Moses Falters (2)
Striking the Rock
(Bible Study - August 1999)
In our last study (Tidings, 7/99) we saw how Moses, worn out with the burden of carrying the responsibility for an ungracious nation, longed for death (Numbers 11). Our sympathy goes out to him for we know how easily we can become discouraged and complain in much less taxing circumstances. We noted that God did not rebuke him for his human feelings, but provided help in the form of the seventy elders. We move on now to the second occasion when Moses faltered in the company of his brother, Aaron, and both were excluded from going into the land of promise. The occasion was when Moses smote the rock instead of speaking to it, as he was clearly commanded. The incident is recorded in Numbers 20.
Moses accused
To understand the gravity of the offence committed by Moses at Kadesh Barnea, we must
first consider what happened earlier at Rephadim. Rephadim was early in the wilderness
experience of Israel -- the provision of manna had taken place on the fifteenth day of the
second month following the exodus from Egypt (Ex. 16:1).
We do not know precisely how soon after this event the clamour for water arose, but it was probably not long after. Shortage of water can prove a major problem, especially when so large a number has to be supplied. The fault of the Israelites did not lie in the request for water, but in the manner in which the request was presented. There is clearly a lesson for us. The ungracious people accused Moses of taking them out of Egypt so they may die of thirst! (17:3).
Christ struck symbolically
At Rephadim, Moses is instructed to take his rod and, in the company of the elders, to
smite the rock. There is an all-important detail here: God, in the person of the angel,
stands upon the rock (Ex. 17:6) indicating surely the closest of connection between the
rock and Yahweh. The narrative is so concise that we might not linger over this most
significant detail. We are given to understand, however, that when Moses struck the rock,
he was also symbolically striking the representative of God.
The key to understanding the symbolism of the incident is provided by the Apostle Paul, "For they drank of a spiritual Rock that followed them: and that Rock was Christ" (I Cor. 10:4). We are thus encouraged by Paul to understand the symbolism of the episode in Exodus 17. The apostle helps our understanding further when he says: "...God was in Christ, reconciling the world unto himself" (II Cor. 5:19). This leads us to the obvious conclusion that when the Jews rejected and crucified the Lord Jesus, they were effectively rejecting their God also. Our Lord makes this abundantly clear: "He that hateth me hateth my Father also" (John 15:23). Thus we are brought to the conclusion that striking the rock by Moses according to the direction of God prefigures the striking of the Lord Jesus upon the cross, according to the determined will of the Father.
Father and Son are rocks
We focus our attention in the first place on the Hebrew word for "rock,"
tzur. The term occurs frequently in the Old Testament and is used metaphorically of
the God of Israel, as in the following representative passage, "The Rock, his
work is perfect; for all his ways are judgement: a God of faithfulness and without
iniquity, just and right is he" (Deut. 32:4, cf. Psa. 18:2; 31:3; etc.) Another
interesting feature of the passage in Exodus 17 is that the Septuagint (the Old Testament
in Greek) renders the Hebrew tzur by the Greek petra, which is the very word
used by Paul in I Corinthians 19:4, "And the rock was Christ." This
identity of language eloquently testifies to the identity of the Father and the Son and
reminds us yet once again that "God was in Christ reconciling the world unto
himself" (II Cor. 5:19).
What is further most interesting and enlightening is that the rock, once struck, became an unceasing source of water, and this is what Paul affirms when he declares that the rock "followed" them.
Crisis at Kadesh
We must consequently conclude that the rock as a source of water was still available
when they arrived at Kadesh Barnea (Numbers 20:l,2). If, as seems obvious, a literal rock
had not followed them, the miracle at Rephidim (also called Massah and Maribah) had
ensured that thereafter a supply of water was always available for man and beast. This
must have been the case up until their arrival at Kadesh for a nation cannot survive
without a constant supply of water. Why then did the source dry up at this juncture? Was
it because the Israelites had taken it for granted and no longer had any sense of
indebtedness or gratitude to their God? This seems very probable in view of the typically
bad tempered way in which they presented their grievance to Moses: "And why have
ye brought the assembly of the LORD into this wilderness, that we should die there, we and
the cattle?" (Num. 20:4).
There are two features about these plaintive words we should not miss: first, the Israelites speak of themselves as "the assembly of the LORD." There is more than a trace of pride and self-deception in this statement. If, indeed, they were in any true sense the assembly of the LORD, they should be acting in harmony with this special status. Second, their discontent is directed against Moses and Aaron (note the "ye"). The situation illustrates how demanding and discouraging leadership can be. Moses had indeed been given ample opportunity to learn how true this was. Ecclesial history has time and time again confirmed the truth of this observation. Faithful brothers and sisters have too frequently been the objects of criticism, and that from other members who may not be making anything like the same contribution to ecclesial life.
Moses reduced to a fit of temper
To return to Kadesh: Moses and Aaron are plainly distressed by the tide of discontent,
for they fall on their faces at the door of the tabernacle. That the LORD God is with them
and is fully cognizant of what is happening is shown by the appearance of the divine glory
(Num. 20:6).
It is against this background we must see the precise instructions received by Moses: he is to take the rod, with which such remarkable wonders have been wrought in Egypt. He and Aaron are to assemble the congregation and speak to the rock. The striking of the rock at Rephidim had produced the initial supply of water and, as on that occasion, the carrying out of God’s command had produced water, so, now, in differing circumstances, the same result will be produced.
However, the criticisms unjustly leveled against Aaron and himself have riled Moses, and in a fit of temper he forgets the divine instruction and strikes the rock, not once, but twice (v. 11). A copious supply of water gushes from the rock.
At first sight, this is surprising, one would be inclined to think that ignoring God’s commands would produce negative results. Is this a case where the sin of man abounds, but the grace of God is more exceedingly abundant? (See Romans 5:20.) It certainly seems to be the case, for God is concerned for the people and wants to satisfy their thirst.
As for Moses, supported by Aaron, they have acted rashly. Moses has actually said, "Hear now, ye rebels; shall we bring you forth water out of the rock?" (Num. 20:10). We are now back to the Moses who thought he could deliver his oppressed people by his own means (Ex. 2:11-15). All of us have to learn that we can only effectively carry out God’s work by making sure we are acting fully in harmony with His will and instructions. This Moses failed to do at Kadesh.
Sin by an elder
Moses faltered, and thus betrayed his humanity. Inevitably, he had to pay the price,
with Aaron his brother: "And the LORD said unto Moses and Aaron, Because ye
believed not in me, to sanctify me in the eyes of the children of Israel, therefore ye
shall not bring this assembly into this land which I have given them" (Num.
20:12 RSV). At an earlier stage in these articles, we had occasion to reflect upon the
fact that when Miriam petulantly and rashly challenged the authority of her brother, she
was over 90. Moses and Aaron were well over 100 at Kadesh; indeed, we read in the same
chapter of the death of Aaron (v. 28) and from Numbers 33:39 we learn he was 123 years of
age. Moses must accordingly have been 120.
Seniority is thus no guarantee of unfaltering faithfulness, a sobering lesson for an increasing number among us, including the author of this study.
In view of Moses’ wonderful record, and the nobility of his character, was God’s punishment unduly severe? God’s judgements are always just and merciful. It was reserved for a younger man to complete the task of bringing God’s people into the land of promise; his name was Joshua, Jesus in Greek (see Acts 7:45; Heb. 4:8 KJV). What a wonderful reflection that is! There is only one Saviour able to save us to the uttermost (Heb. 7:25). Joshua, in completing the work of Moses, prefigured our Lord.
The death of Moses was not his end. He will most assuredly be in the kingdom; he figures prominently in Hebrews 11:23-28 and his name is unquestionably to be added to those who died in faith (v. 13) and who will receive the fulfillment of God’s promise of everlasting life. Right to the end, when he was rebuked for his rashness, he remained humble. There were no protestations when he knew that he was to be replaced by the younger Joshua. God’s work was always in his eyes of greater importance than himself. May this be, and remain, true of ourselves.
Tom Barling, Teignmouth, UK
Note: The Hebrew word used for the rock in Numbers 20:8 is sela and not tzur, as in Exodus 17:6. Sela is defined in Young’s Concordance as, "a cliff, rock (from its elevation)." Some have maintained that the use of sela points to the Christ, risen from the dead and elevated to the Father’s right hand. This appears a legitimate conclusion and reminds us that our Lord is to be treated with reverence, and not smitten, a concept which speaks of crucifying our Lord afresh (cf. Heb. 6:6). Finally, we should note that the Septuagint does not preserve the distinction between the two Hebrew words, but uses petra in both instances.