prospect.</p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1em'><em>You shall observe all the statutes and the ordinances which I set before you this day- </em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>The Hebrew <em>mishpat</em>, "ordinances", has a wide range of meaning. The idea is of judgment, as if God and His Angels gave these laws as their considered judgment after considering the human condition, and Israel were to abide by them. But the word also the idea of a right or privilege; and that is how we should see God's laws. They are only felt as a burden because of human hardness of neck towards God's ways. His laws are not of themselves burdensome, but rather a privilege and blessing. The law was indeed "holy, just and good" (<em><a href='B:520 7:12'>Rom 7:12</a></em>), designed to inculcate a holy, just and good life (<em><a href='B:630 1:8'>Tit 1:8</a></em>), a way in which a man should "walk" in daily life (<em><a href='B:30 18:4'>Lev 18:4</a></em>), a culture of kindness and grace to others which reflected God's grace to man. If we dwell upon the idea of "rights" carried within the word <em>mishpat</em>, we note that the law begins in <em><a href='B:20 21:1-2'>Exo 21:1-2</a></em> (also <em><a href='B:50 15:12-18'>Deu 15:12-18</a></em>) with the rights of a slave- those considered to have no rights in the society of that day. The "rights" to be afforded by us to others are the essence of God's rightness / justice.</p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1em'><em>These are the statutes and ordinances which you shall observe to do in the land which Yahweh, the God of your fathers, has given you to possess all the days that you live on the earth- </em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>The Hebrew <em>mishpat</em>, "ordinances", has a wide range of meaning. The idea is of judgment, as if God and His Angels gave these laws as their considered judgment after considering the human condition, and Israel were to abide by them. But the word also the idea of a right or privilege; and that is how we should see God's laws. They are only felt as a burden because of human hardness of neck towards God's ways. His laws are not of themselves burdensome, but rather a privilege and blessing. The law was indeed "holy, just and good" (<em><a href='B:520 7:12'>Rom 7:12</a></em>), designed to inculcate a holy, just and good life (<em><a href='B:630 1:8'>Tit 1:8</a></em>), a way in which a man should "walk" in daily life (<em><a href='B:30 18:4'>Lev 18:4</a></em>), a culture of kindness and grace to others which reflected God's grace to man. If we dwell upon the idea of "rights" carried within the word <em>mishpat</em>, we note that the law begins in <em><a href='B:20 21:1-2'>Exo 21:1-2</a></em> (also <em><a href='B:50 15:12-18'>Deu 15:12-18</a></em>) with the rights of a slave- those considered to have no rights in the society of that day. The "rights" to be afforded by us to others are the essence of God's rightness / justice.</p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1em'><em>You must surely destroy all the places in which the nations that you shall dispossess served their gods, on the high mountains and on the hills and under every green tree-</em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>Israel were told to "throw down", "break in pieces" and "utterly destroy" the idols and altars of Canaan. There were times during their history when they obeyed this command by purging themselves from their apostasy in this. The Hebrew words used scarcely occur elsewhere, except very frequently in the context of how God "broke down", "threw down" and "destroyed" Israel at the hands of their Babylonian and Assyrian invaders as a result of their not 'breaking down' (etc.) the idols. "Throw down" in <em><a href='B:20 34:13'>Exo 34:13</a></em>; <em><a href='B:50 7:5'>Deu 7:5</a></em>; <em><a href='B:50 12:3'>Deu 12:3</a></em>; <em><a href='B:140 31:1'>2Ch 31:1</a></em> is the same word in <em><a href='B:140 36:19'>2Ch 36:19</a></em>; <em><a href='B:300 4:26'>Jer 4:26</a></em>; <em><a href='B:300 31:28'>Jer 31:28</a></em>; <em><a href='B:300 33:4'>Jer 33:4</a></em>; <em><a href='B:300 39:8'>Jer 39:8</a></em>; <em><a href='B:300 52:14'>Jer 52:14</a></em>; <em><a href='B:330 16:39'>Eze 16:39</a></em>; <em><a href='B:410 1:6'>Nah 1:6</a></em>. "Cut down" in <em><a href='B:50 7:5'>Deu 7:5</a></em>; <em><a href='B:50 12:3'>Deu 12:3</a></em>; <em><a href='B:140 31:1'>2Ch 31:1</a></em> later occurs in <em><a href='B:290 10:33'>Isa 10:33</a></em>; <em><a href='B:300 48:1-47'>Jer 48:1-47</a></em>; <em><a href='B:300 25:1-38'>Jer 25:1-38</a></em>; <em><a href='B:310 2:3'>Lam 2:3</a></em>. So Israel faced the choice: either cut down your idols, or you will be cut down in the day of God's judgment. Those who worshipped idols were like unto them. The stone will either fall on us and destroy us, or we must fall on it and become broken men and women (<em><a href='B:470 21:44'>Mat 21:44</a></em>). For the man untouched by the concept of living for God's glory, it's a hard choice. God will conquer sin, ultimately. When a man dies, it isn't just a biological, clockwork process. It is God's victory over sin in that individual. Either we must be slain by God; or with His gracious help, we must put sin to death in our members through association with the only One who really did this- and thereby rise to life eternal. </p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1em'><em>and you must break down their altars and dash in pieces their pillars and burn their Asherim with fire. You must cut down the engraved images of their gods- </em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>The Lord's description of the rejected being cut down and thrown into the fire (<em><a href='B:470 7:19'>Mat 7:19</a></em>) is surely referring to these words (cp. 7:5), where the idols of the world were to be hewn down and thrown into the fire. The Lord understood that those who worship idols are like unto them (<em><a href='B:230 115:8'>Psa 115:8</a></em>; <em><a href='B:230 135:18'>Psa 135:18</a></em>). Because all idols (of whatever kind) will be destroyed in the last day, all who worship them will have to share their destruction. And yet we can be hewn down by God's word now (<em><a href='B:350 6:5'>Hos 6:5</a></em>) rather than wait for God to do it to us by the condemnation process. We must cut off (s.w. hew down) our flesh <em>now </em>(<em><a href='B:470 5:30'>Mat 5:30</a></em>; <em><a href='B:470 18:8'>Mat 18:8</a></em> cp. 7:19).</p><p style='margin-left:1em'><em>And destroy their names out of that place- </em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>But when we read the later historical accounts of the place names in the land, we find many cases of names with idolatrous associations not being renamed. Especially we note the prevalence of the "Baal" prefix. They didn't widely obey this. </p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1em'><em>You shall not do so to Yahweh your God-</em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>Verse 3 has just spoken of the need to destroy the names of the idols which were reflected in the place names in Canaan, and instead they were to recognize that Yahweh had placed<em> His</em> Name in the land and especially at the sanctuary (:5). God placed His Name upon places in order to make them suitable places for sacrifice to be offered to Him (<em><a href='B:50 12:4-7'>Deu 12:4-7</a></em>; <em><a href='B:50 12:21'>Deu 12:21</a></em>; <em><a href='B:300 7:12'>Jer 7:12</a></em>). They were to call upon <em>His</em> Name alone, and not allow anything else to tempt them to call upon the name of idols. Commonly enough, the New Testament speaks of baptism as a calling upon the Name of the Lord. This must be understood against its Hebrew background- <em>qara' beshem Yahweh</em>, which originally referred to approaching God in sacrifice (<em><a href='B:10 12:7-8'>Gen 12:7-8</a></em>; <em><a href='B:230 116:4'>Psa 116:4</a></em>; <em><a href='B:230 116:17'>Psa 116:17</a></em>). Baptism was thus seen as a sacrificial commitment to Yahweh in solemn covenant. </p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1em'><em>But to the place which Yahweh your God shall choose out of all your tribes to put His name there- </em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>Worldly religion is made as convenient as possible for the worshipper to come and participate in; the shrines of the Canaanite gods were everywhere in the land, whereas Yahweh insisted that there was one specific place to where His people should come to worship Him. This was perhaps partly to inspire national unity within the family of God. The pagan shrines were each different; they had no uniformity between them, as archaeologists have demonstrated. But the one true God has principles of worship and service which don’t vary geographically and are consistently the same because truth is truth and in that sense doesn’t vary from place to place nor context to context. </p><p style='margin-left:1em'><em>To His dwelling place you shall seek, and there you shall come- </em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>The judgment will be the time when God 'requires' of us our behaviour. And yet the Hebrew word is used about our enquiring / searching to God in prayer now (<em><a href='B:10 25:22'>Gen 25:22</a></em>; <em><a href='B:20 18:15'>Exo 18:15</a></em>; <em><a href='B:50 4:29'>Deu 4:29</a></em>; <em><a href='B:50 12:5'>Deu 12:5</a></em>; <em><a href='B:110 22:5'>1Ki 22:5</a></em>), as well as His 'requiring' / searching of us at the last day (<em><a href='B:50 18:19'>Deu 18:19</a></em>; <em><a href='B:50 23:21'>Deu 23:21</a></em>; <em><a href='B:60 22:23'>Jos 22:23</a></em>; <em><a href='B:90 20:16'>1Sa 20:16</a></em>; <em><a href='B:140 24:22'>2Ch 24:22</a></em>; <em><a href='B:330 3:20'>Eze 3:20</a></em>; <em><a href='B:330 33:6'>Eze 33:6</a></em>; <em><a href='B:330 33:8'>Eze 33:8</a></em>). There is a mutuality between a man and his God.</p><p style='margin-left:1em'>Yahweh cared for / sought after the land and Kingdom He had promised Israel (<em><a href='B:50 11:12'>Deu 11:12</a></em>). The same word is used of how His people were to seek Him, to care for the things of His Kingdom above all else (<em><a href='B:50 12:5'>Deu 12:5</a></em>). There thus develops a mutuality between God and man. </p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1em'><em>and bring your burnt offerings, your sacrifices, your tithes, the wave offering of your hand, your vows, your freewill offerings and the firstborn of your herd and of your flock- </em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>The Hebrew word here for "freewill" carries the idea of spontaneity. This is the clear implication of its usage in places like <em><a href='B:20 35:27'>Exo 35:27</a></em>; <em><a href='B:20 36:3'>Exo 36:3</a></em>; <em><a href='B:70 5:2'>Jdg 5:2</a></em>; <em><a href='B:70 5:9'>Jdg 5:9</a></em>; <em><a href='B:130 29:5'>1Ch 29:5</a></em>; <em><a href='B:130 29:9'>1Ch 29:9</a></em>; <em><a href='B:140 35:8'>2Ch 35:8</a></em>; <em><a href='B:230 54:6'>Psa 54:6</a></em>. There is a strong sense of immediate emotion attached to the word (<em><a href='B:350 14:4'>Hos 14:4</a></em>). And there was a major emphasis in the law of Moses upon freewill offerings (<em><a href='B:30 7:16'>Lev 7:16</a></em>; <em><a href='B:30 22:18'>Lev 22:18</a></em>; <em><a href='B:30 22:21'>Lev 22:21</a></em>; <em><a href='B:30 22:23'>Lev 22:23</a></em>; <em><a href='B:30 23:38'>Lev 23:38</a></em>; <em><a href='B:40 15:3'>Num 15:3</a></em>; <em><a href='B:40 29:39'>Num 29:39</a></em>; <em><a href='B:50 12:6'>Deu 12:6</a></em>; <em><a href='B:50 12:17'>Deu 12:17</a></em>; <em><a href='B:50 16:10'>Deu 16:10</a></em>; <em><a href='B:50 23:23'>Deu 23:23</a></em>). The other legal codes of the nations around Israel were all about rituals; whereas Yahweh's law encouraged spontaneous giving as part of the way of Yahweh. For He is not a God of rituals, but of relationship. The way of the Spirit is the same today; spontaneous, emotional, personal response to God's grace, responding to Him on our own initiative and in our own way, in addition to obeying His specific requirements.&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;</p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1em'><em>There you shall eat before Yahweh your God and you shall rejoice in all that you put your hand to, you and your households, in which Yahweh your God has blessed you- </em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>LXX "And ye shall eat there before the Lord your God, and ye shall rejoice in all the things on which ye shall lay your hand, ye and your houses". The idea may be that what they laid their hands on was the sacrifices which they offered. For that is the context. They were to rejoice in sacrificing their blessings to God. "God loves a cheerful giver" may refer to this (<em><a href='B:540 9:7'>2Co 9:7</a></em>). And to this day, the only way to "eat and enjoy the good things that you have worked for" (GNB) is by offering them to Yahweh. </p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1em'><em>You shall not do all the things that we do here this day, every man whatever is right in his own eyes- </em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>This may refer to how the Mosaic laws were often intended for obedience once settled in the land. During the 38 years journey, it seems the people were not particularly obedient to God's laws and had just done whatever was right in their own eyes. The lament of Judges is that Israel in the land continued to do what was right in their own eyes (<em><a href='B:70 17:6'>Jdg 17:6</a></em>; <em><a href='B:70 21:25'>Jdg 21:25</a></em>). The moral anarchy sadly continued. <em><a href='B:240 21:2'>Pro 21:2</a></em> contrasts doing what is right in our own eyes or mental perception, with God judging the hearts / minds. The fact something may appear morally right to us doesn't mean it is. We may know nothing against ourselves in our own conscience, but this doesn't mean we are thereby justified before God (<em><a href='B:530 4:4'>1Co 4:4</a></em>). There is one thing which will judge us at the end, and that is the word spoken to us (<em><a href='B:500 12:48'>Joh 12:48</a></em>)- not our own native sense of right or wrong. Our conscience will not as it were jump out of us and stand there and judge us in the last day.</p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1em'><em>for you haven’t yet come to the rest and to the inheritance which Yahweh your God gives you-</em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>The idea may simply be that in the wilderness, they had not been able to obey all the commandments in the law because they were not yet in the land, "the rest". But there may be a hint here at something deeper. For Joshua didn't in fact lead the people to "the rest" in ultimate terms (<em><a href='B:650 4:8'>Heb 4:8</a></em>). That was to be the work of the Lord Jesus. There is a connection between the ark and God's resting place:</p><p style='margin-left:1em'>- <em><a href='B:40 10:33'>Num 10:33</a></em>&nbsp; "The ark&nbsp;of&nbsp;the&nbsp;covenant of the Lord went before them... to search out a resting place"</p><p style='margin-left:1em'>- <em><a href='B:130 28:2'>1Ch 28:2</a></em> "An house of rest for the ark".</p><p style='margin-left:1em'>However, the real resting place of God's Name is not in the literal ark, but in the hearts of people humble to God's Word. The exiles were told: "Where is the house that you build unto Me? and where is the place of My rest?... to this man will I look, even to him that is poor and of a contrite spirit, and trembles at My word" (<em><a href='B:290 66:1-2'>Isa 66:1-2</a></em>).&nbsp;</p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1em'><em>But when you go over the Jordan, and dwell in the land which Yahweh your God causes you to inherit, and He gives you rest from all your enemies around you, so that you dwell in safety- </em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>Several times Moses describes Israel’s inheritance of the land as entering “rest”, mindful of how God had sworn that they would not enter into that rest, and yet he had pleaded with God to change His mind about that (<em><a href='B:230 95:11'>Psa 95:11</a></em>; <em><a href='B:650 3:11'>Heb 3:11</a></em>), even though Israel at the time didn’t realize the intensity of pleading and self-sacrifice for them which was going on up in the mountain. Just as we don’t appreciate the extent of the Lord’s mediation for us, that we might enter the final “rest” (<em><a href='B:650 4:9'>Heb 4:9</a></em>).</p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1em'><em>then to the place which Yahweh your God shall choose, to cause His name to dwell there, you must bring all that I command you: your burnt offerings and your sacrifices, your tithes and the wave offering of your hand and all your chosen vows which you vow to Yahweh- </em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>The idea of a central place of worship was perhaps to stop the Israelites just doing their own thing in their local areas when it came to Yahweh worship. His desire for unity amongst His people was reflected in this otherwise strange idea that they were to offer all sacrifices in only one place in the land. No other legal code amongst the nations featured this. But Israel didn't do this, and so it seems that He did accept sacrifice in local sanctuaries; we think of acceptable offerings made in other places, by Gideon, Manoah, David and others. We see reflected here God's willingness to accept less than ideal sacrifices, so desirous is He of relationship with His people. <em></em></p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1em'><em>Rejoice before Yahweh your God, you and your sons, your daughters, your male servants, your female servants and the Levite who is within your gates, because he has no portion nor inheritance with you- </em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>We see God's desire that male and female, slave and free, should unite together in the joy which arises from acceptable sacrifice. Again we see this as the basis of being a "cheerful giver" (<em><a href='B:540 9:7'>2Co 9:7</a></em>), for true joy arise not from selfish hoarding but from sacrifice and giving as God intended. If there were to be no local sacrifices, then the Levites would have had to take their food from the sacrifices offered at the central sanctuary, and transport it home. This would have required them to be in regular contact with the sanctuary. This whole plan would have been unworkable if Israel at this point had inherited as intended up to the Euphrates river; but God had clearly recalculated their inheritance in accordance with their possibilities and spiritual capacities.</p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1em'><em>Be careful not to offer your burnt offerings in every place that you see- </em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>We can’t worship God any way we like, thinking that the fact we accept His existence and even worship Him means that we are somehow free to do it as we think. Israel didn't do this, and so it seems that He did accept sacrifice in local sanctuaries; we think of acceptable offerings made in other places, by Gideon, Manoah, David and others. We see reflected here God's willingness to accept less than ideal sacrifices, so desirous is He of relationship with His people.</p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1em'><em>but in the place which Yahweh shall choose in one of your tribes, there you shall offer your burnt offerings, and there you shall do all that I command you- </em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>It is hard to discern when exactly God named such a place. David and Solomon were confident that God had chosen Zion, but it's unclear whether this was their own preference which they then claimed was God's choice. At any rate, these words of Moses imply God would choose such a place soon after Israel entered Canaan. But there is no record of Him doing so, and the sanctuary moved around to various places. Perhaps that was the idea- that God would choose a place and then move it around, choosing another at a later date. Or perhaps this simply didn't happen; because the people showed themselves not sufficiently spiritual, and so He allowed them to just use local shrines. In this case we see the flexibility of God, and His ability to recalculate and downgrade His expectations of His people. We must note that He alone has the prerogative to do so. </p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1em'><em>Notwithstanding, you may kill and eat flesh within all your gates after all the desire of your soul, according to the blessing of Yahweh your God which He has given you; the unclean and the clean may eat of it, as of the gazelle and the hart- </em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>They were allowed to kill animals for food for their own use, and being ritually unclean was no barrier to eating such meat. The gazelle and hart, GNB "deer or antelope", were given as examples of clean animals which could be eaten, perhaps clarifying the question of whether they could eat animals killed in hunting, who died from arrows at a distance from the hunter, and whose blood could only be poured out some time after killing them.</p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1em'><em>Only you must not eat the blood. Pour it out on the earth as water-</em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>The blood was understood as representing life (:23; <em><a href='B:30 17:11'>Lev 17:11</a></em>). We are not to take life to ourselves; not merely in that we aren’t to murder, but we also aren’t to assume that our lives, or any life, is in fact ours to use or dominate for ourselves. Our lives and those of others are God’s, and we cannot take any life to ourselves.</p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1em'><em>You may not eat within your gates the tithe of your grain or new wine or oil- </em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>Perhaps this command was addressed specifically to the Levites. </p><p style='margin-left:1em'><em>Or the firstborn of your herd or of your flock, nor any of your vows which you vow, nor your freewill offerings, nor the wave offering of your hand- </em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>The Israelites weren't allowed to eat the firstborn, but rather must offer it to God, and the Levites ate part of it. But :18 speaks of them eating these things before Yahweh along with the Levite. So the idea seems to be that the Levites in each local area were to accompany the offerers to the central sanctuary. This was intended to create a strong social bond between the people and the Levites. But sadly this didn't seem to happen.</p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1em'><em>but you must eat them before Yahweh your God in the place which Yahweh your God shall choose, you and your son, your daughter, your male servant and your female servant and the Levite who is within your gates; and you shall rejoice before Yahweh your God in all that you put your hand on-</em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>Whatever they put their hand on to give to God they were to give with joy; for God <em>loves</em> cheerful giving, and hates reluctant or manipulated ‘giving’ (<em><a href='B:540 9:7'>2Co 9:7</a></em>). The idea was that all the family were to go to the sanctuary and rejoice together in their giving. See on :17.</p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1em'><em>Take heed to yourself- </em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>Paul warned the new Israel that after his death ("after my departing", <em><a href='B:510 20:29'>Act 20:29</a></em>) there would be serious apostasy. This is the spirit of his very last words, in <em><a href='B:620 4:1-22'>2Ti 4:1-22</a></em>. it is exactly the spirit of Moses' farewell speech throughout the book of Deuteronomy, and throughout his final song (<em><a href='B:50 32:1-52'>Deu 32:1-52</a></em>) and <em><a href='B:50 31:29'>Deu 31:29</a></em>: "After my death you will utterly corrupt yourselves". Paul's "Take heed therefore unto yourselves" (<em><a href='B:510 20:28'>Act 20:28</a></em>) is quoted from many places in Deuteronomy (e.g. <em><a href='B:50 2:4'>Deu 2:4</a></em>; <em><a href='B:50 4:9'>Deu 4:9</a></em>; <em><a href='B:50 4:15'>Deu 4:15</a></em>; <em><a href='B:50 4:23'>Deu 4:23</a></em>; <em><a href='B:50 11:16'>Deu 11:16</a></em>; <em><a href='B:50 12:13'>Deu 12:13</a></em>; <em><a href='B:50 12:19'>Deu 12:19</a></em>; <em><a href='B:50 12:30'>Deu 12:30</a></em>; <em><a href='B:50 24:8'>Deu 24:8</a></em>; <em><a href='B:50 27:9'>Deu 27:9</a></em>).</p><p style='margin-left:1em'><em>That you don’t forsake the Levite as long as you live in your land- </em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>The implication is that they would no longer live in the land if they forsook the Levite. But they clearly never really supported the Levites. God's patience with them lasted many centuries. For they were not cast out of the land for a long time.</p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1em'><em>When Yahweh your God enlarges your border, as He has promised you, and you say I want to eat meat, because your soul desires to eat meat, you may eat meat, after all the desire of your soul- </em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>Vegetarianism is a matter of personal choice, but it certainly isn’t commanded by God- indeed, quite the opposite (<em><a href='B:610 4:3'>1Ti 4:3</a></em>). If Israel had been obedient, then “the Lord your God shall enlarge thy border” (<em><a href='B:50 12:20'>Deu 12:20</a></em>). Thus “blessed be He that enlarges Gad” (<em><a href='B:50 33:20'>Deu 33:20</a></em>). Who knows the height and depth, length and breadth of what could have been for God’s people? And the same is true for us today. According to Israel’s perception of the land, so it was defined for them. </p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1em'><em>If the place which Yahweh your God shall choose to put His name there is too far from you, then you shall kill of your herd and of your flock which Yahweh has given you, as I have commanded you; you may eat within your gates, after all the desire of your soul- </em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>They were always allowed to kill animals and eat their meat for personal use (:15). So the killing of animals here seems to refer to the possibility of offering the sacrifices in their own "gates", but only once the land was enlarged. We never read of the land being enlarged, indeed their territory was progressively "cut short" (<em><a href='B:120 10:32'>2Ki 10:32</a></em>) after Solomon's time and frequently in the time of the Judges, immediately after their entry into the land. There was never any signal from God that He had now enlarged the land (:20) and therefore this change of the law was allowed. We note that the law of Moses was flexible and open to change. That it should later be abrogated is therefore no surprise. The argument that each Mosaic law was eternal is therefore lacking in careful attention to the text of the law itself.&nbsp;</p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1em'><em>As the gazelle and the hart is eaten, so you shall eat of it; the unclean and the clean may eat of it alike- </em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>As explained on :21, the context appears to be here about eating the sacrificed animals at the time when the land had been enlarged, and such animals didn't have to be sacrificed at the sanctuary. So we note that unclean offerers could eat of the sacrifices in this case. It was not allowed for unclean offerers to eat peace offerings (<em><a href='B:30 7:20'>Lev 7:20</a></em>), nor could Levites or priests approach to the sacrifices whilst unclean (<em><a href='B:30 22:3'>Lev 22:3</a></em>). But there is no statement that the offerer had to be clean, indeed <em><a href='B:50 12:22'>Deu 12:22</a></em> says that some sacrifices could be eaten by the offerer whilst unclean. We see here God's willingness to by all means accept the offerer of sacrifice. </p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1em'><em>Only be sure that you don’t eat the blood, for the blood is the life; you shall not eat the life with the flesh- </em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>"The life with the flesh" effectively means "the blood with the flesh", i.e. the blood must be drained out of the meat. One practical consequence of this was that obedience would have meant social separation from the Canaanites; for none of them observed these positions on blood, indeed eating blood or meat with much blood in it was a delicacy.</p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1em'><em>You must not eat it; pour it out on the earth as water- </em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>We note the triple, laboured emphasis upon not eating blood in :23-25. The blood was understood as representing life (:23; <em><a href='B:30 17:11'>Lev 17:11</a></em>). We are not to take life to ourselves; not merely in that we aren’t to murder, but we also aren’t to assume that our lives, or any life, is in fact ours to use or dominate for ourselves. Our lives and those of others are God’s, and we cannot take any life to ourselves. </p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1em'><em>You must not eat it, that it may go well with you and with your children after you, when you do that which is right in the eyes of Yahweh- </em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>The Lord Jesus specifically alluded to the major Jewish principle of not eating blood- when He taught that unless His blood was drunk, then they had no life in them. This alludes to another reason for not eating blood, given in <em><a href='B:30 17:11'>Lev 17:11</a></em>: "I have given it to you on the altar to make atonement for your souls; for it is the blood that makes atonement by reason of the life". The blood looked ahead to the blood which God would give which would make atonement. The blood of animals couldn't take away sins (<em><a href='B:650 10:4'>Heb 10:4</a></em>). So the blood only 'made atonement' because it pointed forward to that of the Lord Jesus. The whole structure of the laws about blood required some blood of atonement which had to be shed in future, a blood sacrifice of a representative human who was not an animal. That blood was to be given to God, and not to man. Hence the stress upon not eating blood.</p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1em'><em>Only your holy things which you have and your vows, you shall take and go to the place which Yahweh shall choose- </em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>The situation in view is hard to imagine; whether this speaks of when the borders were enlarged, or whether this specifically applies to the priests. The Rabbis like to think that this refers to an Israelite outside the land. </p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1em'><em>and you shall offer your burnt offerings, the flesh and the blood, on the altar of Yahweh your God. The blood of your sacrifices must be poured out on the altar of Yahweh your God, and you shall eat the flesh- </em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>For the situation in view, see on :26. It's unclear whether "the flesh" refers to the meat, or to the literal skin of the animal. The blood of hunted animals was to be covered with dust (<em><a href='B:30 17:13'>Lev 17:13</a></em>), as if buried in death. So the idea may have been that it drained from the altar onto the dust upon which the altar stood. Or it may be that the altar represented God's facility to accept the offering of life. <em></em></p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1em'><em>Observe and hear all these words which I command you- </em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>Moses really wanted Israel's well-being, he saw so clearly how obedience would result in blessing (e.g. <em><a href='B:50 6:3'>Deu 6:3</a></em>; <em><a href='B:50 12:28'>Deu 12:28</a></em>). This is a major theme of Moses in Deuteronomy. There was therefore a real sense of pleading behind his frequent appeal for Israel to "hear" or obey God's words. "<em>Hear</em>, O Israel" in Deuteronomy must have had a real passion behind it in his voice, uncorrupted as it was by old age. He didn't rattle it off as some kind of Sunday School proof. At least four times Moses interrupts the flow of his speech with this appeal: "<em>Hear </em>(‘be obedient’), O Israel" (<em><a href='B:50 5:1'>Deu 5:1</a></em>; <em><a href='B:50 6:3-4'>Deu 6:3-4</a></em>; <em><a href='B:50 9:1'>Deu 9:1</a></em>; <em><a href='B:50 20:3'>Deu 20:3</a></em>). And a glance through a concordance shows how often in Deuteronomy Moses pleads with them to hear God's voice. So he was back to his favourite theme: Hear the word, love the word, make it your life. For in this is your salvation. And the Lord Jesus (e.g. in passages like <em><a href='B:500 6:1-71'>Joh 6:1-71</a></em>) makes just the same urgent appeal.&nbsp;</p><p style='margin-left:1em'><em>That it may go well with you and with your children after you forever- </em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>Things 'going well / good' with Israel is the language of the Kingdom of God in <em><a href='B:50 8:16'>Deu 8:16</a></em> "to do you good / well at your latter end". It is associated with days being prolonged (<em><a href='B:50 22:7'>Deu 22:7</a></em>) and the fulfilment of the promises to Abraham (<em><a href='B:50 30:5'>Deu 30:5</a></em>), and Israel and the children somehow existing "forever" (<em><a href='B:50 12:28'>Deu 12:28</a></em>). So I deduce in the wish "that it may go well with you" a hint towards the eternal establishment of God's Kingdom based around Israel, what Paul terms "the hope of Israel".</p><p style='margin-left:1em'><em>When you do that which is good and right in the eyes of Yahweh your God- </em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>Israel had been told by Moses that their doing what was "good and right" was required for them to possess the land (<em><a href='B:50 6:18'>Deu 6:18</a></em>; <em><a href='B:50 12:28'>Deu 12:28</a></em>). The Gibeonites use the same phrase in appealing for Joshua to do what was "good and right" (<em><a href='B:60 9:25'>Jos 9:25</a></em>) in not slaying them but accepting them into covenant relationship with Yahweh. The people generally didn't want to do this (<em><a href='B:60 9:26'>Jos 9:26</a></em>). It seems God's providence used Joshua's initial unwisdom in order to give Joshua a chance to do what was "good and right", so that Israel could indeed possess Canaan. We marvel at how God works through human unwisdom and dysfunction, in order to achieve His final purpose of giving His people His Kingdom. </p><p style='margin-left:1em'><em><a href='B:50 12:28'>Deu 12:28</a></em> AV "Observe and hear all these words... that it may go well with thee... when thou doest that which is good and right", is as if to say 'When you are obedient, you will be even more obedient'. "You shall therefore keep my statutes, and my judgments: which if a man do, he shall even live in them" (<em><a href='B:30 18:5'>Lev 18:5</a></em>) seems to mean that if we seriously try to be obedient, then obedience becomes a way of daily life, and the individual acts of obedience are not so difficult. This was undoubtedly the Lord's source of victory over the flesh. He lived a life that was in harmony with an atmosphere of obedience. </p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1em'><em>When Yahweh your God cuts off the nations from before you, where you go in to dispossess them, and you dispossess them and dwell in their land- </em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>"Drive out" is s.w. "possess". We must note the difference between the&nbsp; Canaanite peoples and their kings being "struck" and their land "taken" by Joshua-Jesus; and the people of Israel permanently taking possession. This is the difference between the Lord's victory on the cross, and our taking possession of the Kingdom. Even though that possession has been "given" to us. The word used for "possession" is literally 'an inheritance'. The allusion is to the people, like us, being the seed of Abraham. The Kingdom was and is our possession, our inheritance- if we walk in the steps of Abraham. But it is one thing to be the seed of Abraham, another to take possession of the inheritance; and Israel generally did not take possession of all the land (<em><a href='B:60 11:23'>Jos 11:23</a></em>; <em><a href='B:60 13:1'>Jos 13:1</a></em>; <em><a href='B:60 16:10'>Jos 16:10</a></em>; <em><a href='B:60 18:3'>Jos 18:3</a></em>; <em><a href='B:60 23:4'>Jos 23:4</a></em>). The language of inheritance / possession is applied to us in the New Testament (<em><a href='B:560 1:11'>Eph 1:11</a></em>; <em><a href='B:560 1:14'>Eph 1:14</a></em>; <em><a href='B:580 3:24'>Col 3:24</a></em>; <em><a href='B:510 20:32'>Act 20:32</a></em>; <em><a href='B:510 26:18'>Act 26:18</a></em>; <em><a href='B:670 1:4'>1Pe 1:4</a></em> etc.). Israel were promised: "You shall possess it" (<em><a href='B:50 30:5'>Deu 30:5</a></em>; <em><a href='B:50 33:23'>Deu 33:23</a></em>). This was more of a command than a prophecy, for sadly they were "given" the land but did not "possess" it. They were constantly encouraged in the wilderness that they were on the path to possessing the land (<em><a href='B:50 30:16'>Deu 30:16</a></em>; <em><a href='B:50 30:18'>Deu 30:18</a></em>; <em><a href='B:50 31:3'>Deu 31:3</a></em>; <em><a href='B:50 31:13'>Deu 31:13</a></em>; <em><a href='B:50 32:47'>Deu 32:47</a></em>), but when they got there they didn't possess it fully. </p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1em'><em>take heed to yourself that you are not ensnared to follow them, after they are destroyed from before you, and that you do not inquire after their gods saying, How do these nations serve their gods? I will do likewise- </em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>The word so often used for "keeping" / "diligently observing" Yahweh's commandments is from the word meaning a thorn hedge; the idea originally was to hedge in. Taking this too literally led Judaism to all their endless fences around the law, i.e. forbidding this or that because it might lead to doing that or this, which in turn would then lead to breaking an actual commandment. And those various fences become elevated to the level of commandments. But this is not the idea. We are indeed to hedge ourselves in ("take heed to yourself", <em><a href='B:50 11:16'>Deu 11:16</a></em>; <em><a href='B:50 12:13'>Deu 12:13</a></em>; <em><a href='B:50 12:19'>Deu 12:19</a></em>; <em><a href='B:50 12:30'>Deu 12:30</a></em>; <em><a href='B:50 12:32'>Deu 12:32</a></em> s.w.), so that we may keep / hedge ourselves in to keep the commandments of God (<em><a href='B:30 18:4-5'>Lev 18:4-5</a></em>; <em><a href='B:30 18:26'>Lev 18:26</a></em>; <em><a href='B:30 18:30'>Lev 18:30</a></em>; <em><a href='B:30 19:19'>Lev 19:19</a></em>; <em><a href='B:30 19:37'>Lev 19:37</a></em>; <em><a href='B:30 20:8'>Lev 20:8</a></em>; <em><a href='B:30 20:22'>Lev 20:22</a></em>; <em><a href='B:30 22:9'>Lev 22:9</a></em>; <em><a href='B:30 22:31'>Lev 22:31</a></em>; <em><a href='B:30 25:18'>Lev 25:18</a></em>; <em><a href='B:30 26:3'>Lev 26:3</a></em>; <em><a href='B:40 28:2'>Num 28:2</a></em>;&nbsp;&nbsp; <em><a href='B:50 7:11-12'>Deu 7:11-12</a></em>; <em><a href='B:50 8:1'>Deu 8:1</a></em>; <em><a href='B:50 8:11'>Deu 8:11</a></em> (s.w. "beware"); 10:13; 11:1,8,22,32; 12:1; 13:4,18; ; 15:5,9 ("beware");&nbsp; 17:19; 19:9; 23:9 ("keep yourself"); 24:8; 26:16-18; 27:1; 28:1,9,13; 29:9; 30:10,16; 31:12; 32:46). And without falling into the legalism of Judaism, self discipline does require a degree of fencing ourselves in to the one way. Thus the man struggling with alcoholism avoids the supermarket where alcohol is pushed in front of the eyes of the shoppers; the married woman struggling with attraction to another man makes little laws for herself about avoiding his company. And if we do this, then the Lord will "keep" us, will hedge us in to keeping His way (s.w. <em><a href='B:40 6:24'>Num 6:24</a></em>).</p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1em'><em>You must not do so to Yahweh your God, for every abomination to Yahweh, which He hates, have they done to their gods; for even their sons and their daughters they burn in the fire to their gods- </em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>The sacrifice of children to idols was clearly felt by God to be a particularly great abomination. Israel's children were His- in that they were to be raised for Him and to live lives devoted to Him. If we do not raise our children as dedicated for Him (whether or not they accept that path is of course their choice), then we have effectively done what we would most recoil at- to offer our children to the gods of wealth, career and secular success. </p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1em'><em>Whatever I command you, you must observe to do. You must not add to it, nor take away from it-</em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>As Moses very intensely manifested God to the people, so he foreshadowed the supreme manifestation of the Father in the Son. The commands of Moses were those of God (<em><a href='B:50 7:11'>Deu 7:11</a></em>; <em><a href='B:50 11:13'>Deu 11:13</a></em>; <em><a href='B:50 11:18'>Deu 11:18</a></em>; <em><a href='B:50 12:32'>Deu 12:32</a></em> concerning Moses' words is quoted in <em><a class='bible' href='#b66:22:18-19'>Rev 22:18-19</a></em> concerning God's words); his voice was God's voice (<em><a href='B:50 13:1-18'>Deu 13:1-18</a></em>; <em><a href='B:50 18:1-22'>Deu 18:1-22</a></em>; <em><a href='B:50 15:5'>Deu 15:5</a></em>; <em><a href='B:50 28:1'>Deu 28:1</a></em>), as with Christ. Israel were to show their love of God by keeping Moses' commands (<em><a href='B:50 11:13'>Deu 11:13</a></em>); as the new Israel do in their response to the word of Christ. Indeed, the well known prophecy that God would raise up a prophet "like unto" Moses to whom Israel would <em>listen</em> (<em><a href='B:50 18:18'>Deu 18:18</a></em>) is in the context of Israel saying they did not want to hear God's voice directly. Therefore God said that he would raise up Christ, who would be another Moses in the sense that <em>he too</em> would speak forth God's word.</p><p style='margin-left:1em'>Pharaoh had insisted that nothing should be "diminished" from the quota of bricks he had set (<em><a href='B:20 5:11'>Exo 5:11</a></em>), and the same word is later used of how Israel were not to "diminish" ("take away") from obeying Yahweh's commandments (<em><a href='B:50 4:2'>Deu 4:2</a></em>; <em><a href='B:50 12:32'>Deu 12:32</a></em>). They were being reminded that they had changed masters when they crossed the Red Sea, just as Paul says happens when we are baptized (<em><a href='B:520 6:1-23'>Rom 6:1-23</a></em>). And the Red Sea crossing represented baptism into Jesus (<em><a href='B:530 10:1-2'>1Co 10:1-2</a></em>). Like us, Israel were not radically free to do as they pleased. What happened was that they changed masters; hence the appeal to Pharaoh to let God's people go, that they may serve Him rather than Pharaoh. We too will only find ultimate freedom through this servitude to God's ways, and will finally emerge into the radical liberty of the children of God in the Kingdom age (<em><a href='B:520 8:21'>Rom 8:21</a></em>). </p><p style='margin-left:1em'>The Divine intention was that perfect obedience to the law of Moses would lead to a perfect character, which is what we see in the Lord Jesus. The laws were intended to confirm and strengthen the way of obedience. To reduce or expand the corpus of commandments was therefore to take away this self reinforcing nature of the law.</p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1em'><em>If there should arise in the midst of you a prophet or a dreamer of dreams, and he gives you a sign or a wonder- </em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>"If" could as well be translated "when". Paul seems to allude here: "Of your own selves shall men arise, speaking perverse things" (<em><a href='B:510 20:30'>Act 20:30</a></em>). Jeremiah feared God had deceived <em>him</em> (<em><a href='B:300 20:7'>Jer 20:7</a></em>)- showing he knew such a thing was possible. <em><a href='B:50 13:1-3'>Deu 13:1-3</a></em> warns Israel not to believe prophets whose prophecies came true although they taught false doctrines, because they may have been raised up to test their obedience. God deceived Israel by telling them about the peace which would come on Jerusalem in the future Kingdom; they didn't consider the other prophecies <em>which were given at the same time</em> concerning their imminent judgment, and therefore they thought that God was pleased with them and was about to establish the Messianic Kingdom; when actually the very opposite was about to happen (<em><a href='B:300 4:10'>Jer 4:10</a></em>). This is why the Bible is confusing to those who aren’t humble to God’s word. </p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1em'><em>and the sign or the wonder comes to pass of which he spoke to you saying, Let us go after other gods (which you have not previously known) and let us serve them- </em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>The idea is that 'if the miracle appears to happen'. But that is not stated- the argument assumes, for a moment, that the alleged miracle actually happened. The idea is that the false prophet would do fake miracles in order to back up his appeal to serve other gods. Yahweh often makes the point that the signs and wonders He did for His people were far greater than anything ever seen upon earth. Likewise, the sheer magnitude of the Lord's miracles of themselves showed that all belief in demons as sources of power was utterly inappropriate. But the New Testament record assumes, for a moment, that demons had some power. Even though in reality they have no existence. And so here, for a moment, for the sake of argument, it is assumed that the alleged wonders were genuine and not fake.</p><p style='margin-left:1em'>We observe in this passage how empirical evidence isn't necessarily the basis for faith. Even if it apparently exists in the form of fulfilled prophecy, so it apparently can for others who teach falsely. The classic Biblical explanation of faith is in <em><a href='B:650 11:1-3'>Heb 11:1-3</a></em>: “Now faith is assurance of things hoped for, the evidence about invisible things… By faith we understand that the ages have been framed by the word of God, so that what is seen has not been made out of things which appear”. Putting meaning into words, this at first blush is circular reasoning. Faith is the evidence. But on what evidence are we to believe? Faith is the evidence. The Hebrew writer was no simplistic fool. He (or she) was surely aware that this is apparently circular reasoning. Faith is the evidence. So, faith is not evidence-based. You believe on the basis of faith. The same kind of apparently circular reasoning is found often in the Bible. Once you are on the look out for it. Take <em><a href='B:690 5:13'>1Jn 5:13</a></em>: “These things have I written unto you that believe on the name of the Son of God; that you may… believe on the name of the Son of God”. </p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1em'><em>you must not listen to the words of that prophet or to that dreamer of dreams, for Yahweh your God proves you-</em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>The reasoning here is helpful with respect to the claims made by some to perform supernatural feats. Even if it seems they might have done so, that isn’t a good enough reason to believe them; our loyalty to the one true God must not be swayed by apparently impressive deeds or predictions by those who don’t believe in Him.&nbsp;</p><p style='margin-left:1em'><em>To know whether you love Yahweh your God with all your heart and with all your soul-</em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>Yahweh was to be loved with all the heart, soul and mind (<em><a href='B:50 6:5'>Deu 6:5</a></em>). This is understood by Joshua as meaning that those who loved Yahweh would not "mix with" and intermarry with the nations and accept their gods (<em><a href='B:60 23:11-12'>Jos 23:11-12</a></em>; <em><a href='B:60 23:16'>Jos 23:16</a></em>). "Love" for God was not therefore a feeling; Joshua said that they must "take good heed therefore to yourselves, that you love Yahweh" (<em><a href='B:60 23:11'>Jos 23:11</a></em>). This is the love of conscious direction of the mind, the love which is a choice rather than an emotion.&nbsp;&nbsp;</p><p style='margin-left:1em'>Time and again, Moses speaks of the state of their heart. He warns them against allowing a bad state of heart to develop, he speaks often of how apostasy starts in the heart. Moses makes a total of 49 references to the heart / mind of Israel in Deuteronomy, compared to only 13 in the whole of Exodus, Leviticus and Numbers. This indicates the paramount importance which our Lord attaches to the state of our mind. This was perhaps his greatest wish as He faced death; that we should develop a spiritual mind and thereby manifest the Father and come to salvation. Moses likewise saw the state of our mind as the key to spiritual success. But do we share this perspective? Do we guard our minds against the media and influence of a mind-corrupting world? It's been observed that the phrase "The God of (somebody)", or similar, occurs 614 times in the Old Testament, of which 306 are in Deuteronomy. Our very personal relationship with God was therefore something else which Moses came to grasp in his spiritual maturity. Statistical analysis of the word "love" in the Pentateuch likewise reveals that "love" was a great theme of Moses at the end of his life (Moses uses it 16 times in Deuteronomy, and only four times in Exodus, Leviticus and Numbers). </p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1em'><em>You must walk after Yahweh your God and fear Him and keep His commandments and obey His voice- </em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>"Go after" is a phrase Moses frequently uses in his last speech in Deuteronomy, but not elsewhere. It means literally to follow or walk after. He warns against going after other gods (<em><a href='B:50 4:3'>Deu 4:3</a></em>; <em><a href='B:50 6:14'>Deu 6:14</a></em>; <em><a href='B:50 8:19'>Deu 8:19</a></em>; <em><a href='B:50 11:28'>Deu 11:28</a></em>; <em><a href='B:50 13:2'>Deu 13:2</a></em>; <em><a href='B:50 28:14'>Deu 28:14</a></em>), and urges following / walking behind / going after Yahweh alone (<em><a href='B:50 13:4'>Deu 13:4</a></em>). I suggest he was reflecting upon how by following after Yahweh in the Angel, the people had been brought out of Egypt, through the wilderness and to the promised kingdom. Caleb had faithfully followed / walked after Yahweh, and so entered the land. The phrase is used of the people following after the ark to enter Canaan (<em><a href='B:60 3:3'>Jos 3:3</a></em>; <em><a href='B:60 6:9'>Jos 6:9</a></em>). Following after idols led them just to pointless wandering in circles. And so it is in human life today. Following idols leads to pointless wandering, whereas following Yahweh has a specific destination in view- possession of the Kingdom. Elijah uses the phrase when telling Israel they could either follow after Baal, or Yahweh; and if Yahweh is God, then we are to follow Him (<em><a href='B:110 18:21'>1Ki 18:21</a></em>). We cannot follow two directions. But Israel followed after (s.w.) vanity and thereby became vain (<em><a href='B:120 17:15'>2Ki 17:15</a></em>). They carried the tabernacle of Moloch and also of Yahweh, throughout the wilderness journey (<em><a href='B:510 7:1-60'>Act 7:1-60</a></em>:). Following after Baal is paralleled with following / walking after the imagination of their own evil heart (s.w. <em><a href='B:300 3:17'>Jer 3:17</a></em>; <em><a href='B:300 9:14'>Jer 9:14</a></em>; <em><a href='B:300 13:10'>Jer 13:10</a></em>), walking after their own spirit rather than God's (<em><a href='B:330 13:3'>Eze 13:3</a></em> s.w.) and their own covetousness (s.w. <em><a href='B:330 33:31'>Eze 33:31</a></em>). To walk / live just according to the word of our own imaginations is our great temptation. But we are to instead follow God's imaginations and heart, as revealed in His word (<em><a href='B:330 20:16'>Eze 20:16</a></em> s.w.). This is where our acceptance of the word of God as indeed His word... has endless implications. </p><p style='margin-left:1em'><em>And you must serve Him and cleave to Him- </em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>The idea of 'cleaving' to God is a big theme of Moses in Deuteronomy (<em><a href='B:50 4:4'>Deu 4:4</a></em>; <em><a href='B:50 10:20'>Deu 10:20</a></em>; <em><a href='B:50 11:22'>Deu 11:22</a></em>; <em><a href='B:50 13:4'>Deu 13:4</a></em>; <em><a href='B:50 13:17'>Deu 13:17</a></em>; <em><a href='B:50 28:21'>Deu 28:21</a></em>; <em><a href='B:50 28:60'>Deu 28:60</a></em>; <em><a href='B:50 30:20'>Deu 30:20</a></em>); the only other time Moses uses the word in his writings is in <em><a href='B:10 2:24'>Gen 2:24</a></em>, concerning a man cleaving to his wife. Moses seems to have been suggesting to Israel that their covenant relationship with God meant they were <em>marrying God</em>. This was a real paradigm breaker. We may be used to such things. But against the theological background of the time, not to say the generally low level of spirituality among Israel, this was a shocking idea. It reflected the heights to which Moses had risen.</p><p style='margin-left:1em'>The Lord’s common Upper Room theme of ‘abiding’ in Him uses the same word as Moses used in the LXX when exhorting his people to ‘cleave unto’ God (<em><a href='B:50 10:20'>Deu 10:20</a></em>; <em><a href='B:50 11:22'>Deu 11:22</a></em>). This abiding involved loving God and keeping His commandments- all ideas which occur together in <em><a href='B:50 13:4'>Deu 13:4</a></em>; <em><a href='B:50 30:20'>Deu 30:20</a></em>.</p><p style='margin-left:1em'>“If you love me you will keep my commandments” (<em><a href='B:500 14:15'>Joh 14:15</a></em>; <em><a href='B:500 14:21'>Joh 14:21</a></em>; <em><a href='B:500 14:23'>Joh 14:23</a></em>; <em><a href='B:500 15:10'>Joh 15:10</a></em>) reflects a major identical theme in <em><a href='B:50 5:10'>Deu 5:10</a></em>; <em><a href='B:50 7:9'>Deu 7:9</a></em>; <em><a href='B:50 11:1'>Deu 11:1</a></em>; <em><a href='B:50 11:22'>Deu 11:22</a></em>; <em><a href='B:50 13:3-4'>Deu 13:3-4</a></em>; <em><a href='B:50 19:9'>Deu 19:9</a></em>; <em><a href='B:50 30:16'>Deu 30:16</a></em>. Moses at the end of his life, when he spoke Deuteronomy, was very much the image of the future Lord Jesus. </p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1em'><em>That prophet or that dreamer of dreams must be put to death, because he has spoken rebellion against Yahweh your God, Who brought you out of the land of Egypt and redeemed you out of the house of bondage, to draw you aside out of the way which Yahweh your God commanded you to walk in. So you must put away the evil from the midst of you- </em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>Moses' frequent references to the way in which the Exodus had separated Israel from Egypt show the colossal difference there is between us and this world as a result of our Red Sea baptism into Christ (13:5; 15:15; 16:12; <em><a href='B:530 10:1-2'>1Co 10:1-2</a></em>); as our Lord in His time of dying was so strongly aware of the way in which He was redeeming us from this present evil world (<em><a href='B:550 1:4'>Gal 1:4</a></em>).&nbsp;</p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1em'><em>If your brother, the son of your mother, or your son or your daughter, or the wife of your bosom or your friend, who is as your own soul, entices you secretly, saying, Let us go and serve other gods, which you have not known, you nor your fathers-</em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>Moses&nbsp; speaks as if he assumed that surely Israel would love their neighbour as themselves: "Thy brother...or thy friend, which is as thine own soul" almost unconsciously reveals the depth of Moses' positive faith in their obedience, even though on the other hand he clearly understood their future apostacy. So often family loyalties deflect a person from their loyalty to the one true God. The same has always been the case. Our spiritual family should ultimately be more meaningful to us than our natural family; that at least is the ideal, although all families have their dysfunctions, including our spiritual family.</p><p style='margin-left:1em'>Despite omitting some of the Law's commands in his speech, there are other commands which Moses really emphasizes and repeats within his speech; e.g. the need to destroy idols and false teachers, and to provide cities of refuge to cater for the sins they would commit without intending to (<em><a href='B:50 7:5'>Deu 7:5</a></em>; <em><a href='B:50 12:3'>Deu 12:3</a></em>; <em><a href='B:50 12:23-25'>Deu 12:23-25</a></em>; <em><a href='B:50 13:6-14'>Deu 13:6-14</a></em>; <em><a href='B:50 17:2-7'>Deu 17:2-7</a></em>). This surely reflects our Lord's attitude to us; it is his desire that we recognize our sinfulness, our likelihood of failure, our need to separate from things which will lead us away from Him. And yet the Christian community is increasingly blind to this. Moses' frequent references to the way in which the Exodus had separated Israel from Egypt show the same spirit (<em><a href='B:50 13:5'>Deu 13:5</a></em>; <em><a href='B:50 15:15'>Deu 15:15</a></em>; <em><a href='B:50 16:12'>Deu 16:12</a></em>); as our Lord in his time of dying was so strongly aware of the way in which he was redeeming us from this present evil world.</p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1em'><em>of the gods of the peoples who are around you, near to you or far off from you, from the one end of the land to the other end of the land- </em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>In <em><a href='B:60 12:1'>Jos 12:1</a></em>; <em><a href='B:60 12:7'>Jos 12:7</a></em> we meet “the kings of the earth”, i.e. of the land, and this must surely be the basis of how we are to understand the references to “the kings of the earth” in Revelation. <em><a href='B:50 13:7'>Deu 13:7</a></em> defines “the peoples which are round about you” (Israel) as being “from the one end of the earth even unto the other end of the earth” (RV). Those peoples which bordered with the Israelites were “the earth” / <em>eretz</em>. </p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1em'><em>you must not consent to him nor listen to him. Neither shall your eye pity him, neither shall you spare, neither shall you conceal him- </em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>These words are quoted in <em><a href='B:300 13:14'>Jer 13:14</a></em> of how God would not pity nor spare an apostate Israel. They were being asked to adopt His perspective. </p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1em'><em>but you must surely kill him. Your hand shall be first on him to put him to death, and afterwards the hand of all the people-</em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>There is stress upon close family members were to be the first to slay apostate members whose apostacy they had reported (<em><a href='B:50 13:9'>Deu 13:9</a></em>; <em><a href='B:50 17:7'>Deu 17:7</a></em>). They were being taught that they had to love God far more than family, and the Lord Jesus continued this teaching (<em><a href='B:470 10:37'>Mat 10:37</a></em>).</p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1em'><em>You must stone him to death with stones because he has sought to draw you away from Yahweh your God who brought you out of the land of Egypt, out of the house of bondage- </em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>The use of stoning (<em><a href='B:50 13:10'>Deu 13:10</a></em>; <em><a href='B:50 17:5'>Deu 17:5</a></em>; <em><a href='B:50 21:21'>Deu 21:21</a></em>; <em><a href='B:50 22:21'>Deu 22:21</a></em>; <em><a href='B:50 22:24'>Deu 22:24</a></em>) was to show their connection with the death of the apostate. It was to also make them realize that any attempt to deny the saving work of God in bringing them out of Egypt, or attempt to reverse it by returning them to bondage, was worthy of death (<em><a href='B:50 13:10'>Deu 13:10</a></em>). We note that false teaching, enticing others to sin, is seen as the most serious kind of sin. The New Testament teaching about church discipline takes a similar approach; moral weakness of individuals was tolerated, although criticized; but those teaching such behaviour were condemned. Stoning resulted in the covering of the body with the dust of the earth, as if recognizing that the death being brought about was also to be the fate of all under the curse in Eden.&nbsp;</p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1em'><em>All Israel shall hear, and fear, and shall not do any more such wickedness as this is in the midst of you- </em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>The group involvement was intended to teach others that such apostacy from Yahweh was unacceptable. We recall a similar judgment of Ananias and Sapphira in the New Testament, which lead to "fear" within the church- and then straight after that we have a notice that the church yet again experienced a growth spurt.</p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1em'><em>If you hear concerning one of your cities which Yahweh your God gives you to dwell there saying- </em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>Like Paul in his time of dying, Moses in Deuteronomy saw the importance of obedience, the harder side of God; yet he also saw in real depth the surpassing love of God, and the grace that was to come, beyond Law. This appreciation reflected Moses' mature grasp of the Name / characteristics of God. He uses the name "Yahweh" in Deuteronomy over 530 times, often with some possessive adjective, e.g. "Yahweh thy God" (AV- i.e. you singular), or "Yahweh our God". He saw the personal relationship between a man and his God. Jacob reached a like realization at his peak. </p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1em'><em>Certain bad men have gone out from the midst of you and have drawn away the inhabitants of their city, saying Let us go and serve other gods, which you have not known- </em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>As discussed on :10, the worst level of sin is when people turn others away from God to idolatry. The gods "which you have not known" means effectively 'With whom you cannot have relationship'. For this is the Hebrew idea of 'knowing'. The idea is not that anything new must be wrong just because they are new. Yahweh was characterized above all as the God who thirsts for personal relationship with His people. </p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1em'><em>then you shall inquire and make search and ask diligently. Behold, if it is true and certain that such abomination is done in the midst of you- </em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>Allegations of misbehaviour or wrong teaching within the family of God must be taken seriously and not pushed under the carpet. But they aren’t to be acted upon without a very careful investigation, during which the love which believes and hopes all things is paramount. This passage cannot be used as a reason to divide from those who have a slightly different Biblical interpretation of something than we do, whilst believing in and worshipping the same Lord. The situation envisaged is if someone were seeking to draw Yahweh’s people away to a totally different god (:13).</p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1em'><em>you must surely strike the inhabitants of that city with the edge of the sword, destroying it utterly and all that is therein and its livestock, with the edge of the sword- </em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>Striking a city with the edge of the sword and completely destroying all life within it was what Israel did to the cities of Canaan (<em><a href='B:60 10:32'>Jos 10:32</a></em> etc.). But the phrase is that of <em><a href='B:50 13:15'>Deu 13:15</a></em>, about what should be done to an apostate Israelite city who turned to idolatry. This explains why the account of Joshua's campaigns list cities like Libnah and Lachish, against which the Assyrians "encamped" and fought against them (<em><a href='B:140 32:1'>2Ch 32:1</a></em>; <em><a href='B:290 37:8'>Isa 37:8</a></em> = <em><a href='B:60 10:31'>Jos 10:31</a></em>). Israel were judging the Canaanite cities for their idolatry; the fact they committed the same meant that they were more than hypocritical. They had done that which they had judged. And they thereby become a warning for us. </p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1em'><em>You shall gather all its spoil into the midst of its street and shall burn with fire the city and all its spoil, everything, to Yahweh your God, and it shall be a heap forever. It shall not be built again- </em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>The absolute destruction of everything in the apostate city meant that there was no possibility of personal gain for those judging it. This meant that the motivation in considering an accusation of apostacy would be treated without any temptation to consider personal benefit if the city were indeed judged apostate. </p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1em'><em>Nothing of the devoted thing must cling to your hand, that Yahweh may turn from the fierceness of His anger and show you mercy and have compassion on you- </em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>Those who wanted to devote themselves to other gods ended up devoted to Yahweh in destruction. There is a powerful logic to devotion. The reasoning seems to be that the false teaching of the city would have spread, and all Israel would have been affected by it- and so God's fierce anger would have come upon them. It is therefore foolish to assume that wrong teaching will not spread; it is attractive by its nature. There is a strong teaching throughout the Bible about shutting down false teaching, whilst having an open attitude to sinners and misbelievers and those who misunderstand within the congregation. </p><p style='margin-left:1em'><em>And multiply you, as He has sworn to your fathers-</em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>The entire promises to Abraham and the fathers depended for their realization upon human obedience: “Hearken to these judgments, and keep, and do them, that the Lord your God shall keep with you the covenant and the mercy which He sware unto your fathers” (<em><a href='B:50 7:12'>Deu 7:12</a></em>). That covenant was initially given in terms which omitted direct reference to any conditions for fulfilment. But it would be ‘kept’ by God if His people ‘kept’ His ways. The promises that God would multiply the seed of Abraham were conditional also; <em>if </em>Israel separated themselves from the peoples of the land, <em>then </em>&nbsp;He would “multiply you, as He has sworn unto your fathers” (<em><a href='B:50 13:17'>Deu 13:17</a></em>). </p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1em'><em>when you listen to the voice of Yahweh your God, to keep all His commandments which I command you this day, to do that which is right in the eyes of Yahweh your God-</em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>On one hand, the promises to Abraham and the fathers depended for their realization upon human obedience; even though on the other hand, the covenant of <em><a href='B:10 15:1-21'>Gen 15:1-21</a></em> appears to be a unilateral expression of God’s grace and assurance to His people. “If you listen to these ordinances and keep and do them, Yahweh your God will keep with you the covenant and the loving kindness which He swore to your fathers” (<em><a href='B:50 7:12'>Deu 7:12</a></em>). That covenant was initially given in terms which omitted direct reference to any conditions for fulfilment. But it would be ‘kept’ by God if His people ‘kept’ His ways. The promises that God would multiply the seed of Abraham were conditional also; <em>if</em> Israel separated themselves from the peoples of the land and were obedient, <em>then</em> He would “multiply you, as He has sworn unto your fathers” (<em><a href='B:50 13:17-18'>Deu 13:17-18</a></em>). The strength of God’s grace also makes some of His promises ‘conditional’ in a different sense; thus He had promised Reuben and Manasseh that they could return to their possessions only when the others had possessed the land (<em><a href='B:50 3:20'>Deu 3:20</a></em>). This condition never happened- yet they were allowed to return. And our very salvation from death and the consequences of sin is in a sense another example of this kind of thing.</p><p style='margin-left:1em'>The word so often used for "keeping" / "diligently observing" Yahweh's commandments is from the word meaning a thorn hedge; the idea originally was to hedge in. Taking this too literally led Judaism to all their endless fences around the law, i.e. forbidding this or that because it might lead to doing that or this, which in turn would then lead to breaking an actual commandment. And those various fences become elevated to the level of commandments. But this is not the idea. We are indeed to hedge ourselves in ("take heed to yourself", <em><a href='B:50 11:16'>Deu 11:16</a></em>; <em><a href='B:50 12:13'>Deu 12:13</a></em>; <em><a href='B:50 12:19'>Deu 12:19</a></em>; <em><a href='B:50 12:30'>Deu 12:30</a></em>; <em><a href='B:50 12:32'>Deu 12:32</a></em> s.w.), so that we may keep / hedge ourselves in to keep the commandments of God (<em><a href='B:30 18:4-5'>Lev 18:4-5</a></em>; <em><a href='B:30 18:26'>Lev 18:26</a></em>; <em><a href='B:30 18:30'>Lev 18:30</a></em>; <em><a href='B:30 19:19'>Lev 19:19</a></em>; <em><a href='B:30 19:37'>Lev 19:37</a></em>; <em><a href='B:30 20:8'>Lev 20:8</a></em>; <em><a href='B:30 20:22'>Lev 20:22</a></em>; <em><a href='B:30 22:9'>Lev 22:9</a></em>; <em><a href='B:30 22:31'>Lev 22:31</a></em>; <em><a href='B:30 25:18'>Lev 25:18</a></em>; <em><a href='B:30 26:3'>Lev 26:3</a></em>; <em><a href='B:40 28:2'>Num 28:2</a></em>;&nbsp;&nbsp; <em><a href='B:50 7:11-12'>Deu 7:11-12</a></em>; <em><a href='B:50 8:1'>Deu 8:1</a></em>; <em><a href='B:50 8:11'>Deu 8:11</a></em> (s.w. "beware"); 10:13; 11:1,8,22,32; 12:1; 13:4,18; 15:5,9 ("beware");&nbsp; 17:19; 19:9; 23:9 ("keep yourself"); 24:8; 26:16-18; 27:1; 28:1,9,13; 29:9; 30:10,16; 31:12; 32:46). And without falling into the legalism of Judaism, self discipline does require a degree of fencing ourselves in to the one way. Thus the man struggling with alcoholism avoids the supermarket where alcohol is pushed in front of the eyes of the shoppers; the married woman struggling with attraction to another man makes little laws for herself about avoiding his company. And if we do this, then the Lord will "keep" us, will hedge us in to keeping His way (s.w. <em><a href='B:40 6:24'>Num 6:24</a></em>).</p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1em'><em>You are the children of Yahweh your God. You must not cut yourselves, nor make any baldness between your eyes for the dead-</em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>Whilst there is nothing morally wrong with cutting the skin, the idea was that Israel weren’t to even appear associated with pagan rituals for the dead. We likewise should naturally not want to even appear like worshippers of any other god (of whatever kind) when Yahweh is our only God. RSV “sons of God” is a phrase used concerning men, especially those who know the true God (<em><a href='B:50 14:1'>Deu 14:1</a></em> (R.S.V.); <em><a href='B:350 1:10'>Hos 1:10</a></em>; <em><a href='B:490 3:38'>Luk 3:38</a></em>; <em><a href='B:500 1:12'>Joh 1:12</a></em>; <em><a href='B:690 3:1'>1Jn 3:1</a></em>), and doesn't have to refer to Angels.</p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1em'><em>For you are a holy people to Yahweh your God, and Yahweh has chosen you to be a people for His own possession above all peoples who are on the face of the earth- </em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>We are to live out in practice what we have been made in status by our gracious Father. The very fact He counts us as in Christ, as the spotless bride of His Son, must be both felt and lived up to by us. The way He counts us like this is a wonderful motivation to rise up to it all. Consider how God told Israel that <em>if</em> they kept His commandments, <em>then</em> they would be His “peculiar treasure” (<em><a href='B:20 19:5'>Exo 19:5</a></em>). This conditional promise is then referred to by Moses as having been fulfilled- Israel became His “peculiar treasure” by status even though they did <em>not</em> keep His commandments (<em><a href='B:50 7:6'>Deu 7:6</a></em>; <em><a href='B:50 14:2'>Deu 14:2</a></em> s.w.; <em><a href='B:230 135:4'>Psa 135:4</a></em>). Moses concludes by saying that “the Lord hath avouched thee this day to be his peculiar people (s.w.)…<em> that</em> thou shouldest keep all his commandments” (<em><a href='B:50 26:18'>Deu 26:18</a></em>). See what’s happening here. God said that <em>if</em> they were obedient, <em>then</em> they would be His special people. Yet He counted them as His special people even though they were not obedient. And He did this so that they would be so touched by this grace that they <em>would</em> be obedient. </p><p style='margin-left:1em'>“You did not choose me, but I chose you… out of the world” (<em><a href='B:500 15:16'>Joh 15:16</a></em>; <em><a href='B:500 15:19'>Joh 15:19</a></em>) corresponds to the oft repeated theme of Moses that God has chosen Israel “out of all peoples” (<em><a href='B:50 7:6'>Deu 7:6</a></em> RVmg.), by grace (<em><a href='B:50 4:37'>Deu 4:37</a></em>; <em><a href='B:50 10:15'>Deu 10:15</a></em>; <em><a href='B:50 14:2'>Deu 14:2</a></em>). </p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1em'><em>You must not eat any abominable thing- </em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>The word "abominable" has connections with idolatry. The reasons for defining certain animals as clear and others as unclean may be connected to the way in which the unclean animals were used in idol worship, especially by the Egyptians. There is a clear connection between unclean animals and idols in <em><a href='B:290 66:17'>Isa 66:17</a></em>; <em><a href='B:330 8:10'>Eze 8:10</a></em>. There is nothing unclean of itself (<em><a href='B:520 14:14'>Rom 14:14</a></em>), every creature is "good" and was made "very good" (<em><a href='B:610 4:4'>1Ti 4:4</a></em>); the differentiations were purely for teaching purposes, and therefore at the Lord's death the differences were collapsed. The unclean animals were only "unclean to you" (<em><a href='B:30 11:6'>Lev 11:6</a></em>). Peter struggled to accept this, but was taught that the unclean animals had been intended to represent the Gentiles- and now they were to be accepted on an equal footing to the Jews, the supposedly "clean" animals. Again we see the temporary nature of the law of Moses; the animals were not of themselves unclean originally, nor were they after the Lord's death. <em></em></p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1em'><em>These are the animals which you may eat: the ox, the sheep, the goat- </em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>"You may eat" invites us to see this as an echo of the commandment in Eden; God said that they "may eat" of all in Eden, apart from one tree (<em><a href='B:10 2:16'>Gen 2:16</a></em>). The implication is that Israel was Eden, and the lesson of Adam and Eve was applicable in every human situation. </p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1em'><em>the hart and the gazelle, the roebuck, the wild goat, the ibex, the antelope, and the chamois- </em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>Comparing the lists of clean and unclean animals in <em><a href='B:30 11:1-47'>Lev 11:1-47</a></em> and <em><a href='B:50 14:1-29'>Deu 14:1-29</a></em>, we see the Deuteronomy list tends to be more specific. This is understandable; for the people were now going to enter the land, and there would be specific questions about specific animals. </p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1em'><em>Every animal that has a split hoof- </em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'><em><a href='B:30 11:3'>Lev 11:3</a></em> adds more detail: "Whatever parts the hoof, and is cloven-footed". The sense of the Hebrew is "Whatever parts the hoof, and completely divides it". Some animals part the hoof but don't completely divide it to the end, such as the camel. The lesson would be that there must be clear division between clean and unclean, good and bad, and that division must not be begun and not finished. The line dividing good from evil must run to the end through every part of our lives.</p><p style='margin-left:1em'><em>And chews the cud among the animals, you may eat- </em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>The Hebrew means to bring the food up again, to ruminate. Perhaps this was to represent ruminating upon God’s word; and being cloven-footed perhaps speaks of being sure footed and walking stably in life. To chew the cud (ruminate on God’s word) but not walk the talk (not having a cloven foot) still makes us unclean. However, it may be that there is little significance in the chewing of the cud of itself, because doing so didn’t make the animal unclean of itself- it was just an exercise for Israel to teach them the concept of discernment, self control and obedience to God even when this meant practical inconvenience for them.</p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1em'><em>Nevertheless these you must not eat of those that chew the cud or of those which have a split hoof: the camel, the hare and the rabbit. Because they chew the cud but don’t have a split hoof, they are unclean to you- </em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>Some animals part the hoof but don't completely divide it to the end (see on :6), such as the camel, which has a kind of ball at the back of their foot which means the hoof is not completely divided. The lesson would be that there must be clear division between clean and unclean, good and bad, and that division must not be begun and not finished. The line dividing good from evil must run to the end through every part of our lives.</p><p style='margin-left:1em'>The hare was apparently thought to be avoided by demons ("jinns") and so was worshipped; hare bones or skills were used as good luck charms, and still are among some Arab tribes. So the reason for having nothing to do with hares was religious rather than because hares are somehow more intrinsically unclean than other animals.</p><p style='margin-left:1em'>As with the language of demons in the New Testament, the Bible here speaks of things as they appear. For hares and rock badgers do chew the cud, but their munching movements, the lower jaw moving backward and forward, suggest they are chewers of the cud- but in fact they don't.</p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1em'><em>The pig, because it has a split hoof but doesn’t chew the cud, is unclean to you-</em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>Appearing to make a differentiation in our walk, our external life, is no good unless internally we are chewing the cud, masticating our food, ruminating upon God's word (:6). Many people appear to have made a division between themselves and society but this is no evidence that they are spiritual. </p><p style='margin-left:1em'><em>Of their flesh you shall not eat and their carcasses you shall not touch- </em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>The basis of the command to us in our age to “touch not the unclean thing” by being separate from sinful things (<em><a href='B:540 6:17'>2Co 6:17</a></em>).</p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1em'><em>These you may eat of all that are in the waters: whatever has fins and scales may you eat-</em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>All fish have fins and scales, it's just that some aren't evident. We see here how the Bible is written in places from the viewpoint of humans, and according to their understanding of things, even if that understanding is false. And this is why we find mental illness attributed to "demons" in the New Testament, even though demons don't exist.</p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1em'><em>Whatever doesn’t have fins and scales you must not eat; it is unclean to you- </em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>The parable of the drag net pictures fishermen sitting down with their catch, throwing away the “bad” fish. These would’ve been the unclean sea creatures, e.g. crabs, which had got caught up in the net. This represented the ‘sitting’ of the final judgment at the last day (<em><a href='B:470 13:48-49'>Mat 13:48-49</a></em>). We are to make that same division between good and bad in the choices we make today. </p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1em'><em>Of all clean birds you may eat- </em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>LXX makes this a command: "Ye shall eat every clean bird". The reference may specifically be to the birds used in the ritual of the cleansing of the leper; as if this was the only time a bird may be eaten. For the basis upon which clean and unclean animals were divided (chewing the cud, cloven hooves) doesn't apply to birds. It could be that birds were not to be eaten, apart from those sanctified or "made clean" by the rituals which used birds.</p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1em'><em>But these are the ones you must not eat: the eagle, the vulture and the osprey- </em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>These birds all hunt and eat other unclean animals, and many of them were totems of the idols believed in by the nations. Again the idea was to teach God’s people the need to keep away from association with things which resembled sin, which would put ideas in the mind which tended towards sin rather than righteousness. This principle is so relevant today in connection with what we watch or read, for by presenting ourselves continually with sinful associations we are the more likely to ourselves fall into sin.</p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1em'><em>the red kite, the falcon and the kite after its kind- </em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>It is common in primitive societies for tribes and individuals to have totems, an animal or plant which they are associated with. This practice is common today in central Africa. Seeing there are no animals unclean of themselves, as the New Testament makes clear, one reason for the specific designation of some animals as "unclean" may be because they were associated with local tribes or individuals who were to be treated as unclean. The meaning of some of the names of the designated "unclean" animals are suggestive of individuals.</p>&nbsp;<p style='margin-left:1em'><em></em></p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1em'><em>every raven after its kind- </em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>We note how Elijah was later to be made to depend upon food brought to him by unclean ravens (<em><a href='B:110 17:4-6'>1Ki 17:4-6</a></em>). This was all part of God's program to educate him against exclusivity. God told Elijah that He had commanded unclean ravens to feed him; and thus He reminded Elijah of a basic fact, that God speaks to even unclean animals (<em><a href='B:10 1:22'>Gen 1:22</a></em>)- and they obey him. The ravens not only obeyed Yahweh in going to Elijah, but in not eating the food they were carrying. Elijah likely considered that the fact God spoke to him meant that he must therefore have some automatic superiority over others. But not so. It’s the same with us. We can consider that because we have heard God’s true voice, we thereby are justified before Him. But He speaks to and uses all, clean and unclean.&nbsp;</p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1em'><em>the ostrich, the owl, the seagull and the hawk after its kind- </em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>The reference to seagulls shows that these laws were intended for Israel in the land, rather than whilst in the wilderness. We continually note the flexible nature of God's law given through Moses. </p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1em'><em>the little owl, the great owl and the horned owl- </em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>The extensive stress upon not eating owls of any kind was because the local tribes considered that owls were the most human-like of all birds. They were therefore worshipped and considered as mediators between the gods and man. There was to be no even going near these birds, because association is the basis of so much downward sliding in spiritual terms. </p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1em'><em>the pelican, the vulture and the cormorant- </em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>Some of the birds forbidden as unclean were thought to be good luck symbols, and their carcasses were used as medicines or potions used in idol worship. The vulture and pelican were amongst these. The take away lesson is that we are to avoid all associations with that which is paganic and anti-God. </p>&nbsp;<p style='margin-left:1em'><em><a href='B:50 14:18'>Deu 14:18</a></em><em> the stork and the heron after its kind and the hoopoe and the bat- </em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>These animals, the bat especially, were associated with tombs and the dead. They were thought to carry messages to the dead, and to facilitate the passage of the supposed "immortal soul"- a false teaching which the Bible knows nothing of. <em><a href='B:290 7:1-25'>Isa 7:1-25</a></em> speaks of the chirping and muttering of the dead, alluding to the sounds made by these animals. Quite simply, Israel were to have nothing to do with these wrong ideas and the animals associated with them. </p>&nbsp;


text:
<p style='margin-left:1em'><em>All winged creeping things are unclean to you; they shall not be eaten- </em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>The idea may be that they had the potential to fly, but often preferred to crawl on earth. Refusing to use spiritual potential was seen as a bad thing, and Israel didn't need even the unconscious association with anything which resembled that. This is why so much which passes for entertainment would be better not viewed nor listened to by Christians; there is nothing unclean in itself, but the subliminal associations are what drag us down.&nbsp;</p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1em'><em>Of all clean birds you may eat- </em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>See on :11. But "birds" is not the same Hebrew word as in :11. The idea in the immediate context is "Of all clean winged things you may eat".</p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1em'><em>You must not eat of anything that dies of itself; you may give it to the foreigner living among you who is within your gates, that he may eat it, or you may sell it to a foreigner, for you are a holy people to Yahweh your God- </em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'><em><a href='B:20 22:31'>Exo 22:31</a></em> says they were to throw such food to the dogs and not eat it. Perhaps "dogs" meant Gentiles. This command wasn’t only for hygienic reasons. God wished to encourage His people to have a healthy work ethic, not taking short cuts, but eating animals they had raised themselves for that purpose. We live in a society where laziness and trying to live for free has become almost an art form. We cannot ultimately get around the curse, that we shall eat only as a result of the sweat of our own labour. We have to accept our humanity and our fallen condition, looking for the lifting of the curse in God’s future Kingdom.</p><p style='margin-left:1em'><em>You must not boil a young goat in its mother’s milk- </em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>This was likely a pagan ritual which Israel weren’t to follow. It may also be that God’s sensitivity to the feelings of animals is coming out here; and He wishes us to live lives regulated by sensitivity to all of creation. See on <em><a href='B:50 20:19'>Deu 20:19</a></em>. The laws in the "Book of the Covenant" abruptly end with this, as if it summed up the spirit of all the others (<em><a href='B:20 23:19'>Exo 23:19</a></em>; <em><a href='B:20 34:26'>Exo 34:26</a></em>). Kid goats were thought to be most tasty when boiled in their mother’s milk. It seems that God considered this narcissistic and absolutely over indulgent, and without thought to the feelings of the mother goat; even though goats (rather than sheep) are at times a symbol of sinners and the unclean. The Mosaic law sought to inculcate a culture of kindness and extreme sensitivity to all, even animals. Read like this, it is similar to the prohibitions of killing on the same a cow and a calf, or a ewe and her lamb (<em><a href='B:30 22:28'>Lev 22:28</a></em>). It is likely that this was also related to a paganic fertility ritual, performed at harvest time (which is the immediate context of the prohibition); and God didn't want His people to even remotely be associated with that. For He alone was the source of all fertility.</p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1em'><em>You must surely tithe all the increase of your seed which comes forth from the field year by year- </em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>The Levites had their own land on which to grow crops, and the seed was to come from these tithes. It was Israel's refusal to support the Levites which left them without teachers of God's law, and resulted in the Levites having no time to study that law. </p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1em'><em>You shall eat before Yahweh your God, in the place which He shall choose to cause His name to dwell there, the tithe of your grain, of your new wine and of your oil, and the firstborn of your herd and of your flock, that you may learn to respect Yahweh your God always- </em></p>LXX "the place which the Lord thy God shall choose to have his name called there", that is, the place which Yahweh chose as the place where men would call upon His Name in worship. And again we note that the commandments were not random tests of obedience; the process of taking time out of life to go that place and eat the tithes there, presumably as part of a peace offering, was "that you may learn". God's law is not a chain, a burdensome leash restraining human behaviour; but rather inculcates a self reinforcing upward spiral of spirituality and closeness to Him.


text:
<p style='margin-left:1em'><em>If the way is too long for you, so that when Yahweh your God shall bless you, you are not able to carry it because the place which Yahweh your God shall choose to set His name there is too far from you- </em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>The blessing which would result in their being too far from the sanctuary is defined in <em><a href='B:50 12:20'>Deu 12:20</a></em> as being "When Yahweh your God enlarges your border". We never read of the land being enlarged, indeed their territory was progressively "cut short" (<em><a href='B:120 10:32'>2Ki 10:32</a></em>) after Solomon's time and frequently in the time of the Judges, immediately after their entry into the land. There was never any signal from God that He had now enlarged the land and therefore this change of the law was allowed. If Israel had been obedient, then “the Lord your God shall enlarge thy border” (<em><a href='B:50 12:20'>Deu 12:20</a></em>). Thus “blessed be He that enlarges Gad” (<em><a href='B:50 33:20'>Deu 33:20</a></em>). Who knows the height and depth, length and breadth of what could have been for God’s people? And the same is true for us today. According to Israel’s perception of the land, so it was defined for them. </p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1em'><em>then you must turn it into money and take the money in your hand and go to the place which Yahweh your God shall choose- </em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>The law given in <em><a href='B:50 12:20-22'>Deu 12:20-22</a></em> about what was to happen when the land was enlarged doesn't feature this provision. We note that the law of Moses was flexible and open to change. That it should later be abrogated is therefore no surprise. The argument that each Mosaic law was eternal is therefore lacking in careful attention to the text of the law itself.&nbsp;&nbsp;</p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1em'><em>and you may spend the money on whatever your soul desires, cattle or sheep, wine or strong drink, or whatever your soul asks of you, and you may eat there before Yahweh your God, and rejoice, you and your household- </em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>There was to be joy in giving to God rather than any sense of resentment; and the families (“your household”) were to have this explained to them so that even the children learnt to rejoice in giving rather than being selfish. Again we see God’s emphasis on the need for giving to be done cheerfully; He simply <em>loves</em> cheerful giving (<em><a href='B:540 9:7'>2Co 9:7</a></em>).</p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1em'><em>The Levite who is within your gates you must not forsake, for he has no portion or inheritance with you- </em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>God's ideal was that the Levites would live from the tithes given by Israel (<em><a href='B:50 14:27'>Deu 14:27</a></em>); but He foresaw that this ideal level wouldn't be reached by them, therefore the Levites were given land on which to grow their own crops for survival. However, it must be noted that by opting to make use of God's concessions to human weakness, real spirituality became harder to achieve. Thus it was harder to accept Yahweh as King if they had a human king demanding their allegiance. </p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1em'><em>At the end of every three years you must bring forth all the tithe of your increase in the same year and store it within your gates- </em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>There were three separate tithes commanded under the Law of Moses. Yet the tithing churches have simply said: ‘There’s something about tithing in the Old Testament. So, hey, give us 10% of your money!’. The first was the Levitical tithe of 10% on 100% of the produce for the first six years and was destined for the Levites and priests (see too <em><a href='B:50 12:19'>Deu 12:19</a></em>). The second tithe was the Festival tithe of 10% on the 90% remaining produce after the Levitical tithe. This tithe had to be eaten in the presence of the Lord and was collected on the 1st, 2nd, 4th, and 5th years only. The third tithe was the tithe of the poor to be collected on the 3rd and 6th years only (<em><a href='B:50 14:22-29'>Deu 14:22-29</a></em>; <em><a href='B:50 26:12-15'>Deu 26:12-15</a></em>; <em><a href='B:370 4:4-5'>Amo 4:4-5</a></em>). No tithe was collected on the 7th year or Sabbatical year. The farmers were to let the land rest in that year. The tithe consisted of fruit, grain, wine and later animals that are treated as produce from the land. It never consisted of money. Tithes were conducted annually and were based upon one’s produce increase for the year. This just isn’t talking about putting paper money or cheques on an offering plate each week as demanded by the tithing churches.</p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1em'><em>and the Levite, because he has no portion nor inheritance with you, and the foreigner living among you and the fatherless and the widow, who are within your gates, shall come and shall eat and be satisfied, that Yahweh your God may bless you in all the work of your hand which you do-</em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>The early church began by having all things common, in imitation of&nbsp; how the priests had "like portions to eat" (<em><a href='B:50 18:8'>Deu 18:8</a></em>). Notice the stress on the equality of the priests and the studied irrelevance of their personal wealth (<em><a href='B:130 24:31'>1Ch 24:31</a></em>; <em><a href='B:130 25:8'>1Ch 25:8</a></em>; <em><a href='B:130 26:12'>1Ch 26:12</a></em>). The Law was geared around the assumption that the priests would be so caught up in Yahweh's work that they would never be rich (consider <em><a href='B:50 14:29'>Deu 14:29</a></em>), and the wonder of doing His work would compensate for their lack of physical possessions (<em><a href='B:40 18:23'>Num 18:23</a></em>). Yet the early church couldn't sustain the intensity of their initial realization of these things. </p><p style='margin-left:1em'>We came into this world with nothing and can carry nothing out. In Isaiah’s image we are as ragged prisoners in dark cells awaiting death, but set free by the light of the Gospel. We are all, in a sense, ‘fatherless’ and ‘widows’. This is why Israel were given specific instruction to take care of such (<em><a href='B:50 14:29'>Deu 14:29</a></em>) for in so doing they were to recognize their own needs.&nbsp; Realizing this, knowing it deep within the fiber of our beings, we ought to be able to respond with the simple abandonment and “uncomplicated totality” of the desperate.</p><p style='margin-left:1em'>Israel were given manna in the wilderness, and they ate it and were full (<em><a href='B:20 16:8'>Exo 16:8</a></em>; <em><a href='B:20 16:12'>Exo 16:12</a></em>). But they were promised that in the promised land of the Kingdom, they would likewise eat and be full, again from blessing given by God (s.w. <em><a href='B:50 8:10'>Deu 8:10</a></em>; <em><a href='B:50 11:15'>Deu 11:15</a></em>; <em><a href='B:50 14:29'>Deu 14:29</a></em>; <em><a href='B:50 26:12'>Deu 26:12</a></em>; <em><a href='B:50 31:20'>Deu 31:20</a></em>). After our Red Sea baptism, we are now in the wilderness; but by feeding on the manna, the word of God in the Lord Jesus, we have a foretaste of the Kingdom experience. But the curse for disobedience was that they would eat and not be full / satisfied (<em><a href='B:30 26:26'>Lev 26:26</a></em>).</p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1em'><em>At the end of every seven years you must make a release- </em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'><em><a href='B:490 6:35'>Luk 6:35</a></em> has the year of release in mind, in the idea of lending without expecting anything back. The end of a 'seven' period suggests the end of the creation week. We are to live in the spirit of the Kingdom now, in our attitudes to others.</p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1em'><em>This is the method of the release: every creditor shall release that which he has lent to his neighbour. He must not demand it of his neighbour and his brother because Yahweh’s release has been proclaimed-</em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>The Hebrew for "proclaimed" means 'to call out, to announce', and the idea of proclaiming release / forgiveness (s.w.) of legitimate debt is the idea alluded to in the great commission- we are to call out, to announce to the world, the radical forgiveness of debt.</p><p style='margin-left:1em'>The final release was in the death of Christ releasing us from all our sins, which are likened to debts in the New Testament. We are therefore not to “demand” recompense for sin from others because of the great release proclaimed. Jesus foresaw the difficulty of doing this, and urges us to pray constantly that we forgive or release our debtors (<em><a href='B:470 6:12'>Mat 6:12</a></em>). The year of release was proclaimed on the day of atonement, in the same way as the cross has initiated a time of release from sin. The idea of ‘proclaiming’ this release or forgiveness is behind the language Luke uses to record the great commission, to proclaim this wonderful news to absolutely everybody- that their debt is cancelled. </p><p style='margin-left:1em'>Because God released, men were to release. God's release / forgiveness and ours are related. We are to forgive because He forgives, and there seems a suggestion in <em><a href='B:470 16:19'>Mat 16:19</a></em>; <em><a href='B:470 18:18'>Mat 18:18</a></em> that what we bind and unloose is somehow confirmed by God in Heaven- our forgiveness or lack thereof becomes His. The very fact that <em>Yahweh</em> has released others means that we likewise ought to live in a spirit of releasing others from their debts to us: “The creditor shall release that which he hath lent…<em> because</em> the Lord’s release hath been proclaimed” (<em><a href='B:50 15:2'>Deu 15:2</a></em> RV). </p><p style='margin-left:1em'>"Demand" or AV "exact" is s.w. to be a taskmaster, used of the Egyptians treating Israel like this (<em><a href='B:20 3:7'>Exo 3:7</a></em>; <em><a href='B:20 5:6'>Exo 5:6</a></em>; <em><a href='B:20 5:10'>Exo 5:10</a></em>; <em><a href='B:20 5:13-14'>Exo 5:13-14</a></em>). Unforgiveness and even demanding of others what we legitimately could, is effectively treating God's people as the Egyptians did. Our experience of deliverance from Egypt should mean that we will never likewise afflict others, but show them the same deliverance by grace which we experienced. The word is more usually translated "oppressor". For a creditor to demand repayment hardly seems like 'oppression', but God's view of our debt to Him, and the depth of His release of us, is such that He considers we have no right to demand back <em>any </em>debt. Indeed, to do so is seen by Him as oppression and abuse. In secular life, this seems a foolish and weak position; only those who have personally felt the depth of their own debt to God and gracious release will be motivated to release others. The sense of true release from debt should be so great to us that we simply would never think of demanding back debt from others, in whatever form. The Lord taught the same in the parable of the two debtors; the forgiven man failed to dwell upon the wonder of His release, and therefore demanding debts back from his brother. </p><p style='margin-left:1em'>The outlook of those who&nbsp; felt their salvation (the penny) was less by grace than the others became bitter: "Is thine eye evil, because I am good?" (<em><a href='B:470 20:15'>Mat 20:15</a></em>). In saying this, the Lord was referring back to <em><a href='B:50 15:9'>Deu 15:9</a></em>, which warned Israel not to have an evil eye towards their poverty stricken brother (cp. the unwanted labourer) who asked for a loan near the time of the year of release, when all debts were cancelled. In the year of release, Israel were "to remit every private debt... and not <em>demand</em> it of thy brother" (<em><a href='B:50 15:2'>Deu 15:2</a></em> LXX). This is behind <em><a href='B:470 18:28'>Mat 18:28</a></em>, where Christ speaks of the man who demands repayment from his brother. The Lord is implying: You should live in the spirit of the year of release all the time, giving without expecting. </p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1em'><em>Of a foreigner you may exact it, but whatever of yours is with your brother you must release-</em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>It is perhaps not the foreigner who lived with Israel who is in view, but the foreigner to whom Israel would lend if they were blessed for obedience (:6; <em><a href='B:50 28:12'>Deu 28:12</a></em>). Just as God assumed He would enlarge their territory in line with their hoped for obedience (<em><a href='B:50 14:24'>Deu 14:24</a></em>), so He legislated in hope that they would be obedient and be accordingly blessed. But His positive attitude was one of hope, for every indication was that this idol-carrying community would not be obedient. We see here therefore His positive spirit in hoping for their obedience and blessing. And to this day, He seeks to save and bless. This Divine hope that He would bless His people for their obedience is continued in :4.</p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1em'><em>However there shall be no poor among you, for Yahweh will surely bless you in the land which Yahweh your God gives you for an inheritance to possess it-</em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>See on :3. Moses knew that there would always be poor people in the land, even though if the Law was properly kept this would not be the case (:4,11). Having reminded them that if they were obedient, “there shall be no poor among you; for Yahweh will surely bless you”, Moses goes on to comment that “the poor will never cease out of the land”- and he gives the legislation cognizant of this (:4,11). Moses realized by the time of Deuteronomy that they wouldn’t make it to the blessings which were potentially possible. And yet he speaks so positively of how they would inherit the Kingdom. God recognizes that His people won’t totally make it spiritually nor receive all the blessings they could, and yet this doesn’t mean they won’t be saved. This is a comfort for us in our spiritual incompleteness; and it also means that we shouldn’t expect the community of God’s people to be perfect. Even God doesn’t expect that, and the very structure of His own law foresaw that.</p><p style='margin-left:1em'>"Save when there shall be no poor..." (AV) could be interpreted as meaning that Israelites could press for the restoration of debts when and if there were no poor within Israel. The implication could also be that by demanding the return of debts, the poor were driven into deeper poverty. </p>&nbsp;<p style='margin-left:1em'>The spirit of not demanding debts and writing them off every seven years would not lead to poverty. And that is why people demand the return of debts- they fear they will become poor otherwise. Here we have a totally counter-instinctive command- to not demand debts to be repaid because there should be no fear of poverty amongst those who are the blessed of the Lord. We may lose the extra we lent- but not descend into poverty. That assurance should be enough.</p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1em'><em>if only you diligently listen to the voice of Yahweh your God, to observe to do all this commandment which I command you this day- </em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>The word so often used for "keeping" / "diligently observing" Yahweh's commandments is from the word meaning a thorn hedge; the idea originally was to hedge in. Taking this too literally led Judaism to all their endless fences around the law, i.e. forbidding this or that because it might lead to doing that or this, which in turn would then lead to breaking an actual commandment. And those various fences become elevated to the level of commandments. But this is not the idea. We are indeed to hedge ourselves in ("take heed to yourself", <em><a href='B:50 11:16'>Deu 11:16</a></em>; <em><a href='B:50 12:13'>Deu 12:13</a></em>; <em><a href='B:50 12:19'>Deu 12:19</a></em>; <em><a href='B:50 12:30'>Deu 12:30</a></em>; <em><a href='B:50 12:32'>Deu 12:32</a></em> s.w.), so that we may keep / hedge ourselves in to keep the commandments of God (<em><a href='B:30 18:4-5'>Lev 18:4-5</a></em>; <em><a href='B:30 18:26'>Lev 18:26</a></em>; <em><a href='B:30 18:30'>Lev 18:30</a></em>; <em><a href='B:30 19:19'>Lev 19:19</a></em>; <em><a href='B:30 19:37'>Lev 19:37</a></em>; <em><a href='B:30 20:8'>Lev 20:8</a></em>; <em><a href='B:30 20:22'>Lev 20:22</a></em>; <em><a href='B:30 22:9'>Lev 22:9</a></em>; <em><a href='B:30 22:31'>Lev 22:31</a></em>; <em><a href='B:30 25:18'>Lev 25:18</a></em>; <em><a href='B:30 26:3'>Lev 26:3</a></em>; <em><a href='B:40 28:2'>Num 28:2</a></em>;&nbsp;&nbsp; <em><a href='B:50 7:11-12'>Deu 7:11-12</a></em>; <em><a href='B:50 8:1'>Deu 8:1</a></em>; <em><a href='B:50 8:11'>Deu 8:11</a></em> (s.w. "beware"); 10:13; 11:1,8,22,32; 12:1; 13:4,18; ; 15:5,9 ("beware");&nbsp; 17:19; 19:9; 23:9 ("keep yourself"); 24:8; 26:16-18; 27:1; 28:1,9,13; 29:9; 30:10,16; 31:12; 32:46). And without falling into the legalism of Judaism, self discipline does require a degree of fencing ourselves in to the one way. Thus the man struggling with alcoholism avoids the supermarket where alcohol is pushed in front of the eyes of the shoppers; the married woman struggling with attraction to another man makes little laws for herself about avoiding his company. And if we do this, then the Lord will "keep" us, will hedge us in to keeping His way (s.w. <em><a href='B:40 6:24'>Num 6:24</a></em>).</p><p style='margin-left:1em'>Like Paul in his time of dying, Moses in Deuteronomy saw the importance of obedience, the harder side of God; yet he also saw in real depth the surpassing love of God, and the grace that was to come, beyond Law. This appreciation reflected Moses' mature grasp of the Name / characteristics of God. He uses the name "Yahweh" in Deuteronomy over 530 times, often with some possessive adjective, e.g. "Yahweh thy God" (AV- i.e. you singular), or "Yahweh our God". He saw the personal relationship between a man and his God. Jacob reached a like realization at his peak. </p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1em'><em>For Yahweh your God will bless you, as He promised you, and you will lend to many nations but you shall not borrow; and you will rule over many nations but they shall not rule over you-</em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>We see God's utter grace in that this blessing has often come true of Israel, despite their <em>dis</em>obedience. For Israel would lend to others only if they were blessed for obedience (<em><a href='B:50 28:12'>Deu 28:12</a></em>). We see here the Divine eagerness for blessing upon His people, and His earnest hope for their loyalty to Him- although every evidence was that they were disloyal, as they still had with them the idols of Egypt. </p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1em'><em>If a poor man, one of your brothers, is with you within any of your gates in your land which Yahweh your God gives you, you must not harden your heart nor shut your hand from your poor brother-</em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>Verse 4 has just predicted that if Israel were obedient, there would be no poor person. But as so often in Deuteronomy, there is the realistic acceptance that Israel will not be obedient, and an appropriate mechanism from God in dealing with even that situation. The context suggests therefore that the poor man was poor because of poor decisions and disobedience to God's word- but still there was to be generosity to him, without arguing that his poverty was his own fault. For we have all been saved by utter grace from the eternal consequence of our sins, and each sin was avoidable...</p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1em'><em>but you must surely open your hand to him and lend him sufficient for his need, that which he lacks-</em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>The same word is in <em><a href='B:230 34:9'>Psa 34:9</a></em> "there is no <em>want</em> to them that fear the Lord". Again, the point is that his need was perhaps due to his own poor behaviour. The same word is used in Proverbs to describe the need or want that comes to the lazy and unspiritual (<em><a href='B:240 14:23'>Pro 14:23</a></em>; <em><a href='B:240 21:5'>Pro 21:5</a></em>; <em><a href='B:240 24:34'>Pro 24:34</a></em>). But still that need is to be responded to, as Proverbs also makes clear- the needy are to be helped. "He that gives to the poor (s.w.) shall not lack" (<em><a href='B:240 28:27'>Pro 28:27</a></em>). That Proverb would appear a comment upon <em><a href='B:50 15:8-10'>Deu 15:8-10</a></em>.</p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1em'><em>Beware that there is not a wicked thought in your heart saying, The seventh year, the year of release, is at hand, and your eye be evil against your poor brother and you give him nothing and he cries to Yahweh against you, it is sin to you- </em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>Time and again, Moses speaks of the state of their heart. He warns them against allowing a bad state of heart to develop, he speaks often of how apostasy starts in the heart. Moses makes a total of 49 references to the heart / mind of Israel in Deuteronomy, compared to only 13 in the whole of Exodus, Leviticus and Numbers. This indicates the paramount importance which our Lord attaches to the state of our mind. This was perhaps his greatest wish as He faced death; that we should develop a spiritual mind and thereby manifest the Father and come to salvation. Moses likewise saw the state of our mind as the key to spiritual success. But do we share this perspective? Do we guard our minds against the media and influence of a mind-corrupting world? It's been observed that the phrase "The God of (somebody)", or similar, occurs 614 times in the Old Testament, of which 306 are in Deuteronomy. Our very personal relationship with God was therefore something else which Moses came to grasp in his spiritual maturity. Statistical analysis of the word "love" in the Pentateuch likewise reveals that "love" was a great theme of Moses at the end of his life (Moses uses it 16 times in Deuteronomy, and only four times in Exodus, Leviticus and Numbers). </p><p style='margin-left:1em'>The Hebrew for ‘thought’ really means ‘word’- the idea is to ensure that you don’t have a self-talk that says… that because the year of release was coming up soon, therefore you would not lend your brother anything, knowing that you had to forgive him the debt in the year of release. Here we have the OT equivalent of the New Testament ‘devil’. We <em>can </em>control our self-talk, but we must be aware that it takes place. Moses is basically saying: ‘Beware of your own self talk; see how you speak to yourself in unfinished sentences like “The year of release is at hand…”, resulting in you ‘finishing the sentence’ by unkind deeds’. </p><p style='margin-left:1em'>The Biblical record seems to very frequently seek to deconstruct popular ideas about sin and evil. One of the most widespread notions was the "evil eye", whereby it was believed that some people had an "evil eye" which could bring distress into the eyes of those upon whom they looked in jealousy or anger. This concept is alive and well in many areas to this day. The idea entered Judaism very strongly after the Babylonian captivity; the Babylonian Talmud is full of references to it. The sage Rav attributed many illnesses to the evil eye, and the Talmud even claimed that 99 out of 100 people died prematurely from this (Bava Metzia 107b). The Biblical deconstruction of this is through stressing that <em>God's</em> eye is all powerful in the destiny of His people (<em><a href='B:50 11:12'>Deu 11:12</a></em>; <em><a href='B:230 33:18'>Psa 33:18</a></em>); and that "an evil eye" refers to an <em>internal</em> attitude of mean spiritedness <em>within</em> people- e.g. an "evil eye" is understood as an ungenerous spirit in <em><a href='B:50 15:9'>Deu 15:9</a></em>; <em><a href='B:470 6:23'>Mat 6:23</a></em>; <em><a href='B:470 20:15'>Mat 20:15</a></em>; or pure selfishness in <em><a href='B:50 28:54'>Deu 28:54</a></em>; <em><a href='B:50 28:56'>Deu 28:56</a></em>; <em><a href='B:240 23:6'>Pro 23:6</a></em>; <em><a href='B:240 28:22'>Pro 28:22</a></em>. We must remember that the people of Biblical times understood an "evil eye" as an <em>external</em> ability to look at someone and bring curses upon them. But the Bible redefines an "evil eye" as a purely <em>internal</em> attitude; and cosmic evil, even if it were to exist, need hold no fear for us- seeing the eyes of the only true God are running around the earth <em>for</em> us and not against us (<em><a href='B:140 16:9'>2Ch 16:9</a></em>). </p><p style='margin-left:1em'>Speaking in the context of serving <em>either</em> God <em>or</em> mammon, the Lord uttered some difficult words: "Lay not up for yourselves treasures upon earth... the light of the body is the eye: if therefore thine eye be single, thy whole body shall be full of light. But if thine eye be evil, thy whole body shall be full of darkness... how great is that darkness!" (<em><a href='B:470 6:19-22'>Mat 6:19-22</a></em>). All this is in the context of not being materialistic. The Lord is drawing on the OT usage of "an evil eye"- and consistently, this idiom means someone who is selfishly materialistic (<em><a href='B:240 22:9'>Pro 22:9</a></em>; <em><a href='B:240 23:7'>Pro 23:7</a></em>; <em><a href='B:240 28:22'>Pro 28:22</a></em>; <em><a href='B:50 15:9'>Deu 15:9</a></em>). The NIV renders some of these idioms as "stingy" or "mean". A single eye refers to a generous spirit (<em><a href='B:130 29:17'>1Ch 29:17</a></em> LXX), and a related Greek word occurs in <em><a href='B:540 8:2'>2Co 8:2</a></em>; <em><a href='B:540 9:11'>2Co 9:11</a></em>; <em><a href='B:540 9:13'>2Co 9:13</a></em> with the sense of "generous". So surely the Lord is saying that our attitude to wealth controls our whole spirituality. Whether we have a mean or generous spirit will affect our whole life- an evil (stingy) eye means our whole body is full of darkness. Just let this sink in. If we are materialistic, our whole life will be filled with darkness, whatever our external pretensions may be, and there is a definite link to be made here with the " darkness" of rejection. </p><p style='margin-left:1em'>To not lend to one's poor brother will be counted to us as sin; a classic example of a sin of omission.</p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1em'><em>You must surely give to him, and your heart must not be grieved when you give to him, because for this Yahweh your God will bless you in all your work-</em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>The Hebrew for "be grieved" is usually translated 'evil'. To feel mean towards helping someone who is in a fault of their own making (according to the rest of Old Covenant teaching about 'need' and 'poverty') is a great evil, but we will only perceive that if we perceive our own poverty before God and His grace toward us- see :15.</p><p style='margin-left:1em'><em>And in all that you put your hand to</em>- </p><p style='margin-left:1em'>Note the connection with the usage of 'hand' in :8. If you open your hand wide, then whatever you put your hand to will be blessed. There is here the implication of an upward spiral- if we open our hand to others, in not demanding of them that which we could and being generous to the need (not only financial) of our poor brother, then the work of our hand will be blessed yet more. </p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1em'><em>For the poor will never cease out of the land, therefore I command you, saying, You must surely open your hand to your brother, to your needy and to your poor, in your land-</em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>They are "your" poor and "your" needy. Their issues and needs are <em>yours</em>. There's amazing psychological penetration here into the thought processes we have when we encounter need and poverty, in whatever sense. We so easily assume that firstly, it is 'their fault', and secondly, that someone else will respond- perhaps God directly. But the needs and poverty are <em>ours</em>. These two reasons are likely the most common reasons for our lack of response to others' need.</p><p style='margin-left:1em'><em><a href='B:50 15:7'>Deu 15:7</a></em> foresaw that when confronted by the poor, there would be a tendency to “harden your heart and close your hand to your poor brother”; there was no mechanism suggested for determining his genuineness, but rather a command to respond. Indeed Israel were warned not to have “a thought in your wicked heart” and devise how not to be generous to the poor (<em><a href='B:50 15:9'>Deu 15:9</a></em>); they were to “open your hand wide” to the poor who approached them (<em><a href='B:50 15:11'>Deu 15:11</a></em>). Lest we think this was merely for Old Testament times- these verses are applied to us, by way of allusion, in <em><a href='B:690 3:17'>1Jn 3:17</a></em>: “But whoever has the world's goods, and beholds his brother in need and <em>closes his heart</em> against him, how does the love of God abide in him?”. In Hebrew thought, “the hand” referred to power and ability. No matter how materially poor, we each have a “hand”- even if it’s not a financial one. And we are to “open” it- the Hebrew word carrying the idea of unloosing, as in untying a sack. It’s as if we’re all tied and twisted up inside ourselves, and it’s this which stops us responding. The most extrovert of persons is like this too- for to reach out to assist another’s poverty involves our opening of ourselves and releasing the potential to help which we’ve each been given. And that is totally independent of our personality type. We are all Christ’s servants, and we’ve each been given talents to trade. It’s one of capitalism’s worst myths that if you have no money, you’re no use to anyone. </p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1em'><em>If your brother, a Hebrew man or a Hebrew woman, is sold to you and serves you six years, then in the seventh year you must let him go free from you-</em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>The language of letting the servant go free, sending him away, but not letting him go empty but giving him of your good things- is all the language of the Egyptians sending the Israelites out of Egypt, but not "empty". And this is made explicit in :15. We are to treat others as we were treated by God when He redeemed us from Egypt. There are times and contexts in which we are effectively Egypt to others, having power over them- the power to forgive, for example.</p><p style='margin-left:1em'>Slaves could be bought out of slavery by others or by themselves somehow raising the required amount. Often they went into slavery in order to pay a debt. But six years was the maximum they could serve- that was enough to pay any debt. They could not be then forced to still pay some debt. This total freedom from debt may look forward to the intended "rest" of the Kingdom at the end of the 6 days / 6000 years of Biblical human history. </p><p style='margin-left:1em'>These commands repeat those of <em><a href='B:20 21:2-8'>Exo 21:2-8</a></em>, which were the<em> mishpat </em>with which the law of Moses opened. The Hebrew <em>mishpat</em>, "ordinances", has a wide range of meaning. The idea is of judgment, as if God and His Angels gave these laws as their considered judgment after considering the human condition, and Israel were to abide by them. But the word also the idea of a right or privilege; and that is how we should see God's laws. They are only felt as a burden because of human hardness of neck towards God's ways. His laws are not of themselves burdensome, but rather a privilege and blessing. The law was indeed "holy, just and good" (<em><a href='B:520 7:12'>Rom 7:12</a></em>), designed to inculcate a holy, just and good life (<em><a href='B:630 1:8'>Tit 1:8</a></em>), a way in which a man should "walk" in daily life (<em><a href='B:30 18:4'>Lev 18:4</a></em>), a culture of kindness and grace to others which reflected God's grace to man. If we dwell upon the idea of "rights" carried within the word <em>mishpat</em>, we note that the law begins in <em><a href='B:20 21:1-2'>Exo 21:1-2</a></em> (also <em><a href='B:50 15:12-18'>Deu 15:12-18</a></em>) with the rights of a slave- those considered to have no rights in the society of that day. The "rights" to be afforded by us to others are the essence of God's rightness / justice.</p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1em'><em>When you let him go free from you, you must not let him go empty- </em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>The same word for "empty-handed" is used of how Israel didn't leave slavery in Egypt empty-handed (<em><a href='B:20 3:21'>Exo 3:21</a></em>); and of how Jacob likewise did not return to his land from his slavery "empty-handed" but wealthy (<em><a href='B:10 31:42'>Gen 31:42</a></em>). Constantly they were bidden see how they were being dealt with as their God had previously treated their fathers. And they were to remember this by not sending any slave away from them "empty-handed". Always they were to live life under the deep impression of how they had been redeemed themselves, and were to reflect that grace to others in every context and situation of their lives. And the new Israel likewise.&nbsp;</p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1em'><em>You must furnish him generously out of your flock, out of your threshing floor and out of your winepress; as Yahweh your God has blessed you, you shall give to him- </em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>As noted on :13, this abundant provision was to reflect the huge wealth they had on leaving Israel, laden down with jewels. <em></em></p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1em'><em>You must remember that you were a bondservant in the land of Egypt and Yahweh your God redeemed you, therefore I command you this today- </em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>Moses' frequent references in Deuteronomy to the way in which the Exodus had separated Israel from Egypt shows his concern that they were slipping back to Egypt / the world in their hearts (<em><a href='B:50 13:5'>Deu 13:5</a></em>; <em><a href='B:50 15:15'>Deu 15:15</a></em>; <em><a href='B:50 16:12'>Deu 16:12</a></em>); as our Lord in his time of dying was so strongly aware of the way in which he was redeeming us from this present evil world.&nbsp;See on :13. </p><p style='margin-left:1em'>One of the most repeated themes of Moses in Deuteronomy is the way he keeps on telling them to "remember" all the great things which God had done for them on their wilderness journey, and especially the wonder of how He had redeemed them as children (his audience had been under twenty years old when they went through the Red Sea). Moses really wanted them to overcome the human tendency to forget the greatness of God as manifested earlier in our lives and spiritual experience. Our tendency as the new Israel is just the same- to forget the wonder of baptism, of how God reached out His arm to save us.</p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1em'><em>If he tells you I will not go out from you because he loves you and your house, because he is well with you- </em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'><em><a href='B:20 21:5'>Exo 21:5</a></em> says: "But if the servant shall plainly say, ‘I love my master, my wife, and my children. I will not go out free’". The servant could retain his wife and children if he devoted himself to his master's house for the rest of his life. The situation was set up in order to make the servant pay a price for his wife and children. He made a free choice to marry whilst a servant; and he was to make that choice aware of the huge long term price he was going to have to pay for it. That was in order to help him understand the long term commitment required from a man in marrying and having children. It was a resignation of his personal freedom (<em><a href='B:20 21:5'>Exo 21:5</a></em>), and the man had to knowingly make that choice. We can deduce that the marriage was completely his choice; if it were forced upon him by the master, then this would be the kind of personal manipulation and robbing of personal freedom which the law of Moses outlaws. And that is the take away lesson from this- all the more relevant in our age of casual relationships, married men refusing to resign personal freedom and fathering of children without taking personal responsibility. </p><p style='margin-left:1em'>The Lord's crucifixion was likened to His ear (His hearing of the master's word) being nailed to an upright piece of wood (cp. the cross; <em><a href='B:20 21:6'>Exo 21:6</a></em> = <em><a href='B:230 40:6-8'>Psa 40:6-8</a></em> = <em><a href='B:650 10:5-12'>Heb 10:5-12</a></em>). That was the sign of His total dedication to the house of Yahweh, but it was motivated by His love for us, and commitment to entering an eternal relationship with us His family. His relationship with us is described as "I and the children whom God has given me" (<em><a href='B:650 2:13'>Heb 2:13</a></em>). This would allude to this situation, where the servant was 'given' a wife and thence children by the master, God (<em><a href='B:20 21:4'>Exo 21:4</a></em>). The children were given to Him by God, the master, because He plainly declared His love for us, His wife and children. And that plain declaration was surely on the cross. </p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1em'><em>then you shall take an awl and thrust it through his ear to the door, and he shall be your servant forever. Also to your female servant you shall do likewise-</em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>The servant was saying that he was now permanently attached to the household, symbolized by his ear being physically attached to it. The ear was chosen because this was a symbol of obedience to the master's word. R.E. Clements notes that this alludes to the ancient pagan practice whereby "a household god would have been kept by the threshold of a house to guard it" (R.E. Clements, <em>Exodus</em> (Cambridge: C.U.P., 1972) p. 133). Moses is attacking this idea- by saying that God, Israel's God, is the One there- and not the household gods which those around Israel believed were there.&nbsp; See on <em><a href='B:20 12:7'>Exo 12:7</a></em>.</p><p style='margin-left:1em'>This custom is alluded to in <em><a href='B:230 40:6'>Psa 40:6</a></em>, and applied to Christ in <em><a href='B:650 10:5-10'>Heb 10:5-10</a></em>. For love of us, the wife whom He was given by God His “master” (:16), Christ chose to stay in the Father’s house for ever. The nailing of the ear to a piece of wood is understood in <em><a href='B:650 10:1-39'>Heb 10:1-39</a></em> as prophetic of Christ’s nailing to the cross. The ear represented obedient listening to the Master’s word. Christ on the cross was ultimately obedient to God’s word- for our sakes. That we are seen as His wife should inspire us to the utmost faithfulness and support of His cause in this world.</p><p style='margin-left:1em'>The question is whether this apparently lifelong commitment was undone by the provisions for the release of slaves at the year of Jubilee. The nature of the language used here would suggest that the freedom of the year of Jubilee didn't apply in this case. So we again see how the law of Moses, like any legal code, had internal contradictions, and times when one law must take precedence over another. These features of the law of Moses were in order to elicit thoughtful obedience to it, rather than blind obedience of a perfectly consistent legal code. For the law was to inculcate thoughtful relationships, both with God and man.</p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1em'><em>It must not seem hard to you- </em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>We continually notice the extreme attention paid by God to mental attitudes. No other legal code has ever featured anything like this. It is a reflection of the degree to which God judges the heart, and mental attitudes are supremely important to Him. </p><p style='margin-left:1em'><em>When you let him go free from you, for he was worth double the hire of a hireling; he has served you six years; and Yahweh your God will bless you in all that you do- </em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>The phrase "let go" is often used of how God let Israel go from Egypt, overruling how the wicked Pharaoh refused to let the people go. The term is used later in the Mosaic legislation; the way Israel had been "let go" from Egypt was to determine how they "let go" others from slavery (<em><a href='B:50 15:12-13'>Deu 15:12-13</a></em>; <em><a href='B:50 15:18'>Deu 15:18</a></em>); their own experience of redemption was to influence how they released others. Just as ours should. The letting go of the scapegoat into the wilderness was likewise to remind them of how they had been let go from Egypt into the wilderness without being slain for their sins- all by grace (<em><a href='B:30 14:7'>Lev 14:7</a></em>; <em><a href='B:30 14:53'>Lev 14:53</a></em>; <em><a href='B:30 16:10'>Lev 16:10</a></em>; <em><a href='B:30 16:21-22'>Lev 16:21-22</a></em>; <em><a href='B:30 16:26'>Lev 16:26</a></em>). <em></em></p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1em'><em>All the firstborn males that are born of your herd and of your flock you must sanctify to Yahweh your God; you must do no work with the firstborn of your herd, nor shear the firstborn of your flock-</em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>It was God's initial intention that all the firstborn males should be sanctified to His service, from whatever tribe (<em><a href='B:20 13:2'>Exo 13:2</a></em>). But this plan didn't work, and so He called one tribe (Levi) to be His sanctified priests. And they also didn't really do their ministry, and so under the new covenant, all are priests. But the command to still give the firstborn of their animals was a reminder of God's ideal intentions. <em><a href='B:20 13:2'>Exo 13:2</a></em> also implied that&nbsp; the sacrificial animals would be provided by the firstborn of every animal. But this plan also didn't work.<em></em></p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1em'><em>You must eat it before Yahweh your God year by year in the place which Yahweh shall choose, you and your household- </em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>The idea was that every family in Israel came up at least once per year to the sanctuary. The firstborn animals were to be kept and then brought up to the sanctuary. The sanctuary was intended to be a point of national focus, and this reflects God's great interest in unity amongst His people. But God never stated that He had chosen a place in Israel, at least not (arguably) until the time of David. Israel were simply not responsive enough to enable all His intended plans to come about, and therefore so much of the law was not possible of complete fulfilment as intended.</p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1em'><em>If it has any blemish, is lame or blind or has any defect whatever, you must not sacrifice it to Yahweh your God-</em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>A person who feels they are somehow a nice guy and worthy of invitation will be the one who tends to consider others as unworthy of invitation to the Kingdom. He or she who perceives their own desperation will eagerly invite even those they consider to be in the very pits of human society. The lame, blind etc. were not allowed to serve God under the law (<em><a href='B:30 21:18'>Lev 21:18</a></em>), nor be offered as sacrifices (<em><a href='B:50 15:21'>Deu 15:21</a></em>), nor come within the holy city (<em><a href='B:100 5:6-8'>2Sa 5:6-8</a></em>). The Lord purposefully healed multitudes of lame and blind (<em><a href='B:470 15:30'>Mat 15:30</a></em>), and allowed them to come to Him in the temple (<em><a href='B:470 21:14'>Mat 21:14</a></em>). His acted out message was clearly that those who were despised as unfit for God’s service were now being welcomed by Him into that service. The lame and blind were despised because they couldn’t work. They had to rely on the grace of others. Here again is a crucial teaching: those called are those who can’t do the works, but depend upon grace. </p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1em'><em>You must eat it within your gates. The unclean and the clean shall eat it alike, as the gazelle and as the hart- </em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>They were allowed to kill animals for food for their own use, and being ritually unclean was no barrier to eating such meat. The gazelle and hart, GNB "deer or antelope", were given as examples of clean animals which could be eaten, perhaps clarifying the question of whether they could eat animals killed in hunting, who died from arrows at a distance from the hunter, and whose blood could only be poured out some time after killing them.<em></em></p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1em'><em>Only you must not eat its blood. You must pour it out on the ground as water- </em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>The blood was understood as representing life (:23; <em><a href='B:30 17:11'>Lev 17:11</a></em>). We are not to take life to ourselves; not merely in that we aren’t to murder, but we also aren’t to assume that our lives, or any life, is in fact ours to use or dominate for ourselves. Our lives and those of others are God’s, and we cannot take any life to ourselves.</p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1em'><em>Observe the month of Abib and keep the Passover to Yahweh your God, for in the month of Abib Yahweh your God brought you forth out of Egypt by night- </em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>Israel both kept Passover and went through the Red Sea at night.&nbsp;Indeed, it is stressed six times in <em><a href='B:20 12:1-51'>Exo 12:1-51</a></em> that it was “night", and hence <em><a href='B:50 16:1'>Deu 16:1</a></em> reminds them to carefully keep the Passover (i.e. at night), “for... your God brought you forth&nbsp;out of Egypt by night".&nbsp;Other latter day prophecies speak of the events of the second coming being at "night":&nbsp;Lot left Sodom in the very early hours of the morning;&nbsp;and it was "at midnight (that) there was a cry made" informing the virgins of their Lord's return (<em><a href='B:470 25:6'>Mat 25:6</a></em>).<em></em></p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1em'><em>You must sacrifice the Passover to Yahweh your God from the flock and the herd, in the place which Yahweh shall choose to cause His name to dwell there-</em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>This seems to imply that now, in the ‘second law’ Moses was giving in Deuteronomy, the Passover sacrifice didn’t necessarily have to be a lamb, and it could be boiled not just roasted (:7). &nbsp;See on <em><a href='B:50 20:14'>Deu 20:14</a></em>. So eager is God for our fellowship that He is prepared to make concessions to our human situations; and we should have that spirit in dealing with others.</p><p style='margin-left:1em'>The softness of Moses, the earnestness of his desire for their obedience, his eagerness to work with them in their humanity, is shown by the concessions to human weakness which he makes in Deuteronomy (with God's confirmation, of course). When they attacked a foreign city, OK, Moses says, you can take the women for yourselves- even though this is contrary to the spirit of earlier commands (<em><a href='B:50 20:14'>Deu 20:14</a></em>; <em><a href='B:50 21:11'>Deu 21:11</a></em>). Likewise with the provisions for having a human king (<em><a href='B:50 17:17'>Deu 17:17</a></em>) and divorce (<em><a href='B:50 24:1-4'>Deu 24:1-4</a></em>). He knew the hardness of Israel's hearts, their likelihood to give way to temptation, and so he made concessions contrary to the principles behind other parts of the Law (<em><a href='B:470 19:8'>Mat 19:8</a></em>). And <em><a href='B:50 16:2'>Deu 16:2</a></em> seems to imply that now, the Passover sacrifice didn’t necessarily have to be a lamb, it could be any animal from the flock or herd, and it could be boiled not just roasted (see on :7).&nbsp;</p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1em'><em>You must eat no leavened bread with it. You must eat unleavened bread with it seven days, the bread of affliction, for you came forth out of the land of Egypt in haste, that you may remember the day when you came forth out of the land of Egypt all the days of your life- </em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>"Therefore let us keep the feast (the breaking of bread, the new Passover), not with old leaven... of malice and wickedness; but with the unleavened bread of sincerity and truth" (<em><a href='B:530 5:8'>1Co 5:8</a></em>). This is echoing Moses' command to keep the Passover feast without leaven (<em><a href='B:20 12:15'>Exo 12:15</a></em>; <em><a href='B:50 16:3'>Deu 16:3</a></em>). Paul saw himself as Moses in trying to save a generally unresponsive and ungrateful Israel.</p><p style='margin-left:1em'>Similarly in <em><a href='B:50 16:3'>Deu 16:3</a></em> the unleavened bread is called the " bread of affliction", whilst in <em><a href='B:530 5:8'>1Co 5:8</a></em> it is called the "unleavened bread of sincerity and Truth", as if being sincere and true and not having malice and bitterness in our hearts is a result of much mental affliction and exercising of the mind. </p><p style='margin-left:1em'>Passover was intended as a personal looking back to their beginnings, both as a nation and individually . It was to remind them of the day they came out of Egypt, all their lives (<em><a href='B:50 16:3'>Deu 16:3</a></em>). This was written in the 40th year of their wanderings, as they were about to enter Canaan. Those who had literally come out of Egypt were largely dead; this verse is a general command to Jews of all generations. So God wanted them to see that in a sense they personally came out of Egypt at that time, even though they were not then born. So with us, while we were yet sinners, before we were born, Christ died for us. On the cross all God's people were as it were taken out of Egypt, in prospect delivered from sin. </p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1em'><em>No yeast shall be seen with you in all your borders seven days, neither shall any of the flesh, which you sacrifice the first day at evening, remain all night until the morning- </em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>Our open approach to table fellowship doesn’t mean we can’t tell right from wrong. Light has no fellowship with darkness. However, our responsibility for working this out in practice is very personal. Each individual Israelite had to ensure that there was no leaven in his or her immediate area on Passover night. "Your borders" is 'you' singular. The Israelite could only be responsible for their local area / home. We must not slip into a mindset which is endlessly concerned with the supposed weaknesses of others next door.</p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1em'><em>You may not sacrifice the Passover within any of your gates which Yahweh your God gives you- </em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>The first Passover was kept in their homes; but the commandments given about the first Passover were not applicable to the Passover generally. For now it is solemnly stressed that the Passover is not to be kept in homes as it was the first time it was kept, but only at the sanctuary (:6). Likewise the command to not eat the first Passover with Gentiles is often misused by "closed table" advocates; but they overlook the clear difference with the later Passover regulations, where Gentiles were welcome to eat it. </p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1em'><em>but at the place which Yahweh your God shall choose to cause His name to dwell in, there you must sacrifice the Passover at evening, at the going down of the sun, at the time that you came forth out of Egypt- </em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>Although the first Passover differed in some ways from the later feast (see on :5), it was to be slain in the evening, as the first Passover lamb was (<em><a href='B:20 12:6'>Exo 12:6</a></em>). But Israel left Egypt some hours later, at night. But here the slaying of the sacrifice and Israel's 'going forth' from Egypt are equated. And this looks ahead to the effect of the death of the Lord Jesus as the Passover lamb. We thereby were freed from Egypt, and should in response to His sacrifice move on out of this world, which is represented by Egypt .</p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1em'><em>You must roast and eat it in the place which Yahweh your God shall choose; and you shall turn in the morning and go to your tents-</em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>See on :2. Israel were told specifically that the Passover lamb must be roasted and not boiled (<em><a href='B:20 12:9'>Exo 12:9</a></em> uses two distinct words for 'boiled' and 'roasted'.). But the word used in <em><a href='B:20 12:9'>Exo 12:9</a></em> for "boiled" is that used in <em><a href='B:50 16:7'>Deu 16:7</a></em> of how the Passover could be boiled, although many Bible versions misleadingly translate the word there as "roast". The translators need not have feared such contradiction. For it is the contradiction of grace. Moses in <em><a href='B:50 16:2'>Deu 16:2</a></em>; <em><a href='B:50 16:7'>Deu 16:7</a></em> was allowing a less strict observation of the Passover than originally intended, typical of the way Deuteronomy, 'the second law', seems to make concessions to Israel's weaknesses. Or it could be that here we have another example of where the Passover regulations given in Exodus were specific only to that time at the exodus. Thus a foreigner was not allowed to eat of that sacrifice, but foreigners were welcome to eat of the Passover later.&nbsp;</p><p style='margin-left:1em'>At the first Passover, which they were re-living, they left Egypt at night and in the morning went into the promised land. They were to imagine their homes as in a sense the promised land; there the principles of the Kingdom were to be upheld so that the home became a small imitation of the Kingdom. That principle applies to us too.</p><p style='margin-left:1em'><em><a href='B:20 12:10'>Exo 12:10</a></em> implies they spent the whole night eating the meal as zealously as possible, because the aim was not to have any left by the morning. So we must make the maximum possible use of the spiritual help and forgiveness given in Christ, before the morning of His coming is here and it is too late to gain help. <em><a href='B:50 16:7'>Deu 16:7</a></em> also indicates the whole night was spent eating: " Thou shalt roast and eat it in the place which the lord shall chose; and thou shalt turn in the morning, and go unto thy tents" . On this first occasion, they literally left Egypt that same night. The sense of urgency and intensity is hard to miss, yet so difficult to replicate in our own experience. </p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1em'><em>For six days you must eat unleavened bread. On the seventh day shall be a solemn assembly to Yahweh your God; you shall do no work- </em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>The leaven or yeast in our context is to be understood as the leaven of malice and wickedness (<em><a href='B:530 5:8'>1Co 5:8</a></em>). The search for leaven at the time of the Passover would therefore look ahead to our self examination at the breaking of bread.&nbsp;The equivalent legislation in <em><a href='B:20 12:15-16'>Exo 12:15-16</a></em>; <em><a href='B:20 13:7-8'>Exo 13:7-8</a></em> stresses that they were to have no leaven in their homes. But now in the maturity of Deuteronomy, Moses stresses "you shall do no work". To be technically obedient to regulations about yeast was easier than to learn the lesson of salvation by grace rather than works. </p><p style='margin-left:1em'>"Solemn assembly" is LXX <em>ekklesia</em>. This is the word rendered "church" in the New Testament. We could reason from this therefore that "church" specifically refers to a gathering of God's people. At that time and during those moments, they are a church. When the entire community of believers is referred to as "church", this is how God views them- as if they are all gathered together at a gathering or convocation before Him. The word in its Biblical usage therefore doesn't refer to what we might call a denomination or fellowship. <em></em></p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1em'><em>You must count for yourselves seven weeks: from the time you begin to put the sickle to the standing grain you shall begin to number seven weeks- </em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>These are the 50 days of <em><a href='B:30 23:16'>Lev 23:16</a></em>, which led to the Greek term "Pentecost"<em>.</em> The putting of the sickle to the barley harvest was therefore at Passover (<em><a href='B:20 9:31'>Exo 9:31</a></em>). The wheat harvest was seven weeks after this. The Lord's death at Passover was as the barley harvest, and we recall that barley was the food of the poor. He died on 13 / 14 Nissan, and resurrected on 16/17 Nissan, which was when the 50 days to Pentecost began to be counted from; for that was the time when the sickle was put to the grain and the firstfruits harvested (<em><a href='B:30 23:15'>Lev 23:15</a></em>). But at the feast of Pentecost 50 days later, there were the baptisms of 3000 people. This was as it were the wheat harvest, of which the Lord's resurrection was a foretaste and firstfruit (<em><a href='B:530 15:20'>1Co 15:20</a></em>; <em><a href='B:530 15:23'>1Co 15:23</a></em>). That great multitude represented all who would afterwards believe, and be finally harvested at the last day.</p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1em'><em>You must keep the feast of weeks to Yahweh your God with a tribute of a freewill offering, which you shall give according as Yahweh your God blesses you- </em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>The Hebrew word here for "freewill" carries the idea of spontaneity. This is the clear implication of its usage in places like <em><a href='B:20 35:27'>Exo 35:27</a></em>; <em><a href='B:20 36:3'>Exo 36:3</a></em>; <em><a href='B:70 5:2'>Jdg 5:2</a></em>; <em><a href='B:70 5:9'>Jdg 5:9</a></em>; <em><a href='B:130 29:5'>1Ch 29:5</a></em>; <em><a href='B:130 29:9'>1Ch 29:9</a></em>; <em><a href='B:140 35:8'>2Ch 35:8</a></em>; <em><a href='B:230 54:6'>Psa 54:6</a></em>. There is a strong sense of immediate emotion attached to the word (<em><a href='B:350 14:4'>Hos 14:4</a></em>). And there was a major emphasis in the law of Moses upon freewill offerings (<em><a href='B:30 7:16'>Lev 7:16</a></em>; <em><a href='B:30 22:18'>Lev 22:18</a></em>; <em><a href='B:30 22:21'>Lev 22:21</a></em>; <em><a href='B:30 22:23'>Lev 22:23</a></em>; <em><a href='B:30 23:38'>Lev 23:38</a></em>; <em><a href='B:40 15:3'>Num 15:3</a></em>; <em><a href='B:40 29:39'>Num 29:39</a></em>; <em><a href='B:50 12:6'>Deu 12:6</a></em>; <em><a href='B:50 12:17'>Deu 12:17</a></em>; <em><a href='B:50 16:10'>Deu 16:10</a></em>; <em><a href='B:50 23:23'>Deu 23:23</a></em>). The other legal codes of the nations around Israel were all about rituals; whereas Yahweh's law encouraged spontaneous giving as part of the way of Yahweh. For He is not a God of rituals, but of relationship. The way of the Spirit is the same today; spontaneous, emotional, personal response to God's grace, responding to Him on our own initiative and in our own way, in addition to obeying His specific requirements.&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;</p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1em'><em>You shall rejoice before Yahweh your God, you, your son, your daughter, your male servant and your female servant, the Levite who is within your gates and the foreigner, the fatherless and the widow, who are among you, in the place which Yahweh your God shall choose to cause His name to dwell there- </em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>The idea was that every family in Israel came up at least once per year to the sanctuary. The firstborn animals were to be kept and then brought up to the sanctuary. The sanctuary was intended to be a point of national focus, and this reflects God's great interest in unity amongst His people. But God never stated that He had chosen a place in Israel, at least not (arguably) until the time of David. Israel were simply not responsive enough to enable all His intended plans to come about, and therefore so much of the law was not possible of complete fulfilment as intended.<em></em></p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1em'><em>You must remember that you were a bondservant in Egypt, and you shall observe and do these statutes- </em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>Moses' frequent references in Deuteronomy to the way in which the Exodus had separated Israel from Egypt shows his concern that they were slipping back to Egypt / the world in their hearts (<em><a href='B:50 13:5'>Deu 13:5</a></em>; <em><a href='B:50 15:15'>Deu 15:15</a></em>; <em><a href='B:50 16:12'>Deu 16:12</a></em>); as our Lord in his time of dying was so strongly aware of the way in which he was redeeming us from this present evil world.&nbsp;We too are to ever remember our status before baptism, which was our equivalent to the Red Sea crossing. </p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1em'><em>You must keep the feast of tents seven days after you have gathered in from your threshing floor and from your winepress- </em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>There are connections between the various sections of Revelation and the Jewish feasts. Here's a summary:</p><p style='margin-left:1em'><em><a class='bible' href='#b66:5:1-14'>Rev 5:1-14</a></em> Passover <em><a class='bible' href='#b66:5:6'>Rev 5:6</a></em>; <em><a class='bible' href='#b66:5:9'>Rev 5:9</a></em> = <em><a href='B:20 12:13'>Exo 12:13</a></em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'><em><a class='bible' href='#b66:7:1-17'>Rev 7:1-17</a></em> Tabernacles <em><a class='bible' href='#b66:7:9'>Rev 7:9</a></em>; <em><a class='bible' href='#b66:7:15-16'>Rev 7:15-16</a></em> RV = <em><a href='B:20 23:16'>Exo 23:16</a></em>; <em><a href='B:20 34:22'>Exo 34:22</a></em>; <em><a href='B:450 14:16-20'>Zec 14:16-20</a></em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'><em><a class='bible' href='#b66:8:1-13'>Rev 8:1-13</a></em>; <em><a class='bible' href='#b66:9:1-21'>Rev 9:1-21</a></em> Day Of Atonement <em><a href='B:30 16:31'>Lev 16:31</a></em>; more detailed links in Harry Whittaker, <em>Revelation: A Biblical Approach</em> pp. 104,105.</p><p style='margin-left:1em'><em><a class='bible' href='#b66:11:1-19'>Rev 11:1-19</a></em> Dedication & Purim The Torah readings for these feasts were <em><a href='B:40 7:1-89'>Num 7:1-89</a></em> and <em><a href='B:450 2:1-13'>Zec 2:1-13</a></em>; <em><a href='B:450 3:1-10'>Zec 3:1-10</a></em>; <em><a href='B:450 4:1-14'>Zec 4:1-14</a></em> about the dedication of the temple; <em><a class='bible' href='#b66:11:10'>Rev 11:10</a></em> = <em><a href='B:190 9:19'>Est 9:19</a></em>; <em><a href='B:190 9:22'>Est 9:22</a></em>. The period from Tabernacles to Purim is exactly 5 months- as mentioned in <em><a class='bible' href='#b66:9:5'>Rev 9:5</a></em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'><em><a class='bible' href='#b66:12:1-17'>Rev 12:1-17</a></em> Pentecost & Passover The Jews traditionally ask: "On this Sabbath, shall I reap?"</p><p style='margin-left:1em'><em><a class='bible' href='#b66:14:1-20'>Rev 14:1-20</a></em> Tabernacles </p>&nbsp;<p style='margin-left:1em'>Revelation 15 + 16 Atonement & Passover <em><a href='B:30 16:1-34'>Lev 16:1-34</a></em>; <em><a href='B:230 118:1-29'>Psa 118:1-29</a></em> the Hallel Psalm</p><p style='margin-left:1em'><em><a class='bible' href='#b66:19:1-21'>Rev 19:1-21</a></em> Passover <em><a href='B:230 113:1-9'>Psa 113:1-9</a></em>; <em><a href='B:230 114:1-8'>Psa 114:1-8</a></em> Passover Psalms</p><p style='margin-left:1em'><em><a class='bible' href='#b66:21:1-27'>Rev 21:1-27</a></em>; <em><a class='bible' href='#b66:22:1-21'>Rev 22:1-21</a></em> Tabernacles</p>&nbsp;<p style='margin-left:1em'>Laying out the material chronologically, we have:</p><p style='margin-left:1em'>Chapter 5: Passover</p><p style='margin-left:1em'>6 months</p><p style='margin-left:1em'>Chapter 7: Tabernacles</p><p style='margin-left:1em'>Chapters 8 & 9: Atonement and Tabernacles</p><p style='margin-left:1em'>1 year</p><p style='margin-left:1em'>Chapter 11: Dedication 5 months (<em><a class='bible' href='#b66:9:5'>Rev 9:5</a></em>)</p><p style='margin-left:1em'>Chapter 11: Purim</p><p style='margin-left:1em'>Chapter 12: Passover and Pentecost</p><p style='margin-left:1em'>Chapter 14: Tabernacles</p><p style='margin-left:1em'>1 year</p><p style='margin-left:1em'>Chapter 15: Atonement</p><p style='margin-left:1em'>Chapter 16 & 19: Passover </p><p style='margin-left:1em'>Chapter 21 & 22: Tabernacles</p><p style='margin-left:1em'>1 year</p><p style='margin-left:1em'>The conclusion would therefore be that we have in the book of Revelation a literal account of the three and a half years tribulation, with the Jewish feasts being the key marker points. And it would appear there will be an especial period of five months tribulation as described between Revelation chapters 9 and 11. </p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1em'><em>and you shall rejoice in your feast, you, your son and your daughter, your male servant, your female servant and the Levite, the foreigner, the fatherless and the widow, who are within your gates- </em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>The feasts were intended as a time of fellowship between male and female, bond and free, and Jew and Gentile (<em><a href='B:550 3:27-29'>Gal 3:27-29</a></em>). They looked ahead to the spirit of the breaking of bread meeting. We note that the feasts were open to children and to the foreigner; there was an open table policy. <em></em></p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1em'><em>You must keep a feast to Yahweh your God seven days in the place which Yahweh shall choose. Because Yahweh your God will bless you in all your increase and in all the work of your hands, you shall be altogether joyful-</em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>See on <em><a href='B:230 90:3'>Psa 90:3</a></em>. &nbsp;Moses was this confident of them, that God would give them the blessings for obedience, just as Paul was confident of the obedience of the Corinthians despite it seeming humanly unlikely (<em><a href='B:540 10:6'>2Co 10:6</a></em>). It’s far easier to have a negative attitude about people than a positive one; but God’s grace and imputing of righteousness to us personally should help us be positive about others.</p><p style='margin-left:1em'>Having stated that the Canaanite tribes would only be cast out if Israel were obedient, Moses goes on to enthuse that those tribes would indeed be cast out- so positive was he about Israel’s obedience (<em><a href='B:50 6:18-19'>Deu 6:18-19</a></em>; <em><a href='B:50 7:1'>Deu 7:1</a></em>). And yet on the other hand he realistically was aware of their future failures. He said those positive words genuinely, because he simply loved Israel, and had the hope for them which love carries with it. Throughout his speech, Moses is constantly thinking of Israel in the land; he keeps on telling them how to behave when they are there, encouraging them to be strong so that they will go into the land. I estimate that about 25% of the verses in Moses' speech speak about this. Israel's future inheritance of the Kingdom absolutely filled Moses' mind as he faced up to his own death. And remember that his speech was the outpouring of 40 years meditation. Their salvation, them in the Kingdom, totally filled his heart. And likewise with the Lord Jesus. <em><a href='B:230 22:1-31'>Psa 22:1-31</a></em>; <em><a href='B:230 69:1-36'>Psa 69:1-36</a></em> shows how his thoughts on the cross, especially as he approached the point of death, were centred around our salvation. And Moses was so positive about them. “The Lord thy God shall bless thee in all thine increase, and in all the works of thine hands”, even though these blessings were conditional upon their obedience. Moses was this confident of them (<em><a href='B:50 16:15'>Deu 16:15</a></em> cp. 28:1,4,12). </p><p style='margin-left:1em'>Moses sounds as if his prayer of <em><a href='B:230 90:17'>Psa 90:17</a></em> has been answered: "Let the grace of the Lord our God be upon us; establish the work of our hands for us; yes, establish the work of our hands". God was willing to hearken to Moses as he prayed so, so earnestly, He was willing to change His expressed purpose in respect to destroying Israel (perhaps <em><a href='B:230 90:1-17'>Psa 90:1-17</a></em> is the transcript of this prayer- <em><a href='B:230 90:3'>Psa 90:3</a></em> in Hebrew asks God not to destroy the children of men, and to repent concerning His servants in:13-17). It should also be noted that Moses as a type of Christ was not the High Priest. He mediated for Israel on a voluntary basis; not because he was under any duty to offer up their prayers. Indeed, they didn't make any prayers for him to offer up. He pleaded with God for them on his own initiative, rather than being asked by them to do so. And this is the basis of Christ's mediation for us; he pleads for us even when we know not what to pray for, even when we don't realize the need to beseech the Father. Moses' mediation, not so much Aaron's offerings, are the prototype which the New Testament uses to explain the Lord's present work. In the Apocryphal Assumption of Moses (1:14), Moses is made to say of God: "He designed and devised me and he prepared me before the foundation of the world, that I should be the mediator". These words are alluded to in a number of NT passages. Clearly we are intended to see Moses' mediation as typical of the Lord's. His freewill mediation was the basis of Israel's salvation (<em><a href='B:350 12:13'>Hos 12:13</a></em>). Likewise the intensity of his prayers and the supremacy of his willingness to sacrifice himself for them was tragically unknown to them at the time. It's almost sad that these things have to be typical of the Lord's preservation and redemption of us his thick-skinned and unknowing people.&nbsp;&nbsp;</p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1em'><em>Three times in a year must all your males appear before Yahweh your God in the place which He shall choose: in the feast of unleavened bread, in the feast of weeks and in the feast of tents- </em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>"Appear" translates a Hebrew word elsewhere translated approve, discern, gaze upon, take heed, look upon oneself, perceive, shew oneself. His very presence before the Lord would have this effect: he would be revealed openly to God, and he would see himself as he was. This was the intention; and yet Yahweh went on to warn them not to appear before Him “empty", vainly, ‘to no effect’. Behold the intense relevance to our appearing before the Lord at our Passover: we can <em>so easily</em> present ourselves there ‘to no effect’, when the intention is that we should be manifesting ourselves to ourselves and to God. The familiar order of service, the well known hymns, the presence of familiar and often family faces...these factors (not wrong in themselves) all encourage us to ‘appear’ there to no effect. </p><p style='margin-left:1em'><em>They must not appear before Yahweh empty- </em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>"Empty" may mean that they were to not attend without bringing a sacrifice, with empty hands. But "empty" is s.w. "without cause", "in vain". Attendance at the feasts was not to be mere ritual, appearing before Yahweh for no purpose. The meaning of the feasts was to be allowed to have the spiritual results intended. And this is a challenge to all whose Christian lives involve regular attendance at meetings. We can so easily slip into a rut of ritual observance, just going through motions "without cause".&nbsp;</p><p style='margin-left:1em'>Material giving to the Lord’s cause was associated with the breaking of bread in the early church (<em><a href='B:510 2:42-46'>Act 2:42-46</a></em>; <em><a href='B:530 16:1-2'>1Co 16:1-2</a></em>), after the pattern of how every male was not to appear empty before Yahweh (Heb. ‘to appear for no cause’) at the Jewish feasts (<em><a href='B:50 16:16'>Deu 16:16</a></em>). We cannot celebrate His grace / giving to us without response. </p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1em'><em>every man shall give as he is able- </em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>The Mosaic Law countered the idea that only the rich can be generous. They all had to tithe. And it’s possible to argue that they had to give around 27%, not just 10% (10% to the Levites, 10% of the rest to support the feasts; and 10% of the rest for the poor). The purification after childbirth and the cleansing of the leper allowed a lower grade of offering to be made by the very poor- to underline that <em>no one</em> is exempted from giving to the Lord, no matter how poor they are. Consider the emphasis: "Every man shall give <em>as he is able</em>... he shall offer <em>even such as he is able to get</em>... then the disciples (consciously motivated by these principles?) <em>every man according to his ability</em>, determined to send relief... let <em>every one of you</em> lay by him in store, as God hath prospered him" (<em><a href='B:50 16:17'>Deu 16:17</a></em>; <em><a href='B:30 14:30-31'>Lev 14:30-31</a></em>; <em><a href='B:510 11:29'>Act 11:29</a></em>; <em><a href='B:530 16:2'>1Co 16:2</a></em>). God reckons a man’s generosity according to what he has; if there is the desire to give, a generous spirit, then this is seen as generosity. This is exemplified by the Lord’s high estimation of the widow’s giving. The amount was not as important as the spirit behind it. “The Lord blesseth a cheerful giver, and will supply the deficiency of his works” (<em><a href='B:240 22:8'>Pro 22:8</a></em> LXX; although not in the Hebrew text, this passage is quoted in the NT as inspired). </p><p style='margin-left:1em'><em>According to the blessing of Yahweh your God which He has given you-</em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>Notice the past tense. Moses often speaks of the "blessing" which God would give them for obedience; but he here speaks of the future blessing of obedience in the prophetic perfect, so confident was he that they would receive it. The blessings of the Kingdom were already obtained for us on the cross. It’s for us to as it were claim them.</p><p style='margin-left:1em'>Despite being fully aware of how weak Israel were, Moses often speaks of the "blessing" which God would give them for obedience; he even speaks of the future blessing of obedience in the prophetic perfect, so confident was he that they would receive it: "Every man shall give as he is able (once he is settled in the land), according to the blessing of the Lord thy God which he <em>hath</em> given thee" (<em><a href='B:50 16:17'>Deu 16:17</a></em>). Moses speaks with confidence of how God would grant them the blessing of the land and victory over their enemies, even though these things were conditional upon their obedience (<em><a href='B:50 19:1'>Deu 19:1</a></em>; <em><a href='B:50 20:13'>Deu 20:13</a></em>), and even though Moses clearly knew that most of them would disobey. The conclusion from this is that Moses thought so much of that minority who would obey his covenant, who would grasp the spirit of his life and the speech he was now making. And our Lord likewise- in his feelings for us, we trust.</p><p style='margin-left:1em'>The Mosaic command to give, every man according to the blessing with which God had blessed him (<em><a href='B:50 16:17'>Deu 16:17</a></em>), is purposely similar in phrasing to the command to eat of the Passover lamb, every man according to his need; and to partake of the manna (cp. the Lord Jesus), every man according to his need (<em><a href='B:20 12:4'>Exo 12:4</a></em>; <em><a href='B:20 16:6'>Exo 16:6</a></em>; <em><a href='B:20 16:16'>Exo 16:16</a></em>). According to the desperation of our need, so we partake of Christ; and in response, according to our blessing, we give, in response to the grace of His giving. </p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1em'><em>You shall make judges and officers in all your gates which Yahweh your God gives you, according to your tribes, and they shall judge the people with righteous judgment-</em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>This was specifically obeyed in <em><a href='B:140 19:7'>2Ch 19:7</a></em>, because the previous system had been open to "respect of persons" and bribes. This was in distinction to how the judgment was done as in most primitive societies, by the heads of families. But that was bound to be open to "respect of persons" and bribes. Therefore nepotism was to e outlawed by the appointment of a judiciary. </p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1em'><em>You must not twist justice, you must not respect persons, neither must you take a bribe; for a bribe blinds the eyes of the wise and perverts the words of the righteous- </em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>The Hebrew <em>mishpat</em>, "ordinances", has a wide range of meaning. The idea is of judgment, as if God and His Angels gave these laws as their considered judgment after considering the human condition, and Israel were to abide by them. But the word also the idea of a right or privilege; and that is how we should see God's laws. They are only felt as a burden because of human hardness of neck towards God's ways. His laws are not of themselves burdensome, but rather a privilege and blessing. The law was indeed "holy, just and good" (<em><a href='B:520 7:12'>Rom 7:12</a></em>), designed to inculcate a holy, just and good life (<em><a href='B:630 1:8'>Tit 1:8</a></em>), a way in which a man should "walk" in daily life (<em><a href='B:30 18:4'>Lev 18:4</a></em>), a culture of kindness and grace to others which reflected God's grace to man. If we dwell upon the idea of "rights" carried within the word <em>mishpat</em>, we note that the law begins in <em><a href='B:20 21:1-2'>Exo 21:1-2</a></em> (also <em><a href='B:50 15:12-18'>Deu 15:12-18</a></em>) with the rights of a slave- those considered to have no rights in the society of that day. The "rights" to be afforded by us to others are the essence of God's rightness / justice.</p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1em'><em>You must follow that which is altogether just- </em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>Heb. "justice, justice". In the days before underlining or italic print, emphasis was achieved by repeating a word twice- e.g. "Justice, justice" (<em><a href='B:50 16:20'>Deu 16:20</a></em>); "Comfort, comfort" (<em><a href='B:290 40:1'>Isa 40:1</a></em>). It has been pointed out that only one of the ten commandments is repeated twice: "You shall not covet". This sober emphasis upon not coveting was surely a reflection of how God perceived the huge danger of His people seeking to 'possess' things as theirs. </p><p style='margin-left:1em'><em>That you may live, and inherit the land which Yahweh your God gives you-</em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>The Pharisees had the “key of knowledge” that enabled men to reach the Kingdom (<em><a href='B:490 11:52'>Luk 11:52</a></em>); but they took it away from men, and thus stopped them entering (<em><a href='B:470 23:13'>Mat 23:13</a></em>). Likewise if the elders / judges of Israel had been wise, the entire people would have entered the land. </p><p style='margin-left:1em'>"Drive out" is s.w. "possess / inherit". We must note the difference between the&nbsp; Canaanite peoples and their kings being "struck" and their land "taken" by Joshua-Jesus; and the people of Israel permanently taking possession. This is the difference between the Lord's victory on the cross, and our taking possession of the Kingdom. Even though that possession has been "given" to us. The word used for "possession" is literally 'an inheritance'. The allusion is to the people, like us, being the seed of Abraham. The Kingdom was and is our possession, our inheritance- if we walk in the steps of Abraham. But it is one thing to be the seed of Abraham, another to take possession of the inheritance; and Israel generally did not take possession of all the land (<em><a href='B:60 11:23'>Jos 11:23</a></em>; <em><a href='B:60 13:1'>Jos 13:1</a></em>; <em><a href='B:60 16:10'>Jos 16:10</a></em>; <em><a href='B:60 18:3'>Jos 18:3</a></em>; <em><a href='B:60 23:4'>Jos 23:4</a></em>). The language of inheritance / possession is applied to us in the New Testament (<em><a href='B:560 1:11'>Eph 1:11</a></em>; <em><a href='B:560 1:14'>Eph 1:14</a></em>; <em><a href='B:580 3:24'>Col 3:24</a></em>; <em><a href='B:510 20:32'>Act 20:32</a></em>; <em><a href='B:510 26:18'>Act 26:18</a></em>; <em><a href='B:670 1:4'>1Pe 1:4</a></em> etc.). Israel were promised: "You shall possess it" (<em><a href='B:50 30:5'>Deu 30:5</a></em>; <em><a href='B:50 33:23'>Deu 33:23</a></em>). This was more of a command than a prophecy, for sadly they were "given" the land but did not "possess" it. They were constantly encouraged in the wilderness that they were on the path to possessing the land (<em><a href='B:50 30:16'>Deu 30:16</a></em>; <em><a href='B:50 30:18'>Deu 30:18</a></em>; <em><a href='B:50 31:3'>Deu 31:3</a></em>; <em><a href='B:50 31:13'>Deu 31:13</a></em>; <em><a href='B:50 32:47'>Deu 32:47</a></em>), but when they got there they didn't possess it fully. </p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1em'><em>You must not plant for yourselves an Asherah of any kind of tree beside the altar of Yahweh your God, which you shall make for yourselves-</em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>Moses adds a whole series of apparently 'minor' commands which were designed to make obedience easier to the others already given. Thus he tells them in Deuteronomy not to plant a grove of trees near the altar of God - because he knew this would provoke the possibility of mixing Yahweh worship with that of the surrounding world (<em><a href='B:50 16:21'>Deu 16:21</a></em>). There was to be no possibility of worshipping idols in the name of Yahweh worship; there was not even to be the possibility of some subliminal suggestion of it arising from having a grove of trees near an altar. Likewise he commands any future king not to send God's people to Egypt to buy horses because he could see that this would tempt them to go back to Egypt permanently (<em><a href='B:50 17:16'>Deu 17:16</a></em>). There are many other example of this kind of thing (<em><a href='B:50 14:24'>Deu 14:24</a></em>; <em><a href='B:50 15:18'>Deu 15:18</a></em>; <em><a href='B:50 17:17-19'>Deu 17:17-19</a></em>; <em><a href='B:50 18:9'>Deu 18:9</a></em>; <em><a href='B:50 20:7-8'>Deu 20:7-8</a></em>). The point is that Moses had thought long and hard about the ways in which Israel would be tempted to sin, and his words and innermost desire were devoted to helping them overcome. Glorious ditto for the Lord Jesus. </p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1em'><em>Neither shall you set yourself up a pillar, which Yahweh your God hates-</em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>Again, there was not even to be the possibility of some subliminal suggestion toward idol worship. The setting up of pillars as memorials was done even by Jacob, but clearly there was a hint of idolatry in them, and now they were forbidden. We likewise need to avoid all subliminal suggestions toward sin from our lives.</p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1em'><em>You must not sacrifice to Yahweh your God an ox or a sheep in which is a blemish or anything imperfect, for that is an abomination to Yahweh your God- </em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>This looked ahead to the unblemished character of the Lord Jesus (<em><a href='B:530 5:7'>1Co 5:7</a></em>). The offering of sacrifices "without blemish" uses a word which is used about Abraham and Noah being "without blemish" (AV "perfect") before God (<em><a href='B:10 6:9'>Gen 6:9</a></em>; <em><a href='B:10 17:1'>Gen 17:1</a></em>). Although the word is used about the sacrifices, it is really more appropriate to persons- "you shall be perfect with Yahweh your God" (<em><a href='B:50 18:13'>Deu 18:13</a></em>), "serve Him in sincerity (s.w. "without blemish")" (<em><a href='B:60 24:14'>Jos 24:14</a></em>). The idea, therefore, was that the offerer was invited to see the animal as representative of himself. Our lives too are to be as "living sacrifices" (<em><a href='B:520 12:1'>Rom 12:1</a></em>). And yet in practical terms, no animal is without blemish. They were to give the best they could, and God would count it as without blemish; as He does with us. David frequently uses the term in the Psalms about himself and the "upright", even though he was far from unblemished in moral terms. </p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1em'><em>If there is found in the midst of you, within any of your gates which Yahweh your God gives you, a man or woman who does that which is evil in the sight of Yahweh your God in transgressing His covenant- </em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>Like Paul in his time of dying, Moses in Deuteronomy saw the importance of obedience, the harder side of God; yet he also saw in real depth the surpassing love of God, and the grace that was to come, beyond Law. This appreciation reflected Moses' mature grasp of the Name / characteristics of God. He uses the name "Yahweh" in Deuteronomy over 530 times, often with some possessive adjective, e.g. "Yahweh thy God" (AV- i.e. you singular), or "Yahweh our God". He saw the personal relationship between a man and his God. Jacob reached a like realization at his peak. </p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1em'><em>and has gone and served other gods and worshipped them, or the sun or the moon or any of the army of the sky, which I have not commanded- </em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>Moses told Israel this when they had carried the star of Remphan and the tabernacle of Moloch through the wilderness, and had taken the idols of Egypt with them (<em><a href='B:330 20:7-8'>Eze 20:7-8</a></em>). Joshua had to appeal to that generation to put away their idols. We see here how Moses was talking on one level, but the people were completely on another. </p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1em'><em>and it is told you and you have heard of it, then you must inquire diligently- </em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>Reports of wrong doing cannot all, therefore, be shrugged off as gossip which we don't want to hear. That can be a lazy response. The far harder response is to do as asked here, to "inquire diligently" and establish facts. </p><p style='margin-left:1em'><em>Behold, if it is true and certain that such abomination is done in Israel-</em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>Moses knew that such idolatry was ongoing in Israel as he spoke. But it is left an open question as to why he did nothing further than lament it at the end of Deuteronomy. Perhaps he reflected God's great enthusiasm for Israel at this time, for He did not behold iniquity in Jacob (<em><a href='B:40 23:21'>Num 23:21</a></em>), and presents Himself in Jeremiah as having fallen totally in love with Israel in the wilderness, wishing not to see their unfaithfulness.</p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1em'><em>then you must bring forth that man or that woman who has done this evil thing to your gates, even the man or the woman, and you shall stone them to death with stones- </em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>The use of stoning (<em><a href='B:50 13:10'>Deu 13:10</a></em>; <em><a href='B:50 17:5'>Deu 17:5</a></em>; <em><a href='B:50 21:21'>Deu 21:21</a></em>; <em><a href='B:50 22:21'>Deu 22:21</a></em>; <em><a href='B:50 22:24'>Deu 22:24</a></em>) was to show their connection with the death of the apostate. It was to also make them realize that any attempt to deny the saving work of God in bringing them out of Egypt, or attempt to reverse it by returning them to bondage, was worthy of death (<em><a href='B:50 13:10'>Deu 13:10</a></em>). We note that false teaching, enticing others to sin, is seen as the most serious kind of sin. The New Testament teaching about church discipline takes a similar approach; moral weakness of individuals was tolerated, although criticized; but those teaching such behaviour were condemned. Stoning resulted in the covering of the body with the dust of the earth, as if recognizing that the death being brought about was also to be the fate of all under the curse in Eden.&nbsp;</p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1em'><em>At the mouth of two or three witnesses shall he who is to die be put to death. At the mouth of one witness he must not be put to death-</em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>Insisting on more than one witness before accepting the truth of an allegation meant that gossip and slander were limited; and Jesus applies this principle to dealing with disputes within His church (<em><a href='B:470 18:16'>Mat 18:16</a></em>). Although His teaching about not condemning our brethren meant that He didn't advocate as it were 'putting to death', but rather stern rebuke and damage limitation. Those who served other gods had to die on the testimony of two or three witnesses. This idea is twice alluded to in the New Testament in the context of making the decision to cease fellowship with someone (<em><a href='B:470 18:16'>Mat 18:16</a></em>; <em><a href='B:540 13:1'>2Co 13:1</a></em>). The implication is that death under the Old Covenant pointed forward to first century church discipline under the New Covenant. But we must note that the reason for this was serving other gods and wilful departing from covenant relationship with the Lord- not minor reasons.</p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1em'><em>The hand of the witnesses must be first on him to put him to death, and afterward the hand of all the people. So you shall put away the evil from the midst of you- </em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>There is stress upon close family members were to be the first to slay apostate members whose apostacy they had reported (<em><a href='B:50 13:9'>Deu 13:9</a></em>; <em><a href='B:50 17:7'>Deu 17:7</a></em>). They were being taught that they had to love God far more than family, and the Lord Jesus continued this teaching (<em><a href='B:470 10:37'>Mat 10:37</a></em>).</p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1em'><em>If there arises a matter too hard for you in judgment, between blood and blood, between plea and plea and between stroke and stroke, being matters of controversy within your gates, then go up to the place which Yahweh your God shall choose-</em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>Judging between "blood and blood" may refer to judging whether between murder and manslaughter. The sanctuary was intended to be a point of national focus, and this reflects God's great interest in unity amongst His people. But God never stated that He had chosen a place in Israel, at least not (arguably) until the time of David. Israel were simply not responsive enough to enable all His intended plans to come about, and therefore so much of the law was not possible of complete fulfilment as intended.</p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1em'><em>and come to the priests the Levites and to the judge who shall be in those days and ask. They shall show you the sentence of judgment-</em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>David and Solomon appear to have concentrated all judgment in themselves, setting themselves up effectively as both king and priest, for the "judge" was to be a priest. Jehoshaphat reformed this by placing the power of judgment in the hands of a group of Levites, priests and heads of families as the higher court in Jerusalem (<em><a href='B:140 19:5-8'>2Ch 19:5-8</a></em>). But still Jehoshaphat didn't appoint a singular senior judge, as required in <em><a href='B:50 17:9'>Deu 17:9</a></em>. We note from <em><a href='B:50 19:17'>Deu 19:17</a></em> that this singular priestly supreme judge is called "Yahweh", because he was to be Yahweh's supreme representative when it came to judgment. But it seems even the best kings of Judah preferred to keep that office in their own power. </p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1em'><em>You must do according to the sentence which they shall show you from that place which Yahweh shall choose, and you must observe to do according to all that they shall teach you- </em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>LXX "And thou shalt act according to the thing which they shall report to thee out of the place which the Lord thy God shall choose, and thou shalt observe to do all whatsoever shall have been by law appointed to thee". The idea may be that their judgment was based upon God's law, but they would ask Him for wisdom as to how to interpret it, and they in turn would "report" that in making judgments. And yet it seems that the priesthood failed to be just judges, as the prophets very often lament the corrupt judiciary in the same context as complaining of a corrupt priesthood. They didn't judge according to God's revealed word, nor seek His guidance; but judged according to their own vested interests. Just as we can today. </p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1em'><em>according to the law which they shall teach you and according to the judgment which they shall tell you, that you shall do. You must not turn aside from the sentence which they shall show you- </em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>The system of judges proposed by Jethro didn't really work, because Moses again felt the burden was too great for him (see on <em><a href='B:40 11:11'>Num 11:11</a></em>), and so the 70 Spirit filled elders were appointed (<em><a href='B:40 11:16'>Num 11:16</a></em>). But this too didn't really work; because in <em><a href='B:50 17:11'>Deu 17:11</a></em>; <em><a href='B:50 21:5'>Deu 21:5</a></em> we seem to read of the priests effectively being the judges, under the direct control of Moses and Aaron. The simple truth was that there was hardly a wise man amongst them. </p><p style='margin-left:1em'><em>To the right hand or to the left- </em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>The wall of water on their right hand and left when they crossed the Red Sea is twice emphasized (<em><a href='B:20 14:22'>Exo 14:22</a></em>; <em><a href='B:20 14:29'>Exo 14:29</a></em>). It is alluded to later, when they are urged to not depart from God's way, not to the right hand nor left (<em><a href='B:50 5:32'>Deu 5:32</a></em>; <em><a href='B:50 17:11'>Deu 17:11</a></em>; <em><a href='B:50 17:20'>Deu 17:20</a></em>; <em><a href='B:50 28:14'>Deu 28:14</a></em>). We passed through the Red Sea when we were baptized (<em><a href='B:530 10:1-2'>1Co 10:1-2</a></em>). We were set upon a path which is walled up to keep us within it. And we are to remain in that path upon which we were set. To turn aside from it would be as foolish as Israel turning away from their path and trying to walk into the walls of water.</p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1em'><em>The man who does presumptuously in not listening to the priest who stands to minister there before Yahweh your God, or to the judge, that man shall die, and you must put away the evil from Israel-</em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>“The evil one” in the Old Testament was always “the evil man in Israel” (<em><a href='B:50 17:12'>Deu 17:12</a></em>; <em><a href='B:50 19:19'>Deu 19:19</a></em>; <em><a href='B:50 22:21-24'>Deu 22:21-24</a></em> cp. <em><a href='B:530 5:13'>1Co 5:13</a></em>) – never a superhuman being, not any personal, superhuman Satan. </p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1em'><em>All the people shall hear and fear and do no more presumptuously-</em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>David however did act presumptuously, and yet lived- by grace. <em><a href='B:100 12:9'>2Sa 12:9</a></em> says that he "despised the word of Yahweh". Indeed, David "despised the commandment (word) of the Lord... you despised me" (<em><a href='B:100 12:9-10'>2Sa 12:9-10</a></em>). David learnt that his attitude to God's word was his attitude to God- for the word of God, in that sense, was and is God. The fact that he is condemned for having "despised the commandment of the Lord" in his sin with Bathsheba indicates that David knew all along what God's will really was. The fact that the flesh took over does not in any way mitigate his responsibility in this. This is a direct quote from the Law's definition of the sin of presumption: "The soul that does anything presumptuously... because he has despised the word of the Lord... that soul shall utterly be cut off" (<em><a href='B:40 15:30-31'>Num 15:30-31</a></em>). Knowing David’s emotional nature and also the fact that he did not completely turn away from God afterwards, we would have expected a quicker repentance if it had been a passing sin of passion. It would therefore seem reasonable to assume that the sin was of presumption rather than passion. In his prosperity he had said “I shall never be moved” and he was determined that he couldn’t be (<em><a href='B:230 30:6'>Psa 30:6</a></em>). Hearing those words from Nathan must have struck real fear into David- he was being incriminated for the supreme sin of presumption, for which there was no provision of sacrifice or repentance. It is a mark of his faith and knowledge of God as the God of love, that He is willing to go on to confess his sin, in the hope of forgiveness. "You desire not sacrifice; else would I give it" (<em><a href='B:230 51:16'>Psa 51:16</a></em>) was spoken by David more concerning this sin of presumption for which there was no sacrifice prescribed, rather than about the actual sin of adultery. However, we must not get the impression that David was a hard, callous man. Everything we know about him points to him be a big hearted, warm softie. David's sin with Bathsheba was in that sense out of character. Yet such is the stranglehold of sin that even he was forced to act with such uncharacteristic callousness and indifference to both God and man in order to try to cover his sin. </p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1em'><em>When you have come to the land which Yahweh your God gives you and shall possess it, and dwell therein and say, I will set a king over me like all the nations that are around me- </em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>Moses often reminds them that he knows they will turn away from the Covenant he had given them (e.g. <em><a href='B:50 30:1'>Deu 30:1</a></em>; <em><a href='B:50 31:29'>Deu 31:29</a></em>). Here he shows that he knew that one day they would want a king, even though God was their king. He had such sensitivity to their weakness and likely failures, and in some areas he makes concessions to them. </p><p style='margin-left:1em'>"Drive out" is s.w. "possess". We must note the difference between the&nbsp; Canaanite peoples and their kings being "struck" and their land "taken" by Joshua-Jesus; and the people of Israel permanently taking possession. This is the difference between the Lord's victory on the cross, and our taking possession of the Kingdom. Even though that possession has been "given" to us. The word used for "possession" is literally 'an inheritance'. The allusion is to the people, like us, being the seed of Abraham. The Kingdom was and is our possession, our inheritance- if we walk in the steps of Abraham. But it is one thing to be the seed of Abraham, another to take possession of the inheritance; and Israel generally did not take possession of all the land (<em><a href='B:60 11:23'>Jos 11:23</a></em>; <em><a href='B:60 13:1'>Jos 13:1</a></em>; <em><a href='B:60 16:10'>Jos 16:10</a></em>; <em><a href='B:60 18:3'>Jos 18:3</a></em>; <em><a href='B:60 23:4'>Jos 23:4</a></em>). The language of inheritance / possession is applied to us in the New Testament (<em><a href='B:560 1:11'>Eph 1:11</a></em>; <em><a href='B:560 1:14'>Eph 1:14</a></em>; <em><a href='B:580 3:24'>Col 3:24</a></em>; <em><a href='B:510 20:32'>Act 20:32</a></em>; <em><a href='B:510 26:18'>Act 26:18</a></em>; <em><a href='B:670 1:4'>1Pe 1:4</a></em> etc.). Israel were promised: "You shall possess it" (<em><a href='B:50 30:5'>Deu 30:5</a></em>; <em><a href='B:50 33:23'>Deu 33:23</a></em>). This was more of a command than a prophecy, for sadly they were "given" the land but did not "possess" it. They were constantly encouraged in the wilderness that they were on the path to possessing the land (<em><a href='B:50 30:16'>Deu 30:16</a></em>; <em><a href='B:50 30:18'>Deu 30:18</a></em>; <em><a href='B:50 31:3'>Deu 31:3</a></em>; <em><a href='B:50 31:13'>Deu 31:13</a></em>; <em><a href='B:50 32:47'>Deu 32:47</a></em>), but when they got there they didn't possess it fully. </p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1em'><em>you must surely set him king over yourselves whom Yahweh your God shall choose; one from among your brothers you shall set king over you. You may not put a foreigner over you, who is not your brother- </em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>It was God's wish that Israel would not have a human king; hence His sorrow when they did (<em><a href='B:90 10:19-21'>1Sa 10:19-21</a></em>). Yet in the Law, God foresaw that they would want a human king, and so He gave commandments concerning how he should behave (<em><a href='B:50 17:14-15'>Deu 17:14-15</a></em>). These passages speak of how Israel would choose to set a King over themselves, and would do so. Yet God worked through this system of human kings; hence the Queen of Sheba speaks of how <em>God</em> had set Solomon over Israel as King, and how he was king on God's behalf (<em><a href='B:140 9:8'>2Ch 9:8</a></em>). Israel set a king over themselves; but God worked with this, so that in a sense He set the King over them. </p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1em'><em>Only he must not multiply horses to himself, nor cause the people to return to Egypt, so that he may multiply horses, because Yahweh has said to you, You shall not go back that way again-</em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>See on <em><a href='B:50 16:21'>Deu 16:21</a></em>. Moses commands any future king not to send God's people to Egypt to buy horses because he could see that this would tempt them to go back to Egypt permanently. There are many other example of this kind of thing (<em><a href='B:50 14:24'>Deu 14:24</a></em>; <em><a href='B:50 15:18'>Deu 15:18</a></em>; <em><a href='B:50 17:17-19'>Deu 17:17-19</a></em>; <em><a href='B:50 18:9'>Deu 18:9</a></em>; <em><a href='B:50 20:7-8'>Deu 20:7-8</a></em>). The point is that Moses had thought long and hard about the ways in which Israel would be tempted to sin, and his words and innermost desire were devoted to helping them overcome. Glorious ditto for the Lord Jesus whom he typified (<em><a href='B:50 18:18'>Deu 18:18</a></em>). Note that the king was warned not to get horses for himself from Egypt because the very act of sending Israelites back into Egypt might tempt them to return there; we are to be sensitive to the spiritual effect our actions may have upon others.</p><p style='margin-left:1em'>Israel were told three times that Saul would have many chariots (<em><a href='B:90 8:11-12'>1Sa 8:11-12</a></em>). If they were spiritually aware, they would have realized that by multiplying horses and chariots, he was going to be a King who ruled in studied disobedience to the Mosaic Law (<em><a href='B:50 17:16-20'>Deu 17:16-20</a></em>). They were given the spiritual potential to grasp this. But they were already hard bitten in their rebellion, and this potential spiritual help went unheeded (although God still gave it to them potentially, even at a time when it seemed pointless. He is so ever willing to coax His people back!).</p><p style='margin-left:1em'>The degree to which God wanted Israel to conceive of Him in terms of Angels is shown by carefully considering the command for Israel not to have chariots (<em><a href='B:50 17:16'>Deu 17:16</a></em> cp. <em><a href='B:290 2:7'>Isa 2:7</a></em>). As this form of transport became increasingly popular, it must have seemed as crazy as Christians being told not to possess motor cars. There must have therefore been a highly significant teaching behind it. Was the purpose of it to make Israel look to the Angel-cherubim chariots of God? The word for 'cherubim' carries the idea of a chariot; the notion of horsemen corresponds with the Angel horse riders of Zechariah and Revelation.</p><p style='margin-left:1em'><em><a href='B:20 14:13'>Exo 14:13</a></em> could appear to be prophecy: “The Egyptians… you shall see them again no more for ever”. But it is understood as a command not to return to Egypt in <em><a href='B:50 17:16'>Deu 17:16</a></em> - and because of Israel turning back to Egypt in their hearts, they would be taken there again (<em><a href='B:50 28:68'>Deu 28:68</a></em>). So we must be prepared to accept that what may appear to be prophecy is in fact commandment, which we have the freewill to obey or disobey.&nbsp; <em><a href='B:330 43:7'>Eze 43:7</a></em> likewise is more command than prediction: “The house of Israel shall no more defile my holy name” (RV). It isn’t saying ‘this is a prophecy that they will not do this’- for they did. Rather is it a plea, a command, that they are not to do this any more.&nbsp;</p><p style='margin-left:1em'>Moses adds a whole series of apparently 'minor' commands which were designed to make obedience easier to the others already given. Thus he tells them in Deuteronomy not to plant a grove of trees near the altar of God - because he knew this would provoke the possibility of mixing Yahweh worship with that of the surrounding world (<em><a href='B:50 16:21'>Deu 16:21</a></em>). Likewise he commands any future king not to send God's people to Egypt to buy horses because he could see that this would tempt them to go back to Egypt permanently (<em><a href='B:50 17:16'>Deu 17:16</a></em>). There are many other example of this kind of thing (<em><a href='B:50 14:24'>Deu 14:24</a></em>; <em><a href='B:50 15:18'>Deu 15:18</a></em>; <em><a href='B:50 17:17-19'>Deu 17:17-19</a></em>; <em><a href='B:50 18:9'>Deu 18:9</a></em>; <em><a href='B:50 20:7-8'>Deu 20:7-8</a></em>). The point is that Moses had thought long and hard about the ways in which Israel would be tempted to sin, and his words and innermost desire were devoted to helping them overcome. Glorious ditto for the Lord Jesus.&nbsp;</p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1em'><em>Neither shall he multiply wives to himself, so that his heart will not turn away; neither shall he greatly multiply to himself silver and gold-</em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>See on <em><a href='B:50 20:14'>Deu 20:14</a></em>. This has strong relevance to Solomon.&nbsp;He did multiply silver, gold, horses and wives; his heart <em>was</em> turned away (:16,17= <em><a href='B:140 9:20'>2Ch 9:20</a></em>).&nbsp; Yet this passage says that if he studied the Law all his life, this would <em>not</em>&nbsp;happen, and also his heart would not be "lifted up above his brethren" (:20).&nbsp;Solomon's whipping of the people and sense of spiritual and material superiority (<em><a href='B:140 10:11'>2Ch 10:11</a></em>; <em><a href='B:250 1:16'>Ecc 1:16</a></em>; <em><a href='B:250 2:7'>Ecc 2:7</a></em>; <em><a href='B:250 2:9'>Ecc 2:9</a></em>) shows how his heart <em>was </em>lifted up. Yet Solomon knew the Law, despite his explicit disobedience to the commands concerning wives, horses etc. But his knowledge of the word didn't bring forth the true humility which it was intended to.&nbsp;Solomon <em>assumed </em>he wasn't proud;&nbsp;he <em>assumed</em> God’s word was having its intended effect upon him, when it wasn’t. Such spiritual assumption is a temptation for every child of God.&nbsp;God’s intention that the king of Israel should personally copy out all the commandments of the Law was “to the end that his heart will not <em>be raised up</em> above his brothers”- i.e. reflecting upon the many requirements of the Law would’ve convicted the King of his own failure to have been fully obedient, and therefore his heart would be humbled. And soon after this statement, we are hearing Moses reminding Israel that Messiah, the prophet like unto Moses, was to <em>be raised up</em> (<em><a href='B:50 18:18'>Deu 18:18</a></em>). Human failure, and recognition of it, prepares us to accept Christ. </p><p style='margin-left:1em'>They had left Egypt with great riches of silver and gold, and this is "your silver and gold" which was to be multiplied even more (<em><a href='B:50 8:13'>Deu 8:13</a></em>). The multiplication of Abraham's seed promised to him clearly meant not simply numerical multiplication, but material multiplication too. That is the sense too in <em><a href='B:30 26:9'>Lev 26:9</a></em>; <em><a href='B:50 30:5'>Deu 30:5</a></em>. We wonder why God gave them all this blessing, knowing that it would lead to such spiritual temptation and failure. We wonder why He gives so many of His people today the same huge blessings, however unappreciated they are. One simple answer is that it is because He loves us with all the love of a father for his children; He rejoiced to multiply them (<em><a href='B:50 28:63'>Deu 28:63</a></em>). The king of Israel was warned in the same words not to multiply silver and gold lest his heart turn away (<em><a href='B:50 17:17'>Deu 17:17</a></em>). The idea may be that we are to leave God to multiply our silver and gold if He wishes, and not set our heart to doing so.</p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1em'><em>When he sits on the throne of his kingdom, he must write for himself a copy of this law in a book, out of that which is before the priests, the Levites-</em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>LXX "And when he shall be established in his government, then shall he write for himself this repetition of the law into a book by the hands of the priests the Levites". 'Writing for himself by the hands of the priests' could mean that as the kings were illiterate, the priests were to guide their hands in copying out the law. Perhaps "this law" refers specifically to the laws in this section warning the king. Solomon must have copied out these laws, and yet right from the time he wrote them out, he specifically disobeyed them all. Solomon was a classic example of where knowledge of God's law alone will not save anyone, unless it enters into the heart.</p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1em'><em>It shall be with him and he must read from it all the days of his life, so that he may learn to fear Yahweh his God, to keep all the words of this law and these statutes, to do them- </em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>The word so often used for "keeping" / "diligently observing" Yahweh's commandments is from the word meaning a thorn hedge; the idea originally was to hedge in. Taking this too literally led Judaism to all their endless fences around the law, i.e. forbidding this or that because it might lead to doing that or this, which in turn would then lead to breaking an actual commandment. And those various fences become elevated to the level of commandments. But this is not the idea. We are indeed to hedge ourselves in ("take heed to yourself", <em><a href='B:50 11:16'>Deu 11:16</a></em>; <em><a href='B:50 12:13'>Deu 12:13</a></em>; <em><a href='B:50 12:19'>Deu 12:19</a></em>; <em><a href='B:50 12:30'>Deu 12:30</a></em>; <em><a href='B:50 12:32'>Deu 12:32</a></em> s.w.), so that we may keep / hedge ourselves in to keep the commandments of God (<em><a href='B:30 18:4-5'>Lev 18:4-5</a></em>; <em><a href='B:30 18:26'>Lev 18:26</a></em>; <em><a href='B:30 18:30'>Lev 18:30</a></em>; <em><a href='B:30 19:19'>Lev 19:19</a></em>; <em><a href='B:30 19:37'>Lev 19:37</a></em>; <em><a href='B:30 20:8'>Lev 20:8</a></em>; <em><a href='B:30 20:22'>Lev 20:22</a></em>; <em><a href='B:30 22:9'>Lev 22:9</a></em>; <em><a href='B:30 22:31'>Lev 22:31</a></em>; <em><a href='B:30 25:18'>Lev 25:18</a></em>; <em><a href='B:30 26:3'>Lev 26:3</a></em>; <em><a href='B:40 28:2'>Num 28:2</a></em>;&nbsp;&nbsp; <em><a href='B:50 7:11-12'>Deu 7:11-12</a></em>; <em><a href='B:50 8:1'>Deu 8:1</a></em>; <em><a href='B:50 8:11'>Deu 8:11</a></em> (s.w. "beware"); 10:13; 11:1,8,22,32; 12:1; 13:4,18; 15:5,9 ("beware"); 17:19; 19:9; 23:9 ("keep yourself"); 24:8; 26:16-18; 27:1; 28:1,9,13; 29:9; 30:10,16; 31:12; 32:46). And without falling into the legalism of Judaism, self discipline does require a degree of fencing ourselves in to the one way. Thus the man struggling with alcoholism avoids the supermarket where alcohol is pushed in front of the eyes of the shoppers; the married woman struggling with attraction to another man makes little laws for herself about avoiding his company. And if we do this, then the Lord will "keep" us, will hedge us in to keeping His way (s.w. <em><a href='B:40 6:24'>Num 6:24</a></em>).</p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1em'><em>Thus his heart will not be raised up above his brothers, and he will not turn aside from the commandment to the right hand or to the left, so that he may prolong his days in his kingdom, he and his children, in the midst of Israel- </em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>The victory of the Lord Jesus is described as Him 'prolonging his days' (<em><a href='B:290 53:10'>Isa 53:10</a></em>), in allusion back to the way <em><a href='B:50 17:20'>Deu 17:20</a></em> teaches that the King of Israel must study the word all the days of his life, with the result that he would "prolong his days". The almost unbelievable victory of the man Christ Jesus against every aspect of the flesh was due to His saturation with the spirit of God's word.</p><p style='margin-left:1em'>God’s intention that the king of Israel should personally copy out all the commandments of the Law was so that “his heart be not lifted up above his brethren” (<em><a href='B:50 17:20'>Deu 17:20</a></em>)- i.e. reflecting upon the many requirements of the Law would’ve convicted the King of his own failure to have been fully obedient, and therefore his heart would be humbled. And soon after this statement, we are hearing Moses reminding Israel that Messiah, the prophet like unto Moses, was to be raised up (<em><a href='B:50 18:18'>Deu 18:18</a></em>). Human failure, and recognition of it, prepares us to accept Christ. To this end, God worked through Israel’s weakness, time and again. He even used it as a path towards His provision of Messiah. God wanted to speak to them directly, but in their weakness they asked that He not do this. Instead of giving up with them, as a Father whose children say they don’t want to hear His voice… instead God goes on to tell Moses: “They have well spoken that which they have spoken. I will raise them up a Prophet from among their brethren (a prophecy applied to Christ in the New Testament)… and he shall speak unto them all that I shall command him” (<em><a href='B:50 18:17-18'>Deu 18:17-18</a></em>).</p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1em'><em>The priests the Levites, all the tribe of Levi, shall have no portion or inheritance with Israel; they will eat the offerings of Yahweh made by fire as their inheritance-</em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>There is a word play here, for "eat" is s.w. "burn up", used of fire consuming sacrifice; and "the offerings of Yahweh made by fire" is an attempt to translate just two words in Hebrew, "Yahweh's fire". The Levites' consumption of the food offered was accepted by Yahweh as if the fire of the altar had burnt it up. They were therefore as it were associated with the altar, Yahweh's representatives. </p><p style='margin-left:1em'>The Levites had no land nor great material wealth to leave to their children; but they had this unique relationship with God to pass on. Jeremiah in depression, having lost all he had, concludes that God is his portion (<em><a href='B:310 3:24'>Lam 3:24</a></em>), clearly alluding to this verse. Even if materially we lose all we have- our relationship with God is our true portion and inheritance, which we will eternally receive in the Kingdom. The writers of the Psalms, some of whom like David weren’t Levites, could use the same Hebrew word to describe how God was their “portion” and inheritance (<em><a href='B:230 16:5'>Psa 16:5</a></em>; <em><a href='B:230 73:26'>Psa 73:26</a></em>; <em><a href='B:230 119:57'>Psa 119:57</a></em>; <em><a href='B:230 142:5'>Psa 142:5</a></em>). This should be our self-perception, whether or not we leave any material inheritance to anyone or not. Not for us the obsession with building up ownership of property, under the excuse we want to leave something to our children. Our service of God and His people is our inheritance, which we shall eternally receive back at the resurrection and the time of the Kingdom of God on earth. The priests and Levites were provided with enough to eat, but no great wealth. So it should be for all full time servants in God’s house. By contrast, the priests of the surrounding tribes were generally more wealthy than the other people, and owned land, which was seen as especially holy (see <em><a href='B:10 47:22'>Gen 47:22</a></em>).<em></em></p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1em'><em>They shall have no inheritance among their brothers; Yahweh is their inheritance, as He has spoken to them- </em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>The Levites had no material inheritance because "the sacrifices of Yahweh the God of Israel... are his inheritance... Yahweh God of Israel was their inheritance" (<em><a href='B:60 13:14'>Jos 13:14</a></em>; <em><a href='B:60 13:33'>Jos 13:33</a></em>; <em><a href='B:40 18:20'>Num 18:20</a></em>; <em><a href='B:50 10:9'>Deu 10:9</a></em>; <em><a href='B:50 18:2'>Deu 18:2</a></em>). Notice how "Yahweh" is put for what is sacrificed to Him. His very existence is an imperative to sacrifice to Him, despising all material advantage in doing so. Job comments that to make gold our hope and wealth our confidence is to deny “the God that is above” (<em><a href='B:220 31:24'>Job 31:24</a></em>; <em><a href='B:220 31:28'>Job 31:28</a></em>). To trust in material wealth is effectively to proclaim ourselves atheists. We are described as the new priesthood (<em><a href='B:670 2:5'>1Pe 2:5</a></em>), so all that was true for the Levites becomes true for us. We are not to seek material inheritance. God will provide for us in ways other than our possessing land and leaving an inheritance to our children. The wonder of serving Him is to more than compensate for this. </p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1em'><em>This shall be the priest’s due from the people, from those who offer a sacrifice, whether ox or sheep. They shall give to the priest the shoulder, the two cheeks and the stomach- </em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>The idea is "the front leg, the two jaw-bones, and the rough stomach of ruminants, in which the digestion is completed". These were thought to be the best parts of an animal; and remember that a leg and the breast of the offering were also to be given to the priest if it was a peace offering (<em><a href='B:30 7:32'>Lev 7:32</a></em>; <em><a href='B:40 18:11'>Num 18:11</a></em>). </p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1em'><em>The first fruits of your grain, your new wine and your oil, and the first of the fleece of your sheep you shall give him- </em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>There is no mention in <em><a href='B:40 18:12-13'>Num 18:12-13</a></em> of the first fleece being given to the priests. But it is mentioned here in <em><a href='B:50 18:4'>Deu 18:4</a></em>, and is an example of where Deuteronomy, 'the second law', is in places more demanding and in others more understanding.</p><p style='margin-left:1em'><em></em></p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1em'><em>For Yahweh your God has chosen him out of all your tribes to stand to minister in the name of Yahweh, him and his sons forever- </em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>The original intention was that all Israel should be a nation of priests, but God continually seems to recalculate His plans according to His people's responsiveness (<em><a href='B:20 19:5-6'>Exo 19:5-6</a></em>). And so the Levites were chosen, and special material provision was arranged for them; although there are continually hints that all Israel were to live in the spirit of priesthood. And under the new covenant, we are all the priesthood (<em><a href='B:670 2:5'>1Pe 2:5</a></em>). God is likewise open to such ammendment and recalculation of intention in the way that He works with us as individuals. </p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1em'><em>If a Levite comes from any of your gates out of all Israel, where he lives as a foreigner, and comes with all the desire of his soul to the place which Yahweh shall choose-</em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>God encourages us to make special devotions to Him. Thus the Levites could choose to leave their areas in the provinces and go and serve at the sanctuary. We must ask what special devotion we could make in response to His grace. The structure of the law of Moses seemed to almost encourage the idea of serving God on different levels. After much study of it, the Rabbis concluded that there was within it “a distinction between holy and holy just as much as there is between holy and profane”. The Levites could choose to go and serve at Jerusalem (or wherever the sanctuary was), and therefore sell their possession of land which they had in the local area (<em><a href='B:50 18:6-8'>Deu 18:6-8</a></em>). By doing this, a number of principles were broken, in order that the highest level- serving Yahweh in the temple- might be achieved.</p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1em'><em>then he shall minister in the name of Yahweh his God as all his brothers the Levites do, who stand there before Yahweh- </em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>There was to be always the possibility for Levites from the provinces to come and live at the sanctuary and serve "before Yahweh", i.e. before the ark of His presence. The Levites lived in the provinces as "foreigners" (:6). This is the language of Abraham and his seed living as foreigners. They were therefore to consider the sanctuary as their home, and being away from it meant living as it were in another land. The appeal to us to live as foreigners and pilgrims is therefore partly based upon this; for we are all the spiritual priesthood (<em><a href='B:670 2:5'>1Pe 2:5</a></em>).</p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1em'><em>They shall have similar portions to eat, besides that which comes from his father’s inheritance-</em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>The word for "share" in <em><a href='B:90 30:24'>1Sa 30:24</a></em> is that used here in <em><a href='B:50 18:8'>Deu 18:8</a></em>, where the Levites were to have the same "portions" or "share". All David's men were to have the same "share". His language choice was setting up his men to see themselves as a new priesthood. The sale of a family inheritance may not refer to property, for the Levites were not to hold property. This however may be one of many tacit acceptances in Deuteronomy that things would not be as they ought to be; perhaps the idea is that if a man repented of how his father had held property, then he was to sell it, and could then move to the live permanently near the sanctuary.</p><p style='margin-left:1em'>The early church began by having all things common, in imitation of&nbsp; how the priests had "like portions to eat" (<em><a href='B:50 18:8'>Deu 18:8</a></em>). Notice the stress on the equality of the priests and the studied irrelevance of their personal wealth (<em><a href='B:130 24:31'>1Ch 24:31</a></em>; <em><a href='B:130 25:8'>1Ch 25:8</a></em>; <em><a href='B:130 26:12'>1Ch 26:12</a></em>). We also have an example of Barnabas selling his illegally held property and giving it to the church, which may be what is in view here with the reference to the Levite selling his father's inheritance and moving to live near the sanctuary. The Law was geared around the assumption that the priests would be so caught up in Yahweh's work that they would never be rich (consider <em><a href='B:50 14:29'>Deu 14:29</a></em>), and the wonder of doing His work would compensate for their lack of physical possessions (<em><a href='B:40 18:23'>Num 18:23</a></em>). Yet the early church couldn't sustain the intensity of their initial realization of these things. <em></em></p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1em'><em>When you have come into the land which Yahweh your God gives you, you must not learn to do according to the abominations of those nations- </em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>The Canaanites were to be driven out of the land for doing these abominations (:12). The reality is that the Canaanites were not driven out for those abominations, because Israel didn't drive them out. And yet it was because of their abominations that Israel were supposed to drive them out (:10,12). We can conclude that Israel didn't dispossess the Canaanites because they didn't hate their abominations but rather participated in them. </p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1em'><em>There must not be found with you anyone who makes his son or his daughter pass through the fire, one who uses divination, one who practices sorcery or an enchanter, a sorcerer- </em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'><em><a href='B:510 7:43'>Act 7:43</a></em> says that they carried the tabernacle of Moloch with them through the wilderness, and Moloch was associated with child sacrifice. Moses is therefore telling them that they were not to worship Moloch once in the land. It all seems an incredibly 'soft' approach to them, rather than challenging them about their idolatry. Perhaps it reflected God's great enthusiasm for Israel at this time, for He did not behold iniquity in Jacob (<em><a href='B:40 23:21'>Num 23:21</a></em>), and presents Himself in Jeremiah as having fallen totally in love with Israel in the wilderness, wishing not to see their unfaithfulness.</p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1em'><em>a charmer, a consulter with a familiar spirit, a wizard or a necromancer- </em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>These people were thought to be able to tell and control the future, and to bring about healing and blessing. Yet these were all the roles of Yahweh. He had predicted a blessed future for Israel, conditional upon their obedience. But they wanted to seek to bypass this by trying to influence their future and blessing through other means. By seeking to these people they were effectively denying their relationship with God, through attempting to merely bypass Yahweh. The huge stress upon Yahweh as the source of a blessed future meant that all these classes of wizards were therefore at best redundant; and to use them was to effectively resign from relationship with Yahweh. And we must consider how we too may be tempted to effectively bypass God, seeking blessing and a (supposedly) assured future by secular means.</p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1em'><em>For whoever does these things is an abomination to Yahweh, and because of these abominations Yahweh your God drives them out from before you- </em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>See on :10. "Drive out" is s.w. "possess". We must note the difference between the&nbsp; Canaanite peoples and their kings being "struck" and their land "taken" by Joshua-Jesus; and the people of Israel permanently taking possession. This is the difference between the Lord's victory on the cross, and our taking possession of the Kingdom. Even though that possession has been "given" to us. The word used for "possession" is literally 'an inheritance'. The allusion is to the people, like us, being the seed of Abraham. The Kingdom was and is our possession, our inheritance- if we walk in the steps of Abraham. But it is one thing to be the seed of Abraham, another to take possession of the inheritance; and Israel generally did not take possession of all the land (<em><a href='B:60 11:23'>Jos 11:23</a></em>; <em><a href='B:60 13:1'>Jos 13:1</a></em>; <em><a href='B:60 16:10'>Jos 16:10</a></em>; <em><a href='B:60 18:3'>Jos 18:3</a></em>; <em><a href='B:60 23:4'>Jos 23:4</a></em>). The language of inheritance / possession is applied to us in the New Testament (<em><a href='B:560 1:11'>Eph 1:11</a></em>; <em><a href='B:560 1:14'>Eph 1:14</a></em>; <em><a href='B:580 3:24'>Col 3:24</a></em>; <em><a href='B:510 20:32'>Act 20:32</a></em>; <em><a href='B:510 26:18'>Act 26:18</a></em>; <em><a href='B:670 1:4'>1Pe 1:4</a></em> etc.). Israel were promised: "You shall possess it" (<em><a href='B:50 30:5'>Deu 30:5</a></em>; <em><a href='B:50 33:23'>Deu 33:23</a></em>). This was more of a command than a prophecy, for sadly they were "given" the land but did not "possess" it. They were constantly encouraged in the wilderness that they were on the path to possessing the land (<em><a href='B:50 30:16'>Deu 30:16</a></em>; <em><a href='B:50 30:18'>Deu 30:18</a></em>; <em><a href='B:50 31:3'>Deu 31:3</a></em>; <em><a href='B:50 31:13'>Deu 31:13</a></em>; <em><a href='B:50 32:47'>Deu 32:47</a></em>), but when they got there they didn't possess it fully. </p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1em'><em>You should be without blame before Yahweh your God- </em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>The repeated references to the “journeys” of the people in the wilderness had as their basis the description of Abraham taking his journey through the desert to the promised land (<em><a href='B:10 13:3'>Gen 13:3</a></em>); the very same two Hebrew words recur in the command to Israel to now ‘take their journey’ (<em><a href='B:50 10:11'>Deu 10:11</a></em>), following in the steps of their father Abraham. As Abraham was commanded to "be perfect" (<em><a href='B:10 17:1'>Gen 17:1</a></em>), so Israel were told: "<em>You</em> (after the pattern of father Abraham) shall be perfect with the Lord" (<em><a href='B:50 19:13'>Deu 19:13</a></em>). The offering of sacrifices "without blemish" uses a word which is used about Abraham and Noah being "without blemish" (AV "perfect") before God (<em><a href='B:10 6:9'>Gen 6:9</a></em>; <em><a href='B:10 17:1'>Gen 17:1</a></em>). Although the word is used about the sacrifices, it is really more appropriate to persons- "you shall be perfect with Yahweh your God" (<em><a href='B:50 18:13'>Deu 18:13</a></em>), "serve Him in sincerity (s.w. "without blemish")" (<em><a href='B:60 24:14'>Jos 24:14</a></em>). The idea, therefore, was that the offerer was invited to see the animal as representative of himself. Our lives too are to be as "living sacrifices" (<em><a href='B:520 12:1'>Rom 12:1</a></em>). And yet in practical terms, no animal is without blemish. They were to give the best they could, and God would count it as without blemish; as He does with us. David frequently uses the term in the Psalms about himself and the "upright", even though he was far from unblemished in moral terms. </p><p style='margin-left:1em'>"Without blame" is the term used multiple times in the law of Moses about the state of sacrificial animals. But it is never used in Deuteronomy. Perhaps this reflects Moses' maturer understanding that no animal actually is without blemish. God recognizes that we will not attain perfection in this life, but we are to do our best towards it; and His love imputes righteousness to us, counting us as unblemished because of our status in Christ. For only Christ was the sacrifice totally without moral blemish (<em><a href='B:670 1:19'>1Pe 1:19</a></em>). </p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1em'><em>For these nations that you shall dispossess listen to those who practice sorcery and to diviners; but as for you, Yahweh your God has not allowed you to do so- </em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>See on :10. The fact those nations were dispossessed was surely evidence that their various magicians were powerless. Yet Israel wanted to trust those same powerless people, just as they would later worship the gods of the nations who defeated them.</p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1em'><em>Yahweh your God will raise up to you a prophet like me, from the midst of you, of your brothers. You are to listen to him- </em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>The promise of a future prophet (who was to be Messiah) is in the context of the prohibition upon using those who claimed to foretell the future, and bring blessing and healing. Trying to achieve future blessing through them was a way of bypassing Yahweh, who had clearly offered a blessed future predicated upon obedience to the covenant. But a blessed future, that of the Kingdom of God, was to be possible through this prophet who was yet to be raised up. Possibly Joshua or some other figure could have fulfilled this prophecy, but the potential wasn't realized. And therefore it was reapplied and rescheduled to the Lord Jesus.</p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1em'><em>This is according to all that you desired of Yahweh your God in Horeb in the day of the assembly saying, Let me not hear again the voice of Yahweh my God, neither let me see this great fire any more, so that I do not die- </em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>The tragedy was that to hear the personal voice of their God was intended to build their faith, and was the most wonderful empirical, experiential evidence that He was real (<em><a href='B:50 4:32-33'>Deu 4:32-33</a></em>). But faced with it, they hurriedly turned away. And this is true in essence of so many people. Israel complained that no other nation had ever been asked to hear the voice of their God in a personal way; they feared that hearing this voice meant their condemnation (<em><a href='B:50 5:26'>Deu 5:26</a></em>). But God meant it so positively; the fact they had heard God's voice was a sign of His amazing grace (<em><a href='B:50 4:32-33'>Deu 4:32-33</a></em>). Yet Israel turned the display of that grace into a reason to fear condemnation. They were far happier not being confronted by such radical grace, and the personal engagement of God with them. And so they desperately sought to use mere religion to shield them from this, asking Moses to go through with this engagement with God and then give them a few rules to obey, which didn't too deeply interrupt their lives. This is the abiding tendency of men of all ages; to flee from grace to the structures of mere religion.</p><p style='margin-left:1em'>It had been God's intention that they came nearer to Him and heard Him directly. But they wanted mere religion to stand between Him and them, they shied away from personal encounter with Him, and wanted Moses to speak with God and relay to them His will. But God positively interpreted their words as a request for Messiah, the word made flesh, and would answer them in the provision of the Lord Jesus (see on :18). But this would be more than a prophet; He would effectively engage them with Yahweh, as His supreme manifestation, although having human nature. And they would need to respond deeply to that engagement. </p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1em'><em>Yahweh said to me, They have well said that which they have spoken- </em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>God’s intention that the king of Israel should personally copy out all the commandments of the Law was so that “his heart be not lifted up above his brethren” (<em><a href='B:50 17:20'>Deu 17:20</a></em>)- i.e. reflecting upon the many requirements of the Law would’ve convicted the King of his own failure to have been fully obedient, and therefore his heart would be humbled. And soon after this statement, we are hearing Moses reminding Israel that Messiah, the prophet like unto Moses, was to be raised up (<em><a href='B:50 18:18'>Deu 18:18</a></em>). Human failure, and recognition of it, prepares us to accept Christ. To this end, God worked through Israel’s weakness, time and again. He even used it as a path towards His provision of Messiah. God wanted to speak to them directly, but in their weakness they asked that He not do this. Instead of giving up with them, as a Father whose children say they don’t want to hear His voice… instead God goes on to tell Moses: “They have well spoken that which they have spoken. I will raise them up a Prophet from among their brethren (a prophecy applied to Christ in the New Testament)… and he shall speak unto them all that I shall command him” (<em><a href='B:50 18:17-18'>Deu 18:17-18</a></em>).</p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1em'><em>I will raise them up a prophet like you from among their brothers; I will put My words in his mouth and he shall speak to them all that I shall command him-</em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>The Messianic prophecy of <em><a href='B:50 18:18'>Deu 18:18</a></em> had a potential Messianic and primary fulfillment in Joshua: “I will raise them up (God ‘rose up’ Joshua- s.w. <em><a href='B:60 1:2'>Jos 1:2</a></em>; <em><a href='B:60 7:10'>Jos 7:10</a></em>; <em><a href='B:60 7:13'>Jos 7:13</a></em>; <em><a href='B:60 8:1'>Jos 8:1</a></em>; <em><a href='B:60 8:3'>Jos 8:3</a></em>)&nbsp; a prophet from among their brethren, like unto you (Joshua’s life was framed to be like that of Moses- e.g. he too was told to remove his shoe when on holy ground, also held his hands up whilst Israel fought their enemies); and I will put my words in his mouth, and he shall speak unto them all that I shall command him (Joshua is constantly presented as telling Israel what God commanded him- <em><a href='B:60 4:8'>Jos 4:8</a></em>; <em><a href='B:60 4:10'>Jos 4:10</a></em>; <em><a href='B:60 4:17'>Jos 4:17</a></em>; <em><a href='B:60 6:10'>Jos 6:10</a></em>; <em><a href='B:60 8:8'>Jos 8:8</a></em>: “according to the commandment of the Lord shall ye do. See, I have commanded you”; <em><a href='B:60 8:27'>Jos 8:27</a></em>). And it shall come to pass, that whosoever will not hearken unto my words which he shall speak in my name, I will require it of him”.&nbsp; The ‘likeness’ between Moses and the prophet like unto him was in that the prophet would also speak God’s words in a similar way. <em><a href='B:60 11:15'>Jos 11:15</a></em> therefore significantly comments: “As the Lord commanded Moses his servant, so did Moses command Joshua: and so did Joshua; he left nothing undone of all that the Lord commanded Moses”.&nbsp;Joshua was a potential Messiah.</p><p style='margin-left:1em'>By the time he uttered Deuteronomy, Moses would probably have been the oldest person any of the congregation had ever known. Many of the earlier generation had been cut down in the wilderness. He was nearly twice the age of Joshua. He had dominated their lives from birth, had stuck with them, with their fathers and even grandparents. Just as the Lord Jesus is to be the central figure in the new Israel. Moses was also a representative of his people, just as the Lord Jesus is in a sense ‘Israel’- the suffering servant refers to both Israel and their Messiah. Moses was “adopted by an imperial parent, punished for his rashness, sentenced to wander forty years in the wilderness, forgiven, restored, hand-selected for an impossible task, accompanied by the overwhelming presence of God at every step…”, just as his beloved people. In the same way as Moses was the mediator of the old covenant, so Christ was of the new. Christ was the prophet like unto Moses (<em><a href='B:50 18:18'>Deu 18:18</a></em>). Moses was the shepherd of the flock of Israel, leading them on God's behalf through the wilderness towards the promised land (<em><a href='B:290 63:12'>Isa 63:12</a></em>), as Christ leads us after baptism to the Kingdom. </p><p style='margin-left:1em'>Moses' persecution by Pharaoh enabled him to enter into the feelings of Israel in the slave camps; and as they fled from Pharaoh towards the Red Sea, Moses would have recalled his own flight from Pharaoh to Midian. The whole epistle to the Hebrews is shot through with allusions to Moses. "In all things it behoved him to be made like unto his brethren" (<em><a href='B:650 2:17'>Heb 2:17</a></em>) is alluding to <em><a href='B:50 18:18'>Deu 18:18</a></em>: "I will raise them up a Prophet from among their brethren like unto thee (Moses)". The brethren of Christ are here paralleled with Moses; as if Moses really is representative of not only natural Israel, but spiritual too- as well as Moses being a type of Christ. For this reason he is such a clear pattern for us, and we are invited so often to identify ourselves with him by copying his example. Moses was made like his brethren through his similar experiences, as Christ was progressively made like us by his life of temptation.</p><p style='margin-left:1em'>The miracle of the loaves and fishes made men see the similarity between Christ and Moses, whom they perceived to have provided the manna (<em><a href='B:500 6:32'>Joh 6:32</a></em>). Therefore they thought that Jesus must be the prophet like Moses, of whom Moses wrote (<em><a href='B:500 6:14'>Joh 6:14</a></em>). But Jesus said that He was greater than Moses, because Moses' bread only gave them temporal life, whereas if a man ate of Him, he would live for ever; His words would give spiritual life which was part of that "eternal life" of the Father (<em><a href='B:500 6:49-50'>Joh 6:49-50</a></em>). The Jews thought that the prophet like Moses of <em><a href='B:50 18:18'>Deu 18:18</a></em> was a prophet equal or inferior to Moses. John's Gospel records how Christ was showing that the prophet would be greater than Moses. Martha understood that when she said that "the Christ... which should come into the world" (i.e. the prophet of <em><a href='B:50 18:18'>Deu 18:18</a></em>) was "the Son of God", and therefore Jesus of Nazareth (<em><a href='B:500 11:27'>Joh 11:27</a></em>). </p><p style='margin-left:1em'>“The prophet” (<em><a href='B:500 7:40'>Joh 7:40</a></em>; <em><a href='B:500 7:52'>Joh 7:52</a></em> RV) is clearly a reference to “the prophet” like Moses, i.e. Messiah. There are many other allusions by John’s record to the <em><a href='B:50 18:18'>Deu 18:18</a></em> passage: “I will put my words in his mouth, and he shall speak unto them all that I command him”. References to the Son only speaking what the Father commanded Him are to be found in <em><a href='B:500 4:25'>Joh 4:25</a></em>; <em><a href='B:500 8:28'>Joh 8:28</a></em>; <em><a href='B:500 12:49'>Joh 12:49</a></em>.</p><p style='margin-left:1em'>Christ was the prophet like unto Moses (<em><a href='B:510 3:22'>Act 3:22</a></em>). Moses was the shepherd of the flock of Israel, leading them on God's behalf through the wilderness towards the promised land (<em><a href='B:290 63:12'>Isa 63:12</a></em>), as Christ leads us after baptism to the Kingdom. It was only through Moses' leadership that they reached Canaan (10:11). As Moses very intensely manifested God to the people, so he foreshadowed the supreme manifestation of the Father in the Son. The commands of Moses were those of God (<em><a href='B:50 7:11'>Deu 7:11</a></em>; <em><a href='B:50 11:13'>Deu 11:13</a></em>; <em><a href='B:50 11:18'>Deu 11:18</a></em>; and <em><a href='B:50 12:32'>Deu 12:32</a></em> concerning Moses' words is quoted in <em><a class='bible' href='#b66:22:18-19'>Rev 22:18-19</a></em> concerning God's words); his voice was God's voice (<em><a href='B:50 15:5'>Deu 15:5</a></em>; <em><a href='B:50 28:1'>Deu 28:1</a></em>), as with Christ. Israel were to show their love of God by keeping Moses' commands (<em><a href='B:50 11:13'>Deu 11:13</a></em>); as the new Israel do in their response to the word of Christ.</p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1em'><em>Whoever will not listen to My words which he shall speak in My name, I will require it of him- </em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>As Moses very intensely manifested God to the people, so he foreshadowed the supreme manifestation of the Father in the Son. The commands of Moses were those of God (<em><a href='B:50 7:11'>Deu 7:11</a></em>; <em><a href='B:50 11:13'>Deu 11:13</a></em>; <em><a href='B:50 11:18'>Deu 11:18</a></em>; <em><a href='B:50 12:32'>Deu 12:32</a></em> concerning Moses' words is quoted in <em><a class='bible' href='#b66:22:18-19'>Rev 22:18-19</a></em> concerning God's words); his voice was God's voice (<em><a href='B:50 13:18'>Deu 13:18</a></em>; <em><a href='B:50 15:5'>Deu 15:5</a></em>; <em><a href='B:50 28:1'>Deu 28:1</a></em>), as with Christ. Israel were to show their love of God by keeping Moses' commands (<em><a href='B:50 11:13'>Deu 11:13</a></em>); as the new Israel do in their response to the word of Christ. Indeed, the well known prophecy that God would raise up a prophet "like unto" Moses to whom Israel would <em>listen</em> (<em><a href='B:50 18:18'>Deu 18:18</a></em>) is in the context of Israel saying they did not want to hear God's voice directly. Therefore God said that he would raise up Christ, who would be another Moses in the sense that <em>he too</em> would speak forth God's word.</p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1em'><em>But the prophet who shall speak a word presumptuously in My name, which I have not commanded him to speak, or who shall speak in the name of other gods, that same prophet shall die- </em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>Falsification of Yahweh's word, speaking falsely in His Name, was the ultimate taking of His Name in vain. Especially when they spoke the supposed words of "other gods" as if Yahweh's words. In illiterate society, the words of the prophets were absolutely vital in order for the people to hear God's words. If they were falsified, then so many people would suffer. And making others stumble out of God's way is seen as the worst kind of sin. This is the sin of false teaching; the sin is not that of genuinely misunderstanding Biblical theology, but of teaching others that sin is righteousness. </p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1em'><em>If you say in your heart, How shall we know the word which Yahweh has not spoken?- </em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>Again, Moses seems to foresee how badly things would go with Israel. He has just warned of the false prophet who speaks falsely in the Name of Yahweh. And he seems to accept this is going to happen, and so he now gives a way of testing whether words claiming to be Yahweh's are true or not. Moses also perceives that this question will be raised in the heart of the thoughtful, faithful ones. </p><p style='margin-left:1em'>Time and again, Moses speaks of the state of their heart. He warns them against allowing a bad state of heart to develop, he speaks often of how apostasy starts in the heart. Moses makes a total of 49 references to the heart / mind of Israel in Deuteronomy, compared to only 13 in the whole of Exodus, Leviticus and Numbers. This indicates the paramount importance which our Lord attaches to the state of our mind. This was perhaps his greatest wish as He faced death; that we should develop a spiritual mind and thereby manifest the Father and come to salvation. Moses likewise saw the state of our mind as the key to spiritual success. But do we share this perspective? Do we guard our minds against the media and influence of a mind-corrupting world? It's been observed that the phrase "The God of (somebody)", or similar, occurs 614 times in the Old Testament, of which 306 are in Deuteronomy. Our very personal relationship with God was therefore something else which Moses came to grasp in his spiritual maturity. Statistical analysis of the word "love" in the Pentateuch likewise reveals that "love" was a great theme of Moses at the end of his life (Moses uses it 16 times in Deuteronomy, and only four times in Exodus, Leviticus and Numbers). </p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1em'><em>When a prophet speaks in the name of Yahweh, if the thing doesn’t follow or happen, that is the thing which Yahweh has not spoken; the prophet has spoken it presumptuously, you shall not be afraid of him-</em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>This is why the prophecies of Christ and of the last days all had some limited fulfilment in the lifetimes of the prophets who gave the prophecies. If the prophet failed to produce such signs, then "you shall not be afraid of him". But the commandment about false prophets in :20 was that they must be killed. Moses seems to foresee a situation where there would be false prophets, and the thoughtful, faithful few would ponder the truth of their words in their hearts (not openly; :21), and would not be able to have the false prophets executed. But, they were not personally to fear their words.</p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1em'><em>When Yahweh your God shall cut off the nations whose land Yahweh your God gives you, and you succeed them and dwell in their cities and in their houses- </em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>"Succeed" is s.w. "possess". We must note the difference between the&nbsp; Canaanite peoples and their kings being "struck" and their land "taken" by Joshua-Jesus; and the people of Israel permanently taking possession. This is the difference between the Lord's victory on the cross, and our taking possession of the Kingdom. Even though that possession has been "given" to us. The word used for "possession" is literally 'an inheritance'. The allusion is to the people, like us, being the seed of Abraham. The Kingdom was and is our possession, our inheritance- if we walk in the steps of Abraham. But it is one thing to be the seed of Abraham, another to take possession of the inheritance; and Israel generally did not take possession of all the land (<em><a href='B:60 11:23'>Jos 11:23</a></em>; <em><a href='B:60 13:1'>Jos 13:1</a></em>; <em><a href='B:60 16:10'>Jos 16:10</a></em>; <em><a href='B:60 18:3'>Jos 18:3</a></em>; <em><a href='B:60 23:4'>Jos 23:4</a></em>). The language of inheritance / possession is applied to us in the New Testament (<em><a href='B:560 1:11'>Eph 1:11</a></em>; <em><a href='B:560 1:14'>Eph 1:14</a></em>; <em><a href='B:580 3:24'>Col 3:24</a></em>; <em><a href='B:510 20:32'>Act 20:32</a></em>; <em><a href='B:510 26:18'>Act 26:18</a></em>; <em><a href='B:670 1:4'>1Pe 1:4</a></em> etc.). Israel were promised: "You shall possess it" (<em><a href='B:50 30:5'>Deu 30:5</a></em>; <em><a href='B:50 33:23'>Deu 33:23</a></em>). This was more of a command than a prophecy, for sadly they were "given" the land but did not "possess" it. They were constantly encouraged in the wilderness that they were on the path to possessing the land (<em><a href='B:50 30:16'>Deu 30:16</a></em>; <em><a href='B:50 30:18'>Deu 30:18</a></em>; <em><a href='B:50 31:3'>Deu 31:3</a></em>; <em><a href='B:50 31:13'>Deu 31:13</a></em>; <em><a href='B:50 32:47'>Deu 32:47</a></em>), but when they got there they didn't possess it fully. </p><p style='margin-left:1em'>Despite being fully aware of how weak Israel were, Moses often speaks of the " blessing" which God would give them for obedience; he even speaks of the future blessing of obedience in the prophetic perfect, so confident was he that they would receive it: "Every man shall give as he is able (once he is settled in the land), according to the blessing of the Lord thy God which He <em>has</em> given you" (<em><a href='B:50 16:17'>Deu 16:17</a></em>). Moses speaks with confidence of how God would grant them the blessing of the land and victory over their enemies, even though these things were conditional upon their obedience (<em><a href='B:50 19:1'>Deu 19:1</a></em>; <em><a href='B:50 20:13'>Deu 20:13</a></em>), and even though Moses clearly knew that most of them would disobey. The conclusion from this is that Moses thought so much of that minority who would obey his covenant, who would grasp the spirit of his life and the speech he was now making. And our Lord likewise- in His feelings for us. <em></em></p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1em'><em>you must set apart three cities for you in the midst of your land, which Yahweh your God gives you to possess-</em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>The person who committed something worthy of death but didn’t as it were willfully do it represents each of us. The language of the city of refuge therefore becomes applicable to Christ, our refuge from the results of our sin (<em><a href='B:650 6:18'>Heb 6:18</a></em>).</p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1em'><em>You shall prepare the way, and divide the borders of your land which Yahweh your God causes you to inherit, into three parts, that any manslayer may flee there-</em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>John the Baptist's ideas of fleeing wrath and preparing a way are surely based upon the Law’s command in <em><a href='B:50 19:3'>Deu 19:3</a></em> that a way or road should be prepared to the city of refuge (symbolic of Christ- <em><a href='B:650 6:18'>Heb 6:18</a></em>), along which the person under the death sentence for manslaughter could flee for refuge. John was preparing that way or road to Christ, and urging ordinary people to flee along it. They didn’t like to think they were under a death sentence for murder. They were just ordinary folk like the soldiers who grumbled about their wages, and the publicans who were a bit less than honest at work. But they had to flee.</p><p style='margin-left:1em'>The command to prepare a way along which to flee to the cities of refuge (<em><a href='B:50 19:3'>Deu 19:3</a></em>) is expressed with the very same words used about God through the Angels preparing a way for Israel to flee along, out of Egypt to the promised land (<em><a href='B:20 23:20'>Exo 23:20</a></em>). This was obviously done purely at God’s initiative. But now, Israel were asked to do the same- to prepare a way for their and others’ salvation. When we reflect upon our own way of escape from this world, it’s clear enough that it was by grace. By God’s sole initiative we came into contact with the Gospel, or were born into such a family at such a time as enabled us to hear it. Our response to that grace must be like Israel’s- to prepare a way for others to flee, when they like us find themselves in a situation that is spiritually against them, although not of their conscious choice. </p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1em'><em>This is the case of the manslayer that shall flee there and live. Whoever kills his neighbour unawares and didn’t hate him in time past- </em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>We are all in the position of the man who unintentionally committed manslaughter and must therefore die. We are under sentence of death by reason of being human, as well as for our actual sins. The avenger of blood could be seen as God, for it is He alone who has the right to execute judgment for sin. And we must note that the word<em> ga'al</em> translated "avenger" is also that translated "redeemer" or 'ransomer'. The cities of refuge are therefore understood in <em><a href='B:650 6:18'>Heb 6:18</a></em> as looking ahead to refuge in the Lord Jesus: "Who have fled for refuge to lay hold on the hope set before us". The allusion is to how the person who found they had committed a sin worthy of death, yet without as it were wishing to have done so, could flee to a city of refuge and be saved there by the death of the high priest. The curse upon Levi was that the members of this tribe were to be scattered in Israel (<em><a href='B:10 49:7'>Gen 49:7</a></em>). However, this resulted in the cities of the Levites being scattered throughout the land, thus providing accessible cities of refuge to all who wished to escape the consequences of sin. Those cities were evidently symbolic of the refuge we have in Christ. Again and again, the curses and consequences of human sin are used by the Father to mediate blessing. It is the sure hope before us which is our refuge. "Hope", <em>elpis</em>, is a confident knowledge of a future reality, rather than a hoping for the best. We should be confident in our salvation. The 'guilty' person was made free totally through the death of the High Priest, clearly looking forward to the significance of the death of the Lord Jesus.</p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1em'><em>as when a man goes into the forest with his neighbour to chop wood, and his hand fetches a stroke with the axe to cut down the tree, and the head slips from the handle and hits his neighbour so that he dies; he shall flee to one of these cities and live-</em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>A theme of Deuteronomy is the way in which Moses visualizes commonplace daily incidents which he could foresee occurring in Israel's daily life: the man cutting down the tree and the axe head flying off and hitting someone; finding a dead body in a lonely field; coming across a stray animal on the way home from work; a man with two wives treating one as his favourite; seeing your neighbour struggling to lift up his sick animal; coming across a bird's nest and being tempted to take the mature bird as well as the chicks home for supper; being tempted not to bother building a battlement around the flat roof of your&nbsp; new house; the temptation to take a bag with you and fill it up with your neighbour's grapes; the need to have weapons which could be used for covering excrement (<em><a href='B:50 19:5'>Deu 19:5</a></em>; <em><a href='B:50 21:1'>Deu 21:1</a></em>; <em><a href='B:50 21:15'>Deu 21:15</a></em>; <em><a href='B:50 22:1-2'>Deu 22:1-2</a></em>; <em><a href='B:50 22:4'>Deu 22:4</a></em>; <em><a href='B:50 22:6'>Deu 22:6</a></em>; <em><a href='B:50 22:8'>Deu 22:8</a></em>; <em><a href='B:50 23:13'>Deu 23:13</a></em>; <em><a href='B:50 23:24-25'>Deu 23:24-25</a></em>; <em><a href='B:50 24:5-6'>Deu 24:5-6</a></em>; <em><a href='B:50 24:10'>Deu 24:10</a></em>; <em><a href='B:50 24:15'>Deu 24:15</a></em>; <em><a href='B:50 24:19'>Deu 24:19</a></em>; <em><a href='B:50 25:11'>Deu 25:11</a></em>; <em><a href='B:50 25:13'>Deu 25:13</a></em>). The sensitivity of Moses was just fantastic! His eager imagination of His people in daily life, his understanding of their everyday temptations so superbly typifies that of our Lord!</p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1em'><em>lest the avenger of blood pursue the manslayer while his heart is hot and overtake him because the way is long, and strike him mortally, whereas he was not worthy of death because he didn’t hate him in time past- </em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>We note that hatred of a neighbour was to be the reason for death. John appears to have this in mind when he reasons that hatred of our brother is effectively a living death sentence (<em><a href='B:690 2:11'>1Jn 2:11</a></em>; <em><a href='B:690 4:20'>1Jn 4:20</a></em>). It was to be that "whoever hates his brother is a murderer", not a manslaughterer (<em><a href='B:690 3:15'>1Jn 3:15</a></em>). And that hatred can be in someone's heart, even if they have not killed the object of their hatred. This is the principle which is taught here.</p><p style='margin-left:1em'>But Israel were not to avenge (<em><a href='B:30 19:18'>Lev 19:18</a></em>). But they <em>could</em> avenge, and provisions were made for their human desire to do so in some cases (see too <em><a href='B:40 35:12'>Num 35:12</a></em>). These provisions must also be seen as a modification of the command not to murder. The highest level was <em>not</em> to avenge; but for the harshness of men's hearts, a concession was made <em>in some cases</em>, and on <em>God's</em> prerogative. <em>We</em> have no right to assume that prerogative. Rather than continually make use of God’s many concessions to human weakness, we should seek to live on a higher level.</p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1em'><em>Therefore I command you, saying, You must set apart three cities for yourselves- </em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>The emphasis was very much upon <em>them</em> making the cities of refuge, and defining the paths which led to them from all settlements in the land (<em><a href='B:50 19:3'>Deu 19:3</a></em>): "I command you, saying, You must set apart three cities for yourselves" (<em><a href='B:50 19:7'>Deu 19:7</a></em>). Yet the record in <em><a href='B:60 18:1-28'>Jos 18:1-28</a></em>; <em><a href='B:60 19:1-51'>Jos 19:1-51</a></em>; <em><a href='B:60 20:1-9'>Jos 20:1-9</a></em> shows that Israel didn't do this, because they didn't even capture all the cities which were to be cities of refuge. <em></em></p>


