The sin of Moses and Aaron

[tm30]

I think I’ve got it figured out, finally. The questions goes, “So why were they punished? Why did God disallow Moses from entering the Promised Land, all because he struck the rock twice to bring forth water?”

Okay, so all I’ve ever heard is, “God was angry because they struck the rock TWICE, which indicates a lack of faith.”

But that didn’t seem quite right, either. Maybe it wasn’t because they struck the rock twice. Maybe it’s because they struck the rock, period.

Numbers 20

7 And the Lord spoke to Moses, saying: 8 Take the rod, and assemble the people together, thou and Aaron thy brother, and speak to the rock before them, and it shall yield waters.

Of course this is from the Douay-Rheims Bible, which specifically reads “speak to the rock”. The New American Bible translation is not as specific, and led to what I believe is the erroneous interpretation that if they had only struck the rock ONCE, all would be well.

And yet, even the Douay-Rheims commentary falls short, by declaring:

12 “You have not believed”… The fault of Moses and Aaron, on this occasion, was a certain diffidence and weakness of faith; not doubting of God’s power or veracity; but apprehending the unworthiness of that rebellious and incredulous people, and therefore speaking with some ambiguity.

Even so, there had to be something more to this than an act of disobedience. Aaron was profoundly disobedient in crafting the golden calf, but God didn’t drop the hammer on him then, when it seemed to be much more severe transgression (at least on the surface).

So, if we look at the New American Bible Translation we see the following passage at the beginning of the chapter:

Numbers 20

The whole Israelite community arrived in the desert of Zin in the first month, and the people settled at Kadesh.

This is footnoted with the commentary:

Probably the Israelites arrived in Kadesh in the third year after the exodus.

Now this is the key, in my opinion. This was 3 years into the exodus, which means it would be 37 more years before Israel would enter the Promised Land (albeit without Moses and Aaron).

Now ask yourself, what does Moses represent in Scripture?

The Law.

And what does the rock point to?

Jesus.

So, Moses struck the rock to draw forth water, when all he had to do was speak it forth.

Fast Forward to the Gospel.

Who was “The Law” during Jesus’ ministry?

The Pharisees.

What did the Pharisees do?

They spoke forth as the representative of Moses (the Law) in enforcing the Law. The Law was all that Israel had. The tablets were gone, but the Law remained as the only source of “water” to the Israelites in their relationship with God.

Who was Jesus?

The rock, that gives forth the waters of life.

What did the Pharisees do, out of their lack of faith?

They struck the rock to bring forth blood. But in doing so, they also brough forth WATER from the rock (as the Roman lanced His side).

What happened 37 years after Moses’ infraction?

Israel entered the Promised Land (but without The Law, Moses, to shepherd them).

What happened 37 years after the Pharisees’ infraction?

In 70 A.D., 37 years after the crucifixion, Israel was driven out of the Promised Land, because the guardians of the Law - the Pharisees - angered God when they struck the Rock Jesus.

And now you know why God punished Moses and Aaron in the way He did. By striking the rock, they were not only disobedient to God in their own moment, they foreshadowed the moment when other disobedient guardians of the Law would strike down His only Son out of their utter lack of faith.

Comments welcome…

 

[patrick457]

That’s a very nice interpretation, I must say. A word though: laying it all on the Pharisees is a bit too simplistic.

At the time of Jesus, the Pharisees was just one of the various flavors of ‘Judean belief’ that existed (which are all usually called ‘Judaisms’, in the plural) in Palestine and the rest of the known world. Yes, they’re big on the two Torahs (the oral and the written, respectively) and interpreting and expounding on them - to the point that they’re often caricatured as being legalistic - and were quite popular with the common people because of their more democratic and ‘liberal’ stance on religious matters, their piety (either real or feigned) and the fact that they can sympathize with many of them: the majority of Pharisees were also commoners, just like them.

However, I think it a stretch to say that historically, the Pharisees were actually responsible for the death of Jesus.

For one, the Gospels does record Jesus’ confrontation with them most of the time, but when we get to the Passion narratives, some of the main players are the chief priests, the scribes, and the elders/rulers. The only time the Pharisees get a direct mention is when guards are asked to guard the tomb of Jesus (Matthew 27:62).

Whenever the chief priests-scribes-elders combination appear, I personally believe it is most likely referring mainly to the Sadducees (who compared to the Pharisees, only get a meager reference in all four Gospels), since we know that a majority of the people who filled in these posts belong to the party, and Caiaphas and Annas are both linked to it, cf. Acts 4:1; 5:17. However, that does not mean I totally excuse the Pharisees on this matter.

Why the Sadducean party? Because they basically were the ones who had the wealth and power and were technically the ones who ran the Temple. It is said that they were fewer than the Pharisees, but they had many of the trump cards in their hands.

The Sadducees were comprised of the Jewish nobility, which meant a good number of the Jewish priesthood - including the High Priest and those who had some association with him, and the aristocratic families of Judea (the latter is probably the presbyteroi tou laou, ‘the elders of the people’ mentioned in the Gospels). Some of these lay aristocrats would have also belonged to the gerousia (the council of elders) who, along with the High Priest, served as the governing body for all of Israel.

In the Gospels, we hear more of Jesus talking with Pharisees, and the later disliking Jesus. But the Sadducees had their own bones to pick with Jesus too: they thought that He was stirring up the people and aiming for a revolution like the other ‘messiahs’ that came and went, which could lead to an upsetting of the status quo. They feared that Jesus’ followers would crown Him as the Messiah and would then attempt to oust the Romans, which would have severe repercussions: they would lose their political power and, most importantly, the Temple (which was actually more important for the Sadducees than it was for the Pharisees - it meant the world to them). Of course, Jesus causing a ruckus at the Temple market would not have helped, either!

So, if we’re going to apply your reasoning here, we can say that punishment was visited the Sadducees with the destruction of the Temple in 70 AD. Interestingly enough, around that time the Sadducees just vanish from the record. Without a physical Temple which was the center of their theology, they no longer had a reason to exist.

 

[NHInsider]

I think I’ve got it figured out, finally. The questions goes, “So why were they punished? Why did God disallow Moses from entering the Promised Land, all because he struck the rock twice to bring forth water?”

Okay, so all I’ve ever heard is, “God was angry because they struck the rock TWICE, which indicates a lack of faith.”

But that didn’t seem quite right, either. Maybe it wasn’t because they struck the rock twice. Maybe it’s because they struck the rock, period.

I think you’ve done a very nice bit of typology, which I will think more about. But I think that Moses’ sin in the “strike the rock” episode has little if anything to do with how many times he struck the rock but with his words:

Numbers 20:
“Listen to me, you rebels! Are we to bring water for you out of this rock?”

Who is being credited here with providing for the Israelites?

Later, when God tells Moses he has blown it, He says:

v 12 “Because you were not faithful to me in showing forth my sanctity before the Israelites.”

So I think Moses’ sin is taking for himself the glory that should have been God’s.

 

[Nita]

Psalm 106:32 & 33
"They angered him at the waters of Meribah and it went ill with Moses on their account; for they made** his spirit bitter**, and he spoke words that were rash.

The above passage is the only one I’m aware of where Scripture sort of spells out what it was that Moses did wrong. It supports NHInsider’s response that it was Moses’ words.
The passage also seems to indicate that Moses’ anger may have gone past the point of being a righteous anger!

I also like the following passage when contemplating Moses’ punishment. It appears he tried to get God to change His mind
Deut. 3:23-27 And I besought the LORD at that time, saying, “…Let me go over I pray, and see the good land beyond the Jordan…” But the LORD was angry with me on your account, and would not hearken to me; and the LORD said to me. “let it suffice you; speak no more to me of this matter. Go up to the top of Pisgah, …and behold it with your eyes; for you shall not go over this Jordon.”
“speak no more to Me of this matter” always makes me wonder if Moses had been pestering God quite often about it.